Luther’s protest is not over

In January 2014, in what catholic.org called a historic gesture, Pope Francis sent a message of unity, recorded on a mobile phone, to charismatic and Pentecostal leaders attending a conference organised by Kenneth Copeland Ministries.

However, it is not the Pope’s message that is the focus of this article, but the speech that preceded it, delivered by Anthony Palmer, a bishop and ecumenical leader of the Communion of Evangelical Episcopal Churches (one of the many groups that are separate from the Church of England), with whom the Pope says he has been “friends for years”. Palmer’s speech was more than a ceremonial introduction to the Pope’s novel greeting. It was, in fact, an open appeal to Protestants to unite with Rome. Such an idea was undoubtedly no revelation to those present nor to the Protestant religious world in general, which was still wondering whether the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, to be celebrated in 2017, would find it still on the defensive or back in harmony with Catholicism.

The thesis of Anthony Palmer’s lecture was that “Luther’s protest is over”. The historical-theological basis for his claim is easily found in evangelical historian Mark Noll’s 2005 book, Is the Reformation Over?[1] published with writer Carolyn Nystrom.

The book, which quickly became a bestseller and apparently persuaded some Protestant leaders[2] to switch to the Catholic side, shows that relations between Protestants and the Church of Rome changed after the Second Vatican Council, with controversy being replaced by cooperation on social, political, and theological issues. The starting point for this change is identified as the signing of a historic agreement between Lutherans and Roman Catholics in 1999. This overcame most of the existing barriers to full unity, and the only issues still under debate, according to the authors of the book, were church authority, papal primacy, and the role of the Virgin Mary—seemingly minor issues that could be resolved in future dialogues.

Yet both Mark Noll’s book and Palmer’s speech overlook the fact that not all Lutherans have welcomed the 1999 document[3] and that not all Protestants are Lutherans. Indeed, Lutherans were very upset by the Catholic Church’s proposal in late 2012 to create a subdivision for Lutherans who convert to Catholicism, similar to the one created for Anglicans. Nor were Catholics very happy with the idea of the 75 million Lutherans celebrating the 500th anniversary of the Reformation with grandeur in 2017.

On the whole, however, the closeness between Protestantism and Catholicism cannot be denied. But a clearer understanding of the time of the Reformation and the theology of the Reformers shows that the differences between Luther and the Pope did not arise simply from the difficulty of formulating dogma correctly, but from an approach to the Christian religion from radically different perspectives.

The historical argument

For those who wish to relegate the spiritual awakening of the sixteenth century to an appendix of history, the Reformation is limited to Luther’s 95 theses and the five fundamental dogmas beginning with sola—sola scriptura, sola gratia, sola fide, solus Christi, and soli Deo gloria.

However, the reality is much more complex. The Protestant Reformation was more than a doctrinal split. Luther’s theses were not just a lonely cry, but the voice of the deep-seated unrest of the whole society of his time. Corruption in the Church had reached unimaginable heights, and religion had become a form of gain. The sale of indulgences, which promised instant release from any place of purgatory, and of relics, as well as pilgrimages and pompous services, made many wonder if their Christian religion was anything like that of Christ.

Voices condemning abuses in the Roman Catholic Church grew louder, and the absolute authority of the Pope was increasingly questioned. Then, between 1378 and 1418, Catholicism was shaken by the Papal Schism. There was a pope in France and a pope in the Eternal City, each claiming to be the heir of Peter and lord of the kings of Europe. This controversy wasn’t just a childish dispute between two prelates. It polarised the whole Church.

Although the lack of study of Scripture sadly plunged Europe into darkness, it also made the first ray of light all the more visible and desirable. John Wycliffe in England, Jan Huss in Bohemia, the Waldensians in the Alpine valleys, and Savonarola in Italy challenged papal abuses and called people to rediscover the Gospel in the Christic simplicity of the first Christian century.

Though they lacked the courage of the reformers, Europe’s first humanists offered unexpected help to the reformers through their books. For example, Erasmus produced a critical edition of the New Testament in Greek, which formed the basis for future translations of the sacred text, and Lorenzo Valla, after rigorous linguistic analysis, showed that the famous document called the Donation of Constantine, in which the Pope claimed authority in temporal matters, was a ninth-century forgery. Valla also translated the word metanoia for the first time as “repentance” rather than “penance”, as was traditionally maintained. Luther adopted this understanding and expressed it right from the first of his 95 theses.

The dogmatic argument

In addition to challenging the abuses of the Catholic hierarchs, the writings and sermons of the Reformers sought to present the fundamental doctrines of Christianity on the basis of the biblical text alone, a practice incompatible with the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Thus was born the best-known principle of the Reformation, sola scriptura, a phrase apparently coined by the Swiss reformer Huldrych Zwingli. Timothy George rightly summarises that this principle “was intended to safeguard the authority of Scripture from that servile dependence upon the church which in fact made Scripture inferior to the church.”[4] Precisely for this reason, the leaders of the Catholic Church at that time frowned upon the translation of Scripture and its mass distribution, for this would bring the whole economic-theological edifice to the brink of collapse. This is the first major dogmatic difference between Catholics and Protestants.

Second, as Timothy George puts it, “Protestantism was born out of the struggle for the doctrine of justification by faith alone.”[5] Luther’s astonishing discovery that salvation comes by grace alone was a veritable earthquake for the theology of the Catholic Church, which was thus deprived of its sacramental and penitential foundation. It is not surprising that the Catholic theologians of the time reacted very violently to the writings of the German Reformer, considering them a blasphemy against the Gospel, while Luther affirmed: “Nothing in this article can be given up or compromised, even if heaven and earth and things temporal should be destroyed.”[6] Nevertheless, the recognition of the central role of justification by faith alone does not mean that the Protestant Reformation can be summed up in this doctrine.

A third major area of the Reformation concerned the theology and practice of worship. Put on a new theological footing, worship for Protestants became the celebration of salvation through Christ, based solely on the authority of the Word of Scripture. Within this framework, Luther spoke of the priesthood of all believers, the role of singing together, and the social aspects of the local community of believers. Paul Althaus has observed in this regard that “‘Luther brought down the community of saints out of heaven and down to earth.”[7] The saints were no longer painted on the walls of the church, but were in the pews, praying for one another, singing together, helping one another, studying the Scriptures together. Luther said: “Whatever it is that you want to do for the saints, turn your attention away from the dead toward the living.”[8]

In this theological context, shared by Zwingli and Calvin, it is not surprising that the Roman Catholic Church reacted violently and tried at all costs to stop the development of the Reformation, because every Protestant dogma was radically different from everything believed and done in the Catholic Church. There was never any idea in the Reformation era that the differences were minor or that only the wording needed to be reconciled. Even if the Reformers did not initially seek to create new Christian denominations, consistency in their interpretation of Scripture led them to break away from Rome.

What to make of Luther’s protest?

The Reformation gave the Roman Catholic Church the opportunity to redefine its own theology and worship practices. Through what history calls the “Counter-Reformation”, Catholicism was able to regain its long-term dominance and influence, albeit in a different way than in the Middle Ages. However, none of the dogmatic turmoil of the Reformation was reflected in the decisions of the Council of Trent (16th century), which initiated the Catholic Counter-Reformation. On the contrary, it reaffirmed Catholic dogmas and established a new monastic order to fight for them—the Jesuits.

More recently, the Second Vatican Council was a reaffirmation of traditional Catholic dogma applied to modern times. Dr Bryan Cross, who was born into a Pentecostal family and became an Anglican and then a Catholic, says explicitly that Vatican II is not to be understood as a rapprochement of Catholicism with Protestant dogmas and ways of life. He explains that Vatican II neither denied nor retracted any previous teaching of Catholicism.[9] This is more than obvious to anyone who reads the decisions of the Council. For example, salvation comes exclusively through the Catholic Church; the interpretation of Scripture, even if accessible to the laity, is only authoritative if it is done exclusively by the Church; the text of Scripture and tradition have equal authority; the priest can forgive sins; and so on. This is why Cross believes that the only way to achieve unity among Christians is for the other Christians to return to the Roman Catholic Church.

However, the Christian world cannot and must not forget what it learned from Luther and the other reformers, namely that the authority of Scripture transcends tradition or political commitments. New truths would continue to be discovered, calling for new changes and reforms, paradoxically difficult tests even for some reformers. Luther and Zwingli opposed the Anabaptists who preached baptism at maturity, ignoring the rich scriptural evidence for it. Later, Transylvanian Sabbatarians and American Adventists called for the recognition of a forgotten biblical institution—the Sabbath as a day of worship.

The list of these truths will continue to expand. The Reformation is not a static process completed 500 years ago, but a dynamic, living process that is indispensable to Christianity. The danger of going half-way must not be ignored, and as long as unity is proposed for the sake of being many and strong, rather than for the sake and in the name of seeing the Reformation through to its conclusion, Luther’s protest is not over.