Tuesday, October 9, 2007

The Bondage of the Will I

I've known for at least a decade that this is a "must-read" but have put it off, because of a mistaken notion. I assumed, having never read Luther's own writings before, that this would be a dry theological treatise on free-will, which I would have to slug through simply because I should.

Boy was I wrong! This is a tailor-made Invective...a veritable handbook!...an extended "howler," if ever there was one! This response makes the current discourse about "Federal Vision" seem tame and practically impotent! (One significant difference, of course, being that Luther actually read the works of the man he was publicly refuting, and engaged the man himself in direct dialogue, rather than simply reading about his teachings while pontificating to others based on hearsay...)

Those who know me, are likely not surprised that I would enjoy this sort of animated verbal sparring! I must admit, however, that at times, I have been a bit astonished at and even uncomfortable with Luther's tone...or at least if I imagine this dialogue occurring today, it seems quite harsh. I don't know enough about the extent of his relationship with Erasmus - did they know each other only through these debates, or did they have a personal relationship? Nor have I read Erasmus' "Diatribe," so I am only learning what he actually said in bits and pieces as Luther quotes him. Maybe the sum of Erasmus' content deserved nothing less - just yesterday, I encountered some of his more absurd assertions (Erasmus').

I have only finished 2 of the 8 "chapters" to date. Here are some of Luther's most inciteful phrases:

"...your book struck me as so worthless and poor that my heart went out to you for having defiled your lovely, brilliant flow of language with such vile stuff. I thought it outrageous to convey material of so low a quality in the trappings of such rare eloquence; it is like using gold or silver dishes to carry garden rubbish or dung." (p63)

"...what kept me from rushing in with an answer to you was...simply disgust, disinclination and distaste - which, if I may say so, express my judgment on your Diatribe. ...you have taken vast pains throughout to be slippery and evasive...you would have nothing actually asserted, while yet you would seem to assert something!" (p64)

"In a word, what you say comes to this: that you do not think it matters a scrap what anyone believes anywhere, so long as the world is at peace...'If they affirm, I affirm; if they deny, so do I.'" (p69)

"So here again, in your desire to discourage us from anything rash, you allow yourself to be carried to the contrary extreme (as fools do) and teach the very quintessence of godless, suicidal folly. Do you see, now, that at this point your book is so godless, blasphemous and sacrilegious, that its like cannot be found anywhere?" (p85)

"You are venting your spleen on us, as usual, in order to prejudice and discredit our cause, because you see that you cannot conquer or overthrow it." (p88)

"What a fulsome speaker you are! - but utterly ignorant of what you are talking about. ...if you do not grasp that, if it leaves you unmoved, then mind your own business, and leave those to grasp it and be moved by it to whom it is given of God!" (p90)

"...your next bit of advice, 'wrong decisions made in councils should not be publicly acknowledged, lest grounds for denying the authority of the fathers should thereby be given.' This, of course, is just what the Pope wanted you to say! He finds it sweeter hearing than the Gospel itself; he will be most ungrateful if he does not honour you in return with a cardinal's hat, plus all the attendant revenues!" (p96)

"So, your Creator must learn from YOU, His creature, what may be usefully preached and what not? God was so stupid and thoughtless, was He, that He did not know what should be taught till you came along to tell Him how to be wise? - as if without your pointing it out He would not have realized that this paradox involves the consequence you draw? " (p98)

Wow! Even Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter seem tame by comparison!

8 comments:

David A Booth said...

Lori,

While Luther's language was exceedingly robust, it should be remembered that he was vindicating the cause of God against someone who wanted to domesticate God for what he (that is Erasmus) believed to be the good of the church and society.

If this doesn't call for robust language, what does?

David

Lori Waggoner said...

Yeah, David...I think as I get further along in the book, Erasmus' heresies will come into full view for me and I will understand the need for the sarcasm.

Initially, I expected a debate over free-will such as I might have with my faithful Christian mother, whose view differs somewhat from mine. That's why the tenor of the language surprised me. Luther is approaching Erasmus, not as one who holds a slightly different view, but as an unregenerate whose teaching will lead vulnerable Christians astray.

Don't get me wrong...I LOVE the passion with which Luther is approaching this; however, I have spent years trying to learn NOT to be overly sarcastic and I'm TRYING to be more gracious in my approach to disagreements. Invective and sarcasm come naturally to me...graciousness does not!

When the vitals of truth are at stake, and especially from an arrogant man who is highly educated and trained extensively in rhetoric, I can see the necessity of "laying it on!"

Bobber said...

I have always wanted to read this too. I have frequently thought it would be a lot like reading Shakespeare because of the translation. Are there more recent translations?

Anonymous said...

Bob, the one I am using is a translation by J.I. Packer and O.R. Johnston, published in 1957. It is not at all like reading Shakespeare...in fact, it is a surprisingly easy read.

ISBN 13: 978-0-800705342-9

I encourage you to tackle it...besides, now that you've finished Harry Potter, you need something else to read, right?

Anonymous said...

So why not use Luther's approach with your Mother as an unregenerate whose teaching will lead vulnerable Christians astray?

Lori Waggoner said...

Hi, Mom. Funny...

Lori Waggoner said...

BTW, conspicuously absent from your theology, Mother-dear, would be:

1) A mindless subscription to whatever the pope or "The Church" says without regard to its Scriptural accuracy.

2) An attitude that whatever might be offensive shouldn't be preached for the sake of preserving peace.

3) An application of "all things are lawful, but not all things are expedient" to speaking the truth.

That which is conspicously present in your life and theology:

1) A whole-hearted belief that your salvation is entirely a work of God's grace and that apart from the Holy Spirit's quickening, you would have remained in sin.

2) A life characterized by love and reverence for God's Word coupled with a heart to share its riches with others.

3) A consistent demonstration of perseverance in the faith, regardless of the trials sent your way.

So there! I Love you...

Anonymous said...

I respect you and am always deeply challenged by your pursuit and endeavors.

If I may, I would like to use John, the elder's words to express my heart felt emotion to you publically, "I have no greater joy than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth."

So there! I Love you, too!