LuW07-Essay on the Law (blog).docx

[German text here; Trnsl Prj here]

[TABLE OF CONTENTS]

Part I. – What actually belongs to the Law that now binds everyone in the New Testament? 321

1. The law that binds everyone, even in the New Testament, is solely the natural law originally written in the hearts of all people. 321

2. Therefore the holy Ten Commandments, which God once revealed through Moses from Mount Sinai, as well as all other laws contained in the Old Testament, insofar as they contain the natural law, are binding on everyone. 321

3. O.T. ceremonial or ecclesiastical laws have lost their power to bind the consciences in the New Testament and have been abolished by Christ. 321

4. Neither the holy Ten Commandments nor any Old Testament law binds Christians. 322

5. What belongs to the natural law in the holy Ten Commandments: to love God and neighbor… and "whatever you want men to do to you, do that to them." 322

6. True Christians, insofar as they are such, are no longer under the law. 322

Part II. – What is the proper understanding of these words: You shall love God above all things and your neighbor as yourself? 335

1. Does not mean “love begins with oneself” or “every man is his own neighbor”, but means: “Whatever you want men to do to you, do to them.” 335

2. Does not mean that I should put my neighbor in my place, but that I should put myself in my neighbor's place and do to him as I would want him to do to me if I were in his place. 339

3. Love is the master of all commandments and the standard of their fulfillment. 357

Part III. – Why must the Law also be proclaimed in the New Testament and also to Christians? 362

1. The law contains the unchangeable will of God, indelibly written in the heart of every man. 362

2. Only those who recognize their sins can come to faith in Christ and to knowledge of his reconciling and redeeming work and suffering. 364

3. Even the believing, enlightened, born-again Christian, who is of course willing to do all good, is not yet completely enlightened and renewed. 365

Part IV. – What is the relationship between the preaching of the law and the preaching of justification through faith? 370

1. The preaching of justification through faith must be preceded by the preaching of repentance from the law. 370

2. Justification itself may be taught from the gospel alone, and therefore the preaching of the law is to be entirely excluded from it. 374.

3. The law must not be preached to the justified as such in order to make them pious and fruitful in good works. 375

Doctrine and Defense.

Volume VII. November 1861. No. 11.

Essay on the Law. *)

I. What part of the Law now binds everyone in the New Testament? ^

The speaker answers this question in the following sentences:

1. ^ The law that binds everyone, even in the New Testament, is solely the natural law originally written in the hearts of all people.

2. ^ Therefore the holy Ten Commandments, which God once revealed through Moses from Mount Sinai, as well as all other laws contained in the Old Testament, insofar as they contain the natural law, are binding on everyone. <Page 13>

3. ^ Not only everything else [apart from the natural law] in the Old Testament, but also everything in the holy Ten Commandments that relates solely to the Old Testament covenant people and to their particular constitution and household, namely to their particular ceremonial or ecclesiastical laws, as well as to their police or civil laws, has lost its power to bind the consciences in the New Testament and has been abolished by Christ; therefore we do not find the Ten Commandments quoted anywhere in the New Testament in the Old Testament form, but in a New Testament form. Thus, for example, the apostle Paul modifies the words of the Fourth Commandment in the Old Testament: "That thou mayest live long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee," Exodus 20:12, thus: "That thou mayest prosper and live long on the earth," Ephesians 6:3. The outward Sabbath of a special day of physical rest commanded in the Third Commandment of the Old Testament is expressly declared abrogated in Colossians 2:16-17: "Let no man therefore make you conscience of meat, or of drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of new moons, or of sabbaths: which are the shadow of things to come; but the body itself is in Christ." The only reason why the Reformed insist that the holy Ten Commandments should also be included in the Christian catechism entirely in the form in which Moses received them from God and

————

*) Reported at the last meeting of the Synod of Missouri Western District at Altenburg, Perry County, Missouri.

gave them to the Jews, is therefore lack of a right understanding of the Law; while the New Testament way in which the Lutheran Catechism presents the holy Ten Commandments is a glorious testimony to the pure knowledge and deep understanding of Luther and the Lutheran Church regarding this matter. [<---- This explains my own question when I read the Small Catechism on the Ten Commandments! ]

4. ^ Neither the holy Ten Commandments nor any Old Testament law binds Christians because they were revealed by God through Moses, for as a written law they were imposed only on the separated people of the old covenant, the Jews.

5. ^ What belongs to the natural law in the holy Ten Commandments and in all the other laws contained in the Old Testament, Christ indicates first by saying that in the two commandments, to love God and neighbor, hang the whole law and the prophets (Matt. 22:36-40), and in another passage that the Law and the Prophets are this Word: "Therefore whatever you want men to do to you, do that to them." Matt. 7:12: So what belongs to this summary and main commandment also belongs, according to Christ's revelation, to the natural law that unites all men in the New Testament. But because the writing of the law engraved on the human heart at the first creation is very much faded after the fall and is not completely restored in the Christian in this life even after the rebirth and renewal, we have, secondly, to recognize whether a law in the Old Testament belongs to the natural law, whether God punishes the transgression of it also in the Gentiles as sin and abomination through his prophets; and finally, thirdly, whether the Law <page 14> is repeated and confirmed in the New Testament as one that also binds Christians.

6. ^ True, believing Christians, as such and insofar as they are, are no longer under the law, but are free from all Law, for, says St. Paul, no law has been given to the righteous; but not so that they could or would live freely against the eternal holy will of God revealed in the Law, but insofar as they, whom Christ has redeemed from the curse and compulsion of the Law, have become a law to themselves through faith and the new birth, and therefore keep and fulfill the law not as a law, but out of the impulse of their new nature in free love, not because they ought to, but because they want to, since God's will has become their will. Luther explains this freedom with the following beautiful parable taken from St. Paul (Gal. 3:23):

"If your lord had imprisoned you in prison and you were exceedingly unwilling to be there, there are two ways in which you could be released from it. First, physically, that the Lord would break the dungeon and set you free physically, letting you go wherever you wanted to go. Secondly, if he would do you so much good in the dungeon, he would make it more cheerful, bright, spacious and most richly adorned, that no royal chamber and kingdom would be so adorned, and

would break and change your courage, so that you would not be out of the dungeon for all the world's good, but would pray that the dungeon would remain and that you would be in it, which would now no longer be a dungeon for you, but a paradise. Tell me, what would be the best redemption here? Is it not true that this spiritual one is the best? For in the first you would remain a poor beggar, as before; but here you would have a free spirit and everything you wanted. Behold, thus Christ has also delivered us spiritually from the Law; not breaking and doing away with the Law, but transforming our heart, which before was unwillingly under it, doing it so much good, and making the law so sweet that it has no greater pleasure nor joy than in the law; would not gladly that any title should fall away." (Luther's Works, Erl. ed. VII, 289. 290. Walch's ed. XII, 343 [StL XII, 253-254; Am. Ed. 76, 9-10]) [Read the below before reading Small Catechism.]

Luther thus answers our whole question in his "Interpretation of the Ten Commandments" from the 19th and 20th chapters of Exodus, preached at Wittenberg in 1528 [AE 62, p. 335]:

"First of all, it should be noted that the Ten Commandments do not apply to us Gentiles and Christians, but only to the Jews. The text testifies to this and makes it clear: "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." It is true and clear enough that we Gentiles were not brought out of Egypt by God, but only the Jewish people of Israel. That is why Moses points the Ten Commandments only to the people who were brought out of Egypt by God. But that we also recognize, worship and honor the God whom the Jews honor, who brought them out of Egypt, we have not through Moses or from the written law, but from other Scriptures and from the law of nature. But I say this to ward off the false spirits who would force Moses upon us to keep all his commandments. But let us refrain from this and not accept it with the slightest title, for as far as it agrees with the natural law. We will read him as we would another teacher, freely and without constraint; but we will not have him for our lawgiver. For we have law enough in the New Testament. Therefore we will not have him in our conscience, but will keep it pure in Christ alone. So it is clear that the Ten Commandments were given to the Jews alone and not to us. In spite of all the divisive spirits who say otherwise!.... [AE p. 339] That is why I want to warn all preachers here. For I see that it is necessary for them to learn the correct custom of Moses and to leave the people unconfused with Moses, and not to let him go further than as an example and where he is an evangelist and prophet. Now if a preacher wants to urge you on Moses, ask him whether you were also led out of Egypt under Moses. If he says: No; then say, "What is Moses to me, because he speaks to those people who were brought out of Egypt? … [AE p. 339] Look at all of God's Word

and commands in all of Scripture, and do not interpret them to yourself until you are sure that they have been spoken to you; so do so, and do not ask what others have been told and commanded. Yea, you speak to the factious spirits, God spake it unto Moses, therefore must I also. Dear one, say: There is no power in it, the Word extends no further than to the one to whom it is commanded. God calls the fish swimming in the water, as it says in the first book of Moses; the birds fly in the air, the worms crawl on the earth, the sun shines: there is also God's Word. Will you therefore become a fish, and dwell in the water, and soar in the air like a bird? Will you become the sun, moon and stars? See what will happen to you. Will it not be seen that Moses was given to a peculiar people? Therefore do not point him to the whole world, but to his people. In the New Testament he has come to an end, and his laws are no longer valid; he must hide himself for Christ. But that we Gentiles have a law is taught to us by our own conscience and reason; just as St. Paul first says to the Romans that the Gentiles also have a knowledge of God, for God has revealed this to them, that they see God's invisible nature, that is, his eternal power and divinity, as perceived in the works from the creation of the world; but they have not glorified him as a God, etc. With which words St. Paul indicates that all Gentiles have knowledge of God, namely, that he created all things, gives all things, nourishes and sustains all things; therefore their own conscience urges them to give glory to God and thank Him for all good deeds. Therefore, even if Moses had never written the law, all men have the law written in their hearts by nature. But God also gave the Jews a written law, that is, the Ten Commandments, for abundance; which are nothing other than the law of nature, which is naturally written in our hearts. Now what Moses wrote in the Ten Commandments we naturally feel in our conscience. Rom. 2[14-15]: ‘For if the Gentiles, saith the apostle, which have not the law’ (that is, the law written by Moses), ‘and yet by nature do the things of the law, these, because they have not the law, are themselves a law unto them, that they may prove that the work of the law is written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts also accusing or else excusing one another.’ … [AE p. 345] Dear Christians, you have heard that when they come in with their Moses and want to bind your consciences with his laws, say to them: Dear Lord, put your glasses on your noses and look at the text correctly. We know well that we must obey God in what he says, and that we belong to God as well as the Jews. But we must make a distinction between the Word of God and the words of God. I should pay attention to this when God says something, whether it concerns me. Therefore, dear fellow, if you want to force me with God's Word, tell me a text that concerns me;

otherwise I will not care that you tell me much from Moses. For Moses with his word was not sent to us, and even if Moses had not come, we would still have had this natural knowledge written in our hearts by God, that there is one God who makes and keeps all things. For even the Gentiles worshipped God without Moses' teaching, just as they, like the Jews, lacked God. Therefore you can soon answer: Dear enthusiast, Moses here, Moses there. If you want me to hear you, tell me a word that concerns me; or I will consider you a deceiver and an apostle of the devil, for you preach what is commanded to others, not to you. If I were to accept and keep all the Word of God, I would also have to build a box like Noah, for God's Word commanded him to build an ark. Now that God's Word is there, go and do as Noah did, build an ark. Christ told Peter to go to the sea and cast a line, and when he saw a fish coming up at first, he found half a guilder in its mouth, which he was to give to him and to himself. That is also the Word of God. But, dear enthusiast, go and do as Peter did; let us see how you will fare. Therefore God's Word must have the addition, that I may know to whom they are spoken. … [AE p. 346] So I say here that the storming of images and the overthrowing of idols may not be forced from this text" (of the First Commandment). "For it is spoken to the Jews alone, and not to us. Give me a text, that God may have forbidden me images; not that I may be favorable to images, but that we may know of a surety on what our faith is based, that we may not build on the sand and answer our adversaries. For a preacher, yes, even every Christian, should and must be certain of his doctrine, not relying on delusion, or dealing with the conceit of men, but being sure of the matter, that thus it is, and not otherwise; which Paul calls "πληροφορίαν" (Col. 2:2. "Riches of the full assurance of understanding") "upon which he might stand in all temptation, and answer the devil and all his angels, yea, God himself, without any wavering. The Jews have a commandment that they should not have images, but they have defined the commandment too narrowly. For God rejects the images that are erected, worshipped and put in the place of God. For there are two kinds of images. He therefore makes a distinction and gives a rule as to which images are forbidden, namely, those that are set up as if they were images of God, as the text clearly indicates. Therefore, the mouths of those who say: All images are forbidden to the Jews are stopped here. Here, no image is forbidden except those through which worship is hindered. So no other image is forbidden here except the image of God which is worshipped. Children are forbidden to climb up on the bench or sit on the table, lest they fall down; again, they are forbidden to go to the water, lest they drown; bread knives are not left in their hands, lest they prick themselves; so children are forbidden, lest nature be violated.

Because children are weak and without understanding, they may be harmed if they are not protected. Thus God also led the coarse Jewish people with such commandments, forbidding them the outward images so that they would not abuse them and fall into idolatry. But those who have understanding and are full of the Holy Spirit must not obey such commandments. If one would forbid me not to take a knife in my hand to cut bread with, lest I harm myself; or forbid me to walk on water, for yesterday a child would have drowned in the water; or not to climb on a bench, lest I fall down: it would be a foolish, ridiculous commandment to say: You fool, do you take me for a child? Shall I be cradled first? So do our fanatics, too, passing off such foolish childish play and still want to be considered great teachers; but they may well go to school for a while yet. Moses was a disciplinarian of the Jews, as St. Paul says, who were a coarse, carnal people, who had to be given an outward commandment of images so that they would not be offended by it. And it could still happen today that such a commandment would be given to the coarse people; but we Christians, who have God's Word, are not allowed to do such a thing, we do not belong in Moses' school, we have a better master. That is why those Jews, as a coarse, foolish people, were only forbidden to make images if they wanted to honor God. Nevertheless, the Jews are not so foolish as to throw away the good coins and thick pennies, of which they have plenty, even though the image of Mary or St. John is engraved on them, so that if all images were forbidden to them, they would have to avoid them as well. But it is nothing but foolish paganism. Christ is as wise and learned as the enthusiasts; yet he is not afraid of committing a sin by attacking the tribute penny on which the image of the emperor, who was a pagan, was placed; nor did he say to the Jews when he asked what the image and the inscription were: "Fie on you! Why do you show me such an image that God has forbidden you? You shall not touch it in the flesh. Therefore, it is stated on the wall that not all images are forbidden. But if we were to follow the enthusiasts, we should not coin money, look into water or mirrors, and put away everything that has an image; indeed, we should gouge out people's eyes if we were not to have an image at all, for we see images on money, in water and in mirrors. Are they not fine preachers? Therefore you see clearly that God does not mean all kinds of images. So now answer the enthusiasts: Dear one, what does the first commandment contain? What is its meaning? It does not teach about outward things, about plowing the field or making shoes, but how to honor and serve God, inwardly and outwardly. If you want to teach well and interpret the Bible correctly, you must have the right meaning. Now, the first commandment teaches that I should have one God, serve him alone and honor him. To the sense and understanding

go all the words in this first commandment. Therefore these images are forbidden here, which are used contrary to the sense and understanding of this commandment, namely, that we should not have confidence in images, but should look to God alone for all good things, and avoid everything that hinders us from this confidence. So now through this text: You shall have no other gods beside me, only the divine images are forbidden to the Jews and not to us. For this is said to the Jews alone. The words are easy to remember. He does not say, "You shall have no other image for yourself," but rather, "You shall have no other gods beside me or for me. What does it mean to have gods? Wooden, stone and silver images, which are gods, as follows. For men are caused by this to become idolaters; and though they do not worship wood, stone, silver, and gold, yet they have confidence that God is pleased to set up images in his honor; which is contrary to the opinion of the first commandment: I am the LORD thy God, thou shalt not, etc. Therefore take heed to the meaning of this commandment. I will, says he, be your God, I will save you. I will help you, and that by pure grace; do not refuse me, do not set up a service out of your own conceit. But the iconoclasts are closing in, tearing down the outside of the image. I almost didn't want to dispute that. But they add that it has to be, and that it pleases God. In this way they do nothing other than pull the images from the eyes and place them in people's hearts, perverting the meaning of this commandment. Thus they deny God, and yet boast, they tear down the images according to God's command and word. The devil on their heads! If they tear down one, they may well put up twenty in their hearts; and of the same false confidence that the mob thinks it is doing God a favor by tearing down the images, they say not a word. So now the correct understanding is that Gentiles and Jews have the Lord for a God who gives everything for nothing, etc., let Moses say so, or whoever will. About this God commanded the Jewish people through Moses, that they should not have images so that they might establish worship. The other images are not forbidden to the Jews either. Secondly, it is to be noted here that we Gentiles and Christians are also not concerned (because we have to put a stop to the seditious spirits everywhere) with such a message and promise:" (I, the LORD your God, am strong, etc.); "for we have other messages and promises or assurances. These, however, as mentioned above, concern only the Jews, not us. For Moses is a teacher of the Jewish people; therefore his words are all directed to the Jews alone. Although the commandments of God are written in the hearts of all men, the hearts are so darkened by the devil that they cannot be seen or recognized. But God now reminds the Jews of the commandments that are imprinted on their hearts, gives them a written law in addition to the natural light, and even gives them the

law itself orally, so that they may see it as it is written in their hearts. But if the natural law were not written and given by God in the heart, it would be necessary to preach for a long time before the consciences would be struck. One would have to preach to a donkey, horse, ox or cow for a hundred thousand years before they would accept the law, even though they have ears, eyes and a heart like a human being; they can hear it, but it does not enter their hearts. Why? What is the fault? The soul is not formed and created for such things to fall into it. But a man, when the law is held out to him, soon says: Yes, it is so, he cannot deny it. He could not be persuaded so soon, unless it were first written in his heart. Because it is now in his heart beforehand, although dark and completely faded, it is awakened again with the word that the heart must confess that it is so, as the commandments say, that one should honor, love, and serve God, because he alone is good and does good, and not only to the pious, but also to the wicked; although the devil strongly prevents man from feeling, recognizing, or accomplishing; indeed, man is also unable to do anything without the work and light of the Holy Spirit. Now this is a bright and clear indication that these words, that God is here foreboding and promising, concern only the Jews. For here he is threatening physical punishment, that he will punish the father if he acts contrary to his commandment, so that the child must also be punished, even to the third or fourth generation. But he does not punish the soul in this way, but only physically and outwardly, as when he punishes one's house, farm, fields and meadows, money and goods; as he did to pious Job, whom he also attacked in the body, although differently, for when he punishes the wicked, of which he speaks here. And when he shows kindness to a thousand members, that is also bodily, and it is this: I will also do good to children and children's children, not only to the fourth generation, but to many generations and members, that the house may remain in good standing and the generation may endure through and through; as David's generation endures through many generations to Joseph and Mary, even to Christ. Again, the generation of the wicked shall be cut off, as Jeroboam's and Ahab's generations were... [AE p. 353] But in the New Testament this punishment is abolished. For we see how God leads and allows the most wicked and desperate wretches to become rich, to live in all good will, and to have the best of fortunes, so that even the pious may be offended and grieved. On the other hand, he lets the righteous be flayed and scraped, tormented and tortured, sends all misfortune on their necks, so that they think that everything goes against the tide; as David beautifully indicates in the 73rd Psalm... In the New Testament, however, we have a different interpretation, namely, eternal death, the wrath of God with the Last Day, hell and eternal damnation, Mark 16[:16]: He who does not believe will be damned. John 3[:18]: He who does not believe in Christ is condemned already. Again, we have in the New Testament

not a physical, but a spiritual and eternal promise: He who believes has eternal life. In Moses, however, it sounds different. He wants to have kept the promise to them, if they also are outwardly pious, and this is the meaning: If the Jews keep themselves from the images and live in the fear of God, he will accept them and provide for them in body and soul. Physically they shall have enough, and if they recognize him as a true God from the heart, their souls shall also be saved. The N.T. reverses this and begins with the spiritual and the inward, holding faith first and saying: If you believe and are devout, you shall have enough, Matt. 6[:33]: Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and your belly shall be well supplied. Both testaments also have this; but the Old Testament begins with the physical, and yet the spiritual is hidden underneath, namely, that one must have enough in faith. It is the same thing in the Old and New Testaments, but it is a different order .... [AE p. 361] So this promise was not made to the Gentile, but to the Jew. So also, that he is angry with the third or fourth generation, hearkening also to the law, indicates a physical wrath and punishment, not an eternal one. But in the N.T. it is different: the child is not punished for the father. But this is how it is: each one believes for himself, the father for himself, the son for himself, the mother and daughter for themselves; just as it is written in Ezekiel: I will not suffer for the father, nor the father for the son. But because he promised the Jews a bodily endowment, he also pardoned or punished them bodily ... [AE p. 376] Paul and the whole N.T. have abolished the Sabbath of the Jews, so that it may be understood that the Sabbath concerns the Jews alone. Therefore it is not necessary for the Gentiles to keep the Sabbath, even though it was a great and strict commandment among the Jews. The prophets have also indicated how this Sabbath should be abolished. Isaiah in the last chapter says [Is. 66:23]: "When the Messiah comes, there will be such a time that one new moon will be on another, one Sabbath on another; as if he wanted to say: There will be a Sabbath every day and a new moon every day. Thus, in the N.T. the Sabbath lies dormant, in the coarse, outward manner. For this commandment also has two senses, like the other commandments, an outward and an inward or spiritual one. In the New Testament every day is a holy day and every day is free. Wherefore Christ saith, The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath, Matt. 12[:8]. Wherefore Paul now and then exhorts Christians not to be bound to any day: You observe days and moons and feasts and seasons. I fear for you, lest perhaps I have labored among you in vain. Again, even more clearly to the Colossians [Col. 2:16]: Let no one now make you conscience-stricken about food or drink, or about an holyday, namely the feast days, or new moons, or the Sabbath, which is the shadow of that which was in the future, and so on. Although the Sabbath has now been abolished, and the

consciences are free from it, it is nevertheless good and also necessary to keep a special day in the week in order to act, hear and learn the Word of God on it. For everyone cannot wait for it every day. Nature also demands that one day of the week be kept quiet and abstain from work, both human and animal. But whoever wants to make a necessary commandment out of the Sabbath, as a work required by God, must keep Saturday, and not Sunday; for Saturday is commanded to the Jews, and not Sunday. Christians, however, have hitherto kept Sunday and not Saturday for the sake of the fact that Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. Now this is a sure sign that the Sabbath no longer concerns us, indeed the whole of Moses, otherwise we would have to keep Saturday; and is a great and strong proof that the Sabbath has been abolished. For we do not find anywhere in the entire New Testament that we Christians are commanded to observe the Sabbath. Why then do Christians also keep Sunday? Although all days are free and one is like the other, it is nevertheless useful and good, indeed very necessary, to celebrate on one day, be it the Sabbath, Sunday, or another day. For God wants to lead the world neatly and govern it peacefully; therefore he has given six days for work, but on the seventh day servants, day laborers and all kinds of workers, yes, also horses, oxen and other laboring cattle should have rest, as this commandment says, so that they may recover with rest; and especially that those who do not have leisure at other times may hear the sermon on the holiday and learn to know God through it. And for this reason, namely for the sake of love and need, Sunday was kept, not for the sake of Moses' commandment, but for the sake of our need to rest and learn the Word of God. Our papists, however, have unfortunately brought us to the point where we have kept our holidays harder than the Jews. But it doesn't matter whether we celebrate or not, consciences are free. Whoever does not want to celebrate, let him work anyway; we do not want to scold him or chase him away. But if he wants to be pious, to know God, then he needs the holiday for the sake of hearing the Word of God. But if he wants to be impudent and reckless, let him go to the devil, like those who do nothing else on a holiday but eat, drink and revel day and night. This is the coarse and outward meaning of this commandment, which does not bind us, but is free to us, it is in our power and discretion whether we want to celebrate or not. If it is necessary for my neighbor, I will drop the holiday and serve my neighbor. But if he needs instruction from the Word of God, I abstain from work. Therefore, the Pope has no power to command that Sunday or other days be celebrated. But this is why we celebrate, because we need to learn God's Word... The spiritual Sabbath is the right Sabbath, kept softly when the heart celebrates the right Sabbath, which is the highest and proper

spiritual work of this commandment, which comprehends the whole nature of man. Christ modeled this Sabbath for us in the tomb; there he kept the Sabbath rightly; there he lies in rest and celebration, abstaining from all works. He does not see, he does not hear, he does not sleep, he does not watch, he does not eat, he does not drink, he does not build, he does not move tongue or vein, hand or foot, he does not stand, he does not walk. Whoever wants to keep the true spiritual Sabbath must be completely dead with Christ. Nor will anyone keep it rightly, unless he is really dead. But we have seen that the right Sabbath is to be kept here when our old Adam ceases from all his works, reason, will, desires and lust, which are all dead and must cease in the right Sabbath. And everything that is in us should be divine, as Paul says to the Galatians, chapter 2[:20]: I died to the law through the law, that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ etc.... [AE p. 379] (But this Sabbath is finally kept only when we have died). Therefore these are the right works of the right Sabbath, which proceed from faith, obedience and the command of God; for God works the right Sabbath. That is why God was so strict and severe about the Sabbath in the O.T., by which this spiritual Sabbath was signified. For it all happened in one figure, Col. 2. The old Jewish Sabbath was only a shadow compared to the true Sabbath of the Christians; therefore God also had him stoned who picked up wood on the Sabbath, as it says in Numbers 15. "But this is done for our sakes, that we may be diligent in our observance, and not take or set up anything without God's Word, or contrary to God's Word, but what we do, that we do it by God's command.... [AE p. 383] This addition (of the 4th commandment), that he says: ‘So that you may live long in the land which the LORD your God will give you’, also indicates that the Ten Commandments are given to the Jews alone, and not to the Gentiles. For he speaks here to those to whom the land of Canaan was promised." (S. Luther's Works, Erlangen edition, vol. XXXVI, pp. 32-101. Hall. A. III, 1546. f. [StL 3, 1031 - 1092; Am. Ed. 62, 335 ff. (339, 345, 346, 353, 361, 376, 379, 383)])

Furthermore, Luther wrote in his treatise "Against the Heavenly Prophets of the Images and Sacraments" at the end of 1524 and the beginning of 1525:

"Well, let us get to the bottom of it and say that these teachers of sin and Moses’ prophets should leave us unconfused with Moses, we neither want to see nor hear Moses. How do you like that, my dear enthusiasts? And say further that all such of Moses’ teachers deny the Gospel, drive out Christ, and abolish the whole N.T.. I speak now as a Christian and for Christians. For Moses was given to the Jewish people alone and is no concern of us Gentiles and Christians. We have our Gospel and New Testament: if they prove from them that images are to be abolished, we will gladly follow them. But if they want to turn us into Jews through Moses, we will not suffer it. What do you think? What do you want to become here? That it may be seen how these enthusiasts understand nothing in Scripture,

neither Moses nor Christ, and neither seek nor find therein but their own dreams. And here we take the reason from St. Paul, 1 Tim. 1:9: No law is given to the righteous (as a Christian is). And St. Peter, Acts 15:10: Why tempt ye God to lay upon the disciples a burden which neither we nor our fathers could bear? But we hope to be saved by the grace of Jesus Christ, just as they also were. With this passage (as Paul with his) St. Peter also lifts the whole of Moses with all its laws from the Christians. Yes, you say: That would be true, of the ceremonies and judicatories [outward rules], that is, what Moses teaches about outward worship and outward government; but the Decalogue, that is, the Ten Commandments are not abrogated, in which there is nothing about ceremonies and judicatories. I answer: I know almost well that this is a common old distinction, but it is given without understanding; for from the Ten Commandments flow and hang all the other commandments and the whole of Moses. *) For it is because he wants to be God alone and have no other gods, etc., that he has instituted so many and varied ceremonies or services, and thus interpreted the first commandment through them and taught how it is to be kept. Again, in order that he might be obedient to parents, not suffer adultery, murder, thievery, false witness, he gave the Judicialia or outward rule, so that such commandments might be understood and carried out. Therefore it is not true that there are no ceremonies in the Ten Commandments, or no judicialia; they are all in them and belong in them. And to show that this is so, God himself has put two ceremonies in it with express words, namely the images and the Sabbath, and wants to prove that these two pieces are ceremonies, also abolished in their own way in the New Testament: that one may see how Dr. Carlstadt in his book treats of the Sabbath just as intelligently as of the images. For St. Paul in Col. 2:16-17 speaks freely and clearly: ‘Let no one make you conscience-stricken about food and drink, or about some days, namely the feast days, new moons or Sabbaths, which are the shadow of that which was in the future’. Here St. Paul abolishes the Sabbath by name, and calls it the past shadow, because the body, which is Christ himself, has come. If Carlstadt were to continue to write about the Sabbath, Sunday would still have to give way, and the Sabbath, that is, Saturday, would be celebrated: it would truly make us Jews in all things, that we would also have to circumcise ourselves, and so on. For this is true, and no one can deny it, that he who keeps one law of Moses as the law of Moses, or makes it necessary to keep it, must keep them all as necessary, as St. Paul, Gal. 5:2 concludes, and

———

*) Luther does not here reject the division of the laws of Moses into moral, ceremonial and political laws as such, but only in so far as one wants to maintain, firstly, that in the Ten Commandments only one of these kinds is contained, and secondly, that Moses' law still binds us in the New Testament as a written law in some part.

says: He who allows himself to be circumcised is guilty of keeping the whole law. So also, whoever breaks images or celebrates the Sabbath (that is, whoever teaches the necessity of keeping them) must also be circumcised and keep the whole of Moses, which indeed (if these spirits were given room) they would in time be compelled to do, teach and keep. .. May you say here: You are not saying that the first commandment has been abolished, for we must have a God! Again, one must not commit adultery, murder or steal? Answer: I have spoken of the law of Moses as the law of Moses. For having one God is not the law of Moses alone, but also a natural law, as St. Paul says in Romans 1:20, that the Gentiles know of the Godhead, that there is one God. This is also proved by the fact that they have set up gods and established worship: which would have been impossible if they knew or thought nothing of God, but God revealed it to them by works, etc. Rom 1:19. Now, what is the wonder that the Gentiles have offended the true God and worshipped idols instead of God? The Jews also celebrated and worshipped idols instead of God, even though they had the law of Moses; and they still now offend the Lord Christ, having the gospel of Christ. So it is not only the law of Moses: Thou shalt not murder, commit adultery, steal, etc., but also the natural law written in everyone's heart, as St. Paul teaches in Romans 2:1. Christ Himself also summarizes all the prophets and laws in this natural law, Matt. 7:12: Do to others as you would have them do to you, for this is the law and the prophets. So does St. Paul in Romans 13:9, when he puts all the commandments of the Lord into love, which the natural law also naturally teaches: Love your neighbor as yourself. Otherwise, if it were not naturally written in the heart, one would have to teach and preach the law for a long time before the conscience would accept it: it must also find and feel it in itself, otherwise no one would have a conscience. Although the devil blinds and possesses hearts in such a way that they do not always feel such a law. Therefore it must be written and preached until God works with them and enlightens them so that they feel it in their hearts, as it says in the Word. Now where the law of Moses and the natural law are one, the law remains and is not abolished externally, but becomes spiritual through faith, which is nothing other than fulfilling the law, Rom. 3:28. For this reason, the image and the Sabbath, and all that Moses set more and above the natural law, because it has no natural law, is free, void and abolished, and is given only to the Jewish people in particular: no different than if an emperor or king made special laws and ordinances in his country, such as the Sachsenspiegel in Saxony, and yet the common natural laws prevail and remain throughout all countries, such as honoring parents, not murdering, not committing adultery, serving God, etc. Therefore let Moses be the Sachsenspiegel of the Jews, and let us

Gentiles not swear by it; just as France does not respect the Sachsenspiegel, and yet agrees with it in the natural law, etc. Why then do we keep and teach the Ten Commandments? Answer: Because the natural laws are nowhere so finely and neatly written as in Moses. Therefore one takes the example of Moses." (Luther's Werke, Erlanger Ausg. Vol. XXIX, pp. 150-157. Walch. Vol. XX, 203-211 [StL 20, 146-153; Am. Ed. 40, p. 92-98]).

Thus Luther finally writes in his "Letter to a Good Friend Against the Sabbath-Keepers" of 1538:

"The third commandment of the Sabbath, on which the Jews insist, is in itself a common commandment of all the world; but the ornament to adorn Moses and make it suitable for his people is not laid upon anyone but the Jews alone; just as in the first commandment no one but the Jews alone should especially believe and confess that the common God of all the world has brought them out of Egypt. For the third commandment's actual meaning is that we should teach and hear the Word of God during the day, so that we may sanctify both the day and ourselves; just as Moses and the prophets have always been read and preached among the Jews on the Sabbath day until this day. But where God's Word is preached, it is self-evident that out of necessity one must celebrate and be silent at the same hour or time and speak and listen alone, without any other business, to what God says and teaches us or speaks to us. That is why it is more important to keep the day holy than to celebrate it. For God does not say: You shall celebrate the holy day or make a sabbath (this is probably self-evident), but: Thou shalt sanctify the feast day or sabbath, that it may be more holy than about celebrating. And where one thing should or can be neglected, it is better to neglect the celebrating than to neglect the sanctifying, because the commandment is mostly about keeping it holy and not keeping the Sabbath for its own sake, but for the sake of keeping it holy. But the Jews esteem the celebrating (which God and Moses do not do) more highly, for their own sake, than the sanctifying. The fact that Moses calls it the seventh day and how God created the world in six days, so that they should not work, is the temporal adornment, so that Moses can show this commandment to his people especially at that time. For this was not written before, neither by Abraham nor by the ancient fathers, but is a temporary addition and ornament placed only on this people, who were brought out of Egypt, which is not to remain forever, any more than the whole law of Moses. But the holy things, that is, the teaching and preaching of God's Word, which is the true, pure meaning of this commandment, has been from the beginning and remains for ever and ever in all the world. Therefore the seventh day does not concern us Gentiles, nor does it concern the Jews themselves any longer than until Messiah; although nature and necessity compel that, whatever day or hour God's Word is preached, one must there, as I have said, be silent, celebrate or keep the Sabbath.

For God's Word cannot be heard or taught if one is thinking about something else or is not quiet." (S. Luther's Works, Erlangen edition XXXII, 443. 444. Walch's edition XX, 2305. 2306 [StL 20, 1854-1855; Am. Ed. 47, 91-93]).

II. What is the proper understanding of these words: You shall love God above all things and your neighbor as yourself? ^

In particular, it is the commandment: ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’, which is at issue here, since it is this commandment in particular whose correct understanding is now often not achieved, indeed which is grossly perverted by many. In fact, there are two main misconceptions about this commandment.

1. ^ First of all, it is thought that if one is to love one's neighbor as oneself, this means that one must measure one's demonstrations of love in such a way that one's neighbor does not gain more advantage and benefit from us than we gain for ourselves, that one therefore shares with one's neighbor in this and therefore takes great care that one does not harm oneself in one's demonstrations of love toward one's neighbor, and even if one's neighbor gains advantage through us, that we do not lose an equal share of it. In the words, "Love your neighbor as yourself," two things are implied: first, that you love yourself, and second, that you love your neighbor as yourself. Hence it is customary in common life to say: Every man is his own neighbor, which some of the Church Fathers (and even some Lutheran theologians have followed them in this, although they reject this saying) express thus: Caritas incipit a se ipsa, that is, love begins with oneself. [The rule of today’s psychologists' therapy.] that is, love begins with oneself. From this one draws the conclusion that one does not love one's neighbor as oneself, but more than oneself, which God does not demand if one's works of love, e.g. in hiding a sum of money, are only a loss to oneself and a gain to one's neighbor; whereas God's Word demands as a sign of true love for one's neighbor that one should not look to what is one's own, but to another's, Phil. 2:4, not to seek what is his, but what is another's, 1 Cor. 10:24, <page 15> not to seek what is good for ourselves, but what is good for many, 1 Cor. 10:33, yes, to be willing to lay down one's life for the brethren. 1 John 3:16. The only correct interpretation of the word "love your neighbor as yourself" is therefore that which the Lord Himself gives with the words: "Therefore whatever you want men to do to you, do to them; this is the Law and the Prophets." Matt. 7:12. Our self-love should therefore be the pattern for our love for our neighbor; just as we love ourselves, so sincerely, so fervently, so actively and so constantly, we should also love our neighbor; just as we always begin with ourselves according to our innate self-love, so we should rather begin with our neighbor according to the law and the prophets.

Luther writes about this in his first shorter interpretation of the Epistle

to the Galatians of 1519 and 1523 according to Bugenhagen's translation of 1525:

"He says: As yourself. The examples of all other laws are to be taken outside us, but this is shown to us inwardly within us; and again, because the outward examples are not felt, nor do they live, they do not sufficiently move man. But this example is felt inwardly in the heart, lived and taught most powerfully; not with writings or letters, not with voices, not with thoughts, but with the sense of sensitivity and experience itself. For who does not fully feel in him how he seeks, thinks and tries all things that are salutary, honest and necessary for him? But this very sense and sensitivity is a living indicator, an inner admonition and a present teaching of what you owe your neighbor, namely the very things you seek, and with just such a heart. What need is there for us to trouble ourselves with many books? Why do we seek many masters? Why do we trouble ourselves with many useless works and righteousnesses? For here, that is, to this inward mind and affection, all laws are to be directed and turned, all books and all works are to be directed, and in this a Christian man is to be awakened through all his works and throughout his whole life. Thus no strong example of this divine teaching can be given, for we neither see nor hear it, like the examples of the other laws, but experience and live in it; and we are never without the same, nor the same without us, but always together with one another. So it is a futile and useless question to ask: What or how much do you owe your neighbor? Let the distinctions of the sophistical magistrorum be accursed. The word is written in your heart, Romans 10:8, in such bold letters that you may grasp it, for you live and feel this rule within yourself. He says you should love your neighbor as yourself, no less than you love yourself. But no one can tell you how much you love yourself, except you yourself, who feel it yourself, which can only be guessed by someone else. Therefore, no one can tell you better than you yourself what to do, what not to do, what to say or what to wish for your neighbor. For here the proverb is not true that says: To be your own master is the most shameful thing; indeed, in this matter you are the very best master of yourself and the one who can deceive you the least, although all others are deceitful. The commandment of God is so easy and near at hand that no one can excuse himself if he does not live right... You also learn from this rule, without any teacher, that you can know the difference between works and good works: you must always clearly determine that it is much better to do good to your neighbor, to be willing, to be kind, to speak well, to be helpful, and to arrange your

whole life so that it is of service to your neighbor in love (as the Apostle said above in verse 13), than if you were to build up the churches of the whole world and have merits in all the monasteries and perform all the holy miracles, without thereby serving your neighbor *). Therefore, the written law: Love your neighbor as yourself, says nothing else than what the law of nature says, Matt. 7:12: What you would that men should do to you (that is, love yourself), do the same things also to them, that is, just as much as you love yourself, so love others also. But what else does the whole Gospel teach? The law, then, which goes through the whole world, is well known to all men, written in the hearts of all men, and will leave no one excused from beginning to end; although the Jews also had their own laws concerning ceremonies and other peoples, which did not bind the whole world, but that law alone, which the Spirit injects into every heart without ceasing. It must also be borne in mind here that some fathers have taken from the words of this commandment the delusion that an ordered love arises from itself. For they say that self-love is prescribed as a rule according to which you shall love your neighbor. I will also give my opinion on this, and it is this: I understand the commandment to mean that it does not command us to love ourselves, but only to love our neighbor. First of all, because the love of self is first in all men and reigns supreme. Secondly, if God had wanted this order, he would have said thus: Love yourself, and then your neighbor as yourself. But now he says: Love your neighbor as yourself, that is, love him as you already love yourself without any commandment. [Luther!] So too the apostle in 1 Corinthians 13:5 gives this as a predicate of love: that it should not seek what is its own; with these words he completely denies the love of self. So also Christ commanded his own denial, and hatred of his own life, Mark 8:35. He also tells the Philippians clearly [Phil. 2:4]: that no one should seek what is his, but what serves others. Finally,

————

*) The speaker cannot refrain from reminding us how extremely important this statement is. A person can do a lot for church purposes and still not be a Christian. Great sacrifices for the affairs of the kingdom of God only too easily bring the false comfort into the heart that one must be a true Christian and have a share in heaven; hence many a man is generous here, while he lives in self-interest towards his neighbor. But God's Word teaches, and all righteous preachers should repeat it again and again, that only good works are those which are done out of love for one's neighbor and in service to him, and therefore only those who are driven and guided in their whole life not by selfishness but by the love of their neighbor can make sacrifices pleasing to God for godly purposes. He who does much for the church and yet is stingy towards his poor neighbor and greedy for gain in trade and commerce is bitterly deceiving himself with that zeal in giving.

if man had true love for himself, he would not need the grace of God. For this same love, if it is right, loves both itself and its neighbor; for the law wants no other love than this. But, as I said, the law presupposes that man loves himself; and Christ, when he says Matt. 7:12, ‘All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you’, shew clearly that even now the will and love of self is in them, and do not do anything here, as you see for yourself. Therefore it seems to me, according to my understanding, that the law speaks of the wrong love with which each one forgets his neighbor and seeks only those things that are useful and beneficial to him; which love is "rightly ordered" when one forgets himself and serves his neighbor alone. This is also shown by the members of the body, each of which serves the other, even with danger. For the hand fights for the head and receives the injury; the feet go into the dirt and dung and water, so that they may redeem the whole body. But it is also quite dangerous for the inclination and the affect of one's own benefit to be nourished under this order of love, which Christ wanted to lay down with the commandment... For this reason I want to admonish everyone to beware of such pagan teachings and sayings; Proximus esto tibi, that is, you should be your (own) neighbor; and: Every man for himself, God for all; and the like; for they are false and perverse, as the commandment indicates." (S. Luther's Works, Walch's ed. IX, 297-305 [StL 8, 1590-1597; Am. Ed. 27, 351-357])

Thus Luther also writes in a more detailed interpretation of the Letter to the Galatians of 1535:

"Therefore people are exceedingly wrong who think they understand this commandment very well: Love your neighbor as yourself. It is true that we all have it in our hearts and know by nature that everyone should do to his neighbor as he would have him do to him. But it does not follow that we understand it rightly; otherwise we would also prove it in deed and prefer love to all other works. But because the works saints think so highly and greatly of the works they themselves have chosen, without, indeed contrary to God's command, such as looking sour, hanging one's head, living unmarried, eating bread and water, dwelling in deserts, wearing gray robes, and the like, it is a certain indication that they consider love, which is the sun among all works, to be little, indeed nothing at all. Such is the incomprehensible and inordinate nature of the blindness of human reason that it can neither understand nor judge anything rightly, not only of the doctrine of faith, but also of the works that God has commanded and is pleased with... If then you want to know how you should love your neighbor, and have a clear and certain example of this, consider with diligence how much you love yourself; then you will certainly find that you

love yourself so much that you would gladly be helped and advised when you were in distress and need, not only by as many people with their bodies and goods, but also as much as all creatures are able. Therefore you do not need a book to teach you how to love your neighbor. For you have in your heart the finest and best book, in which you will find described everything that all kinds of laws may teach you, and you need neither a doctor nor a teacher: just ask your own heart, and it will tell you that you should love your neighbor as yourself. Therefore love, if it is not false, is such a virtue that is ready and willing to serve not only with tongue and hand, but also with body and life. It cannot be induced to serve by the fact that one has previously served her and done her good, nor can it be prevented by the fact that one has previously done her harm and evil, take this as an example: A mother nurtures and cares for her child, does not allow herself to be put off by any toil or labor; indeed, the more impure and sick the child is, the greater the diligence and care for the child. The child does not deserve this, indeed, it only causes her much trouble. What does it do that she does not become weary, etc.? She is a mother, that is, she loves the child, etc. So Christian love also shows itself towards everyone." (S. Luther's Works, Walch's ed.. VIII. 2695-97 [StL 9, 668-669; Am. Ed. 27, 56-58]).

2. ^ Another misconception and misapplication of the phrase, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’, is that one believes one must draw the conclusion from it that it is therefore against the love of one's neighbor that I am rich or a master and let my neighbor remain poor or a servant. This would in fact abolish equality, because I would then necessarily have to love myself more than my neighbor, for if I loved him as I love myself, I would also make him equal to me. But this principle is just as troublesome and confusing to the conscience as it would, if it were carried out, overthrow all orders in the world. For if this alleged understanding of the words, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’, were correct, then, first, no man could in good conscience have and enjoy anything that his neighbor would not also have and enjoy, and, secondly, absolute Communism would be the only right relation among men in regard to their goods. But the words: ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’, have a completely different meaning. Their interpretation, as already noted, is given by the Lord Himself in the words: "Therefore whatever you want men to do to you, do to them," Matt. 7:12. These words do not mean that I should put my neighbor in my place, but that I should put myself in my neighbor's place and do to him as I would want him to do to me if I were in his place, that is, if I thought it fair and right for him to do to me. If, for example, my neighbor is poor and I am rich, I should act towards him as I would think fair,

that he should act towards me if I myself were poor and my neighbor rich. But what would I then want and consider it fair and right to do to me? Not that the other should share with me all that he had, and make himself equal to me, for then a second poor man would come, a third, a fourth, and so on, and thus there would be an eternal sharing, and neither human nor divine order could exist. Not only would such sayings of the Word of God then lose their validity: "The rich and the poor must be among themselves, the Lord has made them all," Prov. 22:2; but even the rule of the seventh, ninth and tenth commandments would thus be abolished. Much less would I be able to wish in this case that the rich man would give me all his <page 16> wealth and thus make me rich and himself poor. But I would wish and consider it fair that the rich man should help me according to my need and according to his means, taking into account other poor people who have the same or perhaps a greater need; that he should either, where necessary, give and bestow alms, or lend me money, or give me work, or at least provide me with work and with it bread, or otherwise take care of my need. Just as I would want someone to do for me if I were in my neighbor's place, so I should do for him if I want to love my neighbor as myself. The same would be the case if I were master and my neighbor my servant. Love does not demand that I make my servant something other than he is by God's providence, or even that I make myself a servant and him a master; but that I deal with him as I would want him to deal with me if I were in a superior position, that is, if he were my master and I his servant.

Luther wrote about this in his "Exhortation to Pastors to Preach Against Usury" of 1540:

"Christ teaches his Christians that they should deal with temporal goods in three ways, of which we have often said, and Matt. 5:42, Luke 6:30 is clear. First, that they should give gladly. You shall give to everyone who asks you. Secondly, they should lend gladly or let them borrow; of this Christ says Luke 6:35: You should lend and not hope or expect anything from it. Thirdly, a Christian should also let him take the cloak for his coat, of which Matthew 5:40-41... Yes, you say, how can I give to everyone? It ought to be (as they say) a rich merchant who should feed us; for it is impossible, even to Caesar, to give to everyone; God alone can do it, and no man... When our Lord thus says Matt. 5:42: You should give to everyone; here everyone does not mean that I should give to all men or to all the poor on earth. He knows this well, as it is impossible. But in this place he speaks against the Jewish mind, which had this text in the law before it, v. 43: You shall love your friend and hate your enemy. From this they taught and held that one

should not give to everyone, but only to friends, because one should only love one's friends and hate one's enemies. Christ says against this: You should give to everyone, that is, not only to your friends, but also to your enemy, and exclude no one in his need or distress, whether friend or foe. His words make this clear when he says in v. 47: "If you give or do good to your friends alone, what great thing have you done? Do not the wicked and tax collectors do likewise, and give to their friends? On the other hand, such a man is not called one who otherwise has or can have enough; for there are (especially at this time) many wicked scoundrels beyond all measure, who make themselves poor, needy and beggarly, and cheat the people, to whom one should let Master Hans give his alms with the rope and sack, if the authorities were not so careless and lazy and let the gallows be set up and celebrated in the streets in vain. And so there are many more lazy people who, fresh, healthy and strong, could well work, serve and feed themselves, but rely on the fact that Christians and pious people are happy to give. And where giving is not enough or does not give enough, they make up for it by stealing, indeed by taking freely in public, in the courtyards, in the streets, even in houses. . Christ did not command you here to give to such, but only to the poor in your city, or around you, as Moses also taught in Deut. 24:14, who cannot work, serve and feed themselves, or whose faithful work and service will not suffice. Here one should help, give, lend, whether friend or foe. A Christian can do this well, and it is not so difficult for him, especially where the rulers live with foreign beggars and pranksters or unknown and lazy people. Thirdly, if a Christian is to give, he must first have; that which has not, gives nothing. And if he is to give tomorrow or the day after tomorrow or for a year (for Christ calls me to give as long as I live), he cannot give it all away today. Therefore, since the Lord Christ gives to give, he certainly gives to those who have and are able to give. Otherwise it is said: ‘Run me in the hand’. But the monks have masterfully escaped this commandment. Some have had nothing to leave and have sought their bellies alone in the monastery (indeed in the kitchens). There were some who gave everything away for one day, but they took everything for eternity and gave it to them for the rest of their lives and until they had received more than the world itself has. Yes, that is a fine gift: a penny for a thousand guilders, that is, very cheap. On the other hand, St. Paul teaches the Corinthians (1 Cor. 8:13-14) that he does not want them to give in such a way that they should suffer hardship and those to whom they give should be in good health. No, this is not what our Lord Christ desires, that I should make myself a beggar with my goods, and the beggar my master; but that I should take care of his need and help him as much as I can,

that the poor may eat with me, and I may not eat with the poor, or take from my house and give to strangers. A Christian can do this even against his enemy, even if a Jew or pagan would not do this against his enemy. That is, since he says: Give to everyone who asks you; but he who does not need it cannot ask, but must be a knave. To be in want" (or need) "is also many things. Sometimes one needs a great deal and too much for his useless, shameful splendor. The devil may give them enough. Christ speaks to his Christians, who are called to suffer with him and who need this world's life for eternal life, each according to his state; as he says in Luke 12:29: "Do not be lifted up. It is said: Habentes victum, for the necessities of the body we shall all have enough, and not leave anyone behind, not even the enemy, as St. Paul says, 1 Tim. 6:8: God gives us all plenty for our use, etc.... Secondly, lending is to be spoken of in the same way as giving is spoken of. First, that a Christian should lend, not only to his friend, but also to his enemy, as the Lord says Matt. 5:46 and Luke 6:34: If you only lend to your friends, what are you doing more than anything else? Do not the ungodly also lend one to another, that they may receive the same in return? Secondly, to lend to the needy, and not to the mischievous, or lazy, or proud, as is said above about giving; of which says Sirach 29:4: Some think that what they borrow is found, but do not think to give it back. Such lazy rascals abuse this commandment of Christ, relying on the fact that one is obliged to lend; therefore one should not lend to them. Thirdly, to lend is to have it in one's power to lend, and to be able to lend tomorrow or for a year. Otherwise the saying is true: If you do not give it back to me, I cannot lend it to you again, that is, I must let it go, because I no longer have it to lend. On the other hand, the children of Adam are also so bitter: if they should lend a turnip stalk to the one who has offended them, they would rather give him everything that the mercenaries curse, and still want to be called Christians and go to the sacrament. Therefore let every man see to it, according to his conscience, when, where, how much and to whom he should or must lend or give. In this no other measure can be taken than the neighbor's need and Christian love, which God has commanded us to show to our neighbor, just as we would have shown to others in the same case, whether we were friends or enemies. Such a loan is neither difficult nor impossible, so that the sophists here have not had cause to change our Lord's commandment and to make of it their good pleasure, which they call consilia or councils; for reason teaches us that one should do to another what one would like to have another do to them, as the Lord says there in Matt. 7:12:

Whatever you would have others do to you, do also; this is the law and all the prophets; indeed, all natural law also says this. Now it is certain that I would like people to give to me, to lend to me, to help me in my need. Again, it is certain that no one should give, lend, or help me where I have no need of it, am lazy, am a rogue, want to splurge, do not want to work, do nothing, nor suffer, when I could do so, am healthy, am strong, and lack nothing, except that people are too pious and give me enough, when it would be more reasonable for them to beat me to death and drive me out of the country, or hang me on the gallows." (Luther's Werke. Walch's edition X, 1056-1067 [StL 10, 886-895; Am. Ed. 61, 306-314]; Erlangen edition XXIII, 310-320).

(To be continued.)

————————

Doctrine and Defense.

Volume VII. December 1861. No. 12.

Essay on the Law. ^

(Continuation and conclusion.)

3. ^ Finally, to the proper understanding of the word "love your neighbor as yourself," which is rare even in our day, belongs this, that the commandment to love one's neighbor is the greatest and noblest next to the commandment to love God, and therefore love is the master of all commandments and the standard of their fulfillment, as Scripture (Rom. 13:8-10) expressly calls love the law, and indeed according to Gal. 5:14, the fulfillment of all laws.

Luther writes about this in his Church Postil on the Epistle of the 4th Sunday after Epiphany:

"Many books and doctrines have been given to instruct the lives of men, so that there is neither number nor end to them, and there is still no end to the making of books and laws, as we see in spiritual and secular laws and spiritual orders and estates. And if all this were still to be suffered and a special grace, when such laws and doctrines would all be drawn and acted upon according to the main law, rule and measure of love; as the Holy Scriptures do, which also give many and various laws, but all of them are drawn and held in love, to which love also subjects them all. So that they must all give way and never be law, nor be valid where love is concerned. We read many examples of this in Scripture, and especially Christ himself shows Matt. 12:3-5, how David ate the holy shewbread with his companions. For although there was a law that no one should eat such holy bread except the priests alone, yet here love was a free empress over the same law, and compelled it under her control, so that it had to give way and cease at the time when David was hungry, and had to suffer such judgment: David is hungry, he should be helped; as love says: Do good to your neighbor where he needs it. Therefore desist, thou law, and forbid him not to do such good; but do him good yourself, and serve him in need, and catch him not with

thy prohibition. Again, thus he also says there that on the Sabbath one should do good to the neighbor who needs it, just as the law forbids doing anything on the Sabbath; but because there is need to help the neighbor, love should take precedence and the Sabbath should count for nothing. Now if the laws were thus drawn into love, and if all of them were obeyed according to love, it would not matter how many of them there were. For he who would not hear or learn them all could hear and learn a few, one or two, in which he would learn the same love that is taught in all. And if he hears and learns them all, if he could not recognize love in all of them, he would still recognize it in one law. This rule and way of mastering and understanding the laws is also given here by St. Paul, when he says [Rom. 13:8]: "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. Again: All the commandments are summed up in the commandment: Love your neighbor as yourself. Item: Love does no harm to one's neighbor. Item: Love is the fulfillment of the law. All the words of this epistle conclude by saying that love is master over all laws. Again, where the law is taught and practiced without love and apart from love, there is no greater misfortune, no greater injustice, no more miserable misery on earth. For there the law is nothing but a plague and a ruin. There the proverb is true: Summum jus, summa injustitia, the most severe law is the most severe injustice. And Solomon Ecclesiastes 7:17: Noli nimium esse justus, do not be too strictly just. Yes, we let the beam stick in our eye and do not know it, and we deal with it by tearing the splinter out of our neighbor's eye; we make stupid, frightened and despondent consciences, without all need and cause, and with great damage to body and soul. And there is great toil and labor, and yet all is lost. We can prove this with examples: if, in the case mentioned above, when David was hungry (1 Sam. 21:6), the priest had not wanted to give him the holy bread, and had been so blind that he had stood on the law and not recognized love, and had denied him the food, what would have become of it? As much as it would have depended on him, David would have died of hunger, and the priest would have committed murder for the sake of the law; there would certainly have been nothing else but summum jus, summa injustitia, the most severe law is the most severe injustice. Moreover, if you look into the heart of such a mad priest, you will find the abominable abomination that he makes sin and conscience where there is no sin and conscience; for he thinks that it is sin to eat bread when it is love and a good work. Again, he does not consider murder a sin to let David die of hunger, but a good work and worship. But who can sufficiently recount such abominable, blind, perverse folly? For with such a deal he does so evil that the devil could not do worse: namely, by creating sin and conscience, when

there is none, he takes away grace, salvation, virtue, and God with all his goods; and all this without cause and also falsely and deceitfully, so that he denies and condemns God through and through. Again, because he makes a good work and service of God out of murder and injustice, he puts the devil and lies in the place of God and causes the highest idolatry that can be, and thus corrupts body and soul; murders the body through hunger and the soul through conscience; makes God a devil and the devil a god; heaven a hell and hell a heaven; sins become law and law sins. This, I think, is what it means to be perverted, and the strongest right to become the strongest wrong. All kinds of laws should therefore be given, ordained, and kept, not for their own sake, nor for the sake of works, but only for the exercise of love; which is also the right opinion of the law, as St. Paul says here: He who loves another has fulfilled the law; so that if it is seen that it is not for the benefit of the neighbor, but for harm, it should be left behind. For one law can be beneficial to a neighbor at one time and harmful at another. So it is if one wants to govern the people according to the law and the work and not the laws according to the people, just as the driver directs the road according to the cart. Now it is true that the road often follows the cart, goes straight ahead; but again, sometimes it goes crookedly and unevenly, when it really wants the cart to be bent and uneven. So it must be that people follow the law and the work where they can and where it is good for them. But again, where it is harmful to them, the law should truly bend and give way, and the ruler should be wise, so that he leaves room for love and abolishes works and laws." (Luther's Works, Erl. ed. VIII, 52-60. Walch's ed. XII, 488-497 [StL 12, 364-370; not in Am. Ed.?])

Furthermore, Luther writes in his 1522 treatise "On Spiritual and Monastic Vows":

"The Lord Christ has now made this example a common rule, since he thus teaches two similar things: David broke the law that forbade the eating of holy bread, and therefore in an emergency one may break the Sabbath and all laws (Mark 2:25 ff.). For if this consequence did not follow, Christ would not have proved rightly that the Sabbath could be broken by the same example of another law that David broke when he ate shewbread. Therefore it is clear here that the divine commandments always exclude the case of distress, not only of souls, but also of bodies and goods. For the reason that one law may be broken, from the same reason any other law may be broken, that is, interpreted and explained in the right understanding, as far as it binds or does not bind. For the passage John 10:35 remains nevertheless true, that the Scripture cannot

be broken. [Note the above and below on John 10:35!] And Matt. 5:18, that one letter or one word of the law shall not pass away until all be fulfilled. Therefore when I say, I may break the commandment, I may break the law, that is to say, I may break its wrong understanding (as David did) and keep the right one. So Christ says Matt. 12:5: The priests in the temple break the Sabbath and do not sin. In addition, the Sabbath may be broken not only for the sake of soul and body, but also for the sake of goods, such as pulling an ox or donkey out of the pit or watering it, as the Gospel says in Luke 14:5. And this is all that is said: God did not give his commandment that body, soul, and goods should perish because of it, but that you should use these things in faith and fear of God and his commandments. Therefore they are always to be understood in such a way that you also remember no less that he created your body, soul and possessions, and that he also wants you to have respect and concern for these things in faith. So if any of these things are in danger, that you may know that his commandments will never be commandments, but that you may break them for the sake of necessity... And if some perverse, clever person were to say: "I hear well, for the same reason I would also commit adultery, murder, steal, and break all of God's commandments?" The short answer is: there can be no such need. To sum up: to interpret, understand and mitigate all laws, all commandments and vows there is no certain, better rule than Christian love alone. For no commandment or law should, nor can it, be understood or mitigated in cases that are contrary to love. For it is impossible for a case of necessity to arise in matters that are contrary to love. Again, everything that is not contrary to love is free; you may mitigate all laws, especially in the case of adversity. And consider the passage of Paul in Romans 13:8: Owe no one anything except to love one another. Dearly beloved, who wants to make another law to be kept above the law of Paul? And if it is already made, by vows or otherwise, how can you be obliged to keep it, how can it bind you, when the holy Apostle says: "Owe no one anything except to love one another"? Therefore the vows that we wish to make we may well keep, but we are not bound to keep them; Christ says Matt. 7:12: This is the law and the prophets. And also Matt. 22:20: In these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Therefore against love, or above the commandment of love, nothing can or ought to bind, nor does anything bind, whether commandment or vow, whatever it may be on earth. Now it is easy to see why it is impossible, and by no means quite right, to mitigate or dispense the laws of God in adultery, murder, thievery, where there is no need, and the like; again, why they may be mitigated

in the vow of chastity and other vows. Namely, that in the same vows love is acted and commanded against; but in the others, where murder, adultery, etc. are forbidden, love is not violated, but is thereby kept. And Christ also confirms this in Matt. 12:7, where he prefers mercy to all commandments and laws, saying to the Pharisees who insisted on the Sabbath, "If you knew what this is, that I desire mercy and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the innocent. In the same way, he wants mercy to be shown where the body or property is in need, and the law should not be understood to be contrary to need or to bind in need. In the same way the Lord Christ blames the apostles, when they plucked the ears of corn in the sowing season, for being hungry, that is, for needing mercy in time of need. But so it is not with faith toward God; for God is not for man's sake, but man for God's sake." (Luther's Werke, Walch's edition XX, 2025-2032 [sic: StL 19, 1653 - 1658])

Finally, Luther writes in the Church Postil on the Gospel on the 18th Sunday after Trinity:

"But what does Abraham do to him? He closes his mind, takes his reason captive, and obeys the voice of the Lord, went and did as God commanded him. Thus he proved that this commandment was from his heart; otherwise, if he had killed his son a hundred times, God would not have asked anything about it; but God saw that this work was done from the heart and out of the love of God. Afterwards the Jews wanted to follow this example and sacrificed their children to God just as Abraham did. But why was this work of the Jews not pleasing to God? Because it was not done from the heart and out of the love of God, but they looked only at the work, and did it afterwards without command or word from God; but God says: "Dear sirs, it is not because Abraham sacrificed his son that I am concerned, but that he proved by this deed that he loves me with all his heart. Love must first be in the heart, then do works, and they will be pleasing to God: for all the works of the law are designed to show the love of God that is in the heart, which love the law requires and desires above all things. For this reason it is also to be noted here that all the works of the law are not commanded to be done badly; no, no; for even if God had given more commandments, he would not want them to be kept to the detriment and harm of love; indeed, if they are against the love of one's neighbor, he wants them to be torn up and overthrown. If the law is contrary to love, it ceases and should no longer be a law. But where there is no hindrance, the keeping of the law is an indication of the love that lies hidden in the heart. For this is why laws are needed, so that love may be demonstrated by them; but if they cannot be kept without harming one's neighbor, God wants them to be abolished and

taken away. It is as if a householder were to command a servant to work the land, and the servant were to go and wash the dishes. Should not the householder be justly angry with the servant? So it is with God, who wants his commandments to be kept, and that they should be honored more than the commandments of men, and that all commandments should be done in love. Therefore, as I said, the law should only be an exercise to prove love; otherwise, without love, God asks nothing about the works, they are as beautiful as they want to be. Now you see how many people there are who know what this law is: You shall love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself. Of course, there are few of them and even fewer who keep it. How could they keep what they do not know? We are blind, and our very nature is blind; and human reason knows nothing less than what the law of God wants." (Luther's Works, Erlang. ed. XIV, 139-144. Walch's ed. XI, 2254-2260 [StL 11, 1689-1693; Am. Ed. 79, xxx; Lenker 5, 172 f.])

III. Why must the Law also be proclaimed in the New Testament and also to Christians? ^

The answer to this is threefold:

1. ^ Because the law contains the unchangeable will of God, indelibly written in the heart of every human being, as the eternal, irrevocable and unchanging guideline for all beings created for the knowledge and fellowship of God, as Christ expressly says: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets. I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matt. 5:17-19. <page 17>

Luther wrote about this in his 1539 treatise "Against the Antinomians":

"Whoever does away with the Law must also do away with sin. If he wants to let sin stand, he must rather let the Law stand. For (Romans 5:13) where there is no law, there is no sin: if there is no sin, Christ is nothing. For why, if there is neither law nor sin, does he die for it? From this we see that the devil does not mean to take away the law by this spiritualization, but Christ, the fulfiller of the law. For he well knows that Christ can be taken away soon and easily; but the law is written in the heart, that it cannot be taken away: as is well seen in the Psalms of lamentation, where the dear saints cannot bear the

wrath of God, which can be nothing else than the painful preaching of the law in the conscience. And the devil also knows well that it is not possible to take away the law from the hearts, as St. Paul testifies in the second chapter of Romans [Rom. 2:12], that the Gentiles who did not receive the law through Moses, and therefore have no law, are nevertheless their own law, as those who must testify that the work of the law is written in their hearts, etc. But he [the devil] proceeds to make people secure, and teaches them to have no regard for either the law or sin, so that if they should suddenly be overtaken with death or an evil conscience, having previously been accustomed to sweet assurance, they might sink to hell without any counsel, as if they had been taught nothing but sweet assurance in Christ; therefore such terror would be a sure sign that Christ (who must be sweetness itself) had rejected and forsaken them. This is what the devil seeks and desires." (Luther's Werke, Erlang. Walch's Edition XX, 2019. 2020 [StL 20, 1614-1615; Am. Ed. 47, 110-111])

With the latter words Luther obviously wants to say that whoever knows what the law is and that it still proves its power will not despair even in the felt terror of conscience, for he will turn from the law to the Gospel, where he will find what the law demands. But if one thinks that the law has been taken away and yet is assailed by the terror of conscience, there is no help, counsel or consolation available.

Furthermore, Luther writes in his Church Postil in the second sermon on the Gospel on the 18th Sunday after Trinity:

"Thus it is first given to us through Christ that we do not fulfill the law, and that sin is completely forgiven; but not so or given to us that we should henceforth not keep the law, and always continue to sin, or that one should teach thus: If you have faith, you may (need) no longer love God and your neighbor; but that the law may only now be begun and kept, which is the eternal, immutable, unchangeable will of God." (Luther's Werke, Erl. ed. XIV, 154. 155. Walch's ed. XI, 2273 [StL 11, 1703-1704; Am. Ed. 79, xxx; Lenker 5, 188])

Furthermore, in his "Sermon on the Difference between the Law and the Gospel" of 1532, Luther writes:

"It is true that the law or the Ten Commandments have not been abolished in such a way that we are now free from them and may not have them. (For Christ has freed us from the curse, not from the obedience of the law.) No, he does not want that; but that we should keep them with all diligence and earnestness; but where we have done so, not trust in them, nor where we have not done so, despair. Therefore see to it that you rightly distinguish between the two words and do not give more to the law than is due to it; otherwise you will deny the gospel. Nor should you regard the gospel and think of it in such a way that the law perishes; but let each one remain in its circle and compass." (Luther's Werke, Erl. ed. XIX, 244. Walch's ed. IX, 422. 423 [StL 9, 807; Am. Ed. 57, ~72])

Furthermore, in his second disputation "Against the Antinomians" of 1538, Luther writes:

"Just as the law existed before Christ and condemned us under Christ, but was redeemed and reconciled through the forgiveness of sins and is now to be fulfilled by the Spirit, so it will remain fulfilled after Christ in the life to come, when the creature (as the law now requires) has become completely new. Therefore the law will never be abolished in eternity, but remains either to be fulfilled in the damned or fulfilled in the saved. But these, Satan's disciples, have these thoughts, as it seems that the law is only given for a time and is abolished after Christ's coming, like circumcision." — Furthermore, Luther writes in the third disputation: "Although the law could be done away with according to the grammar and the dead letter (for this must be the opinion of these enthusiasts), as one erases something written on a tablet; but who would rather tear the living law, which is written in our hearts and which stands before us as a handwriting that cannot be erased (which is of the same kind as Moses' law) from our conscience?" (Luther's Werke. Walch's ed. XX, 2044. 2048 [StL 20, 1635, 1638; Am. Ed. 73, 56, 59])

Finally, Luther writes about Christ's words in Matt. 5:19. in his "Interpretation of the 5th, 6th and 7th chapters of Matthew" of 1532:

"I will hold so firmly, says he (Christ), that I not only do not want to abolish any (commandment), but whoever is a preacher and abolishes or lets go the least part, he should know that he is not my preacher, but should be condemned and cast out of the kingdom of heaven. For that he says he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven is nothing other than that he shall not be in the kingdom of heaven, but, as he thinks he is little, that he despises God's commandment, so shall he be despised and cast away." (See Luther's Works, Erl. ed. XLIII, 88. Walch's ed. VII, 635 [StL 7, 425; Am. Ed. 21, 71])

2. ^ The second reason why the law must also be preached in the New Testament is that only those who recognize their sins can come to faith in Christ and to knowledge of his reconciling and redeeming work and suffering; but knowledge of sin comes through the law alone. For it is not only written: "Through the law comes knowledge of sin," Rom. 3:20, but also: "I did not know sin without the law. Without the law sin dead." Romans 7:7-8. But at the same time the Scripture testifies to us: "But the law came in beside, that sin might be made more powerful. But where sin has become powerful, grace has become much more powerful." Rom. 5:20. Hence St. Paul, in his letter to the Romans, when he wants to give the whole of was God's counsel for our salvation, first proves from the law that "both Jews and Greeks," that is, all men, "are all under sin." Rom. 3:9.

Luther writes about this in the Gospel on the Sunday after Christmas Day:

"If a person is to become spiritual and come to faith, he must first be under the law; therefore, without the law no one recognizes himself for what he lacks; but he who does not know himself does not seek grace. But when the law comes, it demands so much that man feels and must confess that he is not able to fulfill it; he must then despair of himself and, humbled, sigh for God's grace." (Luther's Works, Erl. ed. X, 283. 284. Walch's ed. XI, 369 [StL 11, 267; Am. Ed. 75, 424; Lenker 1, 290-291])

Thus Luther further writes in his "Writing Against the Antinomians" of 1539:

"Where will one learn what Christ is, what he has done for us, when we are not to know what the law is (which he fulfills for us) or what sin is, for which he has done enough? And even if we could not preach the law for ourselves and tear it out of our hearts (which is impossible), we must preach it for Christ's sake (as is done and must be done), so that it may be known what he has done and suffered for us. For who can know what Christ suffered for us and why, if no one knows what sin or law is? Therefore the law must be preached where Christ is to be preached. Even if one does not want to use the word law, the conscience is still frightened by the law, when the sermon says that Christ had to fulfill the law for us, Matt. 5:17, Gal. 3:13; why do we want to do away with something that cannot be done away, but is strengthened all the more by doing away with it? For the law frightens me even more when I hear that Christ, the Son of God, had to bear it for me, neither if it were preached to us apart from Christ and without such great martyrdom of the Son of God, but only with tribulation. For in the Son of God I see, as in fact, the wrath of God, which the law shows me with words and small works." (See Luther's Werke, Erl. ed. XXXII, 7-8. Walch's ed. XX, 2022. 2023 [StL 20, 1616-1617; Am. Ed. 47, 113])

3. ^ Finally, the law must also be preached to those who have already become true Christians, for the reason that even the believing, enlightened, born-again Christian, who is of course willing to do all good, is not yet completely enlightened and renewed, but has the old Adam, that is, flesh and blood, and therefore still needs the teaching of the law, even terror and compulsion; as we see then that the law is also preached to Christians through the whole of Holy Scripture.

Luther wrote about this in his fifth disputation "Against the Antinomians" in 1539:

"The law rules over man as long as he lives. But he is freed from the law when he dies. It is therefore necessary for man to die if he wants to be freed from the law. Now if the law rules over man as long as he lives, sin also rules over him as long as he lives.

Therefore man must die if he wants to be freed from sin, for the law is the power of sin, and sin is the sting of death. These three, law, sin and death, cannot be separated from each other. Therefore, as long as death is still in man, sin and the law are in man. We receive the law apart from Christ, that is, the letter, which has not yet been fulfilled, but must necessarily be fulfilled by us. In Christ, indeed, the law is fulfilled, sin is put away, death is destroyed; that is, if we have been crucified and died in Christ through faith, these things have truly happened in us: but if we live, we are not yet in Christ, but live apart from Christ under the law, sin, and death. But the matter itself and experience testify that even the righteous or faithful are subjected and delivered to death daily. Therefore, as far as they are under death, they must also be under the law and sin. It is especially coarse and inexperienced people and harmful deceivers of consciences who want to take the law away from the church. For such an undertaking is not only foolish and contrary to God, but also impossible. For if you want to take away the law, you must also take away sin and death at the same time; for death and sin are or arise through the law, as St. Paul says: The law kills, 2 Cor. 3:6. Again: the law is the power of sin, 1 Cor. 15:56. But since you are faced with the fact that the righteous die daily, it is a very great folly to suppose that they are without law. For if there were no law, there would be neither sin nor death. Therefore they should first prove that the righteous are without all sin and death, or that they no longer live in the flesh, but have been taken out of the world altogether: then it would be rightly taught that the law has been abolished for them and cannot be taught in any way. But because they cannot prove this, but experience sets the contrary before their eyes, they are beyond measure impudent teachers, that they presume to cast the law out of the churches. But when they fabricate that their church or its listeners are bad, that all godly people and Christians are without the law, then it is openly evident that they are mad and frenzied and do not know what they are saying or stating. For this is nothing other than to think that all their hearers are taken away from this life. But to have such thoughts is like letting someone dream that a wonderful play is being held on an empty stage and that he is watching. For in this world, as long as it exists, both the righteous who live in the flesh and the wicked (who are always more in number) are mixed together. Now as the law is given without doubt that it should not be rejected, but taught, that by it men may know both sin and death, or the wrath of God: so also is it given to the godly, as long as they have not yet died and are still in the

flesh. In Christ, who was raised from the dead, there is certainly no sin, no death, no law, to which he was subject in life. But the same, our Lord Christ, is not yet fully raised in his saints; indeed, in them, as firstfruits, he only begins to rise from death. But in the ungodly, who are mixed in the church and are greater in number than the pious, he is still dead in all things, indeed he is nothing in them; they are wicked under the law and must be frightened by the law, indeed, where possible, with physical thunderbolts. Now, as far as Christ is raised in us, so far are we without law, sin and death; but as far as he is not yet raised up in us, so far are we and remain under the law, sin and death. Therefore the law (as well as the gospel) must be preached without distinction, both to the righteous, or believers, and to the ungodly; to the ungodly, that they may be alarmed thereby to recognize their sin, death, and the inevitable wrath of God, by which they will be humbled; to the godly, that they may be reminded thereby to crucify and mortify their flesh, together with lusts and vices, so that they may not be secure, Gal. 5:24, for security takes away both faith and the fear of God, and makes the latter worse than the former was. It may be considered certain that the legalists dream that sin is essentially taken away by Christ, as it is in itself, as the philosophers or worldly wise men and jurists also speak of it; and that they do not understand at all that sin alone has been taken away in such a way that God does not impute it to man (Ps. 32:2), but forgives it out of mercy; for sin is given as a gift of grace, not abolished according to its substance and nature, just as the law is not so abolished, nor death destroyed; and all this for Christ's sake in this life, until we come and become a perfect man, in the measure of the perfect stature of Christ, Eph. 4:13 [sic]." (Luther's Werke. Walch's ed. XX, 2053-2057 [StL 20, 1642-1645; Am. Ed. 73, 63-65])

Furthermore, Luther writes in the Church Postil on the Gospel on the 5th Sunday after Trinity:

"But this is also to be known, that the doctrine of the law is not to be completely abandoned even among those who are Christians, but because it is still the case with Christians that they still live in the flesh and blood, which stirs with sinful lusts, and therefore must remain in daily repentance: so they still need such preaching and admonition for this purpose, that after receiving forgiveness of sins they do not again become secure, nor give place to the flesh against the Spirit, Gal. 5:13." (Luther's Works, Erl. ed. XIII, 118. Walch's ed. XI, 1798 [StL 11, 1330-1331; Am. Ed. 78, 217-218; Lenker 4, 161])

Luther writes further in his "Report of M. Johann Eisleben's

False Doctrine and Shameful Deed", from the year 1539 :

"For even we, who have been made holy through grace, nevertheless live in a sinful body, and must allow ourselves to be punished, frightened, killed and sacrificed by the law for the sake of such other sin, even to the pits; so that the law in this life before and after must always be lex occidens, damnans, accusans (a killing, condemning, accusing law), as St. Paul and our books teach so abundantly." (Luther's Werke, Erl. ed. XXXII, 72. Walch's ed. XX, 2070 [StL 20, 1658; Am. Ed. 61, 342])

Furthermore, in his 1524 "Interpretation of the Main Summa of God's Commandment", Luther writes the following about the words:

"That no law is given to the righteous," 1 Timothy 1: "So then, as St. Paul says, the law remains on the unrighteous, that it may hinder them and frighten them, as long as they know that they must have something different and better, so that the law may be sufficient, and so be rid of it. Thus you say: If it be so, there is none righteous on earth, for even St. Paul himself commanded Timothy hard before, saying, "As I have exhorted you," etc., and shortly after: "This commandment I command you." There is a commandment which he also further commands and orders. Yes, how full all Scripture, Old and New Testament, is of such commandments! Are not Paul and Timothy or the Christians pious? or what may he say: No law is given to the righteous, and he himself adds to it and gives it to him? According to the Spirit the believer is righteous, without all sin, and has no law; according to the flesh he still has sin, etc. Therefore, take for yourself a devout Christian who has a pure heart, a good conscience and an uncontaminated faith; he will therefore have to say: Even if I have a pure heart, a good conscience and a righteous faith, my flesh, my tongue and my fist are not clean, that is, the old rogue I have on my neck is still unclean. The faith that leads us up to heaven to God does not want to suffer any law. There the heart has as much as can ever be demanded, a cheerful courage, a desire to do good, a friendly and submissive heart that submits to everyone; there everything is pure and righteous. But outwardly the flesh does not yet want to do so; all kinds of filth and evil lust, anxiety for food, fear of death, avarice, anger and hatred still cling to it: the filth always remains next to the faith that it may beat and fight with it. Now because these things still exist, Scripture counts us as unrighteous and sinners in that we have as much duty to live according to the law of the flesh as they do to resist and restrain the lust of the flesh. But even this is done with pleasure from the Spirit, not with vexation and displeasure. For herein is the difference between the two: both are restrained by the law, but those who are in the Spirit have a willing, cheerful heart; but the other do not. Therefore it is given to them and not imputed to them, although there is still

sin; but those are condemned because they have no desire and love for it. So divide a Christian into two parts: That he is both righteous and unrighteous. The Holy Spirit dwells in the heart, but not in the flesh, where the devil dwells with his seed; so must a man live on earth, that he may be constrained and compelled by the law from within, that he do not do evil, but remain unconstrained by the Spirit, because he does good of himself. This lasts until he dies. On the Last Day we shall be clean in body and soul, without any evil desire; indeed, heaven and earth will be full of good." (Luther's Works, Erl. ed. LI, 303 -305. Walch's ed. IX, 520-522 [StL 9, 880-882, § 47-50; Am. Ed. 56, 111-112])

A statement by Luther about the necessity of preaching the law because of the false Christians who always mingle with the true Christians also belongs here. The holy man of God writes in his 1539 treatise "Councils and Churches":

"So now do my Antinomians, who preach very finely and (as I cannot think otherwise) with real earnestness about the grace of Christ, the forgiveness of sins and what more is to be said about the article of salvation. But this consequence (this necessary conclusion) they flee like the devil, that they should tell the people of the third article, sanctification, that is, of the new life in Christ. For they think that people should not be frightened or grieved, but should always preach comfortingly about grace and the forgiveness of sins in Christ, and by all means avoid these or similar words: "Do you hear it? you want to be a Christian, and yet remain an adulterer, a fornicator, a complete swine, proud, avaricious, usurer, envious, vengeful, malicious, etc.! But so they say; do you hear it? Are you an adulterer, a fornicator, a miser, or some other sinner? If you believe, you are saved and need not fear the law, for Christ has fulfilled all things. Dear friend, tell me, does this not mean conceding the antecedent and denying the consequent (that is, admitting the principle and denying what follows from it)? Yes, it means to take away and destroy Christ Himself, even when He is preached in the highest degree. And everything is mere yes and no in the same matters. For such Christ is nothing and nowhere, who died for such sinners as do not, after forgiveness of sins, forsake their sins and live a new life. Thus they preach Christ nicely in the Nestorian and Eutychian dialectic (or art of inference), that Christ is, and yet is not; and are fine Easter preaching, but shameful Pentecostal preaching. For they preach nothing de sanctificatione et vivificatione Spiritus Sancti, of the sanctification (and vivificatione) of the Holy Spirit, but only of the redemption of Christ; when Christ (whom they preach highly, as is right) is Christ, or has purchased redemption from sin and death, that the Holy Spirit should make us new men out of the old Adam, that we should die to sin and live to

righteousness, as St. Paul teaches Rom. 6:2 ff, begin and increase here on earth, and accomplish it there. For Christ has merited for us not only grace, but also the gift of the Holy Spirit, that we might not only have forgiveness of sins, but also cessation from sins, John 1:10, 17. Whoever therefore does not cease from sins, but remains in his former evil nature, must have another Christ from the Antinomians. The true Christ is not there, and when all the angels cry out, ‘nothing but Christ! Christ!’, he must be condemned with his new Christ." (Luther's Werke, Erl. ed. XXV, 323. 324. Walch's ed. XVI, 2741. 2742 [StL 16, 2241-2242; Am. Ed. 41, 113-114])

IV. What is the relationship between the preaching of the law and the preaching of justification through faith? ^

The short answer to this is threefold:

1. The preaching of justification by faith must be preceded by the preaching of the law of repentance.

2. Justification itself may only be taught from the gospel and therefore the preaching of the law must be completely excluded from it. [I.e., the Proper Distinction of Law & Gospel.]

3. The law must not be preached to the justified as such in order to make them pious and fruitful in good works and must therefore not be imposed on the new, but only on the old man.

1. ^ The preaching of justification through faith must be preceded by the preaching of repentance from the law, as it is written: "Thus it is written, and thus Christ must suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and cause repentance and remission of sins to be preached in his name among all nations, and be raised up in Jerusalem." Luke 24:47.

Luther wrote about this in his 1539 treatise "Against the Antinomians":

"They have invented a new method for them, that grace should be preached first, then the revelation of wrath, so that the word "law" may not be heard or spoken. This is a fine cat's nest, they like it very much, and think they want to draw the whole Scripture in and out, and thus become lux mundi (a light of the world). This is what St. Paul should and must give in Romans 1. But they do not see how St. Paul teaches in a contrary way, first showing the wrath of God from heaven and making all the world sinners and guilty before God; then, when they have become sinners, he teaches them how to obtain grace and become righteous, as the first three chapters show in a powerful and clear way. And it is also a strange blindness and foolishness that they think that the revelation of wrath is something other than the law, which is not possible; for the revelation of wrath is the law where it is recognized and felt, as Paul says: Lex iram operatur (the law causes wrath).

Have they not done well to put away the law, and yet teach it when they teach the revelation of wrath? But they turn the shoe around and teach us the law according to the gospel and wrath according to grace. But what shameful errors the devil means by this cat's stool, I see some of them well, but cannot deal with them this time; also because I hope it shall cease, it is not necessary." (Luther's Works, Erl. vol. XXXII, 9. 10. Walch's vol. XX, 2024. 2025 [StL 20, 1618; Am. Ed. 47, 114-115])

Furthermore, Luther wrote in his "Interpretation of Several Chapters of the Second Book of Moses" from 1524-1526:

"The Gospel is not a sermon for coarse, crude, desolate sinners who live without some devotion, but is a consolation for afflicted souls, Matt. 11:28, for it is tender food that a hungry soul wants. Hence the dear Virgin Mary also sings in her Magnificat Luke 1:53: He has filled the hungry with good things. Otherwise the mad mob will fall in, and if they all want to be evangelicals and Christian brothers, they will cause riots and all kinds of misfortune. The devil is on their heads. A Christian is not impudent, wild and crude, but his conscience is stupid, faint-hearted and despondent; sin bites them and they are afraid of God's wrath and of the devil and death. The Lord Christ tastes good to such a downcast and oppressed heart. Again, the redemption from sin, death, the devil and hell also tastes good to those who are stuck in their lot, and feel such distress, and would like to have rest: they get it when the heart has faith; but they also feel how frail the old Adam is." (Luther's Werke, XXXV, 221. 222. Walch's Ausg. Ill, 1285. 1286 [StL 3, 858-859; Am. Ed. 62, 178-179])

Furthermore, Luther writes in his great "Interpretation of the First Book of Moses" from 1536-1545:

"Pious and God-fearing people, who are oppressed by their cross and have to experience many a misery and hardship, need comfort and promise to lift them up. On the other hand, those who are stubborn, stiff-necked and secure should be frightened with examples of God's wrath, so that, as is said here, they may learn to fear God. But now our hearts are inclined not to like to be chastened. We all accept the promises with joy and do not resent them. But the preaching of the law frightens people and makes them, as it were, fierce and angry. For this is why the prophets were slain, because they did not preach the blessing promised to Abraham, but punished ungodly customs and idolatry, and held and admonished the people to discipline and the fear of God. Just as the world is not hostile to us because we teach the Gospel and proclaim the good deeds of the Lord Christ to the people clearly and purely. For everyone gladly accepts and praises such things, unless they are publicly ungodly. But hence arises all indignation

and misfortune, that we hold the doctrine of the adversary against ours, and say that the Pope is the Antichrist, and at the same time punish the doctrine and shameful life of those who adhere to the papacy. [AE 3, p. 221] So also Christ says John 7:7: "The world hates me, for I bear witness of it that its works are evil... Therefore these are very harmful teachers who at this time, for I know not for what reason, pretend and argue that the law should not be preached in the church. As if you did not want to teach the law there, since there is a right people of the law, namely, miserly, arrogant people, adulterers, usurers, idolaters, etc. Would you still like to strengthen and increase the security of these rough and secure people with the promises of the New Testament? Doesn't God want that even today the place where Sodom and Gomorrah were consumed by fire from heaven must stand as a memorial and symbol of his wrath, and that one should preach about it at all times and say that only a few will repent and learn to fear God? At this time you will find many of them who are offended by the preaching of the law, which is necessary, and flee from it; for they say that their consciences are troubled when they hear such preaching of the law. But are they not fine Christians? They do not stop sinning in hatred, anger and envy, in fornication, avarice, gluttony and drunkenness, etc.; when they hear that such sins are punished, they are angry and do not want their consciences to be troubled! Shall we then let each one do as he pleases and still tell him he is blessed? By no means! For here you hear that the punishment of Sodom and Gomorrah is to be held against all descendants, and indeed against the Church of God itself, so that people may learn to fear God. In the doctrine of Antinomians it said: "If a man were an adulterer, he would have a gracious God if he would only believe. But what kind of church would this be if such terrible words were spoken and preached in it! Therefore a distinction should have been made and thus taught that adulterers or sinners were of two kinds: The first, who recognize their adultery or sin and are heartily afraid of it, and begin to have anxious remorse and sorrow for it, and not only let them be sorry that they have sinned, but also desire and strive from the heart that they may not do such sin again. Such people, who are not secure in their sin but are terrified and afraid of God's wrath, if they hold fast to the gospel and trust and rely on the grace and mercy of God through Christ, will be saved and have forgiveness of sins through faith in Christ. But the other adulterers or sinners, even though they cannot excuse their sins, do not feel pain and sadness about them, but rather rejoice that they have been advised to do what they desired, look for further causes and opportunities to sin, and are sure to follow them. The same

cannot believe because they do not have the Holy Spirit, and they are deceived and defrauded by such a teacher who preaches to them about faith. For this disease must have another medicine, namely, that you tell them with St. Paul Heb. 13:4: God will judge the adulterers. 1 Cor. 6:9-10: They will not see the kingdom of God. Rom. 8:8: Without purity no one can please God; therefore let the unclean and defiled be under God's wrath, etc. One must have such a hammer in order to crush such hard hearts of stone." (Luther's Works, Walch's ed. 1, 1784-1790 [StL 1, 1185-1189; Am. Ed. 3, 221-224])

Luther writes in the same place:

"Therefore the Antinomians are well worthy that everyone should be their enemy who wants to hold out and defend themselves with our example; for this is the reason why we taught about God's grace in the beginning. The accursed pope had even oppressed the poor consciences with his human statutes, had taken away all right means, help and consolation, so that the poor despondent hearts could have been saved against despair: what else should we do then, but to lift up the oppressed and weighed down hearts again and hold out the right consolation to them. But we also know that we must speak differently to those who are full, tender and fat. At that time we were all outcast and greatly afflicted. The water in the bottles was out, that is, there was no consolation. We lay like the dying, like Ishmael under the bush. That is why we needed such teachers to show us God's grace and teach us how we could be refreshed. But the Antinomians would have it that the doctrine of repentance should begin badly with grace; but I did not follow this process. For I knew well that Ishmael had been cast out and despondent before he heard the consolation from the angel. For this reason I followed the example, and comforted no one except those who had previously repented and suffered for their sins and had themselves been tormented by them, whom the law had frightened, whom Leviathan had assaulted, and whom Leviathan had made even dismayed. For it was for their sake that Christ came into this world, and does not want the smoldering wick to be extinguished, Isaiah 42:3, which is why he calls out in Matt. 11:28: Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden." (Luther's Werke, Walch's Ed.. I, 2144. 2145 [StL 1, 1428-1429; Am. Ed. 4, 50-51])

Furthermore, Luther begins his "Instruction for the Visitors" of 1538 [sic 1528] thus:

"Now we find in the doctrine, among others, chiefly this defect, that although some preach of faith, whereby we are to be justified, yet it is not sufficiently shown how one is to come to faith, and almost all omit a piece of Christian doctrine, without which also no one may understand what faith is or means. For Christ says in Luke 3:8, 24, 47 that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name. But many

now speak only of forgiveness of sins, and say nothing or little of repentance, when without repentance there is no forgiveness of sins, nor can forgiveness of sins be understood. And if forgiveness of sins is preached without repentance, the result is that people think they have already received forgiveness of sins and thus become secure and fearless. This is greater error and sin than all the errors before this time, and is indeed to be feared, as Christ says in Matt. 12:45, Luke 11:26, that the latter will be worse than the former. Thus the preachers are to punish gross sins in the common man, but where there is false holiness, they are to exhort much more severely to repentance." (Luther's Werke, Erl. Ausg. XXIII, 12. 13. Walch's Ausg. X, 1912-1914 [StL 10, 1636; Am. Ed. 40, 274])

Finally, in his 1539 treatise Against the Antinomians, Luther writes:

"I have certainly taught, and still teach, that sinners should be provoked to repentance by the preaching or contemplation of the passion of Christ, that they may see how great is the wrath of God against sin, that there is no other remedy for it but that God's Son must die for it; which doctrine is not mine, but St. Bernard's — what St. Bernard's? It is the preaching of all Christendom, of all the prophets and apostles. But how does it follow from this that one should therefore do away with the law? I cannot find such a conclusion in my Dialectica (art of reasoning), and would like to see and hear the master who could prove it. When Isaiah 53:8 says: I have smitten him for the sin of my people: Dear one, tell me, here is Christ's suffering preached, that he is smitten for our sin, but is the law thereby thrown away? What do you mean, for the sin of my people? Does it not mean as much as because my people have sinned against my law and have not kept my law?" (Luther's Werke, Erl. ed. XXXIl, 5. Walch's ed. XX, 2018. 2019 [StL 20, 1613-1614; Am. Ed. 47, 110])

2. ^ Justification itself may be taught from the gospel alone, and therefore the preaching of the law is to be entirely <page 18> excluded from it, for thus it is written: "But we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them that are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be guilty before God: Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now without the work of this law is righteousness revealed in the sight of God." Rom 3:19-21.

Luther wrote about this in his "Disputations against the Antinomians" of 1538:

"The law is not only unnecessary for man to be justified by it, but quite useless and impossible in all things. But those who hold the law in the opinion that they want to be justified by it, to them the law also becomes a poison and pestilence to righteousness. When we speak of justification, we cannot sufficiently speak against the inability and weakness

of the law and against the most harmful and poisonous trust in the law. For the law was not given to make righteous or alive or to help with righteousness (Gal. 3:21), but to denounce sin and bring wrath (Rom. 3:20, 4:15), that is, to convict and accuse the conscience. Death is not laid on us that we should live by it, nor sin inherent in us that we should be innocent by it: so the law is not given that we should be justified by it, because it can give neither righteousness nor life. In sum, as high as heaven is above the earth, so far should the law be separated from justification; and nothing should be taught, said, or remembered in the article concerning justification, but only the word of grace." (Luther's Werke, Walch's ed. XX, 2039. 2040 [StL 20, 1632; Am. Ed. 73, 53-54])

3. ^ The law must not be preached to the justified as such in order to make them pious and fruitful in good works, and it must therefore not be imposed on the new man, but only on the old man; just as the holy apostle Paul calls out to the Galatians, who had again placed themselves under the yoke of the law: "I want to learn this from you alone: Did you receive the Spirit through the works of the law, or through the preaching of faith? Are you so foolish? You began in the Spirit, will you now complete it in the flesh? He who gives you the Spirit and does these things among you, does he do it by the works of the law or by the preaching of faith?" Gal 3:2-3, 5.

Luther writes about this in his Church Postil on the Gospel on the 3rd Sunday after Trinity:

"The Gospel, where it is right in the heart, should make such a person who does not wait so long for the law to come, but is so full of joy in Christ, has a desire and love for good, that he gladly helps and benefits everyone where he can, out of a free heart, before he even thinks of the law, dares to risk his body and life, not asking anything about what it suffers, and thus becomes full of good works that flow from himself; just as Christ is not willing to take up a straw by force, but without compulsion he lets himself be nailed to the cross for me and all the world and dies for the lost sheep: This is called work upon work. Nevertheless, learn to discern and rightly divide these two pieces when it comes to the meeting where the law and sin are in dispute with your conscience, so that you can confidently reach into Moses' mouth and tell him to be silent, to put him out of your old man; take him to Moses in the school, so that he may dispute with him and say: "Listen, you are lazy and indolent, to do good, to serve what is nearest. Where you ought to praise Christ, you would rather drink a pint of beer; before you should be in danger for Christ's sake, you would much rather rob and look after the neighbor,

where you can. For the same lazy rascal who will not go away, and whose fists will not work, whose feet will not go where they should, whose eyes will not see properly, thou mayest take tablets of stone, and beat the ass with them, that he may go away. Therefore, if you attack me, as it is right to say to Moses, I will gladly hear you and follow you, even my fist and my life apart from faith and the righteousness of my conscience before God; You may rule as a disciplinarian among the household, and call me to be obedient, disciplined, patient, to do good to my neighbor, to help the poor, to praise and glorify God, to let myself be defiled and blasphemed for the sake of His Word, and to suffer all the plagues of the world; I am well pleased with all this and will do more than I can do according to the outward man. For the Spirit is willing, says Christ, and more than willing, though the flesh is weak. But if you want to reach further, where you should not go, into my heart and faith, I will neither hear nor see you: for there I have another great, unspeakable treasure, which is called Christ with his Baptism and Gospel. In short, as far as the outward man is concerned, you cannot impose and drive too much, but you should not impose anything on the conscience at all; for where the Spirit is, who brings us Christ, he is above all laws, as St. Paul says in 1 Timothy 1:9: "No law has been given to the righteous”, and yet he does more than he could do according to the flesh. For according to the law we are nothing but sinners, and for the sake of our person we ought to remain condemned under the law, but for the sake of Christ and baptism we are above all laws. So Moses is to do his work apart from Christ, that he may drive those who are not Christians or are ever the old man. For he does not thereby make Christians pious or righteous; but he does so by showing them what their office is, that they may gladly do according to the Spirit, without the flesh wanting to do so, nor being able to follow the Spirit, that they may still have need of admonition and restraint; but nevertheless their conscience remains free, that the law has no right to accuse and condemn them before God. Therefore such teaching and admonition must also be given in Christendom, as the apostles also did, that each one may be admonished and reminded of what he ought to do in his state." (Luther's Works, Erl. ed. XIII, 39-41. Walch's ed. XI, 1692-1694 [StL 11, 1251-1253; Am. Ed. 78, 136-137; Lenker 4, 76-78])