{"id":21451,"date":"2018-07-25T19:14:35","date_gmt":"2018-07-25T23:14:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=21451"},"modified":"2024-08-18T16:58:54","modified_gmt":"2024-08-18T20:58:54","slug":"martin-luther-was-extraordinarily-devoted-to-mary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2018\/07\/martin-luther-was-extraordinarily-devoted-to-mary.html","title":{"rendered":"Martin Luther Was Extraordinarily Devoted to Mary"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>
\"\"<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
Despite the radicalism of early Protestantism with regard to many ancient Catholic \u201cdistinctives,\u201d such as the Communion of the Saints, Penance, Purgatory, Infused Justification, the Papacy, the priesthood, sacramental marriage, etc., it may surprise many to discover that Martin Luther was rather conservative in some of his doctrinal views, such as on baptismal regeneration, the Eucharist, and particularly the Blessed Virgin Mary.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n

Luther indeed was quite devoted to Our Lady, and retained most of the traditional Marian doctrines which were held then and now by the Catholic Church. This is often not well-documented in Protestant biographies of Luther and histories of the 16th century, yet it is undeniably true. It seems to be a natural human tendency for latter-day followers to project back onto the founder of a movement their own prevailing viewpoints.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Since Lutheranism today does not possess a very robust Mariology, it is usually assumed that Luther himself had similar opinions. We shall see, upon consulting the primary sources (i.e., Luther\u2019s own writings), that the historical facts are very different. We shall consider, in turn, Luther\u2019s position on the various aspects of Marian doctrine.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Along with virtually all important Protestant Founders (e.g., Calvin, Zwingli, Cranmer), Luther accepted the traditional belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary (Jesus had no blood brothers), and her status as the\u00a0Theotokos<\/i>\u00a0(Mother of God<\/i>):<\/div>\n
\n
Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . \u201cbrothers\u201d really means \u201ccousins\u201d here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers. (Sermons on John<\/i>, chapters 1-4, 1537-39)<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
He, Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary\u2019s virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. (Ibid<\/i>.)<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
God says . . . : \u201cMary\u2019s Son is My only Son.\u201d Thus Mary is the Mother of God. (Ibid<\/i>.)<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary\u2019s Son, and that Mary is God\u2019s mother . . . She is the true mother of God and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two Christs . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone. (On the Councils and the Church<\/i>, 1539)<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\n

Probably the most astonishing Marian belief of Luther is his acceptance of Mary\u2019s Immaculate Conception, which wasn\u2019t even definitively proclaimed as dogma by the Catholic Church until 1854. Concerning this question there is some dispute, over the technical aspects of medieval theories of conception and the soul, and whether or not Luther later changed his mind.<\/p>\n

Even some eminent Lutheran scholars, however, such as Arthur Carl Piepkorn (1907-73) of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, maintain his unswerving acceptance of the doctrine. Luther\u2019s words follow:<\/p>\n

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary\u2019s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God\u2019s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin.(Sermon: \u201cOn the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,\u201d December [?] 1527; from Hartmann Grisar, S. J.,\u00a0Luther,\u00a0<\/i>authorised translation from the German by E. M. Lamond; edited by Luigi Cappadelta, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, first edition, 1915, Vol. IV [of 6], p. 238; taken from the German\u00a0Werke<\/i>,\u00a0Erlangen, 1826-1868, edited by J. G. Plochmann and J. A. Irmischer, 2nd edition, edited by L. Enders, Frankfurt, 1862 ff., 67 volumes; citation from 152, p. 58)<\/p>\n

She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God\u2019s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. (Personal\u00a0<\/i>[\u201cLittle\u201d<\/i>]\u00a0Prayer Book\u00a0<\/i>, 1522)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Later references to the Immaculate Conception appear in his House sermon for Christmas (1533) and\u00a0Against the Papacy of Rome\u00a0<\/i>(1545). In later life (he died in 1546), Luther did not believe that this doctrine should be imposed on all believers, since he felt that the Bible didn\u2019t explicitly and formally teach it.<\/p>\n

Such a view is consistent with his notion of\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/i>\u00a0and is similar to his opinion on the bodily Assumption of the Virgin, which he never denied \u2014 although he was highly critical of what he felt were excesses in the celebration of this Feast. In his sermon of August 15, 1522, the last time he preached on the Feast of the Assumption, he stated:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n