Luther versus Melanchthon?: Zur Frage der Einheit der Wittenberger Reformation in der Rechtfertigungslehre

Reinhard Flogaus — 2007-04-12T16:39:30-00:00

Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, Vol. 91 (2000), pp. 6-46.

During the last decade the new Finnish Luther research established by T. Mannermaa has revived the old thesis by K. Holl and his school that Melanchthon “spoiled” Luther’s doctrine of justification by faith by an imputative understanding of justification. According to this view, Luther’s teaching on justification through the presence of Christ was superseded by Melanchthon’s one-sided forensic doctrine of justification, which also appeared in the Formula of Concord. In this paper important texts by Melanchthon on the doctrine of justification are compared with statements by Luther made at about the same time in order to find out whether the two Wittenberg reformers really held different opinions on this central point of Reformation theology. The analysis makes clear that both, Luther and Melanchthon, saw forensic and effective justification not as alternatives but as a unity. It is true that up until the Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians Luther mostly understands the presence of God in man as the presence of Christ and that on the whole Luther emphasizes this point more than Melanchthon, who in this context usually speaks of the Holy Ghost. This does not, however, constitute a substantial difference. While in the octavo edition of the Latin Apology and in the German Editio princeps of the Confessio Augustana, which appeared in the fall of 1531, Melanchthon stresses the forensic aspect of the doctrine of justification, this is much less pronounced in the German Confessio Augustana Variata of 1533. In Melanchthon’s Loci of 1535ff iustus effici and iustus reputari do no longer play a decisive role. Melanchthon interprets justification above all as the forgiveness of sins, as reconciliation and as a gift of the Holy Ghost. During these years Luther also stressed the complete forensic justification as opposed to the gradual and partial effective justification of the believer. Moreover, since 1532 Luther adjudicated priority to the justifying forgiveness of sins as God’s grace over the presence of the Holy Ghost as God’s gift, whereas Melanchthon thought that the forgiveness of sins coincided in time [simul] with the gift of the Holy Ghost. However, Melanchthon also conceded priority in matter to the complete forgiveness of sins. Similar to Luther after 1531, the Formula of Concord describes the presence of the Holy Ghost as secondary. However, it differs from Luther’s and Melanchthon’s theology in the sense that the term “justification” refers only to righteousness and the forgivenss of sins. Ever since the Loci of 1535 there was a deepening gulf between Melanchthon and Luther with regard to the importance of the voluntas of man for justification by faith, but not with regard to the meaning of forensic justification. In this important respect both reformers were — in contrast to the opinion of Finnish research — very much of the same mind.

CiteULike: mauricelee's Flogaus

Luther versus Melanchthon?: Zur Frage der Einheit der Wittenberger Reformation in der Rechtfertigungslehre