Vodpod videos no longer available.

. . .either by faith in this life, or by sight at the judgment seat in the next.

Hear the the words of the Prophet:

“By myself I have sworn,
       my mouth has uttered in all integrity
       a word that will not be revoked:
       Before me every knee will bow;
       by me every tongue will swear.

They will say of me, ‘In the LORD alone
       are righteousness and strength.’ ”
       All who have raged against him
       will come to him and be put to shame.”

                              – Isaiah 45:23-24

The Apostle Paul referred to the Prophet, applying the New Testament fulfillment:

“And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.  Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth.” – Phil 2:8-10

Vodpod videos no longer available.

“Any man can sing in the day. When the cup is full, man draws inspiration from it. When wealth rolls in abundance around him, any man can praise the God who gives a plenteous harvest or sends home a loaded argosy. It is easy enough for an Aeolian harp to whisper music when the winds blow-the difficulty is for music to swell forth when no wind is stirring. It is easy to sing when we can read the notes by daylight; but he is skilful who sings when there is not a ray of light to read by-who sings from his heart. No man can make a song in the night of himself; he may attempt it, but he will find that a song in the night must be divinely inspired. Let all things go well, I can weave songs, fashioning them wherever I go out of the flowers that grow upon my path; but put me in a desert, where no green thing grows, and wherewith shall I frame a hymn of praise to God? How shall a mortal man make a crown for the Lord where no jewels are? Let but this voice be clear, and this body full of health, and I can sing God’s praise: silence my tongue, lay me upon the bed of languishing, and how shall I then chant God’s high praises, unless He Himself give me the song? No, it is not in man’s power to sing when all is adverse, unless an altar-coal shall touch his lip. It was a divine song, which Habakkuk sang, when in the night he said, “Although the fig-tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.” Then, since our Maker gives songs in the night, let us wait upon Him for the music. O Thou chief musician, let us not remain songless because affliction is upon us, but tune Thou our lips to the melody of thanksgiving.” – Charles Spurgeon

[The translation is from H.C. Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church (1903), based on Luther’s Opera Latina (Frankfurt, 1865-73]

Background.  In 1520, Pope Leo X issued a bull of excommunication against Luther.  He directed the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation to execute it.  Charles V, however, was reluctant to take this step.  Only 21 years old at the time, Charles had only at great expense and with much diplomacy managed to get himself elected Emperor in 1519.  He was reluctant to alienate the German princes, many of whom were already suspicious enough of the consolidation of Habsburg power. 

A number of these — and most importantly, Luther’s own powerful sovereign, the Elector Frederick the Wise of Saxony — insisted that German subjects be tried only before a German body.  Since the Imperial Diet was then in session at Worms, Luther was summoned to appear before it for examination.  Frederick insisted that Luther be granted a safe-conduct pass guaranteeing that he would not be seized if he were to appear.  The Emperor agreed.  Luther then set out from Wittenberg, passing through city after city where he was received with acclaim and celebration.

The papal representatives at the Diet were acting under instructions from the Pope not to allow the occasion to degenerate into a debate, but to put the accused firmly on the defensive.  On the first day of his appearance, Luther was asked whether he acknowledged authorship of a list of his works which had been determined to be in error.  He did.  He was then asked whether he was willing to recant the errors contained in them.  Unwilling to answer “on the fly,” Luther asked for 24 hours in which to deliberate his response.  The request was granted. 

On the following day the examination reconvened, in the presence of the Emperor and the assembled princes and nobles of the Empire.  The interrogator was Dr. Ecken, an official in the administration of the Archbishop of Trier.  Luther did not compose his remarks for reading from a manuscript, but spoke impromptu.  Nor was any official transcript made of the transaction.  Accordingly, what transpired has had to be reconstructed.  The account that follows was composed by Luther himself, not long afterwards.  Bear in mind that he relates the scene in the third person, speaking in the first-person only when he quotes from memory what he said there.  [Additional accounts have been published, based on the recollection of some of the persons in attendance.]

_________________Luther’s account_____________________

Dr. Ecken:

. . . Do you wish to defend the books which are recognized as your work? Or to retract anything contained in them? . .

Luther: 

Most Serene Lord Emperor, Most Illustrious Princes, Most Gracious Lords . . . I beseech you to grant a gracious hearing to my plea, which, I trust, will be a plea of justice and truth; and if through my inexperience I neglect to give to any their proper titles or in any way offend against the etiquette of the court in my manners or behavior, be kind enough to forgive me, I beg, since I am a man who has spent his life not in courts but in the cells of a monastery; a man who can say of himself only this, that to this day I have thought and written in simplicity of heart, solely with a view to the glory of God and the pure instruction of Christ’s faithful people. . . .

. . . Your Imperial Majesty and Your Lordships: I ask you to observe that my books are not all of the same kind.

There are some in which I have dealt with piety in faith and morals with such simplicity and so agreeably with the Gospels that my adversaries themselves are compelled to admit them useful, harmless, and clearly worth reading by a Christian. Even the Bull, harsh and cruel though it is, makes some of my books harmless, although it condemns them also, by a judgment downright monstrous. If I should begin to recant here, what, I beseech you, would I be doing but condemning alone among mortals, that truth which is admitted by friends and foes alike, in an unaided struggle against universal consent?

The second kind consists in those writings leveled against the papacy and the doctrine of the papists, as against those who by their wicked doctrines and precedents have laid waste Christendom by doing harm to the souls and the bodies of men. No one can either deny or conceal this, for universal experience and world-wide grievances are witnesses to the fact that through the Pope’s laws and through man-made teachings the consciences of the faithful have been most pitifully ensnared, troubled, and racked in torment, and also that their goods and possessions have been devoured (especially amongst this famous German nation) by unbelievable tyranny, and are to this day being devoured without end in shameful fashion; and that thought they themselves by their own laws take care to provide that the Pope’s laws and doctrines which are contrary to the Gospel or the teachings of the Fathers are to be considered as erroneous and reprobate. If then I recant these, the only effect will be to add strength to such tyranny, to open not the windows but the main doors to such blasphemy, which will thereupon stalk farther and more widely than it has hitherto dared. . . .

The third kind consists of those books which I have written against private individuals, so-called; against those, that is, who have exerted themselves in defense of the Roman tyranny and to the overthrow of that piety which I have taught. I confess that I have been more harsh against them than befits my religious vows and my profession. For I do not make myself out to be any kind of saint, nor am I now contending about my conduct but about Christian doctrine. But it is not in my power to recant them, because that recantation would give that tyranny and blasphemy and occasion to lord it over those whom I defend and to rage against God’s people more violently than ever.

However, since I am a man and not God, I cannot provide my writings with any other defense than that which my Lord Jesus Christ provided for His teaching. When He had been interrogated concerning His teaching before Annas and had received a buffet from a servant, He said: “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil.” If the Lord Himself, who knew that He could not err, did not refuse to listen to witness against His teaching, even from a worthless slave, how much more ought I, scum that I am, capable of naught but error, to seek and to wait for any who may wish to bear witness against my teaching.

And so, through the mercy of God, I ask Your Imperial Majesty, and Your Illustrious Lordships, or anyone of any degree, to defeat them by the writings of the Prophets or by the Gospels; for I shall be most ready, if I be better instructed, to recant any error, and I shall be the first in casting my writings into the fire. . . .

Thereupon the Orator of the Empire, in a tone of upbraiding, said that his [Luther’s] answer was not to the point, and that there should be no calling into question of matters on which condemnations and decisions had before been passed by Councils. He was being asked for a plain reply, without subtlety or sophistry, to this question: Was he prepared to recant, or no?

Luther then replied:

Your Imperial Majesty and Your Lordships demand a simple answer. Here it is, plain and unvarnished. Unless I am convicted [convinced] of error by the testimony of Scripture or (since I put no trust in the unsupported authority of Pope or councils, since it is plain that they have often erred and often contradicted themselves) by manifest reasoning, I stand convicted [convinced] by the Scriptures to which I have appealed, and my conscience is taken captive by God’s word, I cannot and will not recant anything, for to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us.

On this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me.

Amen.

De Servo Arbitrio

(On the Bondage of the Will)

Abridged

1525

A.D.Martin Luther

The Significance of the Issue

It is not irreligious, wasteful, or superficial, but essentially healthy and necessary, for a Christian to know whether or not his will has anything to do in matters pertaining to salvation. Indeed, let me tell you, this is the hinge on which our discussion turns, the crucial issue between us; our aim is, simply, to investigate what ability “free will” has, in what respect it is the subject of divine action and how it stands related to the grace of God. If we know nothing of these things, we shall know nothing whatsoever of Christianity, and shall be in worse than the heathen! He who does not admit this should acknowledge that he is not a Christian; and he who ridicules or derides it should realize that he is the greatest enemy of Christianity. For if I am ignorant in the nature, extent and limits of what I can and must do in relationship to God, I shall be equally ignorant and uncertain of the nature, extent and limits of what God can and will do in me – though God, in fact, works everything in everyone. Now, if I am ignorant of the works and powers of God, I am ignorant of God himself; and if I do not know God, I cannot worship, praise, give thanks or serve Him, for I do not know how much I should attribute to myself and how much to Him. We need, therefore, to have in mind a clear-cut distinction between God’s power and ours, and God’s work and ours, if we would live a godly life.

__________________________

First published in 1525, Martin Luther’s Bondage of the Will is acknowledged by theologians as one of the great masterpieces of the Reformation. It is Luther response to Desiderius Erasmus’ Diatribe on Free Will, written in his direct and unique style, combining deep spirituality with humor. Luther writes powerfully about man’s depravity and God’s sovereignty. The crucial issue for Luther concerned what ability free will has, and to what degree it is subject to God’s sovereignty. For Luther, this key issue of free will is directly connected to God’s plan of salvation. Is man able to save himself, or is his salvation entirely a work of divine grace? This work is vital to understanding the primary doctrines of the Reformation and will long remain among the great theological classics of Christian history.If you have not read this great work, and if you are interested in the true nature of man’s natural will, the remainder of an abridged version can be found here. The complete work is available for audio download here.

Vodpod videos no longer available.