Luther’s Sermon on the Authority of St. Peter

Translator’s Preface

Martin Luther preached the following sermon on June 29, 1522, which was both the Second Sunday after Trinity and the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul. Since there was usually a morning and an afternoon sermon on a typical Sunday, and since the morning sermon was usually reserved for the regularly appointed Gospel, Martin Luther probably preached this sermon on the special Gospel for the feast day in the afternoon. We do not know who transcribed it; Georg Rörer, the eventual tireless transcriber of Luther’s sermons, didn’t arrive in Wittenberg until the fall of 1522. But the transcription was quickly converted into two printed German pamphlets, one published in Augsburg and the other in Nuremberg. When translated, both pamphlets were titled (with slightly different German spellings): “A Christian Sermon on the Authority of Saint Peter, Delivered by Martin Luther in Wittenberg in the Twenty-Second Year. Very Useful for All Believers in Christ to Know.” These pamphlets are the primary basis of the sermon’s reproduction in the Weimar Edition of Luther’s works (see Sources below).

This sermon was also included in three later collections—Johann Schott’s collection of twelve Luther sermons on several Marian festivals and other saints’ festivals (XII. Predig D. Martin Luthers, Strasbourg, 1523), Johann Herwagen’s similar collection of “short sermons” translated into Latin (Conciunculae quaedam, Strasbourg, 1526), and Stephan Roth’s collection of Luther’s festival sermons now commonly called Roth’s Festival Postil (Auslegung der Euangelien an den furnemisten Festen ym gantzen iare, Wittenberg, 1527). Roth’s is the most edited version, but he also corrected some of the typographical errors in the earlier printings.

In the broader context, Luther had just returned from the Wartburg less than four months earlier, and he was busy. He began a May 15 letter to Spalatin by complaining about how overwhelmed he was with all the letters he had to read and reply to. He was also in the throes of overseeing the publication of his New Testament translation. The printing of Matthew had been completed by the beginning of June, and Luther had included this marginal note on 16:18 (“And I also say to you: You are Peter”): “Cephas in Syriac and Petros in Greek mean eyn fels [“a rock”] in German, and all Christians are Peters on account of the confession of faith that Peter makes here, which is the rock on which Peter and all Peters are built. If we share his confession, then we also share his name.” Luther was still in the process of reconciling the basic tenets of the Reformation, which he had gleaned from Scripture, with Scripture passages that had been used for many years to promote and uphold important Roman Catholic teachings.

In the new Christian Worship three-year lectionary, the text Luther based this sermon on is the appointed Gospel for Sundays falling on August 21–27 in Year A (Proper 16). I pray that this fresh translation proves professionally beneficial for my fellow confessional Lutheran pastors, and spiritually edifying and historically instructive for all. It is indeed a “very useful [sermon] for all believers in Christ to know.” To God alone be the glory.

Sermon on the Authority of Saint Peter

Matthew 16:13–19.
Then Jesus came into the region of the city of Caesarea Philippi and asked his disciples, “Who do the people say that the Son of Man is?” They said, “Some say you are John the Baptist, others that you are Elijah, still others that you are Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “And who do you say that I am?” Then Simon Peter answered, “You are Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus replied to him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I also say to you: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my congregation, and the gates of hell shall not overcome it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. All that you will bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven, and all that you will loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven.”

You know this Gospel well, for it has now been preached and hyped for so long that by now it should be very well known. And it is also basically the best section and the chief passage in the Gospel that Matthew records. And they¹ have been using this passage to ornament themselves from the beginning, and so there is also no passage that has caused greater damage than this one, which is what happens when those who are reckless meddle with the Scriptures. They twist them this way and that, which is exactly what has happened, and the holier the passage is, the sooner a person can go wrong and the more shameful the damage he can do. Therefore observe this as a general rule: Whenever anyone goes along and floats and hovers around in the Scriptures like this, and has no firm understanding on which he can establish his heart, he should just leave it alone entirely, for when the devil has caught you with his pitchfork, so that you are not established on a settled conscience like you should be, he tosses you back and forth, so that you don’t know which way is out. Therefore you must be certain on the basis of a clear and pure understanding.

This Gospel is all about making us recognize what Christ is. Now Christ is recognized in a twofold way. The first way is by his life, as is said here: “Some say you are Elijah, others John the Baptist, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Thus when a person judges by reason alone, and by flesh and blood, he cannot grasp Christ any further than merely as a holy, pious man who provides others with a fine example that they should follow. Reason cannot understand him any further, even if he were to show up here today. Now whoever accepts him this way, merely as an example of a good life, is still locked out of heaven. He has not yet grasped or recognized Christ. He thinks of him only as a holy man as Elijah once was. Therefore note the rule: Where reason alone is involved, there you will only find the understanding that people think of him as a teacher and holy man. That perception will last as long as the heavenly Father does not instruct that person’s heart.

The second understanding of Christ is the one that St. Peter expresses: “You are a special man, not Elijah, not John, not Jeremiah, not someone who shows and leads the way for other people. There needs to be something much higher with you. You are Christ, the holy Son of God.” This identification cannot be attributed to any saint, whether John or Elijah or Jeremiah or any one of the prophets. Therefore when someone thinks of Christ only as a pious man, his reason always continues to float and hover around, going from one identification to the next, from Elijah to Jeremiah. But here he is singled out and held to be something more special than all the saints, and something definite and certain. For if I am uncertain about Christ, my conscience is never at peace and my heart does not have any rest. Therefore a distinction is being made here between faith and works. Here Christ himself is making it clear to us how we should grab hold of him—not with works. We do not come to him with works; works come after the fact. I must first come into the possession of his goods and blessings, so that he becomes mine and I become his.

Christ makes it clear that this is what he wants when Peter says, “You are Christ, the Son of the living God.” Christ himself acknowledges this answer when he says, “Blessed are you, Simon Peter. Your flesh and blood has not revealed this to you. And you are Peter, and a rock, and on this rock I will build my church, which the gates of hell shall not overcome.” Now here is where the power lies to know what the church is, what the rock is, and what it means to build the church. Here we must find an enduring rock on which the church is supposed to stand, just as he says: It is a rock on which my church shall stand, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. This rock is Christ, or the Word, for Christ is not known except through his word. Without his word, Christ’s flesh does not help me at all, even if it were to show up here today. And it is these words, when it is said that Christ is the Son of the living God, that make him known to me and describe him for me. This is what I build on. These words are so certain, so true, so established, that no other rock can be so surely and strongly grounded and fortified.

Now “rock” means nothing else but the evangelical Christian truth that proclaims Christ to me, by which I establish my conscience on Christ. No authority or power, not even the gates of hell, shall be able to do anything against this rock, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3[:11], “No one is able to lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.” The same thing is said by Isaiah in Chapter 28, which is really what Christ is commenting on here: “I will lay a stone in Zion, an approved stone, a precious stone, one that is well anchored, so that whoever believes in him will not be put to shame” [28:16]. The apostles make very powerful use of this passage and it is also cited in 1 Peter 2[:6] and in Romans [9:33 and] 10[:11]. There you have it in clear words that God plans to lay one foundation stone, one keystone,² an approved stone, a cornerstone, and none other besides, which is Christ and his gospel. Whoever is established on this stone will not be put to shame and will stand so firmly that all the gates of hell shall not overcome him.

Therefore Christ alone is the rock, and wherever someone lays down a different rock, make the sign of the cross and guard yourself, for that is certainly the devil. For this passage may not be understood about anyone else except Christ alone, as St. Paul says. That is the pure understanding of this passage, and no one can deny it. The universities do not deny it either; they admit that Christ is the rock. But they want St. Peter to be another rock next to him and try to lay an additional stone there. They want to create a dead-end path³ alongside the proper highway. We should not and will not tolerate that, for the more precious the passage is, the more firmly we should stand on it, for it is clear from Isaiah and Paul that Christ alone is the stone.

Now this is the understanding they have given to the passage: Christ says, “You are Peter. On this rock I will build my church.” They want to take that to mean that Peter is the rock, and all the popes who have succeeded him. So then they have to have two rocks. But that cannot be, since Peter singles Christ out here and will not let either John the Baptist or Elijah or Jeremiah be his equal. He does not want any of them to be the rock here. Plus, the pope is sometimes an evil scoundrel [böser bub] and nowhere near as good as St. John the Baptist or Elijah or Jeremiah. And if I cannot build on John, Jeremiah, Elijah, or any of the saints, how then am I supposed to build on a sinner whom the devil has possessed?

For this reason Christ tears all saints away from our eyes here, even his own mother. He wants there to be one rock, while they want to have two. Now either they must be lying or Scripture is. But if Scripture cannot lie, we must therefore conclude that the entire papal government is built on nothing but puddlework, lies, and blasphemy of God, and the pope is the arch-blasphemer of God by applying this passage to himself, even though it is only talking about Christ. The pope wants to be the stone, and the church is supposed to stand upon him, just as Christ foretold of him in Matthew 24[:5]: “Many will come in my name saying, ‘I am Christ.’” In so doing the pope makes himself out to be Christ. Sure, he does not want to have the name Christ, for he does not say, “I am Christ.” But he wants to attribute to himself the nature and the office that belong only to Christ.

Now this is the simple understanding of this passage: Christ is the foundation stone upon which the church shall stand, so that no authority or power will be able to do anything against her. It’s just like when a house is built here on earth, it relies entirely on its good footing, or like a castle that has its foundation on a rock. We could imagine the castle saying, “I have a good foundation, and I completely depend on it.” The heart that stands upon Christ does the same thing. It says, “I have Christ, God’s Son. I stand here upon him and I completely depend on him as on a well-anchored rock. Nothing can harm me.”

Therefore to build on the rock here means nothing else but to believe in Christ and to confidently rely on him, trusting that he is mine along with all his goods and blessings. For I stand upon all that he has and is capable of. His suffering, his dying, his righteousness, and all that is his is also mine. That is what I stand on, just like a house upon a rock, which stands on all that the rock is capable of. Now when I stand on him the same way and know that he is God’s Son, that his life is greater than all death, his honor greater than all shame, his blessedness greater than all sorrow, his righteousness greater than all sin, and so on, then nothing can do anything against me, even if all the gates of hell were to come at once.

Now on the other hand, when I stand on anything else besides this foundation stone, such as on some good work, and even if I had the works of all the saints, yes, even of St. Peter, and do not have faith, then I am opposed to Christ. For compared to his light, everything else is darkness; compared to his wisdom, everything else is foolish; compared to his righteousness, everything else is sin. Now when I stand on my own work and run up against him through his judgment, I would be knocked down into eternal damnation. But when I grab hold of him and build on him, then I am taking hold of his righteousness and all that is his, which preserves me before him so that I am not put to shame. Why can I not be put to shame? Because I am built on God’s righteousness, which is God himself. He cannot reject that, otherwise he would be rejecting himself.

This is the correct, simple understanding of this passage. Therefore do not let yourselves be led away from this understanding, otherwise you will be knocked down and condemned by the rock.

Now they may say, “But Christ says here, ‘You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.’” You have to understand that this way: Here Peter is called a rock, and Christ is called a rock elsewhere, because Christ is the whole rock, while Peter is a part of the rock. It’s like how he is called Christ, while we are called Christians after him, by reason of fellowship and faith, since we also have a Christ-like nature in us. For through faith we become one spirit with Christ and receive from him his nature. He is pious and holy, he is righteous, and we are righteous through him, and all that he has and is capable of, we may boast of too. But this is the difference: Christ has all his goods by obligation and by right, while we have them by grace and mercy. In the same way he calls Peter a rock here, because he stands on the rock and through him becomes a rock himself. Thus we too are rightly called Peters, that is, rocks, because we acknowledge the rock, Christ.

Now they may wish to press the matter further and say, “Whatever the case may be with your interpretation, I am going to follow the text, which says, ‘You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.’ There the text indicates that Peter is the rock.” If so, then confront them with what follows, namely that all the gates of hell shall not be able to do anything against this rock. St. Peter did not stand firm, for immediately in the text that follows the Lord called him a devil. The Lord was saying how he would go to Jerusalem, would suffer so much at the hands of the Jews, and would ultimately also be put to death and then rise again. When he said that, Peter spoke up and rebuked the Lord, “God forbid such a thing! This shall never happen to you.” Then the Lord said, “Get behind me, you devil or tempter!” [Matt. 16:21–23]. So the rock would have fallen and the gates of hell would have overcome it, if the church were built on Peter. For the Lord continues by saying, “Peter, you do not have the will that God has” [16:23]. See, my friend? Do you see? Here the Lord calls Peter a devil, when he previously pronounced him holy and blessed. Why? All of this happened so that he would stuff the yappers of the useless babblers who want to have the church built on Peter and not on Christ himself. He also had it happen in order to make us certain in our understanding, so that we would know that the church was not founded on a puddle or a manure pile, but on Christ, who was established as a cornerstone, as a foundation stone that is well anchored, as Isaiah says.

Likewise when the servant girl called out to Peter and he denied Christ [Mark 14:66–72], when he then falls and I am standing on him, where will I end up? If the devil were to take the pope captive and I were standing on him, I would definitely be on bad footing. That is why Christ also let Peter fall, so that we would not regard him as the rock and would not build on him. For we must be established on the One who stands firm against all devils, which is Christ. Therefore hold firm on this understanding, for he says that all the gates of hell shall be able to do nothing against it.

Faith is an almighty thing, like God himself is. That is why God also wants to authenticate and test it. That is also why everything that the devil has the power and ability to do must set itself against it, for Christ is not speaking empty words when he says here that all the gates of hell will not overcome it. “Gates” in Scripture mean a society and its government, since they would conduct their legal affairs by the gates, as God had commanded in the law in Deuteronomy 16: “You shall appoint judges and officials in all your gates” [16:18]. So here “gates” means every authority in the devil’s control, along with their attendants and followers,⁴ such as kings and princes, along with the wise men of this world, who cannot help but set themselves against this rock and this faith.⁵ The rock stands in the middle of the sea, where the waves roll along and storm, flash, bluster, and rage against it, as if they were trying to knock the rock over, but it has no problem standing firm, because it is well anchored. In the same way we must be alert and on our guard, because the devil and every authority in his control will charge at us and try taking on the rock. But he will not be able to do anything, just like the waves on the sea do not succeed in knocking the rock over, but fall away and break themselves up on it. It’s just like you see currently: Our ungracious princes are angry, and the highly learned are also angry, along with all those this world considers holy. But you should not pay any attention to it or waste any concern on it, for they are the gates of hell and the waves on the water that storm against this rock.

Christ continues: “And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. All that you will bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven, and all that you will loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven.” As you stuck with the simple understanding before, stick with it now, too. The keys are given to the one who stands on this rock through faith, to whomever the Father has given the ability to do so. Now you cannot single out any one person who remains standing on the rock, for one person falls today, the next one tomorrow, just as St. Peter fell. Therefore there is no specific individual to whom the keys belong. Instead they belong to the church, that is, to those who stand on this rock. The Christian church alone has the keys and no one else, although the pope and bishops could use them as those to whom their use has been entrusted by the congregation. A parson who carries out the ministry of the keys, that is, who baptizes, preaches, and administers the Sacrament, does so not on his own behalf but on behalf of the congregation. For he is a servant or minister of the entire congregation, to whom the keys have been given, even if he happens to be a scoundrel. For if he does it in place of the congregation, then the church is doing it, and if the church is doing it, then God is doing it. For you have to have a servant or minister. If the entire congregation all came forward and all baptized, they might very well drown the child, since there would probably be a thousand hands reaching for it. It won’t work. Therefore you have to have a minister who carries it out in place of the congregation.⁶

Now the keys to bind or to loose are the authority to teach and not just to absolve. For the keys are applied to everything by which I can help out my neighbor—to the comfort that one person gives another, to public and private confession, to absolution, but most commonly to preaching. For when a person preaches, “Whoever believes will be saved,” that is what it means to unlock, and when he preaches, “Whoever does not believe is condemned” [Mark 16:16], that is what it means to lock and bind.

The binding is put before the loosing. When I preach to someone, “You belong to the devil indoors and out [wie du geest und steest],” then heaven is closed to him. When he then falls down and acknowledges his sin, then I say, “Believe in Christ and your sins will be forgiven for you.” That is what it means for heaven to be unlocked, just like Peter does in Acts 2[:37–41]. Thus we all have the Christian authority to bind and lock and to loose and unlock.

Now the way they have applied it is to strengthen and establish the pope’s laws. They claim that binding means to make laws. But that is the way that blind guides go. But you should stick with the simple understanding that you have now heard and not let yourselves be turned away from it, if you want to stand firm against the attacks of sin, death, and the devil.

That is where we will let the matter rest for now and call upon God for his grace.

Sources

Pietsch, Paul, Georg Buchwald, Alfred Götze, et al., eds. Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Vol. 10. Part 3. Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1905. Pages xvi, xxi, xliv, cxxvii–cxxix, 208–216.

I also consulted Stephan Roth’s version in his Festival Postil, as reproduced by Karl Drescher, Ernst Thiele, Georg Buchwald, et al., eds., Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe, vol. 17, part 2 (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1927), 446–53. Roth was especially useful in correcting some typographical errors in previous editions, providing alternate and better spellings of certain words, and filling out the end of Luther’s sermon, which is quite abrupt in the original pamphlets.

Endnotes

¹ A few times in this sermon Luther uses a general “they” to refer to the papists.

² German: hauptsteyn. In English, keystone denotes the central stone at the summit of an arch, but Luther is using it here as a synonym for cornerstone, but with emphasis on its vital importance.

³ German: holtzweg. A Holzweg, lit. “wood or timber path,” is a road or path in the woods that does not connect two inhabited locations, but leads only to a place where trees are being felled or some other commercial venture is being undertaken. The German expressions “to be or get on the Holzweg” mean “to be on the wrong track or to fall into error.”

⁴ Alternate translation: all the authority of the devil and those who follow it.

⁵ In his 1522 editions of the New Testament, Luther included this marginal note on “gates of hell” in Matthew 16:18: “The gates of hell are every authority opposed to Christians, such as sin, death, hell, worldly wisdom and power, etc.”

⁶ The Erlangen Lutheran theologian Johann Wilhelm Friedrich Hoefling (1802–1853) is caricatured as having a purely functional or practical view of the holy ministry, of which the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod has also been accused in the past. This position is defined thus: The holy ministry does not arise from divine institution, but from an inner, practical necessity of the church. It is easy to see how someone could find support for this position from Luther here, but Luther’s other writings on the holy ministry must also be taken into account. However, Luther certainly is underscoring here that order in the church is a reason for the existence of the public ministry, even if it is not the only or primary reason. Recall that the apostle Paul’s appeal to order among the Corinthians (1 Cor. 14:33, 40) was not simply phrased in human or practical terms. He rather appealed to the fact that God, who is a God of peace and order, wants peace and order to reign in his church.

Luther Visualized 18 – Physical Appearance

Martin Luther’s Physical Appearance

Luther historian E. G. Schwiebert wrote that Lucas Cranach’s “zeal in reproducing the Reformer outstripped his talent,” and called it “most regrettable” that Luther was never sketched or painted by a more talented artist like Albrecht Dürer or Hans Holbein the Younger (p. 571). However, while Cranach’s reproductions are not exactly photographic, he and the members of his studio were certainly not lacking in skill.

Apart from Cranach’s reproductions of the man, which began in 1520, there was, to our knowledge, only one earlier depiction of him, an anonymous woodcut (#9 below) on the title page of Ein Sermon geprediget tzu Leipßgk uffm Schloß am tag Petri un pauli ym .xviiij. Jar / durch den wirdigen vater Doctorem Martinum Luther augustiner zu Wittenburgk (A Sermon Preached at the Castle in Leipzig on the Day of Sts. Peter and Paul in the Year [15]19 by the Worthy Father, Doctor Martin Luther, Augustinian in Wittenberg), printed by Wolfgang Stöckel in Leipzig. Both this woodcut, originally printed in reverse, and another anonymous woodcut, not included in this post, are consistent with Schwiebert’s assertion that for “the first thirty-eight years of his life [up until 1521] he was extremely thin” (p. 573). The latter woodcut is consistently depicted but erroneously cited in Luther biographies (e.g. Schwiebert, p. 574, where he calls it the “earliest known likeness” without citation or proof, and Brecht, vol. 1, p. 412, where he gives an erroneous source, as evidenced from the actual source he cites, whose woodcut is based on #1 below).

As for the reproductions originating with Cranach and his studio in Wittenberg during Luther’s lifetime (#8 excepted), they can be classified into 8 groups (medium and year[s] that the depictions originated and flourished in parentheses):

1. Luther the Monk (copper engraving, 1520; variously copied and embellished by a number of artists)
2. Luther the Doctor of Theology (paintings, c. 1520; copper engraving, 1521)
3. Luther as Junker Jörg (paintings and woodcut, 1521-1522)
4. Luther the Husband (paintings, 1525 & 1526)
5. The Classic Luther (paintings, 1528-1529)
6. Luther the Professor (paintings, 1532-1533)
7. Luther the Aging Man (paintings, 1540-1541)
8. Luther on His Deathbed (painting based on Lukas Fortennagel’s sketch of the dead Luther, 1546)

The other three visual depictions included below are the already mentioned anonymous woodcut (#9), a sketch of Luther lecturing by Johann Reifenstein (#10), and Fortennagel’s already mentioned painting (#11). Scroll down beneath the engravings, woodcuts, and paintings for more on Luther’s appearance.

1. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther as an Augustinian Monk, copper engraving, 1520. The caption reads: “The eternal images of his mind Luther himself expresses, while the wax of Lucas expresses the perishable looks.”

2. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther with Doctor’s Cap, copper engraving, 1521. The caption reads: “The work of Lucas. This is a transient depiction of Luther; the eternal depiction of his mind he himself expresses.”

2. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther as an Augustinian Monk with Doctor’s Cap, oil on panel, c. 1520 (erroneous “1517” in the upper left-hand corner); housed in a private collection. These paintings circa 1520 are lesser known and therefore both are included here.

2. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther, oil on panel, c. 1520, since transferred to canvas; housed in the Lutherhaus Museum in Wittenberg.

3. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther as Junker Jörg [Squire George], oil on beechwood, 1521-1522; housed in the Weimar Classics Foundation. Martin Luther likely posed for this painting during his secret trip to Wittenberg in the first half of December 1521, but cf. next image.

3. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther as Junker Jörg, woodcut, 1522. The Latin superscription accompanying this woodcut read: “The image of Martin Luther, portrayed as he appeared when he returned from Patmos [Luther’s own biblical nickname for the Wartburg Castle] to Wittenberg.”

4. Lucas Cranach, Portraits of Martin Luther and Katharina von Bora, oil on beechwood, 1525; housed in the Basel Art Museum.

4. Lucas Cranach’s Studio, Portraits of Martin Luther and Katharina von Bora, oil on beechwood, 1525-1526; housed in the LWL-Museum für Kunst und Kultur, Münster.

5. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther, oil on panel, 1528; housed in the Art Collections of the Veste Coburg. Cf. the similar painting in the Lutherhaus Museum.

6. Lucas Cranach, Martin Luther, oil on beechwood, 1533; housed in the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. The prototype for this painting, done on parchment in 1532 and housed in Drumlanrig Castle in Thornhill, Scotland, is one of Cranach’s boldest and finest depictions of Luther.

7. Lucas Cranach’s Studio, Martin Luther, oil on panel, c. 1541; housed in the Lutherhaus Museum, Wittenberg.

8. Lucas Cranach’s Studio, Martin Luther on His Deathbed, oil on oak, 1546; housed in the Lower Saxony State Museum, Hanover. See commentary above.

9. Anonymous, Doctor Martin Lutter [sic] Augustinian, woodcut, 1519. See commentary above.

10. Johann Reifenstein, Luther lecturing in the classroom, sketch, 1545. The inscription was added in 1546 by Melanchthon. It begins with oft-quoted words of Luther: “While alive, I was your plague; when I die, I will be your death, O pope.” After some obituary-esque information, it concludes: “Even dead, he lives.”

11. Lukas Fortennagel, The Dead Luther, sketch, February 19, 1546.

While Cranach did have a virtual monopoly on Luther with regard to visual depictions, there are also written depictions that help us to complete our image of the man. Schwiebert gives the most complete treatment on the subject that I have read:

Vergerio, the papal nuncio, noted that Luther had a heavy, well-developed bone structure and strong shoulders… The Swiss student Kessler accidentally met Luther at the Hotel of the Black Bear in Jena when Luther was returning to Wittenberg from the Wartburg, still dressed as a knight. Kessler wrote in his Sabbata that Luther walked very “erect, bending backwards rather than forwards, with face raised toward heaven.” Erasmus Alber, the table companion, described Luther as well-proportioned and spoke of his general appearance in highest praise. …

One important aspect of his general appearance, noted by every observer, was Luther’s unusual eyes. Melanchthon made a casual remark that Luther’s eyes were brown and compared them to the eyes of a lion or falcon. Kessler, when he became Luther’s pupil, observed that his professor had “deep black eyes and brows, sparkling and burning like stars, so that one could hardly bear looking at them.” Erasmus Alber also likened them to falcon’s eyes. Melanchthon added the observation that the eyes were brown, with golden rings around the edges, as in the case of eagles or men of genius. Nikolaus Selnecker also compared Luther’s eyes to those of a hawk, falcon, fox, and eagle, having a fiery, burning sparkle. …

[Roman] Catholics, on the other hand, saw in these eyes diabolic powers. After the first meeting with Luther at Augsburg, [Cardinal] Cajetan would have no more to do with this man, the “beast with the deep-seated eyes,” because “strange ideas were flitting through his head.” Aleander wrote in his dispatches to the Pope that when Luther left his carriage at Worms, he looked over the crowd with “demoniac eyes.” Johannes Dantiscus, later a [Roman] Catholic bishop, visited Wittenberg in 1523 and noticed that Luther’s eyes were “unusually penetrating and unbelievably sparkling as one finds them now and then in those that are possessed.” His enemies also commonly compared him to a basilisk, that fabulous reptile which hypnotizes and slowly crawls upon its helpless prey. …

Another attribute which greatly enhanced Luther’s physical qualifications as a preacher and professor was his voice. It was clear, penetrating, and of pleasing timbre, which, added to its sonorous, baritone resonance, contributed much to his effectiveness as a public speaker. … Luther’s students enjoyed his classroom lectures because of the pleasing qualities of his delivery. Erasmus Alber added that he never shouted, yet his clear, ringing voice could easily be heard.

Sources
Cranach Digital Archive, combined with the power of Google

E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times: The Reformation from a New Perspective (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950), pp. 571-576

Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1985), pp. 318,412

Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: The Preservation of the Church (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), Plates between pp. 14 & 15, and p. 378

Luther Visualized 10 – Return to Wittenberg

Luther’s Return to Wittenberg

Anonymous, Witenburg, watercolor, 1537, from Das Reisealbum des Pfalzgrafen Ottheinrich

The city of Wittenburg is viewed from the south, with the Elbe River in the foreground. On the far left is the palace suburb outside the Coswig Gate. Prominent on the left, in the city itself, is the Electoral Castle or Palace, of which the famous Castle Church was a part. To the east, along the south wall, you can see the Dragon Head Turret at the Elbe Gate. Prominent in the center of the city is the Parish Church of St. Mary, where Martin Luther preached more than 2000 sermons. The University of Würzburg identifies the large building to the east of St. Mary’s as the town hall, but it was inaccurately located by the artist. (It was west of St. Mary’s.) Proceeding east from there, the two notable buildings are the so-called Old Frederickian College of the University of Wittenberg (built in 1503) and the Luther House, respectively.

Upon Luther’s return from the Wartburg in 1522, he preached a series of eight consecutive sermons in the Parish Church, starting on March 9, Invocavit Sunday or the First Sunday in Lent, in order to rectify the prevailing unrest and the spirit of extreme reform. They remain some of his finest sermons, and showcase Luther’s biblical, balanced, and level-headed approach to reform.

In November 1536 Count Palatine Otto Henry departed from Neuberg with a retinue of about 50 persons. Threatened with bankruptcy, he traveled to Krakow to collect on his Polish grandmother Hedwig’s dowry, which had never been paid. Succeeding in his purpose, he began his return trip on January 17, 1537, and took a circuitous route home. He is documented as being in Wittenberg on February 11-12, during which time an anonymous artist in his retinue sketched the city, as he had done with all the other rest stops. The sketch was later made into an ink drawing and finished with watercolors and coating paints. (The mountains were added for effect.) It is the earliest known representation of Wittenberg in humanity’s possession today.

Sources
“Die Reise des Pfalzgrafen Ottheinrich 1536/1537” (University of Würzburg Library)

John W. Doberstein and Helmut T. Lehmann, eds., Luther’s Works, trans. A. Steimle, rev. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 51:67ff

You can also view the more detailed 1744 woodcut by Johann Wilhelm Bossögel, Accurate Depiction of the Highly Distinguished City of Wittenberg in AD 1611, the Famous Home of Electoral Saxony, the Mother and Propagatrix of the Restored Light of the Saving Faith. Here is a guide to the lettering:

A. The Electoral Castle or Palace
B. The Castle Church
C. The Town Hall
D. The Parish Church of St. Mary
E. New Frederickian College (university building completed in 1511)
F. Old Frederickian College (university building built in 1503)
G. Philipp Melanchthon’s House
H. Augusteum or Augustan College (university building completed c. 1571)
I. Augustinian Cloister or Dr. Luther’s House
K. The Elster Gate
L. The Cemetery
M. The Chapel on the Churchyard
N. The Elbe Gate
O. The Dragon Head Turret
P. The Gray Cloister (Franciscan monastery)
Q. Jurists’ College
R. The Town Mill
S. The Ramparts and Ditches
T. The Castle or Palace Gate, or Coswig Gate
V. The Suburbs

Luther Visualized 9 – At the Wartburg

Luther at the Wartburg Castle

Luther Room at the Wartburg Castle (© Red Brick Parsonage, 2018)

This was Martin Luther’s room at the Wartburg Castle, after he was “kidnapped” for his own safety on his way home from Worms. He lived here from May 4, 1521, to March 1, 1522, with the exception of a secret trip to Wittenberg in the first half of December 1521. It was also in this room that Luther translated the entire Greek New Testament into German in less than 11 weeks, between December 1521 and February 1522. None of the furniture is original except possibly the whale vertebra, which was in the castle’s possession at Luther’s time and which Luther may have used as a footstool.

(UPDATE [12/20/21]: For more on Luther’s capture and his time at the Wartburg, click here.)

Sources
Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990), pp. 1,29-30,41-42,46-47

Wolfram Nagel, “Outlawed and unrecognized at Wartburg Castle”

Matthäus Merian der Ältere, Eisenach, copperplate engraving, 1650 (coloring subsequent)

On May 3, 1521, on his way home from Worms, Luther preached in Eisenach and then headed south for a short stay with relatives in Möhra. Johannes Petzensteiner, a fellow Augustinian monk, and Nikolaus von Amsdorf, a colleague at the University of Wittenberg, accompanied him. On May 4 Luther and his companions took leave of his relatives and rode east in their covered wagon, circling around the Altenstein Palace to the south through the village of Steinbach. As they were headed north through the ravine, the party was attacked by armed horsemen. Petzensteiner immediately jumped from the wagon and fled. Luther just had time to grab his New Testament and Hebrew Bible before being snatched from the wagon. He ran alongside the horsemen until they were out of sight, and then was given a mount. The horsemen took lengthy detours in order to mislead any pursuers before leading their captive to the Wartburg south of Eisenach at 11 p.m.

Luther Monument northeast of the Altenstein Palace (© Red Brick Parsonage, 2018), marking the approximate place where Luther was “kidnapped” for his own safety. A beech tree called the “Luther Beech,” which allegedly dated back to the event, was used to mark the spot for centuries, until it came down in a storm in 1841. Duke Bernhard Erich Freund of Saxony-Meiningen had this monument erected at the same spot in 1857.

The above engraving of Eisenach, the city where Luther also attended school from 1498–1501, appeared in Martin Zeiler’s famous Topographia Germaniae series, specifically Topographia Superioris Thüringiae, Misniae, Lusatiae etc (Frankfurt am Main: Matthaeus Merian, 1650), between pages 48 and 49. The city is viewed from the north-northeast, with the Wartburg Castle, built in 1069 according to Zeiler, on the hill overlooking the town. Note how different the castle looked in 1650 from the present day castle. (The various changes undergone by the castle are well documented by models on display there.) The numbers in the engraving identify the following:

1. Princely Residential Castle
2. City Church of St. George
3. Town Hall
4. The Kloeÿ [?]
5. St. Nicholas Church
6. The Bell-House
7. The Royal Shooting Ditch
8. Dominican Monastery
9. Foundation of St. Mary
10. St. Anne Hospital
11. Our Lady’s Gate
12. Clachs [?] Gate
13. St. George’s Gate
14. Dominican Gate
15. The Nuss [Nesse] and Hersel [Hörsel] Rivers
16. Wartburg Castle
17. The Modelstein, where a castle once stood
18. Here the Eisenach Fortress once stood

Quote of the Week – Let It Rain Enemies

The following is taken from Martin Luther’s letter to Elector Frederick the Wise, penned at Borna and dated March 5, 1522. While Luther was “kidnapped” at the Wartburg Castle, his university colleague Andreas Karlstadt was rushing forward with all sorts of changes in worship that the people were not ready for. The neighboring Duke George of Leipzig in Albertine Saxony, a devoted Catholic, heard about the changes and vowed to put an end to them and to “the Lutheran heresy.” Thus Martin Luther decided to return to Wittenberg from the safety of the castle—at risk to his life, since he was still an outlaw—so as to put a stop to the hasty changes and restore order in Wittenberg, and to stop the slanders of Duke George. Elector Frederick the Wise did not want Luther to return, but here is what Luther had to say, as he was already on his way back to Wittenberg…

[T]he devil knows quite well that I did not [hide out in the Wartburg Castle] out of any fear. He could see my heart just fine when I entered Worms; he saw that if I had known that as many devils were lying in wait for me as there are tiles on the roofs, I still would have jumped right into their midst with joy.

Now Duke George is still far from the equal of a single devil. And since the Father of boundless mercy has made us gallant lords over all the devils and death through the gospel, and has given us such a wealth of confidence that we may dare to address him, “Dearest Father!”, Your Electoral Grace can see for himself that it is the greatest insult to such a Father not to trust him enough to know that we are also lords over Duke George’s wrath.

I know this much about myself at any rate: If affairs were the same in Leipzig as they are in Wittenberg, I would still ride right in, even if (Your Electoral Grace will pardon my silly speech) it rained nothing but Duke Georges for nine days and each one were nine times as furious as the one we have. He treats my Lord Christ like a doll-man woven out of straw; my Lord and I can certainly endure that for a while.

Source
Weimarer Ausgabe, Briefwechsel 2:455