Bayer, Oswald. Martin Luthers Theologie: Eine Vergegenwärtigung. Tübingen: Mohr, 2003. Pp. 354. |CE29.00 (approx. $35.00).

Oswald Bayer's latest book originates in a series of public lectures at the University of Tübingen, where he has taught Systematic Theology for twenty-five years, and offers the fruits of a lifelong engagement. It also serves as an introduction to Luther's theology for people without academic background in theology and often draws on earlier writings by the author, including material that has been translated into English.

The book relies on a rich variety of sources, especially those intended for a popular audience, like the Small and the Large Catechism, prefaces to biblical commentaries, hymns, and sermons. Its goal is a reimagining of Luther's theology and its validity for today. The point of contact is the existential plight of the believer then and now. For Bayer, the questions of Luther's times are the same as ours.

The material is arranged according to theological topics. In the first part (“Prolegomena”), Bayer treats four issues: the definition and the main theme of theology, the definition of “evangelical,” and the concept of Holy Scripture. The second part (“Material Dogmatics and Ethics”) discusses twelve topics: creation, the orders of creation (church, state, and economy), anthropology, sin, God's wrath and evil, christology, pneumatology, ecclesiology, faith and good works, the two regiments, eschatology and the trinity, petitionary prayer. A preface and an introduction complement the book.

Bayer locates Luther's theology within the late medieval context. Its purpose is to sharpen and to console the believer's conscience in view of the Last Judgment. He indicates three central perspectives: the call to freedom, the distinction between Law and Gospel, and justification by faith alone. On the whole, he argues, Luther's theology gains consistency from its reference to the dynamic of God's promissio, which is actualized—not merely represented—in the words of institution (“this is Christ's body and blood given for you”) and absolution (“your sins are forgiven”).

Throughout the book, Bayer emphasizes the apocalyptic dualism that shaped Luther's theology. Christianity, he says, knows of the “horrifying possibility” of a final annihilation, which means eternal death and separation, or “evil absolute.” The situation of Anfechtung arises, when the whole world, including one's own self, becomes a hostile environment and God appears as someone who has broken His word. The only escape from this hidden God is the flight to the God who has revealed beyond doubt, “through the Son in the Holy Spirit,” the goodness of His creation and who grants certitude of salvation. Bayer thus distinguishes between a “general” doctrine of God, which deals with the “absolute God” who is experienced as an “enemy,” and a doctrine of the trinitarian God who reveals Himself in Jesus Christ. He also offers a quote, in which Luther insists that God never deals with human beings apart from the word of promise, wherefore we can never deal with God apart from our faith in this word. Is God's judgment always a gracious judgment, as Karl Barth insisted, or does such a conclusion dispose of the reality of evil, as Bayer holds against Barth? Although God's promissio is real, the “overturning” in God, which resolves the deadly confrontation between the human being who sins and the God who justifies, seems to remain incomplete until the “final victory of grace,” when the “original” world that lives according to God's will is restored.

Problems recur when the distinction between a “general” and a trinitarian doctrine of God is projected onto the distinction between Law and Gospel and a “general” anthropology comes into view. The Law then deals with the “non-Christian human being” who stands under God's “demand and accusation” and functions apart from the Gospel. Is the claim that the Law is prior in fact, whereas the Gospel always remains prior in principle, sufficient to prevent their separation? For Luther, the Law leads to humility or even despair, but it is not designed to deceive the sinner about his or her inability to love God, as some of his followers thought. I also wonder whether he would agree that sin constitutes the human being as an individual person, especially since Bayer himself states that subjectivity means being made alive by God's Spirit and endowed with Sprachvernunft and that the Gospel should not be understood only as the negation of sin.

Bayer criticizes the view of the state as a means of coercion as too narrow and points to later texts from Luther that envision the state as a tool of human sociability. He also emphasizes the reformer's high esteem for public law and correlates it with the fear of “complete chaos” in the face of the peasants' revolt. Unfortunately, he takes Luther's view of the inability of the people to govern themselves at face value and does not ask further for the roots of popular resentment, although he mentions a lack of democratic structures as one possible reason. Finally, he believes that the modern state and its loyal Christian citizens stand under a “divine commission to resist evil” by caring for justice and peace. Yet, the cited military actions are dubious examples at best, since they had the opposite effect, especially in Kosovo but also in Afghanistan. (Iraq is not mentioned.) The assessment of Luther's political ethics thus remains disputed.

Matthias Gockel
Wittenberg, Germany