Collected Works of Martin Luther

by Martin Luther

  With the dear blood of Jesus,

  Which from the sins inherited

  From fallen Adam frees us,

  And from our own misdoings.

  1. Christ, unser Herr, zum Jordan kam

  Nach seines Vaters Willen,

  Von Sanct Johann’s die Taufe nahm,

  Sein Werk und Amt zu ‘ rfuellen.

  Da wollt’ er stiften uns ein Bad,

  Zu waschen uns von Suenden,

  Ersaeufen auch den bittern Tod

  Durch sein selbst Blut und Wunden,

  Es galt ein neues Leben.

  2. So hoert und merket alle wohl,

  Was Gott heisst selbst die Taufe,

  Und was ein Christen glauben soll,

  Zu meiden Ketzer Haufen:

  Gott spricht und will, das Wasser sei

  Doch nicht allein schlecht Wasser,

  Sein heilig’s Wort ist auch dabei

  Mit reichem Geist ohn’ Massen,

  Der ist allhie der Taeufer.

  3. Solch’s hat er uns beweiset klar,

  Mit Bildern und mit Worten,

  Des Vaters Stimm man offenbar

  Daselbst am Jordan hoerte.

  Er sprach: das ist mein lieber Sohn,

  An dem ich hab’ Gefallen,

  Den will ich euch befohlen han,

  Dass ihr ihn hoeret alle

  Und folget seinen Lehren.

  4. Auch Gottes Sohn hie selber steht

  In seiner zarten Menschheit,

  Der heilig’ Geist hernieder faehrt

  In Taubenbild verkleidet;

  Dass wir nicht sollen zweifeln d’ran,

  Wenn wir getaufet werden,

  All’ drei Person getaufet han,

  Damit bei uns auf Erden

  Zu wohnen sich ergeben.

  5. Sein’ Juenger heisst der Herre Christ:

  Geht hin all’ Welt zu lehren,

  Dass sie verlor’n in Suenden ist,

  Sich soll zur Busse kehren;

  Wer glaubet und sich taufen laesst,

  Soll dadurch selig werden,

  Ein neugeborner Mensch er heisst,

  Der nicht mehr konne sterben,

  Das Himmelreich soll erben.

  6. Wer nicht glaubt dieser grossen G’nad,

  Der bleibt in seinen Suenden,

  Und ist verdammt zum ew’gen Tod

  Tief in der Hoellen Grunde,

  Nichts hilst sein’ eigen’ Heiligkeit,

  All’ sein Thun ist verloren.

  Die Erbsuend’ macht’s zur Nichtigkeit,

  Darin er ist geboren,

  Vermag ihm selbst nichts helfen.

  7. Das Aug’ allein das Wasser seiht,

  Wie Menschen Wasser giessen,

  Der Glaub’ im Geist die Kraft versteht

  Des Blutes Jesu Christi,

  Und ist fuer ihm ein’ rothe Fluth

  Von Christus Blut gefaerbet,

  Die allen Schaden heilen thut

  Von Adam her geerbet,

  Auch von uns selbst begangen.

  XXXV. Was fuercht’st du, Feind Herodes, sehr? Why, Herod, unrelenting foe.

  FROM THE HYMN of Coelius Sedelius, of the Fifth Century, “Herodes hostis impie.”

  Harmony by M. PRAETORIUS, 1609.

  1. Why, Herod, unrelenting foe,

  Doth the Lord’s coming move thee so?

  He doth no earthly kingdom seek

  Who brings his kingdom to the meek.

  2. Led by the star, the wise men find

  The Light that lightens all mankind;

  The threefold presents which they bring

  Declare him God, and Man, and King.

  3. In Jordan’s sacred waters stood

  The meek and heavenly Lamb of God,

  And he who did no sin, thereby

  Cleansed us from all iniquity!

  4. And now a miracle was done:

  Six waterpots stood there of stone;

  Christ spake the word with power divine,

  The water reddened into wine.

  5. All honor unto Christ be paid,

  Pure offspring of the holy maid,

  With Father and with Holy Ghost,

  Till time in endless time be lost.

  1. Was fuercht’st du, Feind Herodes, sehr,

  Dass uns gebor’n kommt Christ der Herr?

  Er sucht kein sterblich Koenigreich,

  Der zu uns bringt sein Himmelreich.

  2. Dem Stern die Weisen folgen nach,

  Solch’ Licht zum rechten Licht sie bracht’;

  Sie zeigen mit den Gaben drei,

  Dies Kind, Gott, Mensch, und Koenig sei.

  3. Die Tauf’ im Jordan an sich nahm

  Das himmelische Gottes Lamm,

  Dadurch, der nie kein’ Suende that,

  Bon Suenden uns gewaschen hat.

  4. Ein Wunderwerk da neu geschah;

  Sechs steinern’ Kruege man da sah

  Voll Wasser, das verlor sein Art,

  Rother Wein durch sein Wort d’raus ward.

  5. Lob, Ehr’ und Dank fei dir gesagt,

  Christ, gebor’n von der reinen Magd,

  Mit Vater und dem heiligen Geist

  Von nun an bis in Ewigkeit.

  XXXVI. Der du bist drei in Einigkeit. Thou, who art Three in Unity.

  AN IMITATION FROM the Gregorian hymn, “O lux beata trinitas.”

  Original Latin Melody. Harmony in VON TUCHER, 18 — .

  1. Thou who art Three in Unity,

  True God from all eternity,

  The sun is fading from our sight,

  Shine thou on us with heavenly light.

  2. We praise thee with the dawning day,

  To thee at evening also pray,

  With our poor song we worship thee

  Now, ever and eternally.

  3. Let God the Father be adored,

  And God the Son, the only Lord,

  And equal adoration be,

  Eternal Comforter, to thee.

  1. Der du bist drei in Einigkeit,

  Ein wahrer Gott von Ewigkeit;

  Die Sonn’ mit dem Tag von uns weicht:

  Lass leuchten uns dein goettlich Licht.

  2. Des Morgens, Gott, dich loben wir,

  Des Abends auch beten fuer dir,

  Unser armes Lied ruehmt dich

  Jetzt und immer und ewiglich.

  Gott Vater, dem sei ewig Ehr,

  Gott Sohn der ist der einig’ Herr,

  Und dem Troester heiligen Geist,

  Von nun an bis in Ewigkeit.

  On the Bondage of the Will (1525)

  Translated by Henry Cole, 1823

  This treatise was published in December 1525 in reply to Desiderius Erasmus’ De libero arbitrio diatribe sive collatio (On Free Will), which had appeared in September 1524 as Erasmus’ first public attack on Luther. The work tackles the issue of whether human beings, after the Fall of Man, are free to choose good or evil. The debate between Luther and Erasmus is one of the earliest of the Reformation over the issue of free will and predestination.

  Despite his own criticisms of the Roman Catholic Church, Erasmus argued that the church needed reformation from within and that Luther had gone too far. Erasmus had asserted that all humans possessed free will and that the doctrine of predestination was not in accord with the teachings found in the Bible. He argued against the belief that God’s foreknowledge of events was the cause of events and upheld that the doctrines of repentance, baptism and conversion depended on the existence of free will. He likewise contended that grace simply helped humans come to a knowledge of God and supported them as they used their free will to choose between good and evil — choices that would then lead to salvation through the atonement of Christ.

  Luther’s response was to propose that sin incapacitates human beings from working out their own salvation and that they are incapable of bringing themselves to God. Thus, there is no free will for humanity, since any will they might have is overwhelmed by the influence of sin. Central to his analy
sis, both of the doctrines under discussion and of Erasmus’ specific arguments are Luther’s beliefs concerning the power and complete sovereignty of God.

  Portrait of Erasmus of Rotterdam by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1523

  CONTENTS

  PREFACE BY THE TRANSLATOR.

  INTRODUCTION.

  ERASMUS’ PREFACE REVIEWED.

  ERASMUS’ SCEPTICISM.

  THE NECESSITY OF KNOWING GOD AND HIS POWER.

  THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD.

  EXORDIUM.

  DISCUSSION: FIRST PART.

  DISCUSSION: SECOND PART.

  DISCUSSION: THIRD PART.

  CONCLUSION.

  APPENDIX: MARTIN LUTHER’S JUDGMENT OF ERASMUS OF ROTTERDAM.

  APPENDIX: MARTIN LUTHER TO NICOLAS ARMSDOFF CONCERNING ERASMUS OF ROTTERDAM.

  PREFACE BY THE TRANSLATOR.

  THE TRANSLATOR HAS long had it in meditation, to present the British Church with an English version of a choice Selection from the Works of that great Reformer, MARTIN LUTHER: and in November last, he issued Proposals for such a publication. He considers it however necessary to state, that this Treatise on the BONDAGE OF THE WILL, formed no part of his design when those Proposals were sent forth. But receiving, subsequently, an application from several Friends to undertake the present Translation, he was induced not only to accede to their request, but also to acquiesce in the propriety of their suggestion, that this work should precede those mentioned in the Proposals. The unqualified encomium bestowed upon it by a Divine so eminent as the late Reverend AUGUSTUS MONTAGUE TOPLADY, who considered it a masterpiece of polemical composition, had justly impressed the minds of those friends with a correct idea of the value of the Treatise; and it was their earnest desire that the plain sentiments and forcible arguments of Luther upon the important subject which it contained, should be presented to the Church, unembellished by any superfluous ornament, and unaltered from the original, except as to their appearance in an English version. In short, they wished to see a correct and faithful Translation of LUTHER ON THE BONDAGE OF THE WILL — without note or comment! In this wish, the Translator fully concurred: and having received and accepted the application, he sat down to the work immediately: which was, on Monday, December 23rd, 1822.

  As it respects the character of the version itself — the Translator, after much consideration of the eminence of his Author as a standard authority in the Church of God, and the importance of deviating from the original text in any shape whatever, at last decided upon translating according to the following principle; to which, it is his design strictly to adhere in every future translation with which he may present the public — to deliver FAITHFULLY the MIND of LUTHER; retaining LITERALLY, as much of his own WORDING, PHRASEOLOGY, and EXPRESSION, as could be admitted into the English version. — With what degree of fidelity he has adhered to this principle in the present work, the public are left to decide.

  The addition of the following few remarks shall suffice for observation.

  1. The Work is translated from Melancthon’s Edition, which he published immediately after Luther’s death.

  2. The division-heads of the Treatise, which are not distinctively expressed in the original, are so expressed in the Translation, to facilitate the Reader’s view of the whole work and all its parts. The Heads are these — Introduction, Preface, Exordium, Discussion part the First, part the Second, part the Third, and Conclusion.

  3. The subdividing Sections of the matter, which, in the original, are distinguished by a very large capital at the commencement, are, in the Translation, for typographical reasons, distinguished by Sections I, II, III, IV, &c.

  4. The Quotations from the Diatribe, are, in the Translation, preceded and followed by a dash and inverted commas: but with this distinction — where Erasmus’ own words are quoted in the original the commas are double; but single, where the substance of his sentiments only is quoted. The reader will observe, however, that this distinction was not adopted till after the first three sheets were printed: which will account for all the quotations, in those sheets, being preceded and followed by double commas. Though it is presumed, there will be no difficulty in discovering which are Erasmus’ own words, and which are his sentiments in substance only.

  5. The portions of Scripture adduced by Luther, are, in some instances, translated from his own words, and not given according to our English version. This particular was attended to, in those few places where Luther’s reading varies a little from our version, as being more consistent with a correct Translation of the author, but not with any view to favour the introduction of innovated and diverse readings of the Word of God.

  With these few and brief preliminary observations, the Translator presents this profound Treatise of the immortal Luther on the Bondage of the Will to the Public. And he trusts he has a sincere desire, that his own labour may prove to be, in every respect, a faithful Translation: and that the work itself may be found, under the Divine blessing, to be — an invaluable acquisition to the Church— “a sharp threshing instrument having teeth” for the exposure of subtlety and error — a banner in defence of the truth — and a means of edification and establishment to all those, who are willing to come to the light to have their deeds made manifest, and to be taught according to the oracles of God!

  HENRY COLE.

  London, March, 1823.

  INTRODUCTION.

  MARTIN LUTHER, TO the venerable D. Erasmus of Rotterdam, wishing Grace and Peace in Christ.

  THAT I have been so long answering your DIATRIBE on FREE-WILL, venerable Erasmus, has happened contrary to the expectation of all, and contrary to my own custom also. For hitherto, I have not only appeared to embrace willingly opportunities of this kind for writing, but even to seek them of my own accord. Some one may, perhaps, wonder at this new and unusual thing, this forbearance or fear, in Luther, who could not be roused up by so many boasting taunts, and letters of adversaries, congratulating Erasmus on his victory and singing to him the song of Triumph. — What that Maccabee, that obstinate assertor, then, has at last found an Antagonist a match for him, against whom he dares not open his mouth!

  But so far from accusing them, I myself openly concede that to you, which I never did to any one before: — that you not only by far surpass me in the powers of eloquence, and in genius, (which we all concede to you as your desert, and the more so, as I am but a barbarian and do all things barbarously,) but that you have damped my spirit and impetus, and rendered me languid before the battle; and that by two means. First, by art: because, that is, you conduct this discussion with a most specious and uniform modesty; by which you have met and prevented me from being incensed against you. And next, because, on so great a subject, you say nothing but what has been said before: therefore, you say less about, and attribute more unto “Free-will,” than the Sophists have hitherto said and attributed: (of which I shall speak more fully hereafter.) So that it seems even superfluous to reply to these your arguments, which have been indeed often refuted by me; but trodden down, and trampled under foot, by the incontrovertible Book of Philip Melancthon “Concerning Theological Questions:” a book, in my judgment, worthy not only of being immortalized, but of being included in the ecclesiastical canon: in comparison of which, your Book is, in my estimation, so mean and vile, that I greatly feel for you for having defiled your most beautiful and ingenious language with such vile trash; and I feel an indignation against the matter also, that such unworthy stuff should be borne about in ornaments of eloquence so rare; which is as if rubbish, or dung, should he carried in vessels of gold and silver. And this you yourself seem to have felt, who were so unwilling to undertake this work of writing; because your conscience told you, that you would of necessity have to try the point with all the powers of eloquence; and that, after all, you would not be able so to blind me by your colouring, but that I should, having torn off the deceptions of language, discover the real dregs beneath. For, although I am rude in speech, yet, by the grace of God, I am not rude
in understanding. And, with Paul, I dare arrogate to myself understanding and with confidence derogate it from you; although I willingly, and deservedly, arrogate eloquence and genius to you, and derogate it from myself.

  Wherefore, I thought thus — If there be any who have not drank more deeply into, and more firmly held my doctrines, which are supported by such weighty Scriptures, than to be moved by these light and trivial arguments of Erasmus, though so highly ornamented, they are not worthy of being healed by my answer. Because, for such men, nothing could be spoken or written of enough, even though it should be in many thousands of volumes a thousands times repeated: for it is as if one should plough the seashore, and sow seed in the sand, or attempt to fill a cask, full of holes, with water. For, as to those who have drank into the teaching of the Spirit in my books, to them, enough and an abundance has been administered, and they at once contemn your writings. But, as to those who read without the Spirit, it is no wonder if they be driven to and fro, like a reed, with every wind. To such, God would not have said enough, even if all his creatures should be converted into tongues. Therefore it would, perhaps, have been wisdom, to have left these offended at your book, along with those who glory in you and decree to you the triumph.

  Hence, it was not from a multitude of engagements, nor from the difficulty of the undertaking, nor from the greatness of your eloquence, nor from a fear of yourself; but from mere irksomeness, indignation, and contempt, or (so to speak) from my judgment of your Diatribe, that my impetus to answer you was damped. Not to observe, in the mean time, that, being ever like yourself, you take the most diligent care to be on every occasion slippery and pliant of speech; and while you wish to appear to assert nothing, and yet, at the same time, to assert something, more cautious than Ulysses, you seem to be steering your course between Scylla and Charybdis. To meet men of such a sort, what, I would ask, can be brought forward or composed, unless any one knew how to catch Proteus himself? But what I may be able to do in this matter, and what profit your art will be to you, I will, Christ cooperating with me, hereafter shew.