The posting of the ninety-five theses has been described as one of the most carefully researched events in German history,298 and yet its origins and factual validity are somewhat elusive. In his own writings, Luther never referred to the posting of the theses itself, but rather only to his regret at the way in which they had spread around Germany.299 Documentary evidence does exist, however, to indicate that Luther did send the theses to Albrecht of Mainz and to the local ordinary,
Hieronymus Schulze, strengthening Luther’s later statement that he had followed the correct procedure for raising theological debate.300 This argument is reinforced by Luther’s claim that the theses were not simply an articulation of his own opinion, and that some were intended purely to question indulgence practice and stimulate discussion.301
Jubilee of 1617: Appropriating the Past Through Centenary Celebration’, in Exorcising our Demons:
Magic, Witchcraft and Visual Culture in Early-Modern Europe (Leiden: Brill, 2003), pp. 197-236. 298 Martin Treu, ‘Der Thesenanschlag fand wirklich statt: ein neuer Beleg aus der
Universitätsbibiothek Jena’, Luther, 78.3 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007), 140-144 (p. 143).
299 In the 1541 pamphlet Wider Hans Worst, Luther asserts his regret at the rapid dissemination of his
ninety-five theses throughout Germany; see Martin Luther, WA, 51, 540.15 – 541.7. In a letter to Amsdorf of 1 November 1527, Luther does refer, however, to having celebrated the tenth anniversary of ‘tramping down’ the theses the previous day, ‘Wittembergae die Omnium Sanctorum, anno decimo Indulgentiarum conculcatarum, quarum memoria hac hora bibimus utrinque consolati 1527’; see Luther, Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe), Briefe, 18 vols (Weimar: Böhlau, 1930-1985) [hereafter WA Br.], 4, 275. 25-27. The question of Luther’s claims regarding the posting of the theses is discussed further in Erwin Iserloh, The Theses Were Not Posted: Luther between
Reform and Reformation (London: Chapman, 1968), pp. 55-62.
300 Of the letters claimed to be sent by Luther, only that addressed to Albrecht of Mainz has been
preserved; see Luther, WA Br., 1, 110-112, and 4, 275.25ff. It has been argued, however, that both letters were most likely very similar in content; see Walther von Loewenich, Martin Luther: Der
Mann und das Werk (Munich: List, 1982), p. 104.
301 In the preface to the theses, Luther clearly states that the theses are to be discussed at a disputation
at the University of Wittenberg: ‘Amore et studio elucidande veritatis hec subscripta disputabuntur Wittenberge, Presidente R. P. Martino Luther, Artium et S. Theologie Magistro eiusdemque ibidem lectore Ordinario.Quare petit, ut qui non possunt verbis presentes nobiscum disceptare organt id literis absentes. In nomine domini nostril Ihesu Christi. Amen.’ See Luther, WA, 1, 233-238.1-9. In the letter to Pope Leo X that accompanied the publication of the Resolutiones in 1518, Luther claims once again that he sought only to stimulate debate; see Luther, WA, 1, 528.18-26. Similarly, in his letter to Christoph Scheurl of 5 March 1518, this claim is supported in Luther’s regret at the spread of the theses which were intended for the learned and not the public: ‘Primum, quod miraris, cur non ad vos
137
The status of the episode was long questioned owing to its lack of objective, historical proof, and in the second half of the twentieth century, the debate as to whether the event ever actually took place concluded that it did not happen,302 at least not in the way presented by many histories derived from Melanchthon’s account, with Luther’s personal nailing of the theses to the church door, and this conclusion has largely been accepted by modern scholars. Nevertheless, while the episode has generally been consigned to the realm of Protestant myth, later accounts have continued to include the posting of the theses, thereby illustrating the episode’s power in the Luther narrative. This is borne out by a survey of some of the major works of the last thirty years; Oberman, for example, relates the event in a simple narrative that recalls Melanchthon’s telling while Manns, Marius and Genthe all question the veracity of the legend but provide the standard representation
nevertheless.303 This model of acknowledging scholarly doubt while providing the accepted account is found in MacCulloch’s recent history of the Reformation, indicating the difficulty of removing such a key narrative episode from a history that is otherwise lacking in episodes accepted as historical fact.304 As these accounts make clear, the episode has assumed a significance to the Luther story despite the absence of historical data, so much so that the reader expects to find the episode in any telling of Luther’s life. In this instance, the episode reinforces Luther’s centrality to the start of the Reformation; as such, while scholars may debate and must
acknowledge the dubious historical nature of the episode, they cannot remove it from their narratives as to do so would disappoint readers’ expectations. Moreover, the episode’s removal would challenge an understanding of Luther as the catalyst of reform that has dominated both Protestant and Roman Catholic understanding for over four hundred years. As with all chronology, historical narratives require a beginning, and the Ninety-Five Theses episode, however dubious historically,
eas miserim, respondeo, quod non fuit consilium negre votum eas evulgari, sed cum aucis apud et circum nos habitantibus primum super ipsis confeni, ut sic multorum indicio vel damnatae abolerentur vel probatae ederentur.’ See Luther, WA Br., 1, 152.6-10.
302 See Erwin Iserloh, The Theses Were Not Posted: Luther between Reform and Reformation
(London: Chapman, 1968).
303 See Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil (New Haven: Yale Univ. P.,
1989), p. 190; Peter Manns, Martin Luther (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1982), p. 91; Richard Marius, Martin Luther: The Christian between Man and God (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. P., 1999), pp. 137-138; Hans Jochen Genthe, Martin Luther: Sein Leben und Denken, Bensheimer Hefte, 77 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996), p. 117.
304 Diarmaid MacCulloch, Reformation: Europe’s House Divided 1490-1700 (London: Allen Lane,
138
provides a single and readily identifiable act with which to begin a history of the Reformation.
Despite the attempts of Iserloh and Aland to prove otherwise,305 the legend of Luther nailing his theses against indulgences to the Castle Church door has retained a key status in Luther’s story and that of the Reformation, no doubt in part because of its visually dramatic qualities, but also because the episode provides a single, identifiable act that marks the birth of the Lutheran movement; as such, history is here at the mercy of narrative. Thus, the Ninety-Five Theses are cast, if not as a clear break from Rome, as the beginning of the Reformation at the very least, and thereby of Luther’s active decision to reform the Church. Such an emplotment is of course overly reductive and denies Luther’s post-1517 contribution to Lutheran theology; this naïve emplotment reflects, however, the interpretation found in many accounts of Luther’s life that his significance lies in the act that famously began the
Reformation rather than in the years that followed.306 This interpretation takes advantage of an obvious narrative episode of the nailing of the theses as the climax to the Luther story thus far; yet the consequential underplaying of Luther’s later adulthood is all the more curious given that Luther’s post-1517 theological writings contributed more to the course of the Lutheran movement than the posting of the Ninety-Five Theses.307 The active posting of the theses is significant, however, to an understanding of Luther’s character; in the classic Protestant tradition, Luther rejects in his posting of the theses the Catholic Church and its medieval theology,
specifically the practice of indulgences.308 If the posting of the theses did not take place, as Iserloh argues, Luther remained a faithful Roman Catholic monk who sought to open a theological discussion on the practice of indulgences, and was not the defiant figure challenging the Church as seen in much Protestant writing. In this interpretation, Luther is thus seen initially as a more passive figure seeking not to challenge but to debate questions of theology in an established academic practice.
305 For Iserloh’s and Aland’s contribution, see p. 6, note 17.
306 This interpretation with its focus on Luther’s earlier years recalls similarities with biblical figures
whose biographies concentrate on youth and early adulthood; the most obvious examples are Jesus, Moses and John the Baptist. See Richard Burridge, What are the Gospels?, pp. 135-138 and pp.197- 198.
307 A chronological survey of Luther’s writings reveals that the majority of his theological works were
written in the last twenty-nine years of his life after 1517, and were of greater significance than the 95 Theses.
139