¹ Luthers Auseinandersetzung mit Gabriel Biel in der Disputatio contra Scholasticam Theologiam, 1517 (Copenhagen, 1962), 46f.

² Die Entwicklung der Akzeptations und Verdienstlehre von Duns Skotus bis Luther (Münster, Westfalen, 1963), 363.

³ Op. cit., 364.

⁴ The Harvest of Medieval Theology (Cambridge, Mass., 1963), 425ff.

⁵ Biel, I Sent, d 43 q. i art. 4 cor.

⁶ Dettloff, op. cit., 364.

⁷ “… secundum ineffabilem iustitiam, non nostram sed suam…” Canonis Misse Expositio, ed. H. A. Oberman et W. J. Courtenay, I (Wiesbaden, 1963), Lect. 23 E, 212; cf. Augustinus, De Trinitate V, PL 42.874.

† Year of death.

⁸ Thesis 35: “Non est verum, quod ignorantia invincibilis a toto excusat,” WA I. 225 (Sept. 1517).

⁹ Disputationen Dr. Martin Luthers, ed. Paul Drews (Göttingen, 1896), 340. Cf. WA 39 I. 419. 17–19 (Jan. 1538). Cf. WA 1.373, 24f. (1518).

¹⁰ “Occam enim et moderni, ut vocantur, sceleste docent, quod ratio sine Spiritu Sancto possit Deum super omnia diligere, et quod tantum meruerit primam gratiam.” Ibid.

¹¹ WA 54. 186. For an early parallel to the Preface of 1545 see Bornkamm, Heinrich, “Luthers Bericht iiber seine Entdeckung tier iustitia dei,” ARG 37 (1940), 123f.Google Scholar, where one finds reference to WA 5. 144, 1–23 (1519). More explicit: idem, “Iustitia dei in der Scholastik und bei Luther,” ARG 39 (1942), 27. In answer to the challenge posed by Denifle's thesis according to which Luther's interpretation of the iustitia Dei is a “discovery” of what had been always assumed in scholasticism (Die abendländische Schriftausleger bis Luther über iustitia dei [Röm. 1: 17] und iustificatio. Quellenbelege zu Denifles Luther und Luthertum, 2 ed. I 2 [Mainz, 1905]), reiterated by Joseph Lortz (Luther discovers only “neu für sich”; Die Reformation in Deutschland I² [Freiburg i. Br., 1941], 183) Karl Holl as regards the exegetical tradition (“Die iustitia dei in der vorlutherische Bibelauslegung des Abendlandes,” Festschrift für Adolf von Harnack, 1921. Gesammelte Aufsätze, III [1928], 171–88) and Heinrich Bornkamm as regards the systematic tradition (art. cit., ARG 39 [1942], 1–46), called attention to the pluriformity and unclarity on this point within scholasticism in connection with the interrelated concepts of iustitia-misericordia. Whereas we are of the opinion that herewith the challenge of Denifle/Lortz has been answered, we believe that our introduction of the twin concepts of iustitia Dei — iustitia Christi enables us now to do justice also to the consensus and basic uniformity in the medieval tradition. Seen against this background, the several motives which played their part already in Luther's first Commentary on the Psalms prove to form one pattern. See section III. We should state explicitly at this point that the twin terms we employ — “iustitia Christi” and “iustitia Dei” — are interpretative concepts, introduced to articulate and clarify the duplex iustitia operative in all medieval doctrines of justification.

¹² WA 50. 659; we follow here the translation of Lewis W. Spitz, editor of vol. 34, “Career of the Reformer” IV, Luther's Works (Philadelphia, 1960), 286.

¹³ “Igitur ‘meditari’ est pulsare cum Mose hanc petram, ‘decurrere’ autem ‘aquas’ est erumpere multos sensus et copiam intelligence.” WA 55. 2. 1, 15. Exod. 17: 6; Num. 20: 11.

¹⁴ WA 55. 2. 1, 16. 2f.; cf. WA 55. 2. 1, 55–56 and Excursus WA 55. 2. 1, 39ff.

¹⁵ Bradwardine, De Causa Dei (London, 1618), I. 35. 308 C-D; FitzRalph, cf. W. A. Pantin, The English Church in the fourteenth century (Cambridge, England, 1955), 133; Gerson, , “Super magnificat VIII,” Opera omnia, ed. Du Pin, L. E. (Antwerpen, 1706), IV. 360Google Scholar A; Karlstadt, De spiritu et litera, ed. Ernst Kähler (Halle, 1952), s; Contarini, cf. F. Dittrich, Gasparo Contarini (Braunsberg, 1885), 488ff.

Calvin's subita conversio, dated by P. Sprenger in 1527–28, should also be understood in the light of this tradition. For literature see his Das Rätsel um die Bekehrung Calvin's (Neukirchen, 1960).

In the augustinian epistemological tradition there is always an element of ‘suddenness’ (cognitio through illumination). After the aristotelian-thomistic epistemology (cognitio through sense perception) had secularized and transformed the event of cognitio into the process of cognitio, the subito or statim becomes the characteristic of a special revelation or of the supernatural gift of sapientia, often used to express the passivity of the mystic in the visio Dei. Cf. Bonaventura, Itinerarium mentis, Prol. 2; Tauler, Sermo Rom. 8:14, G. Hofmann, Johannes Tauler, Predigten (Freiburg, 1961), no. 45 [ed. Vetter, 43], 345.

¹⁶ WA 3. 549. 26–32. See also Ernst Wolf, Staupitz und Luther (Leipzig, 1927), 145ff.

¹⁷ Der junge Luther und Augustin, I (Gütersloh, 1934), 160.

¹⁸ “Sequitur tandem ex predictis, quod Scriptura sancta aptius et melius utitur verbis, quam curiosi disputatores in suis studiis. Immo, nisi quis eorum imaginationibus renuncians velut calceos suos cum Mose exuerit, non poterit ad istum rubum flammeum appropinquare, ‘terra enim sancta est.’” WA 55. 2. 1, 21.21–22.2. “Tercius est non docere malum (i.e., maxime docere bona). Quos tres gradus in Augustino…” WA 55. 2. 1, 24. 12f.

¹⁹ Ed. cit., 56. 8–13.

²⁰ Emphasized by Gerhard Ebeling as the main theme in the first Commentary on the Psalms: “Die Anfänge von Luthers Hermeneutik,” ZThK 48 (1951), 172–230; 187. Cf. his Luther, Einführung in sein Denken (Tübingen, 1964), 100ff.

²¹ “Primum ergo est per prudentiam cognoscere petenda, que confert lectio. Secundum vigilans et studiosa cognitorum masticatio, que est meditatio excitans fervorem et affectum. Demum sequitur desideratorum bonorum petitio.” Sermones Dominicales (Hagenau, 1510), 47 C. Cf. Gerson, “De mystica theologia speculativa,” cons. 8 G; Opera III. 411f. Cf. Thomas ST II II. q 82. art. 3.

²² “Sed quomodo ad hanc dilectionem perveniemus? Responsio: … lectio, meditatio, oratio, quam sequitur contemplatio…” Sermones Dominicales, 85 C/D.

²³ Cf. my “‘Facientibus quod in se est Deus non denegat gratiam.’ Robert Holcot O.P. and the beginnings of Luther's Theology,” HTR 55 (1962), 317–42.

²⁴ “Sed confitemur tibi, quia indigemus ostensore bonorum, et ex nobis non videmus ista bona. Sed lumen vultus tui (i.e. fides…) signatum est (…) super nos (i.e. desursum…).” WA 55. 2. 1, 80, 28– 81, 2; cf. 83, 5: “et revelata parvulis (sine dubio super quos ‘signatum est hoc lumen’).”

²⁵ Cf. “Ergo oportet nos [pro actualibus peccatis] satisfacere. Illa est doctrina papatus et inventa ab illis sua opinione, inventae sunt multae viae reconciliandi Deum. Hoc argumentum videmus esse fontem et originem omnium monasteriorum, missarum, peregrinationum, invocationis sanctorum et similium, quibus omnes conantur satisfacere pro peccatis.” Disputatio de Iustificatione, 1536, Drews, op. cit., 59. Cf. WA 39 I. iii.

²⁶ WA 54. 185; cf. Luther's Works, op. cit., 336f.

²⁷ This emphasis on conservatio rather than on praeparatio also underlies Luther's second most important autobiographical statement, contained in his letter to Staupitz of May 30, 1518. WA 1.525–527; Luther's Works, Vol. 48, ed. Gottfried G. Krodel (Phil. 1963), 65–70. Here the key word is not ‘satisfactio’ but its related 1517 parallel ‘poenitentia’: “… poenitentia is genuine only if it begins with love for iustitia and for God”; “The commandments of God become sweet when they are read not only in books, but also in the wounds of the sweetest Savior.” Ibid., 65f. This understanding of poenitentia is expressed in the first of the 95 theses: “Dominus et magister noster Jesus christus dicendo: Penitentiam agite etc., omnem vitam fidelium penitentiam esse voluit,” WA 1.233; cf. Luther's Works, Vol. 31, ed. Harold J. Grimm (Phil., 1957), 25. Luther's point is therefore lost if one translates ‘penitentiam agite’ with ‘repent.’ As the characteristic of the life of the faithful in a state of grace it should be rendered by ‘do penance’. This first thesis assails the indulgences exactly because this ‘do penance’ applies to omnis vita, not merely to justification (iustificatio impii) in the sacrament of penance.

²⁸ Cf. Lombardus, III Sent. d. 40, c.i.n.i; Bonaventura, III Sent. d. 40, art. 1 q. 3, resp. 5 ad 5; Thomas, ST I II q. 107, art. 1, ad 2; Scotus, Ox. III d. 40, q. 1, n. 8; Biel, III Sent. d. 40, q. 1, art. 3, dub. 1.

²⁹ Sermones Dominicales, 60 B.C.

³⁰ Loc. cit., 60 F; III Sent. d. 40, q. 1, art. 3, dub. 1.

³¹ III Sent. d. 40, q. 1, art. 2 concl.

³² III Sent. d. 19, q. 1, art. 2 concl. 5.

³³ “Cui, nisi nostrum meritum iungatur, insufficiens, immo nullum erit.” Sermones de Festivitatibus Christi, 11 G.

³⁴ The yoke of the new law is lighter: “In lege nova, moralia sunt eadem quae tune [i.e., in lege vetero], sed magis explicita; caeremonialia sunt multo pauciora et leviora, quae imposita sunt per Christum; iudicialia nulla sunt posita per Christum, sed magis est lex mititatis et humilitatis, in qua non oportet habere iudicialia.” Oxon. I, III, qu. 40 (Vives, torn 15, n. 3, 1085a). Fear and love represent the contrast between the Old and the New Law: “Ilia dicitur esse lex timoris, haec autem amoris.” (Ibid. n. 8, 1097). The ceremonial laws were heavier and more in number: “Quantum ad caeremonialia dico, quod ilia fuit multo gravior et quantum ad multitudinem et quantum ad difficultatem observandi.” (Ibid, n. 4, 1085). The new law is lighter in as much as it is accompanied by more and more effective help and aid to accomplish this law: “Simpliciter ergo plura adiutoria et efficaciora sunt in lege Christiana quam veteri, et ideo ex ea parte lex nova est levior.” (Ibid. n. 7, 1093) By far the greatest help is an incitement which the Old Testament did not provide; when we fulfill the New Testament law, there is the promise of life eternal: “Est autem unum adiutorium valde notabile, quia nobis pro observatione legis christianae promittitur explicite vita aeterna; illis autem vel raro vel numquam nisi bona temporalia promittebantur; numquam autem tantum alliciunt animam ad servandum legem bona temporalia sicut bona aeterna.” (Ibid., 1094)

³⁵ Cf. Yves M.-J. Congar, O. P., “Le sens de ‘l'Économie’ salutaire dans la ‘théologie’ de S. Thomas d'Aquin (Somme Théologique),” in Festschrift Joseph Lortz, ed. Erwin Iserloh and Peter Manns, II (1958), 73ff. As far as I can see, it has not yet been noticed that though there is no parallel in scholastic theology for Luther's expression “iustitia Dei passiva,” Thomas knows a “iustificatio passive accepta”: “iustificatio passive accepta importat motum ad iustitiam sicut et calefactio motum ad calorem,” ST I II q. 113, art. 1. This word “passive” is however understood here from the point of view of man who is drawn into this process of justification; “passive” thus interpreted stands for what we have designated as the iustitia inhaerens or iustitia Christi.

³⁶ PL 44. 222. Cf. the concise summary by Anselm Forster, Gesetz und Evangelium bei Girolamo Seripando (Paderborn, 1963), 69f.

³⁷ ST I II q. 108, art. 1 c.a.

³⁸ ST I II q. 106, art. 1 ad 1.

³⁹ CT V. 472. Cf. Forster, op. cit., 76f.

⁴⁰ CT V. 472.

⁴¹ Enarr. in Ps. 9; PL 36. 125. CT V. 666. Applied by Luther to Christ!! WA 55. 1. 1, 76.4.

⁴² Denz. 806. In the new edition Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum (Freiburg, 1963⁸²), 1541.

⁴³ Denz. 830; ed. cit., 1570.

⁴⁴ Compare the verb “debere” in the Tridentine Decree on justification (Denz. 836–1576) with Luther's “pro quibus debemus nos satisfacere”; Drews, op. cit., 59.

⁴⁵ “Sicut vos dicitis charitatem ipsam imbuere fidem, sic dicimus nos Christum esse formam istius fidei.” WA 40 I. 229, 8f. Cf. “… sic dicimus nos Christum esse formam istius fidei et sic apprehensus est iustitia Christiana; propter hanc reputat nos iustos et donat vitam.” (Ibid.) Karin Bornkamm points to Luther's statement “… quod Christus sit mea forma, sicut paries informatur albedine. Sic tam proprie et inhesive, ut albedo in pariete, sic Christus manet in me et ista vita vivit in me; et vita, qua vivo, est Christus.” WA 40 I. 283, 7ff. Luthers Auslegungen des Galaterbriefs von 1519 und 1531. Ein Vergleich (Berlin, 1963), 97. Very important is the section entitled “Christus als forma fidei,” 93ff.

⁴⁶ Römerbriefvorlesung 1515–16; Rom. 12: 2: “Et sic est [Christianus] in peccato, quoad terminum a quo, et in iustitia quoad terminum ad quem.” WA 56. 442. “Nam philosophia efficientem [causam] certe non novit, similiter nec finalem.” Disputatio de homine, 1526; Drews, op. cit., 90–92. Thesis 13. Cf. WA 39 I. 176.

⁴⁷ Disputatio de Iustificatione, Luther presiding, 1536; Drews, op. cit., 58. arg. 17. Cf. WA 39. I. 109. Luther's Works, Vol. 34, ed. L. Spitz (Phil., 1960), 178.

To summarize the Roman law tradition in one sentence: aliquid proprium [proprietatem] habere est hire possidere. Possessio stands with ususfructus over against proprietas or dominium. Cf. Max Kaser, Eigentum und Besitz im alteren romischen Recht (Weimar, 1943), 310ff. Ernest Levy, West Roman Vulgar Law: the law of property (Phil. 1951), 19ff. Hugonis Grotii, De iure belli ac pads, libri tres, ed. P. C. Molhuysen (Lugduni Batavorum, 1919), II. II.3, 143, note 1.

⁴⁸ “… quecunque in Scriptura continentur et in praedicationibus sonant, vel misericordiam dei vel iustitia dei … commendant.” Sermones Dominicales, 101 G. “Et attendite, quam pulchre opus iustitiae sequitur opus spei, ne fiat vana praesumptio, si non conversi, nee penitentes, vitam speramus.” Sermones de Festivitatibus Christi, 12 E.

⁴⁹ “… duplae morti nostrae salvator impendit simplam suam; et ad faciendum utramque resuscitationem nostram in Sacramento et exemplo praeposuit et proposuit unam suam… Cum in ea fieret interioris hominis sacramentum, exterioris exemplum…” De Trinitate IV. 3; PL 42. 891; WA 9. 18. Cf. Gerhard Ebeling, Evangelische Evangelienauslegung. Eine Untersuchung zu Luthers Hermeneutik (Darmstadt, 1962²), 238, note.

⁵⁰ “… omnia in uno christo implentur et inveniuntur, quia quicquid in lege tam multis verbis et factis agitur, totum unus christus habet in veritate… Sicut modo in spiritu unica ceremonia, scilicet sacramento, omnia tribuit, que olim multis carnalibus et imperfecte, i.e. signo dedit.” WA 3. 262. 16–29 (±1515). Cf. WA 39 I. 462. 20ff. (in 1538).

⁵¹ The first time that Luther clarifies the expression “iustitia dei passiva” is in De servo arbitrio, 1525: “… sic iustitia Dei latine dicitur, quam Deus habet, sed Ebraeis intelligitur, quae ex deo et coram Deo habetur.” WA 18. 769, 1. The identification of iustitia Dei and iustitia Christi as expressed here in “ex [!] deo et coram deo” is especially striking when one puts it side by side with a passage out of an All Saints sermon of Bernard of Clairvaux. In connection with Psalm 142 (143): 2 —, “non enim iustificabitur in conspectu tuo omnis vivens” — Bernard points out that this “omnis vivens” embraces both men and angels so that even angels, though they live so much closer to God, can be presented as justified “ex eo” but not as justified “coram eo”; the expression “in conspectu tuo” is understood to mean: “munere eius, non in eius comparatione.” Dominica I Novembris, Sermo V, 9. Sermones de Tempore, ed. J. M. Mandernach (Coloniae, 1863), 494. Cf. Luther in the Dictata super Psalterium, the gloss on the same verse: “quia non iustificabitur: i.e. non erit iustus nisi per tuam iustitiam in conspectu tuo, coram te, omnis vivens, quantumvis in sua iustitia iustificetur.” WA 3. 443, 13–14.

The natural sequel to this article is a discussion of the iustitia Dei which in a new de-eschatologized form — as iudicium in via — underlies Luther's earliest ‘simul’ doctrine, later formulated as simul iustus et peccator: “In inferno enim solum erit iudicium, in coelo autem sola misericordia: hie autem simul utrumque…”; “… per misericordiam et iudicium [in via], de iudicio sine misericordia [in inferno], ad misericordiam sine iudicio [in coelo] pervenias. Amen…” “Iustorum autem est unum tantum flagellum, non multa… scilicet in carne tantum, quia misericordia circumdat eum.” WA 4.133, 13f.; 19f.; 29ff. (Dictata, Ps. 100 [101]).

In view of the fact that humilitas is the lasting context of the iustitia Dei, interpreted as iudicium, we remain unconvinced by Ernst Bizer's argument that the “Turmerlebnis” is to be dated in 1518, since till then “der Begriff der Iustitia ist noch der alte, der humiliatio entsprechende.” Fides ex auditu (Neukirchen, 1958), 96. For the most detailed and convincing answer to Bizer see Bornkamm, Heinrich, “Zur Frage der Iustitia Dei beim jungen Luther” I, ARG 52 (1961), 16–29Google Scholar; II. ARG 53 (1962), 1–60. I deviate from Bornkamm formally in that I am more inclined to regard Luther's autobiographical statement of 1545 (with its parallels) as an important source, to be taken seriously with the indicated provisos; materially in that Luther's interpretation of the crucial Ps. 70 [71] — WA 3. 462, 36f: per Iudicium… fit Iustitia, and WA 3. 465, 32: Iudicium is tropologice humiliatio by which we forestall the final judgment — does indeed already identify iustitia Dei with Christ litteraliter, and with fides Christi tropologice (moraliter), but through humiliation. Though this humiliation is itself a work of God in man [WA 3.462, 36], it is the precondition for the gift of iustitia: huic dat deus gratiam (WA 3.462, 37f.). Later, when Luther develops his marriage theme, Christ accepts our possessions, i.e., our sins, and thus, He carries the iudicium, whereas we acquire his possessions and thus receive his iustitia. In the interpretation of this Psalm Luther is still involved in what he, on April 8, 1516, calls an error. See next note.

⁵² Whereas one root of the understanding of the new righteousness as possessio rather than as proprietas is to be found in Roman civil law, the other root can be discerned more specifically in the application of marriage imagery — contractus, sponsalia, consummatio — with the exchange of possession between the partners. See Luther's sermon on the two kinds of righteousness (Palm Sunday 1518 or 1519), WA 2. 145–52; transl. L. J. Satre in Luther's Works, Vol. 31, Career of the Reformer, I (Philadelphia, 1957), 297–306. This marriage theme should be interpreted in the light of John of Staupitz' De Executione aeternae praedestinationis (Nuremberg, 1517), translated and discussed in my forthcoming Forerunners of the Reformation.

Staupitz may on this point have been influenced by Luther. See the application of the marriage vow in Luther's letter to George Spenlein, April 8, 1516, a monk in one of the major augustinian monasteries, Memmingen. WA Br. 1. 35f.: “tu, domine Iesu, es iustitia mea, ego autem sum peccatum tuum; tu assumsisti meum et dedisti mihi tuum; assumsisti, quod non eras, et dedisti mihi, quod non eram”. Before this description of justification, Luther allows us a revealing glance into his life by pointing to the basic ailment of his time which he has not yet been able to suppress completely in himself: “Fervet enim nostra aetate tentatio praesumptionis in multis, et iis praecipue, qui iusti et boni esse omnibus viris student: ignorantes iustitiam Dei, quae in Christo est nobis effusissime et gratis donata, quaerunt in se ipsis tam diu operari bene, donee habeant fiduciam standi coram Deo, veluti virtutibus et meritis ornati, quod est impossibile fieri. Fuisti tu apud nos in hac opinione, imo errore, fui et ego: sed et nunc quoque pugno contra istum errorem, sed nondum expugnavi.” For a (questionable) translation of this letter see Luther's Works, Vol. 48, 12f.

As for Staupitz, so for Luther, theology is not scientia nor attributio per analogiam. The theological enterprise is for both an act of thanksgiving, the imputation of the highest praise to God, confessio laudis. Imputare Deo and laudem dare are synonymous with the key verb cantare. The confessional rather than ontological nature of the unity in justification by marriage with Christ comes through in the verb cantare in the preceding words: “… disce ei cantare et de teipso desperans dicere ei….” This cantare is explained in the Dictata super Psalterium Ps. 100 [101], WA 4.127, 2ff. and 132, 11–25. Note esp. the parallel example of adoption, ibid. 130, 36–131, 8.

The locus classicus for the contractus between Christ and the believer is Luther's 1520 “Reformation writing,” The Freedom of a Christian, written on the instigation of Staupitz to Pope Leo X. WA 7. 25ff. Cf. Luther's Works, Vol. 31, 351–54. See further, on Rom. 2:15, WA 56.204, 22.