Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-04T08:53:50.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Problems of Luther’s ‘Tower-Experience’ and its Place in his Intellectual Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

W. D. J. Cargill Thompson*
Affiliation:
University of London, King's College

Extract

The problem of the date and significance of Luther’s so-called ‘tower-experience’ (Turmerlebnis)—the moment of illumination at which he came to his new understanding of Romans 1:17—is one of the longstanding cruces of modern Luther-scholarship. Since the problem was first raised in its modern form by German scholars at the beginning of the present century probably no aspect of Luther’s biography has attracted so much attention or has been the subject of so much controversy: and even to-day, although the nature of the debate has changed considerably in recent years as new arguments and new solutions have been put forward, it still remains one of the central issues in all discussions of Luther’s early intellectual development, not only because it presents the irresistible fascination of an unresolved conundrum but also because in traditional historiography it has always been closely identified with the complex question of when and how Luther arrived at his reformation theology.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The best modern introduction to the study of the problem is Der Durchbrach der reformatorischen Erkenntnis bei Luther, ed B. Lohse, Wege der Forschung 123 (Darmstadt 1968), which contains a selection of extracts from many of the most important books and articles relating to the controversy, published between 1904 and 1966. Several of the items printed in Lohse include historiographical surveys of the development of the debate: see especially Lohse’s introduction (pp ix-xxiii) and the articles by G. Pfeiffer (pp 163-202), H. Bornkamm (pp 289-383) and, for the later period, O. H. Pesch (pp 445-505). Useful surveys in English of the earlier phases of the controversy will be found in Mackinnon, [J.], Luther and the Reformation, 4 vols (London 1925-30) 1, pp 147-56Google Scholar, and Rupp, [G.], [The] Righteousness of Cod: [Luther Studies] (London 1953) cap 6, pp 121-37Google Scholar. Scheel, [O.], Dokumente [zu Luthers Entwicklung (bis 1519)] (2 rev ed Göttingen 1929)Google Scholar contains a comprehensive collection of primary texts relating to Luther’s early development.

2 WA TR з, no 3232c (Lauterbach), p 228; Scheel, Dokumente, no 235, p 91. Other reports of the same conversation are to be found in WA TR 2, no 1681, p 177 (Scheel, Dokumente, no 238, p 94) and WA TR 3, no 3232a and b, p 228 (Scheel, Dokumente, no 235, p 91). In all these versions the phraseology in which the discovery is described is very similar, so that we may be sure that the gist of Luther’s remarks is accurately recorded. The most important difference between the reports, which has given rise to considerable controversy, lies in the words used to describe the place where the discovery is alleged to have taken place. Lauterbach, quoted in the text, has in hac turri et hypocausto (generally interpreted as the heated room where Luther had his study) and in diesem thurn; Cordatus’s very similar account has in hac turri (in qua secretus locus erat monachorum) and auff diesem thurm (WA TR 3, no 3232a, p 228)Google Scholar; Schlaginhaufen has Dise kunst hatt mir der S S [Spiritus Sanctus] auf diss Cl eingeben (WA TR 2, no 1681, p 177), subsequently expanded in Rörer’s version to auf dieser cloaca, with the words in horto inserted above in the MS (Ibid, n 1); Aurifaber’s later printed version omits the reference to the place altogether (Ibid, p 177). On the strength of the readings Cl and cloaca and Cordatus’s phrase in qua secretus locus erat monachorum, Grisar argued that Luther’s ‘tower-experience’ must have taken place in the privy: see Grisar, [H.], Luther, trans Lamond, E. M., 6 vols (London 1913-17) 1, pp 392, 396-7Google Scholar. Not surprisingly this view has been hotly contested by protestant scholars, chiefly on the ground that Schlaginhaufen’s cryptic auf diss Cl is neuter and so cannot legitimately be expanded to cloaca which is feminine. This also rules out the suggestion of some scholars that Cl is an abbreviation for cella. For a discussion of this point, see the extract from [E.] Stracke, Luthers grosses Selbstzeugnis [1545 über seine Entwicklung zum Reformator], SVRG 140 (1926), in Lohse, p 111, n 9. Stracke argued that Cl is the standard abbreviation for clarissimum and that it refers not to the place where Luther’s experience took place but either to the text in Paul or to the concept of iustitia Dei. However, this seems improbable. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion is that Cl is an abbreviation for claustrum: see Saarnivaara, [U.], Luther Discovers the Gospel: [New Light upon Luther’s Way from Medieval Catholicism to Evangelical Faith] (Saint Louis 1951) P 48 Google Scholar. n 104.

3 WA TR 4, no 4007, pp 72-3; Scheel, Dokumente, no 404, p 148.

4 da reumet ich das abstractum und concretum zustatten: Luther means that he reconciled the abstract concept iustitia Dei with the concrete state of being righteous (iustus); in other words he perceived that ‘the righteousness of God’ is that by which men are made righteous (compare the two previous descriptions).

5 WA TR 5, no 5518, p 210; Scheel, , Dokumente, no 474, p 172 Google Scholar.

6 For example, WA TR 5, no 5247, p 26, September 1540 ( Scheel, , Dokumente, no 449, p 162)Google Scholar; WA TR 5, no 5553, pp 234-5, winter 1542/3 ( Scheel, , Dokumente, no 476, p 173)Google Scholar; Lectures on Genesis, WA 43, p 537 ( Scheel, , Dokumente, no 460, pp 166-7)Google Scholar. The fullest description is to be found in the Preface to the 1545 edition of Luther’s Latin writings, WA 54, pp 185-6 ( Scheel, , Dokumente, no 511, pp 191-2Google Scholar), quoted below pp 201-3.

7 Grisar is generally credited with having coined the term Turmerlebnis: see Grisar, , Luther, 1, p 377 Google Scholar.

8 Reiter, P. J., Martin Luthers Umwelt, Charakter und Psychose sowie die Bedeutung dieser Faktoren für seine Entwicklung und Lehre. Eine historisch-psychiatrische Studie, 2 vols (Copenhagen 1937-41) 2, pp 320-2Google Scholar; Erikson, E. H., Young Man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History (London 1959) pp 198200 Google Scholar; Brown, N. O., Life against Death: the Psychoanalytical Meaning of History (London 1959) cap 14, esp pp 202-6Google Scholar. For a discussion of the problem, see above p 188, n 2.

9 See, in particular, the account in the 1545 preface, WA 54, pp 185-6, quoted below pp 201-3.

10 WA 54, pp 185-6: see below pp 201-3.

11 The Dictata super Psalterium was published by G. Kawerau in WA 3-4 (1885-6); the lectures on Romans by Ficker, J. in Anfänge reformatorischer Bibelauslegnng, 1, Luthers Vorlesung über den Römerbrief 1515/16 (Leipzig 1908)Google Scholar. Earlier German historians had tended to place Luther’s discovery very early in his career, during his Erfurt period. His most famous nineteenth-century biographer, Julius Köstlin, for example, dated it to the third and last year of his monastic life at Erfurt before his first call to Wittenberg, in other words to 1508: see Köstlin, J., Life of Luther, Eng trans (London 1883) pp 54-5Google Scholar.

12 Denifle, H., Luther und Luthertum in der ersten Entwkkelung quellenmässig dargestellt, 2 vols (Mainz 1904-9) 1, pp 404-15Google Scholar, 392—5, reprinted in Lohse, pp 1-18.

13 Seeberg, R., Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 4 vols (Leipzig 1908-17) 4 Google Scholar, Die Lehre Luthers, pp 68-9; Ritschi, O., Dogmengeschichte des Protestantismus, 4 vols (Leipzig/Göttingen 1908-27) 2, p 11 Google Scholar. See abo Boehmer, [H.], Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung: [Ein kritischer Bericht] (1 ed Leipzig 1906) pp 32-3Google Scholar. This view has generally been held to be incompatible with Luther’s statement in a sermon of 21 May 1537 that at the time he became a doctor [that is, October 1512] he was ignorant of the light—’Iterum acquisivimus lucem. Sed ego, cum doctor fierem, nescivi’ (WA 45, p 86; Scheel, , Dokumente, no 364, pp 135-6Google Scholar).

14 Holl, K., ‘Der Neubau der Sittlichkeit’ in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kirchengeschichte, 1, Luther (6 ed Tübingen 1932) pp 193-7Google Scholar.

15 Scheel, O., Martin Luther. Vom Katholizismus zur Reformation, 2 vols (2 ed Tübingen 1917) 2, p 321 Google Scholar; Strohl, H., L’Évolution Religieuse de Luther jusqu’en 1515, Études d’Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses publiées par la Faculté de Théologie Protestante de l’Université de Strasbourg 1 (Strasbourg/Paris 1922) pp 143-6Google Scholar; Mackinnon, , Luther and the Reformation, 1, pp 150-1Google Scholar.

15 Boehmer, H., Der junge Luther (Gotha 1924) p 110 Google Scholar. This represents Boehmer’s final position. In the first edition of his Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung (1906) he argued against Denifle that it took place in the winter of 1508-9 during Luther’s first period at Wittenberg (see above n 13). Subsequently he modified this. In the fifth edition of Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung (1918) he placed it at the end of 1512 or the beginning of 1513, in the period between Luther’s advancement to the professoriate at Wittenberg and the commencement of the first lectures on the psalms: see Boehmer, [H.], L•ither [and the Reformation] in the Light of Modern Research, trans Potter, E. S. G. from 5 German ed (London 1930) p 60 Google Scholar. Finally in his monograph Luthers erste Vorlesung, Berichte über die Verhandlungen der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, PhK 75 (1923) pt 1 (Leipzig 1924) and in his popular biography Der junge Luther he narrowed the date down still further to April/May 1513.

17 Hirsch, [E.], ‘Initium theologiae Lutheri’ in Festgabe für D. Dr. Julius Kaftan (Tübingen 1920) pp 150-69Google Scholar, reprinted in Lohse, pp 64-95.

18 Vogelsang, E., Die Anfänge von Luthers Christologie nach der ersten Psalmenvorlesung, Arbeiten zu Kirchengeschichte 15 (Berlin/Leipzig 1929) esp pp 57-9Google Scholar.

19 Bornkamm, H., ‘Luthers Bericht über seine Entdeckung der iustitia dei’, ARC 37 (1940) pp 117-28Google Scholar; ‘Iustitia dei in der Scholastik und bei Luther’, ARG 39 (1942) pp 1-46; ‘Die Frage der iustitia dei beim jungen Luther’, ARG 52 (1961) pp 15-29, 53 (1962) pp 1-59, reprinted together in Lohse, pp 289-383. Bornkamm’s views have changed slightly during the course of his career. In his 1940 article he originally argued for a date in the spring of 1515 at the time when Luther was preparing the lectures on Romans. In his 1942 article he revised his opinion and came out in favour of Vogelsang’s theory. In his third article, written twenty years later, while somewhat modifying his earlier agreement with Vogelsang’s arguments, he reaffirmed his belief that Luther’s new understanding of Romans 1:17 dates back to his first lectures on the psalms (see Lohse, esp pp 299, 381).

20 Müller, A. V., Luthers Werdegang bis zum Turmerlebnis (Gotha 1920) cap 6, esp pp 128-30Google Scholar.

21 Stracke, Luthers grosses Selbstzeugnis in Lohse, p 114.

22 Compare Rupp, Righteousness of God, p 137: ‘We conclude, therefore, that, as Vogelsang suggests, the new orientation of thought seems likely to have occurred in the course of the lectures on the psalms, 1514. It is hardly likely that any closer date will be arrived at.’

23 Grisar, , Luther, 1, cap 10, pp 374404 Google Scholar. In many respects Grisar’s arguments foreshadow those of Saarnivaara and Bizer. Thus he maintains that Luther had not yet arrived at his mature doctrine of justification in the lectures on Romans; that this only occurred in 1518 or at the beginning of 1519; and that the evidence of the 1545 preface is correct in dating the ‘tower-experience’ to the time when he was beginning the second lectures on the psalms.

24 Saarnivaara, , Luther Discovers the Gospel, esp cap 6, pp 7487 Google Scholar.

25 Ibid, esp cap 8, pp 92-120. ‘Our conclusion is that Luther’s tower experience took place during the time he was preparing his second course of lectures on the psalms, probably in the autumn or early winter of 1518’ (p 108). Compare p 103: ‘The only possible conclusion is that his dating of this discovery in his Preface of 1545 is correct.’

26 See, for example, Cranz, [F. E.], [An Essay on the] Development of Luther’s Thought [on Justice, Law, and Society], Harvard Theological Studies 19 (Cambridge, Mass., 1959) esp p 41 Google Scholar, n 1; Dickens, A. G., Martin Luther and the Reformation (London 1967) pp 2531 Google Scholar.

27 Bizer, [E.], Fides ex auditu: [Eine Untersuchung über die Entdeckung der Gerechtigkeit Gottes durch Martin Luther] (Neukirchen 1958, 2 Google Scholar rev ed 1961, 3 ed with new postscript 1966). References in this article are to the third edition, the text of which is identical with that of the second edition except for the addition of the postscript, pp 179-204. Excerpts from the third edition will be found in Lohse, pp 115-62. For a full discussion in English of Bizer’s views, see the review article by Rupp, G., ZKG 71 (1960) pp 351-5Google Scholar.

28 He does not cite Saarnivaara in the first two editions and only refers to him briefly in the postscript to the third edition, p 187.

29 Bizer, Fides ex auditu, see esp the section ‘Das Selbstzeugnis von 1545 und die Operationes in Psalmos’, pp 165-71.

30 Sec esp his discussions of the first lectures on the psalms, ibid, pp 15-22, and the lectures on Romans, pp 23-52.

31 Ibid, esp pp 166-7. ‘Was Luther entdeckt hat, ist zunächst die Theologie des Wortes und im Zusammenhang damit die Bedeutung des Glaubens. Das Wort zeigt nicht einfach den Weg zur Gerechtigkeit und beschreibt diesen nicht nur, sondern es ist das Mittel, wodurch Gott den Menschen rechtfertigt, weil es den Glauben weckt’ (p 167). Compare the postscript to the third edition (1966), p 180: ‘Meine These ist nun, dass Luther in der Vorrede davon berichte, wie er “das Wort als Gnadenmittel” entdeckt habe.’

32 Compare Bizer, Fides ex auditu, p 94.

33 For a very full account of the development of the controversy following the publication of Fides ex auditu, see Pesch, [O. H.], [‘Zur Frage nach Luthers reformatorischer Wende’], Cattolica 20 (Münster 1966) pp 216-43Google Scholar and 264-80, reprinted in Lohse, pp 445-505.

34 See, in particular, Prenter, R., Der barmherzige Richter. lustitia dei passiva in Luthers Dictata super Psalterium 1513-15, Acta Jutlandica 33, 2 (Aarhus/Copenhagen 1961), extract in Lohse, pp 203-42Google Scholar, and the extended critique of Bizer by Bornkamm, [H.], [‘Zur Frage der iustitia dei beim jungen Luther’], ARG 52 (1961) and 53 (1962) in Lohse, pp 289383 Google Scholar, For Bizer’s reply to their criticisms, see Fides ex auditu, postscript (1966), pp 179-204.

35 See Peters, [A.], [‘Luthers Turmerlebnis’], Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie 3 (Berlin 1961) pp 203-36Google Scholar, in Lohse, pp 243-88; Aland, [K.], [Der Weg zu Reformation, Zeitpunkt und Charakter des reformatorischen Erlebnisses Martin Luthers], Theologische Existenz Heute, NF 123 (Munich 1965)Google Scholar, extracts in Lohse, pp 384-412. Other notable converts to the idea of a late date include H. Jedin and E. Wolf, see Pesch in Lohse, pp 455-6. See also the important recent article by Brecht, Martin, ‘lustitia Christi: Die Entdeckung Martin Luthers’, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 74 (Tübingen 1977) pp 179223 Google Scholar, which appeared too late for consideration in this paper but which argues that ‘Luther made the decisive discovery of his theology in the spring of 1518’ (p 222). I am grateful to professor Brecht for kindly sending me a copy of his article through the good offices of Dr E. Langstadt.

36 For the difficulty and importance of defining the terms ‘reformation’ and ‘pre-reformation’ in relation to Luther’s early thought, see Bornkamm in Lohse, pp 376-7; Grane, [L.], Modus loquendi theologicus: [Luthers Kampf um die Erneuerung der Theologie (1511-1518)], Acta Theologka Danka 12 (Leiden 1975) pp 1112 Google Scholar.

37 Compare Bornkamm in Lohse, esp pp 376, 381-2.

38 See Grane, Modus loquendi theologicus, p 11. For a more detailed survey of the literature to 1966, see Pesch in Lohse, pp 445-505.

39 Compare Bornkamm’s criticisms of Bizer, Lohse, p 334.

40 Compare, for example, the many passages in which Luther appears to treat justification in Augustine’s sense as a life-long process of renewal which will not be completed until the next world, for example, W A 56, pp 272-3.

41 Compare Cranz, Development of Luther’s Thought, cap 2, pp 41-71; Peters in Lohse, pp 242-88.

42 WA TR 1, no 352, p 146.

43 WA 54, p 186; Scheel, , Dokumente, no 511, p 192 Google Scholar.

44 connexionem verborum: Luther means the connection between the first phrase ‘the righteousness of God is revealed in it the gospel’ and the second ‘the just shall Uve by faith’. Compare his accounts in the Table Talk, quoted above pp 188-9.

45 WA 54, pp 185-6; Scheel, , Dokumente, no 511, pp 191-2Google Scholar.

46 ‘Interim eo anno iam redieram ad psalterium denuo interpretandum,’ etc (WA 54, p 185; Scheel, Dokumente, p 191).

47 E. Hirsch pointed out that the use of the term ‘passive’ in relation to iustitia Dei first occurs in Luther’s writings in De servo arbitrio (1525) and it did not become a regular part of his theological vocabulary until the 1530s, so that the language in which he describes his discovery in the 1545 preface is that of his old age (‘Initium thcologiae Lutheri’, Lohse, pp 71-5).

48 See above p 189.

49 Compare the statement in WA TR 4, no 4007, p 73, ‘Sed postea cum consequentia viderem ... et insuper August [inum] consulerem, da wardt ich frolich’ (see above p 189).

50 WA 56, p 158.

51 Ibid pp 171-2.

52 Ibid p 172.

53 For Luther’s use of Augustine’s De spiritu et littera in the lectures on Romans, see Lohse, B., ‘Die Bedeutung Augustins für den jungen Luther’, Kerygma und Dogma 11 (Göttingen 1965) pp 116-36Google Scholar; Grane, Modus loquendi théologiens, esp cap I, pp 23-62.

54 Stracke, Luthers grosses Selbstzeugnis, Lohse, pp 112-13. Compare Rupp, Righteousness of God, p 123.

55 Hirsch, ‘Initium theologiae Lutheri’, Lohse, p 86 n 62; Mackinnon, , Luther and the Reformation, 1, p 150 Google Scholar.

56 Loofs, F., Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmengeschichte (4 rev ed Halle 1906) p 689 Google Scholar; Scheel, O., Die Entwicklung Luthers bis zum Abschluss der Vorlesung über den Römerbrief, SVRG 100 (1910) p 117 Google Scholar.

57 Bochmer, Luther in the Light of Modern Research, p 45.

58 Compare Rupp, Righteousness of God, p 123; Rupp, however, followed Stracke in holding that the passage should be regarded as a digression (see above a 54).

59 Bizer, Fides ex auditu, pp 10, 127-30, 165-71. Compare Saarnivaara, Luther Discovers the Gospel, pp 97-9.

60 Bizer, Fides ex auditu, pp 165-7, 180, see above p 195 n 31. Other supporters of the revisionist theory tend to interpret Luther’s discovery in the tower rather differently. Saarnivaara equates it with Luther’s ‘discovery of the full Reformation insight into justification, that God justifies the sinner by graciously imputing, or reckoning, the merits of Christ to him as his righteousness’, though he also writes that ‘from another point of view, the content of the discovery was the “Lutheran” distinction between the Law and the Gospel’ (Luther Discovers the Gospel, p 46). Aland adheres to the traditional view that the ‘tower-experience’ involved the realisation that iustitia Dei is the passive righteousness by which God justifies man through faith and that this righteousness is revealed in the gospel (Lohse, p 406); but he places this discovery in 1518 (p 409).

61 See Rupp, ZKG 71 (1960) p 354; Bornkamm in Lohse, pp 353-6.

62 Bizer, Fides ex auditu, p 184; Saarnivaara, Luther Discovers the Gospel, pp 109-11; Aland in Lohse, pp 399-401.

63 In his article ‘ Christi, Iustitia” and “Dei, Iustitia”: Luther and the Scholastic Doctrines of Justification’, HTR 59 (1966), pp 126 Google Scholar, H. A. Oberman appears to cast doubt on the historicity of Luther’s ‘tower-experience’ by pointing out that it belongs to a well-established literary tradition of conversion experiences, including those of Augustine and Calvin. ‘This state of affairs,’ he writes, ‘allows us to conclude that there is a “Turmerlebnis” tradition which provides for a conceptual framework and an established language, in which and through which one can formulate one’s own important discoveries’ (p 9). Although Oberman does not explicitly deny that Luther’s ‘tower-experience’ took place, the implication of his remarks is clearly that Luther’s accounts of the ‘tower-experience’ should be treated as essentially a literary or metaphorical way of expressing his religious discovery. I find this attempt to rationalise the ‘tower-experience’ unconvincing. While Oberman is undoubtedly right to draw attention to the precedents in Christian literature for Luther’s ‘tower-experience’, it does not follow from this that Luther’s accounts do not relate to a genuine personal experience of his own. In view of his repeated and unequivocal statements about his discovery, I see no reason to doubt that he did experience a moment of illumination at Wittenberg, even if perhaps he afterwards magnified its importance.

64 Although there are few overtly autobiographical passages in the lectures on Romans referring to Luther’s personal religious experiences, such as occur in some of his other lectures, the general tenor of the lectures on Romans suggests a confident assurance that men are justified through God’s grace, and not through their own righteousness, which would appear to indicate that he had now found the answer to the spiritual crisis of his early years in the monastery.

65 See Rupp, Righteousness of God, pp 154-5, 195-6, 205; Bizer, Fides ex auditu, esp pp 148-64.

66 This is admitted by some exponents of the revisionist theory. Compare Saamivaara, Luther Discovers the Gospel, p 46, ‘the “tower experience” of Luther was not the beginning, but the relative end of his development’; ibid, ‘Luther’s experience in the tower was not his conversion. It was the final exegetico-religious discovery of the evangelical way of salvation.’ See also Peters in Lohse, p 255, ‘In dem “Turmerlebnis” beschreibt Luther das geistige Ringen, in welchem seine systematische wie exegetische Erwägungen zu einem geschlossenen Ganzen zusammenschiessen.’