Category: Book Reviews

Posted on

Engaging “Against the Church” by Douglas Wilson

In this book, Doug Wilson does what he does best. He offers a return to ol’ time religion, but without altar calls and endless refrains of Just As I Am.  The book is divided into four sections. The first, the most controversial, is entitled Against the Church (also the title of the book). In it, he attacks liturgy, sacraments, infant anything, tradition, systematics and doctrine in favor of the new birth. Wilson’s central premise is that “it is only possible to be for the church in this effectual way if you begin mastering the case against ita. We, in liturgical traditions, value holy things and holy means. Doug writes that “God does not show sufficient respect for our holy things.” He means that our liturgical services are less than appetizing to God if God is not directing the holy.

God is the ultimate iconoclast. The Church has become a place of idolatry masqueraded by the holy. Part of the thesis is that we have arranged our holy furniture after our own desires, and thus, used them for our own purposes and as a result have left God out of the equation. Our house is being left desolate and we kinda like it as long as “our” sacred means are left untouched.

Wilson’s goal is to stress that outwardly we have beauty, but inwardly our churches are dying a thousand deaths because of the stench of death that has permeated our furniture. Central to this analysis is the necessity of the new birth. According to Pastor Wilson, we have failed to stress the new birth and also failed to make distinctions that the Bible makes concerning who is in and who is playing like he is in. In other words, true baptism changes the stuff inside and without that you only have a “wet member of the visible covenant” (18).

Wilson is not contra institution, he is after an institution with an evangelical heart (35). We cannot affirm a religion where the outward controls the inward, but the opposite is desired. What flows from the heart produces the type of church/liturgy that is pleasing in God’s eyes.

Engaging Doug Wilson and Some Notes

I love Doug Wilson. In order to let the reader know what my samba dance looks like, I should say upfront, this man has changed the direction of my life. He is my presiding minister in the denomination I serve. I have spent much time with him in meals, private conversations, phone calls, etc. My admiration for this man is truly heartfelt. God bless him. To make it even better, may the whole Trinity bless him. He’s a man for such a time as this.

So, here it comes…

Actually, nothing comes. I learned long ago from John Frame that throwing mud at friends is a losing strategy. And if I were to throw mud it would be very little. In fact, it would be the type of mud that my little kids may accidentally eat on a rainy day causing no tummy pain. I would simply say, “Well, look at that honey: little Zeke had a little mud for lunch, but I think it will help him make better distinctions between good food and food that may look good, but is not.” Then, we would laugh for a bit and move on.

I rarely finish a book these days. In fact, I can honestly say this is only the third book I have read from cover to cover this year, and in this case, the cover and its title gave me a quick heartache. I spend most of my time reading essays, various portions of books, commentaries, and writing a fair bit, but finishing a book is rare. Maybe because of the nature of my relationship with Doug and our denomination, I was able to work my way through the 212 pages of this book. I confess: this is not my favorite of Wilson’s books, and many of his books have I consumed in this last decade. But still, it was a needed book to consume, if only to perform a type of pastoral introspection that is needed from time to time.

Wilson sees things most of us can’t. Maybe it’s his view from Moscow that helps…you know, he’s near Russia and stuff. But from my vantage point–and I kid you not I am staring at the prettiest Florida waves ever a I write–the world down here is not in need of liturgical iconoclasts, but of any liturgy worth a darn. The south is replete with happy-happy-joy-joy Christianity. And sometimes my desire as a zealous disciple of Calvin (God rest his soul) is to use my clerical garb (which is magical, I hear) and walk right to a certain campus in my hometown that rhymes with Pee-See-See and start going all Book of Common Prayer on them. But alas, I actually did that and the looks I got….my, oh my!

Seriously, Doug’s points are valid. I know the liturgical dangers of loving something so much that we end up forgetting the point of the means; and the point is to show us how terribly idiotic we are if we forget the Point of the point.

So, kudos to Doug for pointing us to Jesus more fully; for making us more aware that bad people hide behind bread and wine and peace be with you. Also, thanks to Doug for directing us to the regeneration…whatever that means, it means new life, new world, and new order. And I want me some of that everyday and hope that the people I minister to want some as well. Great thanks also for calling us to lively worship; the kind that makes the kingdom of darkness tremble and God’s people rejoice.

Finally, my thanks to Doug for getting me in such great trouble in the last 12 years. It’s been real. As a result, I’ve seen happy babies, communing babies, spitting up babies, screaming babies, halleluiah babies, and my own babies. But I’ve seen them all, as a friend of ours would say, through new eyes. And to me, that matters a whole lot. In fact it matters so much that I am up for a good beer right now; the kind that is dark and foamy. Cheers for iconoclasts and to hell with the Church choir if Jesus ain’t leading it.

  1. Introduction  (back)
Posted on

Book Review: Fleeing Fundamentalism by Carlene Cross

This book should never have been written. Its ending is depressing. Its story is horrifying, though sprinkled with episodes of hope and love. Ultimately, this is a story about the loss of faith. Indeed one of the saddest accounts I have read in a long time.

Carlene Cross tells her story in this 273 page book. Carlene was a dreamer. She hoped for a life where romance and the four spiritual laws would co-exist forever. In her pursuit, she meets a strikingly persuasive and zealous man named David. David wore his religion everywhere. It was tattooed all over his life. His evangelistic zeal and charm drew Darlene ijnto his world. They were eventually married. Their marriage, though carrying on the appearance of normalcy, became a nightmare of biblical proportions. While Carlene followed in the steps of submission of the fundamentalist variety, David followed in the steps of his lusts and passion for women, pornography, and strip clubs. While the young, striking orator delivered crowd-pleasing messages on Sunday morning, he found psychological and physical relief in strip clubs during the week.

Carlene’s life was a life that desired to keep her private life private, but all that began to unravel after David’s revelation of his lengthy addiction and deceit.

At that moment, Carlene begins to plan her escape from her tormentor. But her escape is slow and painful, and then only to be rushed by unforeseen events. Her three children become victims of a jealous and maniacal father who upon leaving his successful ministry plunges into theological despair. On the other hand, Carlene is also embracing liberal theology; the pop kind with foolish arguments lacking much serious historical support. In fact, the story ends with religious uncertainty. That is, I should say that Carlene is certain of one thing: that submission to a holy book is not an option.

With this brief summary in mind, here are a few observations:

First, religious zeal is only healthy when it is moderated by religious charity. Take charity away, zeal destroys.

Second, fundamentalism is deadly in every sense. It destroys a proper view of God and self and often leads many to abandon the faith once the door outside the fundamentalist world is open. Some embrace a bright faith, while most embrace darkness in all its misery.

Third, Carlene’s abandoning the faith is a result of being a part of a community where only the external matters. Questions of the heart are never addressed, but external appearance means everything. God says man looks on the outside.

Fourth, self-centered ministry is self-destructive. Any ministry based on man’s personality and style is doomed to failure. No man is called to such a self-centered mission. David lacked accountability in the most common of ways.

Finally, while this book offers a frightening account of spousal abuse and betrayal, we may be tempted to believe these are rare accounts in the Christian world. But the reality is quite the opposite. In fact, spousal abuse sometime is easire to hide in the Christian home, since people are never looking for it.

May women be courageous to find voices in their community and seek immediate help when they are suffering the pain of abuse. No woman–Christian or non-Christian–should suffer under the hands of tyrants, not for one night; not ever.

Posted on

Christian Pipe-Smoking: An Introduction to Holy Incense is NOW AVAILABLE!

Our first published kindle book from Kuyperian Press is now available for download!

It is but a booklet, some twenty-five pages, but each page will delight the Christian pipe smoker, enlighten his heathen fellow-enthusiast, crush the ambitions of the heathen teetotaler, and soften the heart of the Christian abstainer. All four of these good things are guaranteed to happen if you but promise to go onto your porch tomorrow with your pad or other device, light your pipe, and Tolle Lege.

Christian Pipe-Smoking: An Introduction to Holy Incense [Kindle Edition]

Uri Brito (Author), Joffre Swait (Author)

Posted on

Christian Pipe-Smoking: An Introduction to Holy Incense, From Kuyperian Press

Blogger and book reviewer, Joshua Torrey, reviews our kindle book that comes out tomorrow:

It is an interesting thing providence. My family was out for a couple days in advance of me for a much needed vacation (a longer one scheduled in November). One of my early stops after their departure was to the local liquor store for vodka and Djarum Blacks. Almost the same day this little book(let) entitled Christian Pipe Smoking, from Uri Brito and Joffre Swait, pronounced to my inbox its arrival pleading to “simply smell what we smoke and then make up your mind” (4, “Acknowledgements”). Since I have given up of even casual smoking with the birth of my second child, this seemed a valuable coinciding of thoughts, teaching, and behavior. After an initial reading, I stepped out of my house to strike matches more often than I had previously done the rest of the year while considering the concept of “holy incense.”

Despite the book’s short length, I was engrossed by the provocative application of Plato’s “three-fold division” to smoking (7-9). Once a regular smoker of cigars, I now only find myself smoking on rare occasions. For me it has never fit my schedule. Perhaps too closely, I reflect the archetype of a cigarette smoker (7-8), seeking the instant gratification of smoking. Christian Pipe Smoking invited me to think about smoking and particularly pipe smoking once again. The insight that “the pipe—can endure for decades” (10) unabashedly caused evaluation of my postmillennial paradigms. Quite seriously, I am persuaded that this earth has a long time to go (think 10k to 100k years). So, I should live in a way that reflects this truth in every facet of my life. Potentially, it has not entered many minds how these paradigms might apply pipe smoking. Yet Christian Pipe Smoking presents both an eschatological and theological world in which the distinct differences between pipe smoking and all other forms of smoking are clearly articulated. Not all smoke is created equal.

In conclusion, that “not everyone should smoke a pipe, but everyone should be encouraged to appreciate a pipe-smoker” (11) is successfully communicated via Christian Pipe Smoking. Smokers and non-smokers alike will enjoy this brief reflection on smoking, theology and liturgy. Many will be challenged by the simplistic thoughtfulness of the authors. I sat taking a drag of an eventually formless Djarum Black listening to the echo of words portraying a resounding rhythm of pipe smoking (12-17).  Perhaps some will even “discover that pipe smoking, for all intents and purposes, is a form of prayer” (17).

NOTE: Kindle Edition will be available for download tomorrow, September 26th.

Posted on

Don Miller and the Institutional Church

The pastoral task has all the ingredients for abstractness. After all, we are constantly engaging dead people and throwing around foreign terms to most in the pew. In fact, many of the concerns I have heard over the years from parishioners of different traditions has been the concern that sermons and pastoral work do not reach the laity. Donald Miller manifested this sentiment in his now controversial blog post I don’t connect with God by singing. I connect with him elsewhere. The article received abundant criticism. Miller asserted elsewhere that he simply intended to start a conversation–and what a conversation he started. In another interview, Miller summarized his post:

And so I talked about the reality that I don’t get a lot out of church when I go. I don’t connect with God very well there, and I wondered if it wasn’t more of a learning style issue because it is a lecture format, and it’s not how everybody learns. a

Miller’s concern was not unique. Many have expressed this frustration with the intellectualization of worship. Rev. Jeff Meyers’ wonderful book “The Lord’s Service: The Grace of Covenant Renewal Worship answers Miller’s concern with clarity and with classic historical categories. Meyers argues that worship ought to have a wholistic vision prioritizing every detail as opposed to over-emphasizing merely the word preached.

Don Miller asserts that one of his struggles is that the worship service does not appeal to his style of learning. The worship service has as its emphasis a lecture model. Since Miller does not learn through lecture models, therefore Miller no longer finds appeal in the institutional church. b In his interview with The RELEVANT he asserts that he did not qualify things well in his blog post and that looking back he wished he would have not written it. But as the interview continued, Miller affirms the same sorts of things his critics condemned in the original blog post.

I actually believe Miller is on to something. The lecture model of doing church is not the one I advocate. In many ways, the Church–especially in the Reformed tradition, which naturally claims a more intellectual history–has become a magnified classroom with lengthy biblical expositions at its center. Whatever precedes the sermon is only pre-game information. And whatever comes after it is not as significant as the sermon either. But as Randy Booth rightly noted–quoting a portion of James Jordan’s work Theses on Worship– in his booklet A Guide to Worship, “the entire service is sermonic, not just the sermon.” c “The sermon itself,” he writes,” is very important, but it is not the all-important event. It is one important part of the many other important parts of worship.”

But if this is the case and any historical/liturgical tradition will attest, and since I am convinced Miller is aware of this historical precedent, then why not work to change this paradigm in the institutional church instead of generalizing it and bidding the historical ecclesiastical traditional adieu? With Miller’s book and lecture platform he could affect thousands of pastors who see worship as a lecture hall. That’s the reformer Don Miller the Church needs, not the one who throws away everything for a literal walk in the park on Sunday morning.

What is Miller trying to get rid of?

According to the author of best-seller, Blue Like Jazz, we have turned over the Acts church to the hands of professionals, known as the pastoral staff. Instead of doing that, we should simply hand out sheriff badges to everyone and say to them that they are all pastors. They are all in control. Sunday serves only to prepare these pastors–male and female–to go forth and be the church wherever they are. First Peter two does affirm our royal priesthood. We are all priests in the sense that we are no longer bound by bloody sacrifices. Christ’s redemption is accomplished, thus transforming us into agents of redemption in the world. However, what Miller fails to see is that Paul does not flatten the priesthood, he sees the priesthood operating differently in different spheres (I Tim. 3, Eph. 4:11-13). There is an office of priest (overseer) that is distinct from the general priesthood that we all inherit united to Messiah, Jesus.

Miller also wants to get rid of the institutional Church as center of community life.

I frequent a coffee shop weekly where one of the baristas is the leader of a church. When I asked him about the church, he told me that they meet at the same coffee shop on Sunday mornings to drink coffee and discuss the Bible. When I asked him to define a bit further what they do, he was quick to point to the flaws of the modern church. “We don’t need structure. We need to return to simplicity.” Since I have lectured on this topic before a few years ago, d. I can probably summarize this general view point as the “Romanticized Acts Church” movement. I am no opponent of coffee and Bible studies; in fact, I encourage them. But the idea that a return to the first century Church–as privately interpreted–is the solution to today’s ecclesiastical woes is overly caffeinated.

Why can’t I simply find community on my dinner table? or a pub? –because community life is complex. There is nothing wrong with finding community in these places, but they are all incomplete pictures of community life. They may be fine extensions of the community life, which the creeds refer to as “the communion of saints,” but to assert that that is a legitimate replacement for Word, Sacrament, and Discipline in the context of the gathered community is simplistic and dangerous. What then do we do with the adulterer? or the rich folks who are arriving at the Lord’s Supper and the agape meal and eating and drinking everything before the poor arrive? or the sexual abuse situations that are unfortunately prevalent in our churches? Miller has no answer. “I can maybe set up a board or something like that,” he said casually. But wouldn’t a board indicate some type of structure; the very same type you are attempting to eliminate?

Miller also says that he doesn’t find intimacy with God by singing songs to him.

As one deeply involved in ecclesiastical music, this concerns me. Miller is suffering from the psalmic-less nature of modern church music. What some of us treasure each Sunday through hymns and psalms of lament, imprecation, and overwhelming joy has been largely forgotten. The robustness of masculine voices and the beauty and nuance of female singing has become a forgotten history. All of it replaced by praise bands, and the few songs intended for congregational singing are quickly swallowed by the voluminous instrumentation.

If Miller is saying he simply does not like to sing, then he needs to re-adjust his biblical priorities. A quick search for the words “singing” and “music” will reveal their prevalence, especially in the Hebrew Scriptures. Because I don’t like to do something does not mean I should simply replace or eliminate it from the life of the church.

How Miller finds intimacy with God.

The answer is another example of a faulty ability to differentiate. Miller writes:

The answer came to me recently and it was a freeing revelation. I connect with God by working. I literally feel an intimacy with God when I build my company. I know it sounds crazy, but I believe God gave me my mission and my team and I feel closest to him when I’ve got my hand on the plow. It’s thrilling and I couldn’t be more grateful he’s given me an outlet through which I can both serve and connect with him.

I find his response a wonderful example of missing the point. We all find intimacy with God by working. We were created to work for six days, which means there is a great priority that God places on that. We all find hobbies and passions that fulfill us as men. We all agree with Eric Liddel’s wonderful attestation of the presence of God when he says in Chariots of Fire, “When I run I feel his pleasure.” When Miller works with his crew he feels God’s pleasure. But his intimacy ought to be the outworking of an intimacy that begins when by the Spirit we are seated with Christ in the heavenly places (Eph. 2:6).

Miller’s entire paradigm could be easily dealt with by reading an introduction to ecclesiology. e Don Miller is the product of modern individualism. And though he flees from that language with his post-modern categories, ultimately, he falls in his own trap. Miller believes that church is all around us. Yes, we go as church to the world. We carry the name of God. f But we go as church because we have already been fed by the head of the Church as we gathered as one body.

Conclusion

Miller’s platform is huge. His simple blog post, which he indicated took him about three minutes to write, led to a firestorm on the web. His attempt to start a conversation actually hinders us from having a more necessary conversation. The question should not be whether we worship in the traditional sense or simply find intimacy with God through other means, the question is “How has God called us to worship?” Further, whether you worship in a more lecture-style congregation or otherwise because of your learning style, what does your personal style of learning have to do with worship? What if God’s way of sanctifying you is by killing your learning style and causing you to appreciate God’s way of learning? What if the institutional church is God’s way of killing your wants so you may conform to his? What if attending church regularly is the way God intended to prepare you to understand intimacy?

I am not one to deny Miller’s connection with God via his work and habits, but I do reject his premise that abandoning the institutional church is the path to a deeper connection. The institutional church, I argue, is the deepest means of finding intimacy with God.

  1. Read more at http://www.relevantmagazine.com/god/church/donald-miller-church#KDZHerDkw3EuWr6q.99  (back)
  2. If you do not have this book, please purchase Kevin DeYoung’s wonderful work found here: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Love-Church-Institutions-Organized/dp/0802458378  (back)
  3. see Covenant Media Foundation for copies  (back)
  4. My lecture at the Family Advance Conference in 2012; e-mail for a PDF copy  (back)
  5. Maybe R.B. Kuiper’s work “The Glorious Body of Christ  (back)
  6. This is the heart of the third commandment  (back)
Posted on

Another Review of The Trinitarian Father by Kevin Johnson

Uri Brito establishes his point at the outset and drives it home throughout the book: Earthly fathers are to imitate God the Father. And this only makes sense because the God of heaven and earth is Triune. He doesn’t exercise his will and display his attributes in a vacuum. He is a culture. He is a civilization. He is a family. He is a Father to an actual Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. We are made in that image.

Every chapter is anchored by and revolves around Scripture. Uri takes us from the Garden to the Gospel – the Gospel that turns the hearts of fathers to their children, and the hearts of children to their fathers. We see in Genesis that God is a benevolent Father, preparing Adam for blessing and life. Isaiah reminds us that we are worshipers and imitators at our core. We will become what we worship. Solomon reminds us of our royalty. Every father will equip his son to rule – to be a dawning sun on a cloudless morning or to be smoke in the eyes. Luke gives us Wisdom made flesh. The Son of man increasing in wisdom and stature. Our sons, if we are like The Father, will be like The Son.

The Trinitarian Father is a great introduction to the topic of fatherhood. It teases the appetite. While it is a short work, the author has managed to cover a lot of ground. Uri’s brevity is adorned with great depth. Almost every sentence could be (and should be!) put on an index card for routine reflection. The book sets forth both a theological framework for fatherhood and practical hooks upon which every father would do well to hang his cap.

The Trinitarian Father makes you think; it brings you back to Scripture; it convicts you; it will make you shift in your chair. Ultimately, the book calls you to look into the heavens, see your Father, and remember that he’s done for you all that He requires of you. I heartily recommend this book. –Kevin Johnson

Purchase a copy by e-mailing the author at uriesou@gmail.com.

Posted on

Praise for “TheTrinitarian Father”

The Trinitarian Father is not another work by an expert father to the rest of us — no, it’s better than that. Rather than offering his own wisdom, Uri Brito guides fathers through the whole biblical sweep of our Heavenly Father’s redemptive wisdom in his Son in order to unfold to us what true fatherhood is. In this work, we learn that the future of the church and of the culture is fathers — fathers who instruct their children from the the wisdom, example, and self-sacrifice of their Trinitarian Father.

John Fraiser, Pastor of Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in La Grange, Kentucky

Posted on

The Trinitarian Father (Book and PDF edition)

The good news is that the book is now in print and should be here by Christmas. Some of you may have purchased the book in kindle form, but the new book is a revised version of the kindle edition with several new chapters added. It is a great Christmas gift for all dads (do you hear it moms?)

Covenant Media Foundation will be publishing the book and as soon as I am made aware it’s available I will make it known.

The even better news is that you can get a PDF copy of my booklet now for any amount. That’s right. Simply donate however much you think my little labor of love is worth, and leave your e-mail in my paypal account or send me an e-mail at uriesou@gmail.com and I will send you the book in PDF form.

Suggested donation: $1.99



Posted on

A Short Bio of the Man Who Changed the World

The great Reformer Martin Luther belonged to a peasant family. Luther once wrote that “his father, grandfather, and all his ancestors were thorough peasants.” Luther’s father made his livelihood by mining for copper. Margaret was Luther’s strong and strict mother. In fact, you can see that Luther’s personality comes very much through his mother. There is some record of the strictness and sometimes harshness in the Luther home. On one occasion, “His mother whipped him till the blood flowed, for stealing a hazel-nut.” In fact, Luther writes that it was the strictness and the rigorous life that led him to the monastery and made him a monk. a

One of the remarkable events in Luther’s life was one that is often unknown. Growing up in a peasant home, Luther’s opportunities to move to a higher rank of society were minimal. One of the things young Luther did to help with schooling and food was to go around from door to door with his friends and sing. It was in one of those occasions where he met Mrs. Ursula Cotta. She welcomed Luther to her table and exerted a great influence on Luther. Specifically, Mrs. Cotta taught Luther the ways of a more refined home circle. Essentially, she taught Luther proper mannerisms. This actually provided Luther opportunities to move to a higher rank in society than the ones his parents belonged b. At 18 Luther entered into the University of Erfurt and as always Luther distinguished himself. The author S.M. Houghton observed: “Little did Luther realize that even at this time God was preparing him for a career of activity which was to astonish Europe, and which was to shake a proud and polluted Church to its foundation (79).” It was at Erfurt that Luther came across a copy of the Bible. Contextually, we need to remember that peasants did not have copies of the Bible, so this was Luther’s first engagement with the Word of God. What caught his attention was the story of Hannah and Samuel, and how Samuel was called by God. This is all the background formation of Martin Luther before he became the great Protestant leader.

When Luther finished his studies, a series of events occurred, which really led Luther to consider his life and what he wanted to do in the future. There are two main events. The first was the day when one of Luther’s best friends got involved in a fight and was killed. At that moment he asked himself the question: “What if I had been killed instead of my friend?” The second and legendary event was the day when during a trip, a vicious thunder-storm broke over Luther. Luther believed that he was surely going to die before he reached his destination, and “stricken with fear he fell prostrate to the ground, crying out: ‘Help, Anna, beloved saint, I will become a monk.’” Luther kept his vow and after a big farewell party, the next day he presented himself at the door of an Augustinian monastery. Growing up in a peasant home, the last thing Martin’s father wanted was his son to pursue an ecclesiastical life. He wanted him to pursue law and achieve fame and wealth. But Luther wanted something different than fame and wealth, though as result he certainly achieved fame and the respect of many of the wealthiest in Europe. Luther—ultimately—wanted peace with God. For Luther, the way to obtain this peace was to isolate himself. He obeyed the very strict monastic rules, performed menial tasks, and went on begging on behalf of the monastery c. One author said that Luther was the “most sincere, conscientious monk who ever tried in genuine earnestness to merit salvation by human effort (81). He even became proud of his humility. This is important because this is shaping Luther’s thinking and how drastic his theological change was. He sacrificed everything to find peace. “He observed every detail of discipline, praying, fasting, watching, confessing his sins and he literally tortured his body to obtain peace for his soul.” Luther’s conscience plagued him so much that he despaired of salvation, and his physical strength began to waste away (Sketches, 80). His fellow-monks couldn’t help him, the departed saints that Luther prayed to so fervently could not help him. One person who brought some consolation to Luther was John von Staupitz, the head of the Augustinian monastery in Germany. He visited Luther often. Luther would cry often to his friend, Staupitz: “Oh, my sins! My Sins! My Sins!” Luther could not view God as the punisher of sin. Staupitz offered Luther many great theological truths that sank into Luther’s head. Once he said to Luther: “ Your thoughts are not according to Christ; Christ does not terrify, he consoles.” In God’s grace, the Spirit revealed to Luther that our works can never merit salvation before God. Only the mercy and grace of God can bring sinners to true faith. Luther once wrote that the phrase The Just Shall Live by Faith was the very gate of Paradise.
The result of a changed mind is a changed life. Martin Luther began proclaim the light of the gospel far and wide, and before long he became aware that this was not received well by the Church of the day.

Martin Luther was deeply troubled when he was commissioned to go to Rome in 1510. In his way to Rome he discovered that there was deplorable wickedness being done in the name of the Church, he saw the remarkable ignorance in the monasteries. The priests did not know the Scriptures well. Luther was so enamored with Rome in the beginning of his trip, but at the end, he wrote: “If there is a hell, Rome is built over it.” (Sketches, 84). When Luther returned to Wittenberg , he received a doctorate degree and began to preach in the parish church. He was loved by the people, because here was a man opening the word of God. As the people began to learn, Luther desired that more people hear the Word of God. As a result, Luther began to protest more and more.

And his protest came to a culmination when the popes decided that St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome should be rebuilt. The expense was to come from every area of society where the church had influence. One of Rome’s fundraiser experts was a man named Tetzel. Tetzel taught that those who donated to the project of re-building would deliver their loved ones who had died from purgatorial torments. Tetzel, and other issues of corruption infuriated Luther who began to preach vehemently against Tetzel. Luther wrote down 95 theses attacking indulgences. And at mid-day 1517 on October 31st, Luther nailed them to the Wittenberg Castle. His intention, of course, was to begin a conversation, but the conversation has been going on for over 400 years now. There was the printing press that made Luther’s theses popular, but what really got the attention of the citizens was that following October 31st was All Saints’ Day. Multitudes flocked to church. Luther’s theses were read, copied, printed, and distributed all over Germany, and eventually all over Europe (Sketches, 88). Luther’s these was received with little protest by the church, but as the popes and priests began to see how much it was affecting the population.

As Luther’s fame went far and wide, he quickly became the leader of this new movement emerging in Europe. In Luther’s day, Emperor Charles V was requested to deal with the case of Martin Luther. He ordered Luther to appear before him in the city of Worms. Luther’s friends reminded him of what had happened to John Huss. But Luther was committed to going to Worms. This is the famous Diet of Worms. The Council of Worms as is commonly known. Luther arrived at Worms and the streets were crowded with people all waiting to see the man who was taught to be the “devil personified” (88). He was the man who stood up against church and state, and not church and state were ready to crush him. As Luther entered the hall of the assembly he was astonished that the great religious and political leaders of the day were all present. The presiding office, Johann von Eck, opened the proceedings by asking Luther if he was the author of the writings on the table, and secondly he asked Luther if he would retract the doctrines in the books. Luther answered that he was the author of the books, but he said he wanted to think through his doctrines carefully to make sure he was being truthful to the Word of God. Luther spent the rest of the evening in prayer. April 18th, 1521 is described as the greatest day in Luther’s life. One author describes the day as “one of the sublimest scenes which earth ever witnessed, and most pregnant with blessing.” Luther came back and Dr. Johann von Eck posed the question again: “Luther, do you recant of the doctrines written in your book?” And here is the English translation of what Luther said:

“Unless I am convinced by testimonies of Scriptures or by clear arguments that I am in error—for popes and councils have often contradicted themselves—I cannot withdraw, for I am subject to the Scriptures I have quoted; my conscience is captive to the Word of God. It is unsafe to do anything against one’s conscience. Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise. So help me God.”

Several days after this statement, Luther was declared to be an outlaw and anyone who lodged him or gave him food or drink were liable to be charged with treason. Nothing stopped Luther’s mission and throughout the rest of his life he wrote, preached, translated and left a remarkable legacy. In these times he held very dear to Psalm 46, and in fact, wrote his greatest hymn A Mighty Fortress is our God. God became his fortress in his time of trial.

In 1546, Luther fell ill and shortly thereafter he died. It is said that one of his closest friends asked Luther if remained determined to stand fast in Christ and in the doctrine which he had preached! Luther responded with a distinct Yes. Luther died and was buried at the Wittenberg Castle; the same place where 29 years earlier he had nailed the 95 theses.

  1. see Martin Luther the Man  (back)
  2. Sketches from Church History, pg. 79  (back)
  3. Sketches, 81  (back)
Proudly powered by WordPress