Luther’s ignorance on this subject led him to speak of Adam’s having the Spirit, of the Spirit’s being our law-fulfiller, and of the Jewish church, as not having been justified by the law, because they did not have the Spirit. (See Part iv. Sect. x. note z . Part v. Sect. x. note z.) — as if the Spirit of grace were a creational, natural, or legal possession! Again; while he saw the Law to be a condemning precept, he did not understand its real nature, form, and design — that it was an interpolation, typical in all its parts, preparatory, temporary; whose glory was to be done away with. (See Part iii. Sect. xxiv. note i. Part v. Sect. x. xi. xii. xiii.) This ignorance led him to bring it back upon the people of God, instead of banishing it forever; to heap burdens with his left hand, which he had hardly removed with his right. He was not led to apprehend the distinct nature, as well as the end, of Law-obedience and Gospel-obedience; nor that obedience to the Law which he substantially demanded, even if not in word, is not only an obeying for life instead of an acting of the life given, but even denying God to be what He is and is manifesting himself to be, while we profess to believe in Him, and serve Him. 63
These are some of the principal DEFECTS of Luther’s theology: 64 which he manifests, as might be expected, in this elaborate treatise. I have dealt fairly, as I believe, both with his excellencies and with his defects. It has been my endeavour to give the most faithful rendering I could to his whole text, and to every word and syllable of it. His excellencies, which, if I have succeeded in my endeavour, cannot be hidden, I have made yet more conspicuous by extricating each point of his argument, and specifying it distinctly, with the numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. prefixed. I have endeavoured to obviate his errors and defects and to supply, severally, by expressing THE TRUTH. My statements are ample, but I am not aware that they are prolix. I have desired to consult brevity; and in some instances, I have obtained, as I fear, the reward of laboured brevity, by becoming obscure. But I hope not often so.
The reader must have seen already that, if I was to publish Luther, it must be with NOTES. I honestly believe that he would be unintelligible without them, as well as defective and fallacious. I have therefore adhered rigidly to two simple principles throughout: ‘in the text, Luther, all Luther, and nothing but Luther; but in the notes, my own sentiments, whether agreeing with or contradicting his.’
Now, if it is asked why, in all wonder, have you thought it worth your while to publish Luther at all, when you pronounce his sentiments to be both defective and. erroneous; I am not without an answer. With all its defects and errors, confessed and professed, I count this a truly estimable, magnificent and illustrious treatise. I publish it therefore,
- Because I deem the subject all-important.
- Because I know no other work of value upon this all-important subject, which discusses it by the same sort of argumentation.
- Because Luther’s name is gold with some, and will, I hope, beget readers.
- Because his right is so very right, and so very forcible.
- Because his very errors and defects throw some rays of light upon their corrector and supplier, claim and obtain a hearing for him, and open a way to the more successful march and entry of truth.
The wise Paley remarks that, if he could but make his pupils sensible of the precise nature of the difficulty, he was half-way towards conquering it Let the reader see what sort of a God, and of a Christ, and of a salvation, Luther, when brought into day, sets before him; and my expectation is that he will cry out for something better.
I have said Luther’s name is gold, and Luther, I trust, will beget readers. Do not let it be supposed that I am therefore leaning upon Luther’s arm for the support of truth. May that be far from me. I disclaim, as he did, man’s authority; what he protested against the Fathers, I protest against him, and against every uninspired teacher.
The fair and legitimate use of human authority is to awaken attention. What so eminent a man of God has said, is worth listening to, is worth weighing: but if he could now be called before us, he would say, ‘Weigh it in the balances of Scripture; I desire to be received no further than as I speak according to the oracles of God.’ High respect is due to the opinions of a godly, God-raised, God-owned man — but he is man, fallible man at last; and this man carried the mark of his fallibility with him to his grave, indeed, he has left it not only in his writings, but as a frontlet between the eyes of his blindly-devoted followers who consubstantiate with him. “To the law and to the testimony.” Good! But that appeal will not ensure the knowledge of THE TRUTH: all do not know THE TRUTH who search the Scriptures. It is the Scripture as we believe it to be opened to us by the Holy Ghost, which is the guide of our spirit; and while we are bound to yield a certain deference and obedience to the decisions of a lawfully constituted human tribunal — submitting to its inflictions even to the destruction not only of our worldly substance, but of our flesh — our spirit owns no fetters but those which the Spirit imposes.
I commend this work, therefore, both as it respects Luther, and as it respects my own part in it, to the candid, patient and anxious consideration of the reader — earnestly requesting him to compare what is written here with the Scriptures, and carrying with him into that comparison a prayer which I here breathe out for him, ‘Lord, grant me to understand your word; preserve me from concluding rashly against anything that is written in this book, however it may contradict my preconceived opinion; and what is true in it, enable me to welcome, digest, hold fast, and enjoy!’
I have already hinted that my desire has been to accomplish a faithful translation. I believe the Lord has given me my desire. I need scarcely say I have found it a difficult undertaking. Every scholar knows that the work of translation is one of great nicety. In every language, there is some one word which more precisely than any other, corresponds with the given one; but it may often be the rumination of many hours to find that word. This has been much of my toil. Luther’s work, above most others, demanded it: he abounds in emphatic and distinctive words. His meaning also, as I have said, is not always unambiguous. He, too, wrote in a dead language: in which, though he doubtless tried his best on this occasion, and was complimented by having it supposed that the elegant pen of Melancthon had assisted him, he was but a clumsy and middle-aged composer. He has proverbs, moreover, without end; some German, some classical.
‘The Germans, you know (as a very learned friend, whom I consulted in one of my difficulties, obligingly writes to me), are great proverbialists, and many of their allusions are now lost. I have searched a great variety of authors, on a similar inquiry (he was kind enough to do so now), but in vain.’
I too, in a much humbler way, have made some search and a great deal of inquiry, but have learned nothing: witness, the Wolf and the Nightingale (p. 79), the beast which eats itself (p. 196), and the palm and the gourd (p. 373). My greatest perplexity has arisen from his mixing the old with the new, in some instances, and luring me, like a will o’ the wisp, to go after him, because I fancied I had a lantern to guide me; but soon I found myself left in darkness.
I fear my notes will incur the censure of two different sorts of reader — each of whom will account many of them superfluous. I can only say none of them have been inserted without thought and design. To the learned, I have been anxious to vindicate my accuracy; to the unlearned, I have been anxious to give such helps as might enable them to understand me. The learned must bear the burden of my laborious dullness, and the unlearned, of my Latin and Greek.
With respect to my theology, I will not wonder if I appear more positive and dogmatic to some, than even Luther himself. Let me be understood here. While I make no claim to infallibility, but desire only that my assertions may be brought to the standard of Scripture, I desire to give my reader the full benefit of the firmness and
