The below is from pp.398-401, the last section of the last chapter of Bainton’s, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (1950), which I just finished reading today. It is an excellent book and the author did an admirable job. If I were a speed reader I would read it again. But alas, I am not, so on to new horizons.
The Measure of the Man
“When one comes to take the measure of the man, there are three areas which naturally suggest themselves. The first is his own Germany. He called himself the German prophet, saying that against the papist asses he must assume so presumptuous a title, and he addressed himself to his beloved Germans. The claim is frequent that no man did so much to fashion the character of the German people. Their indifference to politics and their passion for music were already present in him. Their language was so far fashioned by his hand that the extent of their indebtedness is difficult to recognize. If a German is asked whether a passage of Luther’s Bible is not remarkable, he may answer that this is precisely the way in which any German would speak. But the reason is simply that every German has been reared on Luther’s version. The influence of the man on his people was deepest in the home. In fact the home was the only sphere of life which the Reformation profoundly affected. Economics went the way of capitalism and politics the way of absolutism. But the home took on that quality of affectionate and godly patriarchalism which Luther had set as the pattern in his own household. The most profound impact of Luther on his people was in their religion. His sermons were read to the congregations, his liturgy was sung, his catechism was rehearsed by the father with the household, his Bible cheered the fainthearted and consoled the dying. If no Englishman occupies a similar place in the religious life of his people, it is because no Englishman had anything like Luther’s range. The Bible translation in England was the work of Tyndale, the prayer book of Cranmer, the catechism [and Commentary, the “Standards”] of the Westminster divines. The sermonic style stemmed from Latimer; the hymnbook came from Watts. And not all of these lived in one century. Luther did the work of more than five men. And for sheer richness and exuberance of vocabulary and mastery of style he is to be compared only with Shakespeare. The Germans naturally claim such a German for themselves. Yet when one begins to look over the centuries for those whom one would most naturally compare with this man, not a single one of his stature proves to be a German. In fact a German historian has said that in the course of three hundred years only one German ever really understood Luther, and that one was Johann Sebastian Bach. If one would discover parallels to Luther as the wrestler with the Lord, then one must turn to Paul the Jew [sic, Judean], Augustine the Latin,*1 Pascal the Frenchman,*2 Kierkegaard the Dane,*2 Unamuno the Spaniard,*3 Dostoevski the Russian,*4 Bunyan the Englishman, and Edwards the American.”
[*1 Augustine (354-430) was a Roman, not a Latin. Modernly perverters of truth call him a Berber, African-Latin. Numibia was a ROMAN province in Central Africa, surrounding Carthage. His mother was a citizen of Carthage. The multi-cultural perverters, in their dishonesty to find something, anything to which they can claim ownership to establish something they have ever done in the history of the world, claim his mother was a Berber simply because the origin of her name, Monica, is unknown. It could be just as much Punic, or Greek, or Latin. The Greeks founded city states throughout the entire Mediterranean coastline and islands. To assume his mother was a Berber is obnoxious and anti-intellectual.
However, Carthage is known to have been founded by a colony of Phoenicians from Tyre. The Phoenicians were a Hebrew people (as were the ancient Greeks, with whom the Phoenicians were in close association), not Canaanite. The Vandals (a Gothic / Nordic viking tribe) had crossed the Straits of Gibraltar in a.d. 429 and conquered North Africa, and eventually wrested Carthage from Rome in a.d. 439.
Liberal subverters engage in the same obfuscative subterfuge with Hannibal, claiming that he was an African. Despite sculptures of him far closer to the time in which he lived than modern charlatans can fabricate while smoking pot.
Here is a copy of the earliest-known portrait of St. Augustine (from the 6th century, just a 100 years or so after the time he lived) and below it is a bust of General Hannibal Barca (247-c.181 b.c.), who is considered to be one of the greatest military leaders of all time. His father’s name was Hamilcar Barca (the c in Barca is hard like a k). The name Hamlicar seems to be of Gothic origin or properly, proto-Gothic.
*2 Bainton’s mention of Kierkegaard here is a bit of an insult to Luther, as Kierkegard entirely perverted Lutheranism and corrupted it with mystical existential humanism. Pascal, of course, was Catholic, but he did associate himself with Jansenism (a theological movement within the Catholic church in France, named after the Dutch theologian Cornelius Jansen, that came quite close in numerous theological doctrines to Reformed / Calvinist faith) and did write The Provincial Letters and The Pensées, which, though they were theological in nature and significant in their literary value (influencing the form of other French writers), they cannot be compared to major theological compendium of doctrine; and his faith and love of Scripture does not seem to be that which consumed all of life, never to be put aside, as with Luther.
*3 Basque-Spaniard Miguel De Unamuno Y Jugo (1864-1936) seems inappropriate, as a Catholic turned existentialist (socialist leaning). If “anyone having a religious crisis or crossroads” qualifies one to be compared to Luther, then that would include the majority of all people everywhere. The point is not merely crisis, but persevering through crisis to the true destination and producing something—MONUMENTAL—of lasting, significant value; not apostatizing on the rocks of humanism or paganism.
*4 The comparison to Dostoevski seems out of place, since he never developed any systematic or comprehensive spiritual work; maybe Tolstoy (who was an ethnic Lithuanian, though born in Russia) would have been a little better; but he also was Russian Orthodox (non-Roman Catholicism) and mystical, ignoring Scripture when “feelings” or “premonitions” or “humanistic reasoning” felt better to self.
The other comparisons seem appropriate. However, the ones exceptioned above seem to rather be a disservice to the reader and a slight to Luther. Notes mine. R.A.B.]
“And that is why in the second great area, that of the Church, Luther’s influence extends so far beyond his own land. Lutheranism took possession of Scandinavia and has an extensive following in the United States, and apart from that his movement gave the impetus which sometimes launched and sometimes helped to establish the other varieties of Protestantism. They all stem in some measure from him. And what he did for his own people to a degree, he did also for others. His translation, for example, affected the English version. Tyndale’s preface is taken from Luther. His liturgical reforms likewise had an influence on the Book of Common Prayer. And even the Catholic Church owes much to him. Often it is said that had Luther never appeared, an Erasmian reform would have triumphed, or at any rate a reform after the Spanish model. All of this is of course conjectural, but it is obvious that the Catholic Church received a tremendous shock from the Lutheran Reformation and a terrific urge to reform after its own pattern.
“The third area is of all the most important and the only one which to Luther mattered much, and that is the area of religion. Here it is that he must be judged. In his religion he was a Hebrew, not a Greek fancying gods and goddesses disporting themselves about some limpid pool or banqueting upon Olympus. The God of Luther, as of Moses, was the God who inhabits the storm clouds and rides on the wings of the wind. At his nod the earth trembles, and the people before him are as a drop in the bucket. He is a God of majesty and power, inscrutable, terrifying, devastating, and consuming in his anger. Yet the All Terrible is the All Merciful too. ‘Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord . . .’ But how shall we know this? In Christ, only in Christ. In the Lord of life, born in the squalor of a cow stall and dying as a malefactor under the desertion and the derision of men, crying unto God and receiving for answer only the trembling of the earth and the blinding of the sun, even by God forsaken, and in that hour taking to himself and annihilating our iniquity, trampling down the hosts of hell and disclosing within the wrath of the All Terrible the love that will not let us go. No longer did Luther tremble at the rustling of a wind-blown leaf, and instead of calling upon St. Anne he declared himself able to laugh at thunder and jagged bolts from out the storm. This was what enabled him to utter such words as these: ‘Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen’.”
[Many claim that Luther never actually made this exact declaration. However, Bainton points out that while that actual quote was not recorded by the Holy Roman Emperor or Catholic officials at the Diet of Worms, others in attendance, in their notes, so recorded it. Whether Luther declared it at that historic moment (and the “authorities” chose not to record it accurately into their records) or whether Luther spoke it at other times to his supporters and confederates (who then recorded the fuller version) we cannot know; but the fact that others present so recorded it seems to clearly indicate that Luther did express those exact sentiments, at some time; and it seems odd that they would insert something that he said at some other time, as if he said it at that monumental historic moment.
Bainton seems to have written Luther’s biography doctrinally neutral. To better under LUTHER’s doctrine (not the modern Lutheranism, so-called, a semi-Catholicism, to which it degenerated due to Melanchthon, Luther’s right-hand man and successor, who sadly compromised doctrine for attempted unity with Rome—for which Luther would have probably disowned him) see Luther’s own work that showcases the true Reformed Doctrine: Bondage of the Will (1525) Martin Luther, 328pp., pb., 20.00 + P&H; masterpiece destroying Arminianism / Man’s Free Will; revealing God’s Sovereignty; contains superb historical and theological introduction by the translators J. I. Packer and O. Johnston. Luther wrote it in 1525, in Latin; it was titled De Servo Arbitrio (literally, “On Un-free Will”, or “Concerning Bound Choice”). Also in stock, 297pp., pb., 1823 translation by Henry Cole, 18.00 + P&H. See also: Martin Luther: Protest Changed the Course of History, 15.00 + P&H, 105 min. DVD, dramatic B&W 1952 classic, Awesome; if you’ve never seen it, get it; I try to make it a point to watch every year; originally released in theaters worldwide/nominated for 2 Academy Awards; magnificent depiction of Luther & forces at work in surrounding 16th century society resulted in historic reforming efforts; from guilt-burdened monk to eventual break w/ Rome; it is unsurpassed. Special 50th Anniv. colorized Ed. includes: full length film; story of making of the film; Biography of many features not available before, a documentary history with Robert E. A. Lee, retired head of Lutheran Film Associates; trip to historic Luther sites including breathtaking color views of Wittenberg, Eisenach, Worms,Wartburg, Augsburg. Photos, background info, credits for producer, director, writer leading actors. Here I Stand: Life of Martin Luther (1950) R. H. Bainton, 441pp., Hb., 20.00 + P&H. All mentioned titled are in stock.
About 4 years ago while researching my genealogy, I found out that Luther was a cousin of mine, possibly from 3 different ancestors of mine. Notes mine. R.A.B.]