No description available.

Luther’s theological and ethical consideration of lying is founded on protecting the reputation and welfare of the neighbor. In sermons, prayer books, catechisms, lectures, letters, and table talks, Luther addresses lies and secrecy in varying contexts and continually returns to the same conclusion: a person’s speech should protect the neighbor’s reputation rather than harm it. Luther first develops his thoughts on lying in catechetical literature on the eighth commandment, “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor,” which he interprets positively as a requirement to protect the neighbor’s reputation. Diverging from an idealized Augustinian ethic which condemns all lies as sinful, Luther’s emphasis on protection of the neighbor allows him to identify truths as sinful when they harm another and lies as sinless when they protect another. Luther does draw on Augustine’s framework of three types of lies—the harmful, the playful, and the dutiful—to distinguish among sinful, harmless, and beneficial lies. Luther maintains this focus on protection and the distinction among kinds of lies in his Lectures on Genesis, where he examines lies in many different contexts, commending some and condemning others. Luther’s interpretations expand to offer application and advice to his contemporaries, including advice on how to deceive others in an appropriate way. Luther’s consistent position on deception in his catechetical and exegetical writing provides his rationale for advising lying in the case of Philipp of Hesse’s bigamy despite the disastrous consequences for both Luther and Philipp. Combined with his theology of the seal of the confessional, Luther’s view of lying provides further protection for the neighbor, whether the neighbor is a rich influential ruler or the vulnerable woman next door. As others in the Wittenberg circle wrote their own catechisms, they drew heavily on Luther’s concern for protecting the neighbor and continue to excuse lies that prevent harm. Luther’s emphasis on protection and prevention of harm thus become an enduring focus in the Lutheran ethical tradition’s treatment of lying and deception. / 2025-07-26T00:00:00Z

This study seeks to define “mysticism” historically by looking back to the concept mystical theology (μυστική θεολογία / mystica theologia) and the association of books under this category. The first Latin canon of mystical theology developed from the ninth to the middle of the thirteenth century around translation and commentary on the writings of Dionysius by John Eriugena, Thomas Gallus, Robert Grosseteste, and Albert the Great. The second Latin canon of mystical theology developed from the thirteenth to the end of the fifteenth century and centered upon the more practical task of teaching an advanced form of unitive and apophatic prayer (largely by Bonaventure, Hugh of Balma, and Jean Gerson). Nonetheless, the writings of Dionysius and the method of apophaticism—whether understood as negative predication (apophatic theology) or imageless (apophatic) prayer—remained fundamental. The criterion of immediacy also played a central role in the development of the concept, especially after the thirteenth century. Martin Luther inherited this concept of mystical theology. Reading Dionysius through the comments of Gerson and Johann Eck, Luther understood mystical theology as an advanced form of imageless prayer that sought an unmediated, experiential knowledge of God in majesty (“the naked God”) through union. Luther’s mature writings rejected any attempt to know God in this direct way. However, drawing on Augustine and Johann Tauler, Luther redirected the elements of experiential knowledge and the method of negation that he learned in mystical literature. Rather than addressing the disproportion between the finite and the infinite, Luther’s version of negative theology addressed the disproportion between the word of the Law and the word of the Gospel. In turn, Luther redirected Dionysius’s original emphasis on the mediated nature of all theology towards the pastoral task of assurance. For Dionysius direct knowledge of God was metaphysically impossible. For Luther direct knowledge of God was not impossible, but disastrous. Only in the negation of the Law and “darkness of faith” in the spoken, external words of the Gospel could assurance be found.

This study is about a King of Sweden and his relationship to Martin Luther’s theology. Gustavus III was king in Sweden during the 18th century and he is mostly famous for being a friend of the theater and arts. This study investigates the religious relationship between the king and the image of Martin Luther’s theology. My main question in this study asks how Gustavus III described himself as a Lutheran Monarch. The method consists of a content analysis of primary sources from the late 18th century, mainly Helgdagsreduktionen from 1772 and the Eccelesatique-samlingar from 1789. The result shows that the King had churchly ambitions and was interested in liturgical questions. The result also shows Gustavus III worshipped former kings of Sweden which influenced how the king wanted to describe himself as a good Lutheran in the shadow of Gustavus I and Gustavus Adolphus. The household theology of Martin Luther shows the position of the king and how he absorbs this position in his writing to the subjects and the priests. The king’s function is viewed as a father that maintained the subject’s true path to Christianity. The image of Gustavus III is also central in this study because the idea of the early modern monarch was forged in the very foundation of the protestant reformation which Martin Luther started.

This study aims to clarify the angelologies of Emanuel Swedenborg and Martin Luther, using textual study as method, and to use comparative analysis to distinguish both differences and similarities between them. The theory I have applied is new historicism, which views the text as an artefact and holds that a text and its context influence each other in a constant give-and-take-relationship. As the topic of angels is vast, I have chosen to focus on the angel’s being and task within creation, their relationship to humans and especially children, and their relationship to baptism. In the process of the study several similarities and differences between Swedenborg’s and Luther’s angelologies have become obvious, many of which have been shown to depend on their contexts as well as their respective theologies and basic assumptions about what an angel in essence is. What has also become clear after conducting this study is that both Luther and Swedenborg saw angels as a natural part of human life and specifically life in the church.

The aim of this thesis is to assess Martin Luther King Jr.’s theory, practice, and pragmatic function of Nonviolent Direct Action, and to propose that it must be understood as violent in a substantive way. The purpose of interpreting King’s Nonviolent Direct Action as violent is to show the efficacy of the theory, which is to fend off critiques of futility and to expose the psychological and philosophical depth of the seemingly simple tactic. Nonviolent Direct Action is commonly considered to be a method of civil disobedience that aims to motivate substantial social or political change without a physically violent clash. However, this thesis identifies more fundamentally the presence of an intention to inflict a harmful or painful psychological effect on those it is directed against, to affect a response from the conscience that motivates a change of behaviour. For that, there must be a strategic staging of events by the oppressed and their supporters who are unable and unwilling to overcome the oppressor on traditionally physically violent terms. The unviability of traditional violence for the oppressed group necessitates a reliance on a psychological tactic to invoke negative emotion in the oppressor. After an introductory chapter, this thesis will proceed to reconstruct King’s theory of nonviolence by examining a collection of his written works, written records of his sermons and speeches, and Jonathan Eig’s biography King: A Life. Next, a chapter is devoted to analyzing the novel categorization in this thesis of Nonviolent Direct Action as violent by considering what psychological violence means, and how other nonviolent tactics that exclude psychological violence are insufficient to effect social or political change in contexts of the oppression of Black Americans. The fourth chapter examines Richard Gregg’s book The Power of Nonviolence, which supports the case for the use of nonviolent tactics in the face of physically violent oppression. Maintaining, among other things, that nonviolent tactics promote the well-being of the oppressor and the oppressed and allow for good standing between the groups in the future. The fifth chapter contains an exposition of William James’s work including Principles of Psychology and other essays. Comparisons between James’s theory and King’s practice will be drawn, especially concerning their positions on innate moral feelings of harmony, dissonance, and the moral universe. The sixth chapter will make concluding remarks.

This essay aims to find out if there’s any way to consolidate Martin Luther’s ideas regarding free will set forth in his work On the Bondage of Will with a more modern, libertarian understanding of the free will. This is done to ultimately see if Luther’s teachings on the subject can be harmonized with Alvin Plantingas “free will defence” in regards to the problem of evil or if these two ideas are fully or partly incompatible. I conclude in the end that while Luther’s ideas and the free will defence might seem incompatible at face value, if you look at the purpose behind the free will defence, namely explaining the existence of moral evil in the world despite an omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent creator then Luther’s idea that the will of man is bound to do evil fulfils the same purpose.

No description available.

No description available.

The concept which Martin Luther had of the nature of woman did a great deal to intensify the idea of woman's inferiority in the modern world. Framed by an investigation of the traditional and unique aspects of that concept and speculation about its effect on succeeding generations, a delineation of Luther's view will reveal his contribution to the concept of female inferiority and evil. As a formulator of religious and ethical concepts for modern man, Luther insured the continuance of this idea in the modern world. While it has adapted to changes in society's forms, the whole fabric of Luther's view of the female remains. Though some of his ideas remain as remnants reduced to truisms, the impact which they still have on human relationships and societal structure cannot be taken lightly.