Theological Origins of Modernity

108 chapter four
its own theology. He admits as much already in 1520, claiming that it is not
a question of the authorities but of arguments and fi rm assertions. “Th at is
why I contradict even my own school of Occamists who follow the modern
way, which I have absorbed completely.” 26 Nominalism held that God
was supremely free and could consequently be merciless in his wrath and
that human beings had only enough free will to welcome God into their
lives. Luther’s recognition that God’s righteousness was not an external
judgment, but the righteousness or justifi cation that he gave to human
beings, reconfi gured the supreme force in the universe into a benign being.
27 Luther thus does not deny divine omnipotence—indeed he magnifi
es it—but suggests that the awesome power of his God (and the terror it
generates) is a blessing because it acts in and through human beings and is
the basis of their salvation.
luther and the reformation
For all of its profundity, Luther’s insight would probably have remained
unknown to us except for the intersection of Luther’s personal crisis and
the spiritual and political crisis of his time. Th is conjunction produced the
Reformation.
Th e central purpose of religious practice for both Luther and the church
was salvation, but they disagreed about how it was to be obtained. According
to the church, salvation was wrought by divine grace, but behind such
grace lay divine justice and divine reason. God thus saved those who merited
salvation by their good works and true repentance. Th e church played
a crucial role in evaluating the sinfulness of human actions and in assigning
earthly penance. From an early period, however, the church had found
it diffi cult to convince many newly converted Christians (especially among
the most powerful) to perform penitential acts and as a result had come to
accept a fi nancial payment in lieu of actual service. Th is was the origin of
the idea of an indulgence. Th e practice of selling indulgences, however,
soon became a dependable source of revenue. Moreover, church authorities
began to claim that the church was the repository of all the forgiveness
earned by the suff ering of the martyrs who had fallen on behalf of Christ
and that the church had the right to sell this forgiveness to release sinners
or their dead relatives from time they would otherwise have to serve in
purgatory. In this way, the questionable practice of accepting gold in lieu
of penitential acts in this world became the corrupt practice of accepting
gold and promising God’s forgiveness for the sins of both the living and
the dead. Th e papacy authorized the sale of indulgences for a variety of