the mystical theology of valentin weigel - DataSpace at Princeton ...

the rest of the Bible without danger of misinterpretation. 109 As readers, however, human
beings are notoriously fractious, and although many agreed that Luther had found the true
interpretation of Scripture, others did not. Luther’s early disputations were with those
who defended papal authority, but within a few decades, even Luther’s followers began
disagreeing with one another about their interpretations of the Bible, or even about their
interpretation of Luther’s interpretation of the Bible. 110 Weigel would have encountered
this controversy about the true meaning of Scripture when he studied theology in
Wittenberg, Luther’s university, and it should be noted that the conflicts Weigel
witnessed were all fought amongst Lutherans, all of whom would have shared Luther’s
commitment to Scripture as the only true authority in matters of doctrine.
Weigel was acutely aware that the thorny question of biblical interpretation
proved an obstacle to moral behaviour for Christians. In his treatise Der güldene Griff,
Weigel describes an agonizing time before he came to true faith, where he followed his
109 A succinct formulation is found in Luther’s preface to his translation of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans:
“Diese Epistel ist das rechte Heubtstück des newen Testaments, und das allerlauterste Euangelium, Welche
wol wirdig und werd ist, das sie ein Christen mensch nicht allein von wort zu wort auswendig wisse,
sondern teglich damit umbgehe, als mit teglichem brot der Seelen, Denn sie niemer kan zu viel und zu wol
gelesen oder betrachtet werden, und je mehr sie gehandelt wird, je köstlicher sie wird, und bas schmecket.”
WA7, 3:1-10. He concludes by remarking: “Also finden wir in dieser Epistel auffs allerreichlichste, was ein
Christen wissen sol...Dazu das alles mit Schrifften trefflich gegründet, mit Exempeln sein selbs und der
Propheten beweiset, das nichts mehr hie zu wundschen ist. Darumb es auch scheinet, als habe S. Paulus in
dieser Epistel wollen ein mal in die kürtze verfassen, die gantze Christliche und Euangelische lere, und
einen Eingang bereiten in das gantz alte Testament. Denn on zweiuel, wer diese Epistel wol im hertzen hat,
der hat des alten Testaments liecht und krafft bey sich.” WA7, 27:15-25.
110 A classic example is the division between the Philippists (who followed Philipp Melanchthon) and the
so-called Gnesio-Lutherans (also called Flacians, after their chief spokesperson Matthias Flacius): their
party were true Lutherans, who claimed to best represent Luther’s position, even after Luther’s death (in
1546) meant that he could no longer step in to arbitrate this dispute. Robert Kolb, "Dynamics of Party
Conflict in the Saxon Late Reformation: Gnesio-Lutherans vs. Philippists," Journal of Modern History 49,
no. 3 (1977): 1289-1305. Reprinted in Robert Kolb, Luther’s Heirs Define His Legacy (Aldershot:
Variorum, 1996), 1-17. Diarmaid Macculloch cites two rival editions of Luther’s collected works (the first
by the university in Wittenberg, the second produced by the one in Jena) as a tidy metaphor for Luther’s
divided legacy: “the two sets of weighty volumes glaring at each other aross the floor of the Frankfurt Book
Fair symbolized the contested legacy of Luther’s theology, and the uncertain future of Lutheranism as a
body of doctrine.” Diarmaid MacCulloch, Reformation: Europe's House Divided, 1490-1700 (London:
Allen Lane, 2003), 347. MacCulloch also provides a good overview of the complicated rivalries over
Luther’s legacy in that same volume, 347-353.
40