Luther: We Have To Pay for the Disasters of My Preaching

Here's another obscure Luther quote from a Roman Catholic apologist:

"Who would have wanted to begin preaching, had we known beforehand that so much disaster, riotousness, scandal, sacrilege, ingratitude [i.e., towards himself], and wickedness were to follow. But now . . . we have to pay for it." (Johannes Janssen, History of the German People From the Close of the Middle Ages, 16 volumes, translated by A.M. Christie, St. Louis: B. Herder, 1910 [orig. 1891], XVI, 13; from EA, vol. 50, 74; in 1538. "EA" = Erlangen Ausgabe edition of Luther's Works [Werke] in German, 1868, 67 volumes), Denifle, ibid., 26.

I found about half a dozen versions of this quote as well, mostly from Roman Catholic sources. For instance, here's a version from Henry O'Connor:

In 1538, more than twenty years after the beginning of the Reformation, Luther dwells on the same thought: "Who would have begun to preach, if we had known beforehand that so much unhappiness, tumult, scandal, blasphemy, ingratitude, and wickedness would have been the result?" [source]

The Roman Catholic apologist in question uses this quote three different ways. First, he uses it as an example of "The Agony of Luther" over "the State of Early Protestantism." Second, that during the Reformation "Catholics were no more ignorant or impious or wicked than, for example, Lutherans, according to the descriptions of Luther himself." Third, he uses it to prove "Luther, in later years, lamented often about the actual course of his 'Reformation' in Germany, thus perhaps revealing a sense of failure and guilt."

Sometimes I simply can't find the context for a quote. Well, at least I'm looking for it. People like the Roman Catholic apologist cited above often don't even bother to make sure the quote being used proves the point being made when it's place back in context. It's like magic: without a context, the quote can be made to prove three different disparaging things. All the documentation given serves as a smokescreen for the fact that the author has no idea what the actual context says. But it looks impressive, doesn't it? He mentions what "EA" means, and gives the number of volumes is the German set. In this blog entry, I'll show that even without having a context to check, the Roman apologist probably got this quote wrong as well.

The Source
I'm not sure exactly which secondary source is being used, or if he simply made his own quote based on a few different sources.

He cites Heinrich Denifle's Luther and Lutherdom. Denifle states:

The condition was indeed such that, as early as 1527,Luther expressed a doubt whether he would have begun, had he foreseen all the great scandals and disorders." "Yes, who would have wanted to begin preaching, "said he eleven years later, "had we known beforehand that so much misfortune, factiousness, scandal, calumny, ingratitude and wickedness were to follow. But now that we are in it, we have to pay for it."

The Roman Catholic apologist's quote doesn't quite match up. When comparing it to Denifle, note that the Catholic apologist inserted the two words "towards himself." That is, without a context, he knew that the "ingratitude" mentioned was directed toward Luther. That's indeed possible, but without a context... who knows? Luther could've meant ingratitude toward the Gospel, or ingratitude toward each other, or ingratitude toward God. The Catholic apologist also left out the words, "that we are in it." Why? I have no idea.

The Context?
He also cited Johannes Janssen's History of the German People From the Close of the Middle Ages Volume 16, and his quote doesn't quite match up to this either. While this is also a source for polemic negative caricatures, it actually proved to be a helpful guide to interpreting the quote. Janssen provides a longer quote, stating:

While Luther speaks here of the anarchy and demoralisation as transitory and accidental, he is forced in other places to confess that: 'Had I foreseen all this abomination, I should never have begun to teach the evangel.' 'Who indeed would have set about to preach,' he said in 1538, 'had he known beforehand that so much disaster, riotousness, offence, sacrilege, ingratitude, wickedness, would be the result? But now we are in the midst of it, we must go through with it, and recognise that it is not man's strength and doing but the Holy Spirit Himself that can help us through; or else we shall not be fit people for the work.' [Dollinger, i. 304-305]

One interesting difference between Denifle's rendering and Janssen's is "we have to pay for it" versus "we must go through with it." The former could suggest regret and punishment, while the later suggests weathering a necessary storm. Which is correct? I can't know for sure, but with Janssen's extended quote, his translations appears to make more sense. Denifle's quote though does work better as propaganda, left as it is.

Interpretation
I think one thing is very obvious from Janssen's extended quote: the points that the Roman apologist extracts from it are spurious. Luther wasn't in agony, nor is it proved he meant to describe those true believers who embraced the Gospel, nor does the quote prove Luther had a sense of failure and guilt. As I've written before, Luther expected the Gospel to incite the activity of the Devil, particularly among those who don't embrace it. He expected the Gospel to cause division and trouble, and to infuriate the world against the true church. What should one do when facing such trouble? Regret preaching the Gospel? Countless statements from Luther could be provided proving Luther never regretted the Gospel, or proclaiming the Gospel. Luther also doesn't view the categories that Roman Catholic apologists suggest. That is, it wasn't for Luther: Roman Catholic vs. Protestant. It was: those who embrace the Gospel by faith alone, and those who do not. It was the true church versus the Devil's world.

As this quote suggests, the proper course of action when a preacher of the Gospel finds oneself in midst of tumult: "go through with it, and recognise that it is not man's strength and doing but the Holy Spirit Himself that can help us through; or else we shall not be fit people for the work." Who would want to preach the Gospel if they knew beforehand of all the trouble it was bring into one's life? Probably no one. But as the quote suggests, The Holy Spirit is able to see one through, as he did with the early apostles, who likewise faced dire circumstances brought on by the Gospel. The Holy Spirit makes one fit for such work.

Documentation
While I didn't find the context for this quote, it's actually a good possibility there isn't one. The reason: the quote appears to be from the Table Talk. I found it being cited by Roman Catholic writer Hartmann Grisar:

Who would have started preaching," he says in the same year, oppressed by such experiences, "had he known beforehand that such misfortune, fanatism, scandal, blasphemy, ingratitude and wickedness would be the sequel ? "To live any longer he had not the slightest wish now that no peace was to be hoped for from the fanatics." [source]

Grisar say's it's from a Lauterbach Table Talk. Keep in mind, Luther didn't write the Table Talk. They are recollections of what Luther said as recorded by his friends. Sometimes a historical context is given, sometimes it isn't. Sometimes an actual context is given, sometimes it isn't. As Grisar points out elsewhere, "Of course, it must not be overlooked that the Table Talks are ephemeral—‘children of the moment.’ " That is, one is not reading a theological treatise or exposition.

What is interesting is Grisar used this quote to document some of Luther's depression towards the state of the world. That is, Grisar's interpretation is in conflict with the Catholic apologist. The Catholic apologist uses the quote more or less as a description of Luther's despondency over Protestantism. Grisar though uses it over Luther despondency toward the world.