Martin Luther: Ninety-five Theses

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

Nailing a document such as the Ninety-five Theses to the door of Wittenberg Castle Church was not a particularly unusual act in Martin Luther's day. The door served as a kind of billboard, and it was a common way to announce a meeting to discuss matters concerning Christendom and Christianity. It is uncertain whether Luther actually nailed the document to the church door or simply sent it to select bishops, including Albert of Mainz, the German nobleman who took part in the Tetzel scheme for selling indulgences. The document opens with an announcement that for the love of the truth and with a desire to bring truth to light, Doctor Martin Luther, professor of theology, planned to hold a meeting where the points he raised would be discussed. He invited all interested parties to attend or to send their arguments to him via letter to be included in the discussion.

Theses 1–9

Luther first takes up the issue of repentance. He uses the Latin phrase Poenitentiam agite, which is generally translated as simply “repent,” though sometimes it is translated as “do penance.” The distinction was important to Luther, for it pointed to the difference between being truly penitent and simply performing outward acts of penance, such as sacramental penance—that is, receiving the sacrament of penance after confessing to a priest. He argues that true inward repentance consists of self-hatred caused by sin. A crucial thesis is number 5, which states: “The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.” In other words, the pope (and by extension priests) can impose penalties on the faithful only for violation of the “Canons,” that is, canon law or church law. Nor, as Thesis 6 states, can the pope remit guilt except insofar as guilt has been remitted by God. Further, the portions of canon law that pertain to repentance can be imposed only on the living, not on the dead. In sum, Luther is making a clear distinction between the pope and God in matters of repentance and in the applicability of church law to penitents. Ultimately, this view would lead to the Protestant rejection of the Catholic Church's sacrament of penance, that is, confession of sins to a priest.

Theses 10–26

In this group of theses, Luther turns to the theological concept of purgatory. He calls those priests who impose canonical penances on the dying “ignorant and wicked” and characterizes this practice as “tares,” or weeds that are sown in a field of wheat or other grain—that is, an undesirable element. His use of this word is an allusion to Jesus' parable of the wheat and the tares in the Gospel of Matthew 13:24–30. Luther says that canonical penalties used to be imposed before penitents were given absolution (forgiveness) in the sacrament of penance, not after, as a test of their sincerity. Luther maintains that when people die, they are released from all earthly penalties as embodied in canon law. The penalty of purgatory is imposed not by earthly law but by the person's own fear, even despair, brought about by his or her own sinfulness. Purgatory is a process by which souls increase in love and decrease their own fear as they become more assured of their own blessedness. Accordingly, when the pope remits all penalties in purgatory, he can remit only those that he himself has imposed—again, according to earthly or canon law. This line of argument leads to another crucial thesis, number 21: “Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved.” The pope can free souls only from earthly penalties. Luther goes on to argue that if the pope could remit all penalties, only the most perfect could gain entrance to heaven, meaning that most people are deceived by “that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.” The pope does not hold the keys to heaven, but he can intercede, that is, pray for the souls of the deceased.

Theses 27–38

Luther at this point turns specifically to the practice of selling indulgences and, what amounts to the same thing, letters of pardon. He refers to Johann Tetzel's rhyme quoted earlier about the penny jingling or ringing in the coffer, noting that the practice of paying for indulgences is a mark of “avarice” and citing a central doctrine of Protestantism—that “the intercession of the church is in the power of God alone.” As a result of what Luther is laying out here, it can be said that, in general, Protestantism believes in a more personal relationship with God, in contrast to Catholicism, which traditionally saw the church as a necessary mediator between people and God at a time when people in general could not read and, even if they could, had no copy of the Bible to read for themselves. Luther states that no one can know whether people wish to be bought out of purgatory. Pointing to the rarity of true contrition, Luther makes a bold statement in Thesis 32: He says that people who depend on letters of pardon will be “condemned eternally” and that people should be cautious in believing that such letters from the pope will have any effect on a person's salvation. Letters of pardon are ineffective without true contrition; the soul cannot be bought out of purgatory by indulgences and “confessionalia,” another term for letters of pardon. Luther contends that every Christian has a right to remission of guilt and to the blessings of Christ without letters of pardon.

Theses 39–55

A common theme in this group of theses is the deleterious effect of the practice of selling indulgences and letters of pardon. Luther sees an inconsistency in the effort to preach true contrition while selling letters of pardon. True contrition actually loves penalties, but letters of pardon “relax” people and make them hate penalties. In several theses, Luther argues that the performance of good works and acts of charity are preferable to purchasing “apostolic” pardons, or pardons from the pope and the church hierarchy. Money that is spent on indulgences and letters of pardon would be better spent by helping the poor and would be even better spent to meet the needs of one's own family. Indulgences and letters of pardon fail to make people better; instead, they only make them free from penalty, and spending money on them merits only God's “indignation.” Luther is particularly concerned about the possibility that in purchasing indulgences, people will lose their “fear of God.” It leads to a failure to emphasize the word of God in churches, which is far more significant than the effort to sell from the pulpit pardons and remissions from punishment. Luther alludes to his particular quarrel with the pope—that money gained from the selling of indulgences is being used for the church of Saint Peter in Rome at the expense of the German people. He even suggests boldly that it would be better for the pope to sell the church of Saint Peter and give the money to those from whom “hawkers” of indulgences take it.

Theses 56–80

In this group of theses, Luther walks a fine line between condemnation of the pope—and, by extension, the entire church hierarchy—and his recognition of the pope's authority. Indeed, the power of the pope became a key issue in the Protestant Reformation, one of the results of which was the growing belief among the laity that the hierarchy of bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and popes interfered with a person's individual relationship with God. As a result, many Protestant denominations explicitly disavow hierarchies and the mandated forms of worship they prescribe (such as the Catholic mass) in favor of scriptural reading and more personal forms of worship.

Thus, on the one hand, Luther acknowledges the power of the pope in the remission of penalties in certain cases. A person is “accursed” if he speaks against the validity of apostolic pardons. The pope has “graces” at his disposal, including the Gospel and gifts of healing. But while acknowledging the authority of the pope, Luther condemns practices that the pope condones and that lead to corruption, greed, and false doctrine. He discusses the “treasures” of the church, arguing that the treasures consist of the keys of the church and the holy Gospel, not of material goods. Luther turns ironic when he says that not enough clerics recognize this supremacy of the Gospel, for the Gospel makes the last first and the first last, an allusion to Matthew 20:16: “So the last shall be first, and the first last.” In other words, the emphasis on material things rather than the Gospel of Jesus inverts priorities and turns the Gospel into a tool used as a net to catch riches from men—again a biblical allusion, this time to Matthew 4:19 and Mark 1:17, where Jesus invites his apostles to follow him and be fishers of men. The core of Luther's view is contained in Thesis 72: “But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!”

Theses 81–95

Much of the remainder of the document is taken up with questions that Luther believes the laity would put to church authorities. If the pope has the power to remit time in purgatory through the sale of indulgences, why does he not simply empty purgatory? Why does the practice of saying masses for the dead at the time of their death and on anniversaries of their death have to continue if indulgences can be purchased? Why do God and the pope allow sinners to buy others' way out of purgatory? Why does not the pope use his own riches to build his church in Rome? Why does the pope suspend pardons and indulgences that have not been paid for? Luther then goes on to call for discussion of these matters, believing that the church should answer these questions. He concludes by urging the faithful to “be diligent in following Christ,” confident that they can overcome tribulations and enter heaven.