INTRODUCTION
Solu sexu differet
Luther surmised that men and women differ “only in sex.”a Even with this understatement, Luther had an instinctive appreciation of the manifold reality of sex/gender differences.1 This was an area of life that he first observed from his family of origin or friends’ lives and when ministering to men and women in Wittenberg, until he finally learned from his own personal life through his marriage to Katharina von Bora.2 His personal marital relationship and family life became an invaluable source for him on gender relations even though his marriage shocked some of his colleagues and made him the object of spiteful scorn from his Catholic opponents.3 The bottom line “truth” of the matter for him, however, was to be found in the Bible.b In this respect, Luther’s sola scriptura principle is reflected in his lectures on Genesis, which are clearly interpreted from a profound christological and soteriological perspective.
Adam and Eve in Paradise (1533) by Lucas Cranach the Elder (1472–1553)
A biblical scholar by trade,c Luther returned to the complex Genesis chapters 1–3 and joined the long line of interpreters whose impact in the West for understanding sex/gender has been palpable.d His conclusions on gendered human life culminated in his last lectures on the book of Genesis, spanning nearly ten years (1535–1545). Luther intended to replace the traditional picture of humanity, which he found too much derived from Greek philosophy—reflected in his repeated critique of Aristotle—with a biblically derived picture. This comes to the fore when Luther takes it for granted that “male and female” in Genesis 1:27 connects to the image of God, something that was far from always the case in the tradition before him.e Standing between two worlds and unable to leave behind the tradition he has inherited, he finds Augustine of Hippo (354–430) helpful4 as he sets out to wrestle with this stressful material. Yet, Luther abandons allegorical interpretation of Augustine as a proper way to deal with the image of God in woman, as also the doublecreation schemes of several of the church fathers.f
Diptych with the portraits of Martin Luther and his wife, Katharina von Bora (c. 1529), by artist Lucas Cranach the Elder.
We know, e.g., from Luther’s will that he wanted Katharina to inherit their property and become guardian of their children (WA Br 9:574–76), even if this was against the Saxon laws at the time, and modifications had to be made to Luther’s will. Luther’s theological arguments on the equality of women and his personal aspirations to that direction fundamentally clashed with the basic gender norms and ideologies of his time.
Here Luther denounces monastic life as a status perfectionis: as a form of contempt for life and the created world it is contrary to the common life of ordinary people who live in real obedience to God’s commandments.
In the few verses, Gen. 1:26—2:3 and Gen. 2:21-25, Luther covers a significant space of theological anthropological territory. He ruminates on the origins and original nature of human beings as men and women. The framework for Luther’s deliberation on gender and sex is in his fascination with—and gratitude for—the mystery of creation. Of all the miracles of life, the bringing forth of new human life is in a category of its own. Procreation and the natural conditions for each human birth speak to Luther of the grandness and genius of God’s creation. Elsewhere, Luther praises the common life with children and wife, where even the washing of smelly diapers is as an expression of God’s creation.5
Luther maintains the Augustinian understanding of human beings’ inability to know themselves or God in creation as an inherited condition. Human lives are complicated with the socalled original sin, which Luther, however, considers as a relational rather than an ontological burden. In light of how life was in Paradise, Luther deems that human beings’ passions and love for one another have become compromised, while still bearing the original design for human happiness that God intended in our relationships with God and one another. Due to sin, sexual desire and even nudity have become tainted with unnecessary shame. In a benign debate on the reading of Genesis 2 with the ancient and medieval teachers of nature, Luther explains the building of a woman from Adam’s rib as an equal while being a notably different creature who as God’s image has a special vocation to rule the household and to be the nest for her husband.6
Luther’s depiction includes his marriage charter (that is, his rationale for marriage), his tentative deliberation on the issue of divorce, and his thoughts on celibacy, his old battle call.7 As with his own writings dealing with the interpretation of the Old Testament, these lectures mirror the ongoing discussions with Jewish theology and ideology. Thus, commenting on Gen. 1:26, Luther discusses the God concept, arguing for the Trinitarian God from his knowledge of the Hebrew Elohim and the phrase “Let Us make” in the plural against the fundamental monotheism of Judaism and Islam.8 Likewise, commenting on Genesis 1:27, he argues for the equal and independent status of the female sex as imago Dei from the textual basis, while he distances himself from what he labels Talmudic ideas and also from Aristotle’s and other “Gentile” pejorative perceptions of the female sex as not divinely created. Amidst these larger themes, Luther offers reflection on ever-important theological-anthropological topics, such as the balance between human life and nature’s products, and the character of sleep, death, and resurrection.
A goldmine for Luther’s theology from multiple angles, these lectures and how they were recorded come with peculiar challenges for the reader.
The Fragmented Texts
The first set of Genesis lecturesg occurred between 1 and 18 June 1535, during which Luther covered Gen. 1:1—3:14. The lectures were soon interrupted due to a sudden onset of plague in July, as recorded by Luther’s Wittenberg associate, Veit Dietrich.9
The lectures, held in Latin for an academic (and male) audience and not in the vernacular for the open public, commenced again on 25 January 1536, starting with Gen. 3:15, and by the fall of 1536 he had reached Genesis, chapter 9.h Lecturing continued,10 with interruptions, until 1545.i
Etching of Veit Dietrich.
The published copies of lectures come to us with text-historical problems: with no certainty of the chronology or progress, the authenticity of Luther’s voice as the author has been debated, and even contested. From these precious lectures not even raw scribbles from Luther himself survive; the printed lectures rely on an amalgamation of edited listeners’ notes.11
The reader can, as has been noted, detect editors’ additions in the form of admonitions to the “reader,”12 anachronistic contextual notes from multiple editors’ pens, and suspiciously detailed citations from classical authors.j Luther at first refused to have his lectures published, as he found them “tumultuous and imperfect.” Only after numerous queries did he finally accept, and then without ever going through the material, even though he wrote the foreword to the publication of the first eleven chapters in January 1544.k Therefore, whether any of Luther’s theological positions became altered in the process of recording and transmitting the lectures remains uncertain.
Considering that Luther’s theology matured over the years, straightforward comparisons with the “young” Luther would hardly provide scientific evidence regarding the authorship. All things considered, a reader seeking to understand Luther’s fundamental theolog...
