On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church

by Martin Luther, ALBERT T. W. STEINHAEUSER (Translator)

To begin. I must deny that there are seven Sacraments, and must lay it down, for the time being, that there are only three, baptism, penance, and the bread, and that by the Court of Rome all these have been brought into miserable bondage, and the Church despoiled of all her liberty. And yet, if I were to speak according to the usage of Scripture, I should hold that there was only one sacrament, and three sacramental signs. I shall speak on this point more at length at the proper time; but now I speak of the sacrament of the bread, the first of all sacraments...

Genres: Theology, Religion, Christian, Christianity, Nonfiction, History, Classics

98 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1520

About the author

Martin Luther (1483-1546) was a German monk, theologian, university professor and church reformer whose ideas inspired the Protestant Reformation and changed the course of Western civilization.

Luther's theology challenged the authority of the papacy by holding that the Bible is the only infallible source of religious authority and that all baptized Christians under Jesus are a spiritual priesthood. According to Luther, salvation was a free gift of God, received only by true repentance and faith in Jesus as the Messiah, a faith given by God and unmediated by the church.

Luther's confrontation with Charles V at the Diet of Worms over freedom of conscience in 1521 and his refusal to submit to the authority of the Emperor resulted in his being declared an outlaw of the state as he had been excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church. Because of the perceived unity of the medieval Church with the secular rulers of western Europe, the widespread acceptance of Luther's doctrines and popular vindication of his thinking on individual liberties were both phenomenal and unprecedented.

His translation of the Bible into the vernacular, making it more accessible to ordinary people, had a tremendous political impact on the church and on German culture. It furthered the development of a standard version of the German language, added several principles to the art of translation, and influenced the translation of the English King James Bible. His hymns inspired the development of congregational singing within Christianity. His marriage to Katharina von Bora set a model for the practice of clerical marriage within Protestantism.

Much scholarly debate has concentrated on Luther's writings about the Jews. His statements that Jews' homes should be destroyed, their synagogues burned, money confiscated and liberty curtailed were revived and used in propaganda by the Nazis in 1933–45. As a result of this and his revolutionary theological views, his legacy remains controversial.

Reviews

[Brother Brandon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Luther's take on the sacraments. Very good.

[Andrew Gates · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this book, Luther talks about the sacraments. He refutes that there are seven, but spends most of his time rebutting Rome regarding baptism and the Lord's Supper as well as portraying a positive picture of these two sacraments. The major insight from this book is the centrality of God's promise in the sacraments (40-66). He also has some helpful thoughts on confession that would affect how we think about introspection and accountability (87-92).

[Scott Harris · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the second edition of this book that I've read and I find that it is an interesting read both theologically and historically. Luther's perspective, like so many theologians throughout history, is grossly misrepresented in common reference and understanding. He was a bright, passionate, well-reasoned individual who grew into his perspective on the sacraments shown here. His vitriolic writing, which is abrasive for modern readers, is typical of his contemporaries engaged in these written debates and reflections.

[John Hatley · Rating 4 out of 5]

The more I read of Martin Luther, the more I like him, both as a theologian and as a person. He was truly a remarkable man.

[Brit · Rating 5 out of 5]

Luther is easy to read and reading his writing gives a better understanding of both his times, the church environment and his beliefs and teachings.

[Joshua Pearsall · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was definitely entertaining, Luther's rhetorical skills do make for good reads. Agree or not with his theology the book presents his earlier thoughts, is well written, and he makes his cases strongly. If you want to understand early Luther, it's worth a read.

[Zack Hudson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Of all the reformers, I’ve found Luther the most readable. He is quite repetitive, but his repetition makes for a stronger thesis. In this little book, he sets out to do a couple things: to show that the pope has taken captive the sacraments instituted by Christ and thereby bound the Church, and to propose a proper sacramentology to replace papist superstition.
The true sacraments consist of a promise and sign (or testament and sacrament), and are established by divine institution, with divine promise. The sacraments are made effective to the Christian only as they are received by faith, and their proper function is to strengthen the faith of the participants and bear witness to the Word accompanying the sign.
Don’t expect anything like a point of dogmatics here. Luther is moreso concerned to rip the sacraments from papal hands and return them to the laity, to be received in faith, than to make a systematic statement of doctrine. His position on baptism is a bit confusing for this reason.
Luther’s a bit of a bully, but also kind. His care is for the layman, and he will gladly throw some (hilarious) jabs at the deceivers whilst rushing to the defense of the deceived. Let this be a lesson to you, youngsters: good theology is kind, but not necessarily polite.
Sehr gut!

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings about this book or rather about Luther. On the one hand, Luther has had some important impact on Protestant exegesis that should be reconsidered, he has one drum to beat in every book he writes, and, as he admitted, his style only reflected him in his On the Bondage of the Will.

On the positive side, Luther was no gnostic who saw the importance of the sacraments that we have lost, and even when firing off half his cylinders, Luther still could teach Christians how to verbally punch someone. Thank God for this passionate, irritable, devoted man who loved God and infected Europe with that love.

[Mark Nenadov]

A treatise Luther wrote a few months after he was excommunicated. In it he critiques the Roman Catholic view of the sacraments.

[Cecily · Rating 2 out of 5]

Hmmm... Dit laat me mijn ideeën wel nog eens goed overdenken.

[Dylan Kochan · Rating 2 out of 5]

"To begin with, I must deny that there are seven sacraments, and for the present maintain
that there are but three: baptism, penance, and the bread." - Luther

I'm not the biggest fan of Martin Luther, and I think better Protestant thinkers have evolved from the Protestant tradition. (As a Catholic) I like reading those thinkers and their (more fair) critiques of Catholicism more than most of Luther's stuff. Of course, this specific treatise likely has a political motivation, so that explains its "color" and lofty rhetoric.

But still, when I read Luther (or his debates), I am not very impressed. He's bombastic, loud, and rude, and many times he ventures way beyond his element (he engages in metaphysics to his detriment) or rambles in a way that makes reading difficult.

Yet Luther is important - no ESSENTIAL - for Catholics to read in order to understand how the Protestant Revolution changed everything, and why the the faithful were so enraged at the time. This is bound to better our witness to the world. (It is also bound to help elucidate the complex political dynamics that Protestantism became involved in).

Regarding this treatise specifically, the rambling nature of Luther's arguments showcase his chief difficulty: Luther was grappling ... alone ... to build a new tradition from the ground up, and at one point even asked his reader in the treatise to disregard ALL the writings of the Church Fathers about a certain subject for his (Luther's) singular interpretation. What a burden he takes on (one that he did not meet in my view!).

Here's part of the quote: "What shall we say then of the canon of the mass and the patristic authorities? First of all, I would answer: If there were nothing at all to be said against them, it would be safer to reject them all than admit that the mass is a work or a sacrifice . . . . [speaking about a view pertaining to the mass, which he seems to misunderstand that the mass only works if Christ first gives His body to us, which is not a work of man] - Luther in his section about "Bread"). This is a shamelessly lazy way to get rid of HUGE pieces of evidence/arguments against your position. I commend anyone to read that part of Luther's argument, it is not well done. He simply moves on without addressing this huge historical problem.

Lastly, I could not help thinking: would Luther even be recognized by most American Protestant evangelicals today?

In his sacrament of "Bread," he calls for the abandonment of transubstantiation for consubstantiation, where the both the accidents, substance of the bread AND the accidents, substance of Christ's body are present along with the bread (for Catholics, the accidents of the bread remain and substance changes to Christ). But notice, the substance of Christ is still there for Luther! Christ is present in the Lord's Supper, and it is not a mere symbol (as argued by Zwingli). Arguably, Luther tweaks transubstantiation (I, of course, contend he transmogrified it) in a manner that still maintains a level of fidelity to Catholic modes of thought.

In his Baptism comments, he seems to preserve its regenerative effect, even affirming infant baptism! And he expresses his ignorance on a partial birth baptism of an infant. Once again, he seems to preserve and tweak the modes of thought that come before him.

In his Penance section, he acknowledges the necessity for confession TO ANOTHER CHRISTIAN! And he even argues that each individual Christian has the power of absolution. Notice, he's implicitly admitting that ABSOLUTION is a legitimate thing. (N.B. he admits that the specific "Private Confession" employed in that time cannot be proved by Scripture alone, yet he still believes confession is from the Scriptures)! I rarely hear these types of argument spoken by my Protestant brothers and sisters. But Luther is right: The Bible clearly tells us to confess our sins to one another (James 5:16).

So, I wonder how many American Protestants would recognize Luther's views . . . and how many would lament at how "Catholic" his views sound. Ultimately, the non-recognizability of Luther hints at a problem emanating from the Revolution and its ever-revolving character - a problem that I save for the Church Historians to tease out.

For what it's worth, I think Luther was attempting something that he could not successfully execute and that is why he slowly abandons Catholic teaching to his later more explicitly non-Catholic views. Luther was trying to build a new church with nothing but his personal wisdom, motivation, and shrewdness in choosing which historical traditions to preserve. Notice, this is NOT a reformation (He's not trying to make bad Catholics into better Catholics), this is a complete change/revolution of the Church where one seeks to substantially (excuse the pun) destroy or abandon a past institution to create a better one - a reformation seeks fidelity to the former institution for its growth and healing.

A revolution abandons the former for the perceived better and its promises.

[Tim · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have always been fascinated by the struggle of Martin Luther, but I have not really read much of his writings. I am slowly working on changing this missing portion of my reading diet and was pleased to pick up a copy of "The Babylonian Captivity of the Church" recently at a Half-Price Book.
This is a perfect piece for anyone who wants to delve into Luther's opus as it comes very early in his Reformation career (written only three years after his "Ninety-Five Theses"). I enjoyed hearing the disputatious Luther, yet consistently displaying a pastor's heart.
Obviously as a Baptist I will have many problems with his theological understandings, but I can still appreciate his place in history as he championed "sola scriptura, sola gratia, sola fide, sola Christos, sola Deo gloria."
At times, Luther even started to sound like a proto-Baptist...
In the "Babylonian Captivity," Luther tears down the sacramental system of the medieval Catholic Church, and shows he only accepts two of the seven (as a Baptist, I talk of ordinances instead of sacraments, an understanding that Luther and I would debate quite extensively). Yet, in his work on baptism, I was shocked to hear him say, "For this reason, I would have those who are to be baptized completely immersed in the water, as the word says and as the mystery indicates (p. 71)." Yes!
He still teaches "infant baptism" and dismisses the fact that little ones cannot make a profession of faith for themselves: "some might cite the baptism of infants who do not comprehend the promise of God and cannot have the faith of baptism; so that therefore either faith is not necessary or else infant baptism is without effect [that's right!!!]...infants are aided by the faith of others namely, those who bring them for baptism (p. 76)." Yet he was not consistent in this view of the efficacy of the "faith of others."
When dismissing requiem and memorial masses, Luther states that, "it is a manifest and wicked error to offer or apply the Mass for sins, for satisfactions, for the dead, or for any needs whatsoever of one's own or of others...the Mass is a divine promise, which can benefit no one, be applied to no one, intercede for no one, and be communicated to no one, except only to one who believes with a faith of one's own (pp. 50-51)."
Ah, if only Luther had continued with this natural train of theology...
Well, he didn't, but I believe that all students of Church history, including Baptists, will find this a worthwhile read. It helps to give an understanding of the principles over which the Reformation began and continues today. Sola Deo Gloria!

[Reese Walling · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short, yet full treatise on the abuses and idolatrous nature of Roman Catholicism under the papal see, specifically in it's "taking captive" the laymen with its withholding true sacraments of grace, while imposing demands through false sacraments. I'll sum up the treatise with two quotes: "I am attacking a difficult matter, an abuse perhaps impossible to uproot, since through century-long custom and the common consent of men it has become so firmly entrenched that it would be necessary to abolish most of the books now in vogue, and to alter almost the entire external form of the churches and introduce, or rather reintroduce, a totally different kind of ceremonies. But my Christ lives, and we must be careful to give more heed to the Word of God than to all the thoughts of men and of angels. I will perform the duties of my office and bring to light the facts in the case. As I have received the truth freely [Matt. 10:8], I will impart it without malice. For the rest let every man look to his own salvation; I will do my part faithfully so that no one may be able to cast on me the blame for his lack of faith and his ignorance of the truth when we appear before the judgment seat of Christ." "O pontiffs worthy of this venerable sacrament of ordination! O princes, not of the catholic churches, but of the synagogues of Satan [Rev. 2:9] and of darkness itself! I would cry out with Isaiah [Isa. 28:14], “You scoffers, who rule this people in Jerusalem”; and with Amos 6 [:1], “Woe to those who are at ease in Zion, and to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria, the notable men of the first of the nations, that go in with state into the house of Israel, etc!” O the disgrace that these monstrous priests bring upon the church of God! Where are there any bishops or priests who even know the gospel, not to speak of preaching it?"

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

3/5 — I softly recommend this book.
I think I was expecting something different, which may have hindered the way I read it. It was a recommended read from Ligonier Ministries under Solus Christus, but I would say this work fits better under Sola Fide.

Luther tackles Rome’s misuse of the sacraments in this work. At the time of writing, he held to a three-sacrament view, while Rome had (and still has) seven.

This book requires some historical background—some of which I lacked, even with Lawrence Clayton’s introduction—making certain sections a bit inaccessible.
Nothing in this work particularly moved me or compelled me to think more deeply on the subject.

I could hardly recommend this book to anyone other than seminary students or those interested in church history. You get the same Luther—passionate, sharp, and frustrated with Rome.

[James Ruley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Luther’s “On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church” addresses the church’s errors insofar as they relate to the sacraments. Luther uses Scripture to assert that baptism and the Lord’s Supper are the only sacraments, and that the remaining sacraments—penance, marriage, ordination, confirmation, and extreme unction—are merely promises of God, not sacraments. He also addresses abuses in the church in an effort to correct an improper use of the sacraments.

[Ronnie Nichols · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bold

I do not agree with everything Martin Luther teaches, but certainly agree with his critique of Rome and the Papists. One cannot help to be inspired by a man who was bold enough to stand against “Church” and call them out on their anti Christian and unbiblical teachings and pomp. This is an excellent book and there are several free electronic editions available.

[Rod Innis · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was written early in the time of the Reformation when the doctrine of Luther was in its beginning stages. As a result, there are a lot of erroneous ideas and quite a lot of admitting that he just didn’t know about a number of issues. However, I enjoyed reading it and seeing the early Luther.

[Ole Jørgen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Filled with irony and personal attacks against the Pope, this book gives an polemical introduction to how the teaching of the sacraments was formed in the Lutheran church. Luther does develop the doctrine further through his reformatory career, but this is the beginning. It’s funny how he starts off with three sacraments but ends up with two.

[Sandra Maddox · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone should read this book.

I have believed in God since the age of 4 and have done many Bilble studies. This book opens up God's grace for us as ordained by God in The Bible. A must read.

[Matthew C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

The force of Luther's words are powerful to this day. He pulls no punches in his invectives against the corruptions and backslidings of the medieval church. Especially poignant were his words against the abuses of the sacraments and of clericalism.

[Brandon Larson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding translation and annotation

[Nick Kinsella · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tbh a good takedown of Thomism, "natural law" and the Catholic view of the Mass.

[Valerie R · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not the most dry, though...It's LUTHER! :D
Excellent points, all. (also Luther)

[Lyndon]

Challenging, thought-provoking but not easy reading.

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 5 out of 5]

En genomgång av sakramenten. Jag kan inte säga att Luther övertygar mig helt och hållet, men det är en välgjord text.

[Michael Deschenes · Rating 4 out of 5]

The words he said are harsh but necessary. I’m not sure I would recommend to most readers due to the changes in context, but I am grateful for his impact on history.

[Jonathan Oehlenschläger · Rating 4 out of 5]

Still going strong

[Lee Irons · Rating 5 out of 5]

Luther helpful distinguishes three aspects of the sacraments: (1) God’s word of promise, (2) the outward and visible sign of that promise, and (3) the faith by which the promise is received. All three must be present for the sacraments to be genuine and effective. Several of Rome’s sacraments fail to qualify as true sacraments because they lack one or more of these elements, e.g., God has nowhere attached a promise of grace to marriage. And in the case of the Lord’s Supper, Rome has added such a heap of traditions that the central thing (the promise) has been buried and the sacrament has been turned into a good work that we offer to God, rather than a “testament” from God given to evoke and strengthen our faith. Love this treatise by Luther!

[Noula · Rating 1 out of 5]

It’s interesting to read about the life of Martin Luther. I never understood why Evangelicals and Baptist uphold him as a saint. After talking this book over with a friend, she told me in the end that Martin felt strongly that he was wrong of splitting the church.

[Jay Miklovic · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book Martin Luther takes aim at the Roman Catholic Church's understanding of the sacraments in the 1500's.

A good portion of the beginning of this book was devoted to refuting the Catholic notion of the time that only clergy could partake of the cup, while both laity and clergy could partake of the bread. Luther attacks the Catholic understanding of the Mass, but it is important to note that he does not go so far as many protestants would have liked him to, in denying the real presence of Christ in the sacrament. If one wants to truly understand Luther's Theology of the Lord's Supper this book would be a great place to start.

Luther moves on from the Lord's Supper to offer commentary on Baptism, which again he differs greatly from the Catholic Church on, but again he does not go so far as many protestants would have liked him to. In reading this little book I, for the first time have begun to really understand the Lutheran teaching on baptism. Again, this little book would be a good place great place to start if you want a brief overview of the Lutheran understanding of baptism.

From there Luther speaks of the sacrament of penance, or Confession and Absolution. Later in the book Luther affirms that this sacrament does not fit the definition of a Sacrament, but he does affirm that Absolution is a definite means of grace and its function is in some sense sacramental, though it lacks a tangible feature (ie water, bread or wine) that would truly make it sacrament.

The last half of the book simply blasts the 4 other sacraments of the Catholic Church as not being at all sacramental.

This was a really good read, and can be gone through pretty quickly, and whether you agree or disagree with Luther, this book does give a concise view of Luther's theology of the sacraments, from the mouth of Luther himself.