2017: The Quincentennial Celebration of the Reformation in an Age of Secularization and Religious Pluralism • Hartmut Lehmann 79

Theology Update

2017: The Quincentennial

Celebration of the Reformation in
an Age of Secularization and
Religious Pluralism
By Hartmut Lehmann
Abstract: In the last days of October 1517 Martin Luther finished a series of theological theses in
which he argued that selling indulgences was theologically wrong; in fact, untenable. Protestants consider
Luther’s initiative the beginning of the Reformation. But how should we celebrate the memory of these
events that took place 500 years ago? What is the lasting value of Luther’s message in our time, in an
age of secularization and religious pluralism?

Key Terms: Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther’s political legacy, quincentenary of the Reformation

Against Indulgences a distinct statement. On October 31 he attached

these theses to letters that he addressed to his
ecclesiastical superiors, the archbishop of Mainz
Albrecht and his local bishop, and asked that they
In the last days of October 1517 Martin Luther,
should stop Tetzel’s dangerous activities.
Augustinian monk and professor of biblical the-
A few weeks later, having received no answers,
ology at the University of Wittenberg, finished a
he sent the theses to friends in other places, for
series of theological considerations in which he
example in Nürnberg, Leipzig, and Basel, asking
argued that selling indulgences as practiced by
for a response. It was these friends who published
the Dominican monk Johann Tetzel was theolog-
Luther’s theses, as far as we know as early as De-
ically wrong—in fact, untenable—and threatened
cember 1517, first in Latin and shortly thereafter
the eternal salvation of pious believers. Luther
in a German translation. As a result, within just
organized his arguments in a series of no less
a few weeks, Luther’s theses were discussed in
than ninety-five theses, sentences each expressing
universities and monasteries all over central Europe.

Hartmut Lehmann is Professor of Modern History at the University of Kiel. He is author of Pietismus und weltliche Ordnung in Württemberg
(1969), Das Zeitalter des Absolutismus (1980), Martin Luther in the American Imagination (1988), Säkularisierung. Der europäische Sonderweg in
Sachen Religion (2004), Transformationen der Religion in der Neuzeit (2007), Luthergedächtnis 1817–2017 (2012), and Das Christentum im 20.
Jahrhundert. Fragen, Probleme, Perspektiven (2012).


C 2016 Wiley Periodicals and Dialog, Inc.
80 Dialog: A Journal of Theology • Volume 55, Number 1 • Spring 2016 • March
This was, as we now know, the beginning of
a long and, over the years, increasingly bitter
controversy, for neither side was ready to give
in and seek a compromise—that is, to agree on
a route that would lead toward the necessary
reforms. In Luther’s view, his arguments had
initiated a process of most welcome changes that
would bring back to life true Christian faith. In
the view of his opponents, Luther had caused a
most deplorable schism of the church.
Who Should Celebrate, and
How?
How should we celebrate the memory of these
events that took place 500 years ago? Who should
celebrate—the German Lutherans, or Lutherans
and Protestants around the world? Where should
one celebrate—in Luther’s Wittenberg, or in
Lutheran congregations on all continents? Further-
more, considering the large number of victims of
the religious wars of the following century, should
one celebrate at all? Finally, what is the lasting
value of Luther’s message in our time, an age of
secularization and religious pluralism? What is the
lasting and meaningful value of Luther’s legacy
today? Let us look at the main arguments from
the vantage point of our time.
Luther’s Achievements
No one doubts, I think, that the list of positive
attributes closely linked to Luther’s life and work is
long and impressive. Were some kind of universal
cultural decathlon of peoples from all cultures
and all ages to be held, at least in the eyes of
the Germans, Luther would be the winner of the
gold medal. His achievements would be surpassed
neither by other Germans such as Frederick the
Great or Bismarck, nor by non-German greats such
as Columbus, Leonardo da Vinci, Isaac Newton,
Rembrandt, or Shakespeare. While all of these had
excelled in one discipline, Luther had achieved
greatness in a number of areas.
His translation of the Bible into German made a
singular contribution toward unifying the German
language. In the following centuries, Luther’s trans-
lation inspired many people from other countries to
translate the biblical text into their own vernacular.
Luther composed church hymns that still are being
sung today, adding beauty and style to church
services. As he himself played an instrument, he
became the example of a devoted father who cre-
ated a harmonious family life in which music was
a central feature, not least during the Christmas
season. Together with his wife Katharina he estab-
lished the tradition of Protestant parsonages, which,
at least in Germany, produced some of the greatest
minds in philosophy, the arts, and the sciences.
Even more importantly, as most Protestants still
believe today, it was Luther’s singular achievement
that reading the Bible became a central element in
Protestant families and in Protestant congregations.
Through this, he corrected one of the most
obvious deficiencies of medieval Christianity.
Luther’s “Sermon on Good Works,” his “Address
to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation,”
his treatise “The Babylonian Captivity,” as well
as his treatise on “The Freedom of the Christian
Man,” all composed and published in 1520,
inspired his contemporaries and many generations
since. Furthermore, with his doctrine of the two
realms, or kingdoms, Luther taught the right
balance of the relationship between church and
state, of the spiritual and the worldly spheres.
Luther’s unwavering interest in the importance
of learning had a lasting effect in Germany and
beyond. Finally, in critical situations such as the
Diet of Worms, Luther showed courage and deter-
mination. Thus he became a role model for future
generations of Protestants confronted with political
oppression, including those who were confronted
with totalitarian regimes in the twentieth century.
In varying degrees, these arguments still carry
weight today. For this reason, Protestant churches
in Germany and the German government plan to
celebrate 2017, and the German government is
spending considerable sums of money to restore
the original sites where Luther lived in Wittenberg,
in Eisleben, and in other places. Thousands of
tourists from around the world are expected to
 2017: The Quincentennial Celebration of the Reformation in an Age of Secularization and Religious Pluralism • Hartmut Lehmann
flock to these sites in 2017, thus boosting the
economy in the former East Germany.
What is the Central Message?
Not all is going well, however. Even though more
than two-thirds of the Luther Decade have now
passed, some of the central questions concerning
the commemoration of 2017 have not been
answered. In my view, two of these questions
are of paramount importance. First, what is the
central message that Lutherans, Protestants, and
Christians around the world likely will hear in
2017—and what should they hear? Second, how
are we to deal with the negative traits and some of
the disturbing episodes in Luther’s life and work?
Should they simply be ignored, or if not, how
should we deal with them in 2017? Let me begin
with the second question, and let me concentrate
on the most obvious, the most vexing issues.
The Vexing Issues
First is Luther’s intolerance vis-à-vis other reform-
minded Christians of his age. For example, Luther
adamantly supported the suppression of all those
who believed in adult baptism. He wrote a number
of treatises in which he argued that they should be
expelled. Nor could he come to an agreement with
other reformers, like the Swiss reformer Zwingli.
For Luther, only his own view counted, only his
own interpretation of the Bible, and nothing else.
Second is Luther’s harsh words against the
peasants during the Peasants’ War of 1525. In
the beginning of the conflict Luther argued that
both sides should enter into negotiations in order
to find a settlement. As both parties took up
arms, however, Luther sided with the princes and
condemned the peasants with words that make one
shiver even today. Peasants are like mad dogs, he
wrote, and those who kill them should be called
martyrs and will earn eternal salvation.
Third is Luther’s view of the papacy as an-
tichrist. Not that I wish to praise the moral
81
qualities of Renaissance popes, but by interpreting
the role of the popes in an eschatological manner,
already by 1520 Luther had blocked every effort
that might have led to a compromise. Luther’s
worldview was Manichean, and because of this, he
burned the bridges that some of his associates like
Melanchthon still were ready to build as late as
1530, but which Luther sought to prevent.
Fourth is Luther’s strict theological condemna-
tion of the Turks. As the Ottomans marched north
and threatened to occupy Vienna in the late 1520s,
Luther was alarmed. In his 1529 treatise “On War
Against the Turks,” he argued that Islam was a
highly dangerous belief system, deeply corrupted
by demonic powers. In his view, Muslims were
agents of the devil, and their prophet, Mohammed,
was the devil incarnate. This explained, according
to Luther, why the Turks set out to destroy the
livelihood of Christians.
For Luther, therefore, the Turks were similar
in many ways to the papacy and to witches. Like
the papacy, they held false beliefs but claimed to
govern the lives of people. Like witches, they had
concluded a contract with the devil and set out
to do harm in his name. In this situation, Luther
argued, Christians should learn a simple lesson.
Just as true children of God should be vigilant and
shield themselves from papal influence, they should
not believe in rumors that the sultan was a benign
ruler; and just as they should defend their houses
and their property against all sorts of maleficia
perpetrated by witches, they should do the same if
the Turks continued to march beyond Vienna.
Fifth is Luther’s vitriolic, inexcusable writings
against the Jews. In the early 1520s Luther had
hoped that the Jewish communities of the Holy
Roman Empire would join his cause. This was the
phase in which he wrote a treatise arguing that
Jesus had been born as a Jew. As the leaders of
the Jewish communities hesitated to support him,
however, Luther’s attitude changed drastically. In
the last ten years of his life he wrote three lengthy
treatises in which he condemned the Jews because
they had renounced Jesus. He called Jews wrong-
headed and stubborn, labeling them agents of the
devil. In sharp words he demanded that their syna-
gogues be destroyed, their holy books burned, and
their rabbis expelled along with those Jews who
82 Dialog: A Journal of Theology • Volume 55, Number 1 • Spring 2016 • March
were not prepared to live from manual labor. What
Luther expressed was not modern racism, but the
sum of late-medieval anti-Judaic resentments. No
other sixteenth-century reformer who wrote about
Jews even came close to Luther’s unrestrained rage.
In his famous biography of Luther, first pub-
lished in 1950 and still in print today under the
title Here I Stand, Roland H. Bainton remarks
that “the last quarter of Luther’s life was neither
determinative for his ideas nor crucial for his
achievements.”1 It is best, Bainton suggests, to
ignore those years. I do not agree. In my view,
whatever Luther wrote after 1525 also is part of his
legacy and should be taken no less seriously than
his early works. Let us take, therefore, another look
at the negative episodes that I have briefly men-
tioned. How relevant are they still today, and what
do they mean with regard to the jubilee of 2017?
Luther and the Other Reformers
Let me return to Luther’s intolerant attitude to-
ward other nonconformists. If I am not mistaken,
the five hundred years that have passed since
the early days of the Reformation have, for the
most part, put this issue to rest. In the United
States, for example, Lutherans had to organize as
a free church already in the eighteenth century.
Lutherans in America had to recognize that other
Protestant churches possessed the same rights
as they did—even the Baptists and Mennonites
whom Luther had despised so much. In Germany
it took somewhat longer for ecumenism to emerge.
During the nineteenth century and in the first
half of the twentieth century, free churches had to
suffer a great deal in Germany.2 Since the end of
the Second World War, things have changed.
However, some remnants of Lutheran superiority
still can be observed in today’s Germany. For ex-
ample, the Evangelical Churches in Germany have
not invited representatives of the Free Churches
to serve in the various bodies that prepare the
quincentenary.3 They did not even make an at-
tempt to include representatives of the established
Reformed Churches outside of Germany. As a
result, some years ago members of the Reformed
Churches in Switzerland and in the Netherlands
formed an organization of their own, called Refo
500. They assert that the Reformation was not
the result of Luther’s efforts alone, and that it
is more than a German affair. Consequently, as
they prepare for 2017, these churches are holding
symposia and conferences of their own, and most
certainly they will stage their own celebrations.
It should be mentioned in this context that at
the Lutheran World Federation’s 2010 meeting in
Stuttgart, The LWF officially asked the Mennonite
World Conference for forgiveness. They, the
Lutherans of the world, deplored deeply all the
injustices that had been done to the Mennonites
since the sixteenth century. This was a demon-
strative step away from anything that Luther had
taught in this respect. German Protestants have yet
to make a similar gesture.
Luther and the Papacy
Luther’s deeply negative view of the papacy,
my third example, remained very influential for
many centuries. Anti-Catholicism, or anti-popery as
they used to say in early modern Europe, par-
ticularly in England, became a defining trait of
Protestant identity far beyond Luther’s life, and far
beyond his original context. Luther’s followers be-
lieved the pope was evil—he constantly was con-
spiring to overthrow Protestant church-life. On the
other side of the fence, Catholics were convinced
that Luther had corrupted the minds of faithful
Christians. In other words, as a result of the divi-
sions that had come about through mistakes made
by both sides during the early Reformation, com-
pletely different confessional cultures evolved all
over Europe, and to the extent that Europeans ven-
tured onto other continents, also there. Over time,
a kind of glass wall was erected between Catholi-
cism and Protestantism, creating two religious and
cultural worlds, with different authorities and dif-
ferent lifestyles.
This is what is important in our context.
Much of that history continued on well into the
twentieth century. It was only then, in the era of
the two world wars, that two factors developed
that served to undermine dogmatic confessional-
ism: first, the ecumenical movement; and second,
 2017: The Quincentennial Celebration of the Reformation in an Age of Secularization and Religious Pluralism • Hartmut Lehmann
mass migration. After the end of the First World
War, church leaders from different countries came
to the conclusion that more unity was needed
among Christians if war was to be avoided in the
future. Accordingly, they arranged meetings and
established contacts that strengthened the belief in
the solidarity of all Christians.
Mass migration had more practical effects. As a
growing number of Protestants settled and worked
in Catholic areas and vice versa, people from both
confessional camps met. That was true for most
countries in Europe. Sometimes people from both
sides fell in love and married. Prejudice eroded,
resentment faded away. In 2013 The Lutheran
World Federation and the Catholic Council for
the Unity of Churches published a text under the
title From Conflict to Communion.4 The authors of
this text explore the question of how Lutherans
and Catholics could commemorate the events of
1517 together in 2017—not celebrate, because for
the Catholic side there is no reason to celebrate
the schism of the early sixteenth century, but
commemorate together with a new appreciation of
the efforts of the reformer Martin Luther, whom
many Catholic theologians see in a new and more
positive light since Vatican II.
Luther and the “Turks”
As of now, if I am not mistaken, the explosive
content of Luther’s condemnation of Muslims has
not been discussed as intensively as is necessary in
light of the global tensions between Christians and
Muslims, in particular since 9/11.5 Representatives
of Muslim organizations have not yet taken note
of Luther’s vitriolic attacks against the religion of
Islam in general and against Mohammed in
particular. In my view, Luther’s attacks are no
less insulting than the Danish caricatures of
Mohammed that caused so much trouble and
confusion a few years ago, or the caricatures in the
French magazine Charlie Hebdo.
In the last two decades of his life, Luther was
obsessed by the fear that the reform movement he
had initiated and that bore his name would fail
as powers opposed to his aims, among them the
Turks, took over central Europe. With ever-stronger
83
words he attacked those whom he considered his
enemies: the papacy, the Jews, and the Turks.
What Luther wrote against the Turks in these
years is dictated by anger and full of phantasies of
destruction and extermination.
Considering the tensions between Muslims and
Christians in countries such as Nigeria, Indonesia,
or the Sudan, Luther’s diatribes against the Turks
should not be ignored as we approach the quin-
centennial of 2017. Lutherans should address this
theme now, and they should distance themselves
from these particular writings of Luther most
strongly. Perhaps, they could argue that religious
pluralism and religious tolerance were not part
of Luther’s teachings. Over the years, Protestants
have moved far beyond these particular views of
Luther and now respect other faiths and other
religions and take a strong interest in interreligious
dialogue. In any case, those who are preparing
for the Luther quincentenary of 2017 have yet to
conceive a new and convincing interpretation of
Luther’s infamous writings against the Turks. In
recent years, a number of Lutheran theologians
have participated in dialogue between Muslims and
Christians. These discussions may serve as a fruitful
starting point for the historical contextualization
and the necessary reevaluation of Luther’s most
critical remarks about the Turks.
Luther and the Jews
My last example, Luther’s most negative view of
the Jews, is perhaps the most complicated issue
to address. Ever since the National Socialists drew
on Luther’s writings in their propaganda to justify
their racial policy of extermination, this topic has
held the attention of Reformation scholars and
the wider public.6 In particular, especially since
the 1970s, American and German Lutherans have
struggled with this aspect of Luther’s heritage.
There has been general agreement that there is no
way that Luther’s writings against the Jews could
be interpreted so that they lose their disturbing
character. They are, and they remain, infamous.
This was most clearly expressed in a declaration
of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America
in 1994. The church council of the ELCA
84 Dialog: A Journal of Theology • Volume 55, Number 1 • Spring 2016 • March
acknowledged “with pain” Luther’s “anti-Judaic
diatribes and the violent recommendations of his
later writings against the Jews.” The church council
of the ELCA expressed “deep and abiding sorrow”
over the “tragic effects” of “Luther’s invectives”
on “subsequent generations.” In concert with
The Lutheran World Federation, they deplored
“the appropriation of Luther’s words by modern
anti-Semites for the teaching of hatred toward
Judaism or toward the Jewish people of today.”7
As this last sentence indicates, any attempt to
come to terms with Luther’s diatribes against the
Jews has to deal with the memory of the Holo-
caust. While only a few German Lutherans, such as
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, actively helped Jews who
were persecuted, many others, including Lutherans
from other countries, simply looked the other way.
Some German Lutherans were even among the
perpetrators. Furthermore, some German Lutherans
were among the most fervent supporters of Hitler
exactly because he accused the Jews of having
corrupted political life in Germany. High-ranking
Lutherans published parts of Luther’s tracts against
the Jews shortly before and after the November
pogrom of 1938, called by the Nazis Kristallnacht,
and Luther’s words did not have to be distorted to
fit Nazi terminology. Rather, Luther simply could
be quoted verbatim.
In 1946, on the occasion of the four-hundredth
anniversary of Luther’s death, in response to Allied
war propaganda, some German Lutherans raised
the question of whether Luther should be sent to
the Nuremberg trials.8 They all agreed that this
would be completely wrong.9 But the question of
whether Luther was a key witness for Nazi crimes
against Jews has not disappeared. As it seems, every
new generation that learns about the horrors of
the Holocaust sooner or later discovers the role of
Luther’s writings in this story. It is not surprising
that this matter is hotly debated among German
intellectuals as they prepare for 2017.10
True, Lutheranism is a world religion in the
second decade of the twentieth century, and some
Lutheran churches outside of Germany may be of
the opinion that they need not come to terms with
the anti-Semitic tradition of German Protestantism,
and with the failure of their German brothers and
sisters during the Holocaust. In my view this is
short-sighted, since Luther’s writings, including his
tracts against the Jews, are part of Luther’s legacy
entrusted to all Lutherans.
Learning from Past Celebrations
Before I return to my first question, the question
of what message Lutherans, Protestants, and
Christians from around the world will and ought
to hear in 2017, it is worth looking back at some
of the Luther celebrations in past centuries. It is
eye-opening to do so in a comparative perspective.
1817
Let me begin with the tercentenary of 1817. In
1817, the German public would have heard a
mixed message. Some voices praised Luther as
an enlightened figure who had overcome, almost
single-handedly, medieval superstition. For others,
Luther was the man who had resurrected the
Bible. In the fall of 1817, students who assem-
bled on Wartburg castle made more noise than
anybody else. As they remembered the victories
over Napoleon in 1813, they thought of Luther
as a national hero, as the one whose example had
inspired the Germans as they fought Napoleon
and the French occupation. Even the greatest of
German poets of the time, Johann Wolfgang von
Goethe, was of the opinion that the victory over
Napoleon in 1813 and Luther’s ninety-five theses
of 1517 should be celebrated together.
In the United States, by contrast, the ter-
centenary of 1817 passed with hardly any notice.
For the leading politicians of the early American
Republic, Luther was an almost unknown figure.
True, they had their heroes, but these heroes had
lived in ancient Greece and ancient Rome, not
in the age of the Reformation. In America in
1817 only a few Lutheran pastors reminded their
congregations of what had happened in 1517 and
what it meant to them.11
 2017: The Quincentennial Celebration of the Reformation in an Age of Secularization and Religious Pluralism • Hartmut Lehmann
1883
As Luther’s birthday was celebrated in 1883,
a completely different narrative dominated the
landscape on both sides of the Atlantic. By 1883,
Martin Luther had become a household name for
most educated Americans. Romantic poets like
Ralph Waldo Emerson had discovered his genius,
and anti-Catholic polemicists cherished his fight
against the pope.12 In 1883, almost all American
theological seminaries held special meetings hon-
oring Luther; almost all religious journals, and
even some non-religious ones, published special
issues devoted to Luther; and even non-religious
associations such as the Massachusetts Historical
Society organized special Luther ceremonies.
Perhaps the most impressive speech commem-
orating the life and work of Martin Luther was
given in Boston on November 10, 1883, by
Frederic H. Hedge, then 78 years old, who had
translated into English “A mighty fortress is our God,”
the so-called battle-hymn of the Reformation. “To
Martin Luther above all men,” Hedge explained
to his illustrious audience, “we Anglo-Americans
are indebted for national independence and mental
freedom.” Hedge praised Luther’s “sturdy Saxon
nature,” which made him appear almost as an
Anglo-Saxon, and asked his listeners to give “honor
to the man.” A Lutheran pastor from Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, Emanuel Greenwald, put his message
into two simple sentences: “If there had been
no Luther in Germany,” he said, “there would
have been no Washington in America. For the
invaluable blessings of our civil liberty and free
institutions, we thank God for Luther.”
It goes without saying that for American
Lutherans, 1883 was a welcome occasion to sta-
bilize their role within the spectrum of American
denominations. Even though it was a general rule
that religious figures should receive no statues in
the nation’s capital, Lutherans even successfully
carried through the plan to put up a statue of
Luther in Washington, D.C. In the opinion of the
American public, Luther had risen to the status of
a cultural hero of universal importance.13
Luther celebrations in Germany had a com-
pletely different focus in 1883. Twelve years after
85
the victory over France in the war of 1870/71 and
the unification of Germany under Prussian leader-
ship, Luther was elevated to the most superior seat
in the Olympus of German national history. No
one was greater, it seemed, and no one had influ-
enced German history more than Martin Luther. It
was Luther, literally hundreds, if not thousands, of
orators proclaimed, who had rescued the Germans
from foreign rule and paved the way that led from
the early sixteenth century to the foundation of the
Prussian-dominated Protestant German Empire in
1871. Only a few Catholics voiced disagreement.14
1917
The next stage was the Luther commemoration of
1917. In the third year of the Great War, Germans
were desperately hoping that they might be able to
claim victory despite all of their military setbacks.
They invoked the memory of the courageous
Luther: the Luther who had faced the emperor at
Worms, the Luther who had defied all attacks by
the pope and his allies.
By contrast, in the fall of 1917, half a year af-
ter the United States had entered the war against
imperial Germany, American voices sounded com-
pletely different. For most of those who cared to
comment on the event, Luther had now assumed
a firm place in the negative genealogy of German
history. This genealogy put Luther in a line with
the war-mongering Frederick the Great, with Bis-
marck and his dictum of “blood and iron,” and
with the irrational, militaristic emperor William II.
Lutheran congregations were intimidated and too
frightened to say much. Only a few American the-
ologians dared to point out that Luther deserved
some credit as a theologian, and respect as a “homo
religious.”15
I will skip comments on other celebrations
because what I want to point out is clear: with
few exceptions, all commemorations of Luther in
the past have had a specific message. And in each
case the message was different, depending on the
political and cultural circumstances of the time. It
is not wrong to ask, therefore, what the specific
message for 2017 will be, or should be. It may be
surprising, but even now, as more than two-thirds
86 Dialog: A Journal of Theology • Volume 55, Number 1 • Spring 2016 • March
of the Luther Decade have passed, the answer to
this question still is not clear. As of now, no one
has attempted to analyze the relationship between
Luther’s legacy and the religious conditions of
our time, which are deeply influenced by religious
pluralism, by religious strife between the world
religions, and by secularization.
Preparations and Purpose
Since the beginning of the Luther Decade in 2008,
many German Protestants have been preparing
actively for the events of 2017. A major part of the
preparations is the state-of-the-art restoration of the
primary Luther sites. Millions of euros have been
spent for this purpose. What the organizers hope
for are thousands upon thousands of tourists from
all of the countries with a Protestant tradition.
German politicians consider these tourists mainly
from their economic impact, but for German
Protestant leaders these tourists will form a kind of
international pilgrimage to the places where Luther
once lived.
A second trait is closely related to this. Many
leading German Protestants who speak about 2017
do not hesitate to express the view that this cele-
bration will be a chance to sharpen the Lutheran—
some would also say the Protestant—profile. For
them, 2017 will be a unique opportunity to tell
the world what we all owe to Martin Luther. Some
speakers are not shy to point to special merits we
owe to Luther, like freedom of conscience, political
liberties, and as a consequence, democracy, belief
in education, and tolerance. I hardly need add that
such lists are extremely one-sided and controversial.
But this is not all. Even though some of the
leaders of the Protestant churches in Germany have
pointed out in recent months that 2017 should be
an ecumenical and international event, not much
has been done to facilitate that possibility. For ex-
ample, let us take a look at the Academic Advisory
Council, which has the task of helping church and
state commissions prepare for 2017. Of fourteen
persons on the first Council, appointed in 2008,
only two were non-Germans. The second Council,
appointed last year, consists almost entirely of
Germans, with one exception from Switzerland. It
seems, therefore, that most Germans still consider
Martin Luther a German property. Let us hope
that there is still time for a less provincial approach
to Martin Luther’s quincentennial commemoration.
New Challenges and
Possibilities
I want to conclude, therefore, on a more construc-
tive note. There are, it seems to me, a number of
possibilities that can be explored that would give
the commemoration of 2017 a completely different
character. Let me elaborate three of them.
A World Religion
For example, Lutherans could proudly proclaim
that Lutheranism has become a world religion in
the beginning of the twenty-first century. Conse-
quently, they should organize celebrations on all
five continents—in Brazil and Tanzania, in Tran-
quebar in South India, in Adelaide in Australia,
in Philadelphia, in Copenhagen, and, yes, also in
Wittenberg and Eisleben. In particular, the attempt
should be made to organize celebrations in which
Lutheran congregations from developing countries
come together with their brothers and sisters from
the so-called First World. The master narrative of
such celebrations could be the worldwide solidarity
of Lutherans, and a common trust in the message
of the Bible.
The Work of Reconciliation
Another possibility would be the attempt to con-
tinue the work of reconciliation that was begun by
The Lutheran World Federation in 2010 when they
asked the Mennonites for forgiveness. The year
2017 would be a wonderful opportunity to take up
and expand this story. Reformed churches should
be included, and all the churches that trust Calvin’s
 2017: The Quincentennial Celebration of the Reformation in an Age of Secularization and Religious Pluralism • Hartmut Lehmann
teachings. One should, furthermore, include all the
churches that have their roots in the Radical Ref-
ormation, also the various Baptist bodies as well as
the younger siblings in the Protestant world family.
In this case, the master narrative could be tolerance
and the fight against confessional prejudice and in-
justice. These commemorations would demonstrate
that Protestantism cherishes diversity and has grown
far beyond the early divisive beginnings in 1517.
Overcoming Schism
Even more challenging, but equally rewarding, and
in 2017 perhaps even more inspiring, would be
a sincere attempt to overcome the schism of the
sixteenth century. Let us remember that the Luther
of 1517 was an obedient member of his church.
He was dissatisfied with a single matter, the sale
of indulgences, but he hoped that the necessary
reforms could be achieved. In 1517, therefore, he
proposed theological arguments that would support
such reforms. He did not look for a break, but
he trusted that his arguments would convince his
superiors to do away with misuse. This means,
however, that in 2017 both Protestants and
Catholics can look back to the Luther of 1517
in the conviction that it is both worthwhile and
possible to overcome the confessional differences
that have come about over time.
Millions of couples in which one partner is a
Catholic and another a Protestant wait for such a
step. Millions wait for new initiatives in the ecu-
menical movement. Ever since the Second Vatican
Council the number of Catholic theologians and
church historians who understand Luther’s theo-
logical concerns has grown. One also could argue
that in an age of secularization, those for whom
Christianity still means something should look for
more solidarity. To be clear, I do not plead for
a complete erasure of all differences. This would
be naive and contradict the strength that lies in
diversity. But I plead for a thorough reconciliation
so that both sides, Protestants and Catholics, can
commemorate together in 2017—yes, still in diver-
sity, but in the blessed state of reconciled diversity.
87
To conclude: much time has passed since the
proclamation of the Luther Decade in 2008. But it
is not too late to instill inspiring messages into the
multitude of commemorations that will take place
in thousands of congregations in 2017—messages
that will be heard far beyond 2017.
Endnotes
1. Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (New
York and Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1950), 373.
2. Karl Heinz Voigt, Freikirchen in Deutschland (19. und 20.
Jahrhundert) (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt 2004).
3. Volker Spangenberg, ed., Luther und die Reformation in
freikirchlicher Sicht (Göttingen: Unipress, 2013).
4. The Lutheran World Federation, “From Conflict to Communion:
Lutheran-Catholic Common Commemoration of the Reformation in
2017,” online at https://www.lutheranworld.org/content/resource-conflict-
communion-basis-lutheran-catholic-commemoration-reformation-2017
(accessed December 5, 2015).
5. Adam S. Francisco, Martin Luther and Islam: A Study of
Sixteenth-Century Polemics and Apologetics (Leiden & Boston: Brill, 2007).
6. See Andreas Späth, Luther und die Juden (Bonn: Verlag für
Wissenschaft und Politik, 2001); also Dean Philipp Bell and Steven
G. Burnett, eds., Jews, Judaism and the Reformation in Sixteenth-Century
Germany (Leiden: Brill, 2006); and Thomas Kaufmann, Luther’s
“Judenschriften,” Ein Beitrag zu ihrer historischen Kontextualisierung 2nd ed.
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013).
7. Other Lutheran church bodies, like the Lutheran Church
Missouri Synod, also have distanced themselves from Luther’s writings
against the Jews.
8. Peter F. Wiener, Martin Luther: Hitler’s Spiritual Ancestor (London
& New York: Hutchinson & Co., 1945).
9. Hartmut Lehmann, “‘Muss Luther nach Nürnberg?’ Deutsche
Schuld im Lichte der Lutherliteratur 1948/47,” Luthergedächtnis
1817 – 2017 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012), 176-
188.
10. See the exchange between Christian Pfeiffer and Johannes Wall-
mann in the journal Cicero in 2014. See http://www.cicero.de/berliner-
republik/luther-judenfeind-die-dunkle-seite-des-reformators/57603
(accessed December 5, 2015).
11. Lehmann, Martin Luther in the American Imagination (Munich:
Fink, 1988), 31-41.
12. Lehmann, “Die Entdeckung Luthers im Amerika des frühen
19. Jahrhunderts,” Luthergedächtnis, 5-43.
13. Lehmann, Martin Luther in the American Imagination, 176-193.
See also Lehmann, “The Luther Statues in Washington, D.C., and in
Baltimore,” Luthergedächtnis, 94-109.
14. Lehmann, “Das Lutherjubiläum 1883,” Luthergedächtnis, 59-77.
15. Lehmann, Martin Luther in the American Imagination, 270-
287; see also “Die Lutherjubiläen 1883 und 1917 in Amerika,”
Luthergedächtnis, 78-93.
Copyright of Dialog: A Journal of Theology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.