The man who dared to laugh at the Pope ["Out of the Storm: The Life and Legacy of Martin Luther"]

Diarmaid MacCulloch reviews Out of the Storm: The Life and Legacy of Martin Luther by Derek Wilson

Did 16th-century Reformers laugh? In their portraits they seldom even smile. Times have changed: modern Western clerics (the Reverend Ian Paisley notoriously excepted) vie with secular celebs in conveying toothy approachability. Mateyness is the mode now, even for Popes, but Martin Luther's portraits obey the 16th-century rule of sanctified grimness. In 1521 Hans Baldung Grien made a famous engraving of him, reproduced in Derek Wilson's new biography: Luther was still a tonsured Augustinian monk, although already enemy to the Pope, and Grien portrayed a gaunt, austere reforming saint, his eyes searching a far horizon, the Holy Spirit hovering dove-style above him, fuelling his fight against the Devil.

Even after Luther married, and his wife Katie's catering inspired the German proverb 'as fat as Martin Luther', there was no question of a public smile when he was painted. Luther's only external accreditation for leading a Europe-wide revolution was his Doctorate of Theology, and DDs shouldn't be seen to titter - still less should God's chosen successor to such prophets of old as Elijah.

Recently the veteran Lutheran historian Eric Gritsch published a little study entitled The Wit of Martin Luther. It is difficult to imagine the wit of John Calvin, Martin Bucer or Thomas Cranmer occupying much more than a visiting card. Luther, who inspired and often infuriated them all, powered his Reformation by making Europe laugh at the Pope: angry, injured laughter, bitter with a deep sense of betrayal.

Erasmus, the tidy-minded scholar and wit, had already sniggered at the Church's folly, but Luther's laughter had a prophetic ferocity about it. He had been shocked into realising that the Holy Father in Rome was in fact an agent of Antichrist. How could the Pope be anything else, demanded Luther, when he ordered silence on a loyal son of the Church who had rediscovered the most important truth about the human condition?

This was the truth found in Scripture, especially in the urgent words of Paul of Tarsus to the Romans and Galatians: we humans are so trapped in sin - tangled up in ourselves - that nothing we do merits God's love. A loving judge, God wills to choose some of us out of this doomed, undeserving rabble, to receive his gift of saving grace: then we may enter his presence for ever as his children, saved by faith in the crucified Jesus Christ. In Reformation jargon, that is justification by faith through grace: it is the heart of Reformation Protestantism.

It was a hand-grenade lobbed into the medieval Western Church, levelling all the corridors past death into heaven so artfully constructed by medieval Catholic theologians. Their modern Catholic successors mostly agree that Luther was true to tradition in this matter, and Rome no longer officially classes him as a heretic. Small consolation for Pope Leo X and his immediate successors, who failed to shut Luther up, and struggled with the collapse of united Western Christendom.

Luther's laughter makes him one of the most fascinating (not always the most likeable) of Protestant Reformers. He was generous, passionate, impulsive, inconsistent, intuitive - so his theology is a mess, leaving four centuries-worth of vexations and puzzles for those Christians labelled Lutherans. No one can excuse his anti-Semitism, so convenient for Adolf Hitler in outflanking the German Lutheran establishment: historians can help to explain it, showing how wrapped up he was in the then-common notion that God was about to bring this world to its end. For Luther, Jews were wilfully getting in the way, by not converting to Christianity.

Only the blockheaded have found the whole man easy to understand - yet his hymns, his majestic German Bible translation, his anger and laughter, can be startlingly direct in conveying his love of God. Small wonder that people are always writing biographies of him: there have been at least three in English in the last four years. This latest, by Derek Wilson, scores highly in thoroughness, clarity and human sympathy. If you want a model of how to defy uncomprehending power - your equivalent of Luther's Pope, Emperor, Church - or a model of how to laugh at the Devil, Wilson has provided a reliable guide as to how Luther did it.

Most were granted citizenship in Israel, and hence left India. From what I've heard, many of them still visit their former homes in India.

Here's an interesting article:

Link.



		Lieutenant General J.F.R. Jacob.

Last update - 02:00 06/09/2004

The Jewish general who beat Pakistan

By Amnon Barzilai

"A victory by the Congress Party under the leadership of Sonia Gandhi in the elections to be held in India in May will not lead to any change in India's policy toward Israel. The good relations will continue, and in certain area even grow deeper," assesses Lieutenant General J.F.R. Jacob, a former senior Indian army officer and a Jew, who yesterday completed a five-day visit to Israel. "If I had to rank the present-day level of relations between India and Israel," Jacob adds, "I would give them a 9 out of 10."

General Jacob has close ties to the National Party (BJP), which in the course of its four years in power has tightened relations with Israel and expanded defense cooperation with it. For many years, Jacob served as the party's security adviser. Nevertheless, he says, "based on my personal acquaintanceship with the current foreign minister, I see that the Congress Party, like the National Party, has an interest in maintaining very good relations with Israel." Jacob notes that it was the Congress Party that in early 1992 established diplomatic relations with Israel, "and since then, every Indian government has found Israel to be a friend on which they can rely."

Jacob doesn't think much of the consequences of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on public opinion in India. Although India is the largest democracy in the world, he says, "you have to remember that over 70 percent of Indian society is an agricultural population, which cares about its everyday struggles for existence and survival, and is not interested in foreign affairs."

General Jacob gained prominent fame in his homeland when he headed the Indian army forces that vanquished the Pakistani army in the war that broke out between the two countries in 1971, over control of the Bangladesh region (which after the war became an independent state, having formerly been East Pakistan). For his decisive role in the sweeping victory, Jacob was granted a commendation of merit.

Jacob is proud to say that his illustrious military career is the indelible proof of the tolerance of Indian society. That is the only way to explain how he succeeded as a young Jew, the scion of a family that migrated some 150 years ago from Iraq and settled in Calcutta, to be appointed to one of the most senior command positions in the army.

His full name is Jacob-Farj-Rafael Jacob. He was born in 1923. At age nine, his father, a successful businessman, sent him to a boarding school in the city of Darjeeling, about 500 kilometers from Calcutta. From then on, he only went home on school holidays. In 1941, at age 18, he enlisted in the Indian army, which was under British command. "My father was against my enlistment," he recalls, "but after I found out about the atrocities of the Nazis and their treatment of the Jews, I decided that I would be a military man." Upon his enlistment, Jacob joined an artillery brigade that was dispatched to North Africa to reinforce the British army against the German army under Field Marshal Erwin Rommel. The brigade arrived after the battles were over. From there, Jacob's unit was sent to Burma. "I wanted to fight Germans," says Jacob, "but in the end I fought for three years against the Japanese."

Did you ever meet Orde Wingate?

Jacob: "I was a major in the artillery when I met him in Burma. I know what your opinion of Wingate is, and on his contribution to training special forces in Palestine [the reference is to the Haganah's Special Night Squads - A.B.], but I have a different opinion of him as a commander. In Burma, he was assigned a post that he could not fill [sabotage of communications behind the Japanese army lines - A.B.] His military perception was mistaken. He was a disaster. I prefer not to say any more than that."

Pilgrimage site

General Jacob is a graduate of artillery schools in England and the United States and specialized in advanced artillery and missiles. Prior to his appointment as commander of the Eastern Command (along the Bangladesh front), he commanded an infantry and artillery division. He retired from the military in 1978, following 37 years of service. Jacob tried his hand in the business world, but remained in close contact with government echelons. In the late `90s, he became the governor of the Goa province, and subsequently became the governor of the state of Punjab, which borders Kashmir.

Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between India and Israel, Jacob has paid many visits to Israel. Prime minister Yitzhak Rabin invited him to attend the Jerusalem 3,000 celebrations. On his recent visit here, he even contributed items of Judaica from his parent's home to the Museum of Babylonian Jewry in Or Yehuda. His home in New Delhi has for years been a pilgrimage site for Israeli diplomats, researchers and security officers.

Why is India interested in Israeli military technology?

"Because Israel's know-how and technology are very advanced. But also because countries like the United States and England are not as generous as Israel. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations, Israel has proved that it is happy to work together with India."

This is a big change, compared with the way things were before relations were established between the two countries.

"Actually, there is a long history to what is now happening. As early as 1962, during the war between India and China, prime minister Nehru appealed to prime minister David Ben-Gurion, asking him for military aid. Already then, Israel sent military equipment, mainly 120 mm. mortar rounds. It happened again in the war against Pakistan in 1965 and in the war in 1971: Israel supplied India with mortar rounds, even 160 mm. rounds. And Israel once again proved its generosity in the military conflict with Pakistan in 1999; on that occasion, it also assisted in supplying ammunition, even bombs meant for the Mirage jets of the Indian air force."

How do you see the development of defense cooperation between India and Israel?

"The primary collaboration lies in the shared interest of both countries related to the war on terror, and everything that entails: Electronic fences, radar systems, sensors. Israel also assists with missiles. There is cooperative development and production of helicopters. And of course, the Phalcon surveillance aircraft; they are intended for early warning of a surprise attack by Pakistan or China."

India has also shown interest in purchasing Arrow missiles.

"I estimate that when the United States removes the obstacles, India will be highly interested in acquiring Arrow missiles for defense against ballistic missiles. We need them especially for protection against Pakistan."

In the wake of the talks now being held between leaders of the two countries, aren't relations between India and Pakistan better?

"India has been attacked several times by Pakistan. We cannot take risks, and be unprepared for a surprise attack. India should be prepared for both Pakistan and China. Therefore, there is a need for anti-missile missiles. Due to the Pakistani danger and the threat of launch of missiles with nuclear warheads. And it is important to mention: We don't want U.S.-made Patriot missiles, which are only capable of intercepting missiles at a low altitude of 20 kilometers [as opposed to the Arrow, which is designed to intercept missiles at an altitude of 100 kilometers or more - A.B.]."

Al-Qaida in Kashmir

In spite of the differences in size between India and Israel, there is a similarity in their geopolitical status. Both are surrounded by Muslim states, they have large Muslim minorities, and are threatened by Islamic terror. "India has no problem with Muslim countries," says Jacob. "It only has a problem with terror. And the trouble is that Pakistan has become an asylum for terror groups. The bin Laden people are active in Kashmir and we suspect that his people are active not only in Afghanistan but also in Pakistan. [Pakistani President] Musharraf claims Pakistan does not support terror, but it is turning out that it does not have the ability, or the means, to supervise the terror groups. And I don't know what the truth is.

"In spite of everything, I say that a nuclear war between India and Pakistan is not expected because the two countries cannot afford such a thing. Basically, there is a balance of terror between the two."

Israelis in Goa? They don't help, they don't hurt

In his post as governor of Goa toward the end of the `90s, General Jacob had an opportunity to get to know other sides of the Israeli character. "I had a chance to meet with Israelis in Goa. These young people came there after lengthy army service, without money. All that they want is to live cheap, on the beach."

Were there any problems with them?

"Some of the Israelis are involved in drug dealing, but this is a small percentage. I can say the Israelis do not cause any real damage. But at the same time, their contribution to Indian tourism is insignificant because they do not spend money, since they do not have any.

"I would like to see Israelis coming not only to Goa or Puna, but to get to know the country, to learn its culture. At the same time, I understand them. They arrive in India immediately after army service. They want to have fun and to enjoy life and that's okay, too. I don't have any problem with it." (A.B.)

Go, I thought you might like the following. Czeslaw Milosz wrote it.

Undoubtedly, the hope of Salvation has paled and now it is so weakened that no images are associated with it. Therefore, even when you tell yourself, "If you want to save your soul, you should renounce things which are the most precious to you, your creative work, a romance, power or other satisfactions of your ambitions," it is so hard to accomplish this. Once, when Salvation signified a palm in Heaven, and damnation, eternal tortures in the abysses of Hell, people, it seems, had a stronger incitement to search for saintliness and to temper their gluttonous appetites. Not at all. They killed, committed adultery, grabbed the land of their neighbor, and were avid for fame. Something is wrong here. The tangible presence of Paradise, as promised to the Islamic faithful who fell in battle against the infidel, may increase their fervor in combat, but, in general, life on earth and the idea of Salvation seem to belong to two different orders, hardly connected.
It is not improbable that Martin Luther guessed this when he made Salvation dependent not upon acts but upon Grace.

Now, a little more connected to the topic of the thread...

Diarmaid MacCulloch wrote a History of the Reformation just a couple of years ago. He's more gentle when describing Catholic defects and you can see by the phrases he uses, who he has the better opinion of. For instance, he refers to Calvin as 'buttoned' up. Right from the get go, I could see that his sympathies were not solidly in the Reformers camp. Not that they should be either, and, in my view, he managed to keep that from becoming a problem.

The period that Martin Luther lived in may not have been a let's see your smile era, but the people, I think, did have a sarcastic side or pretty developed sense of humor, however you would prefer to describe based on excerpt below.

Lurking in a little English country church, at Preston Bissett in Buckinghamshire, is an object lesson in the difficulty of understanding the religious outlook of past generations. Holding up the arch at the entrance to the chancel, the most sacred part of the church building, are two carved stone figures, sculpted sometime in the early 14th century. The figure on the north side, crouched on all fours under the weight of the arch, is displaying his ample buttocks towards the high altar, the place where, day by day before the Reformation, the priest of Preston presided at the Mass, transforming breand and wine into the flesh and blood of the crucified Christ. Some later vandal has knocked the head off the carving, as with countless other carvings in Protestant Europe, but the buttocks are unscathed (see Plate 1A) [Me: the plate shows an enormous backside.)
It is easier to understand a Protestant sparing the buttocks -which would admirable convey what he or she thought of the miracle of the Mass- than to understand why they were carved in the first place.
Preston Bissett's priest could hardly have avoided staring at them as he blessed the people at the end of the Mass, before processing down the altar steps and out through the wooden screen which filled the chancel arch and hid the sculpture from his parishoners' eyes....Did the carving express the impatience which many devout people felt with their clergy when they did not perform their sacred task to public satisfaction? Was it meant to be a warning to a lazy or incompetent priest, or was it a private joke? Was it a symbol of Satan who sought to destroy the Church's proclamation of good news at God's altar?
Otherwise the meaning of the figure is now irrecoverable from a belief system where the physical and the spiritual were much more intimately, unexpectedly and exuberantly fused than they became in the Reformation and Counter-Reformation.

I think he also noted in the book that there were two sets of Commandments making the rounds at the time. Tried to find exact excerpt, but couldn't.

Finally, I think that our image of Luther in some measure at least is based on book titled Table Talk that is supposed to be a record of what Luther said. And, for what it's worth, Owen Chadwick, another very well-reputed historian of the Reformation wrote the following in The Reformation

The characteristic memory of Luther is of a man presiding at his own table, with his colleagues and friends around, arguing with him, or listening to his divinity, his politics and his humour. One of the friends shamefacedly took out a notebook and began to jot down Luther's remarks. The habit spread, and twelve different reporters made collections. Luther sometimes mocked nut neither resented nor forbade these deferential scribes. Twenty years after his death, one of them, Aurifaber, published a collection from a variety of collections . Thenceforth Luther's Table Talk became a classic of the Reformation. Rude and outspoken he might often be; 'Dear husband', said Catherine, 'you are too rude'. 'They teach me to be rude" replied Luther. He was so outspoken that his enemies leaped to make capital out of the Table Talk. It is unreliable as a source for details of history, particularly when the events occured many years before the date of the reported conversation; and Aurifaber's text was not untouched by improvement or interpolation. But it is a unique and authentic picture of a man and a divine; he who would understand Luther's person and mind cannot neglect it. It is impossible to apply any epithet to him less than the old classical epithet magnanimous, in its original sense of great-hearted.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.