Christian Identity

It quickly becomes clear from the text that Luther believes a "true Christian" is one who has complete faith in Christ and does not necessarily need to do good works. For example, on page 9 of our text he says "...since faith alone justifies, it is clear that the inner man cannot be justified, freed, or saved by any outer work or action at all." The subject of Christian identity as argued here by Luther is founded upon his own criteria for judging what makes a Christian, is this case the criteria being that one has true faith. This was not the same criteria employed by the Catholic Church at the time, and, because Luther's qualifications for Christianity were pivotal to his arguments and theses, the differences in criteria between him and the Catholic Church was arguably the source of the Protestant Reformation itself. Thus, to answer the question "What makes a Christian" is to addresses the source of a religious schism which has greatly influenced the history of human civilization.

In analyzing the question of religious identity, I find that common modern approach differs greatly from Luther's; it now seems sufficient for one to simply think he is a Christian in order to qualify as one. I base this assumption on personal experience, in that if a person approached me and declared that he was a Christian, I would immediately assume him to be telling me the truth; I would be concerned neither with the specifics of his faith nor with his daily activities. In my mind I would already have associated his identity with his status as a Christian. This criteria of course differs from that employed by Luther, as Luther would argue that a person is Christian if they have true faith, regardless of whether that person believed himself to actually be a Christian. This suggests that there is an objective quality to Luther's criteria, in that a person must meet a standard of faith to be a Christian. This in in contrast to the more subjective modern one I have observed, in which if a person simply asserts that he is a Christian, few will contest his assertion, preferring to simply assume that person is what they say they are. 

We can also analyze the logic behind the formation of Luther's criteria; he quotes the Bible when he describes on pages 41 and 42 an analogy of fruit trees, in that evil ones bear evil fruit and good ones bear good fruit. This analogy seems to me an oversimplification of human nature and an almost self-referential assertion for defining good and evil, in that by this argument one could say that if a good and an evil person perform outwardly indistinguishable actions, the actions of the good person are good actions because he is good and the actions of the evil person are evil because he is evil. Such logic as this seems necessary to Luther's criteria for Christian behavior.

 On the other hand, context must be considered for analyzing his and other religious arguments. Luther disagreed with those who thought paying indulgences and attending church was sufficient to being a Christian, and his arguments seem to reflect his view of the Catholic church. To him a simple portion of donated money and time was not sufficient to enter the Kingdom of God, and as such his analogy of the trees could also be interpreted as a specific attack against buying or selling indulgences. How do you interpret his analogy? Do you agree with my assumption that the criteria of modern society is more subjective than Luther's was? How do you regard Luther's logic within the text?