No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 March 2012
During the initial decade of the Protestant Reformation, the German Anabaptist theologian Balthasar Hubmaier (1480–1528)1 functioned as a transitional figure between radical and magisterial reform. This observation is seen most clearly in the fact that Hubmaier, while concurring with his Anabaptist coreligionists on the necessity of believers’ baptism, dissented from their anti-statism and strict pacifism.2 Earning his doctor theologiae from the University of Ingolstadt under famous Catholic polemicist John Eck in 1512, Hubmaier was an essentially independent thinker who employed his academic training in an attempt to formulate doctrine that not only transcended the controversies of his day but also pointed Christians to the necessity of spiritual formation within a life of common discipleship. With this approach, Hubmaier turned to the Eucharist, second only to justification as the most divisive doctrine of the sixteenth century.3 Hubmaier objected to Roman Catholic transubstantiation, Lutheran consubstantiation, and Zwinglian sacramentarianism on the grounds that all of them, in their concern with the status of the elements, had lost sight of the internal transformation that Christ accomplishes in the faithful during the meal.
1 I have translated all Hubmaier quotations directly from the Balthasar Hubmaier Schriften [abbreviated HS] (ed. Gunnar Westin and Torsten Bergsten; Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1962). Along with each quote I have, for the convenience of readers desiring further interaction with the sources, listed the corresponding page numbers from the standard English edition Balthasar Hubmaier: Theologian of Anabaptism [abbreviated BH] (trans. H. Wayne Pipkin and John H. Yoder; Scottdale, Penn.: Herald, 1989).
2 Alister E. McGrath, Reformation Thought (3d ed.; Oxford: Blackwell, 1999) 219; Eddie Mabry, Balthasar Hubmaier's Doctrine of the Church (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1994) 203–4.
3 Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation (New York: Penguin, 2005) 168.
4 John D. Rempel, The Lord's Supper in Anabaptism (Scottdale, Penn.: Herald, 1993) 41–90; Mabry, Doctrine of the Church, 165–80; Torsten Bergsten, Balthasar Hubmaier: Anabaptist Theologian and Martyr (trans. William R. Estep; Valley Forge, Penn.: Judson, 1978) 192–95, 232–41. I say “since 1960” above since the original German work of Bergsten was published in 1961.
5 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 48, 72; Mabry, Doctrine of the Church, 170–71; Bergsten, Hubmaier, 194.
6 Note, for example, the shift in Rempel from the fact that Hubmaier “made impossible a traditional belief in the corporeal presence of Christ in the sacrament” (Lord's Supper, 44) to the inference that, for Hubmaier, “the only adequate way to correct the error of transubstantiation was to deny the real presence in the Lord's Supper altogether” (ibid., 72).
7 This definition was originally formulated by Augustine, De civitate Dei, 5.5.
8 Balthasar Hubmaier, Der Lehrer Urteil I, in HS, 227 (BH, 246); Der Lehrer Urteil II, in HS, 245 (BH, 268); Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 290 (BH, 319); Eine Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 358 (BH, 398); Eine Rechenschaft des Glaubens, in HS, 486–87 (BH, 555–58).
9 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 355, 362 (BH, 394, 403).
10 Ibid., in HS, 362 (BH, 404). Although quoting the paragraph to which it belongs, Rempel overlooks this text altogether (Lord's Supper, 78) and instead startlingly concludes that in Hubmaier “the Eucharist is given no role in the mediation of grace” (Lord's Supper, 72). This contradiction stems from the false dichotomy in Hubmaier scholarship between the Eucharist as grace-conveying sacrament and as instrument of ethical transformation.
11 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 363–4 (BH, 405–6).
12 Ibid., in HS, 361 (BH, 402).
13 My discussion of the communicatio is indebted to the insightful observations of an anonymous reviewer, to whom I am very grateful.
14 Jaroslav Pelikan, The Growth of Medieval Theology (600–1300) (vol. 3 of The Christian Tradition; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978) 147.
15 Jaroslav Pelikan, Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300–1700) (vol. 4 of The Christian Tradition; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984) 257–8.
16 Oswald Bayer, “Das Wort ward Fleisch. Luthers Christologie als Lehre von der Idiomen-kommunikation,” in Creator est Creatura: Luthers Christologie als Lehre von der Idiomen-kommunikation (ed. idem and Benjamin Gleede; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007) 16–24; Dennis Ngien, “Chalcedonian Christology and Beyond: Luther's Understanding of the Communicatio Idiomatum,” Heythrop Journal 45 (2004) 54–68.
17 Martin Luther, Against the Heavenly Prophets in the Matter of Images and Sacraments, in Luther's Works [LW] (ed. Jaroslav Pelikan; American edition; 55 vols.; St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1955–1986) 40:195–97, 215–16; idem, The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ—Against the Fanatics, in LW 36:341–43; idem, That These Words of Christ, “This Is My Body,” Etc., Still Stand Firm Against the Heretics, in LW 37:56–62.
18 Luther, Sacrament against the Fanatics, in LW 36:342.
19 Martin Luther, Confession Concerning Christ's Supper, in LW 37:207. Here it should be noted that, although the Confession dates to the year of Hubmaier's execution, it played no role in Hubmaier's Eucharistic thought, as Hubmaier's final work was written 3 January 1528 while the Confession was published in February 1528.
20 Ibid., 37:214, 216.
21 Martin Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, in LW 36:33–35.
22 Mabry, Doctrine of the Church, 32; cf. Christof Windhorst, Täuferisches Taufverständnis, Balthasar Hubmaiers Lehre zwischen traditioneller und reformatorischer Theologie (Leiden: Brill, 1976) 102.
23 It is important to note that Hubmaier never made such a terminological distinction; for him, communicatio idiomatum simply meant what would, starting in the 1540s, be termed communicatio idiomatum in abstracto to distinguish it from Calvin's communicatio idiomatum in concreto. Calvin's doctrine would be critical in explaining his further view that the utterly transcendent Logos could perform activities outside of and apart from the human nature of Christ, a notion that Lutheran Scholastics would dub the extra Calvinisticum. However, Calvin first reflected upon these themes in 1536 (first edition of the Institutes, and there in imprecise form), eight years after Hubmaier's death. To trace the development of these themes see B. A. Gerrish, Grace and Gratitude: The Eucharistic Theology of John Calvin (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 124–88.
24 Hence this typology was utilized by Luther, Zwingli, Karlstadt, Oecolampadius, and other prominent Eucharistic thinkers; see David C. Steinmetz, Luther in Context (2d ed.; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2002) 79–81.
25 Balthasar Hubmaier, Das andere Büchlein von der Freiwilligkeit, in HS, 417 (BH, 473).
26 Reinhold Seeberg, Text-book of the History of Doctrines (trans. Charles E. Hay; 2 vols.; Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1905) 2:321–27.
27 Carl Sachsse, D. Balthasar Hubmaier als Theologe (Berlin: Trowitsch und Sohn, 1914) 206–7.
28 Balthasar Hubmaier, Von dem christlichen Bann, in HS, 370 (BH, 415). As illustrated by Heinz Brunotte and Otto Weber (Evangelisches Kirchenlexikon [4 vols.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1961] 1:1163), bstimbte stat is a sixteenth-century German translation of the Latin praesentia definitiva (definitive presence). Note that in Ein einfältiger Unterricht (HS, 290 [BH, 319]), Hubmaier used the term gsättigt stat, which Brunotte and Weber (Kirchenlexikon, 1:1164) show to be a sixteenth-century German translation of the Latin praesentia repletiva (repletive presence), to delineate the mode in which Christ's body is present “everywhere.”
29 Mabry, Doctrine of the Church, 171.
30 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 62.
31 One could perceive that Hubmaier's assertion safeguards the Eucharistic rite from falling out of practice—in other words, were it possible for humankind to bear the real presence apart from the Lord's Supper, the Supper could be seen as pointless. However, this seems to be an unintended benefit of Hubmaier's model, since nothing in the Hubmaier corpus suggests that Hubmaier feared the diminishing value of the Eucharistic rite. Nor did Hubmaier recognize that his portrayal of the Supper as ultimately about bearing the real presence could be a pitfall for persons who either think they can find the real presence elsewhere or regard the real presence as impossible to obtain under any means.
32 Luther, Babylonian Captivity, in LW 36:33–48; Huldrych Zwingli, On the Lord's Supper, in Zwingli and Bullinger (trans. G. W. Bromiley; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953) 188–98, 235–8; Robert Friedmann, The Theology of Anabaptism (Scottdale, Penn.: Herald, 1973) 138–42.
33 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 84–85.
34 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 356 (BH, 395).
35 Balthasar Hubmaier, Etliche Schlußreden vom Unterricht der Messe, in HS, 103 (BH, 75).
36 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 55–56, 79.
37 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 293, 298 (BH, 324, 330); Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 358, 362 (BH, 398, 404).
38 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 290 (BH, 319); Bann, in HS, 370 (BH, 415).
39 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 303 (BH, 336).
40 Ibid., in HS, 297–98 (BH, 329–30).
41 Ironically, the literal force of this language is strengthened by the admittedly strained attempts of Hubmaier scholars to interpret it metaphorically. Thus Rempel, while acknowledging that “[i]t cannot be accidental that Hubmaier uses the same concept, Wesen (essence), to describe the mode of Christ's absence (i.e., from the elements) and that of the church's presence in the Lord's Supper,” is driven to suggest, “This choice of language seems to be a recasting of his ideas into the terminology of the eucharistic debate going on in Moravia at the time” (Lord's Supper, 79). Such a suggestion is absurd on its face, since it cannot explain why Hubmaier employed the precise philosophical terminology he did, much less how Hubmaier could deliberately employ the same terminology to simultaneously depict two different modes—namely, a metaphorical mode (for Christ's presence in believers) and a literal mode (for Christ's absence in the bread and wine).
42 Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 104 (BH, 76); Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 303 (BH, 336). Rempel also concedes this point but interprets it as simply an ethical metaphor: “An ontological shift followed in which the visible church became the res referred to by the signum. That is to say, for Hubmaier the breaking of bread became preeminently a sign of the church and its covenant of obedience” (Lord's Supper, 53). But such metaphorization is entirely foreign to the context, in which Hubmaier bends over backwards to insist on literal verities. In sum, nothing in Hubmaier warrants a metaphorical interpretation of language that, in the Eucharistic debates of the 1520s, was always employed literally.
43 Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 104 (BH, 76).
44 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 300 (BH, 333).
45 As the Council of Trent pronounced concerning the host, “There is, therefore, no room left for doubt that all the faithful of Christ…offer in veneration the worship of latria which is due to the true God, to this most Holy Sacrament” (The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Oecumenical Council of Trent [trans. J. Waterworth; London: C. Dolman, 1848] 268).
46 Hubmaier, Bann, in HS, 370, 372 (BH, 414, 417).
47 That Hubmaier employed metaphor to explain how believers could bear Christ's presence gives the lie to the notion that the bearing of Christ's presence by believers was itself a metaphor. For metaphor is used to elucidate literal claims.
48 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 358 (BH, 398).
49 Windhorst, Täuferisches Taufverständnis, 248–49.
50 Sachsse, Hubmaier als Theologe, 207–8.
51 Balthasar Hubmaier, Eine Summe eines ganzen christlichen Lebens, in HS, 111 (BH, 85).
52 Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 103 (BH, 75).
53 Windhorst, Täuferisches Taufverständnis, 250.
54 Sachsse, Hubmaier als Theologe, 208.
55 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 358 (BH, 398); Messe, in HS, 103 (BH, 75).
56 Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 103 (BH, 75).
57 Ibid.
58 Windhorst, Täuferisches Taufverständnis, 251.
59 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 300–1 (BH, 333–34).
60 Luther, Babylonian Captivity, in LW 36:43–44. It should be noted that Luther himself never used the term “consubstantiation,” which was first applied to Luther's Eucharistic doctrine by Philipp Melanchthon.
61 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 59; Mabry (Doctrine of the Church, 172) identically places “real presence” in scare quotes while reaching a similar conclusion.
62 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 44.
63 Martin Luther, Commentary on Galatians (1519), in LW 2:503; Huldrych Zwingli, De providentia dei, in Zwingli-Hauptschriften (ed. Fritz Blanke, Oskar Farner, and Rudolf Pfister; 7 vols.; Zürich: Zwingli-Verlag, 1940) 6:226–28.
64 Hubmaier, Rechenschaft, in HS, 469 (BH, 535).
65 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 360 (BH, 401).
66 Sachsse, Hubmaier als Theologe, 209.
67 Johann Loserth, D. Balthasar Hubmaier und die Anfänge der Wiedertaufe in Mähren (Brünn: Verlag der histor.-statist., 1893) 275.
68 Windhorst, Täuferisches Taufverständnis, 246–47.
69 As asserted by Rempel: “[T]he role of a sacrament as a bridge between the human and the divine has been rejected…. The Lord's Supper is supremely an ethical reality” (Lord's Supper, 56) and by Mabry: “Hubmaier…[was] not really concerned with Christ being bodily present with the church during the Supper; but rather, with the congregation of believers being able to be with Christ in His suffering, and to identify with His suffering by what was sure to be their own…. One, therefore, desired to suffer as Christ had suffered; not only for the cause of Christ, but also for the needs of the members of the community” (Doctrine of the Church, 171–72).
70 Ibid., 73, 169.
71 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 359 (BH, 399).
72 As seen from the Waldshut period in Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 102 (BH, 74), and from the Nikolsburg period in Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 356 (BH, 395). This fact is confirmed by Rempel, Lord's Supper, 75.
73 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 355, 361–62 (BH, 394, 402–3).
74 Ibid., in HS, 355 (BH, 394).
75 Ibid., in HS, 355–56 (BH, 394–95).
76 Ibid.
77 Ibid., in HS, 356 (BH, 395).
78 Ibid., in HS, 357 (BH, 397).
79 Pelikan, Reformation, 195–96. Luther claimed that “John 6 is to be totally set aside, on the ground that it does not utter a syllable about the sacrament” (Babylonian Captivity, in LW 36:32). With this verdict Zwingli concurred: “[I]n John 6, when Christ referred to eating his flesh and drinking his blood he simply meant believing in him as the one who has given his flesh and blood for our redemption and the cleansing of our sins. In this passage he is not speaking of the sacrament, but preaching the Gospel under the figure of eating and drinking his flesh and blood” (Lord's Supper, 199).
80 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 359 (BH, 399).
81 Ibid., in HS, 362 (BH, 403–4).
82 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 78.
83 Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 104 (BH, 76).
84 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 80–81.
85 Hubmaier, Summe, in HS, 114 (BH, 88).
86 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 303–4 (BH, 336–37).
87 Hubmaier, Summe, in HS, 114 (BH, 88).
88 Balthasar Hubmaier, Eine kurze Entschuldigung, in HS, 276 (BH, 302).
89 Hubmaier, Messe, in HS, 102–3 (BH, 74–75).
90 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 360 (BH, 400–1).
91 Ibid., in HS, 364 (BH, 406).
92 William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story (3d rev. ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996) 73–75.
93 Henry C. Vedder, Balthasar Hübmaier: The Leader of the Anabaptists (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1905) 122–29, 219–21, 242–44.
94 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 363 (BH, 405).
95 Windhorst, Täuferisches Taufverständnis, 248.
96 Sachsse, Hubmaier als Theologe, 208.
97 Hubmaier, Form des Nachtmals Christi, in HS, 359 (BH, 399).
98 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 88.
99 Hubmaier, Summe, in HS, 112, 114 (BH, 86, 88).
100 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 72.
101 Zwingli, Lord's Supper, 212.
102 Huldrych Zwingli, An Exposition of the Faith, in Zwingli and Bullinger, 259, 271.
103 Ibid., 262–65.
104 Amy Nelson Burnett, Karlstadt and the Origins of the Eucharistic Controversy: A Study in the Circulation of Ideas (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011) 62–63.
105 Ibid., 75, 179.
106 Hubmaier, Ein einfältiger Unterricht, in HS, 321 (BH, 291).
107 Rempel, Lord's Supper, 67.
108 Gary Macy, The Theologies of the Eucharist in the Early Scholastic Period (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984) 132.
109 John R. Sommerfeldt, The Spiritual Teachings of Bernard of Clairvaux (Kalamazoo, Mich.: Cistercian Publications, 1991) 31–38.
110 Mabry, Doctrine of the Church, 177.