How Luther Regards Moses: The Lectures on Deuteronomy by Miles Hopgood (review)

Reviewed by: How Luther Regards Moses: The Lectures on Deuteronomy by Miles Hopgood Mark Mattes How Luther Regards Moses: The Lectures on Deuteronomy. By Miles Hopgood. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2023. 213 pp. This book takes on a specific theme, Luther's alleged indifference to law (21), and dismantles it in light of Luther's reaction to Karlstadt's "evangelical legalism," especially over Karlstadt's rejection of the use of images in worship. Often heralded as the champion of Christian liberty, to the point of dismissing the value of the law in [End Page 80] public life, Luther's Lectures on Deuteronomy show that law pushes Christians to reflect on how, in light of the first table of the law, they grow in faith, and in light of the second table, how they grow in love. Hopgood points out that Luther's teaching on law was in flux between his 1520 treatise The Babylonian Captivity of the Church and his 1525 Against Heavenly Prophets. Of course, The Babylonian Captivity emphasized evangelical liberty. But, by the time of The Misuse of the Mass (1521), Luther was advocating a scripturally valid "law of Christ" (lex Christi) as a counterpoint to the unwarranted "law of the pope." In the latter, human laws and teachings were being substituted for scripture as the canon for doctrine and practice, particularly in the discussion about the nature of priesthood. Luther pointed out that the pope advanced his own theory of the priesthood in opposition to the universal priesthood established on the basis of the preaching of the word (36). "The sin of confusing human and divine teaching Luther now articulates in law-centered framework: in this case, the pope and his curia have added to the law by creating their own priesthood and in so doing abrogated the law" (37). While the Levitical priesthood was distinguished from the Christian priesthood as "outward" in contrast to an "inward" matter, Luther discerned a continuity between the Levitical law of Moses and the law of Christ since both are established by God (38). Karlstadt failed to understand that this continuity, which highlights the normative aspect of law under both dispensations, does not entail that Moses is binding for Christians in the same way he was for Jews. For instance, with regard to Karlstadt's iconoclasm, idolatrous images in the heart must be removed and not merely statues of wood and stone. As a matter of the heart, idolatry cannot be reduced to mere human artifacts. Hopgood develops Luther's view of Moses by articulating Moses's three roles: author, prophet, and ruler (18). With respect to the first, Luther sees Moses's authorship as exerting agency and artistry. Authorial intent is the key to deciphering Deuteronomy's depiction of Moses (18). Unlike modern historical-critical approaches to the Pentateuch, Luther countenances no distance between Moses's and [End Page 81] Luther's own audience (87). Indeed, Moses could pass for a lecturer in Wittenberg and Luther could just as easily have appreciated Moses's lectures had he lived in Moses's time. (105) In contrast, Karlstadt's Moses, for Luther, is a construct, one that presents what Luther saw as the Jewish way to understand the law (138), focused on outward matters and not the heart (90). As a prophet, Moses primarily teaches the faith. The first table of the law leads us to understand the content of faith as centered in God while the second table directs us to love our neighbor (104). Indeed, the law offers believers "divine wisdom" (123); Christian ethics flows out of the worship to which the law directs us (124). Moses's law falls short of Christ's will (141), but, even so, Moses conveys both law and gospel in his writings (157). As a ruler, Moses exemplifies the quest for a "just government" (156). Hopgood's goal was to challenge any supposition that Luther was indifferent to law. He succeeds. Mark Mattes Grand View University Des Moines, Iowa Copyright © 2024 Johns Hopkins University Press and Lutheran Quarterly, Inc.