Article #272-2 | Gutenberg Articles

Excerpt

Excerpt from An Open Letter on Translating, by Martin Luther

Grace and peace in Christ, honorable, worthy and dear Lord and
friend. I received your writing with the two questions or queries
requesting my response. In the first place, you ask why I, in the
3rd chapter of Romans, translated the words of St. Paul:
"Arbitramur hominem iustificari ex fide absque operibus" as "We
hold that the human will be justified without the works of the law
but only by faith." You also tell me that the Papists are causing
a great fuss because St. Paul's text does not contain the word
sola (alone), and that my changing of the words of God is not to
be tolerated. Secondly, you ask if the departed saints intercede
for us. Regarding the first question, you can give the papists
this answer from me--if you so desire.

On the first hand, if I, Dr. Luther, had thought that all the
Papists together were capable of translating even one passage of
Scripture correctly and well, I would have gathered up enough
humility to ask for their aid and assistance in translating the
New Testament into German. However, I spared them and myself the
trouble, as I knew and still see with my own eyes that not one of
them knows how to speak or translate German. It is obvious,
however, that they are learning to speak and write German from my
translations. Thus, they are stealing my language from me--a
language they had little knowledge of before this. However, they
do not thank me for this but instead use it against me. Yet I
readily grant them this as it tickles me to know that I have
taught my ungrateful students, even my enemies, to speak.

Secondly, you might say that I have conscientiously translated the
New Testament into German to the best of my ability, and that I
have not forced anyone to read it. Rather I have left it open,
only doing the translation as a service to those who could not do
it as well. No one is forbidden to do it better. If someone does
not wish to read it, he can let it lie, for I do not ask anyone to
read it or praise anyone who does! It is my Testament and my
translation--and it shall remain mine. If I have made errors
within it (although I am not aware of any and would most certainly
be unwilling to intentionally mistranslate a single letter) I will
not allow the papists to judge for their ears continue to be too
long and their hee-haws too weak for them to be critical of my
translating. I know quite well how much skill, hard work,
understanding and intelligence is needed for a good translation.
They know it less than even the miller's donkey for they have
never tried it.

Explanation

Detailed Explanation of Luther’s An Open Letter on Translating

This excerpt from Martin Luther’s An Open Letter on Translating (1530) is a fiery defense of his German translation of the New Testament, particularly his rendering of Romans 3:28, a key verse in the Protestant Reformation. The letter responds to criticisms from Catholic (Papist) scholars who accused Luther of distorting Scripture by adding the word "alone" (sola) to Paul’s statement on justification by faith. Luther’s reply is polemical, witty, and unapologetic, blending theological conviction, linguistic pride, and personal defiance.

Below is a breakdown of the context, themes, literary devices, and textual significance of the passage, with a focus on close reading of Luther’s rhetoric and arguments.

1. Context: Why This Letter Matters

Historical Background:
- Luther’s German Bible (1522, revised 1534) was a cornerstone of the Reformation, making Scripture accessible to the common people (previously, the Bible was mostly in Latin, controlled by the Church).
- The Catholic Church opposed his translation, especially his emphasis on "sola fide" (faith alone), which undermined the Church’s teachings on works, sacraments, and papal authority.
- Romans 3:28 (in Latin: "Arbitramur hominem iustificari ex fide absque operibus") was a battleground. Luther translated it as:
  "We hold that the human will be justified without the works of the law but only by faith."
  - The addition of "only" (allein) was controversial because the original Greek/Latin did not explicitly include it. Critics accused Luther of altering Scripture to fit his theology.
Purpose of the Letter:
- Luther writes to a nobleman (likely a supporter) who relayed two questions:
  1. Why did he add "only" to Romans 3:28?
  2. Do the saints intercede for the living? (A Catholic doctrine Luther rejected.)
- The excerpt focuses on the first question, where Luther defends his translation method while mocking his Catholic critics.

2. Themes in the Excerpt

A. Authority & Translation

Luther’s Defiance of Papal Authority:
- He rejects the idea that the Church (or "Papists") has a monopoly on biblical interpretation.
- His tone is sarcastic and dismissive: "If I had thought all the Papists together were capable of translating even one passage correctly... I would have asked for their aid."
- He inverts the power dynamic—instead of deferring to Church scholars, he positions himself as the superior translator and teacher of German to his enemies.
Translation as a Personal & Theological Act:
- Luther frames his work as a service to the German people, not an imposition: "I have not forced anyone to read it."
- He claims ownership: "It is my Testament and my translation—and it shall remain mine."
- This reflects the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura (Scripture alone as authority), where individuals (not the Church) interpret the Bible.

B. Language & Nationalism

German as a Sacred & Living Language:
- Luther elevates German (previously seen as a "vulgar" tongue) to a vehicle of divine truth.
- He mocks the Papists’ poor German, saying they "are learning to speak and write German from my translations"—implying they are linguistic parasites.
- His pride in German ties into Protestant nationalism—breaking from Latin (the Church’s language) to empower the German people.

C. Justification by Faith Alone (Sola Fide)

The Theological Stakes:
- The dispute over "only" (allein) is not just linguistic but doctrinal.
- Catholics argued that faith + works justify a person; Luther insisted faith alone saves (Ephesians 2:8-9).
- His translation clarifies Paul’s meaning (as he sees it): "without works of the law but only by faith."
- He does not apologize for this addition, implying that theological truth justifies linguistic adaptation.

D. Humor & Contempt for Opponents

Satirical & Insulting Tone:
- Luther ridicules the Papists with animal imagery:
  - "Their ears continue to be too long and their hee-haws too weak" (comparing them to donkeys).
  - "They know it less than even the miller’s donkey"—a deliberate insult to their intelligence.
- He enjoys their reliance on his work: "It tickles me to know that I have taught my ungrateful students, even my enemies, to speak."
- This polemical style was typical of Luther, who often used humor and insults to undermine opponents.

3. Literary Devices & Rhetorical Strategies

Luther’s writing is persuasive, combative, and rich in rhetorical techniques:

Device	Example	Effect
Irony/Sarcasm	"I would have gathered up enough humility to ask for their aid..."	Mocks the idea that Papists are competent translators.
Hyperbole	"Not one of them knows how to speak or translate German."	Exaggerates to dismiss his critics entirely.
Animal Imagery	"They know it less than even the miller’s donkey."	Dehumanizes opponents, making them seem foolish.
Parallelism	"I have not forced anyone to read it. Rather I have left it open..."	Creates rhythmic balance, reinforcing his reasonable stance.
Direct Address	"You can give the papists this answer from me—if you so desire."	Makes the reader feel involved in the debate.
Antithesis	"Their ears are too long and their hee-haws too weak."	Contrasts absurdity (long ears = donkeys) with incompetence (weak hee-haws = poor arguments).
Apologia (Defense)	"If I have made errors... I would not intentionally mistranslate a single letter."	Preemptively defends his work while shifting blame to critics.

4. Significance of the Passage

A. For the Reformation

Bible Translation as a Radical Act:
- Luther’s defiance challenged the Church’s control over Scripture.
- His German Bible became a model for vernacular translations (e.g., Tyndale’s English Bible).
Sola Fide as a Core Doctrine:
- The debate over "only" crystallized the Protestant-Catholic divide on salvation.
- Luther’s unapologetic stance set a precedent for Protestant resistance to Church authority.

B. For Translation Theory

Dynamic Equivalence vs. Literalism:
- Luther prioritized meaning over word-for-word accuracy, arguing that clarity for the common reader mattered more than strict literalism.
- This influenced modern translation philosophy (e.g., NIV vs. KJV debates).
Translator’s Authority:
- Luther claimed the right to interpret and adapt Scripture, a bold move that empowered later translators.

C. For German Language & Culture

Standardization of German:
- Luther’s Bible helped unify the German language, creating a standard dialect (based on Saxon chancellor German).
- His vivid, direct style shaped German prose for centuries.
National Identity:
- By rejecting Latin, Luther linked Protestantism with German nationalism, fostering a distinct religious and cultural identity.

5. Close Reading: Key Lines Explained

"If I, Dr. Luther, had thought that all the Papists together were capable of translating even one passage of Scripture correctly..."
- Tone: Sarcastic, condescending.
- Purpose: Dismisses Catholic scholars as incompetent before they can even critique him.
"They are stealing my language from me—a language they had little knowledge of before this."
- Metaphor: Theft implies the Papists are parasites, benefiting from his work without credit.
- Nationalism: German is "his" language, reinforcing his role as its cultural guardian.
"It is my Testament and my translation—and it shall remain mine."
- Possessive Pronouns ("my"): Asserts ownership over Scripture’s German form, rejecting Church authority.
- Defiance: No one can take it from him, not even the Pope.
"They know it less than even the miller’s donkey..."
- Animal Imagery: Dehumanizes opponents, making them seem stupid and stubborn.
- Humorous Insult: Undermines their credibility with absurdity.
"I do not ask anyone to read it or praise anyone who does!"
- False Modesty: Pretends indifference, but the aggressive tone shows he cares deeply about his work’s reception.
- Challenge: Dares critics to ignore him, knowing his Bible’s popularity makes that impossible.

6. Conclusion: Why This Excerpt Endures

Luther’s Open Letter on Translating is more than a defense—it’s a manifesto on:

The power of vernacular Scripture (breaking Church control).
The translator’s role as both scholar and theologian.
The Reformation’s core: sola fide, sola Scriptura.

His combative wit, linguistic pride, and unshakable conviction make this passage a masterclass in polemical writing. It also reveals Luther’s genius:

Theological: He shapes doctrine through translation.
Linguistic: He elevates German to a sacred language.
Rhetorical: He dominates the debate with humor and insults.

Ultimately, this excerpt captures the spirit of the Reformation—bold, rebellious, and unapologetically committed to making the Bible accessible to all.

Further Reflection Questions

How does Luther’s tone compare to modern debates over Bible translations (e.g., gender-inclusive language)?
Is Luther’s addition of "only" justified theologically, or is it an overreach?
**How does this passage reflect the broader tension between tradition (Catholicism) and innovation (Protestantism)?
Would Luther’s arguments hold up in today’s academic translation standards?

This text remains a pivotal document in religious, linguistic, and cultural history, demonstrating how words can spark revolutions.

Questions

Question 1

The passage’s depiction of Luther’s relationship with his critics is most accurately characterised by which of the following dynamics?

A. A reluctant but respectful acknowledgment of their scholarly limitations, tempered by a desire for eventual reconciliation.
B. A performative humility that masks an underlying anxiety about the validity of his translational choices.
C. A paternalistic condescension rooted in the belief that his critics are intellectually incapable of engaging with the text.
D. A combative triumphalism that weaponises linguistic superiority and theological conviction to dismiss opposition.
E. An ambivalent oscillation between defiance and conciliation, revealing an internal conflict about his role as a reformer.

Question 2

Luther’s assertion that “It is my Testament and my translation—and it shall remain mine” primarily serves to:

A. underscore the personal labour invested in the translation, appealing to the reader’s sympathy for his individual struggle.
B. reject the notion of Scripture as a communal or ecclesiastical possession, instead framing it as a product of individual interpretive authority.
C. preemptively absolve himself of any errors by claiming sole responsibility, thereby shielding his allies from blame.
D. invoke a proprietary metaphor to critique the commercialisation of religious texts by the Church.
E. highlight the temporal and contextual boundaries of his work, implying its eventual obsolescence.

Question 3

The passage’s use of animal imagery (e.g., “miller’s donkey,” “hee-haws”) functions most effectively to:

A. evoke a pastoral simplicity that aligns with Luther’s vision of a Bible accessible to rural, uneducated readers.
B. establish a biblical precedent for his arguments by alluding to the donkey as a symbol of humility in Scripture.
C. create a stark contrast between the divine inspiration of his work and the earthly, bestial nature of his critics.
D. signal his frustration with the debate’s descent into ad hominem attacks, thereby distancing himself from such tactics.
E. reduce his opponents to figures of ridicule, stripping them of intellectual and moral credibility through dehumanising comparison.

Question 4

Which of the following best describes the implicit argumentative structure of Luther’s response to the accusation of altering Scripture?

A. He reframes the accusation as a matter of interpretive fidelity rather than textual literalism, asserting that his translation captures the spirit of Paul’s message more accurately than his critics’ rigid adherence to the letter.
B. He concedes the validity of the criticism but argues that the ends (spreading the Gospel) justify the means (linguistic adaptation).
C. He shifts the burden of proof onto his critics, demanding they demonstrate their own translational competence before questioning his.
D. He appeals to the authority of the German language itself, suggesting that its inherent qualities necessitate the addition of “only” for clarity.
E. He dismisses the accusation as a distraction from the larger theological debate, redirecting attention to the doctrine of saints’ intercession.

Question 5

The passage’s closing lines—“I know quite well how much skill, hard work, understanding and intelligence is needed for a good translation. They know it less than even the miller’s donkey”—are most effectively read as:

A. a lament over the decline of scholarly rigour in theological circles, implicitly calling for educational reform.
B. a veiled invitation to his critics to attempt their own translations, confident they will fail and thus prove his superiority.
C. an admission of the subjective and fallible nature of translation, undermining his earlier claims to authority.
D. a metaphorical extension of his earlier animal imagery, reinforcing the idea that his opponents are incapable of rational discourse.
E. a rhetorical coup de grâce that consolidates his earlier insults into a final, devastating indictment of his critics’ incompetence, leaving no room for rebuttal.

Solutions and Explanations

1) Correct answer: D

Why D is most correct: Luther’s response is not merely defensive but aggressively triumphalist. He weaponises his linguistic skill (“they are learning to speak and write German from my translations”) and theological conviction (“I will not allow the papists to judge”) to dismiss his critics entirely. The tone is combative, even mocking (“it tickles me to know that I have taught my ungrateful students”), and he refuses to engage with their arguments on equal terms. Instead, he asserts dominance through insults, sarcasm, and unapologetic ownership of his work. This aligns with D’s “combative triumphalism”.