Reformation
Wittenberg / Eisleben, Germany
Lutheran (Antinomian)
Rejected by the Formula of Concord
Also: Johann Agricola
⚠ His motives and his arguments must be looked at separately; we record both views. González twice hints that his motives may not have been pure. When Luther had him sent to Eisleben, González writes, Agricola blamed Melanchthon for his removal from the University of Wittenberg, and his later attacks very probably had to do with his wounded pride; and again, his opposition very probably had a tinge of jealousy, because he had had to leave the University of Wittenberg, while Melanchthon was one of its most distinguished professors. ⭐ We record these two remarks, and we also record his arguments themselves — a doubtful motive does not mean an argument fails, and an argument that is refuted does not mean the motive was bad. He was one of Luther's early companions at the University of Wittenberg, was born in Eisleben, Luther's own birthplace, and in 1519 took part with Luther in the Leipzig Disputation.
Below: first his own position, then the church’s verdict — kept separate. A rejected opinion keeps equal weight here.
His own position
⭐ He pushed to the very end the most practical question the doctrine of imputation has to face: if righteousness is freely given and comes from outside us, what use is the law? His answer in 1537 was that it has none. As González reports him: the law has no part in the preaching of the gospel, so the proper place of the law is in the court of justice, not in the pulpit; Moses ought to be sent to the gallows, and anyone who preaches his teaching has not even begun to understand what the gospel is about. He gave two reasons, in González's account: first, preaching the law cannot bring about repentance, because true repentance needs faith, and faith can come only from hearing the gospel; second, the law is no use as moral guidance for Christians, because Christians follow the will of God not from outward commandments but from an inward impulse.
⚠ In an earlier first phase (1527–1528) he argued about something else: does repentance follow faith, or does faith follow repentance? He held the first, Melanchthon the second. Luther brought the two together at Torgau (1528) to mediate, and it ended in a compromise.
The church’s verdict
⭐ The man who refuted him was Luther himself. González's judgment matters here: in a sense, he says, Agricola's position one-sidedly exaggerated Luther's earlier attacks on the law; but for that very reason Luther had to refute him, so that people would not misunderstand Luther's own view. — That is, Luther had to knock down with his own hands what his own words looked like when pushed to the end. In 1577 Article VI of the Formula of Concord formally rejected antinomianism and affirmed the third use of the law for believers. ⚠ What became of him: he had to leave Wittenberg for Brandenburg. González records that he finally recanted, but when he tried to meet Luther again in Wittenberg, Luther would not see him. In 1548, as one of the drafters of the Augsburg Interim, he lost, as González puts it, his standing to serve as a leader among Protestants.
What was at stake for salvation
What he was guarding was this: the gospel is not a new law — if the law is still preached from the pulpit, people will again measure their relationship with God by their works. ⚠ What his opponents were guarding was this: without the law as a guide, the reborn do not know how to live. In the end the Formula of Concord took half from each side.
Threads he belongs to
Justification
Dispute Counterclaim ⭐ He pushed the doctrine of imputation to the end: Moses, as González reports him, ought to be sent to the gallows. ⚠ The man who refuted him with his own hands was Luther himself — Luther had to knock down what his own words looked like when pushed to the end.