Enemies of the Cross is Vincent Evener's careful investigation of the influence of that line of medieval mysticism proceeding from Meister Eckhardt (c. 1260-c. 1328) and including Henry Suso (1295–1366), Johannes Tauler (c. 1300–1361), and the later fourteenth-century anonymous treatise, The German Theology, on the thought of Martin Luther, Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, and Thomas Müntzer. Along with aspects of St. Augustine's theology, argues Evener, mysticism not only offered key concepts foundational for a soteriological alternative to the prevailing scholastic understanding, but these concepts also had significant implications for the three reformers’ understanding of the role of suffering in Christian life, how certitude of truth is attained, and how life should be lived by the Christian individual and community. From this shared crucible, states Evener, Luther, Karlstadt, and Müntzer “were equally involved in this creative theological and pastoral work” (3).
All three agreed that sinfulness originated from self-assertion, although each man understood the concept differently. Luther saw it as self-trust, the conviction that the human being plays an active role in achieving salvation. For Karlstadt, it was self-will, built on reason and sense perception and fashioned according to humanity's own desires. And Müntzer took it as mere pleasure seeking. Contrary to the general approach of scholastic theology, for these three men, justification did not come from humans offering something to God for eternal reward, but via a separation from the fallen, inborn desires that led to self-assertion.
Two concepts from the Eckhardtian mystical tradition proved essential for their alternate soteriology: annihilation and union with the divine. Inborn desires, the source of self-assertion, had to be eliminated, and human beings had to realize the truth of their own nothingness before God. Once this occurred, union with the divine was possible, although each man understood it differently. For Luther, it was union with Christ through faith in the Word extra nos. Karlstadt saw it as self-hatred to the point of the rejection of one's own will and a sinking into the divine will. And Müntzer understood it as God's possession of and direct communication with souls of the elect.
How, then, did one annihilate self-assertion and become open to union with God? Through suffering. Although all three men ascribe “a positive pedagogical value to outward suffering” (221), for each the process was largely internal. Luther claimed that it could be provoked by “anything that taught sinners their sinfulness and nothingness coram deo” (76). For Karlstadt, it was primarily the anguish caused as the human being denied self-will and conformed to God's will. And for Müntzer, “God moved elect souls to salvation through terrible spiritual consternation; on the other side of consternation lay true faith and fear of God” (197).
A cross sent by God for human edification also offered certitude of one's beliefs. However, not all suffering took this form. All three men agreed that false forms existed, including unwanted suffering, suffering embraced as a means of eliciting divine reward, and self-chosen suffering. Thus, understanding suffering became a means by which to identify false doctrine, teachers, and experiences and, in the end, each of these reformers accused the others of false suffering.
Finally, suffering and union with God had implications for each man's views on Christian life of the individual and society. They led Luther to encourage Christians to accept gradual reform and “participate in government and economy, understood as original and enduringly good structures of God's creation” (205). Because Karlstadt thought that progress in the Christian life was sinking into the divine will, he “sought to create a different sort of ecclesial and political actor, committed to the local implementation of right worship and the acceptance of martyrdom, if necessary” (239). By 1524, Müntzer had rejected passive martyrdom. The elect were now “ready to live for God rather than for human beings, even to the point of overturning a society structured to serve the pleasures of the powerful” (239).
Vincent Evener's work engages multiple historiographies, but he is mostly in dialogue with those who have discussed the relationship between Reformation theology and mysticism. Until the 1960s, mysticism had been viewed solely as a medieval ascetic phenomenon, an effort to achieve union with the divine through contemplative exercises, unmediated by Christ, the Word, and the Sacraments—thus contrary to Luther's soteriology. Since then, however, some historians have argued for the influence of mystical language on Reformation theology, and even spoken in terms of a Protestant mysticism, pointing to Luther's insistence on complete dependence on Christ for salvation and union with Christ as the starting point for the believer—centerpieces of his doctrine of justification.
Evener follows this historiography but expands the point, demonstrating that Luther also used a mystical understanding of suffering to identify false Christians and as a point of departure for his view of the Christian life. New, however, is Evener's inclusion of Karlstadt and Müntzer in this picture. In his introduction, he states, “I will argue that both radicals, especially Müntzer, transformed the mystical inheritance in areas of fundamental soteriology and epistemology” (16). Whether one prefers to call the resultant theologies of these three reformers “mystical,” “characterized by mystical thought,” or “replete with mystically-inspired concepts” is to some degree a matter of preference. But there is no doubt that Evener has demonstrated convincingly the influence of the Eckhartian mystical tradition on these men.
And that is the strength of the book, namely that we see this tradition as a key component of the crucible in which Luther, Karlstadt, and Müntzer formulated their theologies. Particularly impressive is Evener's careful explication of which texts from this tradition each man was reading and when. He couples these findings with a systematic analysis of their early writings, allowing him to demonstrate the influence of this mystical tradition on their thought. As a result, we are offered deeper insight into the origins of the Wittenberg Reformation, the commonalities between these three reformers, and their eventual parting of the ways. In the end, Evener provides yet more evidence of the creative ferment occurring in Wittenberg during this period, and not only in the mind of Luther.
