As
religious biographies set to film go, "Luther" is among the best. Few
serious directors have taken on the topic of Christian history since "The
Ten Commandments." After the movie better informed about Martin Luther and
the Reformation.
Although
important parts of Luther's life, positions and views are glazed over or ignored,
it serves to incite curiosity about his 95 Theses and the Augsburg Confession.
The
difficulty with a film portrayal of one of Christian history's more influential
figures is that the historical Martin Luther could not be captured into a couple
of hours. It is just a movie, and is not supposed to address complex eternal questions.
Protestant
Christians will bristle at the brief look at Luther's theology, and the emphasis
on the politics. What else could a filmmaker do? Already, such a film was destined
for a short life in the theaters, and the fact is true: much of the issues surrounding
Luther stemmed from his reaction to politics.
Roman
Catholics might be upset by the anti-Catholic slant. I do not think the film was
meant to put Catholicism in a bad light as much as it was meant to show what events
and concerns caused Luther to react. The movie was aptly titled "Luther"
and not "The Beginning of the Reformation" or "The Great Religious
Revolt."
Indulgences
have never been one of Catholicism's honorable or defensible provisions. There
is no telling of Luther's story without examining the abuses of men looking to
profit from the fear and guilt of illiterate believers. A modern Catholic will
rightly note that personal Scripture among the laity is now encouraged by Rome,
and be frustrated as he acknowledges indulgences are still part of the present
Catholic theology.
Lutherans
will find the movie intriguing, realizing Luther's battle against Rome begot their
own denomination. Coming back to the origin of the Lutheran faith will be exciting
and educational.
Joseph
Fiennes is believable, albeit a little wooden. His Luther will remind viewers
of Jeremy Irons' character in "The Mission." He is noble, calm and steadfast.
Like Irons' priest, Luther faces great adversity through his desire to follow
Jesus Christ.
Luther
comes across as a noble would-be martyr. He shows godly courage, and a few levels
of depth. What is not shown are his own imperfections and inconsistencies. If
this is all you know about Martin Luther, then you only know one small, if not
important, side of him. Like St. Peter, like Deitrch Bonhoeffer, Luther had clear
imperfections, yet he still stoof up for his beliefs.
When
Luther writhes in angst against temptation and evil, he speaks angrily to Satan
as would anyone to his most cursed enemy. Like C. S. Lewis' Wormwood in "The
Screwtape Letters," we can taste the insidious, pervasive nature of Satan.
The spiritual conflict endured by Luther is not the glamorized head-spinning of
"The Exorcist," but shows that he was not merely fighting flesh and
blood entities through academic arguments.
My
recommendation of "Luther" is 100%. Sunday school, CCD and high school
groups could watch it as fodder for discussion. This isn't for the "Adventures
In Odyssey" or "Veggie Tales" crowd. My small group watched it,
and discussed it comparing it with what we understood of Scripture. Could we stand
as Luther stood for the defense of God's Word?
A
solid companion to the movie is "Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther"
by Roland Herbert Bainton. It is an excellent addition to church video libraries.
Anthony
Trendl
•