20/12/2017

Dr Saranyana recently reflected on the person and the work of Martin Luther

In his talk entitled “Luther:500 years later”, the emeritus professor and scientific researcher covered three theories related to the Lutheran reform of 1517. 

On 14 December Dr Josep-Ignasi Saranyana gave a talk in which he talked about the person and the work of Martin Luther within the framework of the V centenary since the Protestant Reform.    

The talk, organised by the Faculty of Humanities and open to the whole UIC Barcelona community, focused on three theories. As part of the first theory, Dr Saranyana underlined the fact that Luther joined a broader reformist movement, which had already started in the Catholic world in the middle of the 14th century mainly in the field of academic institutions.  “Despite its initial position as part of the reform it became separate from the beginning of the early medieval period”. 

As part of the second theory provided by the emeritus professor and scientific researcher from CSIC, he indicated that the Lutheran “novelty” of justification was inspired by late medieval sources.  A “novelty” that, as Saranyana explained, did not achieve its definitive shape until 1522, through the translation of the bible.  Throughout everything, the impact of the Lutheran “novelty” clung to the theoretical and religious terrain. 

The third and final theory presented was the idea that the most influential proposal made by Luther in the configuration of modern times was not his doctrine on justification, but a reflection on the “conscience”. 

The emeritus professor indicated that Luther achieved his discovery when he tried to leave behind the huge anxiety he felt about his salvation.  “Throughout everything, the Augustinian friar was not aware, at least in the initial stages, of the dogmatic consequences of his positioning, as Dino Belluci noted, and in my opinion this was correct” he stated.  

Dr Saranyana also added that maybe at the end of his life, “he realised that the true rupture with Rome was more dogmatic in nature than disciplinary”.