Words and Works

I am puzzled by the following statement from Luther:

"If I were ever compelled to make a choice, and had to dispense with either the works or the preaching of Christ, I would rather do without the works than the preaching; for the works are of no avail to me, whereas His words give life, as He himself declared" (Luther Preface to the New Testament).

Because of this, Luther declared his preference for the gospel of John over the synoptic gospels (and for similar reasons, his preference for Romans, Galatians and 1 Peter over the rest of the NT including the synoptic gospels).

If Luther means this genuinely, then this seems quite absurd.  After all, without Christ's works, we would not be saved, for "He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification" (Romans 4:25).  Even Luther considers the gospel to include the fact that "[b]y his death and resurrection, He has conquered sin, death, and hell for us and all who believe in Him" (Luther Preface).

Of course Luther is NOT repudiating the works of Christ, but then this passage seems to be merely heavy-handed rhetoric (I mean, c'mon... what's up with "for the works are of no avail to me").  I agree with Luther that the gospel of John is "unique in loveliness, and... far, far superior to the other three" (Luther Preface), but not because it includes more of Jesus' preaching than His actual works.

His language appears to be employed in order [i] to continue his disparagement of works and [ii] to justify his preference of certain New Testament texts (he dismisses the letter of James, but more on that later).

Leaving aside [ii], I understand Luther's concern with [i], however the works of Christ are crucial in the life of the Christian.  For Paul tells us to imitate him as he imitates Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1), and Christ tells us to take His yoke upon us and to learn from Him (Matthew 11).  Of course there is more to be said here regarding faith and works (which I will get to in due time, for Luther himself does not repudiate the need for works, only that it is not part of our justification, which is simply a matter of Christ's alien righteousness being imputed into us).  But for now, I'm worried about this kind of rhetoric against works, for such rhetoric can then be employed as a means of excluding much of the Biblical grounds for spiritual transformation and spiritual discipline (just think of the host of Protestants who get all uppity-do against Dallas Willard).  Spiritual transformation is primarily the work of the Holy Spirit in us, but there is an element of our cooperation (which again can only be enabled by God working in us).  Instead of high-charged rhetoric, I think it is best to be clear and specific when it comes to targeting flaws in the faith (though Luther never seemed to care for subtleties and distinctions... where's Duns Scotus when you need him).

-e