Lutheranism- A Misnamed
Tradition?
What does it mean to be a Lutheran? Throughout the centuries
many Lutherans who have pondered this question have assumed that our name
answers the question. We are Lutherans. Therefore we are followers of Luther.
Therefore to be Lutheran is essentially to believe as Luther believed. Ironically
this likely would have been out of step with Luther’s own conception of the tradition
he started. For Luther, the core of the reformation was a focus on Jesus Christ.
As Luther stated: “The first and chief article is this:
Jesus Christ, our God and Lord, died for our sins and was raised again for our
justification.” Though Luther’s ego might have been pleased with the adulation
he received from the German masses, at his best I do not believe Luther would have
wanted his own name or even his own words to become the centerpiece of the tradition.
For Luther, Christ was always to remain at the center.
With this in mind, it has sometimes troubled me when
Lutherans start to treat Luther as the commander-in-chief in questions of faith.
Certainly I have participated in many wonderful discussions with fellow
Lutherans about God, faith, ethics, and other complex life issues. That being
said, here’s the one phrase that I think is overused by Lutherans- Well you know, Luther said, [insert answer
to question.]
Now before I go on, let me qualify this. I am a proud
Lutheran and I am fine with Lutherans wanting to reference Luther as a great
conversation partner in questions of faith. I certainly am fine with giving
Luther a prominent place at the table in our discussions because his perspectives
are certainly foundational. But what I believe we should not do is assume that Luther
has the answers to all of life’s hardest questions.
One reason we should not overly depend on Luther is because despite
having a brilliant mind that offers some great insights for today, Luther was
also a very flawed man. He was extremely intolerant towards those who disagreed
with him. He held views about non-Europeans and Jews that were horribly racist
and even encouraged violence towards them. And he actively encouraged the violent
suppression of peasants who had rebelled against the horribly oppressive conditions
of their day. So in some ways, he really wasn’t so insightful.
Now I am not saying that all of Luther’s views are
invalidated by these flaws. As saints and
sinners sometimes we get things right and sometimes we get things wrong. Many
times we are limited by the culture of our day, which I have no doubt Luther
was. My only point here is that sometimes Luther is not a reliable source of
truth and therefore his perspectives need to be scrutinized.
Furthermore we need to be cautious about trying to use Luther
to support our causes, because often this is wishful thinking. Some have tried to
appeal to Luther in the fight against racism. This seems problematic
considering Luther’s anti-Semitic writings, which in fact helped inspire
Nazism. Some have tried to appeal to Luther as an inspiration for ecumenism. Again
Luther had many good qualities, but he was not exactly someone who prioritized unity
in the midst of difference.
So yes, Lutherans should give Luther a place at the table as
we ponder questions of faith. But we also need to remember that in some cases
Luther was simply wrong, which means that sometimes we need to get over needing
Luther’s permission or approval. If we are looking for a guide and a savior,
that role belongs to Jesus Christ. And that’s the truth, because you know… Luther
would have agreed with me.
