The world of Lutheranism is very different from the world of Calvinists.
I realized this when preparing for the philosophy subject test of the Graduate Record Examination at the end of my senior year of college. Ethics would be a component of this sub-test. My philosophy professor realized that I had not had an ethics course. How was it possible for a new Lutheran college to have no ethics course in its Philosophy curriculum? Clearly, ethics was not an important part of the Lutheran heritage. In contrast, the study of ethics is fundamental to Calvinists.
H. Richard Niebuhr is considered one of the most important Christian theological ethicists in mid-20th-century America, best known for his 1951 book Christ and Culture. In that book, he distinguished four types of relationships between Christians and their surrounding culture. One is Christ against culture, as in the Benedict Option presented several blogs ago. The second is Christ of Culture, as in 19th century Victorian England. That is no longer a realistic option and it is not even desirable because it overrides biblical understandings of the faith. The third is Christ above culture, where the Calvinist Option fits. The fourth is Christ and Culture in Paradox, as exemplified by the Apostle Paul and centuries later by Martin Luther.
Luther was a Bible scholar and preacher. He was not a systematic theologian, unlike John Calvin and his lawyerly Institutes of Christian Religion. Most of Luther’s writing were extemporaneous sermons, which University students transcribed. Relevant here is Luther’s distinction between two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of this world. Other phrases were between temporal and spiritual life, between person and society, between time in this world and time in eternity, between wrath and mercy. He claimed that the expectations of the Christian life were independent of rules followed in governed social life.
Most of what we know of the kingdom of the world is his expectation of governments is his treatise on Against The Rioting Peasants in response to the Peasants Revolt of 1525. In his Germanic way, Luther abhorred disorder. Even if the result was that about 100,000 peasants were slaughtered. That result was not only OK with Luther; he demanded it of the government. Because they were in revolt, the peasants forfeited their status as citizens
In the context of that revolt, the government and society had the task of restoring order and providing safety for its citizens. Key passages for Luther and Lutherans are Romans 13:1 “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God.” The other is Matthew 22:21, where Jesus said “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s.”
The Peasants Revolt also significantly changed Luther’s thinking about the Holy Spirit, whom the peasants claimed as their authority—”the Spirit told us to revolt.” In the years before, Luther wrote hymns to the Spirit and referred frequently to the Spirit. Afterward, he had little to say about the Spirit and began the Lutheran heritage of basically ignoring the Spirit beyond confessing him in the historic Creeds.
Obedience is basic to German culture, and obedience to the governing body is a basic characteristic of Lutherans. There has been no Lutheran president of the USA; theologically political government is just not very important. The kingdom that counts is the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of this world.
The basic question here is what kind of relationship Christians should have with the new Post-Modern culture of our times. This relationship with the government was much easier when the national culture shared the biblical worldview. That’s gone now. But the need to live, work and raise children in the larger culture remains. Withdrawing from it is just not realistic. Rather influence it through the witness of living well within the Kingdom of God.
How have you experienced the tension between living out your personal Christian life in a hostile Post-Modern culture? Can you offer examples of the conflict in your life or the lives of others?
It seems if we feel threatened by the culture it would be difficult to reach it with the Gospel. We can have a mindset of protecting our turf rather than knowing our turf is secure in Christ. Many seemed to be concerned that the government is going to interfere with the church especially in terms of one man and one woman issues. I think we can do much better in reaching the culture when we don’t feel threatened by it.
Hi, Tom. Interesting thought that “our turf is secure in Christ.” The issue is which turf. There have been many different church cultures. Some (many) have not been healthy. I think a sorting out of churches cultures is going on. Repressive ones (Roman Catholic and extreme fundamentalism) are not faring well in the competition for religious attention. From what I can see the community church movement is growing because so many find their culture to be healthy and life affirming. They have a bright future. Traditional Protestant church cultures have a lot to overcome. Those that have gone liberal simply don’t have much to offer.
Thanks David, Couldn’t be more relevant. Charles Colson was getting at this with Kingdom of God. Today it seems either faith is seen as irrelevant by progressives Or we are trying to Christianize government by the Trumpies with no one listening. Minds are made up.
Hi, Bruce. Yes, minds to seem to be made up and that is worrisome. I don’t understand progressives and the determination of many to wipe out Christian influences. My hope is that their over-reaction will bring a constructive re-action.
This is an excellent piece which could stir up tons of responses, because it hits on key questions facing Christians of every strip in our time. I’ll just say this. Perhaps the answer relates to whether we’re more interested in “ethics” or “ethos.” I think of ethics being about what to do and ethos about how to be. While both are worth exploration, I think Jesus would be more about ethos. If that’s true, then wouldn’t we be more interested in living a new life Jesus’ way, whatever’s going on in the culture? Instead of laying out specific behavioral rules and such? Perhaps, like Gandhi, we could read the Sermon on the Mount each morning, giving the Holy Spirit a chance to instill the way of Jesus more deeply into our minds and hearts, so it becomes more and more second nature. That way, I can discern better which efforts in the political kingdom are more aligned with the Jesus Way and so can be supported, and which are not. I prefer ethos to ethics, and under the umbrella of grace and forgiveness, want to seek to live as best I can the Jesus life, boldly and fearlessly. Didn’t Luther urge, “Sin boldly?” But, then, maybe I’m over-simplifying.
I have not worked the distinction between ethics and ethos. Your definition makes sense. We believers should be known by our characteristic Gospel oriented ways and our loving relationships. Until recent decades Christians have had a privileged status in our country. It is sobering to see how much resentment our ethics caused. We have to overcome that. Now we are back to Roman times. We have to earn a our way forward.
Werner Elert’s classic book THE CHRISTIAN ETHOS makes this point well.
Fran, Elert’s The Structure of Lutheranism was pivotal in my understanding of Lutheran. I don’t remember getting into his Christian Ethos. The key issue is Gospel vs Law. But usually that discussion doesn’t address Calvin’s reliance on the Third Use of the Law.
As an evangelist and one who also works daily at encouraging believers around the world to bring Christ to life in the hearts of everyone in their communities through simple acts of kindness I open myself up to a lot of attacks from our secular culture. The level of anger, bitterness and negativity to God’s word and to those who believe is really something to experience. I know to the average Christian that goes to church on Sunday and then really doesn’t talk about their faith the rest of the week, they are probably unaware of this level of resentment.
I believe that there are too many that are too busy with life to see how our government, our education system and the powerful society influencers are all working hard to remove faith from our lives. Through this whole Covid crisis how many times have we heard “Follow the science” “Trust the science” and at the same time ridicule those of faith and make worship out to be some evil disease spreading ritual.
The true crisis is not Covid, but our lack of faith and the ever increasing space between us and God.
Amen brother preach it 👍
Well written Pastor Luecke!
I have experienced anger in many people instead of love. People tend to get angry when they lose the ability to control their lives such as through this pandemic. When we realize we can’t control our lives but instead we rest in Him, our anger fades and we find peace in seeking God through the Holy Spirit.
Chris, thanks for reading my stuff. Anger also emerges when people feel they are not being recognized and supported. Hence, political revolutions. I join the many who are wondering what is happening in our national politics. The extreme right is certainly angry (with cause, I think). I don’t understand the progressives.
Appreciated your article.
– Agree that the two Realms/two Kingdoms gives Lutherans a more Christian response.
– Part of the problem of the ELCA is that they have gone after a leftist pietistic or a Calvinist approach to politics.
– While Luther did urge the princes to restore order, he was also horrified with what brutality they brought the sword.
Douglas, thanks. Just a comment on “leftist pietistic.” I am proud to call my self a Lutheran Pietist. They understood the Holy Spirit. As Lutherans, they would have had the customary German obedience to the governing authority.
very interesting! Unlike Martin Luther, I rely on the Holy Spirit to discern when to speak up, work for change, or keep my mouth shut.
Hi, Karen. Helpful distinction. From what I can see, LCMS Lutherans leaders have chosen to speak up by lobbying on Right to Life issues. Otherwise attention is focused on church issues (Kingdom of God). It is well engrained among Lutheran pastors not to speak out on political issues (keep your mouth shut). You are bound to offend someone in the congregation. It’s the Kingdom of God that counts.
BTW, After considerable effort though difference approaches, I was not able to generate more Views from the Pew. So I have dropped that feature. My natural audience is Lutherans, and few have been in non-Lutheran congregations. So their views are not particularly interesting.
Possibly you can direct me more sources on the two kingdoms and the differences between Calvin and Luther’s view on gov. I think the brief article dips in a number of thought provoking subjects.
Good question. Two kingdom thinking is deeply embedded in Luther’s writing and Lutheran seminary teachings. This is well stated in Luther’s treatise on “Secular Authority,” written in 1523. You can find it in the classic collection of Luther’s writings edited by John Dillinger in 1961. Calvin did his work several decades after Luther’s influence began. I don’t recall a writing that compared and contrasted them, although I have heard there is such a writing. It would be interesting today to have a dialogue between a classical Presbyterian theologian and a Lutheran one.