Can We Still Do Lutheran Political Theology?

Abstract

When Nordic systematic theologians ask about the possibility of doing Lutheran political ethics, the question is not - according to this article - a purely historical one. The question is rather whether Luther's political thinking can be reconstructed in such a way that it makes sense in a contemporary context. A reconstruction cannot just deal with Luther's text, but has to take into account “stations of transformation.” In this article, Søren Kierkegaard functions as one such station, and political theology of the 1970s as another. As a somewhat different position, the ethics of K. E. Løgstrup is mentioned. In the conclusion, the political liberalism of John Rawls is presented as a contemporary conception congenial with Luther's key politico-theological ideas.

Notes

1. Koselleck, “Einleitung,” IX.

2. Törnvall, Andligt.

3. Frostin, Luther's Two Kingdoms Doctrine.

4. WA 19: 36 (translations by S. A.).

5. WA 30/I, 184.

6. WA 11, 250.

7. Ea est, quae exercet et urget bona opera per Charitatem. Hoc est tantum dicere: Qui vult esse vere Christianus seu in Christi Regno, Hunc oportet esse vere credentem. Vere autem non credit, si opera Charitatis fidem non sequuntur (WA 40/II, 37).

8. Darumb wie uns gott hatt durch Christum umbsonst geholffen, alßo sollen wir durch den leyp und seyne werck nit anders den dem nehsten helffen (WA 7: 36).

9. [C]um esset liber (…) omnium se servum fecit, non aliter agens quam si sua essent omnia ista mala, que nostra erant. Itaque super sese accepit peccata nostra et penas nostras, et egit ut vinceret ea tanquam sibiipsi, cum tamen nobis ea vinveret (WA 2, 148).

10. [A]gat cum proximo suo eo affectu, quasi sua sit propria infirmitas, peccatum, stilticia proximi … ( WA 2, 148f).

11. WA 2,146f.

12. Aber weyl eyn rechter Christen auff erden nicht yhm selbs sondern seynem nehisten lebt unnd dienet, ßo thutt er von art seyns geystes auch das, des er nichts bedarff, sondern das seynem nehisten nutz und nott ist. Nu aber das schwerd eyn groß nodlicher nutz ist aller wellt, das frid erhalten, sund gestrafft und den boesen geweret werde, ßo gibt er sich auffs aller willigst unter des schwerds regiment, gibt schos, ehret die uberkeyt, dienet, hilfft und thut alles, was er kan, das der gewalt fodderlich ist … (WA 11, 253).

13. WA 11,259f.

14. nicht an meinen Untertanen das Meine suchen, sondern das Ihre, und will ihnen auch also dienen mit meinem Amt … (WA 11, 273).

15. die Natur lehret, wie die Liebe tut, daß ich tun soll, was ich mir wollt getan haben. Darum kann ich niemand also entblößen, wie gut Recht ich immer habe, so ich selbst nicht gern wollt also entblößt sein; sondern wie ich wollt, daß ein anderer sein Recht an mir nach ließe in solchem Fall, also soll ich auf mein Recht verzichten (WA 11, 279).

16. Troeltsch, Die Soziallehren, 593 (translation S.A.).

17. As Sölle makes clear in the preface, the constructive parts of the book are largely inspired with the “Politisches Nachtgebet” in Cologne. For this, see Sölle and Steffensky, Politisches Nachtgebet in Köln. In these ecumenical night prayers, a rather direct link was established between traditional elements of the Christian service (Scripture readings, prayers etc.) – and concrete political issues. Thus one session led by Sölle and Steffensky was dedicated to “CSSR – Santo Domingo – Vietnam.”

18. Sölle, Politische Theologie, 10 (my translation).

19. Sölle, Politische Theologie, 119.

20. Sölle, Politische Theologie, 120.

21. There is no direct contention (Auseindersetzung) with Luther in Sölle's book. The same is true of Sölle, Phantasie und Gehorsam. However, in the latter – which Sölle characterizes as “Christian Ethics” – she sharply criticizes what can be seen as a traditional Lutheran virtue, viz. obedience, for which she wants to substitute imagination.

22. Frostin, Politik och hermeneutik.

23. Frostin, Politik och hermeneutik, 7 (my translation).

24. Even if I agree with Frostin's rejection of the interpretation of the Two-Kingdoms doctrine as a separation of “religion” from “politics,” I see the connection somewhat differently. According to Frostin, Luther connects the spiritual with the worldly via the law, both in its political and theological use (Frostin, Politik och hermeneutik, 7 (my translation), 130). On the other hand, he ignores Luther's most obvious thought about the connection, viz. that it is established by neighbour love.

25. Even if I agree with Frostin's rejection of the interpretation of the Two-Kingdoms doctrine as a separation of “religion” from “politics,” I see the connection somewhat differently. According to Frostin, Luther connects the spiritual with the worldly via the law, both in its political and theological use (Frostin, Politik och hermeneutik, 7 (my translation), 130). On the other hand, he ignores Luther's most obvious thought about the connection, viz. that it is established by neighbour love, 165.

26. Løgstrup, The Ethical Demand, 111.

27. It would be fruitful to read Løgstrup's political theology in comparison with Sölle and Frostin, for, like both of them, Løgstrup develops his own theology in dispute with Bultmann. Løgstrup does not directly claim that the aim of Bultmann can best be achieved by integrating a political dimension into his existential analysis. However, Løgstrup criticizes the formalism of Bultmann's – and Heidegger's - existential analysis, and he wants to add to it a material dimension that opens the way for a political ethics.

28. Rawls, Political Liberalism, xxii ff.

29. WA 11, 268.

30. Løgstrup, The Ethical Demand, 99.

31. In his reflexions on the very concept of politics, Frostin presupposes a rather simple idea of liberalism, the essence of which is said to be a clear distinction between private and public. Within liberalism thus understood, political theology according to Frostin could only mean either Christian groups' striving after political power – or making theology an instrument for state power. In a contemporary context, this understanding of liberalism is not convincing and hence my concept of Lutheran liberalism does not fit Frostin's definition.

32. See Rawls, Political Liberalism, 5f.

33. For a more extensive discussion of Rawls' political liberalism and its affinity to Lutheran political theology, see Andersen, Macht aus Liebe, 246–277, 298–307.

34. Pedersen, Konkurrencestaten, 32.

35. This fact is strongly emphasised by Frostin, see Frostin, Politik och hermeneutik, 107ff.