Loading...
Keywords
political theology, state, moral laws, lutheran church-missouri synod, social issues, government, politics, luther, natural laws, physical kingdom, spiritual kingdom, civil righteousness
Description
On Jan. 13, 2022, David Brooks, a columnist for The New York Times wrote an article entitled, “America Is Falling Apart at The Seams.” In that article he lists a myriad of problems facing our society, then concludes by opining, “What the hell is going on? . . . There must be. . . some spiritual or moral problem at the core of all this.” Confronting problematic social concerns is nothing new to our society. We can debate whether “America is falling apart at the seams,” as Brooks maintains, but significant issues exist, and they are worthy of our attention. Things become more complicated when these issues become politicized, and the morality of these issues become inextricably intertwined with partisan politics. Does the church have anything to say concerning such devastating social and political issues? If so, who speaks for the church, and how should such speaking be done? Can the church speak with moral authority without getting ensnared in political partisanship? To enter such a discussion is to engage in political theology. The term “political theology” is eschewed by many in the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) today — not without good reason. Political theology has been used in the past to describe a theology that is used (or rather abused) by a theologian or a politician to support his own personal political agenda. However, Dr. Nicholas Wolterstorff has corrected this notion by writing, “Political theology is not theology with a political cast; it is theology of or about the political, more specifically, theology of or about the state.” The point here is that religion is not just a private or personal commitment. If your religion is taken seriously, then it affects every aspect of your life —including your politics. Dr. Robert Benne explains that theistic religions affirm that God is the God of all life, not just the inner recesses of the heart. Belief in God’s universal law will have public repercussions for any society with a critical mass of serious believers . . . The religious impulse for public relevance is irrepressible . . . So the question is not whether organized religion will affect politics but how it will do so. Moreover, there are great stakes involved for both church and society in the manner in which this is addressed and acted upon. Some kinds of interactions are dangerous for both church and society.
This presentation underscores the position taken by the LCMS Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) that “the church must have a ‘stomach for disagreements’ as well as respect for differences of conscience. Also in the church, and not only in the public square, civil but principled debate on social ethics must be encouraged” (emphasis added). Following the lead of the CTCR this paper also stresses that, Christians who share the same theological convictions and confession must learn to tolerate — indeed, even to welcome — some differences and disagreements when it comes to convictions about social and political priorities, positions and strategies. Theological solidarity is not necessarily inconsistent with political diversity, nor do disagreements concerning specific political issues necessarily imply theological disagreement. In fact, to insist upon complete agreement in political matters (as if the church were a political party) would be to undermine or deny the validity of the very principles underlying the Lutheran understanding of the “two kingdoms.” This presentation will review the major elements in the traditional Lutheran understanding of church and state, commends the LCMS for its past role in publicly discussing important political/moral issues (such as Apartheid and abortion), and lays out a structural outline for future ecclesiastical discussions on moral/political issues.
Submission Type
Bible Study; Lecture; Sermon Prep
Submission Topics
Ecclesiology (The Church); Education; Literature and Art; Practical Theology; Preaching and Teaching; Scripture Interpretation; Sin; Worship
Scripture References in this Resource (separated by semi-colons)
Ezekiel 3:17;
Submission Audience
Laity; Ministers; Scholars
People in this Resource (separated by commas)
Martin Luther, Martin Scharlemann, Dietrich Bonhoeffer,John Johnson, William Schumacher, Joel Biermann
Submission Cost
Free
Toward a Robust Political Theology for the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
On Jan. 13, 2022, David Brooks, a columnist for The New York Times wrote an article entitled, “America Is Falling Apart at The Seams.” In that article he lists a myriad of problems facing our society, then concludes by opining, “What the hell is going on? . . . There must be. . . some spiritual or moral problem at the core of all this.” Confronting problematic social concerns is nothing new to our society. We can debate whether “America is falling apart at the seams,” as Brooks maintains, but significant issues exist, and they are worthy of our attention. Things become more complicated when these issues become politicized, and the morality of these issues become inextricably intertwined with partisan politics. Does the church have anything to say concerning such devastating social and political issues? If so, who speaks for the church, and how should such speaking be done? Can the church speak with moral authority without getting ensnared in political partisanship? To enter such a discussion is to engage in political theology. The term “political theology” is eschewed by many in the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) today — not without good reason. Political theology has been used in the past to describe a theology that is used (or rather abused) by a theologian or a politician to support his own personal political agenda. However, Dr. Nicholas Wolterstorff has corrected this notion by writing, “Political theology is not theology with a political cast; it is theology of or about the political, more specifically, theology of or about the state.” The point here is that religion is not just a private or personal commitment. If your religion is taken seriously, then it affects every aspect of your life —including your politics. Dr. Robert Benne explains that theistic religions affirm that God is the God of all life, not just the inner recesses of the heart. Belief in God’s universal law will have public repercussions for any society with a critical mass of serious believers . . . The religious impulse for public relevance is irrepressible . . . So the question is not whether organized religion will affect politics but how it will do so. Moreover, there are great stakes involved for both church and society in the manner in which this is addressed and acted upon. Some kinds of interactions are dangerous for both church and society.
This presentation underscores the position taken by the LCMS Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) that “the church must have a ‘stomach for disagreements’ as well as respect for differences of conscience. Also in the church, and not only in the public square, civil but principled debate on social ethics must be encouraged” (emphasis added). Following the lead of the CTCR this paper also stresses that, Christians who share the same theological convictions and confession must learn to tolerate — indeed, even to welcome — some differences and disagreements when it comes to convictions about social and political priorities, positions and strategies. Theological solidarity is not necessarily inconsistent with political diversity, nor do disagreements concerning specific political issues necessarily imply theological disagreement. In fact, to insist upon complete agreement in political matters (as if the church were a political party) would be to undermine or deny the validity of the very principles underlying the Lutheran understanding of the “two kingdoms.” This presentation will review the major elements in the traditional Lutheran understanding of church and state, commends the LCMS for its past role in publicly discussing important political/moral issues (such as Apartheid and abortion), and lays out a structural outline for future ecclesiastical discussions on moral/political issues.
