INTERSECTIONS What One Lutheran Would Like the Orthodox to Know Robert Saler Between 1576 and 1581, Ecumeni- the mainstream of Orthodox theology cal Patriarch Jeremiah II engaged in at the time, and the absence of formal substantive epistolary dialogue with definition may have lured the Luther- Lutherans of the Tübingen School of ans into thinking that monergism was emerging Lutheran scholasticism. In somehow acceptable to the Orthodox. some ways it would be correct to say Furthermore, the absence of a formal that, prior to the inauguration of the magisterium may have led the Luther- contemporary ecumenical movement, ans to believe that a more individual- it was the most significant point of ized scriptural hermeneutic would be theological contact between Lutheran- welcome in Orthodox circles. To the ism proper and the Orthodox Church. extent that these assumptions were Operating largely under the principle present, they were mistaken. of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” the Lutherans sought to de- It is probably fair to say that, while the termine if the opposition to key doc- Lutherans had a fairly clear sense of trines and magisterial structures of the differences between Roman Cath- Roman Catholicism shared between olics and Orthodox on matters of con- the nascent Protestant movements troversy between the Lutherans and and the Eastern church could some- the Catholics, they underestimated how form a theological bond between the deeper differences in ecclesial and the two communions. theological frameworks between East and West. It was an outreach some- While the exchanges were pleasant what charming in its naivety, and the enough, their historical impact was dialogues did not progress past the negligible. Jeremiah affirmed the Lu- exchange of a few theological treatises.1 therans’ condemnation of what he took to be Roman Catholic innova- As global Christian communities— 1 See Augsburg and tions but he had limited sympathy for Protestant and otherwise—contin- Constantinople: their retention of Western theologi- ue to think about the impact of the The Correspondence cal structures or for the characteristic fragmentation of the churches in the between the Tubin- gen Theologians and Lutheran understanding of salvation West, The Wheel asked if I would re- Patriarch Jeremiah II of as monergistic (that is, the idea that flect upon the contemporary signifi- Constantinople on the God alone is the actor in salvation; cance of this historical exchange from Augsburg Confession, human free will and good works play a contemporary Lutheran theological ed. George Mastran- no part). The exact mechanics of the perspective. I feel the best way to do tonis (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross soteriological synergism between that would be in the form of a missive Orthodox Press, faith and works may have differed be- of my own, as a Lutheran who has the 1982). tween medieval Roman Catholics and privilege of deep friendship with Or- 86 thodox Christians around the globe. While Luther rejected Roman Catholic © 2018 The Wheel. The following are things that I would formulations of the transubstantiation May be distributed for noncommercial use. like my Orthodox friends to hear from of the Eucharistic elements, this was www.wheeljournal.com the mouth of one Lutheran—one who solely because he thought it an un- cannot speak for all Lutherans every- wise imposition of Aristotelian philo- where, obviously, but who sees some sophical categories upon what should deep coherence between the life of properly remain a mystery. And in- faith as lived in a Lutheran key and in deed, Luther regularly compared that an Eastern Orthodox one (even as the mystery to the mystery of the incarna- differences remain real and worthy of tion. Rather than render the effects of discussion): consecration in terms of the categories of substance and accident, one should 1. While sectarian triumphalism is regard it in the same manner as the a problem in some Lutheran circles, homoouios doctrine: a genuine incar- the more fundamental Lutheran im- national mystery that ultimately tran- pulse today is toward ecumenism and scends philosophical categories. the healing of old wounds. For instance, the entirety of the Lutheran World 3. We understand Christ to be truly and Federation’s commemorations (not bodily present in the Eucharist and are celebrations, but commemorations) somewhat puzzled theologically at of the five hundredth anniversary of why we don’t share the Eucharist the Reformation were planned in col- with other bodies (including Roman laboration with the Vatican. Whereas Catholics and Orthodox) who believe Lutheranism used to be defined by the same. To be fair, we understand its oppositional stance towards oth- why history has divided us, but we er traditions (Catholic and Protestant reject the theological division (which alike), mainline Lutheranism in the is why Lutherans of the Evangelical United States and Europe is now more Lutheran Church in America or ELCA accurately described as ecumenical in welcome baptized Christians who be- its bearing. lieve in the real presence to the table, whether they are Lutheran or not). I 2. Lutherans affirm Nicene/Chalcedonian find Peter Bouteneff’s image of “fast- Christology against the classical heresies, ing” from Eucharist together to be and we appreciate the Orthodox for very helpful in helping think through continuing to show us what that looks the lack of a common table, but I do like. Much contemporary Protestant question what such division means theology, under the influence of pro- about the God who is the host of the cess theology and nineteenth-century table, as opposed to human steward- liberalism, has backed away from full ship of the divine mysteries. affirmation of thehomoousios, whereas the Lutheran tradition as a whole— 4. While Luther’s respect for the Theot- particularly in its sacramental theol- okos was grounded in her humanity, ogy—has strongly affirmed the coex- and Lutherans hold to this against the istence of Christ’s full humanity and excesses of Marian devotion claimed divinity. by our Roman Catholic friends, we un- derstand our regard for Mary to be no less Unlike our Reformed friends, we af- deep than that of Catholics and Orthodox firm the bodily presence of Christ as (theologically speaking, although per- ubiquitous throughout creation, in- haps not sociologically). The shifting cluding in the consecrated elements. fate of Mary within Protestantism is a The Wheel 15 | Fall 2018 87 long, complex story that would have ginity), she seems quite far away from to include so many fraught moments. even the most tradition-friendly Prot- Martin Luther saw Mary in her hu- estant piety. But when it is as a broken, manity as a crucial protagonist of fragile human who took the incredible the story of humanity’s redemption. risk of saying yes to a God whom she Through her obedience to God’s call surely could not have understood at as an unwed, scared teenage wom- that moment, or in so many moments an, God brought salvation out of that along the way, she is very close to Lu- which was unimpressive. According- theran sensibilities. And to the extent ly, Luther regularly defended her title that Orthodoxy also rejects the super- “Theotokos” against Nestorian ten- fluous additions to Marian doctrine dencies and he personally believed in characteristic of Roman Catholicism, her perpetual virginity, although be- Orthodox veneration of the Theotokos lief in the latter is not mandated by the and Lutheran love for her might co- Lutheran Confessions. But subsequent here in powerful ways. Lutheranism, and other Protestant movements, in a frenzy to distinguish 5. In my estimation, where soteriol- their piety from Roman Catholicism, ogy is concerned, the major difference gradually identified Marian devotion between Lutherans and Orthodox has to with idolatry and went overboard in do with the sequencing of salvation and denigrating her standing. 2 love for neighbor. Lutherans tend not to talk about the ascetic struggle for sal- This distinction was of course exacer- vation because, in Luther’s view, con- bated when Marian devotion became fidence in our own salvation frees us tied up with controversies over papal to be more concerned about the needs infallibility, with undisputed ex cathe- of the neighbor than that of our own. dra papal pronouncements related to By contrast, on my reading of Ortho- Marian dogma. The fall of Mary with- dox theology, love and service toward in Protestantism coincided with the the neighbor form the key element in rise of the domestic ideal of the fam- salvation (theosis). ily in European and North American Protestantism especially. Instead of As articulated in his 1520 treatise The Marian feasts, we have Mother’s Day Freedom of a Christian, Luther thought as a new liturgical ground zero of pi- that proclaiming salvation by grace ous vocation. Many Protestants who through faith apart from works freed ordain women hold that Marian devo- us to focus our attention on the neigh- tion often functions as a way of “pro- bor’s need. While Lutherans insist on moting women sideways”: honoring a monergistic understandings of God’s specific woman in her vocation so as agency in salvation and the Orthodox to undercut the possibility that wom- favor a synergistic or co-operative ap- en might move into other vocations, proach (emphasizing humanity’s free such as the priesthood. cooperation with grace), the upshot of both is a life lived in confidence 2 See Beth Kreitzer, Reforming Mary: When Marian devotion is presented of God’s mercy and with an orienta- Changing Images of to Protestants laden with what most tion towards the neighbor. These two the Virgin Mary in of us would take to be distracting su- models of soteriology lead to a simi- Lutheran Sermons of per-additions to her humanity (and lar shape of Christian life.