Category Image Lutheranism vs. Orthodoxy


I was alerted to an interesting blog entry about Lutheran pastors becoming Orthodox. I don't necessarily want to wade too deep into this one, as their are some blogosphere heavyweights on this one, such as Christopher Orr. The comments, as well, are quite interesting, and probably do a better job than I at providing an apology for Orthodoxy. There are a few remarks, though, that I think worth making.

As you read through the comments on the blog, there is a hint of an unfortunate reality. That is, there is a significant separation between Luther's theology (and that of his spiritual "descendants") and Orthodoxy. The problem is not really that the Orthodox lessen the centrality of justification by faith, but its rather that we have an entirely different understanding of what that means. This difference in understanding then drives the level of importance assigned by the two groups to different doctrines.

One thing I've learned over the years of mostly observing Lutheran-Catholic debates is that it is very easy to over generalize when it comes to Lutheranism. This may have to do with the fact that Luther, himself, tended toward over generalization as a sort of polemic technique. Whatever the source, it is easy to do. There is also a tendency to assign quotes to Luther that may not actually belong to him. In many cases, the quotes seem to accurately reflect his theology, but not so in every case. So, keep this in mind as I make generalizations about Lutheran doctrine. One quote often assigned to Luther, but I believe, of questionable origins, is that our state after we have "been saved," is that we become a "dunghill covered in snow." That is, Christ's righteousness is imputed to me and there is no ontological change on my part. This, in my mind, creates a number of difficulties (Revelation 21:27 comes to mind), but I won't go into this here. The Orthodox view is almost diametrically opposed to this. We see Christ's death as a killing the old man, and his resurrection restoring human nature to its fully divinized state. We then, can "appropriate" this deification and partake of the Divine Nature as St. Peter instructs us. So, the Lutheran view is that we remain corrupt for all time, with only the appearance of purity, while the Orthodox view is that we have the opportunity to increase in purity. Christ's righteousness actually becomes ours, as opposed to merely being attributed to us. Note the following exchange in the comments section:

[LotzaStitches said...

Anastasia Theodoridis said...

There's the key difference, perhaps. This is not the question Orthodoxy is all about answering. For us, the key question is that of the lover concerning the beloved: "How can I become one with God?"

That's quite different in emphasis and implication and where the attention is focused.

My question/comment:

And where *is* the attention focused?

When I read your key question it implies to me that there is something *I* have to do to be saved. I know that Jesus has done it all and that I am just a poor miserable sinner covered in Christ's righteousness.]

So, in the Lutheran view, the central event in history is the Crucifixion. It is Christ's death specifically that pays the price for our sins. To the Orthodox, the Crucifixion is clearly important, but not more so than the Incarnation, and to some degree somewhat less important than the resurrection, and this is because Christ heals our nature by its assumption, and ultimately divinizes it via the resurrection. This is reflected in the relative importance of various holy days within the Church. The Nativity (and more importantly, Theophany) are important days as they reflect on the Incarnation. Holy Week and Good Friday are packed with services, reflecting on the Crucifixion, and the crowning, without question biggest, feast, is that of Pascha (Easter).

The fact that the various Lutheran confessions still assign the same relative importance to these holy days led me to question whether I had things right, so I posted a comment inquiring into that. I basically asked why the importance of Easter? The response was that the importance is simply that the Resurrection is a sign that Christ's sacrifice on the Cross was accepted. That seemed to ring a bit hollow to me, as it still seems that the big celebration would be around the crucifixion (plus the fact that sacrifice wasn't offered until after the Ascension (Hebrews 10:11-12 ) makes Pastor Weedon's timing a bit odd - although I may be guilty of thinking too linearly).

So, we can see that Lutheranism and Orthodoxy have, in fact, huge differences in understanding of how justification works. It is this difference that drives the degree of importance assigned to other doctrines. The problem is not, as asserted by one commenter, that "However, there are other points of Greek Theology that are problematic - and if pushed could end up endangering justification by faith. There are errors in Greek theology." Rather, these points of Greek Theology (and Russian, and Serbian, and Antiochian, and...) are necessary results of the Orthodox view of justification. That a Lutheran would see these points as heading toward error speaks to the chasm that separates us. I'm reminded of the discussions between the Tubingen scholars and Patriarch Jeremias II.

One final comment has to do with some of the exegesis on that blog, and the comments that follow. One I made a comment on was about the reading of Matthew 25 and the separation of those who ministered to the poor and sick, and those who didn't. I checked with the commentaries of Blessed Theophylact , which is a good summary of Patristic view on the Gospels, and there was no basis for asserting that those who didn't minister in the story in fact, did minister, and were guilty of wanting credit for it. That interpretation is a clear case of trying to fit a warning from our Saviour into a theology that it directly contradicts. A somewhat less severe case was the one I referenced before where Christ was apparently offering his sacrifice to the Father before the Ascension - which is an interesting thing as at the time Christ was supposed to be preaching to the spirits in prison. Again, there is a need to explain the Resurrection, which doesn't fit very neatly into the Lutheran worldview.

Posted: Wednesday - March 07, 2007 at 12:47 PM          

©