Some time ago on this blog I wrote a piece that was aimed at the slogan of the Higher Things youth organization. I suggested that to dare people to be Lutheran was to dare them towards the wrong goal. I suggested we should simply be daring them to be Christians. While I value this organization greatly and have written for their magazine, I still believe that we can do better than daring people to be Lutheran.
This last Saturday, I went to a lecture series in which Pastor Larry Beane was speaking. Some of you may know him from his blog called Father Hollywood. One of the most interesting things he suggested during the day was the fact that the term Lutheran was a term coined by the Roman Catholic Church to brand Luther’s followers as heretics. While I was well aware that Luther never intended to have his name used for church body, I had never thought how the term Lutheran to the Roman Catholics of those days was no different than the term “Arian†and or “Hussite.†They were all terms used to marginalize a group of people who were not falling obediently under the authority of the Pope. They were all terms used to suggest that a particular group of people had placed themselves outside of the catholic (universal) church. In what Pastor Larry Beane called shrewd marketing, they came up with these labels for each of their opponents and then called their own institution the Roman Catholic Church.
Sadly, in an attempt to distinguish ourselves from other branches of Christianity, many Lutherans, especially those most concerned with the confessions of our church, have latched onto the term Lutheran with great affection. This term which was once nothing more than a slur created by the Roman Catholic Church to dispute our catholicity has now become something treasured in our midst. We dare people to be Lutheran. We ask if a particular congregation or pastor is Lutheran enough. We deride anyone who will not claim the label.
What we ought to be doing is what Luther was doing in his day. We ought to be doing what those who signed the Augsburg confession were doing. We ought to be defending the catholicity of our belief and practice. We ought to make clear that we believe the doctrine and the practice of our churches is not simply profoundly Lutheran but is profoundly Christian.
Since the term Catholic has been so shrewdly claimed by the Roman Catholic Church as an institution (just google “catholic†and you will see the success of their marketing strategy), I think in our speaking we do well to say that our doctrine and practices are Christian rather than trying to say that they are "catholic. While it is linguistically proper to speak of our doctrines and practices as catholic meaning that they are the practices and doctrines of the true Christian church on earth, calling ourselves catholic will easily confuse many. I think it an unachievable goal at this point to reclaim the term catholic for those holding the doctrine and practices of the true church of all time. (Some may disagree, and if they wish to do so, fine,)
When we say that we are seeking to defend our catholicity, it has nothing to do with returning to the institution known as the Roman Catholic Church. It refers to associating ourselves with the Christians throughout the ages who have faithfully believed and practiced according to God’s Word. It is to align ourselves with the invisible church rather than any visible institution.
In claiming the catholicity of our beliefs and practices, we also make clear that many of the beliefs and practices of other churches are not truly catholic in nature. This goes both for those in Protestant churches as well as those in the Roman Catholic church. It goes also for any of our churches who refuse to believe and to live together as the Christian church of every age has done. It begs all who call themselves by Christ’s name to return the orthodox doctrine and practice of the church. It hopes that in that bidding, true unity in the church can be achieved.
When we say that we are faithfully Lutheran, most people hear nothing other than that we are following the teaching, practice, and secret handshakes of a particular denomination of Christianity. Using the term internally can of course be beneficial, but I am becoming more convinced that when we are speaking in any way that might be heard by others outside of our church body or outside of the church, we must always make clear that we believe that our doctrine and practices are catholic and not just Lutheran. We must make clear that we believe them to be authentically Christian.
Well said.
You have a real gift my friend for framing this conversation. The naming rights of our churches has been a point of contention for many a “Lutheran” friend and colleague. At St. John in Ellisville, where I work and worship, we get maligned quite often for having taken the name “Lutheran” off our street signage.
I appreciate the way in which you laid out your points and pray that as God’s people on earth, we continue to seek our identity not in a name given by man, but in “HIS” name.
Blessings Brother!
Then, of course, the term Christian was originally applied as a term of derision. So are we now to call ourselves true Israelites?
I sympathize with your point. Lutherans are true catholics. In other words, Lutherans didn’t depart from the truth. However, I question whether claiming simply to be Christian is to claim that catholicity. That is to say, does it in fact communicate what you’re trying to communicate? Or does it communicate something else.
Catholicity is more than just a name (I don’t mean to say that you claim to the contrary). It entails a practice and doctrine that is likewise catholic. It seems that the movement away from using names of specificity is for the purpose of moving away from the historic forms, rites, and ceremonies of worship that confessed the catholicity of the one, holy, catholic, apostolic church. Ironically, excising the name Lutheran is meant to obscure that catholicity rather than emphasize it.
Jason,
I’m not sure the term Christian has ever been used as a term of derision by those with in the Christian church, unlike Lutheran. I agree that what we call ourselves is problematic sitting where we do. I just wish that the followers of the confession of Luther would have remained steadfast in their claim that that confession was catholic and might have reflected that in how they referred to themselves. To be honest, I am not sure at what point the name Lutheran was used regularly as an identification willfully. Perhaps you know and could inform me. I know that the term is still not used in many countries.
I also agree with you that many within our fellowship who have removed the name Lutheran do so not as a way to confess their catholicity but rather as a way to depart from it. I knew my post would make some uncomfortable for this very reason. But if you read the post, it is obvious that I am not suggesting using the word Lutheran less as a way to embrace things that are not catholic.
Finally, I must admit that I am not satisfied with the term Christian either based on all the things that that term has been used to identify. However, I think the term in most people’s mind is a broad term rather than a narrow one. I mean that in the sense that they do not automatically assume particular doctrines when they hear the term Christian. The term catholic is much more loaded with content in the minds of most people. If you say to most people that you are Christian, they are likely to ask for clarification which is exactly what I desire. If you say to most people that you are catholic, they will simply assume they understand what you mean by that term.
If you say that you are Lutheran, I think the general response is to not associate anything immediately with that term but also not to ask what we mean by it. why would they care what a sect that they are not involved in believes or practices.
If you have a better term to suggest other than Christian, my years are wide open.
First, I didn’t mean to imply that your post was advocating the disuse of the term Lutheran in order to depart from the true catholicity of our doctrine and practice. I’m sorry that wasn’t made more clear.
Second, If it’s clear I’m speaking to someone who is not a Christian I will I say that I’m a Christian and then talk about what that means. If, however, it’s clear that I’m talking to a fellow Christian, I simply state what church body I belong to “I’m a Missouri Synod Lutheran.” Usually, the response is something to the effect of “Oh, the strict one.” I usually then ask: “Well, what do you mean by that?” And depending on how much time I have and how much patience the other person has, it brings about a cordial conversation of what LCMS Lutherans believe, teach, and confess. I usually end up asking a lot of questions. Asking them to clarify. I’m sure you end up having similar conversations.
I don’t think there is one term that will completely communicate who we are to those outside of the church or inside the church without clarification. When I meet with the local ministerial alliance, I find that they try to emphasize our similarities and thus overlook our differences. I’d like to get to the point where we could actually rejoice in our similarities and discuss and argue about our differences.
So I wouldn’t say let’s just use one term. I use them all to help explain it. But if I were forced to use one, I’d probably use Lutheran.
Phil, I appreiciate your ability to write well and certainly there is much truth to what you say here. But I do not think that removing the name “Lutheran” from our conversation replacing it with “Christian” would be helpful. It would be better to continue to call our selves Lutheran and catholic adding the blessed question of Father Luther “What does this mean” with explanation. One might say to a Baptist “I am a Christian” and be grossly misunderstood as the Baptist receives the information within the ocntext of his erronious thinking. I am a Lutheran and here’s why: The more I study the Scriptuers the more I seen Lutheran doctrine and the more I study Lutheran doctrine the more I see Holy Scripture. To be Lutheran is to be Christian – and dare I say – in the truest sense as it is known and practiced on earth. Phil, I love ya brother. Larry.
Phil,
I’m sorry, but Lutherans have no claim to the word “catholic” whether that be little-c catholic or Big-C Catholic. I remember how much I objected to saying the Nicene Creed (when it was said) in Lutheran worship because it said “I believe in one, holy, Christian and apostolic Church” which was a translation of the German Christliche which Luther used as a substitute for the Latin catholicam or Greek Katholiken. Luther was wrong to translate it that way, but now that I know more, I think he was right on the money.
The reason that Lutherans have no right to claim and cannot claim “catholic” as their own is because catholic means encompassing the whole. And that’s not just referring to the whole of the faith, but also the whole of time. Lutherans cannot claim that what they believe is the whole of the faith which was believed for all time. Lutherans have jettisoned, either willingly or by just ignoring, the catholic faith. Lutherans cannot claim that the faith that they hold (if it can even be uniformly described) is the same now as it was at the beginning and that it encompassed the whole of Christendom. The purge of so many doctrines (and I concede that many doctrines needed to go courtesy of the papacy) has left only a skeletal image of the faith which has been preserved incorrupt for all time (I don’t need to tell you where that is).
So, please keep using the word Lutheran. It’s what you are. You are certainly not catholics.