Let's Talk

20 years of
Living Theology in the Metropolitan Chicago Synod since 1996

  • Home
  • Issues
    • Welcome to Let’s Talk 2020
    • 22. 2 Reformation Jubilee 500
    • 22.1 Death and Dying
    • All Issues 1996 – present
  • Noted Guest Authors
  • About
  • Contact

19.1: Epiphany 2014 .

archangel gabriel

Religion and the Arts

A Lutheran Learns to Read and Write Icons

By Frederick J. Schumacher

Masks for J.B.

By John A. Lang

As I See It: Clothed in Righteousness

By Frank C. Senn

On the Way: Called on Film

By Benjamin Dueholm

Book Review: Pastrix: The Cranky, Beautiful Faith of a Sinner and Saint

By Gordon J. Straw

Our Lady of Guadalupe and the Season of Advent

By Maxwell E. Johnson

“Eternity,” You Thunder Word

By Frank C. Senn

Homily at Bach Vespers: Breathing Together Again

By Frank C. Senn

Powered by Genesis

You are here: Home / Whither Lutheranism / So What’s the Lutheran Brand?

So What’s the Lutheran Brand?

August 23, 2022 by Benjamin Dueholm

Benjamin J. Dueholm

August 23, 2022

 

Commenting on a recent spate of major media articles describing conversation to Roman Catholicism as a sort of trend in some avant-garde social circles, writer B.D. McClay (herself a Catholic) clarifies that while Catholicism is not cool, nor is it growing in adherents, it is a “brand.” That is to say, “if you call yourself Catholic, it corresponds to something in the head of the person you’re talking to.” Certain vestments, statuary, confessional screens, candles: a reasonably stable and clear set of images is going to present itself even (or perhaps especially) to people who don’t know much about the topic. The associations someone has with that set of images may be positive, negative, or indifferent, but it exists. In a limited way, McClay points out, this is true for Baptists (or “evangelicalism” as such), but not for, say, Methodism. She did not mention Lutheranism either way. 

Is Lutheranism a brand? If it is, I suspect the brand does not extend much beyond the figure of Luther himself: a painting of the friar turned stout paternal burgher, a church door and a hammer posting something of unclear but great historical consequence, two mass-market films in the last seventy years. Dig a little deeper into the foundations of this image and we find a set of sayings that have been adapted as theological slogans (“sin boldly,” simul iustus et peccator), some colorful rhetoric that became downright monstrous on the subject of (to pick one highly consequential example) the Jewish people, and a historical setting of church conflict and corruption. There are, of course, much greater and richer depths below these, but from them we lose Luther the brand image and find the man himself immersed in theological debates and traditions in which he played only a partial role. 

After this summer’s ELCA churchwide assembly approved a proposal to start the process of creating a new constitution (and hence a new church body), I wrote an essay sketching out four possible futures for this still-largest branch of the Lutheran movement in the U.S.: Confessional renewal, amalgamation with other Protestant bodies, decentralized federation, and cultural positioning. Implicit in those possibilities (and any others that did not occur to me) is a much more fundamental question I have not tried to answer: what is Lutheranism, anyway? Or perhaps more urgently, if less profoundly, what do we expect or hope anyone to picture when they encounter the words “Evangelical Lutheran Church in America”?

Formally, we have always been (and still officially are) defined by adherence to the 16th century evangelical Confessions that distinguish our movement from some official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church as well as from the Reformed, Anabaptist, and other Reformation-era movements. This definition leaves broad freedom for worship practices, however, so there is no coherent image of Lutheran worship to cultivate (as our Orthodox or even Anglican siblings have). I have heard more and more, however, and seen myself, that we do not in practice define ourselves this way. 

Effectively we are defined by our constitution, both at the denominational level and by a certain concordance of local constitutions that, together, create a shared structure of cooperation and governance. 

But materially, we are much more defined by our local cultures, which (as we might know from our fading “Lake Wobegon” branding) tend toward the remnants of northern European immigrant folkways and their middle-class white American successors. I wonder, in fact, whether “God’s Work. Our Hands” is unintentionally geared toward people conscientious and financially secure enough to want a part-time job volunteering for things.

So I’d say we have three self-definitions–a confessional definition, a constitutional definition, and a cultural definition. They interact in various ways. We may theologize our peculiar constitutional structure. We may dissolve the content of the Confessions into aesthetic affinity. And we may leave our relatively few Black, Latino, and Asian clergy and congregations in painful, even abusive limbo between a congregational polity that depends on historic housing wealth to function and a culture that can, intentionally or not, exclude them. To complicate things further, our younger clergy and ordination candidates are sometimes made to fend for themselves in housing and insuring themselves and (where applicable) their families. In many settings, a first-call pastor with school debt and no funds for a down payment on a home will be ministering to people whose average financial situation is so different as to constitute a cultural distinction of its own.

I don’t see how a new constitution will resolve any of these contradictions. But in a constitutional, rather than a confessional, church, a constitutional process should at least force us to ask what we want to be and how we want to be known. One early suggestion has been to remove the word “Evangelical” from our name. And it is, to be sure, an effectively dead word in our theological usage. It is fully a political and culture-war brand now and there’s nothing we can do about it.

But if we’re worried about that, there’s an even stronger case against “Lutheran,” an anti-Reformer slur that we adopted for reasons unclear to me. It’s not just that Luther’s shocking personal anti-semitism should not be either ignored or constantly explained in the process of making him our sole and defining icon. It’s not even that the word, if it has any purchase beyond our communities, carries with it outdated and harmful associations of coffee, hotdish, and passive-aggression. It’s that we can’t make Luther bear the weight we are asking him to bear. Bobbleheads, portraits, busts, “Nailed it!” Wittenberg door memes–I increasingly wonder whether these are figures of absence, brand images without content. 

The Before I go further and talk myself into making a case against “Church” and “America” (which would not be all that hard to do), I want to offer this strictly as a thought experiment: If we chose to free ourselves from the name as well as the constitution, what would we want the new name to be? If we didn’t have to be evangelical-but-not-like-that, or here’s-what-I-mean-by-Lutheran, what would we think mattered enough to put on our logo and letterhead? What image would we hope to evoke in the mind of a stranger encountering our church signs? Or in each other’s minds when we have to work out a statement of common purpose or a structure of ministry? What do we want people to Google? 

I can think of my own answers. I love how being a Lutheran (or, if I follow my own logic, a “Lutheran”) gives me an unconditional but critical relationship to the ancient catholic Christian tradition, structures my worship and prayer life through the external Word and the reliably effective Sacraments, and clarifies my moral striving through the lenses of Law and Gospel. If you’re reading this, you probably have your own answers.  I also love “Beautiful Savior,” Thorvaldsen’s Jesus statue, and yes, hotdish. But I don’t need anyone else to love those things with me. Knowing who we are begins with knowing what we love enough to try, even at this late date, to share.

The Rev. Benjamin Dueholm is pastor of Christ Lutheran Church in Dallas, Texas and author of Sacred Signposts: Words, Water, and Other Acts of Resistance (Eerdmans). He is a previous author on Let’s Talk as the regular writer of the “On the Way” column and a regular contributor of The Christian Century.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Filed Under: Whither Lutheranism


Let’s Talk welcomes thoughtful responses to our articles from all readers. Post your thoughts on our Facebook page or scroll down to the bottom to leave a comment.

Subscriber Sign-up

About Benjamin Dueholm

Benjamin J. Dueholm is pastor at Christ Lutheran Church in Dallas, Texas, and the author of Sacred Signposts: Words, Water, and Other Acts of Resistance (Eerdmans 2018).

Recent Articles

Homily at Bach Vespers: Breathing Together Again

Observing Ash Wednesday 2021

Sermon on Embodied Racism

As I See It: Public Health and Public Worship During COVID-19

Is Fasting from the Reception of Holy Communion the Same as Fasting from the Eucharistic Liturgy? A Lutheran Liturgical-Sacramental Reflection on Eucharistic Praxis during COVID-19

Jesus Known in the Breaking of the Bread

Communion at Home

Jessie: A Palm Sunday Parable in the Midst of the Pandemic of 2020

Forsaken

Why Virtual Communion Is Not Nearly Radical Enough

23.1 Advent 2019

the Brown Virgin (La Morenita)

“Eternity,” You Thunder Word

By Frank C. Senn

Farewell Sermon: Home Rejoicing

By Benjamin Dueholm

Self-Care: Being Present to God and to our Bodily Selves

By Frank C. Senn

Holy Living

By Richard O. Johnson

Our Lady of Guadalupe and the Season of Advent

By Maxwell E. Johnson

Recent articles

Homily at Bach Vespers: Breathing Together Again

October 8, 2021 By Frank C. Senn

Observing Ash Wednesday 2021

January 20, 2021 By Matthew Riegel

Sermon on Embodied Racism

July 21, 2020 By Frank C. Senn

As I See It: Public Health and Public Worship During COVID-19

May 14, 2020 By Frank C. Senn

Is Fasting from the Reception of Holy Communion the Same as Fasting from the Eucharistic Liturgy? A Lutheran Liturgical-Sacramental Reflection on Eucharistic Praxis during COVID-19

May 12, 2020 By Maxwell E. Johnson

23.1 Advent 2019

the Brown Virgin (La Morenita)

Let’s Talk 2020

Our Lady of Guadalupe and the Season of Advent

By Maxwell E. Johnson

Holy Living

By Richard O. Johnson

Self-Care: Being Present to God and to our Bodily Selves

By Frank C. Senn

Farewell Sermon: Home Rejoicing

By Benjamin Dueholm

“Eternity,” You Thunder Word

By Frank C. Senn