ELCA and Augsburg/Fortress

[wildboar]

This is a question for the ELCA folks here. If Augsburg Fortress publishes a book, can I assume that the book represents the theology of the ELCA? For instance, would most of the ministers in the ELCA agree with many of the teachings of Jürgen Moltmann?

 

[JoeCatch]

Augsburg Fortress publishes titles under two imprints: Augsburg Publishing and Fortress Press. FP publishes scholarly works, and does not publish exclusively Lutheran works. Publication under that imprint is on the basis of scholarly quality and notability, not doctrinal agreement with the ELCA. With regard to whether most ELCA pastors agree with Moltmann's theology, I really have no idea, but I'm sure it depends on which aspects of his theology you're referring to.

 

[wildboar]

Augsburg Fortress publishes titles under two imprints: Augsburg Publishing and Fortress Press. FP publishes scholarly works, and does not publish exclusively Lutheran works. Publication under that imprint is on the basis of scholarly quality and notability, not doctrinal agreement with the ELCA. With regard to whether most ELCA pastors agree with Moltmann's theology, I really have no idea, but I'm sure it depends on which aspects of his theology you're referring to.

I had studied Moltmann's doctrine of the Trinity a couple years ago and more recently I read The Shack. I was really surprised as I read the book that it seemed to be basically Moltmann's Trinitarian theology in paperback fiction form. More recently I have heard other's state that emergent church folks have drawn quite a bit from Moltmann's theology. So I guess primarily I wonder if Moltmann's Trinitarian Panentheism is the prevailing view in the ELCA or if its one of many views or not accepted at all. In one of the books published by Fortress The Crucified God (for some reason I didn't realize until the other day that Fortress was the publisher) Moltmann teaches a form of patripassianism although he denies it is patripassianism. This also shows up in The Shack. Throughout Moltmann's theology he makes a strong distinction between chronos(quantitative) and kairos (qualitative) time. I agree that a distinction can be made but Moltmann creates a theology in which something can occur in kairos time that does not occur in chronos. His eschatology teaches that Christ returns in kairos but not in chronos. The article on the ELCA site on the resurrection and the virgin birth seem to do the same thing without coming out and screaming it. Tillich and Barth also do some similar things so maybe it's really one of them that is influencing the statements and I just have Moltmann on the brain.

 

[IowaLutheran]

This is a question for the ELCA folks here. If Augsburg Fortress publishes a book, can I assume that the book represents the theology of the ELCA? For instance, would most of the ministers in the ELCA agree with many of the teachings of Jürgen Moltmann?

No. At least two factors weigh against your presumption:

- Very few ELCA pastors read more than an occasional book on theology published by AF, so to say "most" ELCA ministers agree or disagree with a particular author published by AF is not possible.
- AF is known to publish authors with contradictory viewpoints, so you can't automatically assume that a particular work represents the theology of the ELCA.

 

[IowaLutheran]

In one of the books published by Fortress The Crucified God (for some reason I didn't realize until the other day that Fortress was the publisher) Moltmann teaches a form of patripassianism although he denies it is patripassianism.

I haven't gotten around reading The Crucified God yet, but intend to some day - in your view, how does he cross the line from the thoroughly orthodox Lutheran idea of communicatio idiomatum into patripassianism?

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

I've heard about the shack, never read it. And it might be more appropriate to say that certain publications by AF the ELCA has no problem with, but to say most ELCA pastors is a heavy leap I would not make.

In my opinion, since the synod is made up of such a diverse and large body, it "tolerates" a lot more than any individual within the synod would.

I think there is also a difference between people "not having a problem with" someone's theology vs. embracing that theology for themselves.

Hope that helps.

Pax

 

[wildboar]

I haven't gotten around reading The Crucified God yet, but intend to some day - in your view, how does he cross the line from the thoroughly orthodox Lutheran idea of communicatio idiomatum into patripassianism?

They don't really have much to do with each other. The communicatio idiomatum has to do with the relationship between the divine and human natures in the Son, Jesus Christ. Patripassianism teaches that the Father suffered in the crucifixion. Moltmann seems to stangely be in danger of both Tritheism and modalism in his theology. Moltmann says that as Christ suffered in time, so the Father must have suffered in eternity. This is portrayed also in The Shack when Papa (the large African-American woman who is the God the Father figure) is said more than once to have scars on his/her wrists.

 

[AngelusSax]

Moltmann says that as Christ suffered in time, so the Father must have suffered in eternity. This is portrayed also in The Shack when Papa (the large African-American woman who is the God the Father figure) is said more than once to have scars on his/her wrists.

I believe that the Father only suffered in, and this is a BAD way of putting it I am sure, an emotional sense. You know, being ashamed enough to turn His Face away, leaving the Son feeling forsaken on the Cross (I know, fulfilling prophecy, I don't dispute that or doubt or anything like that on this). If someone simply says the Father suffered at the crucifixion in eternity, I would agree with that statement on this level, but I do not see how the Father would suffer in the sense of actually getting scars and physical wounds on His Person of the Trinity - that was solely for the Son I believe.

Not sure about the ELCA at large, but no one I've ever actually met believes the Father was suffering on the cross in the same way as Jesus, save the "in eternity" part.