A Thinking Reed

A typology of Lutherans

Written by

Lee M.

in

Having been hanging around Lutheranism (at least in its ELCA version) for about five years now, I’ve noticed that, like many other mainline Protestant denominations, there are several distinct sub-groups or factions that appear to co-exist with varying degrees of tension. For instance, most readers are probably familiar with the divisions within Anglicanism between evangelicals, Anglo-Catholics, etc., but may be less familiar with such divisions within Lutheranism.

Herewith, then, is my feeble attempt at identifying some of these various sub-groups:

  • Liberal Protestants are probably well-represented among the clergy and denominational poobahs, these are the theologically liberal National Council of Churches, peace ‘n’ justice types. They are the ones who are advocating most eagerly for acceptance of homosexuality in the church and other aspects of a “liberationist” agenda.
  • Evangelicals are eager to join in on the great evangelical megachurch success story. They tend to be morally conservative, but want to downplay Lutheran distinctives (liturgical worship, sacraments) in favor of “seeker sensititve” services and a kind of generic American evangelical piety.
  • Confessional Protestants are the folks for whom the Reformation and the Lutheran Confessions still provide the touchstone of Lutheran identity. Very suspicious of ecumenism, they balk at having things like the historic episcopacy foisted on them.
  • “Small-c” Catholics (a.k.a. “evangelical catholics”) see the Lutheran church as a reform movement within the universal catholic church. They tend to be “high-church” and favor more “catholic” styles of devotion and liturgy and emphasize the Lutheran tradition’s continuity with the pre-reformation church. Like the Lib Prots they are ecumenically minded, but tend to be more favorably disposed to Rome and Orthodoxy (rather than other mainliners), even envisioning eventual reunion. They also tend to be morally conservative, sometimes making common cause with confessional protestants and evangelicals.

What do you all think? Did I leave anybody out? Do other churches have these kinds of divisions?

Comments

5 responses to “A typology of Lutherans”

  1. Joshie

    sounds pretty straight accurate from what I’ve observed!

    My Church History Prof. Dr. Strege might object to your use of the term “evangelical” though. He objected to anyone using the term to refer to anybody outside of the Reformed tradition (in the American context anyway) because he considered Evangelicalism as a specific movement coming out of the Great Awakening in the Presbyterian and Congregational churches. Since Evangelicals are, by definition, Reformed anyone who is not a part of the Zwingli-Calvin tradition cannot be Evangelical. This would include Lutherans, Methodists, Quakers, et al.

    The issue is confused further, in that in German Evangelical just means Protestant and in England Evangelical is a term often used to refer to Weslyan-leaning Anglicans.

    Reply
  2. jack perry

    I’ve been, ah, “hanging around” Catholicism for ten years now, & I don’t think I could do nearly as good a breakdown as you just did. It is an interesting idea though.

    Reply
  3. chip frontz

    Lee, good post. Some further thoughts from my end.

    1. There is a strain of evangelical catholicism that is “liberal” on moral issues. You can see this kind of thing as you look at people like Bp. Stephen Bouman of Metro NY on the editorial board of Lutheran Forum. I think as the arguments regarding homosexuality, etc., have become far more strident, the “liberal” and “conservatives” have become alienated. This has significantly eroded the importance and/or the influence of evangelical catholics within the ELCA.

    2. There is still a significant difference in the heritage of the predecessor churches of the ELCA. The ALC heritage has far more of a congregational polity (and is where you’ll find most WordAloners), while the LCA is far more comfortable with central authority. Throw in a few hundred thousand former Missouri-Synoders, and you’ve got an interesting mix.

    3. It seems to me that the “liberal-Protestant” and “evangelical” wings in your typology are similar in that they come out of a church environment dominated by the American culture. Similarly, the confessional and e.c. movements share a commitment to the 16th century confessions, although they differ on method of interpretation. In other words, the “Schmucker” and “Krauth” traditions which were at Gettysburg in the 19th century are still very relevant. Krauth left Gettysburg and started the Seminary in Philadelphia when he found out that Schmucker would gladly dump certain “Roman remnants” in the Augsburg Confession (like the real presence) for Protestant unity in the New World. The “new measures” Schmucker embraced in worship (the anxious bench, revival techniques) also rankled confessionalists. Sound familiar?

    Reply
  4. Lee

    Josh – that is interesting, because I’d always assumed that “evangelicals” (at least in the modern American sense) spanned a significant spectrum of theological opinion – e.g. Calvinism vs. Arminianism.

    Pr. Frontz – thanks for adding some depth to the discussion. I had wondered if there was a “liberal” wing of the E.C.s (akin to Anglicanism’s “Affirming Catholicism”). I’m sorry to hear that their influence is waning, though, since it’s the group I’m probably most attuned to (either that or I’m just a crypto-Anglican as Josh seems to think!).

    Reply
  5. Chip Frontz

    The liberal wing of “evangelical catholicism” is not really organized. Lutheran Forum has remained solidly conservative on moral issues. You can find those who are supportive of same-sex unions and ordinations of those in such relationships in the Society of the Holy Trinity, but you have to look hard.

    See Dwight’s church for an example of “liberal” e.c.ism in ELCA-land.

    Reply

Leave a comment

More posts