Theosis and preaching: implications for preaching in the Finnish Luther research.

Over the course of the past several years research by Finnish theologians on Martin Luther has come to the conclusion that Luther shared a significant reality with basic Orthodox theology. This reality emerged in theological discussions that the Finnish Lutheran theologians have had with the Russian Orthodox Church. As the Orthodox advanced their theosis theology the Lutherans began to sense that very similar ideas were present in Luther's theology. Carl Braaten and Robert Jenson have edited a book titled Union With Christ: The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther (Eerdmans, 1998) which presents articles by several of these Finnish theologians. Stimulated by these articles, I am fascinated to see the implications that theosis has for preaching. This new Finnish research on Luther points to some problems in Lutheran preaching and to some creative possibilities of thinking about preaching anew as we move into the future.

Problems in Lutheran preaching

First, a word about a fundamental problem in preaching based on past assumptions in Luther research. The Finnish authors point to two problems in Lutheran studies that have a significant impact on preaching. Tuomo Mannermaa writes that

Finnish Luther research has come to the conclusion that Luther's idea of
the presence of Christ in faith can form a basis for treating the
question of divinization. The Lutheran understanding of the indwelling
of Christ implies a real participation in God and is analogous to the
Orthodox doctrine of participation in God, or theosis ... the core of
the often misunderstood patristic doctrine of theosis can be briefly
formulated as follows. Divine life has manifested itself in Christ. In
the church, understood as the body of Christ, human beings participate
in this life and thereby partake of 'the divine nature' [2 Peter
1:4] ... in order to restore [humans to their] original condition as
imago Dei (pp. 25-26).

Mannermaa goes on to indicate that classic Lutheranism was familiar with the notion of God's essential indwelling in the believer. A problem has arisen, however, in Lutheran interpretation. The Formula of Concord defines the relation between "justification" and "divine indwelling" in a manner different from Luther: "the inhabitatio Dei is distinguished conceptually as a separate phenomenon that is logically subsequent to justification" (p. 27). In this division of the concept justification is understood in a totally forensic manner, "that is, it is regarded as a reception of the forgiveness that is 'imputed' to a human being because of the obedience and merit of Christ. The inhabitatio Dei is considered merely a consequence of this 'righteousness of faith'" (p. 28). Luther, however, does not separate Christ from his work. "Christ is, in this unity of person and work, really present in the faith of the Christian" (p. 28).

Simo Puera makes the same point in his article. "According to the Formula of Concord the doctrine of justification includes only God's favor, that is, imputed righteousness.... This means that God is not really present in a Christian when declaring him or her righteous through faith for Christ's sake" (p. 45). This forensic (legal) understanding of justification gives justification a thoroughly objective ground. The problem that Perua sees, however, is that justification becomes something external to the Christian. Divine agency is separated from human agency. The divine agent has asserted that one is justified. The human agent is then called upon for a response. This is quite different from a view of theosis wherein the divine agent divinizes, transforms, the human agent!

This disjuncture between Luther and the Formula of Concord raises the question concerning which interpretation is normative for Lutherans today. This is an ongoing issue for each of us in the life of the Lutheran church in today's world.

Puera points to another factor that contributes to the same problem. The whole Finnish school seems to point a finger of blame here at Immanuel Kant's philosophy.

Characteristic of neo-Kantian theology is the radical separation of
God's being [esse] and his effects [Wirkungen] from each other....
Because of this separation, such theological ideas as the union of God
and the Christian become impossible. The neo-Kantian school has had a
wide and comprehensive influence on Luther research until now. (p. 46).

As I understand this, it seems to me to be a second way that the Lutheran tradition balks at divinization. We can't be related to God's being itself. Kant told us so! Divine agency is one matter. The effect of that agency and the role of human agency is another matter. The Formula of Concord, on the one hand, and a new-Kantian interpretation of Luther on the other hand, appear to mitigate against an understanding of theosis in Luther's theology as set forth by the Finnish school of research. The Finnish theologians find it necessary to combat these two streams of interpretation of Luther in order to assert their claims for divinization as fundamental to Luther's theology.

The problem for preaching that grows out of the Formula and neo-Kantianism is very serious. Mannermaa again:

[Luther] claims that if the person of Christ and that of the believer
are separated from each other in the locus of justification, salvation
is still within the framework of the order of the law.... When it comes
to justification, therefore, if you divide Christ's person from your
own, you are in the Law; you remain in it and live in yourself, which
means that you are dead in the sight of God and damned by the Law. (p.
38)

I am particularly struck by Luther's words "if you divide Christ's person from your own, you are in the Law!" Marking a division between divine agency and human agency leads to a false preaching of the Law. In such preaching divine agency doesn't need much emphasis. That's taken for granted. That's objective. That is finished by Christ. That is outside of me. The preacher can take care of justification (or whatever metaphor for the divine deed of God in Jesus Christ we might summon) with just a few sentences.

Theologically what is happening here is that the Christ who is for us is separated from the Christ who is in us. Christ is outside. We are inside. We are the human agents. That's where the problem lies. The problem lies within us. The problem lies in human agency. That's where the effort for preaching goes. Preaching shaped by this theological conviction seeks to convince congregants that they must act in response to divine agency. They must summon the faith to believe. "Faith as volitional obedience rather than as ontological participation is all that a neo-Kantianized Luther could allow" (p. ix). Our congregants, therefore, must choose to follow and obey. They must live up to the quality of the mercy shown. They must repent and put their lives right. The Third Use of the Law will surely receive big play. God has a plan for your life as revealed in the Bible. Here is how you shall live. Are you doing so? Why not? Turn around. Act. Do what is required of you. Choose the higher path.

The list could go on. Such a list has can become the dominant theme of preaching when we separate divine agency from human agency. And clearly, in my experience, we often have done so. And so we preach the law as demand for human agency. One could make the case that preaching in our past and in our present has been primarily focused on these matters. We preach the law. We preach the law and we think we are preaching the gospel. The gospel after all is a given. Our names have been written down in a heavenly book somewhere. It's all there. We are justified. So let's get on with it. Divine agency is a given. Human agency is the problem. We preach to the problem; we preach to inspire human agency.

Possibilities for Lutheran preaching

The possibility for a new way of thinking about preaching is implicit in the theosis reality. The authors describe theosis in a variety of metaphors. Let us first of all hear these metaphors and then ask how one might talk about preaching that would do justice to the metaphors. Mannermaa uses Luther's language of the "happy exchange" to describe the Lutheran concept of theosis.

The core of Luther's concept of participation finds expression in the
notion of the 'happy exchange', according to which Christ takes upon
himself the sinful person of the human being and bestows his own
righteous person upon that humanity. What takes place here between
hrist and the believer is a communication of attributes or properties:
Christ, the divine righteousness, truth, peace, joy, love, power, and
life gives himself to the believer. At the same time, Christ 'absorbs'
the sin, death, and curse of the believer into himself. Because faith
involves a real union with Christ and because Christ is the divine
person, the believer does indeed participate in God. That is what Luther
means when he speaks of Christ as a 'gift'. Christ is not only the favor
of God, that is forgiveness, but also a 'gift' [donum], God himself as
present. (p. 32)

Puera takes up the same image of the happy exchange in his discussion of Luther. He uses the metaphor as a means of explicating the meaning of the divine indwelling of Christ in the believer.

When Christ gives himself to us, he indwells us and becomes one with us.
Thus, redemption is something that happens not only on the cross but
also in all believers whom Christ indwells through faith. Indeed, only
when Christ indwells us is the redemptive work in us brought into
existence. Luther describes salvation as the so-called wonderful
exchange.... (p. 90)

Another theological image used by the Finnish theologians is generated from the words "favor" and "gift" as we have read above. They indicate that Luther's theology is permeated by the reality that Christ is both God's favor to us and God's gift alive in us.

"Favor signifies God's forgiveness and the removal of his wrath. And
Christ is a 'gift' in that the real self-giving of God comes through him
to the human person .... the notion of Christ as a 'gift' means that the
believing subject becomes a participant in the 'divine nature.'" (p. 33)

And again,

Christ himself is grace [favor] and gift. Christ himself is the grace
that covers a sinner and hides him from God's wrath, and Christ himself
is the gift that renews the sinner internally and makes him righteous.
This occurs, then, when Christ unites himself with a sinner. (p. 53)

The language of deification is also employed by these scholars:

Luther's view of God and of his nature as self-giving love, then, leads
us to the notion of the deification of a created human being. The triune
God lives in the Christian ... this divinization means precisely our
transformation into God's love such that we are God's love. Thus, the
aim of salvation as participation in God and in his love is to effect in
us as well the capacity to fulfill the twofold commandment of pure,
unselfish love. (pp. 92-93)

Note the agency of new life, life that keeps the law by loving God and neighbor, is our participation in God, the transformation of human agency. This manner of talking about life under God's law will require a very different type of preaching than preaching as a demand for voluntary, willful obedience. Human agency cannot keep the law. Jeremiah had it right long ago. Speaking prophetically of a new covenant to come Jeremiah speaks for God saying: "I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God and they shall be my people" (Jer 31:33). New hearts are needed. Union with God is needed. Divine agency become the root of our being is needed. Our old hearts won't do. There is no way to order them into obedience. "I will write it on their hearts," says Yahweh.

The point should be clear though the images for theosis continue to abound in these articles. Let me just list some of the other images used for theosis: God donates Godself in the Son. God becomes present within us. A Christian becomes full of God. We participate in the divine life. We live in union with Christ.

According to Luther all this is effected by the Holy Spirit through baptism, and the necessary precondition for baptism is preaching of God's Word (p. 53). In baptism God joins Godself with the sinner and becomes one with him or her. And preaching is the precondition! The effect of this Finnish research leads us to a new way to talk about preaching. Let me single out the many metaphors used for theosis in this article and apply them to the preaching task. The many metaphors used intend to point to the same basic theotic reality:

Theosis means that preaching:

... effects the "happy exchange."

... brings Christ as grace/favor and gift.

... mediates God's indwelling in the be liever.

... is an instrument for divinization of the believer.

... transforms human agency.

... gives birth to new hearts within us.

... mediates union with God/Christ.

... donates Christ to us.

... is the "real presence" of Christ "for us."

... fills us with God.

... creates our participation in God.

And how shall we preach?

How shall we accomplish this divinizing task in our preaching? How shall we shift our preaching focus from human agency to divine agency? These are challenging questions. The Finnish Luther research has brought me to the point of these questions. Answers that form within me are clearly initial attempts to speak to this issue and are largely dependent on my earlier work in preaching (Telling The Story: Variety and Imagination in Preaching [Augsburg, 1980]; Thinking In Story: Preaching in a Postliterate Age [C.S.S., 1993]). Hopefully this Luther research will invite many of you as well into this process of rethinking the homiletical task.

How shall we preach? There are some things I think I know and some things that still dance on the edge of my imagination as regards theotic preaching. It seems clear to me, for example, that preaching theosis requires a sacramental view of preaching. Preaching as sacrament is not new to Lutheran understanding. The finite in preaching is the instrument of the infinite in the lives of those who hear. The Holy Spirit works with finite words to bring infinite reality to life within us.

The task of the Holy Spirit is to produce faith in Christ and to enable
us to receive Christ with all of his gifts.... Second, the Holy Spirit
reveals the work of Christ to us through the preaching of the word,
helps us to understand God's love toward us, effects faith in us, and in
this way offers and gives Christ and all the gifts of salvation to us as
well. (p. 90)

Word and sacraments are the means of grace in Lutheran understanding. Word refers to Bible, witness, and preaching. It is the word of God that makes the sacraments effective. How can water do such things? How can bread and wine do such things? It is not water or bread and wine that do such things but the word of God working in, with, and under the finite stuff of life. That's how Luther puts it in the Small Catechism. In preaching, the word is associated with finitude not by the presence of earthly elements but through the presence of the human preacher who with his/her bodily voice brings Christ into the lives of believers and deifies its recipients.

The proclaimed word has its origin in the incarnation of Jesus
Christ.... The proclaimed word is the incarnate Christ himself. As
little as the incarnation is the outward shape of God, just so little
does the proclaimed word present the outward form of a reality; rather,
it is the thing itself. The preached Christ is both the Historical One
and the Present One ... the proclaimed word is not a medium of
expression for something else ... but rather it is the Christ himself
walking through his congregation as the Word. (Dietrich Bonhoeffer,
quoted in Worldly Preaching: Lectures on Homiletics, revised edition,
ed. Clyde Fant [Crossroad, 1991], 101)

The sacramental nature of preaching implied in Luther's theology can quite easily be applied to preaching as effecting theosis! And what form shall this preaching take? In my own thinking about preaching I have come to the conclusion that most forms of the variety of ways of preaching at our disposal can be divided into three basic categories:

1. Thinking in idea.

2. Thinking in story.

3. Thinking in image (visual and/or metaphoric)

Preaching that is "thinking in idea" is preaching as explanation. Most of the preaching in our history probably falls under this rubric. The problem here is that explanation of theosis does not produce theosis. Explanation of swimming is not the same as swimming. We could multiply examples here. It seems to me that one could make the case that "thinking in idea" preaching is predicated on the split between divine and human agency. Preaching explains the divine work and the human agent sets out to willfully bring theosis to pass.

"Thinking in story" works best when the sermons' stories are stories of God, and especially when the biblical stories are told in such a way that the hearer participates in the story. God at work in, with, and under the story can be God at work in the life of the hearer at the same time. When the hearer participates in the life of God in the story there is, I believe, the real possibility that the work of God is experienced in the life of the hearer. We experience forgiveness, we experience justification, we experience the divinizing work of God in Jesus Christ in our own existence. Preaching as "thinking in story" appears to me to be open to the possibility that it is a genuine means for the infinite God to indwell the finite hearer. Divine agency is at work through such a sermon. Theosis is a possibility. Hearers' lives are filled with God.

"Thinking in image" or '"thinking in picture" might, first, be a way of speaking about the use of images/icons in the Orthodox churches. Visual images, icons, are used in worship and preaching as a means of grace whereby the viewer actually participates in the reality of that which is seen with the human eye. The human, through sight, participates in the reality of the divine. This may be a fruitful visual way of thinking as we seek to shape a preaching that donates Jesus to people's lives. We hereby understand that both eyes and ears are human instruments that mediate God's grace. Eyes and ears are means through which God can divinize the human. Divine agency can take place through what we see! Theosis is again a possibility.

Second, "thinking in image" is preaching that uses linguistic metaphors as the spark of the human imagination. Images taken from the Bible, from the arts, and from everyday life can spark the human imagination to live in the world of the divine. Finite metaphors become tools of the imagination in receiving the infinite God into one's own body. This, too, might be a helpful way of thinking about preaching that creates union with Christ.

These are some of my initial reactions to the challenging work of the Finnish Luther researchers. I want to add just one more probe of a future for theotic preaching. In my basic works on preaching I have extended sections on first-person, present-tense proclamation of the gospel. There is no reason that such a proclamation cannot be included in all three types of preaching that I have alluded to above. I have worked hard with my students on this aspect of preaching. At some point[s] in the sermon proclamation of promise should be made. This is understood to be the very heart of the sermon. This is what you walked up into the pulpit to announce.

The preacher introduces the proclamation with words such as "What Jesus is saying to us through this story is ..." or "What God is saying to us through this story of Joseph is...." For example, in a sermon on John 1:1-18 the proclamatory word might be something like this: "What we hear Jesus saying through these words of John is: 'I am the Word from the beginning of creation. All things came into being through me. I became flesh to dwell among you. I became flesh to dwell within you today. I have come to live within you. I have come to make you my dwelling place. I have come to fill you with God. I walk into your lives this morning on the wings of the preacher's words. Believe it and it is yours!' Amen."

Proclamation, the heart of the sermon, announces a promissory event of God. God's word so announced is a creative word. God's word is always creative! It creates what it promises (Isa 55:10-11). It is a word that can make humans divine. It is theosis. The sermon focuses on divine agency, not human responsive agency. I lean toward the idea that preaching effects transformation of human agency; teaching is the community at work discovering ways in which people who have been divinized might best give shape to the new life that has that has taken root within them.

Richard A. Jensen

Carlson Professor of Homiletics, emeritus

Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago

[e-mail]