Human Rights and Religion from a Lutheran Perspective

The Lutheran church was born out of the context of asking questions(95 questions initially ie ‘The 95 Theses’) which Martin Luther ‘nailed’ to the church door in Wittenberg as a basis for discussing some issues that he had with the Roman Catholic church of his day. He was himself a teacher of the same church, a very faithful and committed monk and teacher of future monks and priests who were attending the recently established university of Wittenberg. Initially, Luther did so politely and patiently through the established channels of the church. But when he was receiving either no answers, or ones which lacked substance, the volume of the questions increased and the sentiments began to be expressed by a wider group of people. Unfortunately the Roman Catholic Church of that time found them to be too insolent (and maybe pertinent, hence the creation of the Counter-Reformation). Attempts were made to respond to the questions through dialogue and diatribe, but these satisfied neither party and so the hegemonic dominant papacy issued an edict that Martin Luther could be killed at any time by anybody (a Roman Catholic fatwah?). This edict for Martin Luther’s death by anybody at any time had the additional endorsement of the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire at that time, who was supportive of the Papacy and issued his own edict as well.

Serious confessions of faith were developedby the ‘Lutherans’ (as they came to be known), in particular the Augsburg Confession. Out of this crucible of fire and refining came a return to some of the basics of the Christian faith, and these basics touched the hearts and lives of many northern European people through many pamphlets, cartoons, songs, hymns, caricatures as well as jokes. Throughout the remaining forty or so years of Luther’s life as a ‘Reformer’, he remained under the edicts of the Pope and Emperor and so his movements were restricted, including being unable to be at the negotiating table with the Roman church at Augsburg (ten years after the initial edicts). Messengers had to be sent from a neighbouring town where Luther was hiding, relaying to him the state of the discussions, thus intimately but safely involving him in the process of the negotiations at a distance.

The LutheranChurch has lived out of the radical nature of the Christian faith that will always question and probe, as well as speak out against any human organisation that sets itself up as “God”.(Jesus severely questioned the religious authorities of his day who in many situations had abused their responsibility and authority. And St Paul even speaks against himself as a potential abusive authority when he says in his letter to the Galatians: “Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you.” (Gal 1:8)

One of the most prominent atheists of the 19th century, namely Nietzsche, was hatched and reared in a Lutheran manse. Atheism is a natural child of the Lutheran faith in that it comes from a context of questioning the authenticity of what is being said or done within the church and wider community. Atheism should be received asawelcome reality check, addressing some of the aberrations within and on the fringes of both Christianity and the Lutheran confessions. I would argue that Richard Dawkins has many helpful things to say to the church, especially some of the dubious aspects of the church which have been practised and believed in the recent centuries. There is much around the edge of the church that needs to be named and shamed in order for the church to get back to its central tasks, faith and life. Equally, there is much of Dawkinswith which I disagree, but I appreciate the way in which he has brought the issue of religion back into the public arena where issues can be openly discussed. I believe that there is much to lose when we say that matters of faith and religion are private (as seems to be the case in France). This naïve and distorted view of life which tries to make faith only a private issue means that religious groups can develop in unhealthy ghettos without the benefit of both the support and criticism of others in the community. I believe that God gives us our fellow human beings to us both as companions as well as critics, and we should welcome people in both respects.

However, this public engagement and life together is not easy, but then again what worthwhile projects are easy? One of the main issues is that there are more than one hegemonic belief systems which see themselves as possessing the full picture of what life is about. The two most obvious are Christianity and Islam, but there are many others which even if they do not directly say so, in fact assume that their world-view is the more accurate way to look at the world. Even the religious belief that “all religions are essentially the same” is a hegemonic belief system which looks down on any other system that rejects this ‘comprehensive reality’. How can all these belief systems live together in the one country (let alone one world) where these many religions are given equal opportunity to live together?

I can only briefly express where I am as a Christian and the way that I would envisage this possibly working in Australia. As a Christian I do believe that Jesus Christ is the way in which God reaches out to human beings to embrace them with his grace. Jesus is God and Lord of the whole universe. To confess any less than this is to deny the essential aspects of the Christian faith which are held by the majority of churches throughout the world as well as the church down through the ages. However, as we know within the church there are many issues that are both peripheral and central that have been debated long and hard (sometimes for centuries) until there has been a clearer and better way of addressing the misunderstandings that can often arise. I do not believe that there is a clear line between those who are welcome to contribute to this ongoing refining of the issues within the church. In recent centuries we have even had atheists who have joined the discussion. There have also at times been helpful cross-fertilisation that has occurred between Christianity and other faiths (eg with Judaism and Hinduism and Buddhism, as well as others).

A significant part of this issue is the manner in which these discussions can be exchanged within the wider society, as reflected on by artists, theologians, satirists, newspaper editors, etc. I am one that looks for and accepts criticism so long as it is genuinely engaging the issue and not just being personally malicious. I also believe that I am a human being with limitations and cannot always see things from another angle. Take for example the example of the art work called “Piss Christ” which several years ago was displayed as a work of art in the National Gallery in Melbourne. There was public uproar about this and it created a great deal of attention and media focus, which I believe was very helpful and insightful. I came to appreciate the expression by the artist, for in some ways it heightened the actual events of Jesus life in which he was treated in a far worse way than simply being bathed in urine. God is far bigger that any particular human being and I believe that we need to assess whether or not it is God who is being scandalised by some of these expressions or whether we are protecting our own hegemonic reality, which certainly needs to be questioned at times. There are certainly some fine lines that may be stepped over in ways that do not respect the other person. But I believe that to be heavy-handed in preventing freedom of expression and discussion, there are far more disadvantages for both the particular religion(s) and the society at large. All parties may need to enter the discussion to gain deeper insights into their faith, the wider community as well as learn what it means to be a human and what it might mean if there is more to life than our particular viewpoint.

I believe that we need to nurture this fragile and healthy openness between the many religious world-views. Two of the most important aspects of this are to be able to honestly acknowledge that we are only human and may not have all the answers (acting as though we are ‘God’) and secondly to humbly treat each other with good grace and generosity as we listen and debate with each other and seek to hear each other in new ways.

Mike Pietsch 0416 738 631

1