Theology of Cross vs Theology of Glory

[xenia]

You all did such a great job answering my first question that now I am emboldened to ask you a second one:

What is the meaning of a Theology of the Cross versus a Theology of Glory?

Thankful I am,

-Xenia

 

[Rechtgläubig]

You all did such a great job answering my first question that now I am emboldened to ask you a second one:

What is the meaning of a Theology of the Cross versus a Theology of Glory?

Thankful I am,

-Xenia

Theologia Gloriae -
Theologia Crucis -

LOL sorry couldn't resist...



Theology of Glory glorifies man. Think of the self righteous pharisee

Theology of the Cross gives God alone glory. Think of the sinfull tax collector who has nothing to offer God, but his cries of repentance and pleads for mercy as he trusts in Chris's merits. Theologia Crucis's focus is on Christ's suffering and humiliation.

It is hard to give good clean cut definitions, examples are easier (plus I have a list I can cut and paste lol! )

There is no single definition or description to distinguish between the two theologies. Luther himself, however, provides examples (again without using the terms).

Theology of glory offers God its own merits. Theology of the cross trusts christ's merits.

Theology of glory wants to walk by what it sees rather than trusting God's Word. Theology of the cross trusts God's Word in spite of what it sees.

Theology of glory measures the gospel's effectiveness by the church's outward success. Theology of the cross trusts that God is working through the gospel in spite of outward appearances.

Theology of glory expects that God's children will rest on a bed of roses. Theology of the cross remembers that Christ wore a crown of thorns and that "we must through much tribulation enter the kingdom." Theology of glory asserts that God does not need and therefore does not use human words, water and the word, or christ's body and blood under the bread and wine as means of grace. Theology of the cross receives and relies on these means of grace. (WELS Q+A)

 

[Jim47]

Keep coming back with the questions, I might even learn something. I'll confess I didn't know that one.

 

[Tertiumquid]

You all did such a great job answering my first question that now I am emboldened to ask you a second one:What is the meaning of a Theology of the Cross versus a Theology of Glory?Thankful I am,-Xenia

Hi Xenia,

I enjoy studying Luther. Probably the book that most influenced me in my approach to Luther was Gerhard O. Forde's On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/080284345X/qid=1104492522/sr=2-3/ref=pd_ka_b_2_3/102-6958045-7074512). This book simply revolutionized the way I "do" theology, as well as give me an even greater respect for Luther. I reccommend this book to ALL Christians. Everyone should read it.



The following come from my notes, based on lectures I heard by Lutheran scholar Robert Kolb:


The circumstances behind Luther’s “theology of the cross” was the Heidelberg Disputation. Luther was invited to Heidelberg to present his teaching. He presents his, “theology of the cross” vs. “theology of glory” (founded on man’s wisdom and works). The disputation of 1518 creates a stir and attention.

The “theology of the cross” is a theology of foolishness. It denies man’s wisdom and works; it rests upon Christ’s work. We find God and salvation on the cross. It is in God’s action where we find salvation. The theology of glory is founded on man’s wisdom and works. It seems sensible and right by worldly standards. We have to “understand” by the use of our minds, and we have to “do” by our own moral energy to be right with God. By this, it attacked late medieval theology.

Other circumstances that contributed to the development of this concept of Luther’s was his experience of the medieval church. The late medieval church that Luther was confronted with was a church filled with “glory.” By “glory,” Luther meant that the emphasis was not on the achievement of Christ, but on the achievement of the Church, and those achievements were accomplished by the churches’ own power. This glory (of accomplishments worthy of praise without Christ) is the opposite from Luther’s “theology of the cross.” Luther encountered the theology of glory in three different ways. First he encountered the glory of human reason expressed in his earlier scholastic training. Scholastic theology had been strongly influenced by Aristotelian metaphysics, and this influence had misshaped the Biblical method. Secondly, Luther was confronted with the glory of human effort (works). He encountered this in his monastic order. Neither Scholastic theology nor monasticism helped him escape his psychological burdens. Thirdly, he also rejected the “glory of the church” and said the church is a suffering church, rather than a church of beauty and splendor. The church is not supposed to be a “glory” of political power and luxury.

In Luther’s Heidelberg disputation, he presented a series of theses in which he explained the theology of the cross. In theses one, He put forth the notion that the law of God cannot advance the human creature on the way to righteousness. The law hinders him on the way to righteousness. In theses two, he said that human works couldn’t lead to the “end” of righteousness. Thesis three explained that human works always seem attractive and good but they are most likely done apart from Christ. Theses four said that the works of God appear unattractive and evil, but are nevertheless eternal merits. These unattractive works are the “poor works of Christians daily life.” Theses five said that the works of God are works of God because God mediates His presence to us. These theses all have turning the glory of human effort “on it’s head” as their primary purpose. The theses also attack “free will” (in theses thirteen).


the Biblical basis for Luther’s theology of the cross

The revealed God is the God who has revealed himself to us “in a crib and on a cross.” He speaks to us as the word made flesh. He speaks through scripture. In 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:9, Paul says that God reveals himself in the foolishness and the impotence of the cross of Christ In 2 Corinthians 12:9, Paul explains that God’s power is made perfect in weakness. He reveals himself also in our weakness. This foolishness is the highest wisdom. The triumph of the dead body has the last laugh as it “gobbles down death.”

The last place human power and wisdom would look for God is in a manger, in diapers, on cross, on way to tomb, and this is precisely how the New Testament presents God in Christ. It is here that God has revealed what he is really like: he reveals his unconditional and absolute love for fallen sinners.

Luther did not reject natural theology completely, but he didn’t think it was worth much. God reveals himself in the scriptures, as the Word made flesh, through human language about this Word. He reveals Himself through the sacraments of baptism and the eucharistic feast. Here alone God becomes present to reveal Himself to us. Other descriptions of God contrary to the above, tell us more about ourselves than about Him.

In summary, Luther’s theology of the cross is a presupposition about God’s revelation of Himself in Scripture. Luther’s distinction of the “Deus absconditus” versus the “Deus revelatus” try to explain the “hiddenness” of God and His revelation of Himself in His Scriptures.

Luther rejected the “prove it” mentality expressed by those who demanded “signs” (empirical epistemology) and those who demanded “wisdom” (rational epistemology). Luther said that God has placed Himself above human control, revealing Himself in the promise that elicits faith. That promise was given in the theology of the cross, and set forth in the Scriptures.


God Bless,
James Swan

 

[ByzantineDixie]

Probably one of the most practical explanations of the Theology of the Cross that I have run across is presented by Richard Eyer in his book, Pastoral Care under the Cross.

…the “theology of the cross” and “the theology of glory”2. Luther coined these terms to express the distinction that St. Paul and the entire Scriptures make between God’s ways and man’s ways. …the theology of the cross is difficult to grasp because of its sheer foreignness (it goes against every human instinct) and “foolishness,”3 …

Luther says, “Without the theology of the cross man misuses the best in the worst manner,”4 because the theology of the cross is the only way God works. “God wished to be recognized,” not in health, wealth, and success, but “in suffering.”5 As much as parishioners may want to see the hand of God in nature’s beautiful sunrises, moving stories of conversions, or success in parish programs, it is in the cross of Christ and in bearing their own crosses that God chooses to reveal His heart to them.

In speaking of the theology of the glory Luther says, “A theology of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theology of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.”6…

In short, the theology of the cross says that God comes to us through weakness and suffering, on the cross and in our own sufferings. The theology of the cross says, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness”7 The theology of glory on the other hand says that God is to be found, not in weakness but in power and strength and therefore we should look for him in signs of health, success, and outward victory over life’s ills. … All of us hold to a theology of glory at times, not wanting to surrender all to God, but holding out for how we want God to appear and do his magic in the midst of our troubles.

If we do not understand the distinction between the theology of the cross and the theology of glory, we will find ourselves drifting toward a theology of glory in which our culture believes God works though the self affirmation of pop psychology and instant gratification. We will begin to demand that God justify himself to us in our sufferings by giving us healing and success. We will demand a God who does what we want him to do and we will reject the way of the cross by which he comes to us. We will become fearful of suffering and preoccupied with its avoidance at the expense of truth and faithfulness, calling the evil of euthanasia “good” and the good of suffering “evil”.

Footnotes
2. Luther Works, Volume 31, 52
3. 1 Cor 1:18 RSV
4. Luther Works, Volume 31, 55
5. Ibid., 52
6. Ibid., 53
7. 2 Cor 12:9 NIV


And Luther...

Luther on the Theology of the Cross (Heidelberg Disputation, Proof 21)

A theologian of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theologian of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.

This is clear: He who does not know Christ does not know God hidden in suffering. Therefore he prefers works to suffering, glow to the cross, strength to weakness, wisdom to folly, and, in general, good to evil. These are the people whom the apostle calls “enemies of the cross of Christ” [Phil. 3:18], for they hate the cross and suffering and love works and the glory of works. Thus they call the good of the cross evil and the evil of a deed good. God can be found only in suffering and the cross, as has already been said. Therefore the friends of the cross say that the cross is good and works are evil, for through the cross works are destroyed and the old Adam, who is especially edified by works, is crucified. It is impossible for a person not to be puffed up by his good works unless he has first been deflated and destroyed by suffering and evil until he knows that he is worthless and that his works are not his but God’s.

We were in the process of developing an FAQ for TCCL...we only got as far as the two FAQ questions--this was one of them. The above two references and the Scripture references that support the Theology of the Cross can be found here. We consider this particular FAQ unfinished because it does not define and fully explain the Theology of Glory... I am supposed to do that but the momentum for finishing the FAQ has waned.

Peace

Rose

 

[ChiRho]

We were in the process of developing an FAQ for TCCL...

We are?

 

[ByzantineDixie]

We are?

We were....you were on sabbatical and Lotar was spearheading it. Need I say more? -----R

 

[SPALATIN]

We were....you were on sabbatical and Lotar was spearheading it. Need I say more? -----R

maybe we are afraid that if we let someone else spearhead an FAQ project again we will lose them to the RCC or EOC again. The only thing worse than those two would be the non-denoms or SBC.

 

[Rechtgläubig]

maybe we are afraid that if we let someone else spearhead an FAQ project again we will lose them to the RCC or EOC again. The only thing worse than those two would be the non-denoms or SBC.

WOF?

 

[SPALATIN]

WOF?

We lost LOTAR to the EOC and at the same time we lost Bradford to the RCC. Seems spearheading such a project is "DANGEROUS."

 

[Rechtgläubig]

We lost LOTAR to the EOC and at the same time we lost Bradford to the RCC. Seems spearheading such a project is "DANGEROUS."

LOL I think you misread that. LOL! That was WOF = Word of Faith, not uhhh... nevermind...

 

[ChiRho]

WOF?

WOF?

What does that mean?

 

[Tertiumquid]

We were in the process of developing an FAQ for TCCL...we only got as far as the two FAQ questions--this was one of them. The above two references and the Scripture references that support the Theology of the Cross can be found here. We consider this particular FAQ unfinished because it does not define and fully explain the Theology of Glory... I am supposed to do that but the momentum for finishing the FAQ has waned.

Hi Rose,

I constantly have the paradigm of cross/glory running in my head. The other day I was in the local Christian bookstore, and I considered asking the owners if they would consider renaming the store "Glory books and trinkets". Of course, the only one who knew I was insulting them was me.

My 2 cents on a definition:

1. Looking for God outside of the Scriptures is a theology of glory
Luther:Investigating God outside the Bible is “devilish”

“nothing more is achieved than that we plunge ourselves into destruction; for they present an object that is inscrutable, namely, the unrevealed God. Why not rather let God keep His decisions and mysteries in secret? We have no reason to exert ourselves so much that these decisions and mysteries be revealed to us.”

“Whoever would travel the right road and not go astray with his faith, let him begin where God says and where He wants to be found. Otherwise he will surely miss the goal, and all that he believes and does will prove vain.



“For if Christ is passed by, there is no end of sects, of flitting hither and yon, and of error.”



“Those who indulge in their own ideas and speculate about God and His will aside from Christ lose God altogether.”


2.The theology of glory presents a god largely a reflection of our feelings, failings, and fears


Because human creatures are so angry with themselves for failing to meet their own expectation, the gods they fashion are gods of wraith.


Because humans find themselves so unreliable, the gods they fashion are capricious.


Because human creatures want to make it on our own, because we ultimately want to feel responsible for our ultimate well being the gods we fashion demand performance and accomplishment from sinful human creatures

3. Various examples of the theology of glory

-monasticism
-End times books
-"Purpose driven church" type of stuff
-"victorious christian life" theologies
-Signs and wonders pentacostal movements

Again, only my 2 cents.

God bless,
James Swan

 

[ChiRho]

Hi Rose,

I constantly have the paradigm of cross/glory running in my head. The other day I was in the local Christian bookstore, and I considered asking the owners if they would consider renaming the store "Glory books and trinkets". Of course, the only one who knew I was insulting them was me.

My 2 cents on a definition:

1. Looking for God outside of the Scriptures is a theology of glory
Luther:Investigating God outside the Bible is “devilish”

“nothing more is achieved than that we plunge ourselves into destruction; for they present an object that is inscrutable, namely, the unrevealed God. Why not rather let God keep His decisions and mysteries in secret? We have no reason to exert ourselves so much that these decisions and mysteries be revealed to us.”

“Whoever would travel the right road and not go astray with his faith, let him begin where God says and where He wants to be found. Otherwise he will surely miss the goal, and all that he believes and does will prove vain.



“For if Christ is passed by, there is no end of sects, of flitting hither and yon, and of error.”



“Those who indulge in their own ideas and speculate about God and His will aside from Christ lose God altogether.”


2.The theology of glory presents a god largely a reflection of our feelings, failings, and fears


Because human creatures are so angry with themselves for failing to meet their own expectation, the gods they fashion are gods of wraith.


Because humans find themselves so unreliable, the gods they fashion are capricious.


Because human creatures want to make it on our own, because we ultimately want to feel responsible for our ultimate well being the gods we fashion demand performance and accomplishment from sinful human creatures

3. Various examples of the theology of glory

-monasticism
-End times books
-"Purpose driven church" type of stuff
-"victorious christian life" theologies
-Signs and wonders pentacostal movements

Again, only my 2 cents.

God bless,
James Swan

Mr. Swan,

Fantastic stuff, as usual. I understand (perhaps incorrectly) that you belong to a Reformed Church. May I ask what keeps you from being Lutheran?

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

 

[Rechtgläubig]

Mr. Swan,

Fantastic stuff, as usual. I understand (perhaps incorrectly) that you belong to a Reformed Church. May I ask what keeps you from being Lutheran?

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

Hmmm yeah. Is it the hats, or lack of? 'Cause we are working on that...

 

[ChiRho]

1. Looking for God outside of the Scriptures is a theology of glory


God bless,
James Swan

Looking for God (or seeking to define God outside of the Crucified Christ) of Scriptures is a theology of glory.

Just to clarify Luther a bit more!

Pax Christi,

ChiRho

 

[Lutherrunner]

Hi Rose,

I constantly have the paradigm of cross/glory running in my head. The other day I was in the local Christian bookstore, and I considered asking the owners if they would consider renaming the store "Glory books and trinkets". Of course, the only one who knew I was insulting them was me.

.....

3. Various examples of the theology of glory

-monasticism
-End times books
-"Purpose driven church" type of stuff
-"victorious christian life" theologies
-Signs and wonders pentacostal movements

Again, only my 2 cents.

God bless,
James Swan

I'm still fairly new here so forgive me for being a bit naive. From some of my posted questions, you may remember that I am a lifelong Lutheran, raised in the midwest and transplanted to Texas....land of the uh, you know, more fundamental type religions.....I told you that I am dating someone from a non-denominational bible church and that I feel somewhat uncomfortable there, and that I feel that those type of folks seem to think of Lutherans as, how do I say this, well, you know, not fitting in with the way they think things should be......(in other words, I feel like the odd man out, ostracized, so to speak)....they are all about inerrancy, bible teaching sermons, home schooling, conservative politics, etc....(and I realize some of you LCMS folks are somewhat more conservative, yet in a different manner, so don't take that the wrong way, cuz you're probably not all into Falwell and Robertson, Moral Majority, etc....)....anyway, they also had the whole 40 days of purpose small groups and so on, and tried to get me to come, but I declined......

anyway, point being.....it sounds like some of these new, non-denominational, store front churches may be more along the lines of the Theology of Glory or pop religion?

I'm feeling better and better about being a Lutheran!.....they were bringing me down........

 

[Qoheleth]

Looking for God (or seeking to define God outside of the Crucified Christ) of Scriptures is a theology of glory.

Just to clarify Luther a bit more!

BAM! You hit the nail square on the head! Thanks

 

[Qoheleth]

May I ask what keeps you from being Lutheran?

My question also. James??

 

[Carl the Copt]

I only know that glory vs cross is a red herring when it comes to the theological issues and that all theology that one reads in books is and should be properly named as a sleep aide! We all suffer death and so we all know the cross up close and personal, and we all have times where glory seems to be the center of things so the answer Xenia is some are like the Nordics and love the depression that the Cross brings and others would prefer glory. Me give me Glory, as Orthodox that is a better reply.
Carl the Copt