Here at Mockingbird we use the terms “theology/theologian of the cross” and “theology/theologian of glory” quite a bit. As a result, we thought they would be the perfect terms to explore this week. In order to do so, I want to reference the late, great theologian Gerhard O. Forde. I think his definitions of the two terms found in his excellent work On Being a Theologian of the Cross (an in depth look at Martin Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation) are just about perfect. SO, away we go!
Theologians of Glory – “operate on the assumption that what we need is optimistic encouragement, some flattery, some positive thinking, some support to build our self-esteem. Theologically speaking it operates on the assumption that we are not seriously addicted to sin, and that our improvement is both necessary and possible. We need a little boost in our desire to do good works. Of course the theologian of glory may well grant that we need the help of grace.
The only dispute, usually, will be about the degree of grace needed. If we are “liberal,” we will opt for less grace and tend to define it as some kind of moral persuasion or spiritual encouragement. If we are more “conservative” and speak even of the depth of human sin, we will tend to escalate the degree of needed to the utmost. But the hallmark of a theology of glory is that it will always consider grace as something of a supplement to whatever is left of human will and power. It will always, in the end hold, out for some free will.” (Forde, p. 16) – in short a theologian of glory sees the cross as a means to an end rather than the end itself. He/ she is interested in progression to glory as opposed to death and resurrection.
Theologians of the Cross – “operate on the assumption that there must be – to use the language of treatment for addicts – a ‘bottoming out’ or an ‘intervention.’ That is to say, there is no cure for the addict on his own. In theological terms, we must come to confess that we are addicted to sin, addicted to self, whatever form that may take, pious or impious. SO theologians of the cross know that we can’t be helped by optimistic appeals to glory, strength, wisdom, positive thinking, and so forth because those things are themselves the problem. The truth must be spoken. To repeat Luther again, the thirst for glory or power or wisdom is never satisfied even by the acquisition of it. We always want more – precisely so that we can declare independence from God. The thirst is for the absolute independence of the self, and that is sin. Thus again Luther’s statement of the radical cure in his proof for thesis 22:
“The remedy for curing desire does not lie in satisfying it, but in extinguishing it.” The cross does the extinguishing. The cross is the death of sin, and the sinner. The cross does the ‘bottoming out.’ The cross is the ‘intervention.’ The addict/sinner is not coddled by false optimism but is put to death so that new life can begin.
The theologian of the cross ‘says what a thing is’ (thesis 21). The theologian of the cross preaches to convict of sin. The addict is not deceived by theological marshmallows but is told the truth so that he might at last learn to confess, to say, ‘I am an addict,’ ‘I am an alcoholic,’ and never to stop saying it. Theologically and more universally all must learn to say, ‘I am a sinner,’ and likewise never to stop saying it until Christ’s return makes it no longer true.” (Forde, p. 17) – in short a theologian of the cross sees the cross as the end where we die to our sin with Christ and are raised a new creation with Christ. The work is truly finished as Christ promised and there is no moving on from His cross.
COMMENTS
14 responses to “Theologians of Glory vs. Theologians of the Cross: An Intro and Definition”
Leave a Reply
…and never to stop saying it… until Christ’s return makes it no longer true..
— — — — —
Doesn't being a "new creation" mean that at least in some small measure we are actually children of God and thus bear His image… where previously we were not his children…
Great question, Greg. I'd distinguish the issue of being made in God's image from our acquired sonship (by adoption).
So everyone bears the image of God — Christians, Hindus, atheists, Muslims, and so on — since we are made in the image of God.
We become sons of God, on the other hand, by being found "in Christ" and only by that.
Thanks so much to Sean for starting this thread!
One thing I remember is how counterintuitive the distinction between the kinds of theologians was for me at first.
So if anyone else has that experience, just dealing with these as definitions, I can't urge you enough to read Forde's whole book ("On Being a Theologian…"). It's really quite short. And it's hard to get at this distinction without allowing all the theses of the Heidelberg Disputation to slowly play themselves out in your mind and heart. Forde's book is in that sense just as much a devotional book as it is a book of propostional theology — more so in fact.
I think what's hard for pastor and church-goer is that preachers are tempted to teach TOG because their members *want* to hear TOG. Versus preaching what needs to be said/heard, TOC
Sean,
I love it! This is very, very, helpful.
dwcasey, you're right! People always want rules. And as a pastor, I can tell you it is flattering for people to come to you and ask you to give them rules. It makes one feel so wise. The hard thing for pastor and person-in-the-pews is to trust in the cross, the whole cross, and nothing but the cross. (And by cross I have in mind the whole shebang: the passion, death and resurrection of Christ.)
Christ has set us free, free to no longer live a better life or a good life or an uplifted life, or just so that we could have some hope. No Christ came to die, so that we in turn could die. Because in order for us to see the kingdom of God we must be born again and we cannot do this on our own, we must die and he must raise us from death to life. If we try to pick ourselves up by the bootstraps then all we are is seeking Glory. I myself am realizing what a friend I am of glory and I must repent and just give up and die. Why? Because in the scriptures the early bird does not get the worm (in fact the thief on the cross is the one that will be with him in paradise), and you cannot pull yourself up by the bootstraps( ask Lazarus about that); I just have to give up, because all the trying in the world is not gonna save me from my sin. ONLY Christ ONLY the Cross-can do that.
Keith Pozzuto
Forde's work is terrific. I recently went gave an adult Sunday School class on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation–and was immensely blessed myself by the study. Can I also recommend some talks that Carl Trueman gave on the subject? You can find a summary here: http://www.theologian.org.uk/churchhistory/lutherstheologyofthecross.html
To answer Greg, there’s a chart on page 4 here that might shed some light on the new nature — the four states of man’s will as seen by Rome, Calvin, and Luther.
http://www.hope-aurora.org/docs/Sanctification.pdf
I was just doing a search on what is “Glory” and I came across this thread. I do not understand the emphasis on the cross and not a greater emphasis on CHRIST on the cross. Is not Christ the glory of the cross, was the cross not just a stick. Should there not be a greater emphasis on looking to Jesus the author and perfecter of my faith? At the moment i am feeling lost… I have become increasingly disillusioned by “theological” debate. I understand that Calvin and Luther did great things in allowing us to serve God the way we do today. But we can all read the bible for ourselves and it is great english, no? Why do we need their interpretations and thesis? Maybe someone here can help me understand.
by the way what is Glory? (in biblical terms)
Reece, I think cross is used as a shortcut way of saying Christ on the cross. See an earlier post from June:
“The hard thing for pastor and person-in-the-pews is to trust in the cross, the whole cross, and nothing but the cross. (And by cross I have in mind the whole shebang: the passion, death and resurrection of Christ.)”
the TOG crowd are the tares.
excellent post
Thanks Solomon. I think it’s important to remember that we’re all theologians of glory naturally. It is the miraculous work of God’s grace through Jesus’ death and resurrection that we become theologians of the cross…and even then as Forde said we keep returning again and again to the cross to remember that we are sinners. Thank God he promises the TOG in all of us has been put to death on the cross by his grace. He kills the tare is to raise the wheat us to life…or something like that:). Cheers!
[…] address how these ideals are self-imposed and even desired. It was the 16th century reformer Martin Luther who wrote, “The remedy for curing desire does not lie in satisfying it, but in extinguishing it.” […]