Title: Two kinds of love : Martin Luther\u27s religious world Author: Tuomo Mannermaa; Kirsi Irmeli Stjerna Publisher: Minneapolis, Minn: Fortress Press, 2010. ISBN: 978080069707

Jorgenson, Allen

English

Title: Two kinds of love: Martin Luther\u27s religious world Author: Tuomo Mannermaa; Kirsi Irmeli Stjerna Publisher: Minneapolis, Minn: Fortress Press, 2010. ISBN: 978080069707

Jensen, Gordon A.

Scholars Commons

Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious World

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 34Issue 1 Theology and Context(s) Article 212012Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s ReligiousWorldGordon A. JensenLutheran Theological Seminary, Saskatoon, gordon.jensen@usask.caFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusPart of the Religion CommonsThis Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationJensen, Gordon A. (2012) "Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious World," Consensus: Vol. 34 : Iss. 1 , Article 21.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol34/iss1/21Book Review Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious WorldTuomo Mannermaa.Translated, edited and introduced by Kirsi I. Stjerna. Afterword by Juhani Forsberg. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2010 Originally published in Finnish in 1983, this English translation by Stjerna introduces the Finnish Luther scholarship, led by Mannermaa, to English speaking theologians. Finnish re-interpretation of Martin Lutherinterpretations that place forensic justification in the centre of attention, Mannermaa proposes that Luther’s distinction between God’s love and human love is the key to understanding Luther’s theology in general and his theology of the cross in particular. focus Based on his study of the Heidelberg Disputation, Mannermaa explains the basic differences in these two kinds of love. On the one hand, God’s love is giving, creating that which is loving to it, while human love recethat are loveable to it (1). The major difference between the two kinds of love is that while human love strives toward that which is lovable and good, God’s love encompasses that which is unlovable and of no acunlovable. Mannermaa argues that late medieval theology had misunderstood the radical nature of God’s love. For Aquinas and others, the command to “love our neighbour as ourselves” meant that people had human desire to love their neighbour is based on finding this kind of love in others. As Mannermaa notes, such human love is, in reality, selfme as I love myself. He proposes that God’s love, on the other hand, creates out of nothing. God’s love, since it is the opposite of what humans strive for as the ultimate love and good, cannot be loved by a human love. Nevertheless, God’s love, which brings to life that whiis nothing or rejected, is thus nothing short of an act of creation. In this creative act, God gives God’s own divine nature to that which was unlovable by human standards, including God’s righteousness, life and power . Mannermaa goes on to simply hintjustifying action is akin to the Orthodox idea of These two kinds of love form the basis for Mannermaa’s new interpretation of Luther. By using the starting point of the two kinds of love, the obstacles starting with forensic justification, which was developed after Luther, are overcome. Forensic justification, he argues, severely limits or even blocks the transforming power of God’s love, and downplays human love for one another. Furthermoalso stunts the growth of human love for God. Any movement toward God is suspicious, a sure sign of effective justification, and thus, another attempt at a spiritualized works righteousness.  .  Two Kinds of Love goes to the heart of the . Challenging the traditional  ives, coming into being through those things count. This ‘giving love’ of God thus transforms the to have self-love in order to love others. Further, the -centred. It seeks out others who love  that this creative, theosis, or divinization (64). re, forensic justification ch  encountered by 1Jensen: Two Kinds of LovePublished by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2012This important, ground-breaking monograph by Mannermaa is an important contribution to Luther research. He brings back into the conversation many of Luther’s ideas that have been pushed to the sidelines by the majority of Luther research of the last two centuries. For example, the reaction against the medieval insistence on ‘faith active in love’ rather than ‘faith alone’ overlooked Luther’s frequent emphasis on love in the divine-human relationship. Also shunned was any talk of effective, or transformative, justification.  At the same time, one might ask whether the ‘two kinds of love’ are really at the heart of Luther’s theology, as he claims. As the book progresses, Mannermaa tends to define God’s love more in terms of faith and justification. (57-66). Moreover, one can also argue that Luther’s consistent understanding of justification flows from his theocentric approach to theology, rather than love. This theocentric approach totally contradicts any anthropocentric, self-centred approach, be it human love or sin. Further, Luther writes a treatise on Two Kinds of Righteousness in 1519 and supervises a Disputation on Righteousness in 1536 that both deal with two kinds of righteousness within the context of justification, while treatises on two kinds of love are non-existent. This suggests that Luther consistently considered righteousness and justification the key to his theology. Could it be that Mannermaa’s ‘two kinds of love’ are one of the ways Luther explains righteousness and justification, rather than justification and righteousness explaining two kinds of love? Mannerma himself proposes that God’s alien and proper work, terms consistently used by Luther to describe justification, also apply to God’s love (34). Is it love or justification that is a subset of the other? It would also be helpful if he had clarified how human love is a fruit of God’s love (to use his terminology) in the same way that any kind of ‘effective’ or ‘transformative’ justification are fruits of forensic justification. Otherwise, the self-centred (incurvatus in se), human love still sets the agenda for love of God and love of neighbour, which Luther named as sin.  Despite these concerns, this monograph is an extremely important contribution to Luther research, however, and should be read carefully. The Mannermaa school challenges contemporary Luther research, along with the preconceptions and misconceptions of Luther that have developed over time. His critiques of Luther research need to be taken seriously, especially in light of ecumenical dialogue and an increasing move away from justification language in a world that increasingly sees less need to be justified.  Gordon A. Jensen  Lutheran Theological Seminary  Saskatoon, Saskatchewan 2Consensus, Vol. 34, Iss. 1 [2012], Art. 21http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol34/iss1/21

ConsensusVolume 34Issue 1 Theology and Context(s) Article 122012Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s ReligiousWorldAllen JorgensonWaterloo Lutheran Seminary, ajorgenson@wlu.caFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusPart of the Religion CommonsThis Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationJorgenson, Allen (2012) "Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious World," Consensus: Vol. 34 : Iss. 1 , Article 12.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol34/iss1/12Book Review Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious WorldTuomo Mannermaa.Translated, edited and introduced by Kirsi I. Stjerna. Afterword by Juhani Forsberg. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 20 Some readers will be familiar withPresent in Faith: Luther’s View of JustificationKinds of Love, Mannermaa demonstrates how Luther’s definition of faith as in ipsa fide Christus adest (in faith itself, Christ is present) central themes in Luther’s thought.point of emphasis in the history of Lutheranism.Lutherans in the first generation after Luther focussed on the forensic metaphor of justification in an effort to correct certain tendencieof Osiander’s theology.  While Osiander was critiqued for his Christology, his soteriology with its emphasis on the indwelling of Christ also suffered collateral damage.  to be read as a theologian who focussed on the forensic model to the eexistential model of justification: Christ declares us right rather than makes us right before God.  The Finnish school of research existential metaphor of justificationChrist in the believer.  He defined in the patristic sense of the word The first chapter explores love as a key cdistinguishing two kinds of love.  Human love is that which loves what is, and so searches for lovable attributes in existents.  Divine love, by contrastloves “what is not” (2).  This latter point is the basis from which the book proceeds.  At the heart of Luther’s theology, according to Mannermaa, is this image of God making what is unlovable loveable by loving it, rather than recognizing it as lovely. Many significant themes and questions emerge from this central thesis which Mannermaa considers in turn. Mannermaa first ponders how these two loves enable union, importance for a theology that is drastically parts from the medieval paradigmand analogically predicated it of divine lovedifference rather than the similarity of the two kinds of loveloveable by loving it; we love something because it is first loveable.  Thomistic emphasis on analogy implgood, true, and beautiful.  In contrast, beloved ex nihilo (23).  In sum, God’s love directs humans to attend to what is not lovely in order to ascertain God’s modus operandi. 10  Tuomo Mannermaa’s Christ  (Fortress Press, 2005).  In Two relates to other   This theme is deemed to be a forgotten  has brought to the fore the significance of the  for Luther, who often underscored the indwelling of faith as Christ’s presence, which results in  – with wide reaching consequences for dogmaticsoncept for the thought of Luther by first , creates what is loved and so a theme concerned with union with Christ.  He argues that Luther , which located appetitive love in the human .  Luther’s theology of love accentuated the :  God makes somethinLuther ies that God’s loving is like ours: God loves what is Mannermaa affirms that divine love:  the cross. s Luther began xclusion of the divinization – .    of some g held that the first  creates the 1Jorgenson: Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious WorldPublished by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2012 Mannermaa next explores a theology of the cross with respect to the theme of union with Christ.  He notes that a theology of glory is a theology based on human love, while a theology of the cross is based on divine love (28).  In this chapter Mannermaa notes that according to Luther “the purpose of God’s alien work is to bring human beings to where God is, that is, not in heaven and its goodness and ‘what is’ but rather below in the world and in its badness and evil and ‘what is not.’” (33)  Human suffer from a two-fold malady: they are separated from God and do not know it.  Therefore God’s alien work “forms” us in a way that is parallel to the work of a sculptor, chipping away at what is so that what is not becomes what truly is – the finished product. (36)  God forms us by first de-forming us.  This is a hidden work, and seemingly not beneficent to the human:  God makes us not to be so that God can make of us the beloved.  Yet this might invite us to ask:  is creation, then, truly good?  The topic of the worth of creation is then broached in the fourth chapter.  This important theme is addressed by Luther, according to Mannermaa, in his assertion that “God is present precisely in those places that look least like God in the eyes of human beings, namely, in matter and material reality.” (52)  This is the basis upon which one can discern a link between Luther’s theology of the cross and sacramental theology.  In the fifth chapter Mannermaa treats Luther’s theology of the Word.  This theme builds upon Luther’s distinction between the inner and outer; the inner word is human thought that is made “incarnate” in speech in order to express the self (57).  This external word is a double edged sword: on the one hand it is the condition for the possibility of understanding the other, and on the other hand it is the very means for misunderstanding.  While something of an analogy obtains between the human and the divine in this respect, a fundamental difference demarcates the two: the divine essence is wholly and perfectly present in the Word God speaks (59).  This Word, when spoken, creates the condition for its hearing: faith.  “In faith, the ‘Christ Word’ unites with human beings, so that they would unite with the ‘Christ Word.’” (61)  This union results in “deification” although not in the sense that humans become God.  Rather, what Luther intends in emphasizing faith as the presence of Christ is to replace Thomas’ idea of love as the form of faith with the radically new notion that Christ is the form of faith (63).  Mannermaa notes that for Luther, this passivity that is of a piece with faith comes with the activity of love in that the two are held together by Christ himself, present in the life of the believer (65).  This theme is taken up in the sixth chapter as Mannermaa addresses Luther’s admonition to Christians to be “Christs” to their neighbour.  Here he helpfully underscores the manner in which Luther admonishes Christians to “love the sinners and to cover their sins with righteousness” (72).  Christians are called to walk the way of Christ so that they seek out those who are deemed not to be by the world because precisely these are the “objects” of the divine love that abides in the believer who is in union with Christ (73).    In the final chapter, Mannermaa discusses whether Luther’s emphasis on the distinction between the two kinds of love results in an other-worldly approach to reality.  Is love for created reality always in opposition to love for God who loves “what is not”?  Mannermaa stresses that Luther finally does not contrast these two loves in an absolute way and recognizes that they can properly co-exist: 2Consensus, Vol. 34, Iss. 1 [2012], Art. 12http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol34/iss1/12Human beings are supposed to recognize and acknowledge their good and their right, but if they do not manage to obtain them, they are to leave them to God and be trusting and calm, in the state of ‘Gelassenheit’ [serenity]. (86) Mannermaa suggest that Luther commends a certain abandonment that can only be characterized by one who has been united with the God who both creates and recreates in love.  The volume ends with an afterword that explores the state of affairs in Finnish Luther research.  For those who have studied Finnish Luther research, this is a veritable who’s who of Helsinki and environs.  It is worth reading in its own right.  In sum, I cannot over-emphasize the value of this book.  It allows the student of Luther to see a master at work in exploring how the non-systematic Luther stills sounds motifs that resonate throughout his opus.  The footnotes at the end are a gold mine, and the introduction and afterword are themselves worth the price of admission.  Students of Luther research in general, and Finnish Luther research in particular, will want to explore further how Luther scholars differently understand the relationship between forensic and existential metaphors.  Sometimes one reads papers that simplistically contrast the Finnish Luther (existential metaphor) with the German Luther (forensic metaphor).  In fact, Luther is a very complicated thinker, and differing themes come to the fore at differing times in his thought, a point noted by Mannermaa and his students even while it is sometimes forgotten by their fans.  In short, the theme of union with Christ cannot exhaust every dogmatic mine, even while it is a needed and necessary tool for miners, especially miners who purport to sit at the feet of Martin Luder, whose mining father Hans lovingly held forth hope for a non-mining future for his son.  Little did he know how his hope would be bent by another kind of love. Allen G. Jorgenson Waterloo Lutheran Seminary Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 3Jorgenson: Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious WorldPublished by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2012

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&amp;context=consensus

Two Kinds of Love: Martin Luther’s Religious World

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholars Commons

Wilfrid Laurier University

Wilfrid Laurier University