False comparisons. . .

There are a thousand ways to look at the Reformation but not all of them are fair.  The one thing that seems to predominate today is what we compare the two major players but at different points in time.  On the one hand, we tend to see Rome less in view of what Luther saw and historians agree was the situation on the ground in the sixteenth century but more in terms of what we see in Rome today.  On the other hand, we tend to look at the Reformation exclusively in terms of the Reformers without looking much at what the heirs of that Reformation look like today.  It is a false comparison.  Luther did not weep when he visited Rome because of its beauty and inspiration.  He wept because the things everyone knew were on the fringes were there in the center on full display without any shame.

In the sixteenth century, Rome did not look much like it does today.  Even the errors are different.  We forget, for example, what Rome looked like after Trent and what it looked like before Trent.  Even speaking the "Hail Mary" was different --  the final segment, "Pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen," was a response to Reformation critiques.  It did not become official until the 1568 Roman Breviary's release.  We Lutherans tend to look at how Luther dealt with the "Hail Mary" without even thinking that the phrase prone to most Reformation objections was not even a part of that prayer of popular devotion then.  Luther was much more Marian in his approach than we are but we do not get it because we see it all through the lens of today and not through the lens of what was Rome in the sixteeth century.  

We look at Rome and the post-Vatican II Mass and lectionary which holds much in common with our own and we wonder why Luther would speak of the Mass in such derogatory terms.  We do not even know the Roman Canon and many Roman Catholics are not even familiar with it due to the addition of other canons in the wake of the Vatican Council.  We do not get the significance of Luther's liturgical directions and we have forgotten that Luther was working to make an evangelical rubric to be used with the Latin Mass of the day when he came up with the Formula Missae.  It was never a stand alone rite but a set of directions on how to use the Roman Mass evangelically.  We don't get the problem or the solution because we do not even get what was going on in the sixteenth century.

We do not take seriously quite how bad things had gotten prior to the Reformation.  We snicker at the caricatures of Tetzel's wandering minstrel show selling indulgences because we do not see them as significant or even visible parts of Rome today.  We have dismissed much of the false doctrine that was being taught and we have ignored many of the practices that either reflected or gave rise to such false doctrine.  We shrug a shoulder at purgatory or the treasury of merits or a hundred other things that predominated in the hearts and minds of the faithful when the Gospel of forgiveness full and free by the sacrifice of Christ's blood once for all was largely unknown and unpreached.  We do not get the Reformation because we have chosen to ignore what was the shape of Christianity at the time of Luther and we look at Rome today and wonder how on earth could any sane man accuse the Pope of being the anti-Christ.  Well, duh.  Francis was a poor excuse for a pope but compare him to the Borgia pope and we see how it was.  Francis' statements seeming to leave a door open for the embrace of the LGBTQ agenda offend us but papal palaces were a cesspool of sex, vice, intrigue, and immorality.  Even other popes were scandalized by their predecessors yet we somehow are embarrassed or ashamed of the seeming vitriol of the complaints lodged by the voices of the Reformation.  

On the other side of things, we have watched a Lutheranism become lazy, ignorant, accommodating to the times, and embracing culture over cultus for so long that wonder what kind of crazy stuff Luther was spouting.  We have grown up and matured but in so doing we have also become a shadow of what we were.  No Lutherans today would march from Sweden to defend the faithful from Roman armies singing "Salvation Unto Us Has Come."  We can barely muster a full stanza of "Amazing Grace" before we run out of steam and voice.  Rome has been preserved by becoming less Roman and Lutheranism has been spoiled by becoming less Lutheran.  The populace today things of Lutherans as Methodists with a quirk of the liturgy or as slightly more formal evangelicals.  Even those in the pews cannot defend and are not sure they appreciate the liturgy, the sacraments, the sacramental Word, etc...  We are ashamed and embarrassed by Luther and others with him because he seems out of control and too strident for our comfort level.  We, on the other hand, are barely Lutheran because we have ceded too much control to popular opinion over the voice of God's unchanging Word and because we prefer to be comfortable over being faithful.  Rome was scared of Luther's Lutheranism.  Nobody is scared of Lutheranism today.  Is that a good thing?  On the other hand, Rome has conveniently forgotten what it was that made Luther and others rise up while we have also forgotten the same and become a shell of what we were then.

Two hundred years into the Reformation history, the Lutherans were profound enough to raise up a genius like Johann Sebastian Bach.  He was not alone but accompanied by many who went before and those who followed -- great musicians fueled in their craft not by great technical training but by a vibrant faith that was as excited as Luther was over the pure and eternal Gospel.  We struggle to raise up those kind of talented and motivated people today not because we are too Lutheran but because we are not all that Lutheran at all.  We compare the glory days of Lutheranism to the parochial setting in which we were confirmed or the glory of the 1950s when we were growing or the 1900s when the boats were bringing Germans to America like crazy.  Our shortsighted vision has made us ill at ease with Luther and with the treasure of the Gospel he sought to restore.  Almost three hundred years after Bach, concert halls reverberate with the music that once were the look and sound of Lutheranism.  Rome has patched up things to conveniently forget who it was while we Lutherans are scandalized by who we were.  So Rome finds the Reformation a terrible and tragic mistake while we find it largely incomprehensible within our generic Protestant identity.

Do we believe that the Reformation was needed?  Do we believe that the Reformation is still relevant?  Do we believe that Lutherans have a reason to exist?  Do we believe that our future lies with those who identity with Luther or those who find Luther an uncomfortable voice in our moderate age?  We seem to be acting like we have also decided that the Reformation was a mistake and not a tragic necessity or else we would be more vocal in confessing and more visible in living out our faith today.  If the ELCA and Missouri find themselves a shell of their former selves, the blame cannot be laid at Luther's feet.  He bequeathed to us a Scripture we can all read and raised up for us to hear and believe the eternal Gospel of Christ crucified and risen for us.  It is not his fault for us failing to read that Scripture or relativizing its voice or turning the Gospel into some form of therapeutic "I'll overlook what is wrong in you if you will overlook what is wrong with me" kind of self-help movement.  If people are not showing up at our doors, it could be because we think Rome was not so bad and our church is terrible.  We are our own party poopers.