While the following articles deal principally with the Lutheran Church in Germany, the conditions described will readily be identified by many as representative of the true state of Protestantism in most parts of the world. Our purpose in publishing this material is to help people of all religions to analyze their own spirituality in order to achieve a more significant relationship with God.

Are German Lutherans an Endangered Species?

By Awake! correspondent in the Federal Republic of Germany

SOME viewers may have been startled to hear the following words on German television: “The Lutheran Church will have no future at all.” Even more startling was the fact that they originated near the very region that brought forth Martin Luther, founder of that church and father of the Reformation.a

True, the United Evangelical Lutheran Church of Germany has about 25 million members, which is, according to the last official census, some 45 times as many as belong to all the other Protestant groups in Germany combined. Still, the church is in shambles, aptly symbolized on our cover by the bombed-out ruins of the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church in West Berlin.

In 1961, over 50 percent of all Germans were Lutheran. By 1970, the figure was 49 percent, by 1980, 46 percent. Then things seemed to improve. A German daily newspaper reported at the beginning of 1981: “The Lutheran Church in Germany has recovered from its setbacks of a decade ago. . . . Church membership withdrawals . . . have lost their ominous dimensions.”

But membership figures for 1984 showed this optimism to be premature. Estimates now are that the church will lose another 4,500,000 members within ten years. Thus, by the year 2030, only a third or less of the population would be Lutheran.

Why Are They Leaving?

On the aforementioned 1986 television program, seven former church members gave their reasons for disgruntlement: church opposition to Sunday sports, its financing of communist guerrilla movements, its stand on governmental defense policies, its dismissal of two homosexual pastors, and its neglect in caring for animals. Another resented the arrangement whereby church taxes are deducted from members’ earnings. Significantly, only two mentioned God. And yet, is that not what religion is all about?

Although serious, even more disturbing than the drop in numbers, says Johannes Hansen, a leading Lutheran theologian, is “the truly desolate religious state of church members.” This accounts for the fact that on a normal Sunday less than 6 percent of them attend church services, in large cities still fewer. Only one in four considers attending church or reading the Bible to be Christian requirements. In fact, about eight out of ten say that to be a good Lutheran a person must simply be baptized and confirmed, live a decent life and be trustworthy. No wonder the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung noted in an editorial: “The danger for the Lutheran Church does not stem from its numbers but comes from its lack of spiritual strength”!

Church members who lack spiritual strength view their church accordingly. They admire its rich history, boast of its beautiful buildings, and take advantage of the social benefits it offers. When it comes to “finding God,” however, many prefer to look for him in nature rather than in the church. This led a church leader to ask with sarcasm why they do not just go ahead and have their funeral services conducted by the Department of Forestry instead of by the church.

“What seems to be lacking,” commented a U.S. magazine several years ago, “is the passion for God and his truth that characterized the original Lutherans.” Why do so many Lutherans view their church as nothing more than a convenient framework for infant baptism, adolescent confirmation, and adult marriage ceremony? Why do they seek God in nature and turn back to the church only at life’s end for a “decent burial”? Why the lack of spiritual strength?

[Footnotes]

“If the Trumpet Sounds an Indistinct Call . . .”

“IF THE trumpet sounds an indistinct call, who will get ready for battle?” (1 Corinthians 14:8) Could the indifference shown by German Lutherans​—soldiers of the church—​be because the church is sounding an indistinct call? Consider the evidence.

An Identity Crisis

Over the past 200 years, claims Lutheran deacon Wolfram Lackner, Protestantism has progressively abandoned its original confessions of faith. So German Protestantism now “finds itself in a critical identity crisis.”

This identity crisis became more apparent in the 1930’s, as William L. Shirer’s book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich explains: “The Protestants in Germany . . . were a divided faith. . . . With the rise of National Socialism there came further divisions . . . The more fanatical Nazis among them organized in 1932 ‘The German Christians’ Faith Movement’ . . . [and] ardently supported the Nazi doctrines of race and the leadership principle . . . Opposed to the ‘German Christians’ was another minority group which called itself the ‘Confessional Church.’ . . . In between lay the majority of Protestants, . . . who sat on the fence and eventually, for the most part, landed in the arms of Hitler.”

Actually, some of Luther’s teachings played right into Hitler’s hands. Luther’s “two kingdoms” doctrine, arguing that God rules the world through both secular and church authorities, encourages strict submission to civil officials. Thus, the Lutheran publication Unsere Kirche admits that “the greater part of German Protestantism . . . celebrated the end of the Weimar democracy with great enthusiasm and cheered the new dictator.” In view of Luther’s strong anti-Semitic sentiments, the church did not find it difficult to bar from the ministry persons not of Aryan descent.

But what about the “Confessional Church”? In 1934 it adopted the Barmen Declaration, which expressed opposition to National Socialist ideology. A Berlin exhibition about Protestantism during the Third Reich recently revealed, however, that only a third of the Protestant clergy supported the “Confessional Church.” And not even all of that third actively opposed Hitler. The opposition of those who did was apparently misinterpreted by Hitler to mean opposition by the church as a whole. The book Der deutsche Widerstand 1933-1945 (German Resistance 1933-1945) contends that thus was imputed to the Lutheran Church a position of political opposition that it itself did not choose.

After Hitler’s downfall, the church was in shambles. Which of the opposing factions had mirrored its true identity? Why had its trumpet call been so indistinct?

To clear up these questions, 11 leading Protestant clergymen, including Gustav Heinemann, later to become president of the Federal Republic, met in October 1945 to draw up the so-called Stuttgart admission of guilt. Despite their opposition to the Nazi regime, they said: “We accuse ourselves for not having been more courageous in confessing our convictions, more faithful in saying our prayers, more joyful in expressing our faith, and more ardent in showing our love.” These clergymen hoped that this declaration would be a distinct trumpet call to action, triggering a fresh start.

A Religious or a Political Trumpet​—Which?

Possibly embarrassed that their church did so little in opposing Hitler, many German Lutherans today are quick to attack governmental policies. Lutheran clergy, for example, were among the early organizers of Europe’s antinuclear movement. In 1984 a group of North German Lutheran pastors began urging men of draft age to refuse military service. The church condemned this action, however, saying it showed “considerable political intolerance for the feelings of Christians who think otherwise.” At its 1986 general synod, the church defended its right to discuss political issues and then did so. It expressed disappointment at the results of the superpower summit in Iceland and debated at length government policy on refugees, unemployment, and nuclear power plants.

Of course, not everyone agrees with this political activism. Luther, were he alive today, would surely condemn it, according to Professor Heiko Oberman, an authority on the Reformation leader. And Rolf Scheffbuch, Lutheran deacon, complains that nowadays the genuineness of Christian faith is too quickly measured by one’s attitude toward apartheid or missile deployment.

It is obvious that political differences are dividing the church. It is also obvious that the “longtime love affair” between Church and State is showing “signs of fatigue” and is getting “rusty,” as Bishop Hans-Gernot Jung recently expressed it. This explains the reprimanding words uttered by a ranking German politician in 1986: “When dying forests are discussed at greater length than Jesus Christ, the church has lost sight of its real commission.”

Protestantism, as its name indicates, arose from a desire to protest against what had gone before. Thus, from its founding, Protestantism has tended to be liberal, receptive to new ideas, open-minded in its approach, willing to adapt to the norms of the moment. Nothing illustrates this better than Protestant theology. With no final authority to rule on doctrine​—such as the Vatican in the case of Catholics—​every theologian has been permitted to blow his own trumpet of theological interpretation.

Discordant Theological Trumpeters

This has resulted in some very strange sounds. Time magazine reported an example in 1979: “Do you have to believe in God to be a Protestant minister? The answer, as in so many cases these days, is yes and no. Germany, in particular, has been a veritable font of Protestant doubt for decades. But last week, deciding it had to draw the line somewhere, West Germany’s United Evangelical Lutheran Church . . . unfrocked the Rev. Paul Schulz for heresy. . . . Since 1971 he has preached that the existence of a personal God is ‘a comforting invention of human beings.’ . . . Prayer? Mere ‘self-reflection.’ . . . Jesus? A normal man with good things to say who was later glorified into the Son of God by early Christians.” Indicating that “Schulz’s notions are not new, or even rare” was the fact that during the hearings he “played to a sometimes cheering gallery of theology students.” And despite its action, “the commission insisted that it still favors ‘a wide spectrum’ of individual interpretation.”

Pointing to this wide spectrum of individual interpretation, a newspaper editorial says that Protestant theology lacks “conceptual clarity and theoretical exactness” and calls it “elementary hodgepodge theology that comes across no less sterile than stale dogmatism.” A Swiss Protestant newsletter adds: “The ‘either-or’ of Christian perception” has been “replaced by a ‘this as well as that’.” No wonder theologians disagree!a

Is Luther’s House Heading for a Fall?

The crisis in the church is in reality a crisis of faith. But can faith be developed in persons nourished on “elementary hodgepodge theology” and guided in a wishy-washy, “this as well as that” direction? Can Protestantism expect to motivate its troops into Christian action with such an indistinct trumpet call?

As far back as 1932, theology teacher Dietrich Bonhoeffer complained: “It [the Lutheran Church] tries to be everywhere and thus ends up being nowhere.” Is it too late for the church to find its identity? Most church officials agree that the usual methods of revitalization will not work. Something new and different is needed. But what? Retired Bishop Hans-Otto Wölber says: “The future of the church is not a question of methods, but of contents. . . . It is the message that matters. . . . In other words, we stand and fall with the Bible.”

True.

[Footnotes]

[Box on page 7]

Who Sounded a Distinct Trumpet Call for Christian Neutrality?

“We still know very little about the fate of World War II conscientious objectors; until now only the following is known: Among Lutherans, Hermann Stöhr and Martin Gauger uncompromisingly refused military service . . . Seven names of Catholics can be mentioned . . . German Mennonites, traditionally pacifistic, did not choose to ‘exercise the principle of nondefense’ during the Third Reich, based on a decision made by a meeting of elders and ministers on January 10, 1938. Two Quakers in Germany are known to have refused military service. . . . Seven members of the Seventh-Day Adventists can be named who refused to swear the oath of allegiance . . . and were put to death. Jehovah’s Witnesses (Bible Students) mourned the largest number of victims. In 1939 there were about 20,000 persons in the ‘Greater German Reich’ belonging to this . . . religious organization. It is estimated that in Germany alone some 6,000 to 7,000 of Jehovah’s Witnesses refused to do military service during World War II. The Gestapo and the SS therefore gave this group special attention.”​—Sterben für den Frieden (Dying for Peace), by Eberhard Röhm, published in 1985.

Future Prospects for Protestantism​—And for You!

“I HAVE been studying Lutheran theology now for seven semesters and am therefore a prospective minister of the church,” began a letter to the editor in a November 1986 German newspaper. It continued: “I would like to call attention to the fact that our training consists basically of tearing the Bible apart​—only its covers are left. . . . While the student’s faith or its foundation, the Scriptures, is being shattered, most of his lecturers are teaching him the ‘new gospel’ of socialism, thereby giving the church a totally new substance. God is dead​—long live socialism! Jesus has rotted in his grave, we must save ourselves! This is the message that many a minister takes to his pulpit, Sunday after Sunday. We urgently need new facilities to teach us the Bible, but at the moment the church is suppressing them.”

With God’s Word being treated so shabbily, is there any hope that the church and its parishioners may yet recover from their spiritual disarray? An 18th-century Bible translator correctly observed: “The church’s state of health is determined by the way it treats the Scriptures.”

Can a New Reformer Help?

“Dietrich Bonhoeffer is honored and quoted nowadays more than any other theologian of our century,” says theology Professor Georg Huntemann. Bonhoeffer, a leading member of the “Confessional Church,” was imprisoned by the Nazis in 1943 and executed in 1945 for alleged involvement in an assassination plot against Hitler. Huntemann says Bonhoeffer might just be the new reformer the church needs. Note the following excerpts from some of his sermons. Ask yourself: What would heeding his words mean for the Lutheran Church? for my church?

“In religion only one thing is of essential importance, that it be true.” This agrees with what Jesus said: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”a​—John 4:24; see also John 8:32; 14:6; 16:13.

Are you sure that everything your church teaches is really true? Does it teach that man has an immortal soul​—one that cannot die—​or does it agree with the Bible, which says: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die”? (Ezekiel 18:4, 20) Does your church teach you that God is nameless or that he is named Jesus, or does it agree with the Bible, which says: “Thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth”? (Psalm 83:18) Does your church teach you that all good people will be taken to heaven when the earth is destroyed by fire, or does it agree with the Bible, which says: “The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever”?​—Psalm 37:29; see also Psalm 104:5.

“It [the church] must strive for purity of teaching.” This agrees with what Jesus said: “Beware of the leaven . . . , the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.”​—Matthew 16:12; see also 1 Corinthians 5:8.

Does your church welcome “a wide spectrum of individual interpretation,” or does it act in harmony with the divine counsel: “Brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them”?​—Romans 16:17; see also 2 Timothy 2:16-18; 2 John 9, 10.

“On Judgment Day, God will certainly not ask us: Have you celebrated impressive Reformation festivals, but rather: Have you listened to my Word and kept it?” This agrees with what Jesus said: “My brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.”​—Luke 8:21; see also Matthew 7:21; John 15:14.

Does your church place more emphasis on ritual, ceremonies, and buildings than it does upon gaining accurate knowledge of God’s Word? Is occasional holiday attendance at church considered enough, in contrast with the counsel of “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together . . . so much the more, as ye see the day [of judgment] approaching”?​—Hebrews 10:25.

Does your church encourage you to read God’s Word daily, offering you personal assistance in understanding it and providing motivation to do what it requires?

“Religion is work, perhaps the most difficult and most certainly the holiest work that a human can do.” This agrees with what Jesus said: “My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.”​—John 4:34.

Does your church tell you that God’s work for Christians today is to preach “this gospel of the kingdom . . . in all the world for a witness unto all nations”? (Matthew 24:14; see also Matthew 28:19.) Does it incite you to share this glorious Kingdom message with “every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you”?​—1 Peter 3:15.

At least in the above instances, Bonhoeffer gave his church good advice. “But why do his words, his reformative admonition to the church, go so completely unheeded?” asks Huntemann. Of even greater significance, however, is the question: Why do the authoritative words of Christ Jesus go unheeded in far greater measure?

Theologian Ulrich Betz says that West German society thinks and acts in a “post-Christian, not to say neopagan” way. The Lutheran Church must accept blame for at least the 25 million members of that society who are Lutheran. Even as a tree that bears rotten fruit is suspect, so is a church that brings forth pseudo-Christians. Jesus explained: “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.”​—Matthew 7:16-18.

Make this honest appraisal. What kind of fruit is your church producing? Is it improving the personalities of its members? Is it promoting peace and unity on the family, community, and global levels? Is it a bulwark against drug abuse, immorality, and crime? Could you, without hesitation, say that the world would be a better place in which to live if everyone belonged to your church?

Notice on the opposite page why some Lutherans in Germany, after making such an honest appraisal, turned elsewhere for spiritual guidance.

If Your Church Fails to Act, Will You?

If, after making an honest investigation, you are less than pleased with what you see, do more than just complain. A journalist, while commenting on Karl Barth’s statement that a church is its members, logically concluded: “Church members . . . are responsible for what the church says and does.” So ask yourself: Am I willing to share responsibility for everything my church says and does? Can I really be proud of having all its members as spiritual brothers?

While considering these questions, do not overlook the significance of Revelation 18:4, 8. Speaking of the world empire of false religion, displeasing to God, it says: “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues . . . [for] her plagues [shall] come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.”

You may sincerely believe that your church is no part of false religion that God says he will soon destroy. But your life depends upon being 100 percent sure. Are you?

False religion has no future, nor do those who support it. True religion will last forever, along with those who practice it. Make your choice accordingly.

[Footnotes]

[Box/​Picture on page 9]

At their conventions​—for example, by means of dramas as seen here—​Jehovah’s Witnesses are offered practical instruction on applying Bible principles in daily life. This distinct trumpet call of truth, undistorted by political wrangling or doctrinal differences, strengthens their hope for the future and motivates to Christian conduct and activity. Attend a convention and see for yourself!

[Box on page 11]

Former Lutherans Explain Why They Are Now Jehovah’s Witnesses

“What first impressed me about Jehovah’s Witnesses was the cleanliness and honesty I saw at one of their conventions. I encourage others to attend one to experience for themselves the genuine love among the Witnesses.”​—W. R., former sexton.

“I attended church every Sunday. But the sermon, at most 20 minutes long, seldom answered my questions about the purpose of life or about life after death. Jehovah’s Witnesses gave me the answers right from the Bible, and I could talk to them on a person-to-person basis. More must be included in divine services than just responding to church bells every Sunday morning, singing songs, and listening to a sermon. No sincere searcher for truth can be satisfied with that! He wants to do something.”​—E. B., former Sunday-school teacher.

“My activity as church elder never involved Biblical matters, only purely business matters. What helped me most was learning God’s name, Jehovah, a name I never heard mentioned at church. I was impressed with the multitude of truths contained in the Bible.”​—E. M., former church elder.

“The first time Jehovah’s Witnesses spoke to me, the difference [between them and us] was apparent. That they wanted to talk to me about the Bible was totally new and strange. My first question was whether they were being paid for their work. They said no. My second question was whether they had fought during the war. They explained that many Witnesses had been in concentration camps. Finally, I had found persons willing, if necessary, to die for their faith.”​—H. M., former sexton.

“When I asked my pastor to explain why every pastor had his own interpretation, he said: ‘Every pastor has the right to visualize God in the way that will permit Him to be put to the best use in the congregation.’ Later I took turns attending two different congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses. What struck me was the complete harmony between them. And the lectures contained such worthwhile material, always supported by Bible texts that you could immediately read from your own Bible! What a contrast to the many sermons I had heard!”​—U. P., former church social worker and parish nurse.

[Picture on page 10]

District conventions motivate Jehovah’s Witnesses to do the work of preaching God’s Kingdom