Abstract
In his introduction, Durheim says he wants “to build a new bridge across the Tiber (or at least to refurbish a neglected one) for theology in sacraments and ethics” (xi). Nor is the ecumenical bridge the only one crossed in this book; sacraments and ethics themselves still need stronger theological integration, and D. proves a nimble guide. The most significant outcome of D.’s volume is his demonstration that when sacraments and ethics are linked, dialogue between Lutherans and Roman Catholics can relativize disputed topics such as forensic justification and ex opere operato causality. This leads, in his last chapter, not only to important advances on the common ground of the theologians chosen to represent each tradition, but to nuancing, correcting, and enriching the theological contribution of each.
One difficulty with the project is the significant time and authority gap between the interpreters of each tradition. D. addresses this (and, some might argue, gives the game away) by approaching Martin Luther through the Finnish School of interpretation (xv). His care in explaining these distinctions, and in occasionally introducing other schools for comparison, allows a Roman Catholic reader such as myself to come away with a much stronger understanding of intra-Lutheran distinctions and the authority of Luther within the Lutheran churches.
Some Roman Catholic readers might also object to allowing Louis-Marie Chauvet to stand in for their tradition, but Chauvet’s juxtaposition of sacraments and ethics has been influential in the thirty years since the publication of Symbole et sacrement. Like D.’s treatment of Lutheran theology, his treatment of Roman Catholic theology is nuanced and attentive to differences in method and content: he points for example to recent developments in Roman Catholic theology that are relevant to Luther’s critiques, and he is similarly aware of debates about Chauvet’s work.
D.’s strength is his ability to avoid overstating the overlap between these theological patterns, even while he points out paths to consensus and mutual strengthening. The first chapter contextualizes his work with respect to important developments in liturgy and ethics in the 20th century, and chapters 2 and 3 are then laser-focused on sacraments and ethics in Luther and Chauvet, respectively. In these two chapters, he carefully interprets these authors, holding as much as possible to the author’s own purpose, although in Luther’s case attending also to modern interpretations. He attends to the historical and pastoral purpose and context of Luther’s theological work, which allows this Roman Catholic reader to appreciate its austerity. To match Luther’s absolute passivity of the human person in the reception of grace, D. pulls out Chauvet’s consent to the mediation of the body and of the church, while noting critiques.
In the final chapter, D. argues that it is both more faithful to these thinkers and more useful to see them as constructive critiques: alternate models that arrive at some of the same conclusions on sacraments and ethics despite widely divergent theological anthropologies. In the end, passivity and consent should not be harmonized; rather, the strengths and weaknesses of each should be balanced against ecclesial and personal considerations.
There are two especially important theological moves in this chapter. The first, which should be noted by readers of Chauvet whether they are interested in Luther and Chauvet’s theological ethics or not, is a significant critique of Chauvet’s anthropology. In his antipathy to individualism, D. argues, Chauvet inadvertently leaves out any definition of the subject that could allow for resistance to institutional corruption or myopia. The second is D.’s insight that both Luther and Chauvet offer their sacramental theology as a pastoral response to particular failings, and so their models for Christian ethics may be more judicious or less based on the scrupulosity of their audience (132–34). In both cases, D. argues that conversation between these theological models keeps either from becoming unbalanced.
D. makes an important contribution to the ongoing discussion about the relationship between liturgy and ethics, and provides us with a worthy exemplar of the receptivity of ecumenical efforts that strain beyond consensus. D.’s care in introducing his conversation partners makes the book accessible to readers, undergraduate and up, new to sacramental theology, liturgy, ethics, or ecumenism, but it is a must-read for those interested in these fields.