The Suffering of God

According to Martin Luther's 'Theologia Crucis'

Book Details

Discerning Reader Editorial Review

Reviewed 02/26/2009 by Ian Clary.

Recommended. An academic but accessible book to arouse affections for Christ.

Many today idealize Martin Luther (1483-1546) but inevitably misunderstand his theology. Apocryphal stories and historical misconceptions abound. One such misconception has to do with the Ninety-five Theses published in 1517. It is thought, at a popular level, that the theses he nailed to the castle church door in Wittenberg, Germany were a crystalized form of the Reformer’s thought and a manifesto for the total reformation of the Church. This certainly was not the case, as even a cursory read of the theses themselves will reveal. There was much in the famous document that Luther would later repudiate – in particular his view of papal authority. However, if one wants to look at an early document of Luther’s to determine whence his theology developed in a relatively consistent way, it is to his Heidelberg Disputation (1518) that one must turn. In scholarly debate, here Luther hammered out his distinctive theologia crucis (theology of the cross) that has come to be recognized as one of the hallmarks of his thought.

A foundational aspect of Luther’s theologia crucis is the notion that God, in some sense, suffered on the cross when Jesus Christ died. Dennis Ngien, in The Suffering of God According to Martin Luther’s “Theologia Crucis” explores Luther’s answer to the question of how God could have suffered. For obvious reason, this is an extremely difficult subject to navigate. On all sides the threat of heresy looms, but both Luther and Ngien take risks and safely traverse the currents with profound results.

This book, initially published by Peter Lang, was originally written for his doctor of philosophy degree at St. Michael’s College and the University of Toronto under the supervision of David Demson. The Suffering of God is, according to Ngien, explicitly a book of systematic theology. Very little historical background is provided. Any history to be found within its pages is limited mainly to the history of doctrines, in particular how the idea of God’s impassibility was understood throughout the early and medieval church and the nature of the early christological debates. In terms of the latter, Ngien locates Luther in relation to the orthodox patristic understanding of Christ’s two natures, defining him as a solid Chalcedonian. But in relation to the patristic understanding of God’s impassibility, Luther was concerned to distance himself from the Hellenistic idea that deity could not experience emotion, which so influenced the early theologians.

When it comes to Luther’s understanding of the suffering of God, Ngien does argue that although Luther does not fall into the error of patripassianism (Father suffers), he was in fact a theopaschite (God suffers). According to Luther, the Son truly suffers in his whole person. As a result of the Son’s suffering, God himself also suffers. For instance, “God suffers in the person of Jesus Christ, not in His divine nature but according to His human nature. Yet God and man are so inseparably united in the one Person of Christ that the suffering is true of the whole person.” Via the communicatio idiomatum (communication of attributes) the “divine nature suffers along with His human nature;" thus suffering reaches the very being of God. “The suffering of the humanity,” Ngien further explains, “is not only predicated of the Person of Jesus Christ but also of His divine nature. Luther’s use of the abstract phrase, ‘the divinity cannot suffer or die,’ assures us that he was fully aware of the apathy axiom, which was at work, for instance, in Nestorius’ Christology. But this phrase does not hinder the reformer from making the theopaschite declaration that God and suffering coinhere inseparably in the One person of Christ."

After developing Luther’s Christology, Ngien relates Luther’s understanding of the suffering of God to soteriological issues. The cross is the manifestation of God’s love where Christ and sinner exchange places. God as God does not suffer but God determines to suffer when He constitutes humanity in himself bearing sin and mortality “ontically." After discussions of soteriology in relation to the suffering of God, Ngien then turns to the doctrine of the Trinity and shows the framework whereby Luther developed his understanding of the theologia crucis and the suffering of God. Because the Father and Son are distinct persons the Son can suffer and die and not the Father. Yet because the three persons of the Trinity share the one essence – which Luther understands as love, not suffering, contra Jürgen Moltmann – God himself actually experiences suffering. Indeed, Luther expands upon ancient theopaschite teaching so that the theologia crucis is made an entirely trinitarian endeavour.

It would be impossible to capture all that Luther and Ngien have to say about the theologia crucis and its relation to the overall doctrine of God. Suffice to say that Ngien makes the complex manageable in the clarity of his presentation. Although this is a very academic book, the thoughtful pastor or layperson could read it with profit. There are many Latin quotations that have to be dealt with in one way or another, but this does not detract from the book for those who do not know this ancient language. In fact, Ngien so clearly defines his terms that one could develop a Latin vocabulary just reading the book!

One drawback to the written form of the work is that there are many typographical errors – too many to mention. This likely has to do with the transfer of the contents from one publisher to another. This reviewer has not consulted the Peter Lang edition to see if these errors are there. Although each error is insignificant, the amount of them does make their presence conspicuous. Thankfully, this does not diminish the overall quality of the book.

Reading The Suffering of God reminded me again of the great lengths that the Triune God went to in order to procure my salvation. God is a God of love who was willing to die and actually take into himself suffering so that I would not have to suffer an eternity in hell. Because of the depth of this reflection that this book afforded me, I count it as one of the best books that I have ever read. It is deeply affective and no Christian could walk away from its pages not being moved by the love of God.