Luther's Doctrine of Vocation and the Shape of Pluralistic Societies
Martin Fitzgerald, PhD, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
The problem of secular pluralism is one which dogs modern bioethics. The putative split between secular, public ethics and theological, private ethics is one which seemingly demands a thoughtful person reside exclusively as a citizen of either Athens or Jerusalem. Even when one claims their citizenship, the problem of how to organize society remains. This Engelhardtian framing is familiar to a scholar of modern bioethics and much work has been done in response to the gulfs which open up between the so-called “moral communities” which compose a secular, pluralistic society.
In this paper, I will offer a Lutheran response to the dilemma of secular pluralism. What marks Luther’s account of civil society is his re-reading of the doctrine of vocation. Rather than having vocation refer to an exclusive pathway one embarks on, Luther understands any given person as occupying many different vocations at any time. Aside from a select few “natural” vocations (e.g. marriage, preaching), vocations are contingent, historical, and in flux. To be a citizen of this-or-that nation – indeed, to be a “citizen” at all – to have this-or-that job, to occupy a social role in this-or-that community, or so forth, is not a pre-established role according to the composition of the cosmos. Rather, what vocations exist and what vocations one ought to occupy are open-ended and open to revision.
Importantly, vocations are choice-worthy (whether to inhabit, or indeed to construct in the first place) according to the degree to which they promote the common welfare. For Luther, vocations are the means by which God’s love for humanity realizes itself. As he himself writes, God provides us milk via the hands of the milkmaid. A Lutheran, then, ought to be willing to accept many (many) possible arrangements of society owing to the many possible ways the common welfare may be pursued. It is my claim that the flexibility of the doctrine of vocation allows for productive cross-community dialogue without devolving into empty formalisms.
This does not solve all of ethics, of course. Importantly, the terms of debate on this telling shift to the question of what is actually in the common welfare. However, this is nevertheless an important landing point for Lutherans as it creates the terms for future dialogue rather than leaving them adrift in a shapeless sea.
In this paper, I will offer a Lutheran response to the dilemma of secular pluralism. What marks Luther’s account of civil society is his re-reading of the doctrine of vocation. Rather than having vocation refer to an exclusive pathway one embarks on, Luther understands any given person as occupying many different vocations at any time. Aside from a select few “natural” vocations (e.g. marriage, preaching), vocations are contingent, historical, and in flux. To be a citizen of this-or-that nation – indeed, to be a “citizen” at all – to have this-or-that job, to occupy a social role in this-or-that community, or so forth, is not a pre-established role according to the composition of the cosmos. Rather, what vocations exist and what vocations one ought to occupy are open-ended and open to revision.
Importantly, vocations are choice-worthy (whether to inhabit, or indeed to construct in the first place) according to the degree to which they promote the common welfare. For Luther, vocations are the means by which God’s love for humanity realizes itself. As he himself writes, God provides us milk via the hands of the milkmaid. A Lutheran, then, ought to be willing to accept many (many) possible arrangements of society owing to the many possible ways the common welfare may be pursued. It is my claim that the flexibility of the doctrine of vocation allows for productive cross-community dialogue without devolving into empty formalisms.
This does not solve all of ethics, of course. Importantly, the terms of debate on this telling shift to the question of what is actually in the common welfare. However, this is nevertheless an important landing point for Lutherans as it creates the terms for future dialogue rather than leaving them adrift in a shapeless sea.