Gerd Lüdemann's Homepage
Recent Interviews/Press Releases
Veröffentlichungen 2000
by Robert W. Funk
June 30, 2000
Prof. Dr. E. Muehlenberg
Faculty of Theology
George-August University
37073 Goettingen
Germany
Dear Prof. Dr. Muehlenberg:
I write in response to your letter of April 4, 2000.
Although an "open letter" would have been quite
appropriate in such a case, it was not our intention that you would
learn about our letter from in the press. As indicated in the covering
note that accompanied the original text of our letter, the early
publication in Die Welt was an unfortunate turn of events and we
regret any embarrassment that it may have caused. While we will, in
the future, attempt to address you more directly, it is not our
intention to do so privately.
This is, in our view, not a private matter to be worked out among
colleagues. It is a public matter, which concerns anyone who cares
about religious and academic freedom. It is not a private relationship
that compels us to address you, but our common responsibility to speak
openly and honestly about matters that affect the public discussion of
religion in our common culture.
The ocean that divides is not so deep as you might think. The
names David Friedrich Strauss, Albert Schweitzer, and Rudolf Bultmann
are just as familiar here as they are among you. American protestant
theology has for years relied on the tradition of critical German
scholarship to press us beyond the comfortable limits of conventional
thinking, to explore new frontiers in theology. That is why the case
of Gerd Luedemann is of interest to us. Regardless of whether we agree
with his views, that he should be sanctioned for his (admittedly
provocative) challenge to conventional theological wisdom, is a thing
of grave concern for us.
Your letter makes a number of assertions to which we must respond.
First, you have charged that we have acted without knowing all
sides of the story. This may be so, although we have availed ourselves
of the public documents pertaining to the case. If our letter
indicates that we have misunderstood the limits that have been placed
upon Prof. Luedemann's teaching, we would expect you to set the record
straight for us. Moreover, if we have misunderstood the role played by
the faculty in bringing about the decision to alter his status, we
would welcome your clarification of the matter. We do have the text of
the resolution of the faculty passed on 18 November 1998, asking that
Prof. Luedemann be removed from the Theological Faculty.
Second, you have criticized us for not recognizing that the
decision to alter Prof. Luedemann's status was taken not by the church
or by the theological faculty, but by the university and the Ministry
of Culture. We are, of course, aware of the official process by which
Prof. Luedemann's fate was decided. But this in no way relieves the
theological faculty of its responsibility and role in the matter. Was
it not the resolution of the faculty that placed Prof. Luedemann's
status in question in the first place? What role the church might have
played in this process is unclear to us. Nonetheless, that you should
minimize the impact of your own actions, while appealing to the
decision of higher authorities, is most unsettling.
So, too, is your appeal to the authority of the German courts. We
are, of course, aware that the courts have refused to grant Luedemann
an injunction against the decision of the university. But this does
not resolve the matter. The case is still before the German courts,
and will be subject to appeal. In any event, this is a very
complicated case that will likely involve considering certain
provisions of your Grundgesetz regarding the relationship between
church and state. You will need to be part of that discussion. The
church will need to be part of that discussion. You cannot abdicate
your responsibility to participate in this decision by appealing to
state authorities.
Having clarified these matters, we must now insist that you have
not responded to our most fundamental point: that Prof. Luedemann
ought to be allowed to teach students who are not preparing for
ordination in the Lutheran Church. This is based on the conviction
that a public university ought to serve all the legitimate interests
of the pluralistic society which supports it. We realize that the
status of theological faculties in German universities rests on a
complex history, which we may not fully understand from our point of
view here in the United States. And we recognize the need of the
church to impose limits on what is to be considered doctrinally
acceptable, and what is not.
We understand that this is a lesson you have learned in a most
difficult way during the period of the Third Reich. Still, do you
really believe that a theological faculty should not include voices
that, in view of their own research, are very critical of church
doctrine? Many of our private, church-supported seminaries now include
professors who are Jewish, some even, who teach in the area of New
Testament. And their presence has not harmed the church in any way. To
the contrary, it has enriched the environment for preparing church
leaders to serve the church in a pluralistic culture. How much more
would this be true in your own publicly-supported institutions? And
even if someone like Prof. Luedemann could not legitimately
participate in those areas of the curriculum devoted to the
preparation of candidates for ordained ministry, why should he not
participate in those areas that are not devoted expressly to this
function?
Here is the issue as we see it: Do the theological faculties of
your state universities serve only the church, or do they also serve
the broader needs of a pluralistic culture? If the latter is true,
then voices critical of the church, its history, or its doctrines,
ought not be excluded entirely from the lecture halls of the
Theological Faculty. A pluralistic culture thrives on free thought.
This much is basic. Some would even argue that the church can only be
authentic when it, too, welcomes free and critical thought. Was this
not the conviction of Luther, Schleiermacher, Troeltsch, Tillich, and
so many others who have made the German theological tradition such an
important part of western culture?
With such a tradition upon which to rest, what does the
Theological Faculty of Goettingen have to fear from Gerd Luedemann?
Sincerely yours,
Robert W. Funk
Director, Westar Institute
Chair, Jesus Seminar
on behalf of the Fellows of the Jesus Seminar
Copies to: Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder
Minister Thomas Oppermann
Prof. Dr. Horst Kern
Prof. Dr. Gerd Luedemann