Bondage Instead of Freedom? Sola Scriptura as an Entrance to Pathological Theology

Introduction of topic

The principle of Sola Scriptura—Scripture alone as the sole and sufficient authority for Christian doctrine, belief, and practice—was established to liberate the Church from external authorities and ensure that no other power than the Word of God dictated its teachings and practices. However, despite this liberating intent, its empirical consequences also led to new forms of bondage. These include submission to new authorities, a diminished ability to rely on and trust oneself, and obstacles to personal maturation. This paper will focus on these negative consequences and explore the factors that have led a well-intended principle of liberation to produce the opposite effect.

Hence, and despite the good intentions behind the principle, from a contemporary perspective, it appears hermeneutically naïve, even if doctrinally necessary. This paper will not delve into the details of this argument, which has been explored elsewhere. Instead, it will examine the negative—even destructive—consequences of this naivety.

This paper focuses on the Lutheran principle of Sola Scriptura rather than specific doctrines because it serves as the foundation for various doctrinal elements. Thus, it is not merely one doctrine among many, but a fundamental basis for others.

What Is Pathological Theology?

Pathological theology refers to theological frameworks that either reinforce or exacerbate negative psychological dispositions or actively contribute to their formation. For example, an individual predisposed to shame may experience intensified feelings of shame after exposure to such theology. Similarly, theological interpretations may activate shame in ways that hinder psychological development.

Several theoretical perspectives guide the argument in this paper:

1. Hanna Reichel’s concept of theology as affordances understands theology in terms of the potential it enables in its reception. Her approach highlights the importance of evaluating theology based on how it is used, by whom, and for what purposes. A mere focus on correct doctrine is insufficient and can have profoundly negative consequences. One also needs to take into account the diverse conditions for reception among believers.
2. Hermeneutical theory emphasizes that context, preconceptions, and modes of mediation all shape understanding. In this context, theology is always mediated through a community that influences both interpretation and practice. The role of the believing community is therefore crucial in moving beyond the notion that faith is simply a relationship between two entities: the biblical text and the individual believer.
3. Psychological perspectives highlight how human dispositions are shaped by relational bonds before an individual attains independence and personal maturity. These pre-subjective influences play a crucial role in shaping one's understanding of the Christian message and in determining the type of faith community in which an individual feels at home and which provides an experience that compensate for existing problems and is, therefore, also experienced as a meaningful place to develop their religious identity.

The relevance of these perspectives will be explored in light of the following topics:

1. Scriptural authority is necessarily mediated by faith community leaders. These authorities do not merely direct individuals to Scripture but also present specific interpretations and regulate the community's practices. Thus, their authority is not merely formal but extends to shaping the very substance of faith through their position, qualifications, and standing within the community. As a result, obedience to Scripture often translates into obedience to human interpretations of Scripture.
2. Obedience to Scripture equates to obedience to human authority. As long as individuals retain the ability to question interpretations, this does not pose a problem. However, when dissent from human authorities is equated with disobedience to Scripture—and, by extension, to God—serious issues arise. This paper will analyze an empirical example that illustrates this dynamic.
3. Tension between personal experience and scriptural interpretation. This tension may arise when lived experience contradicts theological 'truths' presented by the community. The conflict can also result in emotional repression—such as anger toward religious authorities, shame over failing to conform, and a profound sense of lost trust and recognition.
4. Undermining self-trust and fostering dependence on external authority. The expectation of obedience, combined with conflicts between internal experiences and external doctrines, can lead individuals to distrust their own emotions and reactions. This, in turn, impairs self-reliance and fosters increased dependence on religious authorities, creating a cycle of pathological dependence and insecurity.

Towards a More Life-Affirming Sola Scriptura

Recognizing these negative consequences, Lutheran theology can counteract them by emphasizing other aspects of its tradition that enable a more life-affirming application of Sola Scriptura:

1. Faith in God’s justification allows individuals to trust themselves and their emotions. 
2. All human authority must be open to questioning; no one has absolute power over another’s faith and conscience.
3. The priesthood of all believers must complement Sola Scriptura, ensuring theological competence is distributed among all believers rather than being reserved for clergy.
4. Obedience to Scripture must be guided by wisdom, considering the real-life consequences it produces.
5. The fruits of faith should serve as a measure of a theological message’s validity: joy, trust, peace, justice, and flourishing should result—not fear, intimidation, emotional immaturity, division, or insecure dependence.

By consciously integrating these elements, the Lutheran tradition can uphold Sola Scriptura in a way that promotes spiritual and psychological well-being rather than unintentional bondage.