To honor the 2026 Presidential Theme, “Future/s”, we ask about “Future/s Lost.” How do we wrestle with lost futures within Lutheran theology or because of it? How have Lutheran forms of settler colonialism, heteropatriarchy, ethnocentrism, racism or violence erased other possible futures? What is remembered, what is not, and why? What is required in the wake of these erasures? Alternatively, what other possible futures, counter-memories, alternatives, minor themes, or forgotten texts or practices in scholarship on Martin Luther or within or against Global Lutheranism might offer us new ways of envisioning the future? Can we learn from paths not taken? And what right do we have to do so? As AAR President Laurel Schneider writes about the theme: “The muscle of dystopic imagination is well honed these days, and for good reason. But what about other possible futures, past and present? Where is the sensory richness that might enflesh imagination otherwise?” Again, how might paying attention to these lost futures generate new possibilities, counter-memories, alternative ways of embodiment for Lutheran theological reflection and action?
This paper will argue that previous studies of Martin Luther on masculinity and fatherhood have overlooked how these themes are applied over the course of his exegesis of the stories of the biblical patriarchs in the book of Genesis. To that end, this paper will examine how Luther’s depiction of the biblical patriarchs Joseph in visible emotional distress provides an alternative narrative of sixteenth century Protestant masculinity as dependent on demonstrable signs of ‘weakness’ in the form of tears and lament. In the modern era, this forgotten minor tradition of Luther’s highly emotionally intelligent biblical patriarchs presents an important challenge to contemporary depictions of masculinity as necessitating militarism and aggression. Ultimately, the recovery of these forgotten themes in Luther’s writings can provide a counter-memory that serves as the basis for a different vision of male embodiment in the twenty-first century.
In the wake of postmodernity’s embrace of “Death of God” and democracy giving way to fascism, there is need for mature Protestant Christians responding to socio-political crises from their freedom found in faith and with responsible action. Sadly, the way Lutheran and Luther’s theology are framed as antagonistic toward faithful socio-political action and resistance in the world, cuts off the vibrant future of “adult” social action that is faith working itself out in loving deeds. This paper creates a theological link between theologian and activist Dorothee Sölle and Martin Luther demonstrating Sölle’s ability to take what Luther started and push it toward relevancy, specifically toward validating a theology of resistance as faith working itself out in loving deeds. This paper demonstrates Sölle’s work as the natural progression of Luther’s conception of freedom and responsibility by the “law of love” for the benefit of the neighbor to the glory of God.
To explore lost and possible futures of Lutheran theology demands an expansive view of the history of Luther’s reception. The expansive view recognizes the agency of protagonists of the tradition, but also the agency of detractors, reproducing elements of Lutheran thought or practice while trying to diminish, overwhelm, or destroy their power. The expansive view requires a dialogical method, one focused on the total play of ideas in conflict, and not merely on core concepts traveling across time. I explore a dialogical approach in three unconventional examples: 1) an immigrant silver miner tried for Lutheran heresy by the Bishop of Guadalajara in sixteenth-century Mexico, 2) the clandestine philosopher Jean Baptiste de Boyer d’Argens (d. 1737), and 3) the Protestant clergyman-critic of American imperialism, Samuel Guy Inman (d. 1965).
This paper proposes a reconstruction of Lutheran eschatology to address the "terminal acceleration" of late modernity, where technological and economic change outpaces human social integration. Moving beyond 20th-century eschatological proposals that focused on the inbreaking of the future, I advocate for a shift from purely chronological focus to the recovery of "shared space". By synthesizing Hannah Arendt’s concepts of promise and forgiveness with Luther’s communicatio idiomatum, I outline a tri-partite proposal for relating Lutheran eschatology to the healing and transformation of interpersonal, communal, and public spheres.
The proposal reimagines the church not as a "thin" institution or a weaponized political instrument, but as a "thick" architectural space of reconciliation and "new creation". Ultimately, Lutheran eschatology is presented as an apocalyptic power that resists fragmentation by re-embedding the promises of God within tangible, neighborly relationships and corporate healing.