concordiareader

2007-07-14T08:02:00.000-07:00

A Gem from the Large Catechism

It is therefore, above all things, necessary to train up and accustom young people to hold high in their estimation this commandment and others, and if they transgress, they should immediately be checked, the commandment should be presented to them, and continually be impressed, in order that they may be reared up, not only by chastisement, but also in fear and reverence to God.

The second commandment directs the conduct of "our lips and tongues toward God". The greatest abuse which this commandment censures is that of

spiritual matters which concern the conscience, when false preachers arise and deliver their lying errors for the Word of God.

Recently I was impressed by an essay which spoke about the problems that have sprung forth out of marriages between spouses of differing faiths. Have pastors and parents neglected their duty to "train up young people to hold this commandment in high estimation", when such spiritual matters are treated with indifference as a man and a woman of differing confessions unite in one flesh?

2007-07-13T12:05:00.000-07:00

A Gem from the Large Catechism

(Part 1: The First Commandment)

For this reason, no person should undertake to receive or to present any thing, unless it be commanded of God, that it be acknowledged as his gift, and thanks returned to him for it, as this commandment requires. These media, therefore, for the reception of benefits through the creatures, are not to be rejected; nor should other ways and means than those which God has commanded, be sought through presumption; for this is not receiving from God, but seeking from one's self.

The media through which God delivers His gifts are God's own creatures; they are the means by which God delivers every good thing to us. (This brings to mind a joke about a fellow who sat on a roof top during a flood, rejecting the aid of a boat, a helicopter, and something else as he waited for "divine intervention" to rescue him. On second thought, maybe this was someone's sermon illustration?)

And on the flip side, good things should not be sought except through such means as God has provided and where God has directed and commanded us to look for them. God is the giver of every good thing. If we look for good things elsewhere, we fall into the same trap that Adam and Eve fell into in the Garden of Eden.

2007-03-31T07:04:00.000-07:00

Since joining SparkPeople 35 days ago, I've lost around 25 pounds. I've mostly been watching my caloric intake (not to mention working very hard to make sure that I get 64 oz. of water every day), and I am planning to more seriously focus on the exercise portion of my fitness plan (starting with something simple like going for a walk every day).

I'm the Team Leader for two different teams, "Quick Oats" (guess what I'm trying to find a tasty way to eat...) and "Lutherans" (so far, there are five of us). I'm also walking a "Virtual 5K" on Palm Sunday.

If you'd like to join, it's easy and free. (If you say that spark_father referred you, I get SparkPoints!) :) Maybe you would like to try a:

Free Calorie Counter at SparkPeople.com

2007-02-26T11:36:00.000-08:00

Thoughts on Mission

Pastor Weedon offers a good post entitled "Confusing the how with the what". It reminds me of the song "I love to tell the story" that never actually tells the story... Check out Weedon's post. It's well worth your time.

2007-02-23T21:39:00.000-08:00

Sparkpeople

My wife (among others) will be very pleased to learn that I have joined her in the online health/diet/fitness program at Sparkpeople.com. Check it out at the link below. If you tell them that "spark_father" referred you, I get sparkpoints.

Get a Free Online Diet

I almost forgot: I get points if I tell you that (1) I'm not going to eat in front of the tv; (2) I'm going to get 10 minutes of cardio exercise; (3) I'm going to tell 1 person about my goals. There. Done.

2007-02-18T19:24:00.000-08:00

Good Works are Necessary

(Article VI.)

#7 in the series:
What implications or applications may be drawn

from a quia subscription to the Book of Concord?

Good works are indeed necessary. The faith (about which the previous articles spoke) is the kind of faith that "must bring forth good fruits and good works", on account of this faith "we must do all manner of good works". Why? What sort of good works are we talking about? They are the necessary good works that are required and commanded by God.

Article VI. is quick to note what kind of necessity this is. These good works are in no way required or commanded by God as necessary for meriting salvation. These good works should by no means give someone the impression that he is "meriting favor" before God. (The good work that merited God's favor for us was done by Someone else.) The good works spoken about in Article VI. are necessary for a different purpose (than earning salvation) altogether.

So what are these good works with which God is well pleased? What are these things that God has commanded, that He wants His Christians (of necessity) to do?

**Update** Once again, I'd like to direct you to the excellent post and discussion taking place on this topic at Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions: Roundtable 7: The New Obedience.

2007-02-15T20:56:00.000-08:00

Roundtable 6 is up at the Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions blog, and the topic is Article V. It is an excellent post, and the comments are equally worth reading. My favorite part of their post:

But how does one receive such faith? Faith does not concern itself with “finding Jesus” by somehow traveling backward through time to the historical event of Jesus’ crucifixion. Salvation was achieved on the cross at Calvary, but it was not delivered there. The “instruments” extolled in AC V (Word and Sacraments) deliver salvation, but do not accomplish it.

2007-02-10T17:42:00.000-08:00

When a theologian is asked to yield and make concessions in order that peace may at last be established in the Church, but refuses to do so even in a single point of doctrine, such an action looks to human reason like intolerable stubbornness, yea, like downright malice. That is the reason why such theologians are loved and praised by few men during their lifetime. Most men rather revile them as disturbers of the peace, yea, as destroyers of the kingdom of God. They are regarded as men worthy of contempt. But in the end it becomes manifest that this very determined, inexorable tenacity in clinging to the pure teaching of the divine Word by no means tears down the Church; on the contrary, it is just this which, in the midst of greatest dissension, builds up the Church and ultimately brings about genuine peace.

from the Fourth Evening Lecture of C.F.W. Walther, translated by W. H. T Dau in The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel; St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1929, 1986; page 28.

2007-02-08T16:51:00.000-08:00

The Kurt Marquart Fund for Theological Education in Haiti was recently announced. Initiated by the CTSFW class of 2007, information on the fund may be found by going here.

2007-02-08T07:45:00.000-08:00

God Works Through Means

(Article V.)

(#6) in the series:
What implications or applications may be drawn

from a quia subscription to the Book of Concord?

The faith that saves is obtained through the ways and means that God employs. The ways and means that God employs for mankind's salvation is "the Gospel and the Sacraments". The Holy Spirit is imparted through the Gospel and the Sacraments, to work faith where and when He pleases in those who hear the Gospel, the teaching that "through the merits of Christ, and not through our own merits, we have a merciful God, if we believe these things".

All of this is to say that God works to save us through His Word. The merits of the suffering and death of Jesus are applied in the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments. Speaking of "the Gospel and the Sacraments" is to speak twice of the same thing, because the Sacraments are nothing less than the Gospel in an elemental form. For example, Holy Baptism is the Gospel made watery and applied to men. It wets the baptized, not simply as an outward washing, but as a watery, heavenly flood of salvation and regeneration - because God's powerful Word is attached to that water in Baptism. God's Word makes the water of Baptism powerful, so that those who are baptized in it receive the benefits of what Christ merited upon the cross - the forgiveness of sins and deliverance from death and the power of the devil. This is how God works through His Holy Spirit for our salvation.

The contrary position condemned (censured) in this article is the teaching that the Holy Spirit is received by means (as a result) of "our own preparation, our thoughts and works, without the external word of the Gospel".

Implications and Applications?

Considered with the preceding articles, this article talks about how we receive faith and the mercy of God. In consequence of original sin, we are unable to make ourselves right before God (being filled with "evil desires and propensities", having "no true fear of God, no true faith in God"). The good and righteous works which men are able to do by nature (works of charity for the welfare of others, for example) are only such in the eyes of men; these works do not avail for righteousness before God (see Article XVIII.).

Those who subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions have such a view of fallen humanity, that among them, it should be considered futile to try to persuade fallen people to "make a decision to follow Jesus" or to "accept Jesus into their hearts" (who by nature are unable to do these things anyway). Instead, such Lutherans look for the Holy Spirit to work through the preaching of repentance and remission of sins to convert people to fear of God and faith in God; this preaching of the Gospel speaks about and delivers the mercy that God shows us for the sake of the suffering and death of His Son. The Sacraments do the same thing, putting the old flesh to death and raising souls and bodies to new life in Christ. This is where the working of the Holy Spirit for conversion and salvation is to be sought: in the "means" of grace, the Gospel and the Sacraments.

2007-01-29T07:39:00.000-08:00

God the Son became Man

(Article III.)

(#5) in the series:
What implications or applications may be drawn

from a quia subscription to the Book of Concord?

The two natures of Christ is foundational for Christian faith and life. Before one is able to believe or teach rightly about salvation or good works (compare the "whosoever will be saved" from the Athanasian Creed), one must first have the right Christ. The Augsburg Confession maintains that its adherents teach

that God the Son became man, and was born of the blessed Virgin Mary; and that the two natures, human and divine, inseparably united in one person, are one Christ, who is true God and man, etc."

What are the implications of this union? One Christ - true God and true Man, "was really born," "truly suffered," "was crucified, died, and was buried" (emphasis added). No separation of the two natures is possible, so that one who subscribes to this confession might say that "only the humanity died," etc.

It was necessary for this one Christ (true God and true Man) to do all of these things so that He should be "a sacrifice, not only for original sin, but also for all other sins," and "appease the wrath of God". The sacrifical death of anyone less would disqualify the sacrifice.

The article continues, "this same Christ descended into hell, and truly rose from the dead on the third day, ascended to heaven, and sits at the right hand of God". This He has done,

that he may perpetually reign over all creatures, and govern them, through the Holy Spirit sanctify, purify, strengthen, and console all those who believe in him, and give unto them life and various gifts and blessings, and protect and defend them against the devil and the power of sin.

We hear more of this last work in the articles that follow.

* 02/08/07 Update: An interesting discussion related to this post may be found here.*

2007-01-24T06:33:00.000-08:00

Redeemer Press has made the Piepkorn/McClean volume "The Conduct of the Service" available for purchase on-line. An easier process for ordering this book is in the works, but for those who cannot wait, follow the instructions on the Cyberstones' blog here. The cost is $30, which includes shipping and handling.

2007-01-19T06:17:00.000-08:00

No Creed But...

Paul McCain's Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions blog began one of its early discussions by looking at the popular perception of the historic creeds. As an illustration, a graphic was posted featuring "lost souls" holding a Bible, unable to see the Bible because a clergyman has placed his hand over the “lost souls’” eyes. The clergyman does not look at the Bible; instead he reads from a book titled "Human Creeds" and says: "What else would you like me to teach you about God's Word?"

The illustration reminds me of a popular phrase: "No creed but the Bible!" The statement is piously intended, wanting to place a high view on the authority of the Sacred Scriptures for Christian faith and life. But there is a problem: There is no such thing as a creedless view of the Bible. If you maintain “no creed but the Bible”, then I have to ask you: “What do you believe that the Bible says? Is it necessary for others to believe as you do, or not?” “What interpretation(s) are biblically acceptable and which are unacceptable?” “What teachings of the Bible are authoritative for what we say and do today; please explain how such biblical teachings are to be applied?”

As soon as any attempt is made to answer any of these questions – a creed (an “I believe”) has been formulated. That creed may fall in line with the ancient and historic creeds, what has been believed, taught, and confessed by others for a long time; or it may be something new and original that no one else in the history of the whole world to the present time has believed, taught, or confessed. Whatever the case, some formulation of a creed or confession accompanies the Bible to explain and apply what the Bible says.

Perhaps those who use the phrase “no creed but the Bible” really intend to say that the historic creeds and confessions are not biblical. I have frequently heard that my communion fellowship, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, is not biblical, because that particular phrase does not appear anywhere in the Bible. Response: If this is how we are to understand what it means to be biblical, then the only biblically mentioned church (still in existence) to which a person may belong is the one mentioned in Romans 1:7.

The historic creeds and confessions are not found word-for-word in the Bible, yet this fact alone does not make them “unbiblical". A different question must be asked to determine whether such creeds and confessions are biblical, whether they are a faithful exposition of the Sacred Scriptures, whether they teach and confess the same Faith handed down by the holy prophets and apostles in the sacred writings.

2007-01-17T19:17:00.000-08:00

What is helpful in lumping together...

(Articles III.-V.)

(#4) in the series:
What implications or applications may be drawn

from a quia subscription to the Book of Concord?

Articles III.-V. of the Augsburg Confession flow (and fit) quite naturally together.

* Article III. explains what we confess of Christ - who He is, what He did, and what He continues to do. It ends by explaining that, through the Holy Spirit, Christ sanctifies, purifies, strengthens, and consoles all those who believe in him, etc.

* Article IV. continues the progression. "It is taught further..." links the two articles together. Since "we cannot obtain righteousness and the forgiveness of sins before God", we are directed to the one who can and does obtain the remission of sins for us - Christ (prercisely the one that is confessed in Art. III.) We "are justified before God, by grace, for Christ's sake, through faith, if we believe that Christ suffered for us, and that for his sake our sins are remitted unto us, etc."

* Article V. explains "for the purpose of obtaining this faith". When those who subscribe to the Augsburg Confession are asked, "How is it that you receive whatever it was that Christ did for you?", they give this answer: "The ministry, that is, the Gospel and the sacraments." Article V. explains where it is that Christ sends the Holy Spirit to give faith, to forgive sins, and to make men righteous before God. Where and when He pleases, the Holy Spirit "works faith in those who hear the Gospel, which teaches that through the merits of Christ [cf. Art. III.], and not our own merits [cf. Art. IV.], we have a merciful God, if we believe these things."

What the condemnation at the end of this sequence makes clear is that we do not look for the Holy Spirit "in consequence of our own preparation, our thoughts and works, without the external word of the Gospel." The external word of the Gospel - preached, and administered in the Sacraments - is precisely where the Holy Spirit is pleased to come to us.

You can draw your own applications and implications from these articles and post them in the comments, or if you would rather post your thoughts on your own blog, kindly provide a link back to this post.

2007-01-15T09:01:00.000-08:00

Thoughts from Apology IV. on Preaching

So greatly has this shameful, abominable error prevailed! I myself heard a reputable minister, who did not mention Christ and the Gospel, but preached the ethics of Aristotle, (Aristotelis ethicos). Is not such preaching puerile and foolish among Christians? If, however, the doctrine of our adversaries be true, then are these ethics (ethici,) an invaluable collection of sermons, and a fine new bible. For it is not easy for any one to write better than Aristotle, with regard to an external, honorable life.

We see, that some learned men have written books, in which they endeavor to show, that the words of Christ and the sayings of Socrates and Zeno harmonize beautifully, as if Christ had come to give us good laws and commandments, through which to merit the remission of our sins; instead of proclaiming to us the grace and peace of God and imparting the Holy Spirit, through his own merits and blood.

It seems that part of the problem, lamented recently on Cyberbrethren, is that preachers hear the negative statements in the Confessions about Christ and the Law and Commandments, such as the one quoted above, and interpret these words to mean that, in Christ, there is no law or commandments to be preached. This is a misunderstanding of our confessional statements and their understanding of the Scriptures. (For more on this topic, one might read Scott Murray's Law, Life, and the Living God.)

The reader who pays close attention to what is being said will notice that Christ has not come to give us good laws and commandments "through which to merit the remission of our sins". Christ has indeed come to give us good laws and commandments; they're all over the place in the Gospels and in the writings of His Apostles. One such good law and commandment is: "This do in remembrance of Me" (see Luther's comments here, particularly the paragraph beginning: "And in the first place..."). Yet even though the observance of these laws and commandments does not merit the remission of sins, a person should nevertheless wish to keep them "if he wishes to be a Christian".

2007-01-12T08:57:00.000-08:00

If any article should be considered... (Article IV.)

(#3) in the series:
What implications or applications may be drawn

from a quia subscription to the Book of Concord?

If any article should be considered for its applications and implications, it is Article IV. Within the Augsburg Confession itself, there are several foundational references to the article that we "obtain remission of sins and are justified before God by grace, for Christ's sake, through faith, if we believe that Christ suffered for us, etc."

* This doctrine undergirds Article VI. , which upholds the necessity of "good works" ("because of God's requirement and command"), though "we must not put any confidence in these works, as meriting favor in the sight of God: for we receive forgiveness of sins and justification through faith in Christ, as Christ himself says, Luke 17, 10, etc." (emphasis added). St. Ambrose is quoted: “Thus it has been ordained of God, that whosoever believes in Christ shall be saved; not through works, but without merit through faith alone, he has forgiveness of sins.”

* We also see the doctrine of Article IV. applied in Article XII. on repentance. Forgiveness of sins may at all times be obtained by those who repent and "have faith in the Gospel or absolution,– namely that sins are forgiven and grace is obtained through Christ, – a faith which consoles and imparts peace to the heart" (emphasis added). We also see Article IV. brought to bear in the condemnations in Article XII.:

On the other hand, the Novatians also are here condemned, who refused absolution to those who had sinned after baptism.

Those in like manner are condemned who teach, that forgiveness of sin is obtained, not through faith, but through our own merits (emphasis added).

* Article XX. returns to the theme of good works, highlighted in Article VI., when it says:

First, that our works cannot reconcile us to God and merit grace, but these things are effected through faith alone, if we believe that our sins are forgiven us for Christ’s sake, who alone is the Mediator reconciling the Father. He, therefore, that expects to effect this reconciliation by works, and to merit grace, contemns Christ and seeks a way of his own to God, contrary to the Gospel (emphasis added).

Citations are added of Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 5:1, and St. Augustine, in an effort to show that "a new signification is not introduced here". Augustine's “De Spiritu et Litera” is referenced as clear testimony that "we obtain grace and are justified before God, through faith in Christ, and not by works".

Article XX. adds, on account of the monastic teachings about good works and meriting grace and making satisfaction for sins: "It was, for this reason, necessary to preach and enforce with diligence this doctrine of faith in Christ, that it might be known that through faith alone, without merit, the grace of God is secured" (emphasis added).

Article XX. speaks further on the themes of good works and grace:

It is taught further, that good works should and must be performed, not with a view of placing confidence in them as meriting grace, but in accordance with his will, and for the glory of God. Faith alone constantly secures grace and forgiveness of sins. And because the Holy Spirit is given through faith, the heart becomes qualified to perform good works (emphasis added).

* When we turn to Article XXI., we see that the proper remembrance of the saints is to have our faith strengthened when we see "how grace was conferred on them, and how assistance was afforded them through faith; and also to derive examples from their good works for every vocation". The saints ought not to be worshipped;

from Scripture it cannot be shown, that we should invoke the saints, or seek help from them. For there is but one Reconciler and Mediator appointed between God and man, Jesus Christ, 1 Tim. 2, 5, who is the only Savior, High Priest, Propitiator, and Intercessor before God, Rom. 3, 25, and 8, 34. He alone has promised to hear our prayers; and the highest worship according to the Scripture is to seek and call on Jesus Christ from the heart, in every necessity and affliction; 1 John 2, 1: “If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (emphasis added).

* The abuse of the Mass which is spoken against in Article XXIV. is the understanding that the Mass is a marketable propiation for sins and "an oblation for the living and the dead, in order to take away sins, and to reconcile God." The teaching of St. Paul in Romans 3:25 is cited,

that we obtain grace before God, through faith, and not by works. Such abuse of the mass is evidently opposed to this doctrine if by that means we expect to obtain grace; as it is well known that the mass has been used for the purpose of removing sins, and of obtaining grace and favor before God, not only in behalf of the priest for himself, but also for the whole world, for the living and the dead (emphasis added).

* A similar theme is heard in Article XXVI., which talks about ceremonies, fasts, and orders "instituted by men... in order to merit grace, and to make satisfaction for sin."

In the first place, the grace of Christ and the doctrine concerning faith were by this means obscured, which doctrine with great solemnity the Gospel inculcates, and it insists with earnestness that the merits of Christ should be highly and dearly esteemed, and that it should be known that faith in Christ is to be placed far above all works. St. Paul, for this reason, inveighs bitterly against the Mosaic law and human traditions, in order to teach us, that we are not justified before God by our works, but alone through faith in Christ, and that we obtain grace for Christ’s sake. This doctrine was almost entirely suppressed, by teaching that grace must be merited by the observance of laws, by fasts, and by diversities of meats and dress (emphasis added).

* Article XXVII. returns to a theme introduced in Article XX., addressing a little more specifically the issue of monastic confusion on grace and good works.

For formerly they assembled in monasteries with a view to learn the Scripture, but now they falsely pretend that monastic life is of such a nature, that men merit the grace of God and holiness before God by it; yea, that it is a state of perfection, and they exalt it far above other states which God has instituted (emphasis added).

For every species of worship, chosen and instituted by men without the precept and command of God, in order to obtain righteousness and divine grace, is repugnant to him, and in opposition to his command and to the Gospel (emphasis added).

So St. Paul also teaches every where, that men should not seek righteousness from religious services devised by men, but that righteousness and holiness in the sight of God, come from the faith and confidence that God accepts us graciously for the sake of Christ his own Son. Now, it is clear, that the monks have taught and preached that their assumed piety atones for sin, and obtains righteousness and the grace of God (emphasis added).

Therefore those also who wish to be justified by vows, are separated from Christ, and fail to obtain the grace of God. For these rob Christ of his honor, who alone justifies, and thus they bestow such honor on their vows and monastic life.

* All of this comes to a conclusion in Article XXVIII., where the "power of the bishops or clergy" does not give them an authority to make up ordinances that are necessary in order to "reconcile God and to merit grace".

For the doctrine of Christian liberty must be retained in the church, namely, that the servitude of the law is not necessary to justification, as St. Paul writes to the Galatians: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage,” Gal. 5, 1. For the chief article of the Gospel, that without our merit we obtain the grace of God through faith in Christ, must be maintained, and that we do not merit it in consequence of rites instituted by men (emphasis added).

The article clarifies this elsewhere:

(B)ishops or pastors may make regulations, so that things may be carried on orderly in the church, – not to obtain the grace of God, nor yet to atone for sins, or to bind the consciences of men to hold these regulations as necessary services of God, and to regard them, as if those commit sin, who break them without offence to others.

2007-01-11T08:37:00.000-08:00

Paul McCain has announced that Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions is back and selling at the re-introductory price of $20 (good for the next six months). For those interested in acquiring a fine edition of the Book of Concord (at the lowest price of any new edition that is currently available,) visit the links above.

2007-01-11T07:13:00.000-08:00

Re: (#1) The Implications and Applications of Article I. of the Augsburg Confession; one may be interested in following a similar discussion that is taking place at Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, in their third roundtable discussion.

The roundtable begins by taking a look at the issue of individuals, churches, and the church. The roundtable cites a phrase from Article I. in the Latin, stating that the doctrine of the Trinity must be "believed without any doubt." Regarding doubt, the point is made that the doctrine of the Trinity is a divine mystery, certainly transcending the ability of complete human comprehension; yet there is no doubt but that our churches teach and confess this doctrine. Weedon makes the observation in the comments, that the intention of the Lutherans was "to communicate to the papal party at Augsburg that the Trinitarian orthodoxy of the Lutheran parishes was beyond dispute". (That is, the Lutheran princes should not be outlawed by the emperor for harboring those who teach or hold to heretical doctrines of the Trinity.)

CR notes: If the Trinitarian orthodoxy of the churches of the Augsburg Confession was to be unquestionable, then the individuals of those churches - Pastors, Professors, congregations, and people - could neither teach nor hold to any understanding of the Trinity which was not agreeable to the decree of the Council of Nicaea or the understanding of the Fathers (as specified with reference to the term "persons"); this was the standard to which they held themselves. Their orthodoxy would be called into question if it could be demonstrated that there were some among them who taught, preached, or believed strange (read: heretical) doctrines about God - such as that there are two principles, one good and one evil; that the Father alone is God and the divinity of the Son and the Spirit might be explained away; etc. (The chain is only as strong as its weakest link.)

2007-01-11T06:45:00.000-08:00

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but early on in my studies of the Book of Concord, I was told that the division of the Articles of the Augsburg Confession (with the headings) was somewhat similar to the division of chapters (together with editorial headings) in the Bible: These divisions were not in the original. However, one may see that the article divisions and headings were included in the 1580 Book of Concord by looking here. Perhaps this piece of information was referencing the Augsburg Confession as it was presented in 1530?

What I do remember with some certainty was the understanding that the divisions fall more naturally after each condemnation. It works like this: Article I. ends with a condemnation. Article II. ends with a condemnation. When you arrive at Article III., you do not see a condemnation until the end of Article V., so that Articles III. to V. should all be considered together with regard to the censured teachings of the Anabaptists and others, "who teach that we receive the Holy Spirit in consequence of our own preparation, our thoughts and works, without the external word of the Gospel."

Any thoughts on this? (Or correction of my memory in remembering these things?)

2007-01-05T10:40:00.000-08:00

(#2) What implications or applications may be drawn...

If one makes a quia subscription to the Book of Concord, etc.

The Augsburg Confession

ARTICLE II. – OF ORIGINAL SIN.

We teach, that since the fall of Adam all men who are naturally engendered, are conceived and born in sin; that is, that they all are from their mother’s womb, full of evil desires and propensities, and can have by nature no true fear of God, no true faith in God; and that this innate disease, or original sin, is truly sin, which brings all those under the eternal wrath of God, who are not born again by Baptism and the Holy Spirit.

Hence, we condemn the Pelagians and others, who deny that original corruption is sin, whereby they assert, to the disparagement of the merits and sufferings of Christ, that piety is the result of our natural powers.

Thought:

Reading this, I am reminded of a section of the "Flood Prayer" from Luther's Baptismal Booklet: "we ask for the sake of this very same boundless mercy of yours that you would look graciously upon N. and bless him with true faith in the Holy Spirit so that through this same saving flood all that has been born in him from Adam and whatever he has added thereto may be drowned in him and sink, etc." (The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Robert Kolb and Timothy Wengert, eds., Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000, p.374; emphasis added.) It is perhaps worth noting that Article II explicitly makes a connection to Baptism.

Applications and Implications:

(1) Those who assert that "piety is the result of our natural powers" - that we might somehow naturally have or achieve true fear of God or true faith in God - bring into question what exactly it was that Christ came to do.

(2) When I hear questions pressed against this Article, dissent is often expressed with regard to infants. Infants look innocent. Infants can't *do* anything, can't *hurt* anyone, cannot think - let alone harbor malicious thoughts or ill-will toward anyone. Response?

(3) Believing that infants are conceived and born in sin, the implication is that from infancy we need the grace and promises of God which are given and applied in Holy Baptism, that we might also escape "the eternal wrath of God". (In the Large Catechism, Luther says more about Infant Baptism here.)

(4) There are also in this article - if all men can "have by nature no true fear of God, no true faith in God" - implications for evangelism, etc. Would anyone care to elaborate? (Perhaps with reference to Articles III-V?)

2007-01-04T17:31:00.000-08:00

(#1) What implications or applications may be drawn...

Examples (or questions to get the ball rolling...) :

(1) What significance does the word "unanimous" have for church fellowship for us today, when AC I states that our churches unanimously hold and teach that God is "only one Divine Essence" in which "there are three persons"? Are those who wish to subscribe quia to this article (as part of a quia subscription to the entire Book of Concord) permitted to remain in a fellowship that is not unanimous in confessing the Most Blessed and Holy Trinity in the Undivided Unity?

(2) A related question: Is one who wishes to make a quia subscription to the Confessions bound only to attach himself to a fellowship that is unanimous in rejecting the heresies that are condemned in this article? (For example, should the churches in our fellowship likewise be unanimous in denying the statement of some that the god of the "Mahometans" is also the "true God"?)

(3) What application might be drawn from the teaching that is confessed in this article? Aside from the crassly pagan invocation of "the Mother (Earth), Daughter, and Wisdom" (which without doubt ought to be forbidden among Christians,) what other formulas of divine invocation ought to be censured among quia subscribers?

(4) How does our confession of what is taught about God in this article affect our prayers, either their manner or their words?

(5) Is there any significance to the fact that not one single Bible passage is cited in this article (although passages such as Nehemiah 9:6, Matthew 28:19, Titus 3:10-11 could certainly have been cited), yet an explicit nod is given to both the Council of Nicaea and the Fathers?

2007-01-03T10:47:00.000-08:00

(#1) What implications or applications may be drawn...

If one makes a quia subscription to the Book of Concord, what are the implications of this subscription (or what applications might be made) with particular regard to:

The Augsburg Confession

ARTICLE I. – OF GOD.

Our churches unanimously hold and teach, agreeably to the Decree of the Council of Nice, that there is only one Divine Essence, which is called, and truly is, God; but that there are three persons in this one Divine Essence, equally powerful, equally eternal, – God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, – who are one Divine Essence, eternal, incorporeal, indivisible, infinite in power, wisdom, and goodness, the Creator and Preserver of all things visible and invisible. And the word person is not intended to express a part or quality of another, but that which subsists of itself, precisely as the Fathers have employed this term on this subject.

Every heresy opposed to this Article is therefore condemned: as that of the Manichaeans, who assume two principles, the one good, the other evil. Likewise the heresies of the Valentinians, Arians, Eunomians, Mahometans, and the like; also that of the ancient and modern Samosatenians, who admit but one person, and sophistically explain away these two, – the WORD and the Holy Spirit, – asserting, that they must not be viewed as distinct persons, but that the WORD signifies the oral word or voice, and that the Holy Ghost is the principle of motion in things. (Henkel, The Christian Book of Concord, 1854)

2006-12-28T13:23:00.000-08:00

First published in 1822, David Henkel's Treatise on Holy Baptism: Heavenly Flood of Regeneration, is now available on-line in its entirety at David Henkel Reader.

The Treatise, written nearly two centuries ago, continues to speak to a world where detractors of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism abound. Henkel points out the blasphemous absurdities of emblematical views of the Sacrament and the horrific conclusions to which such positions naturally lead. "Although I do by no means belieive that such denominations have the least idea that this their doctrine leads to this horrid consequence, else one should think they would surely abandon it" (Henkel in Heavenly Flood).

Writing from Lincoln County, North Carolina, without a German-English Dictionary at his disposal, Henkel also provides original translations for a portion from Luther's "Against the Heavenly Prophets" as well as from the section on Baptism in Luther's Large Catechism.

2006-12-27T08:57:00.000-08:00

Confessing the "Whosoever will be saved..." at Christmas

A few years ago, I was reading F. R. Webber's Studies in the Liturgy and was surprised to read that the Quicunque Vult (the Athanasian Creed) had been used among Lutherans "on the Festival of the Holy Trinity, and frequently on Christmas, the Epiphany, Easter Day, Ascension and Pentecost as well." I was surprised because I had never encountered this confession outside of Holy Trinity Sunday.

In my estimation, the custom of making this confession on the Christ Festivals of the Church Year is commendable and worthy of revival. This was vividly illustrated for me on Christmas Day morning, within an hour after confessing both the Quicunque Vult and the Nicene Creed, after preaching a sermon on the two natures of Christ (the Gospel was John 1), when I received a knock on my door from a Jehovah's Witness, who stopped by to deny the divinity of Our God and Savior Jesus Christ! Kyrie eleison!

I would like to join McCain and Veith in wishing you all a "Merry Christmas and a slappy new year!"

(I love this picture of St. Nicholas from Cyberbrethren : )

2006-12-19T12:24:00.000-08:00

Another gem from David Henkel's Heavenly Flood of Regeneration, Part IV:

It may also be justly concluded, to make emblems (which are the same as images) in divine worship of things that are in existence, must be idolatry ; for the commandment says, " Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath," &c. Exod. 20, 4, 5. Types under the law were no likenesses of any thing that was ; for the things they prefigured were not then at all in existence : hence they could not have come under the prohibition of this commandment ; for it prohibits the making and worshipping of likenesses of things that are. But the case stands far different under the gospel ; because there is nothing more to prefigure, no future Saviour whom we must expect at a distance. Now to make emblems in divine worship of those things which are present in reality, must be a notorious breach of this command, and a pagan idolatry. In vain protestants condemn the papish image-worship, when they themselves turn the sacraments into images in their most solemn worship !! Is not this the language of many protestants who deride the papists–baptism is an emblem of some spiritual gift ! bread and wine are holy emblems of Christ's body and blood ! Image-worship belongs to the kingdom of Antichrist ; but in the kingdom of Jesus there is no worship by types, nor in ancient Jerusalem ; but God is worshipped in spirit and in truth."

2006-12-18T22:49:00.000-08:00

Unexpected Gifts

A while back, my classmate Pastor Juhl posted about a box from Amazon that unexpectedly appeared on his doorstep one day, filled with books from his Amazon wish list. I thought of him today when my wife came home from the post office, asking if I was expecting a package in the mail. (I usually am, but this time I wasn't.) Here's what we found when we opened the box.

Another classmate of mine had stopped by earlier this year, having come with a small group of men on a fishing expedition to northern Minnesota. One of the men from his group very kindly remembered us and sent us this beautiful cross as a Christmas gift. My wife was so delighted that it went almost immediately from the box to our living room. - Thank you, Harold! Our best to you and Martha as we watch and wait for the Coming One and anticipate the Christmas celebration of His holy Nativity.

2006-12-12T04:27:00.000-08:00

I love this section of Heavenly Flood of Regeneration; it's in Section III:

3d. God's name is the fundamental thing in baptism ; hence who then, with propriety, can deny it to be a saving means, or flood of regeneration ? Ought it to be called a mere emblem ? It is very lamentable, that so many of the different denominations who profess Christianity, make so extremely light of baptism. They are far from believing it to be so valuable a flood of grace, that they, on the contrary, call it a mere emblem or representation of something to be received in some other way ; an outward token, by which Christians are externally distinguished, &c. So we frequently hear it announced from the pulpit, and in a similar form we may read it in some confession books and catechisms. Nevertheless, they all, when they baptise, say in their forms, ' I baptise thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ;' and yet, in the meanwhile, call this baptism, performed in this holy name, a mere emblem ! a representation ! If baptism is a mere shadow, or an emblem, then God's name can be nothing more ; because that is the ground-work of baptism. If so, God himself must be a shadow, or an emblem ; because his name is himself. Thus, if we make baptism an emblem, we must make his name, hence himself, an emblem ! Ought our minds not to recoil at such a grotesque idea ? If God is no more than an emblem, he is no almighty God. Hence what would this be but implied atheism ? Although I do by no means believe that such denominations (who call baptism an emblem) have the least idea that this their doctrine leads to this horrid consequence, else one should think they would surely abandon it. But let them for a moment, without prejudice, cooly reflect on this subject.

2006-12-11T17:47:00.000-08:00

Weinrich to preach tomorrow

Concordia Theological Seminary's Blue News carried the announcement that Dr. Weinrich will be the preacher and celebrant at tomorrow's Service (Tuesday, Dec. 12) at Kramer Chapel in Fort Wayne. The audio from the services at Kramer Chapel are posted daily at this link.

2006-12-10T17:33:00.000-08:00

New blog on the Book of Concord

McCain, Alms, Veith, and Weedon have opened shop with a new blog which promises to be an "ongoing roundtable discussion about the Book of Concord". Visit this new blog here.

2006-12-10T17:14:00.000-08:00

More from David Henkel's Heavenly Flood of Regeneration:

Now since the word of God is a heavenly light, a holy fire, a divine glory, what then must baptism be ? It must be a shining, vivifying flood ; a cloud of glory, like the pillar of fire by night, transcendently luminous, going before the host of Israel. Why so ? Answer : Because this blessed word, with the water, constitutes baptism.

2006-12-09T18:11:00.000-08:00

Sample from David Henkel Reader: Heavenly Flood of Regeneration -

It is quite congenial to the wisdom of God, that he bestows his blessings by simple means. If he employed great means, the blessings might be ascribed to their greatness ; but when they are simple, the blessings can be ascribed to him only. St. Paul saith, " We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us." II. Cor. 4. 7. The feebler the instrument seems by which mighty works are wrought, the plainer the omnipotent hand of God is to be seen.

2006-12-09T12:52:00.000-08:00

David Henkel Reader is up and running. Posts are initially being added from David's "Heavenly Flood of Regeneration: A Treatise on Holy Baptism".

2006-12-07T13:56:00.000-08:00

From Hermann Sasse to AC Piepkorn about Lutherans going elsewhere

Dear Reverend and Doctor:
Some months ago I wrote to you asking whether you could give me any advice as to how to deal with a student of mine who was in danger of going over to Rome. I was hoping that you perhaps could recommend some good literature. (Lonely Way II, 238)

Replies? Or maybe, in light of recent events, some could offer suggestions, replacing "Rome" with "Constantinople"?

Regarding the latter, I have suggested Avery Dulles's "The Filioque: What Is at Stake?" Perhaps others can suggest something better?

2006-12-04T12:00:00.000-08:00

Why We Continue to Study the Small Catechism

(T)hey declare with a solemn oath, that nothing in the world is easier than learning the Catechism, – so easy indeed, that with a single reading, they can accurately repeat the whole. Then immediately, as if arrived at the highest proficiency and thoroughly instructed, they throw away the book into some corner, and they are ashamed to take it in their hands again.

...

But I, if indeed I may speak of myself, am also a doctor and a preacher, endowed, as I believe, with no less learning as well as experience than those who presume so much on their abilities, and who have attained so high a state of confidence; yet by no means am I ashamed to imitate the young, but just as those whom we teach the Catechism, so do I, – early in the morning, or whenever I get a moment of leisure, – privately recite word by word, the Lord's Prayer, the Ten Commandments, the Articles of Faith, the Psalms, or something of the kind. And though I have leisure every day for these lessons and studies, yet not even in this way am I able to reach the point which I am seeking, or to attain the proficiency which I desire.

...

[This one is the best -]

And while these plethoric and presumptuous saints really scorn the Catechism, and esteem it far too contemptible to be read and studied every day, what else, I ask, do they do but consider themselves far more learned than God himself, than all the angels, the Patriarchs, the Apostles, and all Christians? For since God is not ashamed to teach these doctrines daily, – the very best that he has to teach, – and since he frequently repeats and inculcates them over again, – never adding any thing new or inconsistent with them; – I say further, since all the saints knew nothing either better or more useful to learn and were never able to study them too profoundly, are we not most eminent and accomplished men indeed, who, having read or heard this doctrine once, are fully persuaded that we know it all; nor is there any further necessity for us to read, as we are able to learn in one hour, what God himself has not been able to exhaust in teaching, though he has been teaching it from the creation of the world to the present time? which all the Prophets and all holy men have been ever engaged in studying, and yet of which they remain students perpetually, and necessarily must ever so remain. (Large Catechism, Preface.)

2006-11-30T18:01:00.000-08:00

aardvark alley

Always Yes (T. Pietsch)

Amor et Labor

Ask the Pastor (Snyder)

Augsburg Aggregator

Be Strong in the Grace

Blog My Soul (Kinnaman)

The Blogora

Bunnie Diehl

The Burr in the Burgh (Stiegemeyer)

Café Diem (Pluger)

Carol Rutz's Annexe

The Children of God (E. Harju)

Collarbones (Brondos)

Concordia Seminary Institute of Lay Vocation (Siemon-Netto)

Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions (McCain, et al.)

Conversi ad Dominum (Fenton)

Cranach (Veith)

The Crowned Ones (Cholak)

Cwirla's Blogosphere

Cyberbrethren (McCain)

CyberStones (Petersen)

DarkMyRoad

Explorations in Theology (Wandrey)

Extra Nos (Cruz)

Father Hollywood (Beane)

Friends of Mercy (Sell, ScotK)

General Scuttlebutt

Gottesblog (Eckardt)

Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength

Horn+Swoggled

incarnatus est (Alms)

Keeping the Faith (Bakker)

Latif's Memoir

Long Thoughts of a Confessional Lutheran

Love and Blunder

Luther Library

Lutheran Blog Directory

The Lutheran Logomaniac (Peperkorn)

Lutheran Survivor (Chryst)

Nerd Heaven (Powell)

Norman's Demesne (Teigen)

On the Lutheran Church & Her Liturgy (May)

One Lutheran...Ablog! (Beisel)

Outer Rim Territories (Gillespie)

Paredwka: Dropping the Ball (B. Harju)

The Plucked Chicken (Jacobsen)

Pastor Disaster & the Backsliders (Loree, Scheer, Schaaf)

Poor Miserable Sinner

Preachrblog (Chryst)

Putting Out the Fire

Random Intolerance

Quicunque vult... (Carder)

Rebellious Pastor's Wife

Reformation Letters I & II (Schoewe)

Sacred Meditations (Schroeder)

Schaaf's Kopf

The Sectarian Strand

St. Charles Place (Gottschall)

St. James the Hoosier

Theophilus' Inferno (Cota)

This Side of the Pulpit (Hall)

Uneasy Priest (Juhl)

Wartburg Speaks

Watersblogged!

Weedon's Blog

What Did Jesus Do (Schroeder)

Whey Lay

Wise is She (C.R. Pietsch)

Writ-in-Red (Muehlenbruch)

J. Bushur

M. Harrison

J. T. Pless

L. R. Rast

D. P. Scaer

W. C. Weinrich

2006-11-30T07:21:00.000-08:00

The Smalcald Articles from the 1854 Henkel Concordia have been blogged and are available online at smalcaldreader. Presently, they are blogged in the same rough format as the Small and Large Catechisms at catechismreader, with typographical errors galore. The comment feature on both is closed at present, with plans to open them after the completion of the project.

Luther's Smalcald Articles are a great read, reminiscent of the Augsburg Confession in many ways, with both symbols treating quite a few of the same topics. The intervening time, however, between 1530 and 1537 (and perhaps also the difference in authors and recipients,) accounts for a definite change in tone from "hopeful for reconciliation" to "hopeless that any real reconciliation or reformation will take place".

2006-11-27T19:22:00.000-08:00

Catechismreader is up and running! Ok, so I've had the link posted for quite some time; but this evening, the final portions were posted on the Larger Catechism, bringing both the Smaller and the Larger Catechisms from the 1854 Henkel edition into the blogosphere. While both catechisms are now posted in their entirety, I have yet to go back through with a fine-toothed spellchecker to catch words that I may have inadvertantly mis-typed. (Some misspellings were intentional, in an attempt to maintain the original Henkel spellings. Others were the result of quick-moving fingers hitting the wrong keys... And still others, spellchecker will not catch, because those misspelling may have formulated another word that is correctly spelled!)

2006-11-27T07:06:00.000-08:00

On Infant Baptism from the Large Catechism

Here we further assert, that it is not of the greatest importance as to this point, whether the person baptized believes or does not believe; for Baptism does not become wrong on this account, but all depends upon the word and command of God. Now this is indeed a nice point, but it is founded upon the assertion, that Baptism is nothing else than water and the word of God intimately united; that is, when the word is connected with the water, then baptism is right, although the individual may be destitute of faith at the time of his baptism; for my faith does not make, but it receives Baptism. Now Baptism does not become wrong, even if it be wrongly received and applied, since, as observed above, it does not depend on our belief, but upon the word of God....

For this reason we say, if you have not believed, believe yet, and thus declare: "The baptism was surely right, but I alas! have not received it rightly." For I myself, and all who permit themselves to be baptized, must thus say before God: "I come hither in my faith and that of others, yet I cannot depend on my belief and the prayers of many others for me, but I rely on thy word and command, even as I go to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, not upon my faith, but upon the words of Christ, whether I be strong or weak, for this I let God provide; but I know that he orders me to go, to eat, and to drink, &c., and that he gives me his body and his blood,– which words will neither belie nor deceive me."

2006-11-22T14:57:00.000-08:00

More on the Filioque

The Father and the Son are identical in everything except the mutually opposed relations of fatherhood and sonship. According to the famous dictum of Athanasius, "the same things are said of the Son as are said of the Father, except His being said to be 'Father.'" The only thing that the Father alone can do is to be Father, that is, to generate the Son. Since the Father does not act alone in spirating the Spirit, the Spirit must proceed from the Father and the Son as from a single co-principle. The Holy Spirit is distinguished from the Son by a different relation of origin.

(The Filioque: What Is at Stake? by Avery Dulles, S.J.; Concordia Theological Quarterly; vol. 59, numbers 1-2; p.36)

2006-11-22T06:28:00.000-08:00

Wilhelm Loehe on the Filioque

from

Questions and Answers

to the Six Chief Parts of Luther's Small Catechism

397. On whom do you believe in the Third Article?

The Holy Ghost.

398. Who is the Holy Ghost?

The Third Person of the Godhead, equal to the Father and the Son in essence, majesty, and glory.

399. What do you believe concerning the Holy Ghost?

That from all eternity He proceeds from the Father and from the Son, and has been sent by the Father and by the Son for the sanctification of men.

400. What is the meaning of the words,

"He proceedeth from the Father and the Son"?

They denote the manner of the origin of the Third Person of the Trinity, as it is described in the Athanasian Creed:

"The Father is made of none: neither created, nor begotten.

"The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created, but begotten.

"The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding."

All our imagination and thought fall short of this thrice-holy mystery.

401. Is all Christendom agreed in the doctrine

of the proession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son?

No. The Eastern church believes that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father alone.

402. Why?

Because no express word declaring His procession from the Son is found in the Scriptures.

403. Why then is it believed in the West?

Because otherwise the Father and the Son would not be equal. John xvi. 15.

Because otherwise the order of Persons would not be clear, nor would it be evident which is the Second, and which is the Third Person.

Because otherwise the Holy Ghost would be sent by the Father alone, and not by the Father and the Son. John xv. 26; xvi. 7; xiv. 26.

Because otherwise the Spirit could not be called the Spirit of the Son. Gal. iv. 6.

Published by Repristination Press;
translated by Edward T. Horn and copyright by the same, 1893,

Pages 102-3.

2006-11-20T19:39:00.000-08:00

Thoughts on an Unconditional Confessional Subscription

(fourth part of several to follow)

I wrote:

What makes a subscription to the Book of Concord unconditional?

(4) When the great "we believe, teach, and confess" statements (regardless of an indicated sedes,) together with similar statements such as "our churches believe", etc., are considered the only portions of the Book of Concord which are to be upheld for the Evangelical Lutheran Church to believe, teach, and confess today - ?

From time to time, one hears (from respected persons who care deeply about the Confessions,) that pastors and congregations subscribe only to the "doctrinal articles" contained in the Book of Concord. I'm not speaking facetiously when I say that I'm not quite sure what exactly this means. What exactly is meant by a "doctrinal article"? As I suggest above, are "doctrinal articles" only those portions of the Book of Concord that are highlighted by a certain phrase, such as: "we believe, teach, and confess" or "our churches believe..." or "our ministers teach..."? Are the doctrinal articles only the positions which were stated on controverted teachings? Or is there another operative definition of a "doctrinal article"?

My question:

What is the point of having the Book of Concord at all - if outside of the doctrinal articles (however they are defined), nothing else contained therein should be considered a doctrine of the Evangelical Lutheran Church? Is the ELCA's Church Council finally correct when they resolve the embarrassing problem of the Book of Concord by relegating it to the historical department, by implying that it is not necessary for the Lutheran Church today to hold to everything that is said in the Book of Concord, when they regret the beliefs of their sixteenth century namesake because those beliefs do not match what is believed, taught, and confessed by the "Lutheran Church" today?

If pastors and churches are not subscribing to everything - saying that they believe, teach, and confess whatever is contained in the Book of Concord (out of the conviction that it is, indeed, in agreement with the Sacred Scriptures) - then what is the point of subscribing to it at all? If it was never the intention of the Lutheran confessors that their children should subscribe to everything contained in the Book of Concord, then why did they never draft a concretely specific book of "the Accepted Doctrinal Articles Contained in the Book of Concord to which our Pastors and Churches Subscribe"?

My response:

I would maintain that the unconditional confessional subscription of a pastor and a congregation ought to be to the entire Book of Concord, to believe, teach, and confess not only the doctrinal articles but everything else that is in there, too.

(Perhaps those who are wiser or more knowledgeable than I would be willing to show where I have missed the mark?)

2006-11-19T13:23:00.000-08:00

Thoughts on an Unconditional Confessional Subscription

(third part of several to follow)

I wrote:

What makes a subscription to the Book of Concord unconditional?

(3) When only those portions of the Book of Concord that have the defense of explicit sedes doctrinae in citation are to be upheld as normative for the belief, teaching, confession, and practice of the Evangelical Lutheran Church today - ?

Any time that the word "only" is used, a conditional statement is made. "I would like to eat the whole pie," I say after dinner, "but I think it would be best if I only take a small piece."

If we uphold only those beliefs, teachings, confessions, or practices in the Book of Concord that have explicit sedes doctrinae cited or available for citation, then we do not wish to subscribe unconditionally to the entire Book of Concord. If we only wish to observe those portions that carry an explicit scriptural command, if we only feel compelled to abide by those portions which can be explicitly defended from the Sacred Scriptures, then we have reservations - we reserve to ourselves the right to reject portions of what the Confessions say. We thereby attach a "condition" to our confessional subscription.

An example:

Augsburg Confession XI says that "private absolution ought to be retained in the church, and should not be discontinued"; likewise XXV says: "Confession is not abolished by our ministers. For the custom is retained among us, not to administer the Sacrament, unto those who have not been previously examined and absolved" and "Yet by our ministers it is taught with diligence, that confession, because of absolution, which is the chief part in it, should be retained for the purpose of consoling alarmed consciences, and for some other reasons."

Article XXV does not give any scriptural proof texts in order to defend the retention of the custom of private confession and absolution; in fact, the article seems to go out of its way to cite the teaching of an extra-biblical document to explain that [private] "confession is not commanded in the Scriptures, but that it was instituted by the church."

* * * * *

So - was ist daß?

Even though there is no scriptural command to do so, are the ministers and churches who wish to maintain an unconditional subscription to the Lutheran Confessions required (that is, do they require it of themselves when they freely make their subscription to the Lutheran Confessions,) to offer private confession and absolution on a regular basis?

Antwort:

I believe so, but I'm interested in hearing your comments as well.

2006-11-18T11:55:00.000-08:00

Thoughts on an Unconditional Confessional Subscription

(second part of several to follow)

I wrote:

What makes a subscription to the Book of Concord unconditional?

(2) When, like a certain nineteenth century theologian, one excises offensive portions from the confessions and heartily subscribes to whatever is left, as long as the remaining portions still fit the criteria of "agreeing with the Scriptures" - ?

I've already ranted elsewhere about Samuel Simon Schmucker and his General Synodical Platform. This sort of position is really an "I'll follow the Lutheran Confessions in so far as they agree with whatever criteria I wish to establish", that is, it is a very conditional subscription to the Book of Concord. Cyberbrethren has pointed out elsewhere that someone who wishes to maintain an "in so far as" subscription to the Lutheran Confessions might as well subscribe to the telephone directory or Webster's Dictionary (he may have said, "The Koran",) in so far as it agrees with the Scriptures. If a confessional subscription indicates just how much of the Lutheran Confessions you believe are in agreement with the Scriptures, then to subscribe only in so far as is to leave the field wide open, saying that some parts do and that other parts may not. Ultimately, this boils down to a conditional subscription.

Perhaps the only kind word that I have for Schmucker is that he at least had the honesty to clearly delineate which portions of the Augsburg Confession he found agreeable and to physically cut out those portions with which he disagreed. Schmucker at least defined his in so far as subscription in clearer terms, whereas others leave theirs clouded in ambiguity.

* * * * *

Maybe what's missing in this whole discussion is a clear definition of what it means to "subscribe" to the Lutheran Confessions. Is it a token "pledge of allegiance" - something that we "keep on the books" so that we can maintain our 21st century ties to our long-dead 16th century forefathers, some formality that somehow permits us to retain the name "Lutheran"? Or is it (was it always intended) to be something more - to say that we also believe, teach, confess, and do what is written therein as it is in accord with the Scriptural faith?

2006-11-17T18:00:00.000-08:00

Thoughts on an Unconditional Confessional Subscription

(first part of several to follow)

I have to apologize; I was not playing nice in my previous post.

I wrote:

What makes a subscription to the Book of Concord unconditional?

(1) When, in its entirety and without any exceptions, the Book of Concord is acknowledged as the belief, teaching, and confession of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the sixteenth century - ?

This statement sounds good, and in and of itself, it is certainly true. Most who call themselves "Lutherans" today will acknowledge that the Book of Concord contains the beliefs, teachings, confessions, and practices of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the sixteenth century.

And yet, (this is where I was not playing nice), this nice-sounding statement does not go far enough; it intentionally stops short. It answers the question: "What did they believe?" It does not say anything about me. For my part, I am not making an unconditional subscription unless I say, "Put my name right after theirs. It is my belief, teaching, confession and practice today as well." That is where you see a great divide among Lutherans today, on the question of the extent to which their sixteenth century confessions are still binding for us today.

As an example of this division, we might consider a recently formulated position released by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. (Thanks for the heads-up to Cyberbrethren with the post entitled, "The Situation of the 16th Century No Longer Applies in the 21st Century"; the referenced ELCA news release is also available here). The press release indicates that the ELCA's Church Council "repudiated":

statements in the Formula of Concord and declared that condemnations in the Augsburg Confession directed at the Anabaptists do not apply to today's Mennonite Church USA. The Formula of Concord and Augsburg Confession are among the Lutheran confessions written in Europe in the 16th century.

From the declaration itself, pay particular attention to the following:

The Augsburg Confession's condemnations of the Anabaptists in the matter of baptismal faith and practice (CA IX) and participation in the police power of the state (CA XVI) are properly the subject of future conversation between our churches. We note that Lutheran churches in France and Germany have adopted statements declaring that these condemnations are not church-dividing and that they do not apply to Mennonites in their countries. The Lutheran World Federation has begun conversations with the Mennonite World Conference and we support their efforts to ascertain whether the differences that remain between our two churches in these matters are in fact church-dividing.

What is the point in highlighting these things? It would seem to me that the ELCA wishes to declare that what was believed, taught, confessed, and practiced in the sixteenth century is no longer relevant for the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the twenty-first century. Why? We live in a different context, and things have changed. Rather than maintaining divisions because of doctrine, we should set aside the doctrine, or at the very least, say that it doesn't matter any more.

I would maintain that it is not enough for one who wishes to subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions "unconditionally" to merely acknowledge that the Book of Concord relates what "they believed" in the sixteenth century. If the sentence that follows "this is what they believed" is not "and it is our belief, teaching, confession, and practice, too", then you are looking at some form of a conditional subscription.

PLEASE NOTE: The press release and the declaration of the Church Council of the ELCA both failed to indicate where the Lutheran Confessions actually urge governmental violence against those who held/hold to Anabaptist teachings. (I am not aware of any such urgings.) The word "condemned" is not always used (nor, I suspect, was it exclusively used in the sixteenth century) to mean "capital punishment", "imprisonment, exile, and execution". Dictionary.com kindly highlights several of the ways in which the word "condemn" is used; please consider the following:

1. to express an unfavorable or adverse judgment on; indicate strong disapproval of; censure.

3. to give grounds or reason for convicting or censuring.

4. to judge or pronounce to be unfit for use or service.

7. to declare incurable.

2006-11-14T18:15:00.000-08:00

What makes a subscription to the Book of Concord unconditional - ? (An Opinion Poll)

(1) When, in its entirety and without any exceptions, the Book of Concord is acknowledged as the belief, teaching, and confession of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the sixteenth century - ?

(2) When, like a certain nineteenth century theologian, one excises offensive portions from the confessions and heartily subscribes to whatever is left, as long as the remaining portions still fit the criteria of "agreeing with the Scriptures" - ?

(3) When only those portions of the Book of Concord that have the defense of explicit sedes doctrinae in citation are to be upheld as normative for the belief, teaching, confession, and practice of the Evangelical Lutheran Church today - ?

(4) When the great "we believe, teach, and confess" statements (regardless of an indicated sedes,) together with similar statements such as "our churches believe", etc., are considered the only portions of the Book of Concord which are to be upheld for the Evangelical Lutheran Church to believe, teach, and confess today - ?

(5) When, in addition to the "our churches believe" portions, statements that are qualified with phrases such as "it is the practice of our churches" or "our ministers [do thus and so]", etc., are specifically and particularly the only portions of the Book of Concord which are to be upheld as the belief, teaching, confession, and practice of the Evangelical Lutheran Church today - ?

(6) When one maintains a subscription (of the type suggested in any of the above, or perhaps something else) to the Book of Concord of 1580, understanding that edition as the first and normative edition of the Evangelical Lutheran Symbols and seeing each subsequent edition or translation as a commentary on the authoritative edition of 1580?

(7) When one maintains a subscription to the Book of Concord of 1580 as well as to the Book of Concord of 1584, citing these two as complementary and not differing in any substantial way (with the difference between mehr in the Treatise of 1580 and supra in 1584 not being considered substantial; likewise, the addition of the semper virgo phrase in the 1584 edition of the Smalcald Articles not being considered substantial, perhaps out of deference to FC SD VIII...) and when these two are considered the normative and authoritative editions - ?

(8) When one maintains that his subscription is to the 1580(+1584?) Book of Concord, yet only practices theology solely on the basis of modern translations of that/those text(s), despite modern deviations (eg., gender neutralization,) which have been imposed upon the original texts in order to forward a particular agenda - ?

(9) When one maintains, down to the assertions about garlic juice and magnets, that everything in the Book of Concord (1580 and/or 1584 and/or 1921 and/or 1959, etc.,) is a faithful exposition of the Scriptures and is normative for what we believe, teach, confess, and practice today - ?

(10) When one maintains, beyond the assertions about garlic juice, that everything in the Book of Concord (edition: your choice), including the materials referenced authoritatively by the Lutheran Symbols (such as Luther's Great Confession Concerning the Lord's Supper), is a faithful exposition of the Scriptures and is normative for what we believe, teach, confess, and practice today - ?

(11) When one maintains that, in addition to everything that is written in the Book of Concord, we are also bound to every universally accepted document and doctrine of the Church which does not disagree (implicitly or explicitly) with anything that is written in the Book of Concord or which the Book of Concord does not explicitly condemn or reject - ?

(12) I didn't think that anybody subscribed unconditionally to the Book of Concord anymore - ?

(13) I didn't think that anybody ever subscribed unconditionally to the Book of Concord - ?

2006-11-10T08:39:00.000-08:00

The Small Catechism from the 1854 Henkel Concordia is now up and running at catechismreader. Portions of the Large Catechism are being gradually added as I am able.

Working my way through the Ten Commandments, I find myself praying for the Creed (and Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and the Brief Exhortation to Confession), as the Commandments are nothing but the strictest preaching of the Law intended to kill the sinner dead in his tracks, with no path of escape. You who think yourselves righteous - read what Luther says of the 10 Commandments in the Large Catechism; and if you still think yourselves righteous, then I can be of no help to you.

2006-11-08T19:52:00.000-08:00

Some thoughts on Liturgy and Doctrine from Hermann Sasse

"What causes me to write is rather an issue of the Confessional Lutheran (July-August 1956).... What [Burgdorf, the editor] and his friends fail to realize is the necessity of a liturgical movement within the Lutheran Church which would help to revive the great "Catholic" heritage of our fathers, the liturgical life of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It was this liturgy that has prevented Lutheran Orthodoxy from becoming a mere system or rational theology.

"We cannot revive the theology of our fathers without realizing what theology meant to them: praise of God and doctrine at the same time. One has often the impression that the correct doctrine on the Sacraments is regarded as more important than their celebration. This is the danger for your church, though I must admit having read wonderful sermons on the Sacrament by your theologians, in which the full devotional content of the orthodox liturgy found an expression. But Pieper's Dogmatics is not satisfactory in this respect, due perhaps to the influence of the last stage of Orthodoxy in the later seventeenth century, when the Sacraments had lost their 'existential' meaning. We observe already with Melanchthon... a mere pedagogical understanding of the liturgy. This development went on. The two sides of orthodoxy, orthodoxy as 'pure doctrine' and orthodoxy as 'right worship,' still happily united with men like Johann Gerhard and Paul Gerhardt, were more and more separated which led to a decay of both. Whatever the causes of the development in your church may have been, ... the great task remains for you, as for all Lutheran churches, to regain that lost unity."

When "confessional churches" become "unliturgical", Sasse calls them "ineffective"; they may also fall off the horse in the other direction, when liturgical movements become "heretical or Romanistic". Sasse holds out the unity of the two as the goal, the task being to rediscover and maintain both without falling into tragedy on either side of the horse.

Source:
Hermann Sasse, "Letter to Arthur Carl Piepkorn (1956)," in The Lonely Way: Selected Letters and Essays, volume II (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2002), pp. 239-40.

2006-11-07T13:58:00.000-08:00

Those who subscribe to the Augsburg Confession acknowledge that, according to the Scriptures, Christians may participate in their government (AC XVI). The confession specifically states that Christians may hold legislative, judicial, executive offices, among other civil positions (such as being a soldier). Each Christian is encouraged to carry out his vocation in life; today, as a U. S. citizen who is registered to vote, I exercised that opportunity.

2006-11-05T19:22:00.000-08:00

Announcing Augsburgreader

For those interested in the Lutheran Confessions, Concordiareader is pleased to announce Augsburgreader. At its introduction, Augsburgreader is a transcription of a nineteenth century English translation of the 1580 Book of Concord's "Unaltered Augsburg Confession". Using the blogger/blogspot platform, Augsburgreader makes this translation, originally published by Solomon D. Henkel and Brothers in 1854, available to the blogosphere in a searchable format.

The text used for this transcription is available on-line in digital format, together with various other works, at Lutheran Legacy, where volunteers are being sought to aid in the work of transcription. (Please note: Concordiareader is not affiliated - either officially or unofficially - with the folks at Lutheran Legacy. Browse their site; it's interesting to see what they've made available.)

For now, the comment feature at Augsburgreader is disabled. If you would like leave a comment, you may respond to this post.

2006-10-31T16:56:00.000-08:00

Thoughts of Humiliation and Prayer - St. Luke 13:1-5

The simple truth is, not all of us become the men we once hoped we might be.
But we are all God's creatures.
If there be any among us who thought ill of Mister Hollom,
or spoke ill of him,
or failed him in any respect of fellowship,
then we ask for your forgiveness, Lord.
And we ask for his.

- Jack Aubrey, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World

I will never forget the signing of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. Truth be told, at the time, I did not think too much or care too much about it. It was seven years ago today, and I was a student at the seminary. I was newly married, and the fall quarter had just begun. I had too many other things on my mind to pay that much attention to what the LWF was doing.

The reason I will never forget the signing of JDDJ is because Matt Harrison preached that week at chapel. By the end of the sermon, it became a day of humiliation and prayer for all of us. Harrison called the seminary - really, the entire LCMS - to repentance. We had not cared enough to speak up beforehand. We had not loved them enough to go to any length to dissuade them from their chosen theological path - though we believed it wrong and dangerous to the souls of millions of people. We had not done enough even to try to prevent the tragic event of that Reformation day when the LWF officially sold whatever was left of its Lutheran soul to sleep with Rome on Justification. We in the LCMS had sinned in our silence, our indifference, and our lack of love.

Even though we took no part in the events of that day, we may not stand by and count ourselves innocent. Any self-righteousness which we might muster is smashed by the understanding that even our best and holiest deeds will always fail to break the dreaded oppression of sin. No one may stand boasting in his own decisions, in his own words or deeds before God. Such righteousness crumbles and dies when confronted by the strict demands of God's holy Law. We live alone before God by His mercy.

Events of the past few days have reminded me of that sermon, and the movie quotation above pretty well summarizes my understanding of a godly reaction on our part to such things: Repentance. (See also St. Luke 13:1-5.) The simple truth is that we all have sinned in this matter, and that we are all guilty. We have thought ill, have not thought enough to say anything at all, have not pursued every effort to "restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness". We have failed in our fellowship of humanity, to say nothing of our fellowship in the Gospel, in Christ and His Church.

I pray for forgiveness.

May Almighty God have mercy on all our souls through His Son, Jesus Christ, Our Lord. Amen

2006-10-25T13:33:00.000-07:00

How much of a difference does a comma make?

I was reading through the Henkel Concordia (1854) and noticed something curious:

"I believe in God the Father, Almighty Maker of heaven and earth."

The way I had learned it (and have been saying it) is:

"I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth."

Is there a difference? What does it mean?

2006-10-13T21:52:00.000-07:00

Cyberbrethren posts When is a Book of Concord Not a Book of Concord? Readers who are interested in the Concordia may well find this post an interesting summary of a discussion surrounding textual issues and the Book of Concord. Kudos to Paul McCain for organizing and posting these thoughts.

As a response, I offer a few questions:

1) The Henkels are a very interesting group coming out of Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee in the early 1800s. Weird things were happening in those days (read: revivals), and the early American Lutheran scene isn't very pretty (read: not confessional Lutheran). David Henkel is credited with getting the confessional ball rolling among his family and is one of the translators credited in the Henkel edition of the Book of Concord. (See side links)

Looking at some of David's writings, it is evident that he had access to Luther's works. Is anyone aware of where/how would he/the rest of his family have had access to Luther or a 1580 Book of Concord?

2) Cyberbrethren posted: "Ironically, to this day, the only complete translation of the German edition of the Book of Concord of 1580 is the translation prepared by the Henkels in the 1850s, with the 1854 second edition being the better edition"

What makes the second Henkel edition better than the first? Is there a critique published somewhere?

3) I was a little surprised in the post above to read that "formulas of confessional subscription do not refer to a specific edition of the Book of Concord". The proposed ordination rite for Lutheran Service Book does specifically mention "the 1580 Book of Concord" - so perhaps I do not understand what is being said?

4) One of these days, I will learn to make use of the "trackback" function. I'm sure that there must be a FAQ somewhere...

Again - thank you to Cyberbrethren for an informative and interesting post. I commend it to anyone interested in textual questions about the Book of Concord.

2006-10-13T17:53:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#24)

Affirmative position regarding "God's Eternal Foreknowledge and Election":

12. The Christian is to concern himself with the doctrine of the eternal election of God only in so far as it is revealed in the Word of God, which shows us Christ as the “book of life.” Through the proclamation of the Holy Gospel, Christ opens and reveals this book for us, as it is written, “Those he predestined, he also called.” In Christ we should seek the eternal election of the Father, who has decreed in his eternal counsel that he would save no one except those who acknowledge his Son, Christ, and truly believe on him. The Christian should banish all other opinions since they do not proceed from God but are inspired by the evil foe in an attempt to weaken for us or to rob us entirely of the glorious comfort which this salutary doctrine gives us, namely, that we know that we have been elected to eternal life out of pure grace in Christ without any merit of our own, and that no one can pluck us out of his hand. God assures us of this gracious election not only in mere words, but also with his oath, and has sealed it with his holy sacraments, of which we can remind ourselves and with which we can comfort ourselves in our greatest temptations and thus extinguish the flaming darts of the devil. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.496; FC Epitome XI: 13)

2006-10-12T21:13:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#23)

In the preaching of the law there are two things we must always keep in mind. First, we cannot keep the law unless we have been reborn by faith in Christ, as Christ says (John 15:5), “Apart from me you can do nothing.” Secondly, though men can at most do certain outward works, this universal statement must be permitted to interpret the entire law (Heb. 11:6), “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” We must keep the Gospel promise that through Christ we have access to the Father (Rom. 5:2). It is clear that we are not justified by the law. Otherwise, if the preaching of the law were enough by itself, why would Christ and the Gospel be necessary? Thus in the preaching of penitence it is not enough to preach the law, the Word that convicts of sin. For the law works wrath; it only accuses; it only terrifies consciences. Consciences cannot find peace unless they hear the voice of God, clearly promising the forgiveness of sins. Therefore it is necessary to add the Gospel promise, that for Christ’s sake sins are forgiven and that by faith in Christ we obtain the forgiveness of sins. If our opponents exclude the Gospel of Christ from the preaching of penitence, they deserve to be regarded as blasphemers against Christ. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.144; Apology IV: 256-7)

2006-10-12T20:36:00.000-07:00

The quick and the dead

I had a discussion on a shut-in call today about the difference between "the living and the dead" and "the quick and the dead".

My congregations are currently using The Lutheran Hymnal, and there is some discussion about changing over to Lutheran Service Book. In discussing with my shut-in some of the differences between the two, we started talking about the "updating" in the language of the creed. (I realize that everyone who uses Lutheran Worship is already past this discussion; I appreciate your patience :)

Quick means living. It has all sorts of archaic meanings: as an adjective - not stagnant, running, flowing; fiery, glowing; pregnant.

There is also a verbal form, "to quicken", which means: to make alive, revive; to cause to be enlivened, stimulate. "To quicken" has the archaic meaning "to kindle, to cause to burn more intensely" (which brings to mind the prayer: "Come Holy Ghost, fill the hearts of Thy faithful, and kindle in them the fire of Thy love"). "To quicken" also means "to come to life" - "entering into a phase of active growth and development" and "reaching the stage of gestation at which fetal motion is felt".*

I've always wondered if there was something a little more generic about "living" and whether we did not lose something from "quick" in the updating. Thoughts?

*From Libronix looking at Merriam-Webster, I. 1996, c1993. Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary. Includes index. (10th ed.). Merriam-Webster: Springfield, Mass., U.S.A.

2006-10-10T15:16:00.000-07:00

Book of Concord links posted - I've added several links on the sidebar to locations where the Concordia can be found on-line for viewing or for purchase. (Addall.com is always a great place to look for comparison pricing, although CPH and CBD are not listed in the sites which addall compares). Particularly interesting in this list are the 1580 German edition of the Book of Concord (published in Dresden, scanned from the copy (?)located at(?) Wartburg Seminary's library) and the French edition (which I found when doing research for a mission organization here in northern Minnesota that works with Lutherans in Haiti). Comments and suggestions are welcome.

2006-10-09T21:26:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#22)

[Speaking of Malachi 1:11] (T)he very words of the prophet express his meaning. For they first say this, namely, that the name of the Lord will be great. This is accomplished by the preaching of the Gospel. For through this the name of Christ is made known, and the mercy of the Father, promised in Christ, is recognized. The preaching of the Gospel produces faith in those who receive the Gospel. They call upon God, they give thanks to God, they bear afflictions for their confession, they produce good works for the glory of Christ. Thus the name of the Lord becomes great among the Gentiles (bookofconcord.org: Apology XXIV: 32).

2006-10-07T11:57:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#21)

The question has been, Is the preaching of the Holy Gospel strictly speaking only a preaching of grace which proclaims the forgiveness of sins, or is it also a preaching of repentance and reproof that condemns unbelief, since unbelief is condemned not in the law but wholly through the Gospel? (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.477-8; FC Epitome V: 1).
Answer? The Word of God must be rightly divided in order to maintain the distinction between Law and Gospel. Strictly speaking, the Law "teaches what is right and God-pleasing" and "condemns everything that is sinful and contrary to God's will" (ibid, 478:3). Strictly speaking, the Gospel "is the kind of doctrine that teaches what a man who has not kept the law and is condemned by it should believe, namely, that Christ has satisfied and paid for all guilt and without man’s merit has obtained and won for him forgiveness of sins, the 'righteousness that avails before God,' and eternal life" (ibid, 5; cf. 7).

However, the term 'Gospel' is not always used in its strict sense when it is used in Holy Scripture. The word may also mean "a proclamation both of repentance and of forgiveness of sins" (ibid, 6).

2006-10-04T22:59:00.000-07:00

What's your favorite translation/edition of the Concordia (and why)? The McCain Reader's Edition? Tappert? Kolb-Wengert? The Triglotta? I think that Jacobs was available at the CTSFW bookstore when I was a student; I don't know if it is still there. How about the Henkel edition of the Book of Concord; are there still copies of this edition out there?

When you read the Concordia, what format do you prefer? Do you prefer to read it electronically - either on-line (I think Triglotta is the version available at bookofconcord.org) or electronically (Tappert and Kolb-Wengert are available on CD) or do you like the feel of a book in your hands?

2006-10-04T22:06:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#20)

Here is a quotation about listening to sermons, from the section on the Third Commandment in the Large Catechism:

In the same way those conceited fellows should be chastised who, after hearing a sermon or two, become sick and tired of it and feel that they know it all and need no more instruction....

Let me tell you this. Even though you know the Word perfectly and have already mastered everything, still you are daily under the dominion of the devil, who neither day nor night relaxes his effort to steal upon you unawares and to kindle in your heart unbelief and wicked thoughts against all these commandments. Therefore you must continually keep God’s Word in your heart, on your lips, and in your ears. For where the heart stands idle and the Word is not heard, the devil breaks in and does his damage before we realize it. On the other hand, when we seriously ponder the Word, hear it, and put it to use, such is its power that it never departs without fruit. It always awakens new understanding, new pleasure, and a new spirit of devotion, and it constantly cleanses the heart and its meditations. For these words are not idle or dead, but effective and living. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.378-9; LC 10 Commandments III: 99-100).

2006-10-03T21:02:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#19)

The following quotation from the Formula of Concord (Epitome, Article I - Original Sin) is perhaps implicit in making the point that a preacher should consider the hearers when choosing the words and language that he uses in his sermons. (One can find a similar point made elsewhere in the Confessions, particularly with reference to "sermons for children".)

As far as the Latin words substantia and accidens are concerned, they are not biblical terms and, besides, they are unknown to the common man. They should therefore not be employed in sermons delivered to common, unlearned people, but simple folk should be spared them.

In schools and learned circles these words can profitably be retained in the discussion of original sin because they are familiar and convey no false impressions, and they clearly show the distinction between the essence of a particular thing and that which pertains to it only accidentally.(Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.469; FC Epitome: 23-4).

2006-10-02T08:27:00.000-07:00

Blog My Soul has started a series of noteworthy posts entitled: "How Lutherans Worship". Kinnanman is the author of a book recently released by CPH, "Worshipping with Angels and Archangels", which looks to be an excellent resource to use with confirmation classes and catechumens of all ages.

2006-10-02T08:16:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#18)

To set the context for the following quotation on preaching, Melanchthon talks in this particular section in Apology IV (Justification) about how the "scholastics have followed the philosophers... (in) teach(ing) only the righteousness of reason - that is, civil works - and maintain that without the Holy Spirit reason can love God above all things" (Ap IV:9; Tappert 108). He argues: "If we can be justified by reason and its works, what need is there of Christ or of regeneration?" (ibid, 12).

We have heard of some who, in their sermons, laid aside the Gospel and expounded the ethics of Aristotle. If the opponents’ ideas are correct, this was perfectly proper, for Aristotle wrote so well on natural ethics that nothing further needs to be added. We see that there are books in existence which compare certain teachings of Christ with the teachings of Socrates, Zeno, and others, as though Christ had come to give some sort of laws by which we could merit the forgiveness of sins rather than receiving it freely for his merits. So if we accept this teaching of the opponents that we merit forgiveness of sins and justification by the works of reason, there will be no difference between philosophical or Pharisaic righteousness and Christian righteousness (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.109; Apology IV: 14-6).

It seems that the key problem here is not that these sermons preached "philosophical ethics" but that they "laid aside the Gospel" and made it appear as though Christ's purpose in coming was to teach men how to *merit* forgiveness, salvation, eternal life, etc. When philosophical ethics are *substituted for* the Gospel, a good gift of God's creation is substituted for God as the recipient of our love and trust - ultimately becoming a false god.

2006-10-01T18:08:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#17)

Good works should be done because God has commanded them and in order to exercise our faith, to give testimony, and to render thanks. For these reasons good works must necessarily be done. They take place in a flesh that is partly unregenerate and hinders what the Holy Spirit motivates, fouling it with its impurity. Because of faith they are nevertheless holy and divine works, sacrifices, and the reign of Christ, whereby he shows his rule before the world. For in these works he sanctifies hearts and suppresses the devil. And in order to keep the Gospel among men, he visibly pits the witness of the saints against the rule of the devil; in our weakness he displays his strength. The dangers, labors, and sermons of the apostle Paul, Athanasius, Augustine, and other teachers of the church are holy works, true sacrifices acceptable to God, battles by which Christ restrained the devil and drove him away from the believers. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.133; Apology IV: 189=90)

2006-09-30T08:30:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#16)
Our opponents never mentioned faith, by which we freely receive the forgiveness of sins. All their books and sermons were silent about the exercise of faith in its struggle with despair and about the free forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.257; Apology XXIV: 46)

2006-09-28T22:41:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#15)

In our churches, on the other hand, all sermons deal with topics like these: penitence, the fear of God, faith in Christ, the righteousness of faith, comfort for the conscience through faith, the exercise of faith, prayer and our assurance that it is efficacious and is heard, the cross, respect for rulers and for all civil ordinances, the distinction between the kingdom of Christ (or the spiritual kingdom) and political affairs, marriage, the education and instruction of children, chastity, and all the works of love. From this description of the state of our churches it is evident that we diligently maintain church discipline, pious ceremonies, and the good customs of the church. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.221; Apology XV: 43-44)

2006-09-28T10:46:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#14)

And when the word “Gospel” is used in its broad sense and apart from the strict distinction of law and Gospel, it is correct to define the word as the proclamation of both repentance and the forgiveness of sins. For John, Christ, and the apostles began in their preaching with repentance and expounded and urged not only the gracious promises of the forgiveness of sins but also the divine law. In addition, however, the word “Gospel” is also used in another (that is, in a strict) sense. Here it does not include the proclamation of repentance but solely the preaching of God’s grace. So it appears shortly afterward in the first chapter of St. Mark, where Christ said, “Repent and believe in the Gospel” (Mark 1:15). (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.559; FC SD V: 5-6)

2006-09-27T09:17:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#13)

The Word of God is the true holy thing above all holy things. Indeed, it is the only one we Christians acknowledge and have. Though we had the bones of all the saints or all the holy and consecrated vestments gathered together in one heap, they could not help us in the slightest degree, for they are all dead things that can sanctify no one. But God’s Word is the treasure that sanctifies all things. By it all the saints themselves have been sanctified. At whatever time God’s Word is taught, preached, heard, read, or pondered, there the person, the day, and the work are sanctified by it, not on account of the external work but on account of the Word which makes us all saints. Accordingly, I constantly repeat that all our life and work must be guided by God’s Word if they are to be God-pleasing or holy. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.377; Large Catechism, 10 Commandments, 3rd: 91-2)

2006-09-26T19:14:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#12)

“Dear Father, we pray Thee, give us thy Word, that the Gospel may be sincerely preached throughout the world and that it may be received by faith and may work and live in us. So we pray that thy kingdom may prevail among us through the Word and the power of the Holy Spirit, that the devil’s kingdom may be overthrown and he may have no right or power over us, until finally the devil’s kingdom shall be utterly destroyed and sin, death, and hell exterminated, and that we may live forever in perfect righteousness and blessedness.” (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.427; Large Catechism, Lord's Prayer 2nd Petition: 54)

2006-09-23T11:48:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#11)

Our opponents attribute justification to love because everywhere they teach and require the righteousness of the law. We cannot deny that love is the highest work of the law. Human wisdom looks at the law and seeks righteousness in it. Thus the great and learned scholastics proclaimed the highest work of the law, and to it they attributed justification. Deceived by human wisdom, they did not see the true face of Moses but only his veiled face, just as the Pharisees, philosophers, and Mohammedans. We for our part preach the foolishness of the Gospel, which reveals another righteousness, namely, that because of Christ, the propitiator, we are accounted righteous when we believe that for Christ’s sake God is gracious to us. We know how repulsive this teaching is to the judgment of reason and law and that the teaching of the law about love is more plausible; for this is human wisdom. But we are not ashamed of the foolishness of the Gospel. Because of Christ’s glory we defend it and we ask Christ for the help of his Holy Spirit to make it clear and distinct. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.139; Apology IV: 229-30)

2006-09-22T08:58:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#10)

The past couple of years, my confirmation students were asked to pick a topic from the confessions and write a paper. I have been surprised by the number of students who chose "monastic vows" as the topic of their paper. Today's quote is from "Monastic Vows" in the Apology to the Augsburg Confession:

Meanwhile they neither hear nor preach the Gospel about the free forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake, about the righteousness of faith, about true penitence, about works that have the command of God. But they spend their time either on philosophical discussions or on ceremonial traditions that obscure Christ. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.278; Apology XXVII: 54)

2006-09-21T12:24:00.000-07:00

CTS News Release about Marquart Funeral

This news release came through yesterday on CTSNews at Yahoo!Groups (subscription information below). I was glad to see that the Funeral Service will be available over the internet through the seminary website (see details below).

For Immediate Release
September 20, 2006

Funeral for Professor Marquart to Take Place Friday in Kramer Chapel

FORT WAYNE, Ind. (CTS)-Funeral arrangements for Dr. Kurt E. Marquart, who was called to his eternal home on September 19, have been finalized. The funeral will take place on Friday, September 22, at 10:00 a.m. in Kramer Chapel on the campus of Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, Ind. Calling will take place Thursday, September 21, from 2:00-4:00 p.m. and 6:00-8:00 p.m., and Friday one hour before the service, in Luther Hall on the seminary campus.

All Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) clergy who wish to process for the service should be vested with a white stole and arrive at Kramer Chapel no later than 9:30 a.m. The service will be audio recorded and available on the seminary website by 1:00 p.m. on Friday. To listen to the recording go to www.ctsfw.edu, and select Chapel: Morning Office in the left-hand column.

Dr. Marquart was an Associate Professor of Systematic Theology and served at the seminary from 1975 to the time of his death. He is survived by his beloved wife, Barbara, and children: Danny (Karen); Cynthia (Kerry) Johnson; Barry (Monika); Angela (John) Hill; and Anthony (Rebecca). They have also been blessed with 18 grandchildren and six great-grandchildren.

###

For information about becoming a pastor, please contact the Office of Admission at 1-800-481-2155. To learn more about Christ Academy, a unique program for high school and college men, please call 1-800-481-2155. To help support CTS and its students through a financial contribution, please call the Office for Institutional Advancement toll-free at 1-877-287-4338.

To receive electronic versions of news releases from Concordia Theological Seminary, send an e-mail message to CTSNews-subscribe AT yahoogroups.com. To discontinue receiving electronic versions, send an e-mail message to CTSNews-unsubscribe AT yahoogroups.com.

2006-09-21T08:07:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions #8

Thus you see plainly that Baptism is not a work which we do but is a treasure which God gives us and faith grasps, just as the Lord Christ upon the cross is not a work but a treasure comprehended and offered to us in the Word and received by faith. Therefore they are unfair when they cry out against us as though we preach against faith. Actually, we insist on faith alone as so necessary that without it nothing can be received or enjoyed. (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.441; Large Catechism Baptism: 37)

The water in Baptism does such great things as forgive sins, rescue from death and the devil, and give eternal salvation to all who believe this because the Word of God has connected itself to the water to do this for us. Apart from the Word of God, Baptism has no power; with that Word of God, Baptism is a wet and powerful word. Apart from faith, Baptism gives none of the promised benefits. Yet what is faith? Is it something that we do? Or is it not better to speak of faith as something that God works in us - even the will to believe what God has promised and declared? The Word of God is powerful to do that which we cannot do and converts us to believe that which it gives and proclaims.

2006-09-20T07:20:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#9)

The "Third use of the Law" continues to be a topic of energetic discussions. In preparation for an upcoming pastors' conference on the topic, the pastors in my district have been asked to read Scott Murray's Law, Life, and the Living God.

Below, I've included two points from the Formula on the Third Use. An interesting read on "self-decreed and self-chosen acts of serving God" (referenced in point #2 below) may be found here.

2. We believe, teach, and confess that the preaching of the law is to be diligently applied not only to unbelievers and the impenitent but also to people who are genuinely believing, truly converted, regenerated, and justified through faith.

3. For although they are indeed reborn and have been renewed in the spirit of their mind, such regeneration and renewal is incomplete in this world. In fact, it has only begun, and in the spirit of their mind the believers are in a constant war against their flesh (that is, their corrupt nature and kind), which clings to them until death. On account of this Old Adam, who inheres in people’s intellect, will, and all their powers, it is necessary for the law of God constantly to light their way lest in their merely human devotion they undertake self-decreed and self-chosen acts of serving God. This is further necessary lest the Old Adam go his own self-willed way. He must be coerced against his own will not only by the admonitions and threats of the law, but also by its punishments and plagues, to follow the Spirit and surrender himself a captive. 1 Cor. 9:27; Rom. 6:12; Gal. 6:14; Ps. 119:1; Heb. 13:21.
(Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.480; FC E VI: 3-4)

2006-09-19T18:41:00.000-07:00

+ Dr. Marquart lives! + In these three words, Watersblogged! captures our Christian confession about Jesus, the Resurrection and the Life, and about all those who believe in Jesus: Though they die, yet they shall live; whoever lives and believes in Jesus never dies.

And so we say of Professor Marquart what Our Blessed Lord Jesus said of Jairus's daughter: "He is alive! He is not dead but sleeping!" Sadly for us, we can no longer stir him up to labor with us in Our Lord's fields. The Lord of the Harvest has finally granted our dear doctor to rest from his labors. Now Professor Marquart waits for the coming of Him who shall raise all the dead and give unto him and all believers in Christ eternal life.

In Jesus, Dr. Marquart lives! Thanks be to God!

2006-09-19T12:19:00.000-07:00

+ The Reverend Doctor Kurt Erik Marquart +

Earlier today, I read that Professor Marquart's earthly toils had ended.
Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord.

Update: Fort Wayne Observed indicates that arrangements have been announced: The funeral service will be at 10am on Friday, September 22, at Kramer Chapel on the seminary campus (Fort Wayne). Viewing will be one hour prior to the service on Friday. Calling will be from the hours 2 to 4 and 6 to 8 on Thursday at Luther Hall on campus. The arrangements are by Klaehn, Fahl & Melton Funeral Homes.

For further information and related readings, see the following:
Cyberbrethren and Cyberstones' Memories of Marquart
Also:
Beggar's All
Blessed and Content -- and Disabled
Burr in the Burgh
Cruce Tectum
Father Hollywood
Latif's Memoir
LCMS News Spot
Lutheran Logomaniac
One Lutheran Ablog
Outotoro
Putting Out the Fire
Rev. Tucher
Saint Stephen LC, Milwaukee
Schaaf's Kopf
Territorial Bloggings
Uneasy Priest
Weedon's Blog

2006-09-18T13:37:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#7)

"The distinction between law and Gospel is an especially brilliant light which serves the purpose that the Word of God may be rightly divided and the writings of the holy prophets and apostles may be explained and understood correctly. We must therefore observe this distinction with particular diligence lest we confuse the two doctrines and change the Gospel into law. This would darken the merit of Christ and rob disturbed consciences of the comfort which they would otherwise have in the holy Gospel when it is preached purely and without admixture, for by it Christians can support themselves in their greatest temptations against the terrors of the law." (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.558; FC SD V: 1)

The classic book on this topic is the evening lecture series of C.F.W. Walther collected under the title: Proper Distinction Between Law & Gospel. Recently, Professor John Pless of CTS Fort Wayne authored Handling the Word of Truth: Law and Gospel in the Church Today. Browsing what else is available, I noticed that the professor under whom I studied homiletics has a 4 CD set available through CPH on the Proper Distinction as well as a paperback available through Amazon entitled: Sermon Form and Law-Gospel Preaching. Another volume that I have heard mentioned (though I have not read it) is Herman Stuempfle's Preaching Law and Gospel.

2006-09-17T23:47:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#6)

"Everything that they are to teach and preach is now available to them in clear and simple form in the many excellent books which are in reality what the old manuals claimed in their titles to be: 'Sermons That Preach Themselves,' 'Sleep Soundly,' 'Prepared!' and 'Treasury.' However, they are not so upright and honest as to buy these books, or if they have them, to examine and read them. Such shameful gluttons and servants of their bellies would make better swineherds or dogkeepers than spiritual guides or pastors." (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.358; Large Catechism Preface: 2)

While on the topic of sermons and sermon sources and resources, I have found the following particularly useful (in no particular order):
Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers
The Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, 7 Volumes
The 1529 Holy Week and Easter Sermons of Dr. Martin Luther
In Christ: The Collected Works of David P. Scaer Vol. 1: Sermons
Sermons of Pastor David Petersen which are available here and here.
Sermons of the Rev. Fr. John W. Fenton, available here.
Sermons of Pastor William Weedon, available here and sometimes also here.
Rev. William Cwirla's sermons, available here and here.
Sermons of Pastor Aaron Koch, available here.

While Pastor Peter Cage's sermons are quite edifying, they are rare to find on the web. One is located here.

Probably *the* sermon that has influenced most of my funeral sermons was delivered at the memorial in Fort Wayne for President Barry by the Rev'd Dr. William C. Weinrich.

I have not been "so upright" as to purchase the following commendable resources:
Christ Crucified: Lutheran Sermons by Chad L. Bird
Selected Sermons of Norman Nagel: From Valparaiso to St. Louis

And if you find yourself listed anywhere above, please humor me and consider yourself TAGGED to list your top five sermon sources, resources, or sermons that have influenced you. :)

2006-09-16T04:13:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#5)

"'For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe' (1 Cor. 1:21). 'Peter will declare to you a message by which you will be saved, you and your household' (Acts 11:14). 'Faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ' (Rom. 10:17). 'Sanctify them in the truth; thy Word is truth. I pray for those who are to believe in me through their Word' (John 17:17, 20). Therefore the eternal Father calls out from heaven concerning his beloved Son and concerning all who in his name preach repentance and the remission of sins, 'Listen to him' (Matt. 17:5).

"All who would be saved must hear this preaching, for the preaching and the hearing of God’s Word are the Holy Spirit’s instrument in, with, and through which he wills to act efficaciously, to convert men to God, and to work in them both to will and to achieve."

(Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.531; FC SD II: 51-2.)

2006-09-14T22:26:00.000-07:00

Concordia Reader's Edition of the Lutheran Confessions (unofficial) Latest Information

I've had a few visitors looking for information on the Reader's Edition of the Lutheran Confessions, so I thought I would post what I know and give an opportunity for those who know more to comment.

While CPH indicates that the Reader's Edition is still available at the special price of $20 (as opposed to the regular price of $29.99), the "add to cart" button on their site has disappeared. A product update notice (posted as of when, I do not know) reads:

"The nature of the changes we are presently making to Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions require more time than originally anticipated. We will deliver this revised edition as soon as we are able, and we thank you for your continuing interest and support. Further information will be provided as it becomes available. We are sorry for the delay and thank you for your patience."

Amazon (on what basis, I do not know) projects a November 30th release, but they have the CRE listed at its regular $29.99 price.

2006-09-14T06:47:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#4)

"When you preach to intelligent and educated people, you are at liberty to exhibit your learning and to discuss these topics [the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the Ten Commandments] from different angles and in such a variety of ways as you may be capable of. But when you are teaching the young, adhere to a fixed and unchanging form and method. Begin by teaching them the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, etc., following the text word for word so that the young may repeat these things after you and retain them in their memory."

(Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.339; Preface to the Small Catechism: 9-10.)

2006-09-13T07:32:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#3)

"Whenever good works are praised and the law preached, therefore, we must hold fast to these rules: that the law is not kept without Christ — as he himself has said, 'Apart from me you can do nothing' (John 15:5) — and that 'without faith it is impossible to please God' (Heb. 11:6). The teaching of the law is certainly not intended to abolish the Gospel of Christ, the propitiator. Cursed be our opponents, those Pharisees, who interpret the law in such a way that they attribute Christ’s glory to works and make of them a propitiation that merits the forgiveness of sins. It follows, therefore, that works are praised for pleasing God on account of faith, since they do not please him without Christ, the propitiator. 'Through him we have obtained access' to the Father (Rom. 5:2), not by works without Christ, the mediator."

(Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.147; Apology IV:269.)

This section from the Apology is a great explanation for why Abel's sacrifice was acceptable and Cain's was not (cf. Heb 11:4): Abel offered his sacrifice in Christ, while Cain's sacrifice was offered in something else.

I used this recently as a sermon illustration:

Some speculate that Eve believed that Cain was the Promised Seed (Gen 3:15); some translate her words in Genesis 4:1 "I have gotten a man - the LORD!" Perhaps Cain, too, thought that he was the Christ and looked at himself as the hope of the world and the Savior of mankind. Coming to the place of sacrifice, Cain made an offering out of the fruit of his labor, vegetation cultivated under the sweat of his brow; as the "Promised Seed", Cain made a meritorious sacrifice to God of his own good works. But as time would soon tell, Cain was not that Seed, and his sacrifice was powerless to save.

By contrast, little brother Abel was definitely not the Promised Seed. He was the second son, born without expectation, whose only hope for salvation was in the One whom God had promised. Abel's sacrifice reeked of sin; Abel slaughtered his firstborn sheep and brought the fat of his flock, reminding the Lord God of the animal sacrifice that was necessary to clothe man's nakedness after the Fall (Gen 3:21). Abel's sacrifice pointed both to man's nakedness and sin as well as to the One who covers mankind's nakedness and sin, the Promised Seed who would strive with the devil and all his evil cohorts to win forgiveness, life, and salvation for mankind. Abel's sacrifice was pleasing to God because it was offered with trust in the One who is powerful to save; Abel's sacrifice pointed to the Promised Seed, the Christ. Abel's sacrifice pointed to the One who would be lifted up as a sacrifice upon the altar of the cross for Abel's salvation and for the salvation of all mankind.

2006-09-12T07:23:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#2)

"In the last chapter of Luke (24:47) Christ commands that penitence and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name. The Gospel declares that all men are under sin and are worthy of eternal wrath and death. For Christ’s sake it offers forgiveness of sins and justification, which are received by faith. By its accusations, the preaching of penitence terrifies our consciences with real and serious fears. For these, our hearts must again receive consolation. This happens if they believe Christ’s promise that for his sake we have the forgiveness of sins. Amid such fears this faith brings peace of mind, consoles us, receives the forgiveness of sins, justifies and quickens us. For this consolation is a new and spiritual life. This is plain and clear, the faithful can grasp it, and it has the testimony of the church." (Tappert, The Book of Concord. Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1959, p.115; Apology IV:62f.)

2006-09-11T20:45:00.000-07:00

"On Preaching" from the Confessions (#1)

"In addition, it would be well to preach to parents on the nature of their office, how they should treat those committed to their authority. Although the duty of superiors is not explicitly stated in the Ten Commandments, it is frequently dealt with in many other passages of Scripture, and God intends it to be included in this commandment in which he speaks of father and mother. ... Parents should consider that they owe obedience to God, and that, above all, they should earnestly and faithfully discharge the duties of their office, not only to provide for the material support of their children, servants, subjects, etc., but especially to bring them up to the praise and honor of God." (Tappert, 388; Large Catechism, 4th Commandment, 167f.)

2006-07-12T14:39:00.000-07:00

Cyberbrethren and Conditional Subscriptions

Some time ago, Cyberbrethren posted a concise and helpful explanation of the differences between quia and quaetenus subscriptions to the Lutheran Confessions, about which I would like to comment. I would also like to address the issue of "a pious sounding conditional subscription to the Lutheran Confessions", because there are all sorts of "goats dressed up like sheep" on that issue.

Before I get to any of that, there is another matter that I would like to address. In setting up a particular example of "a pious sounding conditional subscription", Cyberbrethren constructed an argument from a logical fallacy called "the straw man"; it was an argument against a misrepresentation of someone else's position. (No, dear reader, you have not stumbled onto Bill Cwirla's blog; with you, I am eagerly anticipating the next installment in his logical fallacy series...) Where one might be tempted to offer charity in assuming that Cyberbrethren's comments were based on a misreading of "a certain blog site", there have been a string of posts from Cyberbrethren which - without naming this "certain Pastor" or his congregation or identifying the statuary in their building - seem rather aggressive towards them.

On his own blog, the "certain Pastor" had stated that he prefers the words and thoughts of church fathers such as St Leo more than his own words or thoughts. (I'm puzzled as to how this might constitute an "unhealthy regard for the Early Church Fathers".) He then went on to say,

"I tremble at the hubris of attempting to correct them [the fathers], cognizant of the fact that they are more knowledgable of the Scriptures, and holier in speech and conduct, than I" [emphasis mine].

In responding to such a post, a blogger should at least look at the context (in this case, an introduction to a paraphrase of something written by St Leo) and should respond to what the statement is actually saying: the "certain Pastor" wishes to exercise great care as *he* attempts to correct and paraphrase the words of such men as were undoubtedly "more knowledgable of the Scriptures" and "holier in speech and conduct" than himself. Construing this post (which never even mentions the Lutheran Confessions) into some sort of attempt to make a pious sounding conditional subscription to the Lutheran Confessions is really beneath Cyberbrethren. At best, such misrepresentations are annoying; at worst, they cause a blogger's reliability to be called into question.

2006-07-11T14:19:00.000-07:00

Conditional subscriptions to the Lutheran Confessions

I’ve been revisiting my class notes from “Lutheran Church in America”. With a few notable exceptions along the way, American “Lutherans” have generally subscribed to the Lutheran Confessions conditionally. From the colonial days down to the present, where the Confessions are even acknowledged, the subscription has been typically rendered: "I subscribe insofar as (quaetenus) the Confessions agree with the teaching of the Scriptures" or "I subscribe to the ‘doctrinal articles’ or to the ‘fundamental doctrinal articles’ articulated in the Symbolical Books.” One notorious example of this type of confessor is Samuel Simon Schmucker, who rather purposefully took up such a subscription in 1826 when he became the President of the Gettysburg Seminary. According to my notes, it seems that Schmucker spent the rest of his life trying to work out exactly which of the “doctrinal articles” are “fundamental”, as can be seen especially in Schmucker’s “American Rescension of the Augsburg Confession” - “The Definite Synodical Platform” of 1855.

The norm of conditional subscriptions does have a few notable (and perhaps debatable) exceptions. The Synod formed by the Henkel family in Tennessee in 1820 produced a quia subscription to the unaltered Augsburg Confession but fell short of explicitly subscribing unconditionally to the entire Book of Concord. In 1845, some twenty-five years later, the followers of Grabau in the Buffalo Synod became the first in the U.S. to produce an unconditional subscription to the entire Book of Concord; they were followed two years later by the Missouri Synod, which was organized in 1847.

2006-03-31T10:08:00.000-08:00

"Concordia Discordia" posted a week ago by Aardvark Alley discusses the recent LCMS Doctrinal Review decision to revoke their certification of the Reader's Edition of the Lutheran Confessions. The post also includes commentary and sources and links to others who have been commenting on this topic.

Also worthy of a look is Watersblogged's "If the Confessions may contradict your position", as well as Cyberstone's posting of Pastor John Frahm's Fact Sheet on Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions.

2006-03-31T07:44:00.000-08:00

On with the Concordiareaders! I had hoped to start off with a few biographical sketches of people who had in one way or another attached themselves to the Lutheran Confessions. Opening the floor up to suggestions, Harry kindly commented about how the Confessions had impacted his life. It wasn't quite where I had intended to go (I was thinking mostly about dead people,) but it might make for interesting conversation to hear from living people how the Lutheran Confessions have impacted their lives. Eventually, my goal is to take up some of the well-known historical figures (C. F. W. Walther, Wilhelm Loehe, Hermann Sasse, Samuel Simon Schmucker) and look at how they interacted with the Lutheran Confessions.

2005-12-26T13:27:00.000-08:00

Who else reads the Concordia? Introducing: The Concordiareaders! Upcoming posts will include the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly - people who were transformed by reading the Concordia as well as those who tried to transform (read: disfigure) the Evangelical-Lutheran Confessions. Any guesses or suggestions?

2005-09-03T13:00:00.000-07:00

"The Augsburg Confession and its Apology are LEGAL documents inasmuch as they are theological ones." In his blog entry: Suing the Synod, Part 4, the Rev'd Headmaster Joel Brondos offers some thought-provoking comments about the legal intent of the Confessions and the context out of which they arose.

The Augustana and its Apology are certainly not the only symbols to arise out of a legal context. Emperor Charles V convened the Diet at Augsburg as a legal effort to resolve theological tensions in his empire. However, it was twelve hundred years earlier that Constantine invoked his authority as ruler of the empire to assemble the Bishops and convene the Council of Nicea, a similar "legal" effort to resolve theological differences.

As I think about these things, I am curious about those in the early church who confessed the Nicene Creed in the liturgy. Did they see this practice as a "legal" sort of confession? Taking a quick glance at Frank Senn's Christian Liturgy, the liturgical use of the Creed doesn't appear until the late fifth century (by the Monophysites) and the early sixth century (in the rite of Constantinople). According to Senn, the Monophysites in 476 were attempting "to emphasize their loyalty to the Council of Nicea" by their practice of confessing the Nicene Creed in the liturgy (127).

Giving this issue further thought, I wonder how much consideration the Lutheran confessors gave to the legal similarities between the Nicene Creed and their Augsburg Confession. If the opening words of the very first article of their Confession are any indication, it could be said that Nicea was in their foremost thoughts as they made their Confession at Augsburg.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The word out on the street is that the new Concordia Reader's Edition is selling quickly. Get your own copy today while it is still available from CPH for the very low price of $20.

2005-08-10T23:00:00.000-07:00

"Thank God, today a seven-year-old child knows what the Church is, namely, the holy believers and lambs who hear the voice of their Shepherd" (Concordia Reader's Edition, 309).

If we today took our cue from the seven-year-old children of Luther's day, our ideas about what makes a church "healthy" or "successful" would be very different. It's not that we today would say that there is anything wrong with listening to Jesus or God's Word. We're very willing to admit that listening to Jesus is a very important part of what it means to be church.

But when you listen to Luther's seven-year-olds, there is nothing else. Listening to Jesus is all that they know. These seven-year-olds were not alone in thinking this way about the Church; with a little more sophistication, the much older confessors at Augsburg said exactly the same thing: "The Church is the congregation of saints in which the Gospel is purely taught and the Sacraments are correctly administered"(CRE, 60).

What makes for a healthy, successful church? Jesus! The Gospel! The Sacraments! There is nothing else. Nothing is said about packed pews or overflowing offering plates. Luther's children know nothing of fame, nothing of wealth, by which to measure the success or failure, the sickness or healthiness of a church. They only know Jesus and that Jesus knows them. They know that Jesus has given them an eternal treasure, even though it is a treasure which you can't deposit at your local bank. (You really wouldn't want it there, anyway, because moth and rust can destroy even that which is tucked away in the most secure safe-deposit boxes.) What is more, when Jesus purchased and won you from all sin, from death, and from the power of the devil, He didn't stand at the counter with His wallet full of green, asking: "How much?" It wasn't with gold or silver but with His holy, precious blood and with His innocent suffering and death that He made you His own. Once again, we're talking about Jesus, the Gospel, and the Sacraments.

What is the Church all about? How do we measure healthiness or success in a congregation? Maybe the thing to do would be to step back and ask: Are we listening to Jesus? Is His Gospel purely taught in our midst? Are His Sacraments correctly administered according to His institution? And do we pray that it would be this way? Luther's seven-year-olds certainly did. When they prayed that God's Name would be kept holy, they were praying that God's Word would be taught among them in its truth and purity and that they as the children of God would also lead holy lives in accordance with it. When they prayed that God's kingdom would come, they were praying that Our heavenly Father would give them His Holy Spirit, so that by His grace they would believe His holy Word and lead godly lives here in time and there in eternity.

I think that we today could learn a lot from Luther's seven-year-olds.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From what I've read of it so far, the new Concordia Reader's Edition is the best thing to come along since sliced bread. Get your own copy today from CPH for the very low price of $20.

2005-08-03T00:00:00.000-07:00

Welcome to ConcordiaReader! If you love reading and discussing the Lutheran Confessions, then I'm glad to make your acquaintance. I look forward to connecting with you and others across the globe who share a love for these Confessions.

Having been a Concordia reader for quite some time, I own several editions as well as several books about the Book of Concord. On ConcordiaReader, I am writing a book on-line. I invite you to join me as I read through and reflect upon the Lutheran Confessions and some of these other writings. I hope that my thoughts and reflections inspire you to keep a copy of the Concordia on your livingroom coffee table, right where some visitor will ask: What's that? Or if you're not so bold, I hope that I can at least talk you into putting a copy on your bedroom nightstand, where you can thumb through a few pages each evening before going to bed. The Concordia is a book that everyone should read. (It is even available on-line at bookofconcord.org).

Confessions time. Even though it has been sitting on my desk at church since early July, I just opened Concordia The Lutheran Confessions: A Reader's Edition of the Book of Concord (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005). This edition promises to be "reader friendly". If you don't already have a copy of the Book of Concord, order this edition through CPH today. At $20, it is the most affordable Concordia on the market.

concordiareader

Scrolling through the Blogosphere

People I would like to add to my blogroll