Winter Came...and Everything Changed! My Journey to Lutheranism

Greetings in the Name of our Father, His Gracious Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

 

You may not know me but I am extremely familiar with From Geneva to Wittenberg Blog.  You see, three (3) years ago my husband and I were Providentially brought to a Lutheran Church and subsequently the Lutheran understanding, which is the true understanding of the Christian faith. 

 

Last week I was asked to join this wonderful team and write for it.  To say I was surprised is an understatement.  Humbled, definitely.  Excited?!  ABSOLUTELY.  You see From Geneva to Wittenberg was my journey as well.  Okay, so I went from Azusa Street to Geneva then Heidelberg to Wittenberg.  Yes, a long journey to end up with the best theology, the clearest Gospel message and the most wonderful understanding of our Savior Jesus Christ (uhm, that the Bible’s story and found most clearly in the Lutheran Confessions).  This site helped me wrestle with my own questions and doubts, fears and spiritual insecurities or lack of true assurance as it probably would be expressed.  My journey may not be the same as yours, but if you’re here I have a suspicion it’s because you too are asking questions.  So, I thought, “Why not begin my entries on this blog with my own story?” (You can get the whole story in my book “The Accidental Lutheran: The Journey from Heidelberg to Wittenberg”.)  So, here we go:

Winter came…and everything changed

There is a popular show on HBO in which the phrase “Winter is coming…” is used in almost every episode.  For my husband, Bobby, and I we changed it a bit because the Winter of 2016/17 came and with it everything we knew and believed changed.

In July 2013 I completed my doctorate degree in Philosophy and Theology with a healthy dose of Apologetics mixed in.  The topic of my dissertation was the proverbial “Problem of Evil”.  Not to be witty, but after I completed this that’s when all my theological problems began.  Well, they weren’t so much problems as they were questions.  See, peering into the “secret things which belong to God” caused me a lot of inward wrestling.  I understood that God is Sovereign and just but now I believe I pressed the teachings of the Dutch Reformed view regarding the elective purposes of God just a bit too far.  The struggle began in my own heart first and then in discussions with Bobby, we both began to wonder about what we had and were still learning within the Dutch Reformed Christian world (hereafter referred to as Reformed). 

 In 2014 we moved from NYC to Idaho and began to attend a Reformed church about 50 miles away in Boise.  From the start we were warmly welcomed and felt as we had found a home in our new home.  We transferred our membership from that of our church on Long Island to the one is Boise and I began to help with the women eventually leading the mid-week Women’s Bible Study.  Going through several series, Romans, Church History and even Calvin’s Institutes, I’d felt a bond of sisterhood amongst many of the ladies.  However, the distance began to take its toll on me, in particular, with regard to friendships.  Living that far away from your church family is hard.  While we’d done that in NY (church was 45 miles away) I was so busy with completing my doctorate that I didn’t feel it too much.  However, here in Idaho I was really beginning to long for close friendships where I didn’t have to drive an hour to see them or them come to see me.  Three years later, Idaho experienced one of the heaviest snow total winters in decades.

Winter came…and EVERYTHING Changed

It began on Thanksgiving evening in 2016 and did not end until the end of April 2017.  Snow…snow…and more snow.  Bobby and I had moved here to Idaho in 2014 and our dear friends would tell us, when we asked about the winters here, “Oh, no problem. We might get 2 or even 4 inches but by noon it is all melted away.”  Ha!  While Winter 2015 did go that way, the winter of 2016 was not going to let up…at all it seemed.  Every weekend there were snow storms.  Not 2 or 4 inches but 10, 16 and 20 inches at a clip.  Over and over we were blocked in.  It was different here than living in the big city.  Back in New York City the plows would be out the moment an inch or two fell.  Not here in small town USA.  The one neighbor in our cul de sac who had a mini plow had moved back east so we were literally stuck. 

Up to this point we had been attending the reformed church in Boise, some 50 miles away.  We loved this little church.  It was growing and they loved to talk about God’s Word and theology even outside of service.  The church we had come from back east highly recommended it to us.  However, getting there in the winter months was proving near impossible.  On top of snow we would have quick thaws and then blistery temperatures would leave sheets of ice all along the route out of our development.  We tried to stay in contact with our new friends the the reformed church but the distance was proving that difficult.  Emails, social media and phone calls were becoming our only connection and those were quickly fading as the harsh winter marched onward with record snowfalls and thick, dangerous ice covered roads. 

I remember joking with my dear friend, Debby, as she was on the east coast for Thanksgiving and how she and her husband would be coming back to the first winter storm.  The Mountains, all covered in white was breathtaking.  As I sat in my home office, I could see the Trinities blanketed in white looking majestic and regal.  However, the snow didn’t stop that weekend and we missed church.  Later that week, everything melted and we thought, great we can get to church the next weekend. 

That changed drastically.  The next snow fell on Saturday and on Sunday was frozen over with a thick layer of ice.  We missed church again.  Well, in 2013 in NYC we had a tough winter so we both thought we would just slog through it.  Then another melt, then a freeze then another storm with more than a foot of snow in a town that usually had 4-6 inches for the entire Winter.  Each week the snow came, melted a bit, then froze over then more snow.  Soon our little cul-de-sac was a skating rink.  Our town had two plows and didn’t come through to our side for months.  Each weekend it seemed more snow fell and we missed church again.

By January we had not been to church since Thanksgiving and I was longing for the preached Word and fellowship with other believers.  This was not happening and both Bobby and I were beginning to feel it.  Then, one Sunday morning, frustrated that we were snowed in again, we looked at the religious channels.  We hadn’t done that since we left the evangelical church.  However, we figured we might find something a bit more biblical than the charismatics and as God providentially directed we did.  This program called Worship for Shut-In. 

However, the struggle with guilt, for missing services week after week, began to weigh heavily like the ice-laden snow in our town. I struggled with not being there with friends, not worshipping with brothers and sisters in Christ, and most of all, not taking the Lord’s Supper.  That was key for me.  I was hungry.  I was hungry for the preached Word but mostly this new hunger for the Word in the Sacrament began to build up in my heart.  The guilt of missing church week after week began to take its toll.  Bobby and I discussed possibly attending the Lutheran church in town (LCMS) but the snow and ice kept us from going local as well.  The hunger grew. The guilt became overwhelming.

Then, one Sunday morning, frustrated that we were snowed in again, we looked at the religious channels.  We hadn’t done that since we left the evangelical church.  However, we figured we might find something a bit more biblical than the charismatics and as God providentially directed we did.  This program called Worship for Shut-In. 

We sat and watched, listened, even sang along with the old hymns.  It was Lutheran.  It was liturgical.  The pastor even wore a white robe.  Well, we knew that some Lutherans were solid Christians and faithful to God’s Word so we watched and were fed.  Afterwards, I looked up the website, connected with it via email and we felt a bit refreshed.  At least we can get the preached Word until Spring…or so we thought.

Winter had come…and everything changed.  Each Sunday, with every weekend snow storm, we would sit ourselves down and together watch Worship for Shut-Ins (now Worship Anew).  I would even sing along with some of the choir pieces and solos that were part of the program when I knew the old hymns.  Some of these hymns, though, we’d never heard.  However, they were rich and deep and I soon came to learn the Lutheran Service Book is filled with hymns that speak of Christ and His Work, salvation by grace alone through faith alone, and the Lord’s Supper…and Baptism as God’s work alone.  We were being fed on good, solid, biblical food.  Then came the longing to share this with other believers each week but this just wouldn’t happen. 

Saturdays we would prepare to go to church in Boise and then…snow and ice…ice and more snow.  Now, because my dissertation was on God’s Providence I was beginning to “get it”.  God was hindering us from heading up to Boise.  The connections on social media were dropping as we missed service after service.  The phone calls began to wain and emails were less and less frequent.  Separated from our church family, no longer just by 50 miles, was beginning to take its toll.  Hungry for more than just a 30 minute program, though that was helping, we longed to join with the body of Christ to worship and praise our Savior and our God.

Bobby and I would talk…well, mostly I would tell him the longing of my heart.  I was missing being with God’s People and if winters were going to be like this one, then we needed to begin attending somewhere in town.  Many times during the week I would ask, “Could we just visit the Lutheran Church here in town?”  His answer would change the course of our lives.  “Sure, go check them out and we can visit.”

I wasn’t sure Bobby was ready to change churches just because I needed something closer to home but he heard my plea and I contacted Worship for Shut-Ins to see what church in town (there were two Lutheran ones we knew of) would be good for us to attend.  A few days later an email came that Faith Lutheran was a member of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, which we knew to be more faithful to God’s Word than the other Lutheran denomination.  I don’t remember if I left a voice mail or sent an email but I contacted Faith Lutheran and determined that the next Sunday we would visit. 

Well, that Sunday came and Bobby was under the weather so I got ready to go to church.  I walked in, took a seat in a pew near the back and sat waiting for the service to begin.  I looked around at the stained glass, the beautiful pulpit and altar in the front and begin going through the hymnal (which is actually a service book with the whole liturgy in it).  Pastor Kellerman approached me and asked if I was Nancy.  I said yes and told him that Bobby was ill so I was there alone that day.  He welcomed me and a few minutes later service began.

I was familiar with most of the order of service but was shocked when Pastor gave absolution to everyone there.  We had corporately confessed our sins as well as had a moment to privately confess them and then the pastor said that he stood in the place of Christ and forgave us.  I was shocked to say the least.  I must have missed this at the Lutheran Church we would visit in Brooklyn, which friends of ours attend, because this just stunned me.  It wasn’t so much that a man was standing there forgiving me as I could read in the service book the words he just said, it was that sense of hearing in my own ears that Christ had forgiven me all my sins that was a bit shocking.  In the Dutch reformed churches you are given assurance your sins are forgiven but here I was being told “Your sins are forgiven you…”  Writing this just doesn’t bring out the impact of that truth but it awakened me within to the reality of hearing from Christ “daughter, your sins are forgiven…”

As the service continued it seemed to focus completely on the work and words of Christ.  Now, the reformed also focus on Christ but there is always this sense that you have to check yourself to make sure you are in the faith.  While that is biblical, the proof is where the waters get muddied.  In the Dutch Reformed church you look at the fruit you’ve produced to make sure you are a Christian and that you have true faith.  However, in this service I was hearing that we are to look at God’s work in our Baptism and that this faith is then fed through the True Blood and True Body of our Lord Jesus in the Sacrament of the Altar, the Lord’s Supper.  In the sermon the pastor reminded us that even as believers we can never follow God’s Law perfectly because we are still sinners, however, Christ did it for us and then gives us Himself in the Body and Blood of the Lord’s Supper to sustain us.  The focus was on this work of Christ which is completely, totally, 100% outside of us.  Faith is given by God through the Sacraments and then sustained in us through Word and Sacrament.

As a reformed gal the Sacraments were not that powerful.  They were “signs and seals” of God’s Work but they were not actually God’s Work.  This service opened my ears to hear God’s call of Absolution and then how He serves us in the Sunday worship service.  As I left, though the Lord’s Supper was not given that Sunday, I was full.  Then, a young man, Dennis, came over, asked my name and if I were married.  I said I was and that my husband was home sick.  His immediate response was, “Oh, we will pray for him.  Hope to see you again next week.”  That greatly impressed me, almost as much as the service itself, though I have to be honest, I was not used to following along with the liturgy through the Service Book.  However, I went home filled with the preached Word of God.  As I shared with Bobby how the service was, the topic of the sermon and how friendly everyone was, he said we could go again next Sunday.

A few weeks later, early May, we received a phone call from the Pastor in Boise.    During the call I shared how we were visiting the Lutheran church in town as the winter had kept us away.  I will never forget his words, “Well, if you have to attend an imperfect church I suppose you have to…”  That struck me in two ways. 

First, throughout our becoming Reformed we were always told that Lutherans are our brothers and sisters in the faith, only that Luther didn’t go as far as he should in reforming the church and Calvin finished Luther’s work of reformation.  Second, was our pastor somehow telling us that Lutherans weren’t a good church? Or was he saying that Lutherans were imperfect while Reformed were perfect?  The first question confused me.  The latter irked me.  I shared this with Bobby and he wondered to me if our pastor thought only the Reformed are perfect? 

The following Sunday we both felt well and the weather was perfect.  The snow had melted, the ice broken up the streams flowing down the curbs and we could finally travel without feeling the highway was dangerous.  However, that phone call providentially redirected us to attend Faith Lutheran again.  We walked into Bible study this time and enjoyed hearing those around us answering questions, reading the texts and interacting with the Sunday School lesson for the day.  We were warmly welcomed and pastor spoke with us again a little more at length. 

The next week, Bobby was having surgery on his foot so we had shared this with some at church.  On the morning of the surgery the doctor had called in the prescriptions for pain and antibiotic medicines.  While at Wal-Mart two of the ladies from church spotted me and immediately asked if Bobby had the surgery already and then prayed with me.  Wow!  Was this a benefit of attending a church closer to home that I would meet fellow members at stores in town?  Having attended a church 50+ miles away, this did not happen.  The joy just overwhelmed me as I shared this with Bobby after his surgery was finished.

That week we decided we would try out the Wednesday Bible Study at Faith Lutheran.  When we arrived pastor gave us a binder with their study, which they’d been working on for about a year already:  The Reformation and Reformers.  We both love Church History and all things reformational and were excited to learn.  Once again we heard of the work of God, how He does all things regarding our salvation; of justification by faith alone through grace alone; of the sacraments; of how many in the reformation would begin denying the Presence of Christ in the True Body and Blood of the Sacrament; denying that baptism actually does something; forgive us of our sins and washes us clean.  I thought I knew reformation history but over the next several months I was learning more and more and the scriptural teachings were becoming clearer each day.  We made our home at Faith Lutheran, becoming members that September.  For us

Winter came…and changed everything. 

Gnesio Philippist Calvinists and Stuff

Oh the Calvinists. So much misinformation and bearing false witness. I'm not sure if their foolishness is intentionally misleading or just misinformed. I'll assume the latter to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Lutherans and Calvinists have been linked together in many ways since the days of the Protestant Reformation. Suffice it to say, from a Lutheran standpoint, we do not believe the same things as the Calvinists, nor are we very close to believing the same things; much less be in communion together.

Here is a prime example of Calvinist misinformation, which, if a person were to do an historical study of what actually happened, would immediately see that this misinformation is just plain wrong.

The recently deceased Reformed pastor and theologian R.C. Sproul stated the following:

While discussing the Reformed doctrine of predestination in his book Chosen by God, Sproul gives a list of theologians in history who affirm predestination and those who deny it. He states: "We cannot determine truth by counting noses. The great thinkers of the past can be wrong. But it is important for us to see that the Reformed doctrine of predestination was not invented by John Calvin. There is nothing in Calvin's view of predestination that was not earlier propounded by Luther and Augustine before him." (Sproul, p. 167) So far, so good. The early Luther, while as yet an Augustinian monk in the Roman Church, did hold to double predestination. No Lutheran should dispute that, since Luther is quite clear that he did. He (Luther) did, however, hold to a doctrine of single predestination later in life, which the Calvinists cannot bear to admit in many cases. However, that is not what this post is about. Rather, it is Sproul's next statement that throws up all sorts of misinformation.

He continues, "Later, Lutheranism did not follow Luther on this matter but Melanchthon, who altered his views after Luther's death. It is also noteworthy that in his famous treatise on theology, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin wrote sparingly on the subject. Luther wrote more about predestination than did Calvin." (Sproul, p. 167)

Nope. Wrong. Incorrect. The part of the statement to which I refer is Sproul's claim that Lutheranism followed Melanchthon and not Luther on this matter. This is simply false. It is well documented that this is not the case. The most important documentation that refutes Sproul's statement is actually our Lutheran Confessional documents the Epitome of the Formula of Concord and the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord. In fact, these documents were written in view of Melanchthon's compromising and synergism, among other controversies that had crept in to the Lutheran church.

Indeed, the Evangelical Catholic Church (Lutheran) did struggle with this issue in the 16th century. The same issue popped up in the United States in the 19th century, with the first president of the Missouri Synod, C.F.W. Walther, staunchly defending the classic and Confessional Lutheran stance on predestination and monergism.

Back to the 16th century. From the years 1555-1560, the synergistic controversy was fought in the Lutheran churches. The wavering and compromising Melanchthon had written that there are three reasons people are saved. Per Melanchthon, these three are the Holy Spirit, the Word of God, and the nonresistance of a person's will. It is this third reason put forth by Melanchthon that is a problem, since it teaches synergism.

Against Melanchthon, there were the Gnesio, or genuine, Lutherans, who espoused the biblical form of monergism, even opposing Melanchthon. Sadly, one of the Gnesio Lutherans in the monergism camp named Matthias Flacius, over-reacted and ended up teaching error regarding original sin, saying that original sin is the very substance of fallen humanity, which would cause God to be the author of sin.

Enter the Formula of Concord. The first two articles of both the Epitome and the Solid Declaration are on Original Sin and Free Will, respectively. The first article regarding Original Sin corrects Flacius' error while also strongly upholding the Biblical doctrine of Original Sin. The Epitome states, "We believe, teach, and confess that there is a distinction between man's nature and original sin. This applied not only when he was originally created by God pure and holy and without sin [Ge 1:31], but it also applies to the way we have that nature now after the fall. In other words, we distinguish between the nature itself (which even after the fall is and remains God's creature) and original sin. This distinction is as great as the distinction between God's work and the devil's work." (Ep: I, 2)

Here is a clear rejection of Flacius' error.

However, the Epitome also states, "On the other hand, we believe, teach, and confess that original sin is not a minor corruption. It is so deep a corruption of human nature that nothing healthy or uncorrupt remains in man's body or soul, in his inward or outward powers [Ro 3:10-12]" (Ep: I, 8)

The Epitome and the Solid Declaration have much more to say about Original Sin, but this will suffice for the purpose of this blog.

Likewise, the Formula of Concord also formally adopted Luther's -not Melanchthon's- view of the will of man.

"This is our teaching, faith, and confession on this subject: in spiritual matters the understanding and reason of mankind are <completely> blind and by their own powers understand nothing, as it is written in 1 Corinthians 2:14..." (Ep: II, 2)

"Likewise, we believe, teach, and confess that the unregenerate will of mankind is not only turned away from God, but also has become God's enemy. So it only has an inclination and desire for that which is evil and contrary to God, as it is written in Genesis 8:21, 'the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth.' Romans 8:7 says, 'The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.' Just as a dead body cannot raise itself to bodily, earthly life, so a person who by sin is spiritually dead cannot raise himself to spiritual life. For it is written in Ephesians 2:5, 'even when we were dead in our trespasses, He made us alive together with Christ.' And 2 Corinthians 3:5 says, 'Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God.'" (Ep: II, 3)

"For without his grace, and if He does not grant the increase, our willing and running, our planting, sowing, and watering (1 Co 3:5-7) -are all nothing. As Christ says <in John 15:5>, 'apart from Me you can do nothing.' With these brief words the Spirit denies free will its powers and ascribes everything to God's grace, in order that no one may boast before God (1 Co 1:29[2 Co 12:5, Jer 9:23]). (Ep: II, 6)

These Confessional statements are a clear rejection of Melanchthon's synergism and a clear affirmation of monergism. The Formula of Concord has much more to say on these topics, especially in the Solid Declaration. If the reader would like more information, go to http://www.bookofconcord.org or pick up a copy of the Book of Concord; the Epitome and the Solid Declaration are the last two Confessional documents in the book. I heartily recommend the Reader's Edition of the Book of Concord edited by Rev. Paul McCain. It can be found and purchased at http://www.cph.org.

Hence, it should be quite clear to the serious student of history and reader of the Lutheran Confessional statements that R.C. Sproul's statement that Lutherans follow Melanchthon and not Luther is in error. Frankly, we follow Scripture alone, but we happen to agree far more theologically with Dr. Martin Luther than we do with the wavering and compromising Philip Melanchthon after Luther's death.

I find it hard to believe that these statements and issues still exist in Calvinist circles and it makes me wonder why. Lutherans are not synergists, at least not Confessionally. Per Scripture, as well as the Book of Concord, we are monergists.

Not only that, but we also strongly affirm predestination. However, we affirm, with Scripture, that predestination and election pertain to believers, not unbelievers. If the reader would like to see what the Lutherans believe regarding predestination, read the Epitome XI and the Solid Declaration XI.

Nope, sorry R.C., we disagree with the post-Luther Melanchthon in the strongest manner possible.

+Pax+

Epitome VII: The Lord's Supper

Whether in the Holy Supper the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are truly and essentially present, are distributed with the bread and wine, and received with the mouth by all those who use this Sacrament, whether they be worthy or unworthy, godly or ungodly, believing or unbelieving; by the believing for consolation and life, by the unbelieving for judgment? The Sacramentarians say, No; we say, Yes.

For the explanation of this controversy it is to be noted in the beginning that there are two kinds of Sacramentarians. Some are gross Sacramentarians, who declare in plain (deutschen), clear words as they believe in their hearts, that in the Holy Supper nothing but bread and wine is present, and distributed and received with the mouth. Others, however, are subtle Sacramentarians, and the most injurious of all, who partly speak very speciously in our own words, and pretend that they also believe a true presence of the true, essential, living body and blood of Christ in the Holy Supper, however, that this occurs spiritually through faith. Nevertheless they retain under these specious words precisely the former gross opinion, namely, that in the Holy Supper nothing is present and received with the mouth except bread and wine. For with them the word spiritually means nothing else than the Spirit of Christ or the power of the absent body of Christ and His merit, which is present; but the body of Christ is in no mode or way present, except only above in the highest heaven, to which we should elevate ourselves into heaven by the thoughts of our faith, and there, not at all, however, in the bread and wine of the Holy Supper, should seek this body and blood [of Christ].

Epitome VII: 2-5

Here we have direct statements from the Epitome of the Formula of Concord. These statements deal with our rejection of the Sacramentarian stances on the Holy Supper, precisely because the Sacramentarian stances disagree with the words of Christ in Scripture.

Who then, in modern terms, are we talking about? The gross Sacramentarians that the Epitome speaks of would be Baptists, Pentecostals, and so on. These are the churches that flatly accept Zwingli's purely symbolic reading of the last will and testament of Christ.

The subtle Sacramentarians the Epitome speaks about are the Reformed Calvinists, who claim to hold to the Real Presence but in essence reject it. The Reformed hold that the body of Christ is in heaven and will remain there until the second coming. There is some truth to that, but they miss the point that Christ is God and can make His body present wherever He wills it. They also are in rejection of the biblical stance on the communication of the natures of Christ. Likewise, another Calvinist canard to be aware of is the statement that "the finite cannot contain the infinite." This statement is foolish, as when taken to its conclusion, denies the Incarnation of Christ.

"Most injurious of all" indeed, as the Epitome states. Sneaky and subtle in an attempt to retain catholicity, but still just as Sacramentarian as Zwingli and the modern day Baptists and Pentecostals when push comes to shove.

+Pax+

Semper Virgo: A Confessional Position

On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed Virgin, bore not a mere man, but, as the angel [Gabriel] testifies, such a man as is truly the Son of the most high God, who showed His divine majesty even in His mother's womb, inasmuch as He was born of a virgin, with her virginity inviolate. Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin. ~Solid Declaration VIII:24

The Book of Concord doesn't say a whole lot about Mary, the Mother of God. But what it does say, I assert, says quite a bit in itself.

Most Lutheran parishioners in the 21st century deny the historic Christian position of the Semper Virgo, or the perpetual virginity of Mary. A recent poll in a facebook group in which I am administrator bears this out. It seems that at the very least, 75% of Lutherans reject this position. I am estimating here, but this estimate is pretty conservative in my mind.

I am not one of these people. Perhaps even some of my blog mates disagree with me here. I am not certain where they all stand on this particular topic.

I contend that it is most likely that our Lutheran forbears were absolutely referring to the ever-virginity of Mary in the final clause of the quoted Solid Declaration above.

Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin.

The biggest reason I believe this to be so is that all of the early Reformers held to the Semper Virgo. Martin Luther certainly did.

The other reason I believe that the Solid Declaration is teaching the Semper Virgo is that it makes no sense whatsoever to include the final clause "...and nevertheless remained a virgin" if they are meaning to talk about something else. It just doesn't make any sense that they mean something like "she remained a virgin until after she had borne Christ." Since they have already strongly asserted the Virgin Birth, they really do not need to throw this clause in there unless they are referring to something more, such as the Semper Virgo.

Certainly I do recognize that there are arguments in the other direction, and both sides in this discussion use Scripture to support their stances, but that is a discussion for another day.

Yet, if the Semper Virgo is indeed the stance our Confessions take, should we not be believing it?

As for now, this will suffice.

This Confessional Lutheran blogger affirms the Semper Virgo.

+Pax+

Reformed is a Misnomer

It's no secret that the Reformed Church in all of its stripes claims catholicity and claims to be a Reformation of the church catholic. I do not, however, think these claims are valid, for numerous doctrinal reasons.

First, let us say that there are three major ideas in play here. First is the idea of apostolic succession. The Church of Rome banks their entire existence on the succession of the Papacy from St. Peter all the way down to Pope Francis. Other churches base this concept on the laying on of hands traced from the Apostles. Second is the history of the church and the ecumenical councils. All churches that claim catholicity (mainly RCC, Orthodox, Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican) must by default have interest in the councils. Likewise, we have the similar topic of historical church practice and doctrine. Finally, we have the idea of apostolic doctrinal succession via the Scriptures.

I posit that the Reformed Church has none of these. They don't care for apostolic succession. Many churches don't, and nowhere does the Scripture say that the true church is the one who has the Pope or carries on via the laying on of hands, no matter how many other doctrinal errors they have. So, we won't hold that one against them.

The Reformed Church also is not catholic in the sense of church history and the ecumenical councils. Sure, St. Augustine held to a form of double predestination, but the council that the Reformed like the most (Council of Orange, 529) actually sharply rebukes and declares heretical the doctrine of double predestination. And it upholds in very strong wording the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, which is something the Reformed reject, mainly due to their stances on election, atonement, and perseverance. To put it bluntly, the church catholic throughout the years did not hold to limited atonement or perseverance of the saints. Likewise, that same church catholic throughout history has strongly affirmed baptismal regeneration as well as the real bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist, which are two things the Reformed Church rejects. The church councils and history of doctrine and practice are definitely not in favor of the Reformed Church. In short, when pushed, the Reformed Church must in effect say that the church throughout the years simply did not have it right concerning these things.

Finally, we have the idea of doctrinal succession. This idea ties in directly with the second idea. Does the Reformed Church have correct doctrinal succession all the way back to the Apostles? The answer to this also is no. Historically, the church catholic did not teach the strong distinctives of Reformed Theology. In fact, the church catholic actually taught against some of these things. Nobody taught limited atonement, because it's not in the Scriptures. Everyone taught baptismal regeneration and the Real Presence, because they are in the Scriptures. Nobody taught irresistible grace only for the elect by a secret inward call, because that is not in the Scriptures.

The Reformed like to call us back to Scripture, and this is indeed an excellent thing. Yet, they are calling us back to a Calvinistic Systematic reading of the Scriptures, which end up being interpretations of numerous passages that nobody in church history posited for 1500 years. This is not an excellent thing.

Hence, the term "Reformed" Church is a misnomer. The Reformed did not Reform the church, they started something completely new and have interpretations on core theological issues that were new to the 16th century. Not to mention the offspring of the classical Reformed Church which includes the Arminians, Wesleyans, and all stripes of Baptists, all three of which are far from historical catholic Christianity. The catholicity is simply not there, save for one aberrant doctrine taught by St. Augustine. As much as the Reformed claim that they are the true Reformation of the church catholic, they simply are not. It's unfathomable to think that the church catholic was simply wrong on so many core doctrines for 1500+ years.

The Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, errs on the other side of things. By declaring Herself infallible in matters of dogma in 1870, Rome has rendered Herself unreformable altogether and simply cannot call Herself back to the history, catholicity, and Scriptures of the church where She has erred grievously. To do so would be to render Her self-proclaimed infallibility an error in itself. This is not good either. The church catholic must always be brought back to the Word of God as Her infallible truth, being guided by the great Creeds, Confessions, and history of the church. There is hope the Reformed can still do this on core doctrinal topics, but for Rome, that ship has sailed.

There is much more to say about this topic, but from where I stand, these are some of the core issues. More reasons to be Lutheran.

+Pax+

Augsburg Confession IV: Of Justification

Justification is the big topic for the Reformers. Here the Confession dissents from some Roman Catholic thought of the period, which culminated in the Council of Trent formally rejecting the Augsburg Confession on this point.

Augsburg Confession IV

Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4. 

So we see in this short Confessional statement the Lutheran commitment to justification through faith alone, received passively by us as a gift of God for Christ's sake and because of Christ's merits. We also see here the clear rejection of justification by works or merit.

Ultimately, while indulgences jump started Luther and drove his hammer into the door at the Wittenberg church, justification was the most important topic in the Reformation. The question as to how a person can be right with God is a pretty big deal. Rome answered that a person contributes to their right standing with God through their actions and good deeds. Luther flatly rejected this, saying that justification is a free gift given by God by His grace alone.

Here is the topic that we must continue to fight for in the church and continues to be the article on which the church stands or falls. Either Christ justifies us freely for His sake and we are receivers of this gift or we are something else entirely.

Let us not, however, downplay the importance of good works in the Christian life. Martin Luther never rejected that. He was no antinomian. Likewise today, we still have the same Confessions and we certainly uphold good works in the Christian life.

For more reading on this topic check out the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, IV. It's a long read, but it's worth going through. This is the Confessional response the Lutherans made to Rome's rejection of Article IV of the Augsburg Confession.

Augsburg Confession III: The Son of God

Good Friday is a good time to post our third installment on the Augsburg Confession. After all, it was God the Son who suffered and died for our sins on the cross. It was not the Father nor the Spirit who suffered and died. And on to the Confession.

Also they teach that the Word, that is, the Son of God, did assume the human nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary, so that there are two natures, the divine and the human, inseparably enjoined in one Person, one Christ, true God and true man, who was born of the Virgin Mary, truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, that He might reconcile the Father unto us, and be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men.
 
He also descended into hell, and truly rose again the third day; afterward He ascended into heaven that He might sit on the right hand of the Father, and forever reign and have dominion over all creatures, and sanctify them that believe in Him, by sending the Holy Ghost into their hearts, to rule, comfort, and quicken them, and to defend them against the devil and the power of sin.
 
The same Christ shall openly come again to judge the quick and the dead, etc., according to the Apostles' Creed.

Here our Confession of faith takes full aim at orthodox Christology. Of course, the Augsburg does not go into the minutiae of every theological detail here, but suffice it to say, it says a lot in just a couple sentences.

We affirm that there is but one Christ and that Christ is a person. His two natures are inseparably enjoined, as the Confession says. This is to say quite simply that Christ is fully God and fully man. Not only so, but He has also received His human nature from the Blessed Virgin Mary.

We affirm that He truly suffered, He really died, and was really buried in a tomb. With all the Christian Church for 2000 years, we affirm these things.

He descended into hell and proclaimed His victory over sin and death, and then rose again from the dead. He then ascended and sits at the right hand of the Father and has dominion over everyone and everything.

This section of the Augsburg was nothing more than a re-affirmation of orthodox Christology. The Lutherans were simple affirming that they are (and we are) Catholic. There was no dispute with the Papacy and the Roman Church regarding the Christ. Hence, the Roman bishops accepted this article as true in their response to the Augsburg.

Here we stand. We teach nothing new.

Grace and Peace

Augsburg Confession II: Of Original Sin

I will begin by first repeating what Andrew Taylor said in the first post of this series: “The original unaltered Augsburg Confession is, without question, one of the great Confessions of the Church.” In fact, I will go further and state that the Augsburg Confession is central to being Lutheran, it is the heart of our confessional documents. In essence it is our answer to what it means to be Catholic, or rather what the Catholic faith is. 

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

Augsburg Confession, Article II: Of Original Sin

Also they [our churches] teach that since the fall of Adam all men begotten in the natural way are born with sin, that is, without the fear of God, without trust in God, and with concupiscence; and that this disease, or vice of origin, is truly sin, even now condemning and bringing eternal death upon those not born again through Baptism and the Holy Ghost.

They condemn the Pelagians and others who deny that original depravity is sin, and who, to obscure the glory of Christ's merit and benefits, argue that man can be justified before God by his own strength and reason. 

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

This article is of utmost importance in controversies surrounding a great many topics such as justification, predestination, grace, etc. If one does not confess, teach and believe properly concerning Original Sin there is no telling what further errors they will encounter. It is for this reason that it is the second article of this confession, and precedes the article concerning Christ. Melanchthon was concerned with addressing two groups in particular: the Pelagians and the Romanists. 

The former wrongly taught that man can by his own strength and reason can be justified before God. However, while the Romanists agree with some of what we teach they reject two important points. First, that all men are born without the fear of God and without the trust of God. Second, they deny that concupiscence [our inclination to sin] remains after Holy Baptism. It is important here to understand that a lack of fear of God and trust is indeed sin, as is concupiscence which were both inherited to us through Adam. Our Original Depravity (or Natural Depravity) is a result of this fall, on account of which corruption all men are born guilty, children of wrath, and unable to obey the law of God.

Rome and the Pelagians in some respect are different sides of the same coin on the topic of works. Both see justification in terms of human strength and reason, but the Romanist sees this in terms of the sacrament of penance. The Romanist requires penance for all mortal sins (actual sins) that flow out of concupiscence. Penance (or absolution) is only granted by the priest to the penitent (the truly sorrowful). It is here that the Lutheran and the Romanist differ: for the former absolution is received by faith in believing they are forgiven, while for the latter, it is through penance. 

As we discuss other articles of the Christian faith it is important for the reader to remember that Original Sin is very important to understanding the others. When engaging other Christians (especially Roman Catholics) studying the Augsburg and the Apology will be of utmost importance for understanding Tridentine [Trent] Roman Catholic doctrines.

The next post in this series will be addressing our confession of the Son of God

Note: When I state that Roman Catholics see justification in terms of human strength and reason this is post-baptismal justification within their theological framework and modern Roman Catholics would understand such works as flowing from grace, but still a cooperative effort especially in respect to the sacrament of penance. Lutherans understand grace as a declaritive gift received from the cross while Roman Catholics see it as infused (at Baptism) where Original Sin is cleansed and our nature is changed making us more able to do good and overcome evil.

Augsburg Confession I: Of God

The original unaltered Augsburg Confession is, without question, one of the great Confessions of the Church. It also happens to be the chief Confession in the Lutheran Church. With this in mind, we are going to go through the Augsburg part by part here at the blog. Our commentary will be kept to a minimum and the Augsburg will be allowed to speak for itself. We begin:

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

Augsburg Confession, Article I: Of God

Our Churches, with common consent, do teach that the decree of the Council of Nicaea concerning the Unity of the Divine Essence and concerning the Three Persons, is true and to be believed without any doubting; that is to say, there is one Divine Essence which is called and which is God: eternal, without body, without parts, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness, the Maker and Preserver of all things, visible and invisible; and yet there are three Persons, of the same essence and power, who also are coeternal, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. And the term "person" they use as the Fathers have used it, to signify, not a part or quality in another, but that which subsists of itself.
 
They condemn all heresies which have sprung up against this article, as the Manichaeans, who assumed two principles, one Good and the other Evil: also the Valentinians, Arians, Eunomians, Mohammedans, and all such. They condemn also the Samosatenes, old and new, who, contending that there is but one Person, sophistically and impiously argue that the Word and the Holy Ghost are not distinct Persons, but that "Word" signifies a spoken word, and "Spirit" signifies motion created in things.

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

The Confession begins with a formal statement about God. What should be abundantly clear to any reader is that the framers of the Augsburg Confession were Catholic. Luther, Melanchthon, and the others who were influential in the Confession were not revolutionaries, despite what some people within Rome would have you believe. They had no desire to split the Western Church, nor did they leave joyfully.

The Augsburg Confession begins with a confessional statement regarding the Trinity. As you can see, the Augsburg is very Catholic in its formulation. To put it bluntly, the Reformers desired to show that they were not creating something new. Lutheranism, as it has come to be known, is not a new religion or sect within (or not within) Christianity. Lutheranism is nothing more (and nothing less) than the Catholic faith once and for all handed down.

Here in AC I, we see nothing less than classical Nicene Orthodoxy. We do not see any new Christology invented, nor do we see any support of any ancient heresies. Of course, the Evangelical Catholic Church (aka Lutheranism) fully affirms the three great ecumenical creeds. In fact, in the Book of Concord, the three ecumenical creeds are the first things in there, even before the Augsburg Confession.

So we begin by seeing the proper starting point, and by seeing that the Evangelical Catholic Church is nothing new, nor is it a sect that split the Church.

And so the framers of the Augsburg begin, rightfully so, with the Triune God.