What if the times were like
this: Lutherans are saying that while there may have been historic merit
in the Lutheran Confessions, the fact is the old doctrines and
practices no longer make sense to people in our day, and the church must
change to fit the times, adopting new measures if it is to draw people
to Christ, and leave the old things to former times, things like liturgy
and sacraments and concern for doctrine.
Huh?
Aren't the times exactly like this? Well, thing is, the times I have in mind in this
description are two centuries ago, Lutheranism in the US in the 1800s!
If they sound just like our times, and they do, that is because, to
borrow Bishop Sheen's phrase, there are no new errors, just old errors
with new labels, so they look new to us and take us in.
The
fact is, the circumstances and condition of Lutheranism at the time of
the formation of our beloved synod are exactly those of our own. And now
with the added twist that in our times even within our beloved synod
one hears the very same old errors, now with new labels, the synod was
formed to counter, and instead offer solid, orthodox Lutheranism grounded in the
Confessions of the Lutheran faith, our Concordia, so that not only the
book but the synod may present in our teaching and liturgical practice
with one heart, as the name Concordia means, the faith of Christ
correctly stated in them.
So
on this "feast day" of CFW Walther, our first synodical president,
instead of offering something about him, I'm offering his own words about that
which he was all about offering. Well, his own words translated from German, with a few notes from me
indicated like [this].
We
know and firmly hold that the character, the soul of Lutheranism, is
not found in outward observances but in the pure doctrine. If a
congregation had the most beautiful ceremonies in the very best order,
but did not have the pure doctrine, it would be anything but Lutheran.
We have from the beginning spoken earnestly of good ceremonies, not as
though the important thing were outward forms, but rather to make use of
our liberty in these things. For true Lutherans know that although one
does not have to have these things (because there is no divine command
to have them), one may nevertheless have them because good ceremonies
are lovely and beautiful and are not forbidden in the Word of God.
Therefore the Lutheran church has not abolished "outward ornaments,
candles, altar cloths, statues and similar ornaments," [AP XXIV] but has
left them free. The sects proceeded differently because they did not
know how to distinguish between what is commanded, forbidden, and left
free in the Word of God. We remind only of the mad actions of Carlstadt
and of his adherents and followers in Germany and in Switzerland. We on
our part have retained the ceremonies and church ornaments in order to
prove by our actions that we have a correct understanding of Christian
liberty, and know how to conduct ourselves in things which are neither
commanded nor forbidden by God.
We
refuse to be guided by those who are offended by our church customs. We
adhere to them all the more firmly when someone wants to cause us to
have a guilty conscience on account of them. The Roman antichristendom
enslaves poor consciences by imposing human ordinances on them with the
command: "You must keep such and such a thing!"; the sects enslave
consciences by forbidding and branding as sin what God has left free.
Unfortunately, also many of our Lutheran Christians are still without a
true understanding of their liberty. This is demonstrated by their
aversion to ceremonies.
It
is truly distressing that many of our fellow Christians find the
difference between Lutheranism and Roman Catholicism in outward things.
It is a pity and dreadful cowardice when a person sacrifices the good
ancient church customs to please the deluded American denominations just
so they won’t accuse us of being Roman Catholic! Indeed! Am I to be
afraid of a Methodist [on what "Methodist" means here, see the note
below], who perverts the saving Word, or be ashamed in the matter of my
good cause, and not rather rejoice that they can tell by our ceremonies
that I do not belong to them?
It
is too bad that such entirely different ceremonies prevail in our
Synod, and that no liturgy at all has yet been introduced in many
congregations. The prejudice especially against the responsive chanting
of pastor and congregations is of course still very great with many
people — this does not, however, alter the fact that it is very foolish.
The pious church father Augustine said, "Qui cantat, bis orat–he who
sings prays twice."
This
finds its application also in the matter of the liturgy. Why should
congregations or individuals in the congregation want to retain their
prejudices? How foolish that would be! For first of all it is clear from
the words of St. Paul (1 Cor. 14:16)
that the congregations of his time had a similar custom. It has been
the custom in the Lutheran Church for 250 years [this is now about 400
years]. It creates a solemn impression on the Christian mind when one is
reminded by the their joy in such a lovely manner.
We
are not insisting that there be uniformity in perception or feeling or
taste among all believing Christians-neither dare anyone demand that all
be minded as he. Nevertheless, it remains true that the Lutheran
liturgy distinguishes Lutheran worship from the worship of other
churches to such an extent that the houses of worship of the latter look
like lecture halls in which the hearers are merely addressed or
instructed, while our churches are in truth houses of prayer in which
Christians serve the great God publicly before the world.
Uniformity
of ceremonies (perhaps according to the Saxon Church order published by
the Synod, which is the simplest among the many Lutheran church orders)
would be highly desirable because of its usefulness. A poor slave of
the pope finds one and same form of service, no matter where he goes, by
which he at once recognizes his church.
With
us it is different. Whoever comes from Germany without a true
understanding of the doctrine often has to look for his church for a
long time, and many have already been lost to our church because of this
search [just as true now of those born right here but also without such
an understanding]. How different it would be if the entire Lutheran
church had a uniform form of worship! This would, of course, first of
all yield only an external advantage, however, one which is by no means
unimportant. Has not many a Lutheran already kept his distance from the
sects because he saw at the Lord’s Supper they broke the bread instead
of distributing wafers?
The
objection: "What would be the use of uniformity of ceremonies?" was
answered with the counter question, "What is the use of a flag on the
battlefield? Even though a soldier cannot defeat the enemy with it, he
nevertheless sees by the flag where he belongs. We ought not to refuse
to walk in the footsteps of our fathers. They were so far removed from
being ashamed of the good ceremonies that they publicly confess in the
passage quoted: "It is not true that we do away with all such external
ornaments".
(C.F.W.
Walther, Explanation of Thesis XVIII, D, Adiaphora, of the book The
True Visible Church, delivered at St. Paul’s Lutheran Church in
Indianapolis, Indiana, beginning August 9, 1871, at the 16th Central
District Convention, translated by Fred Kramer, printed in Essays for
the Church [CPH: 1992], I:193-194).
Note.
His reference to "Methodist" should not be confused with the present
United Methodist Church, a body formed in 1968 from the union of the
Evangelical United Brethren and the The Methodist Church, which itself
was formed in 1939 from a reunion of three groups originating in the
Methodist Episcopal Church. However, the conflation of the Holiness
Movement with the Social Gospel is characteristic throughout, with the
emphasis on personal feeling of sanctification in living still prominent
in "evangelical" churches to-day and Pietism in our own history.
Hat tip to Pastor Paul T McCain, on whose excellent Cyberbrethren blog I saw this excerpt.
No comments:
Post a Comment