Augsburg Confession: Article VII Discussion

BelindaP

Senior Contributor
Sep 21, 2006
9,214
711
Indianapolis
✟20,888.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
As I mentioned in another thread, I'm going through the Augsburg Confession, and I'm struggling with a few of the articles. This is one of them. For reference, it reads:
Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered.
And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. As Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph. 4:5-6.

I've bolded the part I'm having a problem with. What this seems to say to me is that churches in which the sacraments are administered incorrectly aren't part of the one holy Church. Does that mean to say that denominations that don't believe in the True Presence aren't Christian? What about those where the gospel is taught incorrectly, such as in the Reformed tradition?
 

Studeclunker

Senior Member
Dec 26, 2006
2,325
162
People's Socialist Soviet Republic Of California
✟10,816.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
As I mentioned in another thread, I'm going through the Augsburg Confession, and I'm struggling with a few of the articles. This is one of them. For reference, it reads:
[/font]
I've bolded the part I'm having a problem with. What this seems to say to me is that churches in which the sacraments are administered incorrectly aren't part of the one holy Church. Does that mean to say that denominations that don't believe in the True Presence aren't Christian? What about those where the gospel is taught incorrectly, such as in the Reformed tradition?

May I be so bold as to recommend that you google the 'colloqy of Marburg'? Or, to be more clear, the conferrence of Marburg. It was here that the decision to remain separate from the reformed and Protestant churches was made. Luther didn't recognize these organizations as even Christian. Leaves one to wonder what he'd be saying about the ELCA presently...:scratch:

So, I suppose the answer to your question would be, no, Luther didn't recognize the AnaBaptists, Reformed, Calvanists, etc, etc, etc... as entirely Christian. Some of them, the AnaBaptists for example, he declared flatly non-christian.
 
Upvote 0

filosofer

Senior Veteran
Feb 8, 2002
4,752
290
Visit site
✟6,913.00
Faith
Lutheran
It might be better to provide quotes from Luther (and others) to that effect since those are wide ranging accusations.

Luther did say that Zwingli and his fellow attendees were of a "different spirit," and refused the right hand of fellowship. In other words, he did not claim they were not Christian, only that they did not agree in significant areas of doctrine. Luther said to Zwingli: "I am astonished that you wish to consider me as your brother. It shows clearly that you do not attach much importance to your doctrine."

 
Upvote 0

filosofer

Senior Veteran
Feb 8, 2002
4,752
290
Visit site
✟6,913.00
Faith
Lutheran
BTW, the 15th article at Marburg read like this:

And although at present we are not agreed on the question whether the real body and blood of Christ are coporally present in the bread and wine, yet both parties shall cherish Christian charity for one another, so far as the conscience of each will permit; and both parties will earnestly implore Almighty God to strengthen us by His Spirit in the true understanding. Amen.
All the participants signed the confession--including Luther and Zwingli.

 
Upvote 0

BigNorsk

Contributor
Nov 23, 2004
6,736
815
65
✟18,457.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
If you are asking if Lutherans think only Lutherans are Christians that is completely not correct.

The term church is used in different senses. The invisible church is made up of all believers. They occur in many places.

The question here is where is the visible church. Where does one go to receive God's grace? What marks does one look for to recognize a Christian church.

The emphasis is actually more on the positive, this is how you recognize the church rather than on the negative they aren't and they aren't and they aren't.

I don't think it would be historically correct to say that Lutherans claim any error means a church is not Christian. The question would be how many forms of the gospel may a church despise before it is not longer the Christian church? I would guess there is some disagreement in that, but you don't see Lutherans running around and claim everything is not a Christian church. We probably should be actually a bit more active in that because it's pretty clear that some who use the name Christian have nothing in the way of the gospel. They preach a different gospel, they have no sacraments. Clearly not Christian churches even if they chant the mantra, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.

Marv
 
Upvote 0

DaRev

Well-Known Member
Apr 18, 2006
15,117
716
✟19,002.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
As I mentioned in another thread, I'm going through the Augsburg Confession, and I'm struggling with a few of the articles. This is one of them. For reference, it reads:
[/font]
I've bolded the part I'm having a problem with. What this seems to say to me is that churches in which the sacraments are administered incorrectly aren't part of the one holy Church. Does that mean to say that denominations that don't believe in the True Presence aren't Christian? What about those where the gospel is taught incorrectly, such as in the Reformed tradition?

No, it doesn't mean that they aren't "Christian". Only God Himself knows who the true faithful are, and we believe that they exists everywhere. The passage refers to the "Church" which is the assembly of Christians. There may well be true Christians in those heterodox organizations, but the Church is not present apart from the pure Gospel and the proper administration of the Sacraments.
 
Upvote 0

TheCosmicGospel

Regular Member
Feb 3, 2007
654
70
✟8,670.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I'm not trying to get anybody an infraction here, but is that you believe? If so, then only Lutherans would be the one true church. That isn't what is taught in my church.

Perhaps to carry the conversation, what does your church teach? The Lutheran Church teaches that there is only One True Church. It is recognized by certain signs. How does your church recognize what the true Church is? What signs are important to you? Do you believe everyone who calls thelmselves a christian is really one? That would sure make it easier.

Not even being just a member of a Lutheran Church guarantees anything.

Peace,

Cos
 
Upvote 0

synger

Confessional Liturgical Lutheran
Site Supporter
Sep 12, 2006
14,537
1,565
59
✟44,856.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You also may want to look at the Defense of the Augsburg Confession for that section, which clarifies what they meant (sometimes in very long, dense, head-scratching detail). It explains that it is indeed talking about the invisible Church, hidden among the visible church.

Paragraph 17 is typically dense reading, but here is one of the main points (emphasis mine):

Neither, indeed, are we dreaming of a Platonic state, as some wickedly charge, but we say that this Church exists, namely, the truly believing and righteous men scattered throughout the whole world. [We are speaking not of an imaginary Church, which is to be found nowhere; but we say and know certainly that this Church, wherein saints live, is and abides truly upon earth; namely, that some of God's children are here and there in all the world, in various kingdoms, islands, lands, and cities, from the rising of the sun to its setting, who have truly learned to know Christ and His Gospel.] And we add the marks: the pure doctrine of the Gospel [the ministry or the Gospel] and the Sacraments. And this Church is properly the pillar of the truth, 1 Tim. 3:15. For it retains the pure Gospel, and, as Paul says, 1 Cor. 3:11 [: "Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ"], the foundation, i.e., the true knowledge of Christ and faith. Although among these [in the body which is built upon the true foundation, i.e., upon Christ and faith] there are also many weak persons, who build upon the foundation stubble that will perish, i.e., certain unprofitable opinions [some human thoughts and opinions], which, nevertheless, because they do not overthrow the foundation, are both forgiven them 21] and also corrected. And the writings of the holy Fathers testify that sometimes even they built stubble upon the foundation, but that this did not overthrow their faith.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BelindaP

Senior Contributor
Sep 21, 2006
9,214
711
Indianapolis
✟20,888.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It still seems rather clear to me that Luther and his compatriots believed that the one, true Church consisted only of those people who had the gospel and the sacraments correct. There isn't much room there to say otherwise. It's clear that they didn't consider the Anabaptists to be Christians.

Yet, I was baptized in a Church of Christ and my baptism was considered valid because it was done in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. If it wasn't Christian, then how could that be so?
 
Upvote 0

DaRev

Well-Known Member
Apr 18, 2006
15,117
716
✟19,002.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
It still seems rather clear to me that Luther and his compatriots believed that the one, true Church consisted only of those people who had the gospel and the sacraments correct. There isn't much room there to say otherwise. It's clear that they didn't consider the Anabaptists to be Christians.

Could you direct me to the writing where Luther makes this point?

Yet, I was baptized in a Church of Christ and my baptism was considered valid because it was done in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. If it wasn't Christian, then how could that be so?

A baptism with water in the name of the Triune God certainly is valid regardless of where it's done because it contains the pure word combined with water as Christ instituted it.
 
Upvote 0

BelindaP

Senior Contributor
Sep 21, 2006
9,214
711
Indianapolis
✟20,888.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Could you direct me to the writing where Luther makes this point?
That's what the article seems to say to me.
1. If a person isn't a member of the one, true Church, then they certainly wouldn't be Christian.
2. The article says that only people who have the gospel and the sacraments right are members of the one, true Church.
3. The Anabaptists are outright condemned in the article.

Therefore, they wouldn't be considered Christians.
 
Upvote 0

synger

Confessional Liturgical Lutheran
Site Supporter
Sep 12, 2006
14,537
1,565
59
✟44,856.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Keep in mind that that Anabaptists of that time had more heterodox doctrines than just credobaptism and a repudiation of infant baptism... though that one was the main one they are identified with, and the one main doctrine that reformers and Catholics alike condemned them for. Not only did they teach that baptism was just a symbol (and thus, something WE do...which then makes credobaptism make more sense to them), but they also taught that communion was just a symbol or memorial. Some went so far as to deny the Incarnation, but that was an outlier even among Anabaptists.

See paragraph 258. Book of Concord

As to the paragraph of the Augsburg Confession that we're looking at, I can see where you could read a condemnation of Anabaptist doctrine in it. However, I don't think it's clearly there. The focus is much more on the difference between the visible and invisible churches.

If you want to see what the reformers thought of the Anabaptists, go rather to the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord. There's a section that specifically deals with "Other Factions, Heresies, and Sects" and the first one is, you guessed it, the Anabaptists. Yet, baptism isn't the first issue Lutherans have against them... it is their focus on works for salvation (the same problem we have with Catholics and Evangelicals today!). Then baptism, then issues with the separation of Christians from government/magistrate life. Etc. Here they are:

9] Namely, for instance, the erroneous, heretical doctrines of the Anabaptists, which are to be tolerated and allowed neither in the Church, nor in the commonwealth, nor in domestic life, when they teach:


10] 1. That our righteousness before God consists not only in the sole obedience and merit of Christ, but in our renewal and our own piety in which we walk before God; which they, for the most part, base upon their own peculiar ordinances and self-chosen spirituality, as upon a new sort of monkery.


11] 2. That children who are not baptized are not sinners before God, but righteous and innocent, and thus are saved in their innocency without Baptism, which they do not need. Accordingly, they deny and reject the entire doctrine concerning original sin and what belongs to it.


12] 3. That children are not to be baptized until they have attained the use of reason and can confess their faith themselves.


13] 4. That the children of Christians, since they have been born of Christian and believing parents, are holy and the children of God even without and before Baptism; and for this reason they neither attach much importance to the baptism of children nor encourage it, contrary to the express words of the promise, which extends only to those who keep God's covenant and do not despise it, Gen. 17:9.


14] 5. That a congregation [church] in which sinners are still found is no true Christian assembly.


15] 6. That no sermon should be heard or attended in those churches in which the papal masses have previously been said.


16] 7. That no one should have anything to do with those ministers of the Church who preach the holy Gospel according to the Confession, and rebuke the errors of baptists; also, that no one should serve or in any way labor for them, but should flee from and shun them as perverters of God's Word.


17] 8. That under the New Testament the magistracy is not a godly estate.


18] 9. That a Christian cannot with a good, inviolate conscience hold the office of magistrate.


19] 10. That a Christian cannot without injury to conscience use the office of the magistracy in matters that may occur [when the matter so demands] against the wicked, neither can its subjects appeal to its power.


20] 11. That a Christian cannot with a good conscience take an oath before a court, nor with an oath do homage to his prince or hereditary sovereign.


21] 12. That magistrates cannot without injury to conscience inflict capital punishment upon evil-doers.


22] 13. That a Christian cannot with a good conscience hold or possess any property, but is in duty bound to devote it to the common treasury.


23] 14. That a Christian cannot with a good conscience be an inn-keeper, merchant, or cutler.


24] 15. That married persons may be divorced on account of faith [diversity of religion], and that the one may abandon the other, and be married to another of his own faith.


25] 16. That Christ did not assume His flesh and blood of the Virgin Mary, but brought them with Him from heaven.


26] 17. That He is not true, essential God either, but only has more and higher gifts and glory than other men.


27] And still more articles of like kind; for they are divided among themselves into many bands [sects], and one has more and another fewer errors, and thus their entire sect is in reality nothing but a new kind of monkery.
 
Upvote 0

wildboar

Newbie
Jan 1, 2009
701
61
Visit site
✟16,141.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
There is a blog devoted to the Book of Concord that you might find helpful. Here is the roundtable discussion about the article: Concordia | The Lutheran Confessions: Roundtable 8: The Church

In it, Rev. McCain quotes Sasse as saying:

"This character of the congregation [that is, being "Church"] called by the Word and Sacrament is not lost because it is weak in faith, because some in it are beginners, or even "false Christians and hypocrites", so long as it yet possesses the pure Word and the pure Sacraments....And this Church is present wherever in Christendom, in all congregations and all denominations, where the Gospel is not so obscured and the Sacraments are not so disfigured that Christ the Lord is no longer present in them." (*same paragraph* p.83-84)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BelindaP

Senior Contributor
Sep 21, 2006
9,214
711
Indianapolis
✟20,888.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Keep in mind that that Anabaptists of that time had more heterodox doctrines than just credobaptism and a repudiation of infant baptism... though that one was the main one they are identified with, and the one main doctrine that reformers and Catholics alike condemned them for. Not only did they teach that baptism was just a symbol (and thus, something WE do...which then makes credobaptism make more sense to them), but they also taught that communion was just a symbol or memorial. Some went so far as to deny the Incarnation, but that was an outlier even among Anabaptists.
That's exactly the doctrine I grew up with. We didn't believe in any sacraments, only ordinances. We completely rejected infant baptism and the Real Presence. That's fairly standard doctrine among evangelicals.

As to the paragraph of the Augsburg Confession that we're looking at, I can see where you could read a condemnation of Anabaptist doctrine in it. However, I don't think it's clearly there. The focus is much more on the difference between the visible and invisible churches.
Article XVII actually uses these words: "They condemn the Anabaptists..."

If you want to see what the reformers thought of the Anabaptists, go rather to the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord. There's a section that specifically deals with "Other Factions, Heresies, and Sects" and the first one is, you guessed it, the Anabaptists. Yet, baptism isn't the first issue Lutherans have against them... it is their focus on works for salvation (the same problem we have with Catholics and Evangelicals today!). Then baptism, then issues with the separation of Christians from government/magistrate life. Etc. Here they are:
Again, that's what I grew up with, so I'm very familiar with it.
 
Upvote 0

BelindaP

Senior Contributor
Sep 21, 2006
9,214
711
Indianapolis
✟20,888.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
There is a blog devoted to the Book of Concord that you might find helpful. Here is the roundtable discussion about the article: Concordia | The Lutheran Confessions: Roundtable 8: The Church

In it, Rev. McCain quotes Sasse as saying:

"This character of the congregation [that is, being "Church"] called by the Word and Sacrament is not lost because it is weak in faith, because some in it are beginners, or even "false Christians and hypocrites", so long as it yet possesses the pure Word and the pure Sacraments....And this Church is present wherever in Christendom, in all congregations and all denominations, where the Gospel is not so obscured and the Sacraments are not so disfigured that Christ the Lord is no longer present in them." (*same paragraph* p.83-84)
This is interesting, and it raises a point. What does it take to disfigure the sacraments to where Christ the Lord is no longer present in it?
Omitting the words of institution?
Considering it to be an ordinance rather than a sacrament?
Not discerning the Real Presence?
Having it blessed/administered by women or by those not called to do so?

I know it seems I am picking gnats, but I'm going to have an incredibly hard time accepting an article that says that people have to have their doctrine all in order to be considered Christians.
 
Upvote 0

wildboar

Newbie
Jan 1, 2009
701
61
Visit site
✟16,141.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I think that confessional Lutheran churches generally believe that if the real presence is denied then you do not have the Sacrament of the Altar and Christ's body and blood are not present. So Lutherans would believe that Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox although they attach false teachings to the Sacrament of the Altar still have it. Baptists and Reformed would not.

Lutherans generally also regard baptism as valid as long as it is done using the Trinitarian formula. I believe most would also consider baptism "in the name of Jesus" as valid as long as it was done by a church that confesses the Trinity.

The Gospel is present wherever the Scriptures are read but it can get severely obscured. Official Roman Catholic teaching distorts the Gospel.

I don't know if you can even make such a scale from "true" to "false" or how you would go about that but on an institutional level (local churches may vary) I think that by these standards the Roman Catholic Church may be a truer church than ELCA.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums