Good 'OL LCMS

[PreachersWife2004]

Well, that does it for me. I'm unsubscribing myself from this thread. Not my cup of tea, I guess...

 

[RadMan]

Brief statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod.



29. The orthodox character of a church is established not by its mere name nor by its outward acceptance of, and subscription to, an orthodox creed, but by the doctrine which is actually taught in its pulpits, in its theological seminaries, and in its publications. On the other hand, a church does not forfeit its orthodox character through the casual intrusion of errors, provided these are combated and eventually removed by means of doctrinal discipline, Acts 20:30; 1 Tim. 1:3.
30. The Original and True Possessors of All Christian Rights and Privileges -- Since the Christians are the Church, it is self- evident that they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church. Thus St. Paul reminds all believers: "All things are yours," 1 Cor. 3:21, 22, and Christ Himself commits to all believers the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 16:13- 19, 18:17-20, John 20:22, 23, and commissions all believers to preach the Gospel and to administer the Sacraments, Matt. 28:19, 20,; 1 Cor. 11:23-25. Accordingly, we reject all doctrines by which this spiritual power or any part thereof is adjudged as originally vested in certain individuals or bodies, such as the Pope, or the bishops, or the order of the ministry, or the secular lords, or councils, or synods, etc. The officers of the Church publicly administer their offices only by virtue of delegated powers, and such administration remains under the supervision of the latter, Col. 4:17. Naturally all Christians have also the right and the duty to judge and decide matters of doctrine, not according to their own notions, of course, but according to the Word of God, 1 John 4:1; 1 Pet. 4:11.

 

[RadMan]

A Resolution Declaring the LCMS' Breaking of Fellowship by the Persistent Adherence to the Declaration of False Ecclesiastical Supervision:
Whereas, the Scripture states plainly that no one may ever act contrary to God's Word without consequence as it written, "I will by no means lets the guilty go unpunished," [Exodus 34.7];

And whereas, Jesus says further, "the Scripture cannot be broken." [John 10.35];

And whereas, although Jesus knows Himself to be God, saying, "I and the Father are One" [John 10.30] and it would appear that He does not reserve even to Himself authority to set aside the clear Word of God saying, "Think not that I am come to destroy^ the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.. . Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law ..." [Cf. Matthew 5.17 ff.]

And whereas, from that very place in matters of "ecclesiastical supervision" Jesus, assigns personal responsibility to everyone—students and teachers alike—with the words, "Anvnne who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom ..." [Matthew 5.9]

And whereas, Jesus upbraids Israel's teachers for "ecclesiastical supervision" claiming for itself authority to be "laying aside the Commandment of God. . ." [Cf. Matthew 15.16, Mark 7.8, et. al.]

And, whereas the Holy Ghost directs those facing contradiction between the Word of God and word of men that they "ought to obey God rather than men," [Acts 5.29]

And, whereas it remains "the position of the Synod" that Synod members may be released of personal responsibility for their actions concordant with prior "ecclesiastical supervision" without specific requirement of said counsel to be in concord with the Clear Word of God,

And, whereas, the Rev. Frederick E Davison presented the delegates of the Synod in convention in Houston [2007] opportunity to limit the practice of Ecclesiastical Supervision in the LCMS to the dear Word of God and thereby set aside previously contrary CCM opinion—particularly Opinion 02-2309 et al.;

And whereas, having memorialized the Synod to repeal, revoke, and repudiate any and every resolution of the Synod that proceeds from any notion that the Synod can in any circumstance set aside the personal responsibility of any of its members' from their actions apart from repentance and true faith—such as 8-Ola [2004] and the consequent LCMS Handbook revisions;

And finally, whereas the Synod in two national conventions has declined opportunity to limit or restrain Ecclesiastical Supervision to agreement with the clear Word of God,
Be it resolved, that the Rev. Frederick E Davison hereby declares that the LC-MS has broken fellowship,
And further, that the Saints may know which Pastors are to be received and approved, we hereby mark and avoid [Rom. 16.17ff.] the Rev. Gerald Ki-eschnick, the Rev. David Benke, and each and every other LC-MS pastor who fails to decry such an abuse of the Pastoral Office in the name of "Ecclesiastical Supervision," by stating clearly that the only Ecclesiastical Supervision that may set aside personal responsibility other than the Absolution that accompanies repentance and faith, MUST be in agreement with the clear Word of God;
And finally, we reject all who teach otherwise.
the Rev. Frederick E Davison, Pastor-Mr. Herb Thomas, Congregation President
~~ St— Luke Evangelical Lutheran Church, Richland Center, WI

 

[Jim47]

closed For Staff Review

 

[Jim47]

Staff is still reviewing this thread but the initial report on it does not constitue a violation.

We are fully aware that this discussion may not be in agreement with all LCMS members but simply discussing problems and posting news articles is no violation. RadMan is still a member of the LCMS and has the right under rules to discuss the problems with in.

 

[RadMan]

Copied from CN News with their permission.

 

[RadMan]

HISTORICAL USE OF LAYMEN
WITHIN THE WORSHIP SERVICE


by Rev. Rolf Preus
LAY READERS IN THE EARLY CHURCH
I agree with Pastor Lanier's observation that Paul's command to Timothy (1 Timothy 4:13) that he attend to the public reading of the Scriptures did not necessarily require Timothy to do the actual reading. A recently proposed memorial from the South Wisconsin District did appeal to this passage to oppose lay readers in the Divine Service. This blanket prohibition of lay readers is difficult to reconcile with the very early practice of having lay readers in the Divine Service as is evidenced by writings from Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Apostolic Constitutions (Vol. VII p 493). Produced in the East, that is, in Syria, the Apostolic Constitutions were, for the most part, probably compiled in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, and present a clear rubric on the bestowal of this responsibility to qualified men by the laying on of hands. (Although I must add that there are variant readings on this, with some ancient texts stating simply: "A reader is appointed when the bishop gives him a book; for there is no imposition of hands.") Whether or not there was a laying on of hands, there were three elements never excluded from the ancient practice of appointing lay readers.
First of all, the readers were trained. They were competent to read. In the East, they usually sang the Scriptures, presumably to be better heard. Secondly, they were appointed by the bishop, or pastor. They did not volunteer. They were not elected by a worship committee. They were carrying out that for which the pastor was responsible and were directly under his care and supervision in the performance of their responsibilities. Thirdly, they held an office, albeit not ordained, but a sub-office of the divinely instituted office of the ministry and they were publicly recognized as the readers. How this ancient practice, still retained by the Eastern Orthodox Churches, compares with today's means of choosing lay readers whether by following a round robin method or having volunteer sign up sheets I will leave for you to decide.


WHAT ARE WE SAYING WHEN WE HAVE LAY READERS IN THE DIVINE SERVICE?
It is, as I said, difficult to conclude that one may, on the basis of Scripture, prohibit lay readers of the Scriptures during the Divine Service. Does this necessarily mean that we may not oppose such a practice? At first glance, yes, for who are we to forbid that which God does not forbid? When one sees that this is indeed a very ancient tradition, going all the way back to the second century, still practiced by the churches of the East, it might well seem than any opposition to this practice is invalid. We must, however, consider the ecclesiastical and theological climate in which we live in order to understand how our practice will be interpreted. We didn't create this climate, and, in all humility we must admit we can do little to change it, but I would suggest that we be sensitive to what it is, so that we do not say something we don't wish to say by changing our tradition.
The Lutherans don't have a long tradition of having lay readers. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod had never heard of the practice until recently. Is it possible for us to jump over centuries and connect with the practice of the early church? Can we duplicate their circumstances and their concept of the ministry? Is it possible for us to introduce lay readers into our services and to do so with the assurance that the people will still understand that the teaching of the Word of God in the congregation is the pastor's responsibility? Perhaps. But there are other possibilities as well. It is possible, in fact, quite likely, that the introduction of such a practice, unless accompanied by serious and thorough instruction, will feed certain popular misconceptions both about the nature of the pastoral office and the nature of the Divine Service.
The authority of the bishop was paramount in the early church for obvious reasons. The question of authority - who had it, why, how is it to be exercised, who must submit to it, etc. - was one of the first issues the church had to face. The popular notion of our day, encouraged, I must say, by the rather unfortunate way that our friends in the Wisconsin Synod frame the doctrine of church and ministry, is that the people, the priesthood, simply delegate to various individuals various portions of the office of the ministry as seems fit to a majority of the people at any given time. Lacking an office which can call itself the office of God's own institution which is actually held by specific men, having replaced it with various ministerial functions floating around among the priesthood, the church cannot seriously question the propriety of anyone doing anything in the church except, of course, among conservatives such as ourselves who know that women should be excluded from certain functions which deal with authority.
Now this is an entirely different religious climate than that which obtained when lay readers were introduced in the early church. The popular notion (commonly attributed to the 19th century Lutheran, Hoefling) that the priesthood of all believers creates offices according to its will and that the divinely established office of the ministry is no more than the authority of the priesthood to establish various offices is diametrically opposed to the early church's understanding. The sub-offices which proliferated in the early church, many of which still survive today among the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches were directly under the authority of the bishop deriving their authority from his. Today we are faced with the sad influence of the Church Growth Movement with its preoccupation with identifying alleged spiritual gifts whereby every Christian can find his true place in the life of the church by plugging his so called spiritual gift into the program of the church. If he discovers that his gift is speaking in public, why then he might want to sign up as a lay reader.
But is this what the pastor is doing on Sunday morning when he reads the Bible to the congregation? Is he doing what he is doing because of some interior spiritual gift to do so? Or is he acting according to an office that God has entrusted to him? An office, I might add, that was instituted by Christ for the purpose of giving salvation to sinners. Now if we agree that the reason it is wrong for a woman to be a lector is that she is thereby exercising an authority that God has forbidden of her, on what grounds do people reject our argument? They claim that the reading of the Scriptures in the Divine Service is no exercise of authority at all. It is a sharing. It is sharing the word of God, they say, in the same way that the female vocalist is sharing God's word with us when she sings a Christian hymn or song. We don't always listen carefully to this argument because it is so clearly wrong (at least if the historic understanding of the liturgy still obtains). No, we say, reading the Scriptures in the Divine Service is not the same thing as singing a hymn. That's right, it's not. But don't think that those who make this claim don't make it sincerely. They most certainly do, and that is the problem.
Is the man who reads the Scriptures to us during the Divine Service speaking as a representative of God, authoritatively instructing the people of God? Is this what is happening? Or, is he sharing with us? Do we proclaim the Scriptures in the stead and by the command of Christ, or do we share them with one another, as we would pass around pictures from the family vacation? Now I would suggest that the common defense of women lectors is sincerely given by people who simply don't understand that the meaning of this part of the service has little to do with us sharing things with ourselves and everything to do with Jesus, the Good Shepherd, feeding his flock with the words which come out of the minister's mouth. And I would also suggest that this misunderstanding would not be corrected simply by putting a man behind the lectern instead of a woman. Unless the people understand that what that man is doing he is doing as an extension of the pastoral office, the introduction of lay readers would likely undermine a proper understanding of what is going on..................................................

Read the rest of the sermon here.

http://www.confessionallutherans.org/papers/laity.htm








.

 

[WildStrawberry]

Rad, I think it's great that you are researching and trying to understand what is going on in the LCMS. I know that you find the LCMS to be lacking in many ways and I think it's great that you're doing what you feel is right.

However, I also think it would be REALLY helpful to me and to others on this site if you would explain what you are thinking about the things you post. It's fine and dandy that you're posting them but you never SAY anything about them. It seems that we're supposed all have some mysterious "AH HA!" moment and suddenly know everything that is going on in your brain.

And as you know, God didn't create us that way. So, if you don't mind, could you PLEASE explain where you're coming from by posting all of this? What YOU gleaned from reading it and perhaps WHY you think it's important for the rest of us to know? I think it would go MILES to helping myself and others understand and to keep ALL of us from breaking the 8th commandment.

Thanks muchly!

Kae

 

[RadMan]

I've already stated in my previous posts the reason that I'm reprinting this info. Beyond that I can't say because I have made a point to others that I just wanted facts and not opinions. I can't very well have a double standard. And how can I be breaking the 8th commandment if it's all true?

Most of this is self explanatory anyway.

 

[WildStrawberry]

But what I am asking for is what YOU think are the facts. I mean, I see you saying one thing and others saying "no that isn't correct because" and then posting something else and then you get huffy because...well usually "just because."

Sometimes you have to state WHY you think these facts are relevant. That's all I'm asking.

If you can't, or prefer not to, do this, then please ignore this post.

Kae

 

[RadMan]

The Motives and Qualifications of A Genuine Church-Member​

By: [FONT=&quot]Dr. C.F.W. Walther, First President of the [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Lutheran[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Church[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Missouri[/FONT] [FONT=&quot] Synod[/FONT]​

(From: "Church-Membership: Addresses And Prayers at the Meetings of the Ev. Lutheran Joint Congregation of St. Louis, Mo., and Its Board of Elders by Dr. C.F.W. Walther" Translated by Rudolph Prange, CPH, St. Louis, MO. 1931, Page 11-14)

"By signing the constitution of our congregation, you have shown that you approve of it and have solemnly promised to abide by it. In the name of our congregation I welcome you as voting members. Permit me to add a few remarks.

Only that is a good deed which is prompted by proper motives and performed in a proper spirit. Alms, for example, are good deeds only when given out of love, not under pressure or merely to make people believe that you are a Christian. Diligence in our earthly calling is a good deed only when it issues from the desire to please God, who wills that we eat our daily bread in the sweat of the brow, and not because you wish to gain riches.

The same holds true with respect to joining a Christian congregation. That, too, is a good deed only if we do so because it is Christ's will that believers unite in proclaiming His Word, conducting public worship, and building and spreading His kingdom. The same step would be sinful if taken for the sake of earthly gain, as we read of Simon, the sorcerer, who joined the Christian congregation in Samaria to enrich himself in a material way. (Acts 8)

What has just been said holds true also in the case of those who unite with a truly Evangelical Lutheran congregation. Also this step is a good deed only if they wish to join such a congregation in preference to a congregation of another denomination because they are convinced that only the Evangelical Lutheran Church teaches the pure, unadulterated doctrine of God's Word. Were some one, however, to seek voting membership in a Lutheran congregation simply because he was born and reared in its midst, or to please his parents, or because his friends are members of that congregation, or because the location of its church makes it convenient to attend its services, he would not perform a good deed, even though God may have led him into that church for the purpose of making him a true Lutheran, in other words, an orthodox Christian.
What has been said emphasizes three factors that are essential in the make-up of a genuine member of a Lutheran congregation.

1. A genuine member of a Lutheran congregation must have a thorough understanding of pure Lutheran doctrine or at least must desire to grow in the knowledge of it. Such a one will imitate the Bereans in searching the Scriptures daily; he will not lay aside his Catechism when he has completed his elementary school-training, but throughout his life continue to review it in order that he may understand it better and become more thoroughly grounded in it. He will read other good orthodox books and periodicals to become ever more firmly established in the pure doctrine. Hebrews 5 those Christians who are neglectful in this point are censured. We read: "When for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God and are become such as have need of milk and not of strong meat."

2. A member of a Lutheran congregation must be able to defend his faith and to prove its correctness from God's Word. St. Peter writes, 1 Pet.3:15: "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.' A sad state of affairs is revealed when members of a Lutheran congregation, asked about their faith, say, 'You will have to ask my pastor about that.'

3. A member of a Lutheran congregation should be able to distinguish pure doctrine from false doctrines. Only spineless Lutherans can say: 'What do I care about doctrinal controversies! They do not concern me in the least. I'll let those who are more learned than I am bother their heads about such matters.' They even may be offended when they observe that religious leaders engage in doctrinal disputes. A genuine Lutheran will not forget that in the Epistle of Jude also lay Christians are admonished 'earnestly to contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.' What is more, Christ warns all Christians: 'Beware of false prophets.' And St. John writes in his first epistle: 'Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world.' It is a settled fact that whoever is indifferent to false doctrine is indifferent also to pure doctrine and his soul's salvation and has no right to bear the name Lutheran and the name of Christ. "

 

[Breetai]

YThere was a congregation who had two un-ordained women who had attended seminary and called them to pastorate when they graduated. These women had been told by the denomination's leaders they would never be allowed to be ordained as they were homosexual. Well now the whole denomination is embracing this practice and sliding down that old slippery slope.

I don't understand why anyone who follows God's Word would ordain someone if they are an open homosexual... or a woman for that matter!

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I don't understand why anyone who follows God's Word would ordain someone if they are an open homosexual... or a woman for that matter!

Welcome to ELCA logic. And some believe that LCMS is right behind them, although I don't think so. (I'm WELS by the way, and I don't think we'll ever see that day, thankfully)

I don't get it either.

 

[Breetai]

Welcome to ELCA logic. And some believe that LCMS is right behind them, although I don't think so. (I'm WELS by the way, and I don't think we'll ever see that day, thankfully)

I don't get it either.

Maybe that gave up on sola scriptura? Don't they loose the moral and logical right to call themselves Lutheran if they ignore some of the fundamental points of Luther's doctrine? I would say they are completely undermining what Luther accomplished for the body of Christ, let alone the very Word of God.

Oh well, nothing new here.

 

[RadMan]

October 18, 2007

Willow Creek Repents?

Why the most influential church in America now says "We made a mistake."

Few would disagree that Willow Creek Community Church has been one of the most influential churches in America over the last thirty years. Willow, through its association, has promoted a vision of church that is big, programmatic, and comprehensive. This vision has been heavily influenced by the methods of secular business. James Twitchell, in his new book Shopping for God, reports that outside Bill Hybels’ office hangs a poster that says: “What is our business? Who is our customer? What does the customer consider value?” Directly or indirectly, this philosophy of ministry—church should be a big box with programs for people at every level of spiritual maturity to consume and engage—has impacted every evangelical church in the country.
So what happens when leaders of Willow Creek stand up and say, “We made a mistake”?
Not long ago Willow released its findings from a multiple year qualitative study of its ministry. Basically, they wanted to know what programs and activities of the church were actually helping people mature spiritually and which were not. The results were published in a book, Reveal: Where Are You?, co-authored by Greg Hawkins, executive pastor of Willow Creek. Hybels called the findings “earth shaking,” “ground breaking,” and “mind blowing.”
If you’d like to get a synopsis of the research you can watch a video with Greg Hawkins here. And Bill Hybels’ reactions, recorded at last summer’s Leadership Summit, can be seen here. Both videos are worth watching in their entirety, but below are few highlights.

In the Hawkins’ video he says, “Participation is a big deal. We believe the more people participating in these sets of activities, with higher levels of frequency, it will produce disciples of Christ.” This has been Willow’s philosophy of ministry in a nutshell. The church creates programs/activities. People participate in these activities. The outcome is spiritual maturity. In a moment of stinging honesty Hawkins says, “I know it might sound crazy but that’s how we do it in churches. We measure levels of participation.”
Having put all of their eggs into the program-driven church basket you can understand their shock when the research revealed that “Increasing levels of participation in these sets of activities does NOT predict whether someone’s becoming more of a disciple of Christ. It does NOT predict whether they love God more or they love people more.”
Speaking at the Leadership Summit, Hybels summarized the findings this way:

Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for.​

Having spent thirty years creating and promoting a multi-million dollar organization driven by programs and measuring participation, and convincing other church leaders to do the same, you can see why Hybels called this research “the wake up call” of his adult life.
Hybels confesses:

We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between service, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own.​

In other words, spiritual growth doesn’t happen best by becoming dependent on elaborate church programs but through the age old spiritual practices of prayer, bible reading, and relationships. And, ironically, these basic disciplines do not require multi-million dollar facilities and hundreds of staff to manage.
Does this mark the end of Willow’s thirty years of influence over the American church? Not according to Hawkins:

Our dream is that we fundamentally change the way we do church. That we take out a clean sheet of paper and we rethink all of our old assumptions. Replace it with new insights. Insights that are informed by research and rooted in Scripture. Our dream is really to discover what God is doing and how he’s asking us to transform this planet.


http://blog.christianitytoday.com/outofur/archives/2007/10/willow_creek_re.html
​

 

[DaRev]

Interesting article. Shows that the biggest "church growth" mega-church has finally discovered that "church growth" doesn't work. Programs don't grow the Church, the Holy Spirit does.

 

[Tofferer]

RadMan, in a word:

DUH!


Too many people buy into program oriented churches and forget about the truth of the gospel. For some, the church is nothing more than a social club because that church has forgotten the gospel. This is the type of stuff we should all be aware of and strive to keep from happening. The true church is the one in which the word is preached and the sacraments are rightly administered.

 

[RadMan]

Yep--I hope some of the churches that have ascribed to it will change their minds unfortunately even though Willow has admitted something I think all they are doing is changing their stance. I don't know if it's an off shoot or a restructuring but now they have a Reveal program.

http://revealnow.com/index.asp

 

[RadMan]

RadMan, in a word:

DUH!


Too many people buy into program oriented churches and forget about the truth of the gospel. For some, the church is nothing more than a social club because that church has forgotten the gospel. This is the type of stuff we should all be aware of and strive to keep from happening. The true church is the one in which the word is preached and the sacraments are rightly administered.

I wouldn't say "duh" too fast because they have had influence in most of our Lutheran demons under the PLI and Ablaze programs. The effects will be felt for a long time.

 

[RadMan]

The following quotations appear in the September/October Fort Wayne student
paper, "The Cornerstone."

"Wherever the bishop appears, there let the congregation be; just as
wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church."

"For where there is not a bishop preaching and comforting souls, there is no
Church."

However the Augsburg Confession Claims:

"Article VII: Of the Church.
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."

The Bishop is not the church.

The students who wrote the following two articles appear to be expressing Greek Orthodox Church ideas instead of the Lutheran Church.

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

The Cornerstone - A Publication of the CTS Student Association
Sept/Oct 2007


"An Incarnational Ecclesiology: Charitological and Liturgical"

By Seminarian James Lee

Editor's note: This and the other articles in this issue were written with a
theme of "Lutheran Identity" in mind.

If all theology is indeed Christology, then it must follow that the same is
true for ecclesiology. How can this not be if the Church is the body of
Jesus Christ, who is Her head (Ephesians 5:23)? Thus, it is confessed that
the Church is incarnational. The Church partakes of Christ; She is not an
independent entity. She is joined to Him as a branch to the vine (John
15:1-11). But an ecclesiology that is incarnational has further
implications: To confess that the Church is the very body of Christ implies
that She is both charitological and liturgical.

To be incarnational is to be charitological. The means by which the grace of
God comes to man is through the advent of the Logos in the flesh. He is
life. He is salvation. The Study of Christ and the study of grace cannot be
understood apart from each other. The great Christological debates of the
fourth and fifth centuries were not exercises in academic theology; rather,
they were debates concerning salvation. The conflicting Christologies of
Cyril and Nestorious revealed that these two bishops, in addition to having
differing views of the relationship between the human and divine natures of
Christ, also had opposing views about the work of Christ. A proper theology
of grace cannot be maintained without a proper Christology. Hence, the
confession of justification (CA IV) follows the confession of the Son of God
(CA III) in the "Augustana." Charitology flows from Christology. To know
Christ is to know His work.

Grace is never an abstraction, for an abstraction cannot give comfort. Grace
always has a form. In the Old Testament its form was the sacrificial worship
of the tabernacle and temple. In those rites the God of Israel met His
people in His grace and dwelt among them. He was their God, and they were
His people (Exodus 29:38-45). But this sacrificial structure was merely a
foreshadowing of the true form of grace-the incarnation of the Son of God.
The incarnation is not an abstraction; it is the enfleshment of the Logos.
Here is the form by which the Triune God comes to His people; here is the
form in which God gives grace to men. And our Lord continues to give Himself
to men through from and structure: "That we may obtain this faith, the
ministry of teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was
instituted. For through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, the
Holy Ghost is given" (CA V). Abstraction is still not given room. Grace
continues to be administered through a form.

"But outside of this Christian Church, where the Gospel is not, there is no
forgiveness, as also there can be no holiness [sanctification]. Therefore
all who seek and wish to merit holiness [sanctification], not through the
Gospel and forgiveness of sins, but by their works, have expelled and
severed themselves [from this Church]" (LC, 56). Although this language is
harsh it reflects the reality of an incarnational ecclesiology. The Church
is the location where grace, that is Christ, comes to men through the form
of the liturgy, that is, the preached Word and the Sacraments. The Church is
where abstraction ceases. "Wherever the bishop appears, there let the
congregation be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic
church." The incarnation, grace, and liturgy, far from being independent or
abstract, are manifested in the Church catholic. It is here where Jesus
Christ, the Bridegroom, comes to His Bride in flesh and blood for the
forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation.


_____

"The Education of a Pastor"

By Seminarian Chris Hull

A pastor must know the Word of God in order to comfort souls and defend them
against the snares and wickedness of the devil. St. Paul preaches that a
pastor "must hold firmly to the trustworthy Word as taught, so that he may
be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who
contradict it" (Titus 1:9). The overseer, or pastor, has many qualifications
that must be met, but instruction and refutation are the aspects covered in
this article. Therefore, education is of utmost importance for the life of
the Church. For where there is not a bishop preaching and comforting souls,
there is no Church.

A pastor must teach his people the doctrine of Christ and His Church. The
instruction is a comfort to the people. A pastor does not educate his people
because a Christian must pass a test in order to become a child of God. God
makes His own children through the waters of Holy Baptism. Why then does the
pastor encourage his people in the Word? It is for comfort's sake. Christ
reveals Himself to doubting Thomas and not only grants him peace but also
shows him His wounds. Christ does this to comfort the doubt of Thomas and,
therefore, to turn the doubt into faith. A pastor shepherds a congregation
of sinners like himself who cannot understand all the mysteries of God. The
pastor preaches the Gospel and brings the sacraments so that the people may
know that Christ has brought them into His kingdom. A pastor teaches "that
we have a gracious God, not through our merit but through Christ's merit,
when we so believe" (AC 5). Therefore, the pastor must be educated in order
to instruct his people concerning their salvation and life in Christ.

A shepherd also refutes doctrine and defends his sheep against the attacks
of the devil. Refutation is possible only when one knows the Word. Christ
refutes the devil in Matthew 4 by quoting the Word, which was spoken by Him
in the days of old. Christ also rebukes the devil by the Word of God and
nothing else. This is how the Church has refuted heresy throughout time.
>From Athanasius defying Arius to Luther opposing papal indulgences, the
theologian has used the Word of God to destroy the crafty attacks of the
devil. We today must use the Word and fight all false doctrine and those who
wish to oppose Holy Mother Church.

A theologian is not a man who wastes time with mindless babble and heedless
chatter. Instead, his is a man sent from God in order to comfort souls in
the forgiveness of sins that we have in the death and resurrection of Christ
and brought to us through the means of grace. We, as future pastors, do not
study theology in order to impress people, but so that we may instruct and
refute. Luther wrote the "Small Catechism" in order to educate those who did
not know simple Christian beliefs and to refute those who tried to
complicate justification. We have many resources here at the seminary. We
have the library with numerous texts, chapel three to four times per day
where the incarnate Christ gives us His inheritance through Word and
sacrament, and we have our own theologians teaching us daily how to comfort,
instruct, and refute. We must know the Word so that we may bring Christ to
His people. This is what makes us Lutheran men. We preach nothing but Christ
and Him crucified. We comfort the sinner and destroy the devil, flesh, and
world. Therefore, let us know that education is absolutely necessary, for
without it we are not able to confront heresy nor are we able to comfort
souls with the Gospel of Christ.