Lutheran Book

[paleodoxy]

Other than the Book of Concord...

I'm a Traditional/Reformed Anglican (ex-reformed presbyterian) looking for a book by a Lutheran theologian/scholar that explains generic Lutheranism - from a traditional/conservative/historical perspective.

I'm not looking for a book that historically traces the development of various Lutheran bodies/denominations. I'm just wanting a good overall picture of what makes Orthodox Lutheranism distinctly Lutheran in its theology, doctrine, praxis and goverment (polity).

Thanks for your help!

 

[tschenks]

Try C.F.W. Walther's The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel. Also Church and Ministry.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Well what Luthernism was in the LCMS during Walther's time and what it is now is somewhat differant. As the EO church says " we are a flux constantly" and I have to agree with them. To say Walther's writings are the "norm" for our Lutheran teachng is not quite correct.

In this day and age what defines Lutheranism seems to be defined more by polity than what is heterodox. Whatever the synod can get away with and consolidate their own power defines what our beliefs are. Also cumlative to that problem is the inadequate bibical training that laity gets and what can be fostered on them at synodical conventions. There has been many heterodox "bylaws" passed because bibical knowledge was missng from voting representatives.



continued in next post...........

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

According to these rulings the Synodical President cannot be charged with false doctrine while he is in office nor can those who carry out duties under his direction or with his permission. On January 20-21, 2003 , while affirming the importance of LCMS Convention Resolutions, the Synod's CCM reversed Walther's teaching on "Church and Ministry." The CCM ruled that no LCMS pastor could be removed from office if he is following orders from his superior even though Walther taught that the Voters' Assembly is supreme. This was after reafirming that Walthers book on church and ministry was the accepted position of the LCMS at the 2001 convention (RESOLUTION 7-17A).

Also Walther's position that the "church" (laity) is the supreme authority has been invalidated. "This is to be understood in the sense not only that the church has the power to excommunicate impenitent sinners but also that the congregation has the supreme authority in all church matters such as reproof, church discipline, divisions, judging doctrine, and appointing pastors, to mention only these things." ("Church and Ministry" C.F.W. Walther, 1851, CPH 1987, page 343). Walther also stated "For when our Savior Christ says, 'Tell it to the church,' He by these words commands the church [local congregation] to be the supreme judge. From this it follows that not only one state, namely that of the bishops, but also other pious and learned persons from all states are to be appointed as judges and have decisive votes." ("Church and Ministry" C.F.W. Walther, 1851, CPH 1987, page 343)

With CEO ministers being the sole head of the congregation, lay people only being notified of corporate decisions, has the sanctity of the "royal priesthood" been violated. "Church growth" has incorporated this and defends it on a basis of the great commision. SO when we say that we follow Walther's "Church and Ministry" and "Law and Gospel" we might actually want to go back and reassess that statemant.

Sidebar: Consequences of Action Taken Upon Approval of Ecclesiastical Supervisor (02-2296; 02-2320) http://lcms.org/ccm/min012003.pdf Opinion: The Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod do not allow or contemplate the expulsion of a member of the Synod on the basis of an action taken with the full knowledge and approval of the appropriate ecclesiastical supervisor. For a thorough treatment of this issue, see Opinion 02-2309."
In the same ruling the CCM affirmed the importance of doctrinal resolutions they also reversed 7-17A. On January 20-21, 2003 , the CCM also wrote that doctrinal resolutions of the LCMS that were adopted by more than a two-thirds majority are the official position of the Synod.

 

[paleodoxy]

Radidio,

A lot of what you say here confirms the impression I've received from modern Lutheranism - that it is largely unrecognizable in many ways from traditional/historic Lutheranism and from the theological contributions of C.F.W. Walther.

I am researching Lutheranism because I would like to be more familiar with its history; however, I am really not interested in becoming Lutheran. I truly appreciate (among other things) Luther's high sacramentology and emphasis on Divine sovereignty in election/predestination. In that way, he is truly Augustinian.

OTOH, I find his Law/Gospel dichotomy a bit extreme, and prefer the old Augustinian/Calvinist/Cranmerian approach to soteriology.

Also, I would put more emphasis on "reformed catholicity", while it seems that modern Lutherans are a lot like modern Presbyterians - they are more interested in preserving their distinct identities with regard to secondary and tertiary doctrinal matters - emphasizing the things that set them apart from each other (e.g., eschatology, provincial confessions, etc.)

I find the 39 Articles to be more broad, catholic, pastoral and sacramental.

It's the parochial, myopic mindset of many reformed traditions that caused me to move into the Reformed Anglican fold. The WCF reads more like a systematic theology than a confession; presbyterians are mostly Puritan descendants - a group I consider (along with Zwinglianism) to represent the most radical elements and aspects of the 16th -century Reformation (not counting the counter-reformes, such as the Anabaptists, et. al.).

The core five guys I would trace my leanings back to are: Augustine, Calvin, Cranmer, Bucer and Beza. Luther had a lot of them in his blood, but the brand of reformed theology he invented tended to be a little too sectarian (exclusivist) for my tastes.

Your analysis was quite helpful, and I appreciate you going to such great effort! Very educational and enlightening.

God bless you, brother!
paleodoxy (Jonathan)

 

[SPALATIN]

OTOH, I find his Law/Gospel dichotomy a bit extreme, and prefer the old Augustinian/Calvinist/Cranmerian approach to soteriology.

Could you please give some example of why you feel it is too extreme. Cranmer, btw, was a Luther fanatic. Much of what he used to develop the COE was taken from Luther.

Also, I would put more emphasis on "reformed catholicity", while it seems that modern Lutherans are a lot like modern Presbyterians - they are more interested in preserving their distinct identities with regard to secondary and tertiary doctrinal matters - emphasizing the things that set them apart from each other (e.g., eschatology, provincial confessions, etc.)

I would agree with you that on the surface, the average laymen in the Lutheran church does not seem much different than the presbyterian, but if you dig deeper you will the similarities end.

Education is the key. You can give them information but will they use it. One of my fellow seminarians will point out that Calvinism is just a theology of Soteriology and nothing more that it lacks in so many other areas.

If you have any other questions feel free to ask.

 

[tschenks]

SO when we say that we follow Walther's "Church and Ministry" and "Law and Gospel" we might actually want to go back and reassess that statemant.

Some of us still follow them.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Some of us still follow them.

I agree. Some of US do but there are alot that don't. It's to passe for the "church growth" group.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I know of no popular book at addresses the specifics of the the LCMS.

A good introduction into Lutheranism isThe Spirituality of the Cross by Dr. Gene Edward Veith, Jr. Concordia Publishing House (LCMS), c.1999.

Dr. Veith is a professor at Concordia University - Mequon Wis (one of the official LCMS colleges). He is a layperson, which will be appreicated since he doesn't get lost in the details but gives an excellent overview.

IMHO, less helpful but also worth considering is Why I Am a Lutheran by Dr. Daniel Preus. Concordia Publishing House, c.2004. He is the First Vice President of the LCMS and is widely regarded as firmly representing the "conservative" wing of the denomination.

Both of these were given to me by my girlfriend's father, who is a Lutheran pastor. They helped me.



Conservative Lutherans, especially in the USA, have a wide reputation for being a fightsty group. I heard this even at a Catholic church! It's well earned. Fortunately, it seldom filters down to the congregational level and most lay people are blessed to be untouched by it all - but there are congregations were this goes on, in some parts of the country more than others. I could give you MY spin on all of it - but there would immediately break out a fight. Anyway, check out the two books. I think they will help.


Blessings!


- Josiah


.

 

[Protoevangel]

Conservative Lutherans, especially in the USA, have a wide reputation for being a fightsty group. I heard this even at a Catholic church! It's well earned.

I could give you MY spin on all of it - but there would immediately break out a fight.

Well, you have already made the accusation, at least do the honerable thing and explain it.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Well, you have already made the accusation, at least do the honerable thing and explain it.

I'd rather not, LOL...

While my father has some experience with the LCMS, I did not. My mother comes from a different branch of Lutheranism in the USA (being a "PK") and I had been to my girlfriend's Lutheran congregation (another branch again). But until I began worshipping at our current congregation, I'd ever been to an LCMS church.

The reputation of this particular branch was well-known to me. I had heard it from several nonlutherans, as well as from a lesser number of Lutherans. I'm aware that some avoid any congregations of the LCMS for that reason. I'm aware of SOME of the fights (the fellowship issues, the political struggle for power, the propensity to sue, the Yankee stadium thing) but probably not most of it. I will reserve my opinions about the things. Such would only encourage it.

Jennifer and I were invited to our LCMS church by a friend of mine. And even though it's some distance away (about a 45 minute drive each way on Sunday), we decided to visit. We LOVED it - and have been going almost very Sunday since, and have gotten pretty involved. Much to our mutual pleasent surprise, none of the stuff he both had been told for years about the LCMS was/is true here.

Today, when I hear this about the LCMS (or, now I realize, with any group), I tell people to ignore what they've heard because it doesn't necessarily apply at any given congregation. Check it out! It's sad, IMHO, that the LCMS has a GREAT message (GREAT theology) and soooooooo much going for it, but kinda has one arm tied behind their back by this well-known reputation. People need to know what loving, caring, Gospel-centered people many in the LCMS truely are.


Just MY humble, personal, subjective opinion and evalution. I don't ask anyone to agree. And I am not an official representative of any Lutheran denomination, Synod, group or organization; my words are ONLY meant to reflect the personal feelings and thoughts of this singular individual. I honor and respect the veiwpoints of all who might have different perspectives.


.

 

[Tetzel]

Calling us feisty! I ought to kick your butt!

I know that when I was in the ELCA, the LCMS was regarded as a strict group of people. When my mother visited me a while ago she asked if she needed to bring a hat in order to come to church.

 

[BigNorsk]

As far as a book that would spell out the specifics of being Lutheran, I would think John Mueller's "Christian Dogmatics" would have to be very high on the list. It's available as a book or on cd from Concordia Publishing.

I just love the way he spells out the mistakes rationalists make as well as his explanation of Law and Gosple has to be a classic.

Marv

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

As far as a book that would spell out the specifics of being Lutheran, I would think John Mueller's "Christian Dogmatics" would have to be very high on the list. It's available as a book or on cd from Concordia Publishing.

I just love the way he spells out the mistakes rationalists make as well as his explanation of Law and Gosple has to be a classic.

Marv

I own that book and have used it. In some ways, it's a summery of the doctrine books I used in high school to learn theology. That was a 3 vol. set called Christian Dogmatics by F. Pieper (Concordia Publishing House c.1951). It's pretty heavy stuff, and my father (my teacher) was one VERY HARD teacher!!!!! It took us 3 solid years to make it though those 3 volumes! He even made me learn a lot of the latin terms - I recall having a huge stack of flash cards with all the terms (I've pretty much forgotten them now). I have the set here and use it as a reference, but mostly I just use my Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation CPH. Most of the time, that serves me well. It's only when I need some fine-tuning or vis-a-vis Reformed or Catholic that I dig out my Pieper (still with notes all over the place).

Another doctrine book I own and have used is A Summery of Christian Doctrine by Edward Koehler (a gift from my grandfather - a retired Lutheran pastor). I think this is used as a doctrine text for Lutheran teachers. It's shorter and simplier than Mueller's. It's short on Scriptures but does a good job of relating to the Confessions.


MY thoughts...


- Josiah