Saturday, January 19, 2019

Luther's Sermon on the Marriage at Cana - John 2:1-11.
THE CONSOLATION OF MARRIED PEOPLE AND THE GLORY OF THE MARRIED STATE

Norma A. Boeckler


SECOND SUNDAY AFTER EPIPHANY.



TEXT:

John 2:1-11. And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: and Jesus also was bidden, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when the wine failed, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.

And Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. His mother saith unto the servants, Whatever he saith unto you, do it. Now there were six waterpots of stone set there after the Jews’ manner of purifying, containing two or three firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they tilled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the ruler of the feast. And they bare it. And when the ruler of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and knew not whence it was (but the servants that had drawn the water knew), the ruler of the feast calleth the bridegroom, and saith unto him, Every man setteth on first the good wine; and when men have drunk freely, then that which is worse: thou hast kept the good wine until now. This beginning of his signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

CONTENTS:

A CONSOLATION. A DOCTRINE AND EXAMPLE, AND THE SPIRITUAL MEANING OF THIS MARRIAGE.


1. Enough has been written heretofore on marriage; hence we leave that subject for the present, and treat the following three topics in this Gospel text: first, the consolation this history affords married people by virtue of their marriage; secondly, the faith and love revealed in this Gospel lesson; thirdly, the spiritual significance of this marriage.

I. THE CONSOLATION OF MARRIED PEOPLE AND THE GLORY OF THE MARRIED STATE.

2. In the first place, it is indeed a high honor paid to married life for Christ himself to attend this marriage, together with his mother and his disciples.

Moreover, his mother is present as the one arranging the wedding, the parties married being apparently her poor relatives or neighbors, and she being compelled to act as the bride’s mother; so of course, it was nothing more than a wedding, and in no way a display. For Christ lived up to his doctrine, not going to the rich, but to the poor; or, if he does go to the great and rich, he is sure to rebuke and reprove, coming away with disfavor, earning small thanks at their hands, with no thought of honoring them by a miracle as he does here.

3. Now the second honor is his giving good wine for the poor marriage by means of a great miracle, making himself the bride’s chief cup-bearer; it may be too that he had no money or jewel to give as a wedding present. He never did such honor to the life or doings of the Pharisees; for by this miracle he confirms marriage as the work and institution of God, no matter how common or how lowly it appears in the eyes of men, God none the less acknowledges his own work and loves it. Even our Caiaphases themselves have often declared and preached that marriage was the only state instituted by God. Who then instituted the others? Certainly not God, but the devil by means of men; yet they shun, reject and revile this state, and deem themselves so holy that they not only themselves avoid marriage — though they need it and ought to marry — but from excess of holiness they will not even attend a marriage, being much holier than Christ himself who as an unholy sinner attends a wedding.

4. Since then marriage has the foundation and consolation, that it is instituted by God and that God loves it, and that Christ himself so honors and comforts it, everybody ought to prize and esteem it, and the heart ought to be glad, that it is surely the state God loves and cheerfully endure every burden in it, even though the burdens be ten times heavier than they are. For this is the reason there is so much care and unpleasantness in marriage to the outward man, because everything that is God’s Word and work, if it is to be blessed at all, must be distasteful, bitter and burdensome to the outward man.

On this account marriage is a state that cultivates and exercises faith in God and love to our neighbor by means of manifold cares, labors, unpleasantnesses, crosses and all kinds of adversities, that are to follow everything that is God’s Word and work. All this the chaste whoremongers, saintly effeminates and Sodomites nicely escape, serving God outside of God’s ordinance by doings of their own.

5. For this is what Christ also indicates by his readiness to supply any want arising in marriage, bestowing wine where it is needed, and making it of water; as though he would say: Must you drink water, that is, suffer affliction outwardly, and is this distasteful? Very well, I will sweeten it for you and change the water into wine, so that your affliction will be your joy and delight. I will not do this by taking the water away or having it poured out; it shall remain, yea, I will have it poured in and the vessels filled up to the brim. For I will not deprive Christian marriage of its cares and trials, but rather add to it. The thing shall be wondrous, so that none, except they themselves who experience it, shall understand it. It shall be on this wise: 6. God’s Word shall do it, by which all things are made, preserved and transformed; that Word which turns your water into wine, and distasteful marriage into delight. That God has instituted marriage ( Genesis 2:32) the heathen and unbelievers do not know, therefore their water remains water and never becomes wine; for they feel not God’s pleasure and delight in married life, which if they did feel they would experience such delight in my pleasure as not to feel the half of their affliction, feeling it outwardly only, but inwardly not at all. And this would be the way to turn water into wine, mixing my pleasure with your displeasure and placing the one against the other, so that my pleasure would drown your displeasure, and turn it into pleasure; but this pleasure of mine nothing will reveal and give to you except my Word, Genesis 1:31: “God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.”

7. Here too Christ indicates that he is not displeased with a marriage feast, nor with the things belonging to a wedding such as adornments, cheerfulness, eating and drinking, according to the usage and custom of the country; which appear to be superfluous and needless expense and a worldly matter; only so far as these things are used in moderation and in keeping with a marriage. For the bride and groom must be adorned; so also the guests must eat and drink to be cheerful. And such dining and doing may all be done in good conscience; for the Scriptures occasionally report the like, even the Gospel lessons mentioning bridal adornment, the wedding garment, guests and feastings at weddings. Thus Abraham’s servant in Genesis 24:53 presents ornaments of gold and silver to Rebecca, the bride of Isaac, and to her brothers; so that in these things no one need pay attention to the sour-visaged hypocrites and self-constituted saints who are pleased with nothing but what they themselves do and teach, and will not suffer a maid to wear a wreath or to adorn herself at all.

8. God is not concerned about such external things, if only faith and love reign; provided, as already stated, it be in moderation and in accord with each person’s station. For this marriage, although it was poor and small, had three tables; which is indicated by the word Architriclinus, showing that the ruler of the feast had three tables to provide for; moreover, the groom did not himself attend to this office, but had servants; then too there was wine to drink; all of which, if poverty were to be urged, might have been dispensed with, as is frequently the case with us. So also the guests did not merely quench their thirst with the wine; for the ruler of the feast speaks of how the good wine ought first to be set on, then, when men have freely drunk, that which is worse.

All this Christ allows to pass, and we likewise should let it pass and not make it a matter of conscience. They were not of the devil, even if a few drank of the wine a little beyond what thirst required, and became merry; else you would have to blame Christ for being the cause by means of his presence, and his mother by asking for it; so that both Christ and his mother are sinners in this if the sour-visaged saints are to render judgment.

9. But the excess customary in our times is a different thing, where men do not eat and drink but gorge themselves with food and drink, revel and carouse, and act as though it were a sign of skill or strength to consume overmuch: where, moreover, the intention is not to be merry, but to be full and crazy. But these are swine, not men; to such Christ would not give wine, nor would he visit them. So also in the matter of dress, it is not the marriage that is kept in mind, but display and pomp; as though the most admirable were those most able to wear gold, silver and pearls, and to spoil much silk and broadcloth, which even asses might do and switches.

10. What then is moderation? Reason should teach that, and cite examples from other countries and cities where such pomp and excess are unknown.

But to give my opinion, I would say a farmer is well adorned if for his wedding he have clothes twice as fine as he daily wears at his work; a burgher likewise; and a nobleman, if he have garments twice as costly as a townsman; a count, twice as costly as a nobleman; a duke, twice as costly as a count, and so in due order. In like manner food and drink and the entertainment of guests should be governed by their social position, and the purpose of the table should be pleasure not debauchery.

11. Now is it a sin to play and dance at a wedding, inasmuch as some declare great sin is caused by dancing? Whether the Jews had dances I do not know; but since it is the custom of the country, like inviting guests, decorating, eating and drinking and being merry, I see no reason to condemn it, save its excess when it goes beyond decency and moderation.

That sin should be committed is not the fault of dancing alone; since at a table or in church that may happen; even as it is not the fault of eating that some while so engaged should turn themselves into swine. Where things are decently conducted I will not interfere with the marriage rites and customs, and dance and never mind. Faith and love cannot be driven away either by dancing or by sitting still, as long as you keep to decency and moderation. Young children certainly dance without sin; do the same also, and be a child, then dancing will not harm you. Otherwise were dancing a sin in itself, children should not be allowed to dance. This is sufficient concerning marriage.

II. THE DOCTRINE AND EXAMPLE OF LOVE AND OF FAITH.

12. In the second place, to return to. our Gospel lesson, we here see the example of love in Christ and his mother. The mother renders service and takes the part of house-keeper: Christ honors the occasion by his personal presence, by a miracle and a gift. And all this is for the benefit of the groom, the bride and the guests, as is the nature of love and its works.

Thus Christ lures all hearts to himself, to rely on him as ever ready to help, even in temporal things, and never willing to forsake any; so that all who believe in him shall not suffer want, be it in spiritual or temporal things; rather must water become wine, and every creature turned into the thing his believer needs. He who believes must have sufficient, and no one can prevent it.

13. But the example of faith is still more wonderful in this Gospel. Christ waits to the very last moment when the want is felt by all present, and there is no counsel or help left. This shows the way of divine grace; it is not imparted to one who still has enough, and has not yet felt his need. For grace does not feed the full and satiated, but the hungry, as we have often said. Whoever still deems himself wise, strong and pious, and finds something good in himself, and is not yet a poor, miserable, sick sinner and fool, the same cannot come to Christ the Lord, nor receive his grace.

14. But whenever the need is felt, he does not at once hasten and bestow what is needed and desired, but delays and tests our faith and trust, even as he does here; yea, what is still more severe, he acts as though he would not help at all, but speaks with harshness and austerity. This you observe in the case of his mother. She feels the need and tells him of it, desiring his help and counsel in a humble and polite request. For she does not say: My dear son, furnish us wine; but: “They have no wine.” Thus she merely touches his kindness, of which she is fully assured. As though she would say: He is so good and gracious, there is no need of my asking, I will only tell him what is lacking, and he will of his own accord do more than one could ask.

This is the way of faith, it pictures God’s goodness to itself in this manner, never doubting but that it is really so; therefore it makes bold to bring its petition and to present its need.

15. But see, how unkindly he turns away the humble request of his mother who addresses him with such great confidence. Now observe the nature of faith. What has it to rely on? Absolutely nothing, all is darkness. It feels its need and sees help nowhere; in addition, God turns against it like a stranger and does not recognize it, so that absolutely nothing is left. It is the same way with our conscience when we feel our sin and the lack of righteousness; or in the agony of death when we feel the lack of life; or in the dread of hell when eternal salvation seems to have left us. Then indeed there is humble longing and knocking, prayer and search, in order to be rid of sin, death and dread. And then he acts as if he had only begun to show us our sins, as if death were to continue, and hell never to cease. Just as he here treats his mother, by his refusal making the need greater and more distressing than it was before she came to him with her request; for now it seems everything is lost, since the one support on which she relied in her need is also gone.

16. This is where faith stands in the heat of battle. Now observe how his mother acts and here becomes our teacher. However harsh his words sound, however unkind he appears, she does not in her heart interpret this as anger, or as the opposite of kindness, but adheres firmly to the conviction that he is kind, refusing to give up this opinion because of the thrust she received, and unwilling to dishonor him in her heart by thinking him to be otherwise than kind and gracious-as they do who are without faith, who fall back at the first shock and think of God merely according to what they feel, like the horse and the mule, Psalm 32:9. For if Christ’s mother had allowed those harsh words to frighten her she would have gone away silently and displeased; but in ordering the servants to do what he might tell them she proves that she has overcome the rebuff and still expects of him nothing but kindness.

17. What do you think of the hellish blow, when a man in his distress, especially in the highest distress of conscience, receives the rebuff, that he feels God declaring to him: “What have I to do with thee?” Quid mihi et tibi? He must needs faint and despair, unless he knows and understands the nature of such acts of God, and is experienced in faith. For he will act just as he feels, and will not think of God in a different way and mean the words. Feeling nothing but wrath and hearing nothing but indignation, he will consider God only as his enemy and angry judge. But just as he thinks God to be so will he find him. Thus he will expect nothing good from him.

That is to renounce God with all his goodness. The result is that he flees and hates him, and will not have God to be God; and every other blasphemy that is the fruit of unbelief.

18. Hence the highest thought in this Gospel lesson, and it must ever be kept in mind, is, that we honor God as being good and gracious, even if he acts and speaks otherwise, and all our understanding and feeling be otherwise., For in this way feeling is killed, and the old man perishes, so that nothing but faith in God’s goodness remains, and no feeling. For here you see how his mother retains a free faith and holds it forth as an example to us. She is certain that he will be gracious, although she does not feel it.

She is certain also that she feels otherwise than she believes. Therefore she freely leaves and commends all to his goodness, and fixes for him neither time nor place, neither manner nor measure, neither person nor name. He is to act when it pleases him. If not in the midst of the feast, then at the end of it, or after the feast. My defeat I will swallow, his scorning me, letting me stand in disgrace before all the guests, speaking so unkindly to me, causing us all to blush for shame. He acts tart, but he is sweet I know. Let us proceed in the same way, then we are true Christians.

19. Here note how severely he deals with his own mother, teaching us thereby not only the example of faith mentioned above, but confirming that in things pertaining to God and his service we are to know neither father nor mother, as Moses writes in Deuteronomy 33:9: “He who says of his father and of his mother, I know them not, observes thy Word, Israel.” For although there is no higher authority on earth than that of father and mother, still this ends when God’s Word and work begin. For in divine things neither father nor mother, still less, a bishop or any other person, only God’s Word is to teach and guide. And if father and mother were to order, teach, or even beg you to do anything for God, and in his service that he has not clearly ordered and commanded, you are to reply: Quid mihi et tibi? What have I and you to do with each other? In this same way Chris there refuses absolutely to do God’s work when his own mother wants it.

20. For father and mother are in duty bound, yea, God made them father and mother for this very purpose, not to teach and lead their children to God according to their own notions and devotion, but according to God’s command; as St. Paul declares in Ephesians 6:4: “Ye fathers; provoke not your children to wrath: but nurture them in the chastening and admonition of the Lord;” i.e. teach them God’s command and Word, as you were taught, and not notions of your own.

Thus in this Gospel lesson you see the mother of Christ directing the servants away from herself unto Christ, telling them not: Whatsoever I say unto you, do it; but: “Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.” To this Word alone you must direct everyone, if you would direct aright; so that this word of Mary (whatsoever he saith, do it) is, and ought to be, a daily saying in Christendom, destroying all doctrines of men and everything not really Christ’s Word. And we ought firmly to believe that what is imposed upon us over and above God’s Word is not, as they boast and lie, the commandment of the church. For Mary says: Whatsoever he saith that, that, that do, and that alone; for in it there will be enough to do.

21. Here also you see, how faith does not fail, God does not permit that, but gives more abundantly and gloriously than we ask. For here not merely wine is given, but excellent and good wine, and a great quantity of it. By this he again entices and allures us to believe confidently in him, though he delay. For he is truthful and cannot deny himself; he is good and gracious, that he must of himself confess and in addition prove it, unless we hinder him and refuse him time and place and the means to do so. At last he cannot forsake his work, as little as he can forsake himself — if only we can hold out until his hour comes.

III. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS MARRIAGE.

22. In the third place, we must briefly touch upon the spiritual significance of the text. This marriage and every marriage signifies Christ, the true bridegroom, and Christendom, the bride; as the Gospel lesson of Matthew 22:1-14 sufficiently shows.

23. This marriage took place in Cana of Galilee; that is, Christendom began in the days of Christ among the Jewish people, and continues still among all who are like the Jews. The Jewish nation is called Cana, which signifies, zeal, because it diligently practiced the Law and zealously clung to the works of the Law, so that even the Gospel lessons always call the Jews zealots, and especially St. Paul in Romans 9 and Romans 10. It is natural too that wherever Law and good works are, there zeal will be and contention, one claiming to be better than the other, first of all, however, opposing faith which cares naught for works and boasts only of God’s grace. Now wherever Christ is there such zealots will always be, and his marriage must be at Zeal City, for you always find by the side of the Gospel and faith work-righteous people and Jewish zealots who quarrel with faith.

24. Galilee signifies border or the edge of the country, where you pass from one country into another. This signifies the same people in Zeal City who dwell between the Law and the Gospel, and ought to emigrate and pass from works to faith, from the Law into the Christian liberty; as some also have done, and now still do. But the greater part remain in their works and dwell on the border, achieving neither good works nor faith, shielding themselves behind the shine and glitter of works.

25. Christ’s being bidden to the marriage signifies that he was promised long ago in the Law and the prophets and is earnestly expected and invoked to turn water into wine, fulfill the Law and establish faith, and make true GalileansOF US.

26. His disciples are bidden with him; for he is expected to be a great King, hence to need apostles and disciples in order to have his Word freely and fully preached everywhere. Likewise, his mother is the Christian church, taken from the Jews, who herself most of all belongs to the marriage, for Christ was really promised to the Jewish nation.

27. The six waterpots of stone, for the purification of the Jews, are the books of the Old Testament which by law and commandment made the Jewish people only outwardly pious and pure; for which reason the Evangelist says, they were set there after the Jews’ manner of purifying, as if to say: This signifies the purification by works without faith, which never purifies the heart, but only makes it more impure; which is a Jewish, not a Christian or spiritual purification.

28. There being six waterpots signifies the labor and toil which they who deal in works undergo in such purification; for the heart finds no rest in them, since the Sabbath, the seventh day, is wanting, in which we rest from our works and let God work in us. For there are six work-days, in which God created heaven and earth, and commanded us to labor. The seventh day is the day of rest, in which we are not to toil in the works of the Law, but to let God work in us by faith, while we remain quiet and enjoy a holiday from the labors of the Law.

29. The water in the pots is the contents and substance of the Law by which conscience is governed, and is graven in letters as in the waterpots of stone.

30. And they are of stone, as were the tables of Moses, signifying the stiffnecked people of the Jews. For as their heart is set against the Law, so the Law appears outwardly to be against them. It seems hard and difficult to them, and therefore it is hard and difficult; the reason in that their heart is hard and averse to the Law; we all find, feel and discover by experience that we are hard and averse to what is good, and soft and prone to what is evil. This the wicked do not feel, but those who long to be pious and labor exceedingly with their works. This is the significance of the two or three firkins apiece.

31. To turn water into wine is to render the interpretation of the Law delightful. This is done as follows: Before the Gospel arrives everyone understands the Law as demanding our works, that we must fulfill it with works of our own. This interpretation begets either hardened, presumptuous dissemblers and hypocrites, harder than any pot of stone, or timid, restless consciences. There remains nothing but water in the pot, fear and dread of God’s Judgment. This is the water-interpretation, not intended for drinking, neither filling any with delight; on the contrary, there is nothing to it but washing and purification, and yet no true inner cleansing. But the Gospel explains the Law, showing that it requires more than we can render, and that it demands a person different from ourselves to fulfill it; that is, it demands Christ and brings us unto him, so that first of all by his grace we are made in true faith a different people like unto Christ, and that then we do truly good works. Thus the right interpretation and significance of the law is to lead us to the knowledge of our helplessness, to drive us from ourselves to another, namely to Christ, to seek grace and help of him.

32. Therefore, when Christ wanted to make wine he had them pour in still more water, up to the very brim. For the Gospel comes and renders the interpretation of the Law perfectly clear (as already stated), showing that what belongs to us is nothing but sin; wherefore by the law we cannot escape sinning. When now the two or three firkins hear this, namely the good hearts who have labored according to the law in good works, and are already timid at heart and troubled in conscience, this interpretation adds greatly to their fear and terror; and the water now threatens to rise above the lid and brim. Before this, while they felt disinclined and averse to what is good, they still imagined they might yet succeed by their good works; now they hear that they are altogether unfit and helpless:, and that it is impossible to gain their end by good works. That overfills the pot with water, it cannot hold more. This is to interpret the Law in the highest manner, leaving nothing but despair.

33. Then comes the consoling Gospel and turns the water into wine. For when the heart hears that Christ fulfills the law for us and takes our sin upon himself, it no longer cares that impossible things are demanded by the Law, that we must despair of rendering them, and must give up our good works. Yea, it is an excellent thing, and delectable, that the Law is so deep and high, so holy and righteous and good, and demands things so great; and it is loved and lauded for making so many and such great demands.

This is because the heart now has in Christ all that the Law demands, and it would be sorry indeed if it demanded less. Behold, thus the Law is delightful now and easy which before was disagreeable, difficult and impossible; for it lives in the heart by the Spirit. Water no longer is in the pots, it has turned to wine, it is passed to the guest, it is consumed, and has made the heart glad.

34. And these servants are all preachers of the New Testament like the apostles and their successors.

35. The drawing and passing to the guests is, to take this interpretation from the Scriptures, and to preach it to all the world, which is bidden to Christ’s marriage.

36. And these servants knew (the Evangelist tells us) whence the wine was, how it had been water. For the apostles and their successors alone understand how the law becomes delightful and pleasant through Christ, and how the Gospel by faith does not fulfill the Law by works, every thing being unchanged from what it formerly was in good works.

37. But the ruler of the feast does indeed taste that the wine is good, yet he knows not whence it is. This ruler of the feast is the old priesthood among the Jews who knew of naught but works, of whom Nicodemus was one, John 3:9; he indeed feels how fine this cause of Christ would be, but knows not how it can be, and why it is so, clinging still to works. For they who teach works cannot understand and apprehend the Gospel and the actions of faith.

38. He calleth the bridegroom and reproacheth him for setting on the good wine last, whereas every man setteth on last that which is worse. To this very day it is the surprise of the Jews that the preaching of the Gospel should have been delayed so long, coming first of all now to the Gentiles, while they are said to have been drinking the worse wine for so long a time, bearing so long the burden and heat of the day under the Law; as is set forth in another Gospel lesson. Matthew 20:12.

39. Observe, God and men proceed in contrary ways. Men set on first that which is best, afterward that which is worse. God first gives the cross and affliction, then honor and blessedness. This is because men seek to preserve the old man; on which account they instruct us to keep the Law by works, and offer promises great and sweet. But the out-come is stale, the result has a vile taste; for the longer it goes on the worse is the condition of conscience, although, being intoxicated with great promises, it does not feel its wretchedness; yet at last when the wine is digested, and the false promises gone, the wretchedness appears. But God first of all terrifies the conscience, sets on miserable wine, in fact nothing but water; then, however, he consoles us with the promises of the Gospel which endure forever.

Luther's House Postils - Three Volumes - Are in the Finishing Stages




  1. Warren Malach encouraged us to pursue this project.
  2. Soon - the text was prepared by Alec Satin, The Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry.
  3. The covers are being completed by Norma A. Boeckler for the full color and black and white editions.
  4. There will also be a Kindle ebook edition, 99 cents for each of the three volumes.
  5. Janie Sullivan will work on the print and Kindle editions.
  6. A Gems book will be compiled from the best long quotations in those three volumes, to be called tentatively - Household Sermon Gems from Luther's Postils. I hope to make it full color and shorter for inexpensive, beautiful gifts, the best kind of education and evangelism.
  7. God willing, a combination PDF will be made of all three color volumes and the Gems, one file, offered free and public domain for anyone and everyone to share.
The people in world missions are very pleased about our free, public domain distribution of an increasing number of titles.

Alex Satin already has 72 books I have used, would use again,  and "new ones" I would gladly have in my print library. These are old Lutheran classics that should be known by pastors and laity but fall into neglect. Why? The ALC/LCA ignores their faithful scholars from the past. The LCMS-WELS-ELS leaders favor Walther, Fuller Seminary, and Willow Creek.

My books are all being made available as free, public domain ebooks. I will get more of them posted if I can get off this D5 avalanche for a few days. Yes, I have a welcome break from online teaching coming up for a few weeks. That will work out fine.

Here is your one-stop place for everything mentioned above:



Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry - Over 72 Titles - Free EBooks.
Back Covers of Luther's House Postils


Luther's House Postils, Volume One 

Over 72 free ebooks from the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry, including:

  • Loehe's Small Catechism 
  • Sayings of Charles P. Krauth 
  • Martin Luther, by Henry Eyster Jacobs 
  • The First Free Lutheran Diet, by Jacobs 
  • The Life of Melanchthon, by Joseph Stump 
  • Luther Examined and Re-Examined, by William Dau 


 ---

Luther's House Postils, Volume Two
Over 72 free ebooks from the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry, including:

  • Life of Passavant, by G. H. Gerberding 
  • Election and Predestination, by R. C. H. Lenski 
  • The Story of My Life, by Matthias Loy 
  • The Doctrine of Justification, by Loy 
  • First Principles of the Reformation, by Luther 


---

Luther's House Postils, Volume Three 

Over 72 free ebooks from the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry, including:

  • Churches and Sects, by J. L. Neve 
  • Life of Theodore Schmauck, by G. Sandt 
  • The Confessional Principle, by Schmauk 
  • Church History for Lutheran Young People, by Peter Stromme


lutheranlibrary.org

This collection is constantly growing - free to all users - invaluable for laity to become more informed and for pastors and seminary students to have and use a portable library.



Friday, January 18, 2019

A Report on the Meetings of ELS, LCMS, and WELS Leaders 2012–2015


       A Report on the Meetings of
ELS, LCMS, and WELS Leaders
2012–2015

Background

In 2012 the leaders of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod (ELS), The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS), and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) decided to hold an informal meeting, which was held in December 2012. The impetus behind the meeting was the election of Rev. Mark Schroeder as president of WELS in 2007 and the election of Rev. Matthew Harrison as president of the LCMS in 2010, providing a new opportunity for discussions. 

It had been many years since any meetings had taken place between these synods, which were once in fellowship as members of the Synodical Conference. When fellowship was suspended (ELS/LCMS in 1955 and WELS/LCMS in 1961), it was understood that contacts should continue to be made to try to overcome the differences. The WELS convention in 1961 resolved “that under conditions which do not imply a denial of our previous testimony we stand ready to resume discussions with the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod with the aim of reestablishing unity of doctrine and practice and of restoring fellowship relations, these discussions to be conducted outside the framework of fellowship.” 

Since the preliminary, get-acquainted meeting in December 2012, all three synods have passed convention resolutions that have encouraged continued informal discussions. Additional meetings were held in December 2013 focusing on the doctrine of church and ministry, in December 2014 focusing on the doctrine of church fellowship, and in December 2015 focusing on hermeneutics (methods of biblical interpretation). With this document, we as participants want to give a mutually approved report to our respective synods about the status of these informal meetings.

Surprises
There have been many surprises for all participants in our meetings. Even though the ELS and WELS have not been in fellowship with the LCMS for over 50 years, we found—as we shared our situations openly and honestly—that we have much in common as leaders and as synods. We were able to put to rest some caricatures about our respective synods.

In particular, LCMS participants were surprised to learn how much pain was caused and still exists in the ELS and WELS because of the dissolution of the Synodical Conference in the 1960s. LCMS participants were happy to hear about the high esteem that is present in the ELS and WELS for the public ministry and the pastoral office, and to learn about the nuances of the ELS and WELS fellowship doctrine and that it is not applied in a legalistic way.

ELS and WELS participants, on the other hand, were surprised to see the conservative and confessionally faithful stance of the LCMS leaders, and how open they are to listening and trying to understand the viewpoint of others. ELS and WELS participants learned much about the structure and operation of the LCMS, including the fact that the documents and statements of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR), unless adopted by the synod in convention, do not constitute the official doctrinal position of the LCMS. ELS and WELS participants were heartened to hear LCMS leaders acknowledge with sadness that the ELS and WELS were compelled to break fellowship with the LCMS to avoid the tragedy of the doctrinal controversy that befell the LCMS in the 1970s, and that LCMS leaders are continuing to work for faithfulness in Scriptural doctrine and practice in their synod.

Most of all, it was a pleasant surprise to recognize that doctrinal agreement exists in many areas, some of which we will document here.

Quia! - recommended in the Formula of Concord, Article III.




Agreement

First and foremost among areas of evident agreement is the fact—quite astonishing in our world today and not at all to be taken for granted among those who claim to be Lutherans—that we all agree wholeheartedly on the formal and material principles of theology. We agree that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God and the only source of authority for doctrine and practice. We agree that the chief message of the Bible is justification by grace through faith in the merits of Jesus Christ, and that the entire Bible is Christ-centered. In light of this agreement, it seems that there is reason to continue to discuss doctrine together with the hope that we may be able to come to full agreement under the guidance and blessing of the Holy Spirit.

All of us also confess without reservation (quia) that the Lutheran Confessions are a correct exposition of the Holy Scriptures. When discussing hermeneutics, we found that we say basically the same thing: Our doctrine is based on Scripture, and when we compare Scripture with the Lutheran Confessions, we find that they agree. Therefore we subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions and use them as normative for teaching in the Lutheran Church.  In our sessions, we identified a number of biblical doctrines or practices where we acknowledge that we teach the same thing in our three synods, including the following:
• The Trinity
• The person and work of Christ
• Justification by grace through faith
• Genesis 1–11 is actual history, for example with a six day creation, Adam and Eve, and the fall
• The real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Lord’s Supper
• Baptism
• Law and gospel
• Means of grace
• Eternal election of grace
• Conversion
• Two kingdoms
• End times
• Resurrection of the body
• Antichrist
• Third use of the law
• Rejection of women’s ordination
• Rejection of infant communion
• Worship
• Need for ecclesiastical visitation and doctrinal supervision

We also called to mind how all three synods expressed agreement with A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod when it first appeared in the early 1930s. This doctrinal statement still reflects areas of agreement today. 

Of special note in our discussions was the doctrine of the church, because, to the surprise of ELS and WELS participants, it seemed that we agreed with each other on this doctrine. We also acknowledged agreement in regard to current social issues, such as the sanctity of life, human sexuality, and religious freedom. Last but certainly not least, there was special joy to understand that we all hold to objective justification—that God declared the world righteous through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and that we all recognize it to be the urgent mission of the church to take this gospel to the entire world. 

 Quia!


3

Challenges

In spite of the above areas of agreement, a number of significant differences (real or perceived) remain that need to be thoroughly addressed. It should be stated clearly that we do not expect to reestablish church fellowship in the near future. All of us are convinced that church fellowship requires complete agreement in doctrine. 

For example, in our discussions on the ministry, it has become evident that we carry on church life in very similar ways. We all want well-trained, male pastors to shepherd our congregations, and we all have other church offices such as Lutheran school teachers that serve together with pastors. But we talk about the necessity of the pastoral office in different ways and present the scriptural basis of the doctrine differently, in part due to our different histories and the different concerns that we face. We recognize that further discussions on this topic will need to take place.

In our discussions about church fellowship, we have found that we agree on the general principles and on the practice of closed communion. But we differ on what we say about prayer fellowship.

There also are other potential issues that we have not yet discussed fully, including the roles of men and women, cooperation in externals, and international church relationships. There is ongoing concern about the consistency of practice in our church bodies. None of us sees an easy path to fellowship, and none of us wants to compromise any part of God’s Word in the process. 

Plans and Hopes for the Future

In view of the progress we have made, we intend to continue to meet to pursue additional topics. The tone of our discussions has been positive and friendly, and we have come to a level of mutual respect and trust.

Perhaps God may guide us to a reestablishment of fellowship at some point in the future, a goal for which we pray and work. But even if we are not able to practice church fellowship, we have found benefit in talking together about church work, in patiently trying to understand the issues better, and in providing a measure of encouragement in our lives of repentance and fidelity to Scripture. Gradually we may also look for ways to include others from our synods in these inter-synodical discussions. 

Around us in America we see a culture that is increasingly hostile to Christianity. It is good to be in conversation with the few who are still committed to confessional Lutheranism. This is something that the LCMS especially has been trying to do around the world, bringing Lutherans together and encouraging them to be faithful to the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions. 

Anyone who has advice in regard to ELS/LCMS/WELS relations is invited to direct it to one of the undersigned participants. Certainly, all who read this report are encouraged to remember our discussions and our respective synods in prayer. 

“May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may abound in hope” (Romans 15:13).

This report was approved by the following meeting attendees on December 2, 2015 in Jacksonville, FL:

ELS: 
John Moldstad
Glenn Obenberger
Gaylin Schmeling

LCMS:
Gerhard Bode
Albert Collver 
Charles Gieschen
Matthew Harrison 
Joel Lehenbauer 
Herbert Mueller 
Lawrence Rast 
Jon Vieker
  
WELS: 
Paul Wendland
Joel Voss
James Huebner
Mark Schroeder
John Brenner
Earle Treptow
Thomas Nass

 Quia!

The Rationalistic Historical-Critical Method (HCM) Has Captured the Roman Catholics, the Fulleroids, and Each Lutheran Sect

 Valleskey brought Fuller Enthusiasm to Mordor and became its president as a Fuller alumnus, a fact which he both denied and affirmed. How much did WELS prosper under his regurgitated Barthian rationalism?

Pope Herman the Waltherist loves to sell Church Growth and Roman Catholic books, refuting his claims of being Biblical or faithful to the Book of Concord.

From the Bethany Scholars: 
Dr. Walter A. Maier clearly came down against the Historical-Critical hermeneutic. How big was the Historical Critical Method in Missouri and in other Lutheran seminaries at the time? What about now? Do you think this is the underlying rejection of the 6 day creation?
Maier: (Paragraph divisions added)
“Most of the scholars who use the historical-critical method base their analysis of the Biblical text on certain rationalistic, anti-scriptural presuppositions, and supernaturalism, for example.
“They flatly reject the possibility of divine intervention and miraculous action in human affairs.
“They also operate with various arbitrary, unwarranted assumptions, such as the unreasonable bias that many Biblical accounts, which purport to, do not really present factual history. As a result, their interpretations often subvert the obvious meaning of clear Scriptural passages, and the theological views they express often do not conform to the Word of God. [Then Dr. Maier gave some examples:]
“(1) When the New Testament evangelists composed their Gospels, they simply took over traditional short stories about Jesus which had been circulating in Palestinian Christian communities and worked these into running Gospel accounts. Practically all references to time and place … are of the evangelists’ invention and do not supply authentic information about the life of Jesus.
“(2) The miracles reported in the Gospels did not actually occur. …
“(3) Many of the sayings attributed to Jesus were never spoken by Him at all …
“(4) The Gospels contain many legends and myths, pure fabrications, which were given their form “in the interest of the cultus” and for purposes of edification. Mythological and legendary material, which is the product of “pious fancy” and “active Christian imagination,” is seen in the following accounts: the narrative of Jesus’ baptism, the narrative of Christ’s temptation in the wilderness, the transfiguration narrative, the narrative of the Last Supper, the passion narrative, and the resurrection narrative.
“Liberal theologians regard it as one of the functions of form critical investigation to help the twentieth-century reader to de-mythologize the New Testament Scriptures and thus get down to “what really happened” at the time of Christ and early Christianity. Additional incredible and, indeed, blasphemous views arising from the modern, scholarly use of historical-critical methodology could be cited.
– Walter A. Maier. Affirm. June, 1971. Cited in Lindsell. The Battle For the Bible pp. 86-87.
***

GJ
HCM completely dominated the ALC/LCA and invaded the LCMS. The Seminex crisis was caused by HCM and backed by Jungkuntz, also a big fan of UOJ from his WELS days. As one WELS pastor told me, Northwestern College (WELS) alumni meetings often sported many Seminex bumper stickers in the parking lot. Many students thought Jungkuntz was IT! - and he promoted HCM stealthily, letting the OT man at NWC, Gerke, take the hits and get pushed out first.

The HCM never left the LCMS because it was associated with the best and brightest, like Neuhaus. When Seminex formed and a little sect around it, "only the worst liars left." Many stayed to convert the LCMS - and they did.

Fibby, son of  Ludwig Fuerbringer, built up the St. Louis campus into a majority HCM campus, with some exceptions - Robert Preus. A few like Bohlmann pretended to be conservative.

Now HCM spreads even faster among all Evangelicals and Lutherans through the vast number of Fuller alumni, DMins and PhDs in every denomination. Karl Barth and his mistress Charlotte Kirschbaum are the most influential theologians of this apostate age - sorry to say. Karl and Charlotte loved to play with the "yes" and "no" of everything. They are the official theologians of Fuller, since the key Fuller Seminary leaders went to Switzerland to study with Barth.

All one needs to depart from the Scriptures is to say with Barth, "The Bible is not the Word of God, but contains the Word of God."

So clever!

 Quoting Barth is so popular - but why?

 "Oh Charlotte, I love it when you speak Hegelian! This time slower so I can write it down, Ja?"

Rationalism and the HCM are Calvinist vices. The ultimate cause is letting human reason judge the Word. Luther and his best associates used their genius to declare (exegesis) the meaning of the Scriptures.

The Age of Gimmicks and Methods - brought on by Fuller Seminary and its lackeys - has encouraged Lutherans and Evangelicals to abandon their trust in the efficacy of the Word. More fallout from this includes the hyper-grace groups that are really Antinomian - there is no Law. For them, the Law is obsolete because everyone is forgiven and saved, another version of UOJ.

 Jungkuntz' WELS-bred UOJ led to his sponsorship of the Metropolitan Community Church to train their gay activists as ministers. How can Otten and Harrison support UOJ and claim to be traditional marriage advocates?

Thursday, January 17, 2019

From Virtue Onlne - Episcopal Bishop To Be Deposed for Traditional Biblical Views

 Presiding Bishop Michael Curry.
Do his actions remind you of Matt Harrison's "established doctrines of the Lutheran Church" (Missouri Synod)?



Virtue Online:


The news broke just before lunch on Friday, January 11.
The Episcopal Church's Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, dubbed the "love bishop" for his endless talk about love, announced that the godly orthodox Bishop of Albany, William H. Love is hereby "partially restricted" from performing his duties as a bishop, because he had canonically offended the Church by refusing to allow homosexual marriages in his diocese.

Under Canon IV.4(1)(c) he now faces a trial where he will inevitably be inhibited, deposed and thrown out of the Episcopal Church. His ecclesiastical fate is sealed forever.
Bishop Love is a Bible believing, evangelical catholic who believes in God's Word written more than he believes in the efficacy of General Convention resolutions, many of which have gone against God's revealed Word and will for our lives.

He is the last of the orthodox bishops in The Episcopal Church, and now he will soon be gone because he refuses to succumb to the siren call of Resolution B012 which demanded that every diocese allow homoerotic couples to receive the Church's blessing on their coupling, even though Scripture denounces sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman as the only ideal God recognizes and approves.

This resolution is the final stand in a decades long march by Episcopal pansexualists to push their sexual behavior onto a gullible House of Bishops and clergy in the hope that their new-fangled doctrine of inclusion would somehow fill churches with homosexuals and lesbians just waiting to push open the red doors in the name of diversity.

That has not happened. In fact, the reverse has happened. The election and ordination of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire promptly emptied the Episcopal Church of more than 100,000 members, resulting in the birth of the Anglican Church in North America.

But still a handful of bishops, calling themselves Communion Partners, (CP) thought they could stand and stay as the Church's loyal opposition; their views honorably respected by the other side.
Over time, opposition grew dimmer, as one by one the CP bishops died or retired with no replacement for their views being found in incoming new bishops who swore fealty to the prevailing presiding bishop. It also became apparent that the House of Bishops would only give consents to bishops who permitted the progressive and revisionist agenda of the Church. In fact, eligibility to be a bishop, (preferably now women) was only possible if one signed on to the predominant sexual zeitgeist.


KISSING JUDASES
The Episcopal Church's progressive and revisionist hierarchy have, tragically, become "kissing Judases" (taken from Søren Kierkegaard) --- followers of Jesus who betray him and his teachings, hell bent with every nerve to reach successive generations of the cultured despisers of the Gospel: and then join them and become like them, no longer faithful to Jesus Christ. As Christian sociologist Os Guinness noted, "Some have surrendered to Enlightenment ideas, and become skeptics about God's sovereignty, or skeptics about human sin, or skeptics about the possibility of the supernatural and any world beyond the here and now."


The Communion Partner bishops are quislings who issued statements disavowing B012, but intent on staying in TEC, becoming traitors of the gospel. They collaborate with Curry and the HOB, washing their hands Pilate fashion, assigning progressive bishops to do what they themselves won't do. They submit "pastoral care" to another bishop or a DEPO bishop, as Central Florida Bishop Greg Brewer has done.

Ironically, Brewer got raked over the coals, when a woman priest, the Rev. Alison Harrity, rector at St. Richard's Episcopal Church in Winter Park, told ENS that when she informed Brewer that two men of the parish had asked her to perform their marriage, the bishop told her, "St. Richard's needs a broader oversight." Brewer delegated episcopal pastoral oversight to Kentucky Bishop Terry Allen White, Harrity said. Brewer "didn't even say, 'Let's have a conversation'; he just gave us away." However, Harrity added that the DEPO arrangement feels freeing to her and the congregation.
But as Jesus reminded his hearers; "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it." These quisling bishops who claim the mantle of orthodoxy will have to answer for their sin of commission.

"Any denomination that eliminates a male-female requirement for marriage breaks faith with a foundational element in our Lord Jesus' sexual ethics. It breaks faith also with the apostolic witness to Christ in the New Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures that preceded Jesus, and the historic tradition of the Church universal," writes Dr. Robert Gagnon, theologian and world authority on homosexuality and the Bible.

"Jesus regarded God's creation of "male and female" (Genesis 1:27) as the foundation for all other sexual commands. According to Jesus, God's creation of two complementary sexes is our best indication that God intended marriage to be limited to two persons. This suggests that for Jesus homosexual practice was a more severe violation of God's will at creation than unions involving three or more persons, because it strikes at the very foundation of marriage.

"The Apostle Paul teaches that for a person to attempt sexual union with someone of the same sex is to "dishonor" or "degrade" oneself, for it treats one's sex or gender as only half intact in relation to one's own sex as opposed to the other sex. Rather than have the two halves of the sexual spectrum, male and female, unite to form a single sexual whole, a homosexual union presents a bizarre picture of two incomplete half-males attempting to become a single whole male or two incomplete half females attempting to become a single whole female. Approving homosexual practice in the Church is the antithesis of love because it celebrates that which dishonors the God-bestowed stamp of gender."

Bishop William H. Love will stand before his Lord "in that day" secure in the knowledge that he obeyed Scripture rather than pleasing a group of mitered men and women who approved a resolution that had the blessing of the culture. Theirs may well be a different end.
END

 In 2004, Bishop and Mrs. Robinson...

 ...tore The Episcopal Church apart.
And then they divorced. ELCA decided to join the fun.
 Bishop Guy Erwin was the Confessional Professor for ELCA, like the gay activist Wengert of Kolb-Wengert Book of Concord fame. The 2009 ELCA vote shattered the denomination.

Variations on a Theme by Satan - Mobbing Shows a Lack of Faith.
As Wise as Doves, As Innocent as Serpents


The Mobbing article by Floyd Luther Stolzenburg's successor at St. Mark, Columbus, continues to incite discussion. The behavior of clergy and laity in denominations and Holy Rome is no different than what can be found in corporations. The one big difference is that corporations necessarily protect people from many forms of abuse because the law says they must.

Religious institutions are not governed by the law in dealing with employees: clergy, teachers, organists, staff. When a married pastor was hitting on a young single teacher, and she sought advice, she was blamed, fired, and removed from the calling list. The pastor was moved, not to repentance, but to another parish. It happened before - he was protected, she was not.

When Stolzenburg was forced to resign his call in St. Louis, he came to Columbus, Ohio. The WELS Michigan District clamored to make him their Church Growth Consultant, even though he was also taken to court by the husband of one of his targets. No problem! The hiring board refused to hire Floyd. No problem! WELS made it happen.

As apostasy spreads through Objective Justification, accelerating apostasy, the evil fruit of non-faith grows in a harvest of shame. I know readers shocked by the facts of the Mobbing article, but they are mild.

I could tell stories of many future pastors who were run down and left for dead by the synodical steamroller - LCMS or WELS - while others did nothing in response. I know unbelieving and adulterous laity can be malicious in serving their Father Below, but they need their synodical bosses to energize, enable, and leverage the damage.

If I told the stories, the men and families involved would be wounded all over again.

The LCMS has an interesting two-faced approach. If someone wants to be Synod President, he better kiss up to Herman Otten. However, anyone dealing openly with Otten will be totally shunned by the mobsters he helped achieve power.

WELS has a similar system. Certain people, like John Brug, keep Herman happy and spin everything for him. They encourage him to spike stories of murder, adultery, alcoholism, and seduction. In turn, Otten treats WELS as doctrinal heaven, a light to lighten the Missourians. But do not identify with Otten as a WELS pastor, or the axe will fall. Everyone knows the rules, but no one can recall who wrote them.

  This is Luther summarizing St. Paul.
He did not organize church socials.


Synods Destroying Themselves
When I first began playing computer chess, I was willing to sacrifice pawns for a seeming advantage. I soon learned how much I needed them in the late game.

The church politicians - all of them - think they can sacrifice people who get in their way, sometimes to make progress, sometimes out of pure spite to make up for their difficulties when being potty trained. They have been sacrificing pastors, teachers, lay leaders, entire congregations - for decades - and now each sect is dead and hollowed out.



One Thing Is Needful
A congregation only needs to teach and preach faith from the Scriptures. I have no less an authority than Jesus on this. The Church is the instrument of the Holy Spirit. Don't we wear red for Pentecost when donning our glad rags for an ordination, installation, or similar event? Yes.

What is the chief office of the Holy Spirit in the Word. Jesus said, "To convict the world of sin..."

"Of sin, because they believe not on Me."


  1. Every Church Growth or Missional program is another basket of weed seed sown.
  2. Every step toward women's ordination is another way to identify with the unbelievers of the feminist covens.
  3. Every political scheme is laying out the battleground in a way ideally suited for Satan and his helpers to win. 
 No more programs!

Herman Otten Criticizes Paul McCain in January 21, 2019 Christian News.
Otten Put McCain in the Purple Palace by Working with Paul Secretly and Lying


Herman Otten told me how Paul McCain, in his first and only parish, sent DP Al Barry's newsletter early to Christian News to publish and make a conservative hero out Barry. Both of them denied colluding, and Otten denied this in print.

McCain invited me to a personal tour of the Purple Palace. The phone rang and it was Otten's number. McCain did not answer it. He said, "If they knew I was talking to Otten, I would be fired."

So Otten got McCain into the Purple Palace and kept him there by denying their game after their plot succeeded. When Barry died, McCain sought grace and favor at the Shrine of the Immaculate Migration (Concordia Historical Institute) and next at Concordia Publishing House. He also had a much-praised (by McCain) blog, which was exposed later as plagiarized from Roman Catholic sources and his friends' blogs. McCain never apologized for his blog's dishonesty, but insists everyone has to apologize for offending him.

LutherQuest (sic) finally realized they were publishing McCain's links to plagiarized hagiographies from The Catholic Encyclopedia. They did not apologize to their readers or explain how easily they were fooled.

When Matt Harrison won the SP election in 2010, who showed up for a triumphant photo tour? Paul McCain.

 When Barry replaced Bohlmann, Bucky Hellwig said,
"At least Bohlmann's administration was polite to us." Was he suggesting that McCain was earning his nickname in Missouri - McNasty?

 Notice how papal Matt the Fatt is - "the official teachings of the Lutheran Church." That is a Roman view of dogma - why they cannot be wrong. The Book of Concord does not teach denominations but Biblical truths. 

 Buchholz is another inflated ego in a dying sect.
"How can you, little man, depart from the sacred truths of  our synod fathers? For that we extend - in Christian love - the Left Foot of Fellowship."