Analogy of Faith Question

 Jungkuntz was chairman of the board of Seminex, the first Lutheran seminary to train homosexuals - Metropolitan Community Church.

Dear Pastor Jackson: It is my understanding that the Lutheran teaching on the "Analogy of Faith" not only involves the interpretation of Scripture  as harmonious in all its teachings, but also that the teachings of Scripture must always be interpreted in the light of the "doctrine by which the Church stands or falls," which of course is JBFA and NOT UOJ.  If I am correct in this understanding, is it not therefore "confessionally Lutheran" to maintain the position that any passages of Scripture which the UOJers try to use to teach UOJ must be understood according to this Analogy of Faith?  --WM

WELS-LCMS
"It reads: all correct interpretation of Holy Scripture stands 3 2, 361, 16 (The Leipzig Debate, 1519): That is no way to understand or interpret the Divine Scriptures successfully, when diverse statements are plucked from diverse passages with no rational connection in logic or analogy; rather that is the most notorious rule for going astray in Holy Writ. Therefore, if a theologian does not want to go astray, he must put the entire Scripture before his eyes, set contrary things in contrast, and with the two cherubim, so to speak, facing squarely against each other, find the common ground of their diversity in the midst of the mercy seat. -17 I, 374, 33 (Sermon, 1525) : This word "Make etc .... " [Luke 16:9J is not going to abolish and overthrow the entire Scripture. - 26, 89, 2 (Lectures on 1 Timothy, 1528): Individual statements in Scripture must not militate against the general sense of Scripture.-Cf. also 2, 425,13 (Resolutions on the Leipzig Debate, 1519); 18, 672,23 (On the Bondage of the Will, 1525); 39 II, 219, 9 (Disputation, 1543). 4 7, 639, 7 (On the Super-Christian, etc. Book of Goat Emser, 1521): When they [the fathers} expound a passage of Scripture, they do so not by their own thought or word (for where they do this, as often happens, there they commonly go astray), but rather they bring to it another passage that is clearer and thus illuminate and expound Scripture with Scripture.- ct. also 8, 237, 3 (The 36th {37th Psalm of David, 1521); 10 1,1,582,9 (Church Postils, 1522); 10 III, 238, 6 (Sermon on St. James, 1522); 23,225,1 (That These Words of Christ, 1527); TR 1,379 (Tabletalk, 1532). under the rule of the analogy of faith, it must be in conformity with (the) faith. 5 The expression is taken from the passage in Rom. 12:7 (according to another division, v. 6): "Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith";
Concordia Theological Monthly, 1967, "Luther's Exegetical Principle of the Analogy of Faith," Otto Hof, translated by Richard Jungkuntz.
GJ - Robert Wilken contributed another article in this issue, as did Alfred Von Rohr Sauer. Truly a Seminex  CTM issue, parallel to the CG dominance now. Jungkuntz and Sauer were trained in WELS, graduating from Mordor. Jungkuntz married WELS, taught at NWC. Wilken, a Neuhaus friend, became a Roman Catholic layman after years of working as an assistant pastor with the grandson of LCMS SP Pfotenhauer (the last "conservative" SP).

Roman Catholic

If you read older Catholic documents you will come across the term “analogy of faith.” What does this mean?

The Analogy of Faith refers to the rule for the exegesis of Sacred Scripture. More precisely, it is the presupposition that whenever a text is obscure or difficult, don’t try to create a new meaning or add your custom twist to it. Rather, read that text in light of tradition – primarily the papally approved Doctors of the Church.

Catholics are obliged to read Scripture in this way. This is why you should never use a Protestant “Study Bible.”

Dr. Taylor Marshall

One can also find Calvinist definitions, though they vary between classic Calvinism and the windbag Barth. I was looking up a few and they seemed to straining to sound as profoundly philosophical as possible.

I chose to feature the Seminex gang because they illustrate so much in retrospect. One is that a UOJ champion translated a perfectly good, though ornate, article about the term. Two Seminexers are in the same issue. All three were pugnacious in their careers, on the apostate side. As my WELS friend noted, Seminex sprang from the fetid loins of WELS.

Can the Term Be Rescued?
We can read what Luther has written in his sermons. Rather than use a definition as a guide, we should follow Luther's example. For him, the Bible was a unified Truth from which any passage could be explained. He could argue from the philosophical terms of Rome, to show how wrong they were. He seldom indulged in the difficult to understand theological formulations of previous theologians. He advocated plain interpretation and practiced it as well.

Can We Learn From This Topic?
We should not let someone throw sand in our eyes with a philosophical term that is so easily used and abused by Calvinists, Roman Catholics, and Seminex apostates.

The WELS essays are prime examples of false teachers giddy to show off their profound knowledge - so they think - while obscuring the plain meaning of the Scriptures.

We have to arm ourselves with Biblical knowledge and reading Luther.

Many people swear they have a quia subscription to the Book of Concord. In WELS, this subscription is empty of all meaning. The clergy know nothing of the Confessions and remain scornful of it.