What induces us to discuss this question is the fact that Pastor Roebbelen in connection with the glosses on the Revelation of St. John published in the Lutheraner also stated that with Luther he does not regard the Apocalypse as canonical. This has, we are informed, given great offense in some quarters. Now, we do not agree with our dear brother Roebbelen on this point; we are convinced that this precious book, so rich in comfort for the Christians and the Church, belongs to the canon. Still, we believe that it is not fair — probably it is due to ignorance of the facts of the case — to stamp an otherwise unimpeachable theologian as a dangerous false teacher, who renders the very Word of God suspect, one who sincerely receives as canonical all homologoumena (universally accepted books), but who has his doubts as to the canonicity of one or the other of the antilegomena (disputed books). This would be thoroughly un-Lutheran. For our dear fathers in the faith, with hardly an exception till after the time of the Formula of Concord, regarded and declared all or at least some of the antilegomena as not belonging to the canon; and they did that not from hastiness or levity toward the Word of God, but, on the contrary, because they were very conscientious with regard to the Word of God. Luther’s opinions on the antilegomena are not a “blot” on our Church, but they rather bear witness how careful our Church once was in determining the standard and norm of our faith and life. The summary decrees of the Papists and the Reformed that all the antilegomena must be received as canonical by all Christians on pain of losing their salvation are so little a testimony for the high regard of these denominations for the Word of God that they rather demonstrate how easy it is for those to add something to the canon who hold that the Scriptures are to be interpreted either, in a blind collier’s faith, according to the whim of the Church (that is, of the Pope) or according to the principles of reason. It will therefore not be improper to submit here the testimony of our fathers, particularly of the 16th and the first half of the 17th century; not that we personally hold these opinions, but in order to show that doubts as to the canonicity of the disputed books were held also by men whose orthodoxy no Lutheran would dare to deny, and thus to clear a man like Luther of the suspicion that he had brazenly, in his subjective pleasure, passed judgment on books which had been received into the New Testament Canon.

Walther concludes his article with the words:

If this question be treated in a Christian manner, if the poor laymen are not confused by a dishonest presentation of the real issue, by a partisan exploitation of a matter which the common people find it hard to grasp — which may easily be done here — the discussion of the question can only serve to arouse the Christians to a serious investigation and thus to deepen and strengthen their knowledge and their faith. If any periodical takes cognizance of this our discussion, we herewith state beforehand that we shall not deem any foolish babbling, parading in the guise of a defense, of God’s Word, worthy of an answer; but any pertinent ventilation of this important subject will receive our attention, even though it pronounce ever so sharp a verdict on our old teachers, Luther, Brenz, Chemnitz, Veit Dietrich, Conrad Dietrich, etc.

In this article, Walther quotes extensively from Chemnitz, who in his Examen Concilii Tridentini exposes, in clear and powerful language, the Antichristian and insane character of the above-mentioned papal decree with its appended anathema. Because this presentation is considered a “classic” even today, we here submit it in its salient points.

from Francis Pieper, “Christian Dogmatics,” Vol. I [Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950], pp. 330-38.

See also:

1. The Witness of History for Scripture (Homologoumena and Antilegomena)
2. The Witness of History for Scripture
3. The Witness of History for Scripture
4. Resurrection History

For the Scriptures of the New Testament we have the historical witness of the Early Church (ecclesia primitiva). Its witness is unanimous as to the Four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the thirteen Epistles of Paul, the First Epistle of John, and the First Epistle of Peter (homologoumena). But as to the canonicity of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Second Epistle of Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of John, the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse, doubts, more or less strongly expressed, were entertained (antilegomena). Eusebius in his Church History lists the homologoumena and the antilegomena. The historical fact that the Early Church differentiated between the homologoumena and the antilegomena cannot be changed by a resolution of the later Church. Luther, too, abides by this judgment of the primitive Church; he says, appealing to Eusebius (Church History III, 25), that in ancient times the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles of James and Jude, and the Apocalypse “had a different reputation.” He finds much excellent instruction in the antilegomena, grants that the offensive passages may be explained acceptably by “glosses,” and will keep no one from appraising them as he sees fit. But he will not class them with the “right certain chief books of the New Testament.” As for himself, he will let the doubt entertained by the Early Church remain. Chemnitz denounced the action of the Roman Catholic Church in declaring the Apocrypha of the Old Testament and the antilegomena of the New Testament a part of the canon of Scripture by a mere decree and in anathematizing all those who refused to accept the canon fixed in the Vulgate, as anti-Christian.

from Francis Pieper, “Christian Dogmatics,” Vol. I [Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950], pp. 330-38.

See also:

1. The Witness of History for Scripture
2. The Witness of History for Scripture
3. The Inspiration of Scripture
4. Scripture is Clear & Understandable

The “Everlasting Father” is and was, according to our text, He Who was twelve years old. Even so, the truth of his name “Wonderful” comes before our eyes. But this happens even more when we hear that He also increased in age with wisdom.

a. Who is He Who grows in wisdom? The Christ Child, the God-Man, He “in Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge of God”: Who was like another Man. He, Who knows everything, had divested Himself of the use of communicated by omniscience and divine wisdom according to His human nature and trod the path to learn wisdom, as other people like Him, His brothers, must go. We cannot draw down Christ too deeply in our flesh. He endeavored to learn; He went to teachers, listened to them and questioned them.He made use of human learning resources. And He learned with success, His circle of knowledge became gradually larger, He went on, and His growth was revealed.

b. He increased in wisdom. He did not fill His brain with all sorts of vain,useless, purposeless knowledge, but He grew in such knowledge that made Him wise, it evermore equipped Him to be useful all the more and better to serve His brothers and sisters according to the flesh. Not only did He grow in γνῶσις,1 Colossians 2:3.2 Luke 2:46.3 Luke 2:47. cognitio, but also in σοφία, sapentia; He learned to apply His acquired knowledge ever better for good, salutary purposes for this life, but chiefly for that life. He would serve men. In particular, He increased in heavenly wisdom, in knowledge of the Divine Word, counsel, and will through diligent study of God’s written revelation. Wonderful! The One Who knows everything, learned, learned more and more, was always wise.

c. Why did this happen, for what reason is this reported? An example for us, particularly the dear youth, as an example for imitation. This is welcome praise of Christian youth, if it can be said of them that they are growing in wisdom, that that they are not about appropriating all sorts of useless or even dangerous and harmful knowledge, but useful knowledge, primarily that they may grow in Christian, divine knowledge and thus always better become capable to believe rightly, to live a godly life, to serve one’s neighbor, and evento die blessed. The example of the Child Jesus should be a strong inducement for them. What is praised by Christ, is certainly also welcome praise of our youth.

See also:

1. Christ the Wonderful Person

This is the wish of many on this day: a means that prevents misfortune and brings good luck. Many have their opinion. Some have, according to their opinion, such an agent (relics, amulets, shamrock, etc.). These are foolish talk and evil. Whoever relies on them, has no luck, but bad luck. He draws down God’s wrath and punishment upon himself. This means is the dear Name of Jesus. Our Gospel entices us to the right use of the Name of Jesus. God has admonished us about this in particular through Paul.

Do everything in the Name of the Lord Jesus! because

1. for this purpose has God given us this name.

a. God has given us this name. α. The little Child received this Name in His circumcision. God has given to Him the same. β. But yet this Name is given to us. It is for our use and benefit. This shows the name of Jesus, Savior, Redeemer, Sanctifier.

b. God has given it to us for this purpose, that we should do everything in the Name of Jesus. In other words α. nothing, that one merely says with the mouth, “In the Name of Jesus!”, or that one strikes a cross with the hand with all sorts of plans, or that one uses the Name of Jesus externally as a magical cure. This is all superstition and an abomination before God. In other words β. Rather, to orient everything in reliance on His healing, in invoking His help, in the certainty of his good pleasure, in the desire for his glorification. We Christians should do everything with Christ’s power, from Christ’s Spirit. Jesus’ Spirit and power is acquired only through confidence in Jesus, the Savior. What is done in such power, in such confidence, this we do in Jesus’ Name. Actually, we do not do this, Jesus does this in us.

c. God has given this Name to us for this purpose, that we do everything in Him. Everything that we do in the new year should be done in His Name, in confidence in Him, under His invocation, to His glory: our church going, our prayer, our suffering, our work as businessmen, workers, house fathers, house mothers, teachers and preachers, our dying. Everything that is not done in the Name of Jesus is displeasing to God and sinful. Jesus is the only One with Whom the Father is well-pleased. All works that are not done in the Name of Jesus are therefore condemnable. Only when our works are done in Jesus’ Name can they be pleasing to God.
Truly, that should move us to do everything in Jesus’ Name. God, the careful, compassionate Father, has given this Name to us for this purpose. Should we also not make use of it now? What does a true son with the legacy of his father, a daughter with the gift of mother? Yes, we do everything in Jesus’ Name, because

2. we have nothing but blessings from this.

a. This Name is a powerful Word of God, a divine promise. Jesus means Savior, etc. Everything that God has promised in Scripture about grace, salvation, etc., about physical, spiritual, and heavenly possessions is certain and firm, thus in particular this Name. Everything that is located in the Name of Jesus must be to him who does everything in His Name.

b. Jesus Himself is in His Name. Whoever does everything in Jesus’ Name has Jesus himself in all his ways, the all-powerful, living, acting Jesus. Since everything must go well, nothing but blessing is there.

c. What delightful promises God has attached to this name: answering our prayers; life; being justified; health. (The apostles have done miracles in Jesus’ Name. In so doing they certainly have a particular mandate. Still, this proves the power of that Name.) The devil gives way before the Name of Jesus; enemies have fear before this Name. If one who has such promises does everything in the Name, one has nothing but happiness in everything he does.

d. How confidently we can begin the new year with this Name. If we believe in this Name, then we have forgiveness, righteousness, then our prayer will always be heard; then our work is not lacking in strength and blessing; then we have protection and guardian angels during rest and sleep; patience in suffering, strength, rescue; then death is easy for us and leads to glory.

Who even now can leave this house of God today without firm determination and to cherish the certain confidence:

Now, Lord, may all our doings ever
Be done in Thy good name each day,
And with Thine Amen may Thou never
Forsake our house, but with us stay!
Thy glorious name our hope let be,
Our shield and our prosperity!

Translated by David Juhl

See also:

1. Macau Ministry Center Celebrates 10 Years
2. 15 Congregations Celebrate 25 Years of Partnership

“Yesterday at the Bates Street cemetery of the local Germany Trinity and Holy Cross congregations, the sepulcher commemorating the departed Dr. C. F. W. Walther was dedicated. The mausoleum was devoted to the memory of the departed by the local Evangelical Lutheran congregations. The service began about 4 p.m., and in brief and impressive fashion, lasted three- quarters of an hour. Many, many members of the local Evangelical Lutheran congregations came by way of the Oak Hill Branch of the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Also present were many Germans who are not members of the congregations, yet hold the memory of the departed in high esteem. After Pastor Hermann Bartels spoke a few introductory words, the gathering sang the beautiful church hymn Jesus, meine Zuversicht [Jesus Christ, My Sure Defense], after which the aforementioned pastor read the Bible text, 1 Corinthians 15:12–23, 55, 57. Another hymn by the congregation, glorifying the eternal life won through Christ, led to the following festival address, delivered by Professor F. Pieper.” 1

Dear brethren in the faith! It was on May 7 in the year 1887 that God called out of this life the blessed Dr. Walther, professor of theology at the local Concordia College and pastor of the local Lutheran Gesammtgemeinde. Ten days later, on May 17, we buried his body here. After five years, the same death has given us occasion to assemble at the same place and in like numbers. We have not forgotten the departed one, and we do not want to forget him. This finished sepulcher should also be an external support for our remembrance.

Some months ago, in another place, we also had opportunity to think about this great and faithful teacher. We have erected his statue, hewn of marble, in the aula [hall] of our theological institution. And justifiably so! Dr. Walther was a great theological instructor. Indeed, he was—and I well know what I am saying—the greatest theologian of this century. It’s not that there were not men in this century who have acquired a greater external knowledge in the disciplines that contribute to the study of theology. But there is no known theologian of our century who had exceeded Walther in that which forms the very essence of theology, namely, the clear and certain knowledge of the doctrine revealed in the Scriptures and the ability to present this doctrine convincingly. God also used Walther to exercise a wide-ranging salutary influence upon the Church at large. Even those who found themselves opposed to him acknowledge this.

But Walther was not only a great theological instructor and a great teacher of the Church in general. He was also—this we must confess to God’s glory—great as a practical preacher and curate of souls [Seelsorger]. There are many men who as theologians have a great name, but with all their theology cannot rightly teach and lead a congregation, and thereby demonstrate that they deserve the name theologian only in a limited sense. Walther was a theologian who could also apply his entire theology in leading souls and thereby show that his theology was the correct form. It did not consist in the spouting of more or less learned-appearing human speculations. His theology was rather the ability to communicate the saving truth revealed in the Holy Scriptures to lead souls to salvation.

Let me now speak to you about Walther as a practical preacher and curate of souls. The theme is very comprehensive. I can keep this short because most of you knew Walther the pastor from your own experience.

Walther was above all a true pastor in his public preaching. His preaching was as didactic—that is, presenting the doctrine as clear and sharp—as it was heartfelt, warm, and urgent. In every sermon he gave clear instruction from the Scriptures on doctrine. But every hearer had to note that it had to do not with a mere communication of knowledge, but with the soul and salvation. He preached Law and Gospel in correct distinction and in their correct connection. He preached the Law so that the hearer had to acknowledge: “I cannot through my works be saved. In God’s eyes I am a damnable sinner; if I am re- garded according to what I merit, then wrath and eternal damnation are mine.” But then he preached so that he poured forth the entire fullness of the free grace of God revealed in the Gospel for his hearers. He preached that for every sinner—even the greatest—grace has been won by Christ and is present in the Gospel. Thus no sinner need doubt; rather, through faith in the Gospel, he can and should say: “The blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, cleanses us from all sin.” The clearly acknowledged truth that God through Christ is completely reconciled with all men lay at the base of every one of Walther’s sermons. Thus the proper task of a Christian preacher consists in bringing men to faith in the redemption that has occurred and keeping men in this faith. Walther also understood how, as a preacher, to fill Christians with the desire for good works and a God-fearing life! He understood the art of stirring Christians to good works, without making human works the basis for salvation and without falling into a legalistic conversion of works. He admonished Christians to good works “through the mercy of God,” that is, through remembrance of the fact that for the sake of Christ, heaven and salvation are already given to them. Walther was convinced that with the correct evangelical admonition, one could accomplish everything among Christians.

Furthermore, Walther was a true pastor also in the private care of souls. Here in particular the old members of the congregation can speak from experience. But also those of us who are younger noted, from occasional communications of Walther regarding his pastoral activity, how for him every individual soul lay on his heart, and how he in particular went after the erring. The opposition, indeed, the open hostility that he experienced on the part of the erring did not prevent him from carrying out his office. He saw in these fallen ones only those purchased by the precious blood of Christ, but now souls captive in the net of sin. The curate of souls must seek to rescue them from perdition. Many such persons treated this way by Walther later came to thank this true curate of souls with tears in their eyes. Even when Walther had already been active as a theological professor as his proper office, he was often drawn into exercising private admonition.

Walther was also a true pastor through faithful intercession for the congregation. In his theological instruction, he admonished future pastors to pray daily for their congregations in general and for individual members whose spiritual or physical need is known to the pastor. He himself did this faithfully in the pastoral office. He made it a rule daily and regularly to pray for the congregation. When his office compelled him to speak with an individual, he had already previously spoken to God regarding that person. The need of the member of his congregation was his own need and drove him to prayer; their joy was his joy and moved him to pray in thanksgiving.

I must remind Lutheran congregations of something else. It was chiefly through the witness of Walther that in our time, the biblical doctrine of the nature, the value, and the duty of a Christian congregation was again placed in its proper light.

The often forgotten doctrine that not a sum of churchly orders or churchly persons [but] rather the Christians themselves are the Christian congregation or church he had again demonstrated to be the doctrine confessed in the Scriptures and in the Lutheran Confessions. What blessings this knowledge brought for the Church! With this knowledge, all in external association with the congregation will seriously examine themselves, whether or not there is in their hearts the living faith in Christ, the Savior. With this knowledge, the Church cannot foolishly rely on external means of power or any kind of worldly institutions to build itself. The Church’s entire concern is based upon the faithful and diligent preaching of the Word of God. This preaching of the Word alone works and maintains faith in Christ in the heart. It alone can build the Church.

Walther had also testified powerfully again to the doctrine of the rights of a Christian congregation, a doctrine that had largely been forgotten in Lutheran Christianity. He had again placed into proper light the worth of the Christian congregation granted it by Christ. He bore witness again that all spiritual goods and rights, which there are in the Church, belong not to one person or a few persons or to a particular estate in the Church, [but] rather to the entire congregation of believers. Through faith in Christ, Christians possess the forgiveness of sins. They are children of God and have salvation. Christ has given to them originally and immediately the Word and Sacraments and all spiritual goods and rights. They, the Christian congregations, therefore also have the right and duty to call preachers and to dismiss false teachers. Walther had also powerfully taught again the freedom of the Christian from all human regulations. As decisively as he emphasized that the Christian congregation must submit unconditionally to the Word of God, and all doctrine and admonition taken from the Holy Scriptures requires unconditional obedience, so decisively did he also maintain that no man, no matter how high his position in the world, may lay upon a Christian anything as a binding matter of conscience that is not commanded in the Scriptures.

Finally, Walther did not neglect to show the congregations their Christian duties. He taught: The entire congregation is to be concerned for and is therefore answerable to Christ to see that God’s Word holds sway pure and clear and richly in its midst. The entire Christian congregation is thus the spiritual society [Verein] established by God, that is, to place the light of divine truth upon the lampstand. Walther taught: The entire congregation has the duty to see to it that in its midst, Christian discipline is exercised, in order to guard against offense and so that the fallen brother be returned to the way of life. The Christian congregation is therefore the society established by God, in which the members are duty-bound to aid each other toward the acquisition of the final goal, the acquisition of salvation. Walther taught: The entire Christian congregation is duty-bound to take on also the physical need of its brothers, knowing that in these suffering brothers, Christ suffers, and that in them, Christ is served. Walther taught: The entire Christian congrega- tion is given the concern for the spreading of the Church through the preaching of the Gospel. The establishment, maintenance, and upkeep of Christian institutions are duties inseparably bound together with the Christian estate. The entire Christian congregation is therefore the mission society established by Christ.

Congregations are indebted above all to Dr. Walther for the clear witness to these divine truths. Truly, the congregations have every reason to thank this man who is their teacher. We do not wish to simply leave it at establishing this monument. Rather, by this monument, we would above all remind ourselves to firmly maintain the divine truth to which he bore witness, and to follow his example, which he as pastor and as Christian gave us by God’s grace. And finally: We stand at the grave of a man for whom Christian doc- trine and Christian faith was no mere theory. It was rather praxis. He finished the course and kept the faith to the end. God grant us all grace, that this earthly life and, finally, also death is for us the entrance into eternal life, where we shall thank God from eternity to eternity for all benefits, and also for the gift of this great and faithful teacher. Amen.

from Franz Pieper in “At Home in the House of My Fathers”

See also:

1. Rev. Dr. C.F.W. Walther Bicentennial (1811 – 2011)
2. Submit a Research Paper on CFW Walther
3. The Practical Ethical Lessons of Rationalism
4. Every Sincere Preacher & Minister of Jesus Christ…

In our country, labor and capital are for the most part enemies of each other. Workers join together. But they are not satisfied merely to unite. In many cases they use their union in order to harm their neighbors. They demand that workers who do not belong to their union should be given no work. To achieve this end, people often grab hold of stones, knives, revolvers, and dynamite. That is the murderous spirit of anarchy.

On the other side, the capitalists join together. But they are not satisfied merely with such unity. In many cases they use it to ruin the businesses of and trample neighbors who are not in the “trust.” That is the murderous anarchical spirit of the capitalists.

Furthermore, in recent decades, the number of children, particularly among the American-born population, has taken a dive. The chief cause is that hundreds of thousands of American women consistently murder their unborn children, with and without the consent of their husbands. This murderous spirit has become so prevalent that the well-known preacher Parkhurst [Charles Henry Parkhurst, 1842–1932] has accused a portion of American women of seeking to save the children of heathen while they murder their own progeny. This year a well-known professor of medicine admonished a class of beginning doctors that they reject abortion, which is commonly practiced.

…Enough of the examples taken from the life of our nation. Let’s take a look at ourselves. If we also—which is certainly not the case—were entirely free of the particular manifestation of the murderous spirit that we find among the capitalists and workers, the abortionists and the secret societies, the lynchers, etc., we still stand before the Law of God judged as murderers. The Scriptures say (1 John 3:15): “Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer.” Indeed, the wrath that rises in our hearts against the neighbor is murder before God. The desires that we have to harm our neighbor are murderous in God’s sight. Luther is quite right in his explication of the Gospel on the Sixth Sunday after Trinity regarding the sin against the Fifth Commandment: “Now whether indeed one grade is worse than another, still all of it—the lowest as much as the highest—is sin against this (Fifth) commandment. Thus whoever merely bears loathing in his heart, anger or disfavor against another, is a murderer before God.” May this act of murder, which has thrown all of us citizens of this land into horror and travail, remind us all precisely of this. And may we recognize and confess that we all would burn in hell as murderers if the blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, did not cleanse us also from the sin of murder.

A completely wretched spectacle has played out right before our eyes in the murder of our president. Something that should humble and lead a people to repentance is used for self-glorification. “You have struck them down, but they felt no anguish; You have consumed them, but they refused to take correction. They have made their faces harder than rock; they have refused to repent” (Jeremiah 5:3). But we throw ourselves in the dust before God and say:

Christ, Thou Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, have mercy upon us! Christ, Thou Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, have mercy upon us! Christ, Thou Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us Thy peace!

Amen.

from Franz Pieper, “At Home in the House of My Fathers,” p. 612

For the Scriptures of the New Testament we have the historical witness of the Early Church (ecclesia primitiva). Its witness is unanimous as to the Four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the thirteen Epistles of Paul, the First Epistle of John, and the First Epistle of Peter (homologoumena). But as to the canonicity of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Second Epistle of Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of John, the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse, doubts, more or less strongly expressed, were entertained (antilegomena). Eusebius in his Church History lists the homologoumena and the antilegomena.2

The historical fact that the Early Church differentiated between the homologoumena and the antilegomena cannot be changed by a resolution of the later Church. Luther, too, abides by this judgment of the primitive Church; he says, appealing to Eusebius (Church History III, 25), that in ancient times the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles of James and Jude, and the Apocalypse “had a different reputation.” He finds much excellent instruction in the antilegomena, grants that the offensive passages may be explained acceptably by “glosses,” and will keep no one from appraising them as he sees fit. But he will not class them with the “right certain chief books of the New Testament.” As for himself, he will let the doubt entertained by the Early Church remain.3 Chemnitz denounced the action of the Roman Catholic Church in declaring the Apocrypha of the Old Testament and the antilegomena of the New Testament a part of the canon of Scripture by a mere decree and in anathematizing all those who refused to accept the canon fixed in the Vulgate, as anti-Christian.4

Also the fathers of the Missouri Synod recognized the distinction between the homologoumena and the antilegomena. They did, however, leave it to the individual to form his own views regarding any of the antilegomena, for they were divided in their opinion regarding, e.g., the Apocalypse. In the second volume of Lehre und Wehre (1856, p. 204 ff.) the question regarding the homologoumena and the antilegomena is thoroughly ventilated in the article entitled: “Is He Who does Not Receive or Regard as Canonical All Books Contained in the Collection of the New Testament to be Declared a Heretic or Dangerous False Teacher?” Walther writes:

What induces us to discuss this question is the fact that Pastor Roebbelen in connection with the glosses on the Revelation of St. John published in the Lutheraner also stated that with Luther he does not regard the Apocalypse as canonical. This has, we are informed, given great offense in some quarters. Now, we do not agree with our dear brother Roebbelen on this point; we are convinced that this precious book, so rich in comfort for the Christians and the Church, belongs to the canon. Still, we believe that it is not fair — probably it is due to ignorance of the facts of the case — to stamp an otherwise unimpeachable theologian as a dangerous false teacher, who renders the very Word of God suspect, one who sincerely receives as canonical all homologoumena (universally accepted books), but who has his doubts as to the canonicity of one or the other of the antilegomena (disputed books). This would be thoroughly un-Lutheran. For our dear fathers in the faith, with hardly an exception till after the time of the Formula of Concord, regarded and declared all or at least some of the antilegomena as not belonging to the canon; and they did that not from hastiness or levity toward the Word of God, but, on the contrary, because they were very conscientious with regard to the Word of God. Luther’s opinions on the antilegomena are not a “blot” on our Church, but they rather bear witness how careful our Church once was in determining the standard and norm of our faith and life. The summary decrees of the Papists and the Reformed that all the antilegomena must be received as canonical by all Christians on pain of losing their salvation are so little a testimony for the high regard of these denominations for the Word of God that they rather demonstrate how easy it is for those to add something to the canon who hold that the Scriptures are to be interpreted either, in a blind collier’s faith, according to the whim of the Church (that is, of the Pope) or according to the principles of reason. It will therefore not be improper to submit here the testimony of our fathers, particularly of the 16th and the first half of the 17th century; not that we personally hold these opinions, but in order to show that doubts as to the canonicity of the disputed books were held also by men whose orthodoxy no Lutheran would dare to deny, and thus to clear a man like Luther of the suspicion that he had brazenly, in his subjective pleasure, passed judgment on books which had been received into the New Testament Canon.

Walther concludes his article with the words:

If this question be treated in a Christian manner, if the poor laymen are not confused by a dishonest presentation of the real issue, by a partisan exploitation of a matter which the common people find it hard to grasp — which may easily be done here — the discussion of the question can only serve to arouse the Christians to a serious investigation and thus to deepen and strengthen their knowledge and their faith. If any periodical takes cognizance of this our discussion, we herewith state beforehand that we shall not deem any foolish babbling, parading in the guise of a defense, of God’s Word, worthy of an answer; but any pertinent ventilation of this important subject will receive our attention, even though it pronounce ever so sharp a verdict on our old teachers, Luther, Brenz, Chemnitz, Veit Dietrich, Conrad Dietrich, etc.

In this article, Walther quotes extensively from Chemnitz, who in his Examen Concilii Tridentini exposes, in clear and powerful language, the Antichristian and insane character of the above-mentioned papal decree with its appended anathema. Because this presentation is considered a “classic” even today, we here submit it in its salient points.5

ENDNOTES

1. Baier-Walther, I, 149. Gerhard, Loci (locus “De Scriptura Sacra,” § 75 sqq.), furnishes much material on the refusal of the early Christian Church to receive the Apocrypha into the canon. Cf. Keil,Einleitung, § 216; H. L. Strack, R. E., 2d ed., VII, 442 ff.

2. Church History III, 25. On the Epistles of James and Jude particularly, II, 23. He reports, VI, 25, on the canon of Origen and the latter’s opinion of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Cp. for further detail Baier-Walther, I, 150, note b. Baier says: “It can certainly not be denied that in the ancient Church there was so much doubt as to their writers that they were denied the authority proper to inspired books.” Cp. the comprehensive article “Kanon des Neuen Testaments,” by Theodor Zahn, in R. E., 3d ed., IX, 768-796.

3. See Luther’s prefaces to the epistles mentioned, St. L. XIV: 126-139. On the Second and Third Epistles of St. John, Luther says: “They are not doctrinal epistles, but examples of love and faith and breathe a truly Apostolic spirit,” loc. cit., p. 126 f.

4. Tridentinum, Sess. IV: “But if anyone receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books [the Old Testament plus the Apocrypha, the New Testament, including the antilegomena] entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate edition … let him be anathema.”

5. Examen, 1667, p. 48 sqq. Walther gave a German translation of it, op. cit., pp. 205-210. It is given in the original in Baier-Walther, I, 150 sqq.

from Franz Pieper, “The Witness of History for Scripture (Homologoumena and Antilegomena).” (From Christian Dogmatics, Vol. I [Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950], pp. 330-38.).

See also:

1. The Witness of History for Scripture
2. The Inspiration of Scripture
3. Resurrection History
4. Conference on Archives and History

But is the avoidance of all those who teach differently not an unattainable, ideal situation? Man judges this way, unlike the apostle. The apostle is not talking about an unattainable, floating in the air, and enduring in the air ideal, but of a feasible and enforceable practice, when he exhorts Christians: “mark those who cause schism and nuisance alongside the doctrine that you have learned and depart from them!” – But one exclaims: How can Christians – simple-minded Christians – recognize those who teach differently and distinguish between truth and error? Even simple Christians can do this. Their Savior, who says remain in His Word, has given them in the hand the means to do it. The Holy Scriptures, the Word of the Prophets and Apostles, is for Christians not a collection of riddles, but a lamp to their feet and a light to their path. Christians can only be wrong in their thoughts, words, and opinion, if they place the light of the Word of God under a bushel. When they use their light and right, when they hear and believe their Lord’s Words, then they know the Truth and the Truth makes them free from all bondage of human doctrine. The Lord expressly says that His sheep know their Shepherd’s voice. But the stranger’s voice they do not know, but flee before him (John 10:3-5).

Let us remind one another that when we allow the Word of Christ to dwell richly among us, then it makes wise the simple. One raises finally another [objection]: But success! Success, to set aside the separation in this way, is indeed very uncertain. One must despair of success if one looks at the past and keeps in the present survey. Success, dear fathers and brothers, is not ours, but God’s business, Who has prescribed for us this way to achieve unity and to eliminate separation. Incidentally, we must not complain about success. The Synodical Conference has worked not separately but together. It has steadily grown in spite of decline around it and it is still the most numerous Lutheran Church Fellowship in the United States. Our demise has been predicted from the start. In recent months some have repeated this prediction. It will not come true. We want to ask God primarily for two things. First, for humility. It is not our merit, but God’s grace alone, that we do not teach otherwise, but confess God’s Word. This humility is also to be felt in everything we speak and write. If we certainly are in the flesh, then we will not argue not according to the flesh. We also do not want anyone who occasionally goes astray treated immediately as a false teacher. It is no wonder, explains Luther, that someone in these high things, that we are by nature so alien, sometimes has his own thoughts and lacks some in words. Luther admits that of himself, and we will not hold back with the same confession. But we should not give in to our own thoughts, but once again take hold of God’s Word and thereby resist all our thoughts and all wrong speech. For this we should help each other in humility. Secondly, we want to ask God for mercy that we, as in sincere humility, also testify with clarity and decisiveness the doctrine of the apostles and prophets and expose and reject foreign doctrine. So we strive in the right way toward the unity of the Christian Church and toward the elimination of harmful separation. May God Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, blessed forever, grant it! Amen.

from Franz Pieper, Sermon on Romans 16:17-18.

See also:

1. The Unity of the Lutheran Church
2. Gerhard on Church Unity
3. Concerning the Unity of the Lutheran Church
4. “The Evangelical Lutheran Church observes the unity of confession and love toward all who share with it the one faith.”

The schism of the time of the Reformation would not have occurred if the Christians of Zwingli and his followers, who did not stand with the Words of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Lord’s Supper and in Baptism, would have departed. There would be no schism in the American Lutheran Church if Christians would have kept away from people, whose own word leads on the Christian Church and the preaching office, on conversion and election unto grace. In short, avoiding those who teach differently as apostles of Christ, that is the simple and effective means prescribed by God to eliminate separation in Christendom. According to God’s Word, those who teach differently do not enter the Christian Church under God’s approval that one considers them, but for the purpose that one shuns them. As the apostle expressly inculcates:”There must be factions among you, so that those who are upright may be obvious among you” (1 Cor. 11:19).

Christians must learn this lesson continually from God’s Word. But instead of following this simple and effective way prescribed by God, one attempts humanly devised ways that go from bad to worse. In particular, one tries the way that one can forgive each other to stay in all doctrines in God’s Word. One calls this unity, what according to God’s Word is separation!

from Franz Pieper, Sermon on Romans 16:17-18.

See also:

1. Man Calls It ‘Unity’ – God’s Word Says ‘Separation!’
2. Toying with God’s Word For The Sake of Love & Unity
3. Since all Scripture is God’s Word, His majesty is also in each word
4. Gerhard on Church Unity

5. All teachings of Holy Scripture, although not equally necessary for obtaining salvation, nevertheless have a completely equal binding force on all people, since they are divine revelation to mankind. Luther says, “Absit, absit, ut ullus apex in toto Paulo sit, quem non debeat imitari et servare tota universalis ecclesia.”[^6} It is a crimen laesae majestatis divinae, an intrusion upon the divine majesty, to want to surrender a teaching which is revealed in Scripture. The principle which the “Lutheran Visitor” has made its motto and which the “Lutheran” cites in its issue from December 20th: “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity,” expresses ungodliness, if under “non-essentials” in Scripture are understood revealed teachings. Some object, “It is not meant so badly!” That is certainly true. Indeed, most of those who want to follow God’s revealed Word think they are doing God a service in this. They think they act in a very God-fearing way if they urge only the acceptance of some main teachings and put the rest into the freedom of Christians. But that is a very foolish notion that does not even have the smallest basis in Scripture. God wants to be honored and feared in his Word, and certainly in every one of his words.

from Franz Pieper, “The Fear of God’s Word”

See also:

1. Knowledge of Languages is Necessary to Judge All Teachings
2. Scripture Explains Itself
3. Losing Sight of the Word of Scripture
4. The Delusion that Scripture is Obscure

Matthias Hafenreffer, professor of theology and chancellor of the university of Tuebingen (d. 1619), places this axiom of Luther at the head of his dogmatics, at the same time expanding it on the basis of Scripture and applying it to conditions of his day. Among the theologians of the last century Rudelbach (d. 1862) had this to say in an address on Luther’s instruction as to the study of theology: “You are familiar with the great word of Luther: Oratio, meditatio, tentatio faciunt theologum. This word comprises our entire theological methodology. Here, just as is the case with every thought sealed by the Spirit of God, there is nothing to add, nothing to subtract.” There can be no doubt that the distressing lack of true teachers would be quickly ended if Luther’s methodology were observed everywhere.

from Franz Pieper, “Church Dogmatics, vol. 1.″

See also:

1. Oratio, Meditatio, Tentatio!
2. The Attainment of Theological Aptitude

This corresponds to Ephesians 4:3: “Be diligent to keep the unity of the Spirit which is effected through the bond of peace.” The unity of spirit is the unity of faith which is effected by the Holy Ghost. Wherever this is present, the proper unity desired by God is also present. We are, moreover, to cultivate this unity. It is imperative for us to avoid with all caution anything which might threaten it. It is also important to keep in mind that personal motives often are at the bottom of disunity. Pastors and other official teachers in the church become hostile toward one another, and this enmity of the heart soon gives rise to separation in doctrine and belief. The Bible says: “Be diligent to keep unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.” One is not merely to receive the unity of spirit as something which is brought about of itself, but it requires the application of all diligence to preserve it.

The Formula of Concord states (p.553,7):

We believe, teach, and confess also that one church should not condemn another for having fewer or more numerous outward ceremonies which are not commanded by God, if otherwise they are in agreement on ALL the same articles and properly employ the sacraments, in keeping with the well-known dictum: Dissonantia jejunii non dissolvit consantiam fidei (differences about fasting should not divide the unity of faith) [Trig., p.830].

Our confession states here what the prerequisite is for external union, namely, the agreement in doctrine on all of the same articles. “All” has been capitalized in this present quotation in order to point out that our confession has a very different understanding of church unity than the unionists of our day. The unionists today assert: If there is agreement in several of the chief articles, then many other differences can be overlooked. Our confession, however, states that while we do not require conformity of practice, because it is not commanded by God, we do nevertheless insist on doctrinal unity in all the same articles commanded by God. If we wish to acknowledge a church body as orthodox, it must be in agreement with us on all articles of doctrine.

from Franz Pieper, “The Church and Her Treasure, Twenty-third Lecture” (p.276-277).

See also:

1. Concerning the Unity of the Lutheran Church
2. Lutheran Unity without the Lutheran Confession?
3. Toying with God’s Word For The Sake of Love & Unity
4. The Unity of the Lutheran Church

If all things written in Scripture must be fulfilled, Scripture cannot be the word of man, but must be the Word of Him who holds everything in heaven and on earth in the palms of His hand, who guides all events, without whom nothing in heaven and on earth can occur, who is omnipotent and all-knowing, who is, in short, the great majestic God Himself. – Olshausen says concerning the quotations from the Old Testament in the New Testament are not adduced as mere corroborations drawn from humanly important writings, but as irrefutable proofs from divine books. They possesses this convincing power because they proceeded not from human sages, but from men who were moved by the Holy Ghost.

from Franz Pieper, “Church Dogmatics, vol. 1″

This method is the one which the pious king David teaches in the 119th Psalm and which, no doubt, was practiced by all the Patriarchs and Prophets. In the 119th Psalm you will find three rules, which are abundantly expounded throughout the entire Psalm. They ar called: Oratio, Meditatio, Tentatio.”

Matthias Hafenreffer, professor of theology and chancellor of the university of Tuebingen (d. 1619), places this axiom of Luther at the head of his dogmatics, at the same time expanding it on the basis of Scripture and applying it to conditions of his day. Among the theologians of the last century Rudelbach (d. 1862) had this to say in an address on Luther’s instruction as to the study of theology: “You are familiar with the great word of Luther: Oratio, meditatio, tentatio faciunt theologum. This word comprises our entire theological methodology. Here, just as is the case with every thought sealed by the Spirit of God, there is nothing to add, nothing to subtract.” There can be no doubt that the distressing lack of true teachers would be quickly ended if Luther’s methodology were observed everywhere.

from Franz Pieper, “Church Dogmatics, vol. 1″

See also:

1. Theological Aptitude Comes Through Suffering God

Above all it implies that we acknowledge the entire Holy Scripture as inspired by God, and for this reason, as God’s majestic and infallible Word. Holy Scripture itself proceeds with this claim when it says, πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος (all Scripture is inspired by God), 2 Timothy 3:16. And no less than the Son of God himself also testifies in regard to the individual words of Scripture: οὐ δύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή (the Scripture cannot be broken), John 10:35. The denial of the inspiration of Holy Scripture is therefore from the start the exact opposite of the fear of God’s Word. And whoever accuses Holy Scripture of error in any one part, or even just gives it up as capable of error, has abandoned the fear of God’s Word. The fear of God’s Word demands that we say with Luther, “the Scripture has not yet erred,”1 and with the Formula of Concord, “Toto pectore prophetica et apostolica scripta Veteris et Novi Testamenti ut limpidissimos purissimosque Israelis fontes recipimus ac amplectimur” (with all our heart we accept the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments as the pure and clear fount of Israel).2 Indeed, the one who fears God’s Word must also say with Quenstedt, “In canonical Holy Scripture there is no lie, no falsehood, nor even a little error, whether it is in facts or in words. Rather, each and every thing recorded in it is true, whether it may concern doctrine or morals or history, the calendar, the description of countries or names. And no ignorance, thoughtlessness and forgetfulness, no errors of memory can or may be ascribed to the instruments of Holy Spirit in the recording of the Holy Scriptures” (Didactic-Polemic Theology I. 112).

However, some in recent times think that the fear of God’s Word and the fear of Holy Scripture are two different things. But John Gerhard says quite rightly that there is no essential difference between God’s Word and Holy Scripture.3 Holy Scripture is God’s Word, and God’s Word is Holy Scripture. All the words of Holy Scripture are God’s words because they are inspired by God. In Holy Scripture God has become man in his speaking. And as God approaches men in his incarnate Son, and consequently all are to honor the Son as they honor the Father, and whoever does not honor the Son also does not honor the Father, so also there is no honor and fear of God and his Word except that which is given to Holy Scripture. It is great blindness when those who want to deny the inspiration of Holy Scripture and distinguish between Scripture and God’s Word still think they stand in the true fear of God and his Word. But it is a sad fact that even the theologians of Germany, who call themselves Lutheran and have a good reputation, almost unanimously deny with complete determination that Holy Scripture is the majestic and infallible Word of God inspired by God. Instead of bowing down before every word of Scripture as before the majesty of God himself, they make Scripture into an object of criticism. Yes, as the Jewish scribes and Pharisees once pronounced those who believe in Christ as the Son of God to be wrong and deceived (John 7), so one of the “scribes” of our time has declared that those who still regard Holy Scripture as God’s infallible Word are hardening themselves against the truth.4 Unfortunately, this total renunciation of the fundamental principle of Lutheran church has spread far, particularly in Germany. Yes, it has come so far that some see the church’s salvation in surrendering the doctrine of inspiration.5 It can only improve in this part of the church if this dreadful injury is removed, if the deceivers and the deceived accept Scripture as God’s Word again and thus turn back to the true fear of God’s Word.

Yet the fear of God’s Word entails not only that we acknowledge Holy Scripture as God’s infallible Word, but second, it includes regarding and accepting all teachings of Scripture as binding. Again, it is the exact opposite of the fear of God’s Word to want to take a selection of the doctrines revealed in Scripture according to the importance attached to the individual doctrines and to accept and inculcate the doctrines that are seen as important, but to surrender the doctrines that are seen as less important, that is, to declare as less important those doctrines which individual Christians and Christian congregations can accept or reject. It is always blasphemy if someone does not want to recognize an important or less important law of a king as binding.

from Franz Pieper, “Fear of God’s Word”

See also:

1. What’s In A Word? – Fear
2. Fear of God
3. Have no Fear Little Flock
4. Since all Scripture is God’s Word, His majesty is also in each word

It will, therefore, never do for the theologian to retreat from the Word of the Apostles and Prophets and to seek refuge in the theological Ego. In theology it is absolutely necessary that the theologian disqualify his own Ego. The theologian must disregard all thoughts and opinions of his own, which come to him as unwelcome guests; he will permit only such thoughts, words, and doctrines to make their abode in his heart as are found in Christ’s Word.

from Franz Pieper, “Christian Dogmatics, vol. 1″

See also:

1. Two Ways of Being a Theologian
2. The Theologian of the Cross
3. On Being a Theologian of the Cross
4. Walther as Theologian

from Franz Pieper, “1912 Sermon on Romans 16:17-18.”

The reason why Romish theologians are so insensate as to deny this fact is that they desire to suppress the authority of Holy Scripture and instead thereof to magnify the importance of the “oral traditions,” which they themselves have fabricated. This is the object also of those modern Protestant theologians who deny the inspiration of the Bible and hold that it was an accidental circumstance that occasioned the apostles to pen their epistles.

They, too, wish to evade the authority of Holy Scripture, and so they agree: The apostles were prompted to write their epistles merely by certain conditions that existed in the various congregations at that time, and accordingly their writings cannot be regarded as the rule and standard for the Church through the ages until Judgment Day. The Epistle to the Romans, they maintain, “happened” to be written by St. Paul to the Christian congregation in Rome on account of the fact that he had not yet had the opportunity to visit the city. (Cf. Rom. 1, 13ff)

Similarly, they say, the apostle wrote his letters to the Corinthians because he “happened” to hear from members of Chloe’s household that contentions had arisen in the Corinthian church. But any one who terms these causes “accidental” and intends to prove thereby that the word of the apostles is not the source and norm of the Christian faith for the Church of all times in the final analysis is compelled to deny also that there is a God whose hand directs all such “accidental circumstances.”

Christ declares expressly that all Christians until the Day of Judgment are to be taught by means of the word of the apostles, John 17, 20.

from Franz Pieper, “What Is Christianity?”

See also:

1. The Inspiration of Scripture

Mr. Thomas Kane of Chicago for the past few years has sent to the theological seminaries of our country at his own expense books and other literature which exhort all Christians to dedicate the tenth part of their income to the support of God’s kingdom. Mr. Kane shows on the basis of reliable statistics that those congregations and individual Christians that tithe have contributed to their Church as much as five and ten times more than before. We do not doubt that Mr. Kane’s figures are correct: in fact, we are fully convinced that all our financial troubles would be over if we, too, would pay the tithe to Christ and His kingdom. In two of his articles Mr. Kane reproves theological professors for not insisting sufficiently on the practice of tithing, and he makes the unqualified accusation that they and the ministers of our churches are the real cause of all the financial troubles in the Church.

How shall we answer Mr. Kane’s assertion? We do not obligate New Testament Christians to pay the tithe, since, as we rightly contend, this would go counter to Scripture. In the Old Testament indeed it was God’s will and order that the tithe should be given by every Israelite; but this divine command is not binding upon New Testament believers.  The New Testament contains much instruction about Christian giving, but there is not a single passage in which New Testament Christians are commanded to pay tithes.  Now, since the tithe has not been ordained by Christ, neither the Church in general nor any Christian as an individual has nay right to demand it. We must adhere strictly to this standpoint, in opposition to the Papacy and all enthusiasts. We must stand fast in the liberty where-with Christ hath made us free fro the ceremonial requirements of the Old Testament.

On the other hand, however, we must also bear in mind the Scriptural warning that the liberty which Christ has merited for us must not be used for a cloak to hide our sins. Although the tithe is not commanded in the New Testament, it is, and always will remain, the will and command of God that all New Testament Christians consecrate themselves with all they possess to Christ and contribute most willingly to all the needs of the Church.

This is the clear doctrine of Holy Scripture. Through faith in the Gospel, Christians have been translated from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of Christ, the Christian Church. When they enter this kingdom, they bring with them all they possess: body and soul with all their talents and also all their earthly goods.

from Franz Pieper, “What Christians Believe.”

See also:

1. Preaching of God’s Word by Christian Women
2. Languages Are Necessary in the Christian Church
3. The Supremacy of the “Christian I”
4. True Christian Worship

However, while all this is very true. Holy Scripture excludes Christian women from all public teaching in the presence of men. Paul’s injunction is expressed in two passages. In 1 Tim. 2, 11-14 he says: “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I will suffer not a woman to usurp the authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed then Eve. And Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived, was in the transgression.” 1 Cor. 14, 34. 35 his mandate reads: “Let your women keep silence in the churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the Law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”

Against these passages the objection has been raised that St. Paul here was simply defending an Oriental custom which is no longer binding in the New Testament, especially not in the United States, thousands of miles from the Orient. To this we reply: These texts do not show in any way that the command must be limited to a certain locality (viz., the Orient) or to a certain age. Rather, they indicate that the prohibition is to be in force in all places and at all times until the Judgment Day. Of particular importance is the argument upon which the apostle bases his interdict; for he says: “Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” This argument proves that the prohibition of St. Paul is obligatory upon the Church regardless of where it may exist or how long it may endure. From the passages quoted we therefore draw the conclusion that all Christian women are to be good teachers in their own specific sphere, but never publicly, in the presence of men.

from Franz Pieper, “What Christians Believe.”

See also:

1. Comfort for Women who have had a Miscarriage
2. Comfort For Women Who Have Had A Miscarriage
3. And The Crowd Goes Wild… Without The Preaching of the Gospel!
4. Since all Scripture is God’s Word, His majesty is also in each word

We live in the year of the 400th anniversary of the Reformation, and one is generally looking for points of view under which one can rightly understand the Reformation. EveryChristian – only the Christian – understands the Reformation. First of all, a Christian understands what sin is. He doesn’t merely know the definition of sin, be it the short definition: “Sin is wrongdoing” or a longer definition: “Sin is a departure from the rule of divine Law, whereby God is insulted and is provoked to serious punishment”, but aChristian knows also in his heart and conscience that his sins bring with it a debt before God, a debt so great and so serious that they cannot be paid by any human action or suffering.

A Christian also knows what grace is – God’s grace for the sake of Christ, His incarnate Son! As the Christian knows that no action of God’s Law on its part can satisfy a heart-stricken conscience, he also knows that through faith in what Christ has done and has suffered for him and the whole human race, the certainty of forgiveness of sins and salvation has come into his heart. The Christian knows that it is no illusion, but, thank God, a fact what the Apostle Paul says on behalf of all Christians with these words: “Now, because we have become justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we also have access by faith into this grace therein we stand, and rejoice in hope of future glory that God shall give.”

That is why the Christian now knows as Luther, after he had left the path of his own works and understood Scripture through the working of the Holy Spirit: “The just shall live by faith”, could cry out: “Porta paradisi!” and “Hic me prorsus renatum esse sensi et apertis portisin ipsam paradisum intrasse”, “Here I felt that I was born again and had entered through the widely opened door into paradise itself.”

The Christian now understands further and thanks God in return, that Luther was well prepared through inspiration and power of the Holy Spirit to lose his life, but not ready to recant his doctrine and to let his doctrine stand. Thirdly: Through his experience with sin and grace a Christian also knows that the main objection that one raises against the Reformation is absolutely invalid. The main objection is that the Reformation doctrine of grace hinders good works. A Christian knows namely that he just then – and only then – runs happily in the way of God’s commandments when he is certain through faith in the free grace of God in Christ through the forgiveness of sins and salvation. So we say rightly that every Christian through the knowledge of sin and salvation is a Christian [and] has the proper understanding of the Reformation. Also, all of you are Christians by God’s grace, and as such you have wrought knowledge of sin and grace from the Holy Spirit. So you understand the Reformation. This knowledge of sin Romans 5:1-2. “Gate of paradise!” St. Louis Ed. XIV:447. Opp. v.a. I:23. and grace also forms the essential necessary foundation for the study of theology that some of you begin, some continue. May God in His grace preserve this foundation in all of you, and be careful in all your conduct, so you do not hinder the work of God in you or even destroy it!Therefore you will not forget that all of you must go beyond your own knowledge in relation to sin and grace in the study of theology, beyond the knowledge that Christians have in general.You should obtain through the study of theology to see clearly and to refute all false doctrine that man ever and ever has falsified, especially in our time, the Christian doctrine of sin and grace.

The nominally Lutheran theology of our time and our country has become in large part Erasmian by assuming in one form or another afacultas se applicandi ad gratiam inmen. Thus the Christian doctrine of sin and grace is given up in principle. As Luther called out to Erasmus: Jugulum meum petisti, You went for the Jugular! Patroni liberi arbitrii inimici gratiae [A friend of free will is an enemy of grace] and thereby [an] inimici [enemy] of Christ and theChristian Church. God grant grace that in this academic year we teachers teach the Christian doctrine of grace, and all of you study and learn rightly this Christian doctrine of grace! Amen.

See also:

1. Praise God, for Now the Year is Ending

Only God’s Law, if it is taught without weakening and human addition, creates faith in Christ, gives the highest good here on earth, the certainty of grace and salvation, and gives strength and inclination to walk the narrow path to eternal life. Any change to the Gospel through the addition of human works, whether one calls it virtually merit or only correct behavior, is poison and death to the spiritual life, presents itself as an obstacle, as a trap, as a nuisance between people and those who acquired grace and salvation from Christ. Hence the zeal of the apostle, that he above all, taught that those who teach the Gospel of Christ differently as he taught it, utters a curse (Gal. 1:8). However, are there not Christians in church fellowships that do not remain with the Apostle’s Word in all articles? Do we condemn all, do we deny all salvation, those who deviate in any part of God’s Word? This judgment is unjustly attributed to us.

We know from God’s Word: there is an error in weakness in certain doctrines, in which Christianity can exist, when a man is in his heart a poor sinner and trusts in Christ alone as his Savior. So many join in external separation, but at the same time remain hanging upon Christ in their hearts. We think of the 200 who, invited from Jerusalem, went with Absalom and knew nothing about the evil thing. (2 Sam. 15:11). In fact, the apostle points out in our text, when he speaks of “innocent hearts”, who are seduced “by sweet words and fair speech” of those who cause division. But in spite of everything separation remains a nuisance. God will have no other doctrine in the Church except His Word, and fellowship with those teaching otherwise is from God prohibited evil association
and a constant threat for souls.

Franz Pieper, Sermon on Romans 16: 17-18 (1912)

See also:

1. Topsy-Turvy, Manlike Opinion
2. Topsy-Turvy, Manlike Opinion
3. Man Calls It ‘Unity’ – God’s Word Says ‘Separation!’
4. No Other Doctrine Except His Word

The Christian who knows his Small Lutheran Catechism can defend himself with this knowledge against all errors, for the fundamental articles of Christian doctrine are the very ones against which the errorists offend.

Gerhard writes: “As the Church differs from secular associations which are outside the Church through the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments, so it also differs from heretical communions which are in the Church through the pure preaching of the Word and the correct administration of the Sacraments.” (L. de ecclesia par. 131.)

We distinguish between erring churches, and the godless mass of people outside of the Church. The latter are those communions that, though they still call themselves churches, nevertheless no longer teach anything of the saving Gospel, or as our older teachers expressed it, have no essential parts of the revealed saving truth at all anymore. In such church bodies, insofar as their doctrine is concerned, nobody can come to saving faith. Such communions in our day are the Unitarian groups. These teach no Triune God. Consequently, they also do not teach that Jesus Christ is true God and as true God became man, to redeem mankind by His substitutionary life, suffering, and death. Consequently, nobody within this communion can come to faith in Christ as the Savior of sinners; accordingly, this group and similar ones no longer merit the name of “Christian fellowship.” They are altogether outside of the Christian Church, as it is also confessed by our Church in the first article of the Apology to the Augsburg Confession. We do not place these wholly un-Christian groups on the same level with heterodox churches. In all these heterodox churches it is still confessed that Christ is God’s Son, and that He died for the redemption of man, though indeed at the same time many errors are also being preached. But, nevertheless, souls can still come to faith in these churches. Now, we are not dealing here with the difference between the orthodox Church and the world, but with the difference between the orthodox and the heterodox Church, that is, between churches which confess the revealed truth in all articles of doctrine, and such churches which reject the truth and support error in a number of teachings.

from Franz Pieper, The Distinction Between Orthodox and Heterodox Churches

See also:

1. Veiled To Our Sight Under the Word and Sacraments.
2. Since all Scripture is God’s Word, His majesty is also in each word
3. Christians Who Refuse To Believe the Bible Is God’s Word
4. The Delusion that Scripture is Obscure

Finally, Luther describes how continuance in the Word of Scripture creates those attitudes which are essential for the theologian, namely, grateful delight in the written Word, serene confidence in his ability to teach young and old in all stations of life, lasting and increasing humility to check the pernicious, ever-menacing pride which causes so much havoc in man’s own soul and among others. Luther closes thus: “Behold, here you have David’s rule. If you now will study well according to this example, you will also sing and glory with him, ‘The Law of Thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver,’ (Psalm 119:72); again (Psalm 119:98-100) : ‘Thou through Thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies; for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers; for Thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep Thy precepts.’ Any you will experience how flat and stale the books of the Fathers will taste to you; and not only will you despise the books of the opponents, but your own writings and teachings will please you the longer, the less. When you have arrived at this point, then you can confidently hope that you have made a beginning of becoming a real theologian, who can teach not only the young and immature Christians, but also the more mature, even the perfect Christians; for Christ’s Church contains all sorts of Christians, young, old, weak, sick, sound, strong, alert, lazy, foolish, wise, etc.

But if you feel and think you know it all and are tickled with your own booklets, your teaching and writing, as if you had produced something very precious and had preached admirably, and it pleases you much to be praised before others, yes, even expect such praise, so that you do not become depressed and lose interest: if you have that sort of pelt my friend, then take hold of your ears; and if you grab right, you will find a fine pair of large, long, shaggy ass’s ears; then risk the full cost and decorate yourself with golden bells, so that, wherever you walk, people can hear you, point you out, and say: ‘Look, look! There goes that wonderful creature that can write such fine books and deliver such eloquent sermons.’ Then you are happy, and super happy in heaven; ay, where the fire of hell is prepared for the devil and his angels!

To sum up, let us seek honor and be elated where it is in place. In this Book the glory belongs entirely to God, and it says: ‘Deus superbis resistit, humilibus autem dat gratiam. Cui est gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen! (God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. To Him be the glory forever and ever. 1Peter 5:5; 11)

from Franz Pieper, ‘Christian Dogmatics, vol. I,’ (189-190).

See also:

1. Suffering and the Cross
2. The Seelsorger Confronts the Suffering Soul

a king commands his servant to deliver a message in his name. The servant consents to the command because he considers the message a matter of importance. But when the king bids him to shut the door behind him the servant refuses because he considers it trivial whether the door remains open or shut. And, in truth, it is in itself a trivial matter whether the door is open or closed. Nonetheless, behind the words, “You shall close the door” stands the majesty of the king, the king’s authority. In refusing to close the door, the servant is discounting the entire authority of the king. That the servant had agreed earlier to deliver the message was not because he held the king’s majesty in high esteem but because he in agreement with the message, because it seemed like an important matter to him. By not obeying the king’s command in the other seemingly trivial affair the servant betrayed that he did not respect the king and had decided instead to be his own master.

This is exactly the situation as it stands between God and man. God is the Master; we are His subjects. God has communicated His commands, His will, to us in His Word. If our response to even a single word of our heavenly King is “I will not do it,” or “I do not believe it,” then we dismiss His entire authority, then not God’s authority but our own judgment decides instead. Thus what Luther says is most certainly true: “God does not allow himself to be divided up, nor to be praised at one point and criticized at another, nor to be honored in one instance and scorned in another.” Whoever disdains God at one place in Scripture disdains God altogether; he in effect declares that God is not his authority. Therefore we must maintain: Everything in Holy Scripture is absolutely of equal importance in that it is God’s revelation.

The central truth of Christianity is that man is justified by faith alone, without the works of the law. When the truth os presented to someone and he replies, “It is not true,” then he is reviling God. But he reviles God equally if he says “It is not true” when Scripture tells him that Balaam’s ass could speak; for by this he is accusing God’s Word of falsehood. Consequently, it is not a question here of whether one must be aware of all things revealed in Scripture in order to be saved. It is rather a question of whether one believes the things revealed in God’s Word or whether one chooses to give Him the lie.

from Franz Pieper, “The Evangelical Church: The True Visible Church Of God On Earth, Tenth Lecture”

See also:

1. Scripture In No Way Depends On Man’s Interpretation
2. The Delusion that Scripture is Obscure
3. The Authority of Scripture
4. Scripture Cannot be Broken

In recent times many have tried to justify divergent beliefs within the church on the basis of the different gifts possessed by individual teachers and diverse nations. It is not seldom one hears the reasoning that the special attributes of the nations and teachers necessarily bring about differing beliefs. However, this is a wisdom which is described by God’s Word as folly. In Ephesians 4[:11f.], where the apostle Paul deals with the various gifts bestowed upon the church, he says the gifts have been bestowed in such a way that all Christians shall be united in the one faith and the one understanding of Jesus Christ [4:13].

Hence again we must conclude: If all Christians are to have only one faith as revealed in God’s Word, then God wishes to have only one orthodox church. To speak of different, equally valid descriptions in the church is against God’s express will. According to Scripture only one direction is acceptable, namely, the direction which in all respects adheres to God’s Word; all other directions, whether they deviate much or little, are forbidden by God’s Word.

from Franz Pieper, ‘Lectures on the Evangelical Lutheran Church, the True Visible Church of God on Earth’ (1916).

See also:

1. Faith & Knowledge
2. Helping Maintain Division & Scandal in the Church
3. Dead Faith
4. Faith Now Flits Like A Ghost in Empty Phrases…

Our position to the efforts at church union at present is continuously much criticized. Our position is this: We lament the shredding of the church into many parties teaching diverse doctrines. This shredding is a work of the devil, through which unspeakable damage is done to the church. But how is the damage to be healed? The division arose in that false teachers emerged and Christians, instead of avoiding them, held to them. If one wishes to undo the division, there is no other way in the world other than that Christians once more isolate the false doctrines, censure it and avoid it. In order that Christians be in a condition to do this, we continuously fight the false doctrine in our magazines, from the chancel and also in private conversation, and give witness to the right doctrine. We are also prepared to do more, e.g. to gather at the so called free conferences and there, with all patience, to deal with the doctrinal differences from God’s Word. To put a mere “outward association” without a unity in all articles of the doctrine revealed in the Scripture on the program; otherwise said, to negotiate how much of God’s Word we can leave out, instead of how one can can come to recognition and to acceptance of the whole revealed truth—that is not fitting for Christians.

from Franz Pieper, ‘Our Position on Doctrine and Practice’

See also:

1. The Genesis of False Doctrine
2. Beware of False Prophets
3. A Warning Against False Teachers
4. False Witness

The sectarian church bodies exist only by God’s permission. Therefore, our whole heart should belong to our orthodox Church. We should be glad to belong to it as a member, even under the most humble outward conditions; gladly serve it as preachers and teachers, and, with joyful spirit and restless zeal, work for its extension. We should most earnestly strive, and daily pray, that our descendants may be the heirs of the Church of the Reformation.

Luther confesses of himself, and of the whole church body named after him: “No man can deny this, that we have the ministry and God’s Word pure and rich, that we use and teach it diligently, without any addition of our own new human doctrine, just as Christ commanded, and as the Apostles and all Christendom have done. We invent nothing new but rather hold to and remain with the old Word of God, as the old Church had it. Therefore, with it we are the true old Church, a one-of-the-same-kind Church, which teaches and believes the one Word of God. Therefore the papists again blaspheme Christ Himself, the Apostles, and all Christendom, when they call us Modernists and heretics. For they find nothing about us except only the same old things of the Ancient Church, and that we are like it and one Church with it.” (Against Hans Wurst, 1541. E.A. 26,14.)

Luther states further: “The impurity of doctrine which is not God’s Word, or is without it, is such a poisonous evil thing that even if St. Peter, yes, an angel from heaven would preach it, it would still be accursed, Gal. 1:8. Therefore false teachers and Anabaptists or fake masters of the Sacraments cannot be or remain in the Church, as Psalm I says, for they not only undermine the life, which the Church must bear, especially where this goes on under cover, but also the doctrine is undermined, which must openly be bright and shine, so that the life can be regulated according to it.” (E.A. 26,37.)

from Franz Pieper, ‘The Distinction Between Orthodox and Heterodox Churches’

As our Confession says, “If even the very most intelligent and educated people on earth read or hear the Gospel of the Son of God and the promise of eternal blessedness, they still cannot perceive, comprehend, understand or believe, but rather, the greater diligence they employ and want to grasp these spiritual things with their reason, the less they understand and believe and hold such for foolishness or fables, until they are enlightened and taught by the Holy Ghost.”

But here they say to us, “We also do not mean a cooperation or decision from natural powers, but rather from spiritual powers given previously by God. Grace is everything to us!” In this form, error has (Tr. Note: Pieper writes “hält”, but that word “holds” has no meaning. But “hat” is entirely logical in context) captured many in our time. But they deceive themselves. That they are precisely not letting salvation come by grace comes immediately to light in various ways. They wish to explain to human reason through the assumed human cooperation, decision, good conduct, etc., why one is saved before the other. A good behavior created solely by grace would however not explain why one is saved before the other. Thus they bring even good behavior into express contradiction to grace, in that they say that salvation is not alone from God’s grace, but in a certain respect is also dependent on the conduct of the person. In short, this teaching, that man’s salvation is dependent on the cooperation, decision or good behavior of the person is grounded in the denial of sola gratia.

Franz Pieper, ‘Our Position in Doctrine & Practice’

See also:

1. Good Behavior & The Denial of Sola Gratia
2. Sola

The fact that many Christians stay in heterodox camps and thus separate from us externally is a sad fact. Why? We have already demonstrated that Christians do not belong in that camp, that they are in a fellowship which is not proper for Christians. According to God’s will and ordinance Christians ought to stay where the gospel is purely preached and the sacraments are administered in keeping with the divine Word. Further, a heterodox fellowship is not proper for those Christians because, insofar as they are Christians, they are united with us in faith and mind. In their hearts they believe in justification by grace for Christ’s sake; and they are so minded that they would belong to the orthodox church if they were correctly instructed.

In view of these facts, our public polemics (e.g., in our ecclesiastical periodicals) ought always to be directed toward leading the children of God out of heterodox camps. They should be clearly instructing, resolute, and spiritual. Also our private conversations with the heterodox ought to be suitable for leading the heterodox into the fellowship of the orthodox church. Not only pastors but all orthodox Christians should be able to speak the truth not only to unbelievers but also to the heterodox. The apostolic admonition, “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have” (1 Pe 3:15) applies not merely to pastors but to all congregational members. In this matter there is much neglect among the Christians who through God’s grace are in the orthodox camp. When they should give an answer about the truth faith it is much too easy for them to say, “I’m no scholar; go to our pastor.”

Great learning is not necessary for confessing and defending Christian doctrine. All of Christian doctrine, together with its proof from God’s Word, is in Luther’s Small Catechism. In all struggle and controversy about Christian doctrine, one only needs to remain with Christ’s words, as they read. Christ’s words are clear. Our Savior has not posed a riddle to us. But we must guard ourselves lest a human interpretation is put in the place of God’s Word. For papists, Reformed, and all heterodox constantly put explanations (glosses) in place of the Word of God. What ill treatment has, e.g., the very clear word of God, “This is my body,” to suffer from the Reformed in order to set aside and do away with the clear meaning of the words! (In his “Brief Confession concerning the Holy Sacrament,” Luther enumerated the explanations of seven “holy spirits,” to which he added the subterfuge of an eighth “young holy spirit.”30) Thus the objection that the matter between us and those who teach differently has to do not with remaining in God’s Word, but about various views and interpretations of the Word has no justification. We simply put ourselves under God’s Word; those who do away with God’s Word through their inter-pretation put themselves over God’s Word. To be sure, in order to be able to remain in God’s Word our Christians must diligently learn God’s Word and diligently be occupied with God’s Word, diligently promote the Catechism in their families, read appropriate books and periodicals, etc.

from Franz Pieper, ‘The Glorious Blessing of Fellowship in the Faith’

See also:

1. Orthodox and Heterodox Churches
2. The True Visible Church of God on Earth

- from Franz Pieper, ‘Our Position on Doctrine and Practice’

See also:

1. On Good Behavior
2. No Admittance Except On Good Behavior?
3. Sola
4. The Cause of Good Works

With this recipe, everything in the church of God is turned backwards and upside down. Faith no longer rests on the Scripture, but the Scripture rests on faith. The Church is no longer built on the ground of the Apostles and Prophets, rather the church stands on its own and the writings of the Apostles and Prophets are a growth, needing improvements, on the tree of the Church. It is not the Scripture that judges, what is right or wrong in the Church, but the Church judges what is true and false in the Scripture. In short: The supremacy of the so-called “Christian I” is proclaimed. The Church is to be the sovereign of the Word of God, and thereby of God. It is anarchy in the territory of the Church. An anarchism in the Church steps up to join the anarchism in the territory of the state in our time. It is the necessary consequence thereof, that one surrenders the Christian teaching of the inspiration of Scripture, and with that the full inerrancy of Scripture.

from Franz Pieper, ‘Our Position in Doctrine and Practice’

See also:

1. Act of Supremacy
2. Christian Unity ≠ “going along to get along”
3. Languages Are Necessary in the Christian Church
4. The Hallmark of the Christian Religion

We should, therefore, regard membership in the orthodox Church not only as our duty, but also as the greatest privilege and highest honor, even when tile orthodox Church outwardly bears a very humble form.

This thesis is a simple conclusion from the foregoing. If God has commanded fellowship with the orthodox Church — and that is the case, as we have seen — then this fellowship is our duty, a duty under all circumstances, and a duty for every Christian. God has, under no circumstances, given us a dispensation from the First Commandment, and has said to no Christian: You, for yourself, may cultivate church fellowship with false teachers, as though they were your brethren in the faith. Rather, God simply says: “Avoid them,” that is, avoid all who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned.” Rom. 16:17. Accordingly, whoever has church fellowship with the heterodox is disobedient to God.

But we should look upon fellowship with the orthodox Church not merely as a duty, in the sense that it would be a bitter must for us; simply because a true Christian, who has learned to know God as his dear and gracious Father, is happy when he knows that in a certain matter he is doing God’s will. When he does what God commands him, the Christian walks as in a paradise, asLuther says. Thus, as we have learned, only in the orthodox Church is God given the honor which He demands, and only there are sinners rightly served, so that they reach the final goal set for man, salvation. Therefore, we should look upon membership in the orthodox Church as a most glorious privilege, as a great proof of God’s grace, for which we can never sufficiently thank God. For we ourselves have not provided this treasure for ourselves, but it is the grace of God which has led us into this Church. Therefore we must, if we only reflect a bit, daily thank God on our knees, that we are members of the Church of the Reformation. Think of those Christians who are found within the heterodox Church. Compare our condition with theirs. Note how the souls of those who sincerely seek their salvation are hindered and tortured there, for example, by the false doctrine concerning the identification marks of a Christian, and by the false doctrine which makes the grace of God uncertain for sinners.

But now, even when a soul has found peace in the fact, that God, through His special grace, prevented error from getting a foothold and saw to it that the truth which was still preached in the heterodox Church was impressed upon the heart, there still remains something which must not be underestimated. Heterodox churches are such who cause divisions and offenses in Christendom. (Rom. 16:17.) Such Christians who are found in the heterodox churches support, without intending to do so, those evil works so strongly condemned in God’s Word. The heterodox churches, as such, are in a state of rebellion against God, because they will not follow certain parts of God’s Word. Now, those Christians who are in them strengthen, though unknowingly, this rebellion against God.

Finally: heterodox churches are in a continuous state of warfare against the orthodox Church, against that Church which, in conformity with the will of God, confesses all parts of the truth. Heterodox people revile and persecute those who abide by God’s Word. Surely, an evil work! For Christ says that He will regard that which is inflicted upon those who confess Him as being done to Him. Now, those Christians who are in heterodox churches take part in this evil work and persecute Christ in His confessors of the truth. It is, for example, very terrible that the Lutheran Church, because it has the true doctrine of Baptism and Lord’s Supper, is decried as “Catholic.” This attack against the true Church is no small matter. The Apostle, too, at one time before his conversion persecuted the confessors of the truth in ignorance, as he himself admits. But when he came to the knowledge of the truth, this grieved him very much; yes, it plagued him until his death. He says: “I am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.” I Cor. 15:9. Therefore, we truly have every reason to thank God daily, to thank Him on our knees, for leading us into the orthodox Church, and for preserving us from the heterodox Church. We must regard it as the greatest favor of God, next to having come to faith in Christ at all when we find ourselves in the orthodox Church.

In the discussion, this also was said: That we are in the orthodox Church by grace and not by merit, everyone should easily understand. What has anyone done about being born of Lutheran parents, educated in Lutheran schools, and acquiring a knowledge of the truth? That this is grace, everyone will understand; but that it is the highest gift of grace, all will perhaps not see. That one enjoys good health, and the like, is, of course, also a gift of God’s grace; but what is all grace in earthly things, compared to the grace, that we, as members of the true Christian Church, are virtually overwhelmed with spiritual treasures, and thus rightly provided for in respect to the soul? False Christians, of course, ridicule us when we glorify our membership in the orthodox Church as the greatest gift of grace; our reason often does the same; but the time will come when people will not laugh about this.

Indeed, even the orthodox Church is not in every respect a Pure Church. There are also godless people mixed in with it. Also in it there are hypocrites, people who use the expression “pure doctrine” only with their mouth and only outwardly act as Christians, but in their heart are far from God. These are also in the orthodox Church an abomination to God and to the Church, and when they become manifest, a disgrace for the Church.

Also the upright members of the orthodox Church are and remain poor sinners, who must daily pray the Lord’s Prayer, especially the Fifth Petition. But in spite of this, the orthodox Church is clothed with a glory by which it distinguishes itself above all other churches. It has God’s Word, pure and unmixed. In the face of all error, it firmly clings to the truth which God has revealed to man in the Holy Scriptures. It continues in the Word of Christ in every point, as Christ requires of the Church. It can, to the glory of God, boast of itself, that the words of Christ are being fulfilled in it: “If ye continue in My Word, then are ye My disciples indeed.” John 8:31. It is free from the ugly spots which disfigure the heterodox Church before God: it is free of false doctrine. It is therefore — taking the word in the spiritual sense — the precious one among the visible church bodies. To belong to it, we should regard as the highest honor — again taking the word in the spiritual sense. Is such talk offensive to you? If so, you do not realize how glorious the true doctrine, and how detestable false doctrine is to God!

To be sure, the orthodox Church outwardly often bears a very humble form. And this can, even for Christians, when they are not on their guard against their flesh, become an inducement to be ashamed of their Lutheran Church and to hanker after sectarian churches, standing there in outward splendor. But, we ask, what is the reason? Why does the Lutheran Church outwardly often appear so decidedly in the form of a servant? Is it not just because of its faithfulness to God’s Word? Is it not the circumstance, that the orthodox Church primarily in its doctrine is serious about God’s Word; that it, because of God’s command, does not remain silent in the presence of error, but condemns it; that it does not deal traitorously with the Divine truth, does not look upon truth and error as having equal rights? Is it not, furthermore, also a fact that the orthodox Church takes the Word of God seriously in regard to this life, that it impresses upon the poor, as upon the rich, that all who claim the Name of Christ have the duty to depart from iniquity, and that whoever conforms to the world will also be lost with the world? Yes, that is the practice of the orthodox Lutheran Church, and therefore it must often bear a servant’s form. Would it not be disgraceful if we would be ashamed of this Church because of its outward lowliness, which under these circumstances is an honor for it? Would it not be disgraceful if we would rather want to hold to heterodox churches, because outwardly they are more attractive and of greater value in the eyes of the world? By what means have the heterodox churches, for the most part, purchased this outward greatness and honor before the world? By their unfaithfulness to God’s Word. They deny the truth by not insisting on the exclusive validity of Divine truth, but honoring all kinds of opinions. They flirt with the wisdom of this world, and its godless manner of life.

from Franz Pieper, ‘The Distinction Between Orthodox & Heterodox Churches’

See also:

1. Orthodox and Heterodox Churches
2. Hankering After Sectarian Churches
3. How has the economy affected churches?