7. Representation of the Christian church.

7. Representation of the Christian church.

(Ecclesia repraesentativa)

Christ did not appoint a single person (pope, secular princes, provincial presidents, etc.) nor a college of persons (bishops, pastors, consistories, parliaments, conferences, synods, councils, etc.) who should or could decide and order ecclesiastical matters in a conscience-binding way for the Church. That

1564) Cf. Luther XX, 1781 f.

1565) J. Meisner: Schismatici alii sunt malitiosi, qui scienter et volenter contra conscientiam ex malitia ecclesiam turbant eandemque in duas partes dissentientes a se invicem dividunt; alii non malitiosi, qui ex infirmitate, ignorantia et praeconcepta opinione, quam pro verissima habent, hoc faciunt. Illi de ecclesia non sunt, quia malitiosa eiusmodi scissura maximum est peccatum, omnem extirpans fidem. … Hi de ecclesia utique sunt, quia talis ex ignorantia orta et facta turbatio non statim excutit fidem; quod tum demum fit, quando malitiosa accedit defensio. [Google] (Disput. de eccl. a. 1651 habita, th. 3, qu. 4; in Baier III, 664.)

493 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 428]

the Papacy claims to be the supreme conscience-binding representation and summary of the whole church is one of the characteristics by which the Papacy is recognized as the Antichrist prophesied in Scripture. When the secular authorities, whether monarchical or democratic or otherwise, ascribe to themselves a ius circa sacra or in sacra, this is caesareopapism. In general, if a college of persons, whether composed of ecclesiastical or secular persons or a mixture of both, is granted the power to make decisions or orders binding on certain consciences, this is not Christian, but Papist, or caesareopapist, because in the Christian Church God's Word is the only authority and all Christians are and remain directly responsible to God for everything they believe and do. Admittedly, in order to take care of certain matters, the church may be represented by persons elected by it to do so. Thus, church elders (overseers, presbyteries) may represent a local church, and conferences, synods, councils, etc., may represent other Christians and a small or larger number of local churches. But if we ask about the authority or power of these ecclesiae repraesentativae, it must be said that they always have only advisory power toward individual Christians and congregations. In the "Synodal Manual" of the Missouri Synod, ch. IV, in regard to the relationship of the synod to the local congregations, it is said, "The synod is only an advisory body in regard to the self-government of the individual congregations. Therefore, no decision of the former, if it imposes something on the individual congregation as a synodal decision, has binding force for the latter. Such a synodal resolution can have binding force only when the individual congregation has voluntarily accepted it by a formal congregational resolution or has confirmed it itself. If a congregation finds the resolution not in accordance with the Word of God or unsuitable for its relationship, it has the right to disregard and, respectively, reject the resolution." The factual situation within the Christian church is this: If it is a matter of things taught and decided in the Word of God, it is Christian not to make any man or number of men, however learned and respected, arbiters of what is scriptural doctrine. Every individual Christian must decide this for himself on the basis of the clear, infallible Word of God.

494 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 428-429]

Luther remarks (IX, 1236 f.) on 1 Pet. 3:15 “Be ready always to give an answer to every man”): "St. Peter spoke these words to all Christians: priests, laymen, men, women, young, old, and of whatever rank they are; therefore it follows that every Christian should know the reason and cause of his faith and be able to give cause and answer where it is necessary. Now, so far laymen have been forbidden to read the Bible. Then the devil made a pretty grab, that he might tear people away from the Scriptures, and thus thought: If I make the laity not read the Scriptures, I will then bring the priests away from the Bible in Aristotelem, that they may wash what they will; so the laity must hear what they preach to them. Otherwise, if the laity read the Scriptures, the priests would also have to study, so that they would not be rebuked and overcome" (by the laity from the Scriptures). But you see how here St. Peter says to all of us that we should give an answer and show the reason for our faith. If you die, I will not be with you, nor the Pope; if you do not know the reason for your hope and say: I believe as the councils, the Pope and our fathers believed, the devil will answer: Yes, but, if they were wrong? then he has won and will drag you into hell. Therefore, we must know what we believe, namely, what is the Word of God, not what the Pope or councils put or say. For you must by no means trust in men, but in the mere Word of God."1566) Luther further writes (X, 1540): "The word and doctrine of men have established and decreed that one should leave the judgment of doctrine only to the bishops and scholars and to the councils; what they decide, all the world should regard as law and articles of faith. … Christ sets the contradiction equal, takes away both the right and the power to judge the doctrine from the bishops, scholars and councils, and gives it to everyone and all Christians in general, when he says Joh. 10:4: 'My sheep know my voice'; again v. 5: 'My sheep do not follow the strangers, but flee from them, for they do not know the

1566) Luther here, as throughout, insists on the bare Scripture, nuda Scriptura, in contrast to the Scripture interpreted or commented by men, because the "bare" Scripture is in every case clearer than the exegesis or exposition, and the Christian must in every case judge by the "bare" Scripture whether the exegesis or exposition is correct. This Luther takes at length on Ps. 37, St. L. V, 334 ff.

495 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 429-430]

stranger's voice.' Here you see clearly whose right it is to judge the doctrines. Bishops, pope, scholars and everyone has power to teach, but the sheep shall judge whether they teach Christ's voice or the voice of the stranger. … Therefore we let bishops and councils decide and set what they will; but where we have the Word of God before us, it shall stand with us, and not with them, whether it be right or wrong, and they shall yield to us and obey our word." — Furthermore, concerning the things which are neither commanded nor forbidden in the Word of God (adiaphora), even in this Christians are not to accept a conscience-binding commandment from other men, be they individuals or a smaller or larger number of the same. This would be against Matt. 23:8; 1 Cor. 7:23 etc. Adiaphora are not ordered among Christians by commandment, but by way of mutual agreement (per mutuum consensum) according to love. Here it may be pointed out that votes taken in assemblies of orthodox churches have a different meaning depending on whether they concern Christian doctrines or indifferent things. Votes in matters of doctrine have only the purpose of ascertaining whether all have recognized and agree with the doctrine of the divine word; they do not have the purpose of deciding on the correctness of a doctrine by majority vote or even by unanimity. The orthodox Christian Church remains aware that it cannot make or give birth to Christian doctrines by decision, but can only ever present and confess the doctrines already present and decided in Scripture to the error that has arisen from Scripture. Axiom: Decreta concilii articulos fidei neque condunt neque in auctoritate constituunt, sed, si orthodoxa sunt concilia, articulos fidei in Scriptura iam traditos contra errores insurgentes profitentur. What is true of councils is true of all small or large church assemblies. — In indifferent things, votes are taken to find out what the majority considers most appropriate. The natural order is that in indifferent things the minority sends itself to the majority, not because the majority demands something, but for the sake of love. Because love is the queen here, the majority also sends itself into the minority under certain circumstances.1567) Christians, insofar as they are Christians, never come into dispute about indifferent things, because among them, insofar as they are Christians and

1567) For details, see Walther, Pastorale, p. 372 ff.

496 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 430-431]

walk according to the Spirit, "no one desires to be another's superior, but each wants to be another's inferior," as Luther puts it.1568) If a dispute arises in indifferent things, it is a sign that the mood in the assembly threatens to sink below the Christian level. Therefore, the proceedings about the indifferent things in question should be interrupted and the Christian level restored through instruction and admonition, for example on the basis of 1 Pet. 6:6. Luther's theses (propositiones) about the power of the church in articles of doctrine and indifferent things are well known. He says:1569) "The Christian church has no power to set any article of faith, never has, never will. The Church of God has no power to set any precept of good works, as it never has, nor ever will. All the articles of faith are sufficiently set forth in the Holy Scriptures, so that there is no need to set any besides. All the commandments of good works are sufficiently set forth in Holy Scriptures, so that it is not necessary to set any in addition. The Church of God has no power to confirm articles [of faith] or commandments [of good works] or the Holy Scriptures, as if it did so by higher power or by judicial power, never has, never will. The Church of God, on the contrary, is confirmed and approved by the Holy Scriptures or the Articles of Faith as by the Supreme Lord and Judge. The Church of God confirms the Articles of Faith or the Holy Scriptures as a subject, that is, she recognizes and confesses them as a servant does the seal of his Lord. For the sentence stands firm: he who has not power to promise and give the life to come and the life in time, cannot set articles of faith. The church of God has power to ordain usages in feasts, foods, fasts, prayers, watches, etc., but not over others, only over itself; nor has it ever done otherwise, nor will it do otherwise. But a church is a number or collection of baptized and faithful under one pastor, whether of a city or of a whole country or of the whole world. This pastor or prelate has nothing to set, because he is not the church, unless his church gives its consent."

1568) Of secular authorities, how far one owes obedience to them. St. L. X, 406.

1569) Opp. v. a.. IV, 373 sqq. St. L. XIX, 958.

497 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 431-432]

A part of the Reformed church fellowships of America is also infected with the Roman spirit in that they ascribe to themselves the power of making laws and ordinances binding upon certain things to general church assemblies, such as synods and councils. It is true that they generally say that the church may not establish what is contrary to the Word of God; for example, the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc. But the same fellowships do it roughly in the order of things not commanded in the Word of God. In these things they ascribe to their general church assemblies the power to make ordinances to which Christians are subject for the sake of conscience. For example, in the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterians, chap. XXXI: "It belongeth to synods and councils ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God and government of His Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministrations, and authoritatively to determine the same: which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission, not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God, appointed thereunto in His Word."1570) But this Roman leaven has also penetrated into Lutheran fellowships of America and Germany.1571) They teach a church government appointed by God in addition to the office of the Word of God, which can make iure divino ordinances to which the congregations must be subject. Of course, they also add the restriction that the church government must not prescribe anything that is contrary to the Word of God. But this is a contradiction in itself. It is already against the Word of God to command Christians something that God has not commanded in His Word. The fourth commandment was invoked. Parents could command their children things not commanded in God's Word, if only these things were not contrary to God's Word. Now, however, pastors and other church superiors belonged to the spiritual fathers. Therefore, by virtue of divine order, obedience is owed to them in all things that are not

1570) Cf. the quotations in Günther, Symbolik, § 154-157. [Cf. Popular Symbolics, pp. 240, 241, 243, 288.] Furthermore F. Pastor, lecture on "Church and Church Government," Delegate Synod 1896, p. 27 ff. [English ed. pg 432, note 42.]

1571) Cf. the quotations in Große, Unterscheidungslehren, p. 8. L. u W. 1870, p. 184 f.

498 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 432-433]

commanded in the Word of God, if only they are not forbidden in the Word of God. This argument has confused some. Against this it is to be said: Parents can, however, give their children commands that go beyond God's Word, because they are endowed by God with legislative power toward their children, Col. 3:20: "Little children, be obedient to parents in all things!" But the church, or individuals in the church, God has not endowed with legislative power, but here it is said, "One is your Master, Christ; but you are all brethren." Whoever wants to command in the church beyond Christ's commandment is thereby encroaching on Christ's governance and touching Christ's majesty. Christ has acquired the church for himself with his blood, so that he is its only Lord and ruler. Whoever now wants to command the church apart from Christ, whether this be much or little, thus intrudes on Christ's position as Savior and ruler. He also touches the glory of the Christians, with which their Savior has crowned them. All who, through faith in Christ, have obtained forgiveness of sins and sonship of God, have thereby also obtained the privilege of being subject in all spiritual matters only to Christ and His Word, and of being freed from all the ordinances of men. This is the glorious liberty of the children of God, purchased for them not with gold or silver, but with the dear blood of Christ, and given to them in justification. If now men claim the right to govern Christians with their (men's) commandments, they thereby turn God's free children into servants of men and actually expect them to fall away from Christ as their one Lord and Master. Therefore Luther says (XX, 207): "Dear, let it not be a small thing to you, to forbid where God does not forbid, to break Christian freedom which Christ's blood has tasted, to burden consciences with sin where there is none. He who does this and may do this, may also do all evil, yes, he already denies thereby all that God is, teaches and does, together with his Christ."

Synods with only consultative power have been ridiculed. It has been said that "confusion" and "disorder" would ensue if synods were not given the power to establish conscience-binding orders beyond the Word of God. That this is a groundless fear has been proven in America by the example of the Lutheran synods, which leave consciences completely free with regard to synodical orders. We

499 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 433-434]

so-called Missourians have enjoyed, as far as peace and order are concerned, probably the quietest time the church has ever enjoyed. We may say that the government of the church by the Word of God alone has proved itself in seventy years of practice among us. Admittedly, the flesh of Christians has also wanted to cause disorder among us. But God's Word has revealed its governing, all-controlling power. The free governance, which renounces all territories beyond God's Word of God, has bound us and held us together so firmly that those who are far away thought that we had a "high church" governance and that we were the "church party" in the Lutheran church.

A few more points related to the "ecclesia repraesentativa" are the following: 1. The calling of church assemblies within a congregation or within a conference, synod, etc. stands, of course, first of all with those who have already been commissioned with it by the congregation or an association of congregations. This, however, does not exclude the right of every Christian to call a congregational assembly, Synod convention, council, etc., if circumstances require it and those charged with the calling seem to be in default. 1572) 2. Church meetings shall be presided over by those who have been appointed to preside over them by a previously established order or who are elected to preside over them by the assembly. With regard to the presidency of the board of the local congregation, Walther says:1573) "The pastor of the congregation is to open the meetings with a prayer and, because he bears the office of the Word, which is authoritative for all offices, it is proper for hi to preside. As Luther writes: The office of preaching the Gospel is the highest of all, for it is the right apostolic office, which lays the foundation for all other offices, to which all belong, to be built upon the first," (X, 1592.) However, here too the pastor should not insist on the chair in absolute terms. More about this in the next section on congregational meetings." Walther gives excellent hints on what the presiding preacher should pay attention to in a congregational meeting, so that everything is done honestly and properly and the Christian character of the meeting is preserved.1574) The nine points listed by Walther also contain the essentials for the

1572) Cf. Luther X, 278 ff.<w:t xml:space="preserve">1573) Pastorale, p. 364.

1574) Pastorale, p. 372. [They are reproduced by Fritz, Pastoral Theology, p. 316 f]

500 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 434-435]

presiding over major church assemblies (conferences, synods, councils). The manuals on "parliamentary order" mostly provide the natural order that should be followed in all deliberative assemblies. However, care should be taken, both by the presider and by the whole assembly, that the formal application of "parliamentary rules" in the church does not restrict free debate and violate charity toward those who are less versed in parliamentary rules. 3. It should be self-evident in the Christian Church that the so-called laity also have a seat and a voice in Synod conventions. This is a truth that has also been held by later Lutheran theologians and under state-church relationships. Thus Quenstedt says: "Assessors and competent judges, besides the presiding bishop, are not only the bishops, but also faithful Christians, knowledgeable of the Scriptures, both lay and clerical, sent by the congregations to the council." 1575) The doctrine, which unfortunately has become loud even within the Lutheran Church, that in doctrinal proceedings the laity should be allowed to listen and ask questions, but not to judge and pass sentence, is the naked papist abomination.1576) All who advocate this doctrine prove eo ipso that they have lost understanding and judgment with respect to the Christian state and the Christian church. — If Quenstedt, in addition to the words just quoted, remarks in a note that all Christian "estates," namely, besides the public teachers, also persons in authority (politici) and laymen, are assessors and competent judges in councils, this requires a remark. The so-called doctrine of estates was originally well-intentioned. It was meant to express to the Papacy the truth that judgment in the Church stood not with individual privileged persons but with the whole, with Christians of all estates. But the doctrine of estates can be misunderstood as if the secular estates ("nourishing estate" and "defense estate") stood as such in the church. Now it is true that through the Holy Spirit's work of grace

1575) Systema II, 1627: Assessores et iudices competentes praeter praesidem sunt non tantum episcopi, sed quivis fideles literarum sacrarum periti, tam laici quam clerici, ad concilium ab ecclesiis missi. [Google]

1576) Luther expresses himself crudely about this abomination (XIX, 341): "To know and to judge about the doctrine belongs to all and every Christian, and that in such a way that he is cursed who offends such right by a hairbreadth.”

501 > The Public Ministry. [English ed. ~ 435-439]

people from all kinds of estates (fathers and mothers of households, employers and workers, masters and servants, country fathers and civilians, etc.) are faithful and thus in the church. But they stand in the church, not as such estates, but as believers.1577) Even the administrators of the public ministry of preaching ("doctrinal state") are not in the Church as a "state" distinct from the Christian state and endowed with special powers, but they are, by the calling of Christians, servants of Christians for the public administration of the means of grace, which have all power and efficacy in themselves and not first through the person or "state" of the servants.1578) — In discussing the ecclesia repraesentativa, it is also appropriate to remember that the learned theologians who are present at synods, for example, must use language and expressions that are understood by all those present. The use of a scholarly language that is understandable only to specialists does not correspond to the purpose of our synods and is in fact a kind of insult to the assembly. Luther's saying is well known that theologians, when they are among themselves, may speak so learnedly that even God in heaven is amazed at it, but when they speak before the people, they are obliged to use a form of expression that Hans and Grete understand.