The old (German) Missouri Synod had many detractors through its years of faithful teaching. The list is almost too long to enumerate but one of its detractors came from the period after the birth of the new English LC-MS, an LCMS which slowly, inexorably stripped out its old core teaching – Universal, Objective Justification (i.e. the Gospel). The report of this detractor comes from a distressing source – Prof. Roland Ziegler, a professor that I found (in an earlier blog) praiseworthy in his honoring of C.F.W. Walther. And not only that, his criticism concerns the Missouri Synod in relation to the Lutheran Confessions... could this be true?
I had earlier recommended Ziegler's essay where (on pages 147-151) he helpfully pointed out problems with the unionistic Kolb-Wengert edition of the Book of Concord. However Ziegler also distressingly quotes Hermann Sasse (à la Sasse?) to judge (and criticize) the "LCMS", sometimes known as the "Missouri Synod"... but which Missouri Synod is being judged? The old (German) Missouri Synod or the new English LC-MS?
So I am compelled to address the last section (last 5 pages, pages 160-165) in Ziegler's 2002 essay. In the following review I use the following terms:
- "LCMS", "LC-MS", "Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod", "new English LC-MS" == today's English LC-MS, definitely not the old (German) Missouri Synod
- "old Missouri", "old (German) Missouri Synod", sometimes "Missouri Synod" == old (German) Missouri Synod
- "Missouri Synod" == may refer to either the old (German) Missouri Synod or today's English LC-MS depending on the context
==>> Many hyperlinks have been added for reference and should be helpful for anyone (like me) who is not familiar with some of the things mentioned.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 5a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The New Translation of the Book of Concord:
Closing the barn door after...
Roland F. Ziegler
1)
Introduction; 2) The Text of the Book of Concord - (pgs 145-151)
These sections are informative, and in several ways defend
the Lutheran Book of Concord against deceptive practices by modern attempts to
take away the foundational text. I found out that the "Göttingen edition" from Germany in 1930 was a travesty against the true Book of Concord (page 149). (Reference info.)
3) The Relevance and Authority of the Book of Concord
in
the latest Ecumenical Dialogues - (pgs 151-160)
This section
is also informative and helpful in pointing out the importance of the Book of Concord. Ziegler even mentions Franz Pieper (page 155) as correctly rejecting a "Reformed calumny" concerning the Lord's Supper.
Now Ziegler gets close to
home with a commentary on his own LCMS:
Page 160
4) The Confessions in the LCMS
This summary
may not be surprising to many. The Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod was not a part of A Common Calling, although she participated
in the foregoing Lutheran-Reformed dialogues. [Oh?
Why did the LCMS participate in such a dialogue with the old ELCA and
Reformed? Does the LCMS consider it to be their duty to participate at every religious dialogue? Yes... No? Is there no
reason to "dialogue" with today's ELCA?] Dissenting statements and abstentions in
votes showed the increasing cleave between the Lutheran Church in America, the
American Lutheran Church, and the Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches
on the one hand, and the LCMS on the other. Nevertheless, in the first round of
Page 161
dialogue,
whose results were published in Marburg Revisited, LCMS participants Martin Franzmann
and Herbert Bouman
did not object to the following statement: "As a result of our studies and
discussions we see no insuperable obstacles to pulpit and altar fellowship and,
therefore, we recommend to our parent bodies that they encourage their
constituent churches to enter into discussions looking forward to
intercommunion and the fuller recognition of one's another ministry."45
[That is interesting, Prof. Ziegler. Two high ranking representatives of the LCMS agreed to fellowship with the the forerunners of the ELCA. Isn't that essentially what today's LC-MS
is... a church body of one spirit with the ELCA? No?]
The resolution passed at the
last convention of the LCMS, which declares that she no longer regards the ELCA
to be an orthodox church demonstrates the growing chasm between the two largest
Lutheran bodies in the United States. [OK, so
you say the LCMS is not of one spirit with the ELCA, don't you Prof.
Ziegler?] A characteristic feature of
orthodoxy is to teach the faith once delivered to the saints, as it is taught
and confessed by the church, which includes the Book of Concord. [Very good, Prof. Ziegler]
But what
about the LCMS? [So how is Ziegler going to judge the mess that
today's LCMS is in?] Do we have
the right to be self-congratulatory? To ask the question is, of course, to
negate it. By saying that I do not want to deprecate in any way all the
faithful Christians, congregations, and pastors who sincerely uphold the
confessions in the LCMS. The
LCMS has been a beacon of Lutheran orthodoxy, [Oh?? Is that right? But you just gave evidence above that 2 professors (Franzmann
& Bouman) of the LCMS were of one spirit with the forerunners of the
ELCA... how can you make this statement –"a beacon of Lutheran
orthodoxy" in light of this?]
and it is the
largest church left in which heresy has not been declared to be official
doctrine or expression of a healthy pluralism. [This sentence is difficult to fathom...
what does it mean "or expression of a healthy pluralism"? And who does Ziegler credit that no
"heresy" has been declared as "official doctrine"? And what does Ziegler say about a prominent
St. Louis professor (Theodore Graebner) in 1939 saying that the Missouri Synod
doctrine of Justification was no different than the forerunners of the
ELCA? Will Ziegler lean on the fact that
Graebner's statement was not "official doctrine"?] But, coming from somebody from the outside, these remarks might be
allowed. [Certainly! I would love to hear Ziegler's comments "from the outside" (Germany), especially
with his good essay presenting Walther's theology for his Bi-centennial
celebration.] There are also problems in the
LCMS, and they did not originate in the sixties nor were they caused by the
baby boomers.
So... just who is Ziegler going to consult as his source to find fault in the LCMS?
Hermann Sasse ...
Oh no... Hermann Sasse?! Hermann Sasse is to be Ziegler's reference to judge the LCMS?? I see now who I am going to have to contend
with – an LCMS "à
la Sasse".
- - - - - - - - - continued in Part 5b - - - - - -
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments only accepted when directly related to the post.