Un4: Reformed, Baptists, Methodists — their errors

      This continues from Part 3 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting an English translation of Walther's "Foreword" on Unionism to the 1871 volume of Lehre und Wehre. — I found most helpful how Walther gives the most basic leading error of the 3 major sects. What is their chief claim to… infamy? 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  continued from Part 3  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

These latter words must necessarily be added to those that deal with those who err out of simplicity within the sects, if one does not want to wantonly impute to our Confession a doctrine that it does not have. It is true that, according to the first quotation, our church is far from being able, e. g. from condemning all Reformed Christians who still err in the article of Holy Communion, or all Baptists who still err in the doctrine of infant baptism, or all Methodists who still err in the doctrine of the marks of the state of grace; but our church is as far from allowing a Reformed, Baptist, Methodist to her altar, or even a Reformed, Baptist, Methodist preacher to her pulpit, without having first "reminded, instructed, warned," and induced them to "go and turn to the infallible truth of the divine Word with us, and our churches and schools." On the contrary, our Church declares that in the opposite case "one blind man is led astray by another." 

Hence our church has also taken Luther's anti-unionistic judgment into its Confession and made it its own, “as the most distinguished teacher of the Augsburg Confession declares”: 

“I count them all in one pie, that is, for Sacramentarians and enthusiasts, such as they are, who do not want to believe that the Lord's bread in the Lord's Supper is His true natural body, which the ungodly and Judas receive orally just as much as St. Peter and all the saints; whoever, I say (page 6), does not want to believe this, let him leave me alone, and only hope for no fellowship with me; nothing else will come of it.” (Formula of Concord, Solid Decl., Art. VII.) [#33, Triglotta] 

Hereby our church publicly and solemnly renounces church fellowship, not only with the coarse Zwinglians, but also with the fine Calvinists; and he who does not do so with her, pleads in vain that he has signed all her confessions without reserve. In her best days, our church so little regarded the mere signing of her symbols as a sufficient proof of orthodoxy and of belonging to her, that she rather excluded from co-signing those who were suspected of false doctrine and who nevertheless wished to sign. The formal confession, if it does not become a deed, is not only worthless, but can even be used as a shield to protect against just attacks. But how much our Church demands of a church in order to be able to enter into fellowship with it, it states clearly and unambiguously in the following words of our confession: "We also believe, teach, and confess that no church should condemn the other, that one has less or more external ceremonies uninvited by God than the other, if otherwise in doctrine and all the articles thereof, as well as in the right use of the holy sacraments, it has kept unity with one another". (Formula of Concord. Epitome. Art. X.)

That all the orthodox teachers of our church have ever taught and acted in accordance with this confession needs no proof for anyone who knows them even to a certain extent. Whoever desires testimony to this will find it abundantly communicated in the report of the negotiations of our Synod of the Western District of the year 1870. [Walther's Works: Church Fellowship, pgs 145-192] We repeat here only the following from the great number of pertinent quotations communicated. 

Georg König, Professor primarius at Altorf, † 1654, a theologian who was praised above others for being "a peace-loving man," writes: [Church Fellowship p. 184-185]

"If a Calvinist desires that a Lutheran preacher administer the Lord's Supper to him, then he is either a layman or a preacher, and the latter is either uninformed or well-instructed. If he is uninformed, he will perhaps not know the difference which exists between us and the Calvinists in regard to this doctrine, especially since the latter also want to pretend that they teach that the body and blood of Christ are truly present in the Lord's Supper. Then one must take the greatest care not to admit him to the Lord's Supper, since he knows nothing of the matter and is still filled with his delusion. Rather, he must first be openly instructed as to how far we differ from one another in this doctrine, and it must be clearly explained why one part can neither commune with the other, (page 7) because the Supper of the Lord, among other final purposes, also has to be a mark and watchword of the religion that each one professes. For those who fellowship with a church in the reception of this sacrament, thereby publicly confess that they accept the doctrine of that church, and reject that which is contrary to it, and thus separate themselves from the others. It is therefore necessary that he first accept our confession, reject Calvinism as erroneous, and separate himself from it, if he wishes to partake of our communion. Rather, however, this caution will be needed if the Calvinist is a well-informed one." (Casus conscientiae, p. 597. sq.)

- - - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 5 - - - - - - - - - - -

In the next Part 5, Walther turns up the heat in his warning against… Unionism.