"The pastor is a minister, a servant [Knecht] of the congregation [not the synod] “for Jesus’ sake.” …… When the Word of God has neither commanded nor prohibited something, then the congregation must decide—no synod, no pastor, no presbytery, no consistory." … "We’ve been made suspect and have been slandered for saying: “In its sphere the congregation is the supreme court.” People told us, 'That [power] really belongs to the Holy Christian Church, namely the entire Church throughout the world in its totality.' But it is a lie that it must be understood that way; for Matthew 18:17 says “Tell it to the church,” and the whole context of the passage shows that absolutely nothing else can be meant but the local congregation [Ortsgemeinde]. For if “the Church in the whole world,” “the Church in its totality” were meant, when and where could it meet [and] how could a person “tell it to the Church,” as Christ commands? “The Church of the whole world” has never and nowhere been gathered at one place. In that case, Christ would have commanded something impossible—indeed, nonsensical. No, Christ obviously means the congregation to which those who sinned have come and where those are who have condemned the sinners."
<page 47>
In the Formula of Concord, this position is expressly granted to every local congregation [Ortsgemeinde], namely the "congregation [Gemeinde; Harrison uses Tappert's, Kolb-Wengert's, and McCain's (2006 p. 598) “community” in opposition to Walther’s “Ortsgemeinde” (and the Triglotta), “local congregation” translation. This is confusing Walther’s point that is clearly for the LOCAL congregation! Harrison says that J.T. Mueller "hyper-congregationalizes Walther's original", but what about Harrison? Does he not "hyper-clericalize" Walther's original? Walther clearly is saying that the Müller, p. 698 (and BSLK, 1930 p. 1056) archaic “Gemeine'' is to be orthographically updated to “Gemeinde”.] of God of every place and time", when it states:
"Accordingly, we believe, teach and confess that the congregation [Gemeinde; Walther translated FC SD X, 9 as Gemeinde, “congregation”, NOT Gemeine, “community”] of God of every place and time has the opportunity according to good judgment, authority and power to change, diminish and increase these (indifferent things *) without frivolity and offense in an orderly and proper manner, as is at all times considered most useful, beneficial and best for good order, Christian discipline, evangelical prosperity and for the edification of the church." (FC SD X, 9. Art. X, p. 698 f. [Triglotta p. 1055])
------------
*) Indifferent things (adiaphora) are those which are neither commanded nor forbidden in God's Word.
------------
[All red texts are insertions for reference and commentary]
<Page 45>
Thesis II.
Another main duty is that it should faithfully care for its congregations [Gemeinden] in an evangelical way, and therefore
a. does not arrogate to itself any authority over them, but only assists them in an advisory capacity;
Many dear congregations [Gemeinden] are afraid of synods. We have seen that here in Iowa. It took quite a while before some decided to join. They only decided to do so after they got to know their own preachers and saw that there was no danger involved. The reason for this shyness is that there are many shameful synods that have usurped the ecclesiastical power that the consistories have in Germany, and in many cases they have turned the Christian concilium into a clerical council. They do not want to serve the congregations [Gemeinden], but to rule the congregations [Gemeinden], and the latter are to provide them with the means with which they intend to carry out their <MH 260> plans. They also want to enjoy the pleasure of exercising dominion over a whole large society. For it is pleasant for the old Adam to give orders to others and not to be ordered himself. But it is un-Lutheran. Why? It is precisely unbiblical.
We read in Matthew 18: when it comes to church discipline, it ultimately goes to the church [Gemeinde], and when it has decided, Christ does not say: then the sinner can appeal to the pastor; but it says: then "hold him as a Gentile and a tax collector". Christ thus declares that the church [Gemeinde] is the last and highest judgment, from which no appeal can be made. Where it has decided according to God's word, there the matter is decided. <Page 45> No man can rebel against it, as the Scriptures teach.
That is why St. Paul says to the Corinthians: "Let no man boast. It is all yours. Whether Paul or Apollos, Cephas or the world, etc., everything is yours", 1 Cor. 3:22. He wants to say: "Do not look at the great, gifted people in the church as if they had more than you. No, it is all yours. The apostle thus makes the congregation in the Holy Spirit the owner of all the goods that Jesus has acquired for his church [Gemeinde]. On the other hand, the Savior says of the preachers: "One is your master, but you are all brothers." "Worldly kings reign, and mighty men are called lords; but you are not so: but the greatest among you shall be as the youngest, and the noblest as the servant." This is how the Lord placed the preachers, and this is what the dear apostles kept until their death, for themselves and for all others appointed by them. Even Peter, whose successor the disgraceful pope wants to be, says: "Not as rulers of the people, but as examples of the flock", 1 Pet. 5, 3.
So if you want to be the highest in the church [Gemeinde], then be the most pious, then you are also the highest; but otherwise you must not rule over the church [Gemeinde]. And to the Corinthians St. Paul writes: "Not that we are lords over your faith, but we are helpers of your joy, for you stand in the faith", 2 Cor. 1, 24. And when the apostle exhorted the Corinthians to "raise up a collection", he said: "Not that I command you anything." Consider: the great apostle Paul, who, it is said, studied in the third heaven, said to the Corinthians, when he asked for a collection: "Not, I say, that I command anything; but because others are so diligent, I also test your love to see whether it is of the right kind." So according to the heil.
Thus, according to the Scriptures, no preacher can command the congregation [Gemeinde] to do anything, but he can only repeat the Savior's commandments and say: "Thus says my Lord Christ, you must obey or you will be lost. But if he commands something himself, every member of the congregation [Gemeindeglied] can say: "Pastor, you have nothing to command us; you are not a pope. Don't you know that we are Christians? Whoever wants to command us, to order us to do something, we renounce him, for he turns a servant of Christ into a ruler of Christ, a vice-king, just as the accursed pope says <MH 261> of himself that he is Christ's representative and has the power to give laws to Christendom.
The preacher is a servant, a servant of the church [Gemeinde] "for the sake of Jesus". And that is nothing terrible for the preacher, for then he does the same thing that Jesus did. Let us only remember that the great God has come from heaven and has become our servant, and we miserable sinners should say: it would be against my sense of honor if I were a servant of the church [Gemeinde]. That does not make you a servant of men. For love makes all Christians servants, and whoever does not want to be such does not belong <Page 46> in Christ's kingdom, for Christ's kingdom is a kingdom of love.
But this is not meant to imply that the church [Gemeinde] can command him to do anything. We poor pastors are also Christians and also want Christ to be our king; otherwise, if the church [Gemeinde] had to command us, we would have a many-headed king. We are both equal; you have nothing to command me, and I have nothing to command you. But I, as a preacher, have the command of my Lord, and when I say what He commands, you must obey or you are not a Christian; for Christ says, "He who hears you hears Me, and he who despises you despises Me." It is no joke when the preacher holds up God's pure word to the congregation [Gemeinde]. The congregation [Gemeinde] cannot say: "Oh, we already know him, that poor bastard; we don't pay much attention to what he says. Yes, if Jesus came today and preached to us, we would obey."
But when the poor preacher preaches Christ's word, it is as much as if Christ were present in the flesh, for He says, "He who hears you hears Me," and you must bow. That is why it says in Ebr. 13:17: "Obey your teachers and follow them." Obey them when they appear in the name of the Lord and proclaim his word to you. But if a preacher comes with his own wisdom - even if it were really high wisdom - and he cannot say: The Lord Jesus has commanded it, then I say: "All respect to your wisdom, but you have nothing to command me. I also have experience, I also have a head; I will not take orders from you."
It is not right for the members of a congregation [Gemeinde] to always say: "The pastor has said so, therefore we must do this or that." No real church [Gemeinde] speaks like that. We are sheep, but not four-legged sheep, but sheep of Christ. Therefore, when that wise preacher says: "Of course I cannot prove it from the Bible, but you must respect the ministry that I hold," say to him: "You do not seem to know what your ministry is. We have not given you the office to rule, but to preach the gospel. That is not your office, that you should rule over us."
We now want to hear whether our dear Lutheran Church also stands in this way; for that is precisely why our synod has been so much blasphemed here in America, because we have preserved the freedom of the congregations [Gemeinden] and have always told the preachers: You are not masters, you are servants, and as such you must confess yourselves, or the Lord Christ will not confess you. <MH 262>
The fact that we have declared the congregations [Gemeinden] to be the highest court has been highly suspected. It was said that we were setting up a confused, crazy economy; this was said most of all in Germany: here the preachers were miserable servants of men, and the congregations [Gemeinden] did what they wanted with the preachers. That was [said to be] un-Lutheran, Anabaptist, independentism.
<page 47>
In the Formula of Concord, this position is expressly granted to every local congregation [Ortsgemeinde], namely the "congregation [Gemeinde; MH uses Tappert and Kolb-Wengert / McCain 2006 p. 598 “community” in opposition to Walther’s “Ortsgemeinde” (and the Triglotta), “local congregation” translation. This is confusing Walther’s point clearly for the LOCAL congregation! MH charges JTM with mistranslation, but what about MH?? Walther clearly is saying the BSLK archaic “Gemeine'' is to be orthographically updated to “Gemeinde”.] of God of every place and time", when it states:
"Accordingly, we believe, teach and confess that the congregation [Gemeinde; Walther translated FC SD X, 9 as Gemeinde, “congregation”, NOT Gemeine, “community”] of God of every place and time has the opportunity according to good judgment, authority and power to change, diminish and increase these (middle things *) without frivolity and annoyance in an orderly and proper manner, as is at all times considered most useful, beneficial and best for good order, Christian discipline and discipline, evangelical prosperity and for the edification of the church." (FC SD X, 9. Art. X, p. 698 f.)
------------
*) Middle things (adiaphora) are those which are neither commanded nor forbidden in God's Word.
------------
O dear brothers of the laity, remember this passage! Our dear Church has given you a treasure from her best days. You must hold on to it; for what good are all rights if you do not know them or do not use them? — Where God's Word has commanded or forbidden something, the congregation [Gemeinde] has the decision, not a synod, not a pastor, not a presbytery, not a consistory. That is what our church confesses. It is a liberal [or free] church. It is not a clerical ruled [pfaffenherrschaftliche; see also DL67, 341] community, but a community of members of Christ who are united by an evangelical, gentle, loving bond. [Pfotenhauer quoted this entire paragraph in DL67, p. 341] [Cp. to MH, Church & Office, p. 76: “Wilhelm Löhe promoted Luther's "from above" teaching of the office. Johann Wilhelm Friedrich Höfling, for example, promoted the “from below" teaching. Walther held both in all their challenging tension. [Walther did not teach a “challenging tension”, but “an evangelical, gentle, loving bond.”]
In this thesis, we see the "from below" teaching on the authority of the Church, present wherever two or three are gathered in Christ's name. … Here it is significant that Walther does not exclude clergy from the inherent authority that belongs to the Church. [But Walther does exclude “a pastor” (above) from decisions on adiaphora.] Clergy possess the Keys both as baptized spiritual priests and as those called to exercise the Keys—which are given to all—publicly in the name of Christ on behalf of the Church.” Harrison is always in haste to defend the clergy’s role and authority, but never speaks like Walther teaches above defending the “laity”.]
The Smalcald Articles [Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope] say: "Christ gives supreme and final jurisdiction to the Church, when He says: Tell it unto the Church.” [Matt. 18:17] (First Appendix, p. 333 [Treatise 24])
Note also this passage. We have been so suspected and reviled that we have said: "The church [Gemeinde] has the highest judgment in its circle." We were told: "Yes, the holy Christian church [Gemeinde] has that, namely the whole church on the whole earth in its entirety." But it is a lie that it is to be understood in this way, for Matthew 18:17 says: "Tell it to the church," and the whole context of the passage shows that nothing else can be meant than the local church [Ortsgemeinde]. For if "the church [Gemeinde] in the whole world", "the church in its entirety" were meant: when and where should it come together, how could it be told what Christ commands? "The church of the whole world" is never and nowhere gathered in one place. Christ would have demanded something impossible, even nonsensical. No, Christ obviously means the church [Gemeinde] where those who have sinned have come and where those who have punished sinners are. — Furthermore
The Smalcald Articles [Treatise]: <MH 263> "1 Cor. 3, 21. Paul makes all church ministers equal, and teaches that the church is more than the ministers" (Latin supra ministros, i.e. above the ministers), "therefore <page 48> it cannot be said with any truth that Peter had some supremacy over the churches and all other church ministers before other apostles. For thus he says: 'It is all yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas,' that is, neither Peter nor other ministers of the Word may attribute to them any authority or supremacy over the churches." (First Appendix, p. 330.)
Everyone, pastors and church [Gemeindeglieder] members alike, should note this passage. There our church confesses that the church is more than the ministers. Of course, when the preacher preaches God's Word, the congregation [Gemeinde] is under him, because he does not come in his own name, but in the name of Christ. But if he cannot prove that this is what Christ has commanded, then he must place himself under the congregation [Gemeinde]. It is then above him. So not even Peter had any authority over any church [Gemeinde]. He only had the duty to preach the word of God. But if he could not say: thus says my Lord Christ, thus the Holy Spirit impels me, thus God has revealed it to me; then he, the high apostle, also gave the churches [Gemeinden] all freedom to decide as they saw fit.
Hebrews 13, 17. is usually quoted; this was done by the late Pastor Grabau in Buffalo. He and his followers said: "Obey your teachers and follow them." So when the preacher says: you must build churches [Gemeinden] and schools, the congregations simply have to obey. But that is a terrible error. As the saying goes: "Where there is nothing, the emperor has lost the right." But here the pastor is supposed to have the right to order the church to be built if, for example, the congregation [Gemeinde] has no money. It is true, as Christ says: "He who hears you hears me"; but by this he does not mean: if you do anything else in life that is of equal value, I do all that; but: if you preach my word, it is as good as if I preach it myself. The fact that it comes out of your mouth does not make it less, even if the poorest man preaches it. Therefore the saying "Obey your teachers" is to be understood as follows: if they appear as your teachers, and they do so when they preach God's word to you; for if they do not, they are your deceivers, of whom Christ says: "They do not follow a stranger, but flee from him." (John 10:5). (Joh. 10, 5.) About Ebr. 13, 17. says
The Apology: "This saying demands that one should be obedient to the Gospel. For it does not give the bishops any authority or power of their own apart from the gospel. ... Therefore, if they teach unchristian and contrary to the Scriptures, they are not to be heard. Nor does this saying establish a reign apart from the gospel; therefore they cannot prove their authority, which they have established apart from the gospel, by the <Page 49> gospel, for the gospel does not speak äs traditionibus (of men's statutes), but of God's word to teach." (Art. 28. p. 289 f.) <MH 264>
So it is not only when the preacher teaches wrongly that the congregation [Gemeinde] must not obey, but also when he teaches rightly but presents something that God has not commanded. The congregation [Gemeinde] should maintain its freedom and say: we want to discuss the matter and if we have different thoughts than you, Mr. Pastor, then we will go according to our understanding. Every faithful Lutheran preacher goes to great lengths to help the congregation [Gemeinde] achieve this freedom, while the false preachers hide it from the congregations [Gemeinden]. As long as the Missouri Synod has existed, we have had to fight a serious battle to preserve the freedom of the congregations [Gemeinden]; therefore we want to continue to stand together as one man and help them defend their freedom. However, no one should become safe because things are still going well for us. Many a synod has stood well for a time and then fallen away.
But the fact that the freedom of the congregations [Gemeinden] was also taught in the Lutheran Church in the same way as the symbolic books proves this.
Heshusius*), the famous preacher from the time when the Concordia formula was made, when he writes:
"Matth. 18. the Lord Christ does not give to the secular government, but to his church the highest judgment and authority in church matters, among which almost the most important are the election and appointment of preachers and the judgment on doctrine and the dismissal of unfaithful teachers. For he expressly says that whoever the church does not want to hear should be regarded as a banished heathen and publican, which is not only to be understood as meaning that the church has the power to banish impenitent sinners, but that the church has supreme authority in all church matters, censures, church punishments, judging doctrinal divisions, appointing the pastorate, among other things." (On the appointment and dismissal of preachers. Giessen, 1608. p. 50. f.)
--------------
*) A splendid Postille of the same has been republished in St. Louis by Mr. Dette.
--------------
So in church matters the church [Gemeinde] has the highest judgment. If an obvious sinner has been dealt with in stages according to Matthew 18 and the church [Gemeinde] does not hear him, Christ does not say: "Then go to the synod (or consistory) as a higher court", but he says: then it is over; then he is considered a Gentile and a tax collector. The point here is not how the congregation should act in detail in such a case, but rather: what right does the congregation [Gemeinde] have before God according to his holy word? Only when the congregation [Gemeinde] knows this exactly does the question arise: how should we act? I should only keep freedom in my conscience, <page 50> but not use it arbitrarily without wisdom. —
Heshusius grants the congregation [Gemeinde] the right to exercise "judgment on <MH 265> doctrine". Accordingly, the preacher cannot say: I have studied 9 or 12 years, I must know better than you what is right and what is not. No, everyone is equal. Everyone must settle his own case with Christ, therefore no man can dictate to him what he should believe, only Christ can do that. And that is why no one can allow himself to be tyrannized over, but everyone must say: show us how it is written. The saying has always been true: "The more learned, the more wrong". So if someone insists on his erudition, one need not listen to him for the sake of it; but, conversely, one can say: that you want to be such a learned man, that is already questionable. For it is the same with learning as with riches. Christ says: "How hardly will the rich enter the kingdom of heaven!" One man has money, that is his wealth. Another has learning, that is his wealth. Therefore such a one must become humble and be taught like a child by God's Word, otherwise he cannot be saved.
But if someone thought: well, if the congregation [Gemeinde] is very large and there are many important men in it, then I'll put up with it. But what kind of congregations [Gemeinden] do we have? Some churches [Gemeinden] consist of 7 to 10 families. Do they also have great power, like the church [Gemeinde] in Jerusalem, which consisted of many thousands, or like the church in Rome, which also counted its members by the thousands? Yes, it is all the same. For according to Matthew 18, the Lord adds: "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them". So if there were only two or three Christians there, the Lord would also be there, and from this He proves that the church [Gemeinde] has such great power: because He is among them. But if He is there, it is not half or a quarter of a Christian, but the whole Savior. Yes, a small bush [Buschgemeinde] of seven families has as much power as all the churches [Gemeinden] in America put together, because it also has Jesus among it with all his grace and with all the rights and merits that he has earned for us on the cross. That is why he says
Heshusius: "A small group of 10 or 20 people who confess Christ correctly has just as much authority in the kingdom of Christ as a church of many thousands." (On the office and authority of pastors. Edited by Dr. Schütz. Leipzig 1854. p. 65.)
Let everyone who is in such a small community remember this, and know that it is not the same in the church as in the world. — We are glad that we are in the United States of North America, which is such a great and glorious empire. Not every fool can come and disturb the peace, as in the smaller states of South America. There is a difference whether the empire is powerful or not. But in the kingdom of God it is different. The smallest church [Gemeinde] is as high as the largest <page 51> and the largest is not higher than the smallest: because every church [Gemeinde] is only great because it has JEsum with it. <MH 266>
Luther wrote a letter from Coburg to Melanchthon in Augsburg about the fact that a preacher had nothing to command a congregation [Gemeinde]. The latter was in great distress in Augsburg, as the papist scholars were pressing him and saying that if it were to apply that the bishops had no power in the church except to preach the gospel, then everything would fall apart. The bishops should also be allowed to do this: to make ordinances, but not against God's word; otherwise, if they had demanded this, they would have clearly betrayed that they were servants of the devil. They said that the bishops were also princes, so it was revolutionary to deny them the power they did have. Poor Melanchthon had no advice and wrote to Luther. But Luther only needed one word to prove his point, the word "as", that as bishops they did not have that power. So
Luther wrote:
"A bishop as a bishop has no power to interpret some statutes or ceremonies to his church without the consent of the churches in clear words or in a tacit manner. Because the church [Kirche] is free and a ruler (Latin domina = mistress of the house), and the bishops may not rule over and molest the faith of the churches. For they are only servants and stewards, not masters of the churches. But if the church as one body agrees with the bishop, then they can impose whatever they want on each other, if only godliness does not suffer as a result; they can also leave such things as they like. ... Therefore we cannot grant the bishops the power, either by ecclesiastical or secular law, to command the Church to do anything, however right and godly it may be; for nothing evil need be done for good to result from it. Even if they wanted to use force and compel it, we must not obey, nor consent to it, but rather die; to maintain the difference between these two regimes is for the will and the law of God against ungodliness and church robberies." (Reply to Melanchthon from 1530. XVI, 1207 ff.)
Oh, the golden freedom that the Lutheran Church gives its congregations [Gemeinden]! For this reason alone we should thank God every day that we are Lutherans and that no tyranny is practiced here, as is the case in all other churches. Let us consider, dear brethren, what Luther says here. If a preacher wants to force the congregation [Gemeinde] to do something that God has not commanded, which they could do otherwise without sin, and the preacher says: by virtue of my office I command you to do this; have you not read Ebr. 13:17: "obey your teachers"? then the congregation [Gemeinde] should say: we would fall away from Christ if we <page 52> were to obey now! If you, Mr. Pastor, had said: do it for my love, we would have said: well, if it is so dear to you, then let it be done. That would be a proof of love that submits to all people. But because the preacher commands, the congregation says: we have only one king and he is extremely jealous. Therefore nothing there, since you want to command it. For then Christ would say, "You do not belong to me if you let him command you.
As if someone came to America and swore his oath of allegiance here. If he went back to Germany and wanted to be a Prussian there again without further ado, the king <MH 267> would say: No, you must first renounce before you are accepted here. So it is here. Therefore, one should rather want to die than go under such a human yoke. If our dear Lutherans in Germany knew this, they would all leave the regional church, for there they are forced everywhere to do what their sovereign "as regional bishop" commands. Here is another testimony from
Luther: "Therefore I say, neither pope, nor bishop, nor any man has power to set a syllable over a Christian man, unless it be by his will; and what happens otherwise happens from a tyrannical spirit." (Of the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, v. J. 1520. XIX, 83.)
Oh, not a "syllable", dear brothers in the ministry, let us remember that. It is no shame for us if we do not have this authority, for God has given us a much greater one. What greater power can there be in heaven and on earth than to preach the gospel? The apostle says: "If you do these things, you will save yourself and those who hear you." (1 Tim. 4:16)
Thus, a preacher becomes a savior of men! Would we not be wretched people if we desired a higher power and glory? We can be satisfied and more than satisfied. We cannot thank God enough for eternity that we are allowed to lead the glorious ministry of saving souls for eternity. Finally writes
Dannhauer: "The pastors are servants of the congregation [Gemeinde, to whom the final decision is to be entrusted." (Hodosoph. p. 179.)
But if, according to the above, a preacher cannot command a congregation [Gemeinde], what about the synod? A synod consists not only of pastors, but also of congregational deputies, i.e. also of lay people. It is therefore a representative of the church. Should it not have the power to command a congregation to do something, to give it laws which it must keep for God's sake? No, just as little as the preacher can give commandments and laws to the congregation, so little can a whole multitude of preachers together with just as many lay people. For even the church has no power to give a law that would bind individual Christians <pages 53> or even whole congregations [Gemeinden] in conscience. For in the kingdom of God we are all equal to one another. Therefore writes
Luther: "The Christian Church has the power to set customs and manners to be observed in fasting, feasting, eating, drinking, dress and the like; yet not over others, without their will, but over itself alone; has never done otherwise, nor will it ever do otherwise." (Article of the Christian Churches Violence. XIX, 1191.)
So if, apart from the commandments that God has given, there is another commandment on a Christian or a church [Gemeinde], it must be one that the Christian or church [Gemeinde] has given itself. Of course, I can put whatever I want on myself. But <MH 268> our church members [Gemeindeglieder] are not gathered here. So if we wanted to make a law here, to draft a commandment, the church [Gemeinde] would not have drafted it, the church [Gemeinde] would not have given itself this law; and if we came to our churches [Gemeinden] with it, it would have no force at all; it would only have force if the church [Gemeinde] looked at it and said: yes, it would be nice if we did it this way, and if it now made it its order by a resolution. Then it would be right. But the congregation [Gemeinde] would also have the right to say: we don't accept that. But if the synod were to say: we have decided, we are the highest court, you must obey us, or we will banish you — then the congregation [Gemeinde] would have to say: farewell, synod! we have seen ourselves. You are standing in the place of Christ, you are an assembly of mere popes. We want to be free and remain free. That is Lutheran. And this is not only what Luther said, but also the later teachers, even though they languished in abominable bondage under the bishops of the regional church. Thus writes
Gerhard: "The true Church does not mean to do mean things or to underburden for the sake of her commandment, but only for the sake of preserving order and decency, so that order may be observed and offense avoided, and as long as this is not violated, she leaves consciences free and neither makes them conscience-bound nor imposes anything necessary on them." (Confessio catholica, fol. 627.)
This is another delicious passage. So, even if a synod can say in a certain sense: we are the representatives of our congregations [Gemeinden], that is, the representatives of our church within our territory, it does not follow that we can make laws that bind consciences. We can draft laws, but if the congregations [Gemeinden] do not like them, they will not accept them. Only Christ has the right to prescribe laws to others; but no synod, no national church, indeed no church in the whole world. It can only give <pages 54> laws to itself, but no one else, no creature, not even an angel or archangel, let alone a pastor or a synod.
But now the German theologians, who believe that the state churches can only be helped by a strong church government, say: "Do you not know that the Lutheran church has always been under a consistory? There the preacher received "Rescripte" [official letters from a higher authority], which he had to read out in the church; new "ordinances" were issued, new offices were filled by him; the consistory prescribed new books for churches and schools, and one had to comply.
To this we reply: Yes, unfortunately, that is how it was in the Lutheran Church in Germany. But that was not the realization of the doctrine of the Reformation, but rather directly opposed to it. Luther also helped to establish the Consistory, but not in this ungodly sense, but he wanted to set up the Consistory as our Synod stands now, i.e. the Consistories were to be merely a collegium to which one could turn to get answers to questions in difficult cases, to be advised <MH 269> by this collegium, in short: the Consistory established by Luther was an advisory body.
Thus, for example, Löscher, the court preacher in Dresden and Oberconsistorialvice-president, who could really have had an interest in elevating the Consistory, says this:
Löscher writes: "In Leipzig (1543) a consistory was arranged, but without jurisdiction, in which, as in Wittenberg, everyone could be informed (advised)." (Unschuldige Nachrichten. Jahrg. 1703. p. 25.)
As we see, even in 1543, when the last consistory was established during Luther's lifetime, it had no "jurisdiction", i.e. no power or jurisdiction. The consistories could not give the slightest order. Anyone who had received an order could have sent the rescript back and said: I have nothing to do with you, gentlemen, in this matter. If you want to talk to me, wait until I ask you. You have nothing to command me, but only to advise me if I ask for it. That was Luther's thought.
When we began our work here in America, we said: But what is to become of our church if the preachers all stand alone, scattered over such an immense area? So Luther thought: if all the preachers stood alone, it would soon become a Babel; therefore he established consistories, but not one with "jurisdiction", but one that had a consultative power, which is actually not a power at all, but a duty; for I can be advised by whom I want.
How far Luther was from establishing Consistories with such jurisdiction as they now exercise in the regional churches <page 55> can be seen from the fact that he declared, when already during his lifetime in the Consistories the magisterial class as such wanted to govern the church through its lawyers: "We must tear up the Consistory, for in short we do not want the lawyers and the pope in it". (Walch 1 XXII, 2210 [StL 22, 1511] Table Talk]) If God had wanted Luther to live longer, he would certainly have "torn up" the consistories again.
But did it not happen later that the consistories issued orders? Indeed it is so. But that does not prove that it is right, but only that even in a church of orthodoxy all kinds of infirmities are found, that abuses creep in; and if the abuses are then protected by mighty men, it is difficult to abolish them. Now, however, through the unfaithfulness of many pastors and theologians, the princes have obtained the power to order all central matters in the church by their own authority and also to make laws in the church and not only in the state, to appoint and dismiss preachers according to their arbitrariness. This was abominable, even though even good theologians put up with it. They often complied only because they were afraid of making the whole country rebellious. But the pure doctrine of church authority was still upheld even by the strictest state churchmen at the time. For example
Hülsemann: "The dependence on the jurisdiction of another (church) and the obligation to maintain unity in faith and doctrine with all other particular churches of Christ are different from one another. The former (obligation) is of divine right (1 Cor. 12:24 ff.), the latter (dependence on jurisdiction) is of <MH 270> human right in the relation of one church [Gemeinde] to another." (Praelect. ad Breviar. c. 17. § 2. p. 1217.)
The old Leipzig theologian thus wants to say: "One should not confuse this: that one church should always have the same faith, the same doctrine and, on the basis of this doctrine, the same practice; this is divine right; for God says: "Be diligent to maintain unity in the Spirit through the bond of peace. One body and one Spirit. . . . One Lord, one faith, one baptism." In Eph. 4:3-6 and 1 Cor. 1:10 the apostle says: "Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that ye hold fast one to another in one mind and in one accord." But the fact that several congregations [Gemeinden] unite and then have a kind of superior over them, who also have something to say, is human law.
Hereby Hülsemann declares that the princes actually have no power in the church (and he said this to the princes' faces), but that if they exercised any power, it was because men <pages 56> had given it to them. He naturally wants to say the same of the consistory, superintendent, dean, bishop and whatever these offices are called.
Therefore it also follows that if the Church has given them this power, it can withdraw it again if this power conferred by men leads to the ruin of the Church. — This is why we have declared in our Synodal Constitution that the Synod is only a consultative body. Do the dear members of the congregation [Gemeindeglieder] remember that! — Most of them think when they come from Germany: Praise God, now we are rid of the Consistory, which has imposed so many laws on us and dealt with our pastors as it pleased; it has imposed taxes, appointed preachers and taken them as it wished. We are now rid of that in this free country.
But here they saw: there are synods! The old story is back again! Now it means again: now you have to submit to the synod. — Many who are good-natured by nature put up with this; others, however, always, and rightly, remain suspiciously distant from the synod. For if a synod behaves as if it were a German consistory, it should be trampled underfoot and said: "I do not want to go back under the rule of the clergy, but stand as a free Christian and thank God that I am free from slavery. I don't want to be put in new chains. That is a terrible tyranny and, as we have already heard from Luther, a Christian should rather die than tolerate it. One must say to such tyrants: "Even if you were a king or an emperor, even an angel or an archangel, I would not obey you. Shoot me dead, hang me — but I will not do your will.
But if you say: I have it by human right; one cannot turn everything upside down, I say: Well, for the sake of peace I will do it. If you appeal to my love, it is ready for anything. — From experience, one could share many examples from America of how many poor souls have perished under the tyranny of the synods until their last hour in the greatest distress, because this false church power had made a false conscience of them. They did not <MH 271> know rightly and yet did not want to submit; and when they came to die, they said to themselves: in the end you are wrong and set yourself against God: how can I be saved? But an orthodox Christian laughs at such tyrannical impositions and says: "Show me the Bible passage! But if it is the case that you merely consider it necessary, then it is none of my business; you can impose what you want on yourself, but not on me. We Christians have only one King, namely Christ.
The Constitution of the Missouri Synod states in Cap. IV. § 9: "The Synod, in regard to the self-government of the individual congregations [Gemeinden], is only an advisory body. Therefore, no decision of the former, if it imposes something on the individual congregation [Gemeinde] as a synod decision, <page 57> has binding force on the latter. — Such a synod decision can only be binding if the individual congregation [Gemeinde] has voluntarily accepted and confirmed it by a formal congregational decision [Gemeindebeschluss]. — If a congregation [Gemeinde] does not find the resolution in accordance with the word of God or unsuitable for its circumstances, it has the right to disregard the resolution and to reject it."
You see, as far as the self-government of the individual congregation [Gemeinde] is concerned, the synod is only a consultative body; i.e. the synod cannot command the congregation [Gemeinde] to do anything.
In its own government, the congregation [Gemeinde] can do as it pleases before God, and the synod has no say in the matter. But it has a duty to give advice when asked. So it cannot make laws, ceremonies or any kind of regulations, it cannot impose taxes, not even a cent. If our synod were ever to say that each congregation [Gemeinde] must give one cent every year, the congregations [Gemeinden] should say: not half a cent. You must beg, yes, we will gladly give to a beggar, but if you want to order us to do so, then our friendship is over. For — much or little — if we have granted you a cent this year, you can demand a dollar next year and even more in two years; for we would then have given you the right, the power to command us to do something. The saying that Luther uses in relation to this power is well known: "Dogs learn to eat leather by the strap." Give no man any power that God has not given, that he may say: you must, no matter how little. This is about the freedom we have as Christians, which Christ, the Son of God, has acquired for us through his precious blood of God. Therefore no one should become a servant of men.
According to our constitution, no synodal decision has binding force for the individual congregations [Gemeinden]: no decision, you see! What we decide here in the synod, the preachers and deputies must bring home and say: this is what the synod has decided. But they cannot say: now you must also keep it. No, but the congregation [Gemeinde] can say: as soon as it is a matter that is free to us as Christians, we can disregard the decision of the synod, and the synod can say nothing against it. <MH 272>
Of course, if it sees that the decision is also good for it, it would be foolish not to follow it. As if a man were walking in the forest and had lost his way, and a man came and told him where the way out of the forest was. If that man were to say, "You have nothing to command me," he would be a fool, and the congregation would be a fool if it wanted to reject advice that it saw was good. But be it as it may, the synod can now and never again say: you must obey, even if you do not want to. -
<page 58>
Now we ask everyone: Is a congregation [Gemeinde] in any danger if it excludes itself from a synod which itself declares in the constitution that it is only a deliberative body? This fear is now either childish, or one thinks: yes, they are talking well now; but it can become quite different afterwards. It can certainly be different, according to the principle: jura sunt vigilantibus, i.e. the rights are only valid if one takes it upon oneself to watch over them.
But if the Synod once deviates from this, everyone has the right to say: What do you gentlemen want? you are in contradiction with yourselves; you expose yourselves as obvious deceivers! First you say so, and then you curtail freedom again and want to shackle the congregations [Gemeinden]? —
According to the Constitution, the congregations also have the right to reject and disregard all decisions which are not in accordance with the Word of God or which they do not find suitable for their circumstances. It should be noted that it does not merely mean "not in accordance with the word of God" — that goes without saying and is even conceded by the papists - but it means "or unsuitable for their circumstances." So as soon as a congregation [Gemeinde] realizes that the decision recommended and advised to us is not suitable for us, it can say: we do not accept it.
The constitution of the Iowa Synod, for example, reads quite differently. There it says in the 5th chapter, under the heading "Powers and duties of the Synod and its districts" in § 16: "The Synod is the holder of church government over all pastors and congregations [Gemeinden] belonging to it and makes the final decision in all disputes brought before it from among its members."
This synod declares itself to be the highest court; yes, even the "holder of church government". Immediately afterwards, of course, there is another passage. They probably feared contradiction and therefore added a different form, but the same fox is behind it. It goes on to say: "Or: the synod exercises church government over all the pastors and congregations [Gemeinden] belonging to it and is the highest authority in all disputes brought before it from among its members."
Now it is true that the German regional churches have had it this way. But to the great chagrin of all orthodox believers and to the great detriment of the church. The German Lutheran Church would never have got to where it is now if the great Hanseatic League had not been in control. This can be seen from this: when a believing pastor comes somewhere, everything runs to and leaves the miserable rationalist clergymen, and where the congregation [Gemeinde] still has the power to hire preachers, and various preachers hold trial sermons, they almost always take the one who preaches a believing <MH 273> sermon, <page 59> who gives the people a clear answer to the question: What must I do to be saved? Such a person usually gets the majority of the votes, except for completely godless congregations [Gemeinden] in the cities, where bad boys are in charge.
Rationalism would never have become so dominant in the Lutheran Church if the congregations [Gemeinden] had had the right to appoint and dismiss their preachers. The old books in church and school would never have been abolished if the congregations [Gemeinden] had been consulted. But because the consistory imposed all this, with the declaration: woe to him who opposes it! the church has fallen into terrible decay. If the authorities had not done this, the whole Lutheran church would be in a different state today.
That is why we here in America must be jealous that a similar situation does not gradually develop here. For it is certain that the Iowa Synod does not mean so badly that it would be willing to force people to do anything. But they give themselves this power, and when the right people come, they will say: here it is written: "the synod is the highest authority", therefore be quiet.
As the shameful Pharisees once said: "The people who know nothing of the law are accursed" (John 7:49). They also spoke of the people with such contempt, but they showed that they were enemies of God and his word. No, God also gives his Spirit to the laity, which is why they are called upon to watch over false teachers.
So it goes without saying that it is foolish for the dear congregations [Gemeinden] that adhere to the Synod to say that they could lose their church property by joining. We would consider someone to be a very nefarious person who, as a pastor, wanted to persuade the congregation [Gemeinde] to have its church property transferred to the synod. The synod would say: What's it to us? We don't need a church there. We don't even live there. So we don't want a church, a school or a vicarage. We want to possess nothing but the dear Word of God; and when we come, we come as guests who are happy to be entertained, and then we want to strengthen ourselves together from God's Word and say what serves our salvation, and then we go home and tell our congregation: So and so has the synod said, and at home it will then be said: Well, if they speak so sensibly, then we want to consider the matter and if we find the proposals good, we want to accept them.
We have said at all times that the dear churches [Gemeinden] should not include in their constitutions the sentence: we always adhere to the Missouri Synod. We do not wish this. The name of the Missouri Synod should not appear at all in the constitution of the congregations [Gemeinden]. It is not a sin. But only not if it is added: as long as the Missouri Synod sticks to the pure doctrine it has now. Without this <page 60> addition it is wrong; no one should chain himself to men, but retain the freedom to leave it again at any moment, so that one cannot then say: you are traitors if you leave. The church [Gemeinde] has the freedom at any moment, if it joins today, to leave again tomorrow, and no man can make a conscience of it. <MH 274>
For the good Lord has given no law that at least 3, 5, 10 congregations [Gemeinden] should form a whole, send representatives and have them make decisions for them. For if a congregation did not have another congregation [Gemeinde] nearby and was alone on an island, it might not have the opportunity or the money to send its representatives to Berlin, for example. That is all free. So let no one worry that we are lusting after the property of the congregations [Gemeinden]. And if the churches [Gemeinden] wanted to give it to us, we would say: you are great! You need it yourselves and we don't need it. *)
-----------
*) That it is really most foolish to say that the congregation [Gemeinde] loses its church property by joining the synod is evident from the fact that the opposite is true. For if the congregations [Gemeinde] join, they become co-owners of the institutions and all the property of the synod, to which they may not have given a cent; while the synod never, ever receives a right to the possession of the congregation's [Gemeinde] property.
-----------
But that is what we want the church order to always say: If disputes break out in the congregation [Gemeinde], those who stick to the pure doctrine, to the confession of the Lutheran Church, should retain the church property. We do not want to catch people by trickery. Nor do we believe that we have accomplished anything great if we have only gathered many congregations [Gemeinden]. If they join reluctantly and unwillingly. No, we have only accomplished something if the congregations [Gemeinden] have come to realize that we are doing a blessed work of God here. Our dear pastors know that it is not our way to harass the congregations [Gemeinden]; rather, we want to show them the benefits of such an association and tell them how there is no danger at all to their freedom; and if they are then convinced and want to join, they are very welcome.
Following this, attention was drawn, for example, to the practice of other synods in America, especially that of the Pittsburg and Canada Synods, which shows how there the freedom of the congregations [Gemeinden] is curtailed in a tyrannical manner. We know very well that those synods which allow the church property of the congregations [Gemeinden] to be prescribed to them do not do so because they want it for themselves; but they have it prescribed to the synod in order to keep the congregations [Gemeinden] with the synod through the property; because, as is well known, many weak Christians prefer to remain with a synod that does not please them <page 61> rather than to leave and lose their church property. And those clever people know this, which is why they do it. But that is satanic. One should not seek to force something apparently good by such miserable earthly means. The Jesuits have this principle. No, if we have a good purpose, then let us use only good means to achieve our holy purpose.
That we Missourians, in spite of these principles, which we have always practiced, have been so often reviled and slandered, as if we held the same view of church property of the congregations [Gemeinden] as those tyrannical synods, is not in the least owing to some <MH 275> zealous members of the Iowa Synod, though the Synod as such has not been guilty of any such outrages.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments only accepted when directly related to the post.