► Subscribe to our channel to get notifications when we go live: https://dtbl.org/youtube || If you have questions or topics that you’d like discussed on HTV, email them to support@higherthings.org or send text to 936-647-3235.
Tag: Roman Catholic
Article 23: Marriage of Priests, Part 2
The Purpose of Marriage
Marriage has a number of purposes. In the beginning, God created man and woman and gave them to each other in marriage for mutual companionship and help, and for the procreation of children (Genesis 2:18-25; Genesis 1:28). It should be noted that marriage was instituted before the fall into sin, and so these were its original purposes. But after the fall into sin, the estate of marriage takes on an additional dimension. But before we discuss marriage as a help for human weakness, we must take a look at sin.
Marriage and Sin
The original sin was the desire to be like God in knowing good and evil (Genesis 3:4-5). When Eve and then Adam took the fruit, they rejected the likeness that God had given them. They wanted to be like God in knowing good and evil, and they got their wish. They knew evil and they were the evil. Their sin was not just their disobedient act; it was simultaneously a corruption of their entire self. This is what theologians have traditionally called Original Sin. Original sin is not just a small defect on an otherwise good nature, but it is a total corruption of human nature. It is inherited and birth. It is the sin before we sin.
This doesn’t mean that humans are helpless to do nothing good. We can do some manner of good works in a civil sense (these are not good works before God). But at the same time, original sin means that we are always inclined to sin. And this includes sexuality. What God created as good—the estate of marriage and the gift of sex—sin has corrupted. Because of the weakness of human nature, marriage has also become after the fall into sin a help against human weakness by giving us a good outlet for sexuality.
Marriage as a Help against Human Weakness
“Seeing also that, as the world is aging, man’s nature is gradually growing weaker, it is well to guard that no more vices steal into Germany. Furthermore, God ordained marriage to be a help against human infirmity,” (Augsburg Confession XXIII.14-15). What was true in 16th century German is also true in 21st century America. Human nature is getting weaker from sin, and marriage is a help against human weakness. So marriage guards against lust because in marriage, sexuality is not about fulfilling your own desires (corrupted by original sin), but about giving of yourself for the sake of another.
It is good for a man not to marry, writes St. Paul, but if he cannot keep himself from sinning, he should get married (1 Corinthians 7). Forbidding marriage does not eliminate the natural sexual desire in humans. And because of the weakness of sin, forbidding marriage also leads to more sin. Marriage is good, and it is good for sinners. Therefore, we should seek to honor marriage as God’s good gift.
Marriage is a help for sinful people, but it doesn’t provide the solution for sin. That is only found in Jesus’ suffering and sacrificial death. It is found in the forgiveness of sins—and that even counts for sins committed within marriage.
You can read the Book of Concord at http://www.bookofconcord.org
“Concord” is a weekly study of the Lutheran Confessions, where we will take up a topic from the Book of Concord and reflect on what we believe, teach, and confess in the Lutheran Church. The purpose of this series is to deepen readers’ knowledge and appreciation for the confessions of the Lutheran Church, and to unite them “with one heart” to confess the teachings of Holy Scripture.
Rev. Jacob Ehrhard is pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church in New Haven, MO.
Article 23: Marriage of Priests, Part 1
An issue facing the Church at the time of the Reformation is whether priests, or pastors, could be married. The tradition that had been received in the medieval Church was that priests and monks were required to take a vow of celibacy and to forsake marriage. Priestly celibacy had a long history, but it was not always so. St. Paul gives instructions that ministers should have one wife (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Tit. 1:6). While he does not command ministers to get married, it is certainly allowed and even expected as the norm.
The historical circumstances of forbidding priests to marry probably has more to do with keeping church property from being inherited by a pastor’s children than it has to do with a sexual ethic. But regardless of how it started, it had become a big problem by the time of the Reformation. Forbidding marriage doesn’t eliminate the nature human desire for intimacy, and there were notorious cases of fornication and adultery by priests. As St. Paul writes, the Law also has the function of increasing sin (Rom. 5:20), and the forbidding of marriage in particular is a teaching of demons (1 Tim. 4:1-3).
The Goodness of Marriage
In answer to the question of whether priests can marry, the Augsburg Confession first points to the goodness of marriage. It is good because God created humans as man and woman in order to be fruitful and multiply (Gen 1:28). This is part of human nature. Marriage is good because God instituted it as the proper place for this procreation to take place. There is no inherent sin in sexual desire and activity; it’s only a sin when it becomes disordered.
This basic goodness of marriage is affirmed in the New Testament, where Jesus blesses marriage with a miracle at Cana, and St. Paul recommends it. Although he also says that it is good for a person not to marry, he admits that this is difficult and can only be done with a special gift from God (see 1 Cor. 7).
To impose a law where God has not is an offense to God. To impose a law that goes against what God has instituted and built into creation is disastrous. “For no man’s law, no vow, can annul the commandment and ordinance of God. For these reasons the priests teach that it is lawful for them to marry wives,” (AC XXIII.8-9). Priests, pastors, and ministers can make use of marriage because marriage is good.
You can read the Book of Concord at http://www.bookofconcord.org
“Concord” is a weekly study of the Lutheran Confessions, where we will take up a topic from the Book of Concord and reflect on what we believe, teach, and confess in the Lutheran Church. The purpose of this series is to deepen readers’ knowledge and appreciation for the confessions of the Lutheran Church, and to unite them “with one heart” to confess the teachings of Holy Scripture.
Rev. Jacob Ehrhard is pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church in New Haven, MO.
Article 22: Both Kinds in the Sacrament
The first 21 articles of the Augsburg Confession dealt with various topics of doctrine. The final 7 are about abuses that have been corrected in the churches of the Lutheran Reformation. While these concluding topics are concerning practical issues, that doesn’t mean that they have nothing to say to us today. The abuses may have been corrected, but the theological arguments that underlie them still speak to us. And we must also be on guard so that these abuses—or ones like them—do not creep back into the Church.
Concomitance
The first abuse that is considered is both kinds in the Sacrament. This refers to both of the elements in the Lord’s Supper—the bread and the wine. In the medieval Roman Church, the blood of Christ in the chalice was withheld from the laity. Only the priests would partake of the wine. The laity were only offered Christ’s body in the bread. The theological reason for this practice is something known as concomitance. Concomitance is the teaching that Christ’s whole self is present in both the bread and the wine. That means that it was only necessary to receive one element to receive Jesus’ body and blood.
Eat AND Drink
However, the Lord’s Words say, “Take, eat, this [bread] is My body…Drink of it all of you, this [wine] cup is the New Testament in My blood.” The Lord’s command is to eat and to drink. But there’s also much more than His command in the Lord’s Supper. He also gives His body specifically with the bread and His blood specifically with the cup. It’s not up to us to divide or combine what Jesus has neither divided nor combined. If we do something other than what Jesus has given us to do, we cannot be sure that we are doing it for our good.
Reintroduction of Both Kinds
There’s an interesting historical note with respect to how this change was introduced. While Luther was in hiding for fear of being executed for his teaching, one of his colleagues decided to reintroduce the chalice of wine to the laity along with the bread. The story goes that he shoved the chalice in their faces and said “Das Blut Christi!” (The blood of Christ—imagine it said with an angry German accent). The people were so frightened of this new practice, they didn’t know what to think. Luther returned to the parish for a short time and returned to their old practice so that there was time to teach the people concerning the true nature of the Sacrament.
Today
So what about today? There probably exists no Lutheran Church today that gives only the bread and not the wine. In fact, many Roman Catholic churches today also offer both kinds to the laity (though not as often). But also of concern is that, at the time of the Reformation, many people weren’t even receiving the bread! They didn’t go to communion at all. They might go to church and watch other people commune, but they did not themselves participate at all. Today there are many people who do not make use of the Sacrament frequently. It’s not that the Church removes the cup, but that the people removes themselves from both bread and wine, body and blood of Christ.
The same thing that eventually returned both kinds to the Church is also what draws you to frequently commune—the Lord’s words. “Given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins.” “This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
You can read the Book of Concord at http://www.bookofconcord.org
“Concord” is a weekly study of the Lutheran Confessions, where we will take up a topic from the Book of Concord and reflect on what we believe, teach, and confess in the Lutheran Church. The purpose of this series is to deepen readers’ knowledge and appreciation for the confessions of the Lutheran Church, and to unite them “with one heart” to confess the teachings of Holy Scripture.
Rev. Jacob Ehrhard is pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church in New Haven, MO.
Prescriptive/Descriptive
We have reached a point of division in our review of the Augsburg Confession. The first 21 articles or topics have been about doctrine—articles of faith. What follows are several abuses that have been corrected—matters that were either eliminated or reformed. The Augsburg Confession itself makes this distinction. Immediately following the Worship of the Saints, the confession states:
This is about the Sum of our Doctrine, in which, as can be seen, there is nothing that varies from the Scriptures, or from the Church Catholic, or from the Church of Rome as known from its writers. This being the case, they judge harshly who insist that our teachers be regarded as heretics. There is, however, disagreement on certain abuses, which have crept into the Church without rightful authority. And even in these, if there were some difference, there should be proper lenity [kindness] on the part of bishops to bear with us by reason of the Confession which we have now reviewed; because even the Canons are not so severe as to demand the same rites everywhere, neither, at any time, have the rites of all churches been the same; although, among us, in large part, the ancient rites are diligently observed. For it is a false and malicious charge that all the ceremonies, all the things instituted of old, are abolished in our churches. But it has been a common complaint that some abuses were connected with the ordinary rites. These, inasmuch as they could not be approved with a good conscience, have been to some extent corrected. (Augsburg Confession XXI.5-9)
Without going into an extensive study of the practices of the medieval Roman Church, it’s hard to make much sense of this little paragraph. The big takeaway is that, just as the doctrine of this confession does not differ from that of the ancient Church, likewise the Lutheran reformers did not get rid of the practices of the ancient Church. Although, it should be noted that practices never have been the same everywhere at all times. However, good practices always conform to right doctrine. Both doctrine and practice are intimately related.
Because the first 21 articles deal with doctrine and the last 7 deal with abuses of practice, some people have also made a distinction between prescriptive and descriptive articles of the Augsburg Confession. Since the first 21 articles deal with matters of doctrine, they are prescriptive—they lay down a rule of faith that must be followed. On the other hand, the last 7 they consider to be descriptive—practical matters that are solved practically, but are not binding on today’s Church. But this is an unnatural division that the Augsburg Confession does not make.
Rather, we should see the entire Augsburg Confession as descriptive. The Lutheran Confessions are not canon law, or rules that must be followed. They are confessions of faith—simply restating what Scripture and the ancient creeds have first said. It describes the faith of the evangelical Lutheran Church. First, the various articles of faith are laid out. Then that faith is put into practice.
In fact, some of the best theology is found in the practical section of the Augsburg Confession. Because theology underlies every practice addressed and every abuse corrected. Next week we will turn to these abuses and see how the theology and faith of the Church of the Augsburg Confession is put into practice.
You can read the Book of Concord at http://www.bookofconcord.org
“Concord” is a weekly study of the Lutheran Confessions, where we will take up a topic from the Book of Concord and reflect on what we believe, teach, and confess in the Lutheran Church. The purpose of this series is to deepen readers’ knowledge and appreciation for the confessions of the Lutheran Church, and to unite them “with one heart” to confess the teachings of Holy Scripture.
Rev. Jacob Ehrhard is pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church in New Haven, MO.
Categories
Who Was Martin Luther? Part 20
by Rev. Donavon Riley
After Heidelberg, and the explosion it caused amongst his listeners, Luther moved to tie his teaching to the daily life of Christians. Eck’s response to the 95 Theses, and other papal critics who pushed back against what Luther had said at Heidelberg, motivated the monk to translate his theology into language the common man could appreciate. And so, in May 1518, Luther published “Resolutions Concerning The 95 Theses.”
Luther began by addressing how the papal teaching regarding confession had no basis in Scripture. God demanded a change of heart and mind, not outward works. “Doing what was in one” had nothing to do with salvation. And buying an indulgence accomplished nothing for a Christian, because repentance and penance were two different things altogether.
Martin attacked the papal teaching about confession, penance, and outward works, but his most pointed criticism was focused on absolution. He wrote, “Christ did not intend [by the power of the keys] to put the salvation of people into the hands or at the discretion of an individual.” Everything depends, Luther asserted, on “believing only in the truth of Christ’s promise.”
This meant that for a Christian that indulgences were unnecessary. However, Luther also knew, as one Luther historian wrote, “that he was including [within his critique of indulgences] pilgrimages, special masses for the dead, shrines, religious images, relics, special spiritual exercises, and much of what was central to the practice of medieval religion.”
Luther also made sure to lay out for his readers that the Roman Church didn’t possess a treasury of merits that were available to Christians for the right price. Christians couldn’t buy their way into heaven. Only Jesus Christ and his bloody suffering and death received in faith by a Christian granted him access to the kingdom of heaven. And this was offered freely to all people apart from works, merits, or a special indulgence from the Pope.
At Heidelberg one listener said to Luther, “If the peasants heard you say that [even good deeds can be sins], they would stone you.” However, in the ‘Resolutions’ Luther went further than he had at Heidelberg on this topic. “The Church needs a Reformation,” he wrote, “but it is not the affair of one man, namely the pope, or of many men, namely the cardinals, both of which have been demonstrated by the most recent council. On the contrary, it is the business of the entire Christian world, yes, the business of God alone.”
Luther signed off by dedicating the Resolutions to Pope Leo X. The monk stated simply that if anything he’d written could be disproven by the clear words of Scripture he would recant. Martin concluded by writing, “I put myself at the feet of Your Holiness with everything that I am and have. I will regard your voice as the voice of Christ, who speaks through you.”
Next time we will examine the response of Luther’s colleagues and critics to the publication of his Resolutions and other works.
Rev. Donavon Riley is the pastor of St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in Webster, Minnesota.
