Some Cases of Conscience on Lutheran Church Government!

[Charles Austin]

I guess I will try to take Peter’s advice, and ignore what goes on in this thread.
I have been in online discussions since 1983, and I think I have learned how to recognize Trollish, infantile, and unbalanced behavior. We have seen it a few times before in this modest forum, and I think we’re seeing it again. And let us remember, Dave Likeness, some persons need to be “verbally attacked.” My only advice to the one laying this junk on us: Get a life. Get help.
But carry-on.

[RDPreus]

It really is possible to ignore threads and posts that we find annoying, but it isn't easy.  I understand.  You are a radical liberal and I am a stick in the mud dead orthodox conservative, but we are both argumentative at heart.  So, concerning posts that annoy, let me, in the words of former President Bill Clinton, say to you: "I feel your pain."   

[Dave Benke]

My advice to me is as follows:

This is a person, I guess not a bot, who migrated over from Lutherquest because he was too strange for that site. 
The best working tactic is to ignore both the thread and any contributions from the thread-bearer on any other thread.
A thread-bare approach.

Dave Benke

[D. Engebretson]

I think it is helpful, also, to realize that this is a discussion board.  A place, I would think, to share ideas, debate the merits of those ideas, endeavor at times to learn, hope at other times to enlighten.  It is a small corner of the world.  We are not going to move mountains here.  And we are not called to engage everything.  We are not all equally gifted or blessed with the same knowledge and insight. Sometimes I think it's easy to get waaaay to worked up here.  Walk away. Take a breath. And since this is the holy Ascensiontide, go to church and receive God's gifts!  You will gain much more.

[Brian Stoffregen]

I've replied (to no one's surprise) because I enjoy the personal study it takes to support my arguments. I learn things.


The latest learning, whatever Luther meant by "election" in his works, it was not likely to be a democratic type election (like we have in our congregations and church bodies). According to Wiki, Germany didn't become democratic until 1919.


It seems more likely that the meaning behind "election" (whatever German or Latin word Luther used,) was like God's "election" of Israel. It was not a democratic decision, but God's choice. Their election means that they are "the Chosen People."


ἐκλέγομαι and related words, ἐκλεκτός, ἐκλογή, can and are are translated, "the elect," "election," but it's not an election like in a democracy. The words, refer to making a choice. Frequently, it is about God choosing, e.g., The Chosen people, the Chosen Son; God chose you; Jesus chose the Twelve. Sometimes its about a human choice: guests choosing places of honor at a banquet; the Jerusalem council choosing representatives to send to the Gentile converts.


What is clear to me, especially when used in terms of God's choice, is that the words do not refer to a democratic election.

[Juan Jeanniton]

I've replied (to no one's surprise) because I enjoy the personal study it takes to support my arguments. I learn things.

The latest learning, whatever Luther meant by "election" in his works, it was not likely to be a democratic type election (like we have in our congregations and church bodies). According to Wiki, Germany didn't become democratic until 1919.

It seems more likely that the meaning behind "election" (whatever German or Latin word Luther used,) was like God's "election" of Israel. It was not a democratic decision, but God's choice. Their election means that they are "the Chosen People."

ἐκλέγομαι and related words, ἐκλεκτός, ἐκλογή, can and are are translated, "the elect," "election," but it's not an election like in a democracy. The words, refer to making a choice. Frequently, it is about God choosing, e.g., The Chosen people, the Chosen Son; God chose you; Jesus chose the Twelve. Sometimes its about a human choice: guests choosing places of honor at a banquet; the Jerusalem council choosing representatives to send to the Gentile converts.

What is clear to me, especially when used in terms of God's choice, is that the words do not refer to a democratic election.

But here is the historical teaching of the Missouri Synod (which I have put in red):

"With the keys of the kingdom of heaven every Evangelical Lutheran LOCAL CONGREGATION HAS ALL THE CHURCH POWER it needs, that is, the power and authority to do all things that are necessary for its administration." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.24

"Finally the congregation is represented as the SUPREME TRIBUNAL, Matt.18:15-18.... Passage quoted" Note 7 on p 29 refers to this using the term 'highest jurisdiction' and referring in turn to the "Power and Primacy Of Pope," 'highest and final jurisdiction to the church... (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.24

"In public church affairs nothing should be concluded without a vote and consent of the congregation." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.48)

(Under the topic of what kinds of things may be decided on in Voters) " In Matt. 18 the Lord Christ entrusts not to secular government but to HIS CONGREGATION THE SUPREME JUDGEMENT AND POWER to matters pertaining to the church, among which are: the election and calling of pastors, the judgment of doctrine, and the power to depose unfaithful teachers." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, quotes Hesshusius CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.54)

"To the church the final decision must be entrusted." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, quotes Dannhaus, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.56)

"SINCE THE RIGHT TO VOTE BELONGS TO THE WHOLE CONGREGATION, the voting, of course, must be done by those who represent the congregation." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.66)

"Though the constitution made the congregation the possessor of all church power and the HIGHEST TRIBUNAL, it did safeguard the ministry in various ways. The tenure of office was made permanent. No calls to pastors providing for a time limit were tolerated in the Missouri Synod." ("Government in the Missouri Synod" by Carl Mundinger, 1947, CPH, page 196)

"The Congregation, Not the Pastor, Has Supreme and Final Jurisdiction.--In according with the Scriptures (see texts quoted in previous paragraph) [These passages are printed at the end of this article after the *.] Our Confessions say:--"CHRIST GIVES SUPREME AND FINAL JURISDICTION to the church when he says: "Tell it unto the church'" (Smalcald Articles, Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope. Trigl.,p.511.) ("Pastoral Theology", John Fritz, CPH 1932, page 314)

Walther also regularly quotes Matthew 18:15-20 as textual proof for the divine institution of the Congregation in addition to the divine institution of the Voters' Assembly. He writes in his pastoral theology: "Since, ACCORDING TO GOD'S WORD, THE CONGREGATION IS THE HIGHEST COURT WITHIN ITS CIRCLE (Matt.18:17 Col. 4:17), and the preacher has church authority only in common with the congregation (Matt. 20-25-26; 23:8; 1Peter.5:1-3; 2Cor.8:, the preacher must be concerned that the congregational assembly, both regular and special ones as needed at times, be held in Christian order to consider and carry out what is necessary for its governing (Matt. 18:17; 1Cor. 5:4;2 2Cor.2;6 Acts 6:20 15:1-4, 30; 21:17-22; 1Tim.5:20)." (Pastoral Theology by C.F.W. Walther, CN New Haven Mo., 5th Edition 1906 page 257)

"Therefore, I say that neither the pope nor a bishop nor any other person has the authority to prescribe to a Christian even the least command unless he consents to it. Whatever else is done stems from a tyrannical spirit" (Babylonian Captivity of the Church 1520 Luther) Walther, Church and Ministry Page 314

"History shows, too, that for a long time in the Church of the first centuries public ministers were appointed by congregational vote. The remark of the Smalcald Articles: 'Formerly the people elected pastors and bishops.' (Trigl. 525, ibid, 70), can be proved to be historically correct." (Pieper Vol. III Page 453)

The burden of proof is on those who say that any one of the above teachings of the Missouri Synod are CONTRARY to the teachings of the Bible and Lutheran Confessions.

[Brian Stoffregen]

I've replied (to no one's surprise) because I enjoy the personal study it takes to support my arguments. I learn things.

The latest learning, whatever Luther meant by "election" in his works, it was not likely to be a democratic type election (like we have in our congregations and church bodies). According to Wiki, Germany didn't become democratic until 1919.

It seems more likely that the meaning behind "election" (whatever German or Latin word Luther used,) was like God's "election" of Israel. It was not a democratic decision, but God's choice. Their election means that they are "the Chosen People."

ἐκλέγομαι and related words, ἐκλεκτός, ἐκλογή, can and are are translated, "the elect," "election," but it's not an election like in a democracy. The words, refer to making a choice. Frequently, it is about God choosing, e.g., The Chosen people, the Chosen Son; God chose you; Jesus chose the Twelve. Sometimes its about a human choice: guests choosing places of honor at a banquet; the Jerusalem council choosing representatives to send to the Gentile converts.

What is clear to me, especially when used in terms of God's choice, is that the words do not refer to a democratic election.

But here is the historical teaching of the Missouri Synod (which I have put in red):

"With the keys of the kingdom of heaven every Evangelical Lutheran LOCAL CONGREGATION HAS ALL THE CHURCH POWER it needs, that is, the power and authority to do all things that are necessary for its administration." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.24

"Finally the congregation is represented as the SUPREME TRIBUNAL, Matt.18:15-18.... Passage quoted" Note 7 on p 29 refers to this using the term 'highest jurisdiction' and referring in turn to the "Power and Primacy Of Pope," 'highest and final jurisdiction to the church... (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.24

"In public church affairs nothing should be concluded without a vote and consent of the congregation." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.48)

(Under the topic of what kinds of things may be decided on in Voters) " In Matt. 18 the Lord Christ entrusts not to secular government but to HIS CONGREGATION THE SUPREME JUDGEMENT AND POWER to matters pertaining to the church, among which are: the election and calling of pastors, the judgment of doctrine, and the power to depose unfaithful teachers." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, quotes Hesshusius CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.54)

"To the church the final decision must be entrusted." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, quotes Dannhaus, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.56)

"SINCE THE RIGHT TO VOTE BELONGS TO THE WHOLE CONGREGATION, the voting, of course, must be done by those who represent the congregation." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.66)

"Though the constitution made the congregation the possessor of all church power and the HIGHEST TRIBUNAL, it did safeguard the ministry in various ways. The tenure of office was made permanent. No calls to pastors providing for a time limit were tolerated in the Missouri Synod." ("Government in the Missouri Synod" by Carl Mundinger, 1947, CPH, page 196)

"The Congregation, Not the Pastor, Has Supreme and Final Jurisdiction.--In according with the Scriptures (see texts quoted in previous paragraph) [These passages are printed at the end of this article after the *.] Our Confessions say:--"CHRIST GIVES SUPREME AND FINAL JURISDICTION to the church when he says: "Tell it unto the church'" (Smalcald Articles, Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope. Trigl.,p.511.) ("Pastoral Theology", John Fritz, CPH 1932, page 314)

Walther also regularly quotes Matthew 18:15-20 as textual proof for the divine institution of the Congregation in addition to the divine institution of the Voters' Assembly. He writes in his pastoral theology: "Since, ACCORDING TO GOD'S WORD, THE CONGREGATION IS THE HIGHEST COURT WITHIN ITS CIRCLE (Matt.18:17 Col. 4:17), and the preacher has church authority only in common with the congregation (Matt. 20-25-26; 23:8; 1Peter.5:1-3; 2Cor.8: , the preacher must be concerned that the congregational assembly, both regular and special ones as needed at times, be held in Christian order to consider and carry out what is necessary for its governing (Matt. 18:17; 1Cor. 5:4;2 2Cor.2;6 Acts 6:20 15:1-4, 30; 21:17-22; 1Tim.5:20)." (Pastoral Theology by C.F.W. Walther, CN New Haven Mo., 5th Edition 1906 page 257)

"Therefore, I say that neither the pope nor a bishop nor any other person has the authority to prescribe to a Christian even the least command unless he consents to it. Whatever else is done stems from a tyrannical spirit" (Babylonian Captivity of the Church 1520 Luther) Walther, Church and Ministry Page 314

"History shows, too, that for a long time in the Church of the first centuries public ministers were appointed by congregational vote. The remark of the Smalcald Articles: 'Formerly the people elected pastors and bishops.' (Trigl. 525, ibid, 70), can be proved to be historically correct." (Pieper Vol. III Page 453)

The burden of proof is on those who say that any one of the above teachings of the Missouri Synod are CONTRARY to the teachings of the Bible and Lutheran Confessions.

I am not LCMS. Walther has almost no significance in the ELCA (or its predecessor bodies).

[Juan Jeanniton]

I am not LCMS. Walther has almost no significance in the ELCA (or its predecessor bodies).

You call yourself a Lutheran. Do you subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions in a quia or just merely a quatenus sense? Now if in a quia sense, well then on what just and lawful and Scriptural authority do you reject Luther's Works as if they were anti-Scriptural, when it comes to the question of congregational voting? (I have put Luther's theses on Congregational Voting in blue.)
 
"The other way of sending is indeed also one by God, but it is done through the instrumentality of man. . . . Now a new way of sending was instituted, which works through man but is not of man. We were sent according to this method; according to it we ELECT AND SEND others, and we install them in their ministry to preach and to administer the Sacraments. This type of sending is also of God and commanded by God. Even though God resorts to our aid and to human agency, it is He Himself who sends laborers into His vineyard." LW22:482

"Let this passage be your sure foundation, [1Cor.14:31] because it gives such an overwhelming power to the Christian congregations to preach, to permit preaching, and to call. Especially if there is a need, it [this passage] calls everyone with a special call-without a call from men-so that we should have no doubt that the congregation which has the gospel may and SHOULD ELECT AND CALL from among its members someone to teach the word in its place." LW39:311

"Neither Titus nor Timothy nor Paul ever instituted a priest without the CONGREGATION'S ELECTION AND CALL." LW39:312

"Moreover, if there were really decent bishops who want to have the gospel and wanted to institute decent preachers, they still could not and should not do so without the will, THE ELECTION, AND CALL OF THE CONGREGATION-except in those cases where need made it necessary so that souls would not perish for lack of the divine word." LW39:312

"Again, we even read in Acts 4 [6:1-6] regarding an even lesser office, that the apostles were not permitted to institute a person as deacon without the knowledge and consent of the congregation. Rather, THE CONGREGATION ELECTED AND CALLED the seven deacons, and the apostles confirmed them." LW39:312

"But the community rights demand that one, or as many as the COMMUNITY CHOOSES, shall be chosen or approved who, in the name of all with these rights, shall perform these functions publicly." LW40:34

"How much more, then, does not a certain community as a whole have both right and command to commit BY COMMON VOTE such an office to one or more, to be exercised in its stead. With the approval of the community these might then delegate the office to others." LW40:36

". . . then it but remains either to let the church perish without the Word or to let those who come together CAST THEIR BALLOTS and elect one or as many as are needed of those who are capable." [2Tim. 2; Acts 18: 24ff; 1Cor.14: 30; Ti.1: 6ff.] LW40:37

Why do you reject these statements of Luther's Works on Congregational Voting as false and un-Lutheran doctrine? The burden of proof is on those who contend that the above theses written by Luther himself are false doctrines which contradict the teachings of the Bible and Lutheran Confessions.

[Brian Stoffregen]

I am not LCMS. Walther has almost no significance in the ELCA (or its predecessor bodies).

You call yourself a Lutheran. Do you subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions in a quia or just merely a quatenus sense? Now if in a quia sense, well then on what just and lawful and Scriptural authority do you reject Luther's Works as if they were anti-Scriptural, when it comes to the question of congregational voting? (I have put Luther's theses on Congregational Voting in blue.)
 
"The other way of sending is indeed also one by God, but it is done through the instrumentality of man. . . . Now a new way of sending was instituted, which works through man but is not of man. We were sent according to this method; according to it we ELECT AND SEND others, and we install them in their ministry to preach and to administer the Sacraments. This type of sending is also of God and commanded by God. Even though God resorts to our aid and to human agency, it is He Himself who sends laborers into His vineyard." LW22:482

"Let this passage be your sure foundation, [1Cor.14:31] because it gives such an overwhelming power to the Christian congregations to preach, to permit preaching, and to call. Especially if there is a need, it [this passage] calls everyone with a special call-without a call from men-so that we should have no doubt that the congregation which has the gospel may and SHOULD ELECT AND CALL from among its members someone to teach the word in its place." LW39:311

"Neither Titus nor Timothy nor Paul ever instituted a priest without the CONGREGATION'S ELECTION AND CALL." LW39:312

"Moreover, if there were really decent bishops who want to have the gospel and wanted to institute decent preachers, they still could not and should not do so without the will, THE ELECTION, AND CALL OF THE CONGREGATION-except in those cases where need made it necessary so that souls would not perish for lack of the divine word." LW39:312

"Again, we even read in Acts 4 [6:1-6] regarding an even lesser office, that the apostles were not permitted to institute a person as deacon without the knowledge and consent of the congregation. Rather, THE CONGREGATION ELECTED AND CALLED the seven deacons, and the apostles confirmed them." LW39:312

"But the community rights demand that one, or as many as the COMMUNITY CHOOSES, shall be chosen or approved who, in the name of all with these rights, shall perform these functions publicly." LW40:34

"How much more, then, does not a certain community as a whole have both right and command to commit BY COMMON VOTE such an office to one or more, to be exercised in its stead. With the approval of the community these might then delegate the office to others." LW40:36

". . . then it but remains either to let the church perish without the Word or to let those who come together CAST THEIR BALLOTS and elect one or as many as are needed of those who are capable." [2Tim. 2; Acts 18: 24ff; 1Cor.14: 30; Ti.1: 6ff.] LW40:37

Why do you reject these statements of Luther's Works on Congregational Voting as false and un-Lutheran doctrine? The burden of proof is on those who contend that the above theses written by Luther himself are false doctrines which contradict the teachings of the Bible and Lutheran Confessions.

I, and the ELCA, do not look at the Confessions the same way that the LCMS does.


I'm arguing that Luther's (or the translator's) use of "elect" and "election" in his works does not refer to a vote of congregational members. It's like God's "election" of Israel as his chosen people. It's a choice made unilaterally; not democratically.

[peter_speckhard]

I am not LCMS. Walther has almost no significance in the ELCA (or its predecessor bodies).

You call yourself a Lutheran. Do you subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions in a quia or just merely a quatenus sense? Now if in a quia sense, well then on what just and lawful and Scriptural authority do you reject Luther's Works as if they were anti-Scriptural, when it comes to the question of congregational voting? (I have put Luther's theses on Congregational Voting in blue.)
 
"The other way of sending is indeed also one by God, but it is done through the instrumentality of man. . . . Now a new way of sending was instituted, which works through man but is not of man. We were sent according to this method; according to it we ELECT AND SEND others, and we install them in their ministry to preach and to administer the Sacraments. This type of sending is also of God and commanded by God. Even though God resorts to our aid and to human agency, it is He Himself who sends laborers into His vineyard." LW22:482

"Let this passage be your sure foundation, [1Cor.14:31] because it gives such an overwhelming power to the Christian congregations to preach, to permit preaching, and to call. Especially if there is a need, it [this passage] calls everyone with a special call-without a call from men-so that we should have no doubt that the congregation which has the gospel may and SHOULD ELECT AND CALL from among its members someone to teach the word in its place." LW39:311

"Neither Titus nor Timothy nor Paul ever instituted a priest without the CONGREGATION'S ELECTION AND CALL." LW39:312

"Moreover, if there were really decent bishops who want to have the gospel and wanted to institute decent preachers, they still could not and should not do so without the will, THE ELECTION, AND CALL OF THE CONGREGATION-except in those cases where need made it necessary so that souls would not perish for lack of the divine word." LW39:312

"Again, we even read in Acts 4 [6:1-6] regarding an even lesser office, that the apostles were not permitted to institute a person as deacon without the knowledge and consent of the congregation. Rather, THE CONGREGATION ELECTED AND CALLED the seven deacons, and the apostles confirmed them." LW39:312

"But the community rights demand that one, or as many as the COMMUNITY CHOOSES, shall be chosen or approved who, in the name of all with these rights, shall perform these functions publicly." LW40:34

"How much more, then, does not a certain community as a whole have both right and command to commit BY COMMON VOTE such an office to one or more, to be exercised in its stead. With the approval of the community these might then delegate the office to others." LW40:36

". . . then it but remains either to let the church perish without the Word or to let those who come together CAST THEIR BALLOTS and elect one or as many as are needed of those who are capable." [2Tim. 2; Acts 18: 24ff; 1Cor.14: 30; Ti.1: 6ff.] LW40:37

Why do you reject these statements of Luther's Works on Congregational Voting as false and un-Lutheran doctrine? The burden of proof is on those who contend that the above theses written by Luther himself are false doctrines which contradict the teachings of the Bible and Lutheran Confessions.

I don't think subscribing to the Confessions has anything to do with needing to accept or reject extra-Confessional statements of Luther. You seem to want other people to generate a thesis for you to critique. What is your position? What problem do you see that you are you trying to solve? People can talk about whether the voting unit is a family or an individual if they want. What is your position on that? To list a bunch of quotes and then demand that people give you a basis for rejecting them-- well, that isn't why anyone logs onto the forum. 

[Charles Austin]

And Luther’s writings are not “doctrine.“ We reject a lot of things that Luther wrote.

[Donald_Kirchner]

And Luther’s writings are not “doctrine.“

Oh, I wouldn't go so far as to say that. Nor would some others. E.g.:

https://www.elca.org/JLE/Articles/931

[Juan Jeanniton]

I am wondering, does the American Lutheran Church (ELCA) admit of electing pastors, bishops, deacons, and other ministers of the Word and Sacrament through the congregational vote, and if so, when were women first granted the right to vote congregationally in the American Lutheran Church (and I am not talking about the LCMS, WELS, or CLC, but the American Lutheran Church that eventually evolved into the ELCA)? Somewhere I have read that in the early 1900's the Suomi (Finlandic Lutheran) Synod granted women the right to congregationally vote. Are there any American Lutheran Publicity Bureau articles which discuss the question of who may vote in the congregations?

[Charles Austin]

Women voted in ULCA congregation at least in the 1950s. I know this because my mother voted. We do not “elect“ ordained leaders through the congregation. They are ordained by the church body, and called by the congregation. The American Lutheran Church did not “evolve” into the ELCA. It merged with With two other church bodies.
If you’re going to truly raise these silly issues, do your homework first.

[John_Hannah]

Are there any American Lutheran Publicity Bureau articles which discuss the question of who may vote in the congregations?

I don't remember that it was the subject of any article. It was not controversial in our circles. Anyone recall an article?

Peace, JOHN