|
A
letter from C.F.W. Walther to Pastor Ottesen of the
Norwegian Synod, as given in "Walther Speaks to the Church, Selected
Letters by C.F.W. Walther", edited by Carl S. Meyer, Concordia
Publishing House, St. Louis London,
1973. -------------------------------------- What
Luther wishes to prove with 1 Cor. 14 in the essay of 1523 remains true
after as well as before. Luther teaches: The Keys or the office belong
originally and immediately [unmittelbar] to the whole church, that is, to
all believers. But God has established the ordinance in the church that
this office is to be administered publicly only by those especially called
to it, who are competent to teach, and who now in a special sense by
virtue of their office can in the name and command or in the stead of
Christ function publicly. However,
because the church originally has the office, every Christian can and
should make use of this privilege, where His [God's} ordinance is not
disrupted thereby, for example, among the heathen, or where necessity
cancels the ordinance, e. g., when no pastor is available to baptize a
dying child, or when a wolf opens his mouth in the church, every Christian
then has the power, yes, the duty and the obligation to oppose him. This
doctrine, which Rasmussen's practice condemns, pervades the entire Luther,
and there is no statement of Luther's, either in his earlier or his later
years, which would contradict it. Whether Luther based this doctrine at
different times in various ways doesn't make any difference as far as the
question is concerned. Granted that Luther's earlier explanation of 1 Cor.
14 is to be preferred to his later one, this would not alter the matter in
the least; for in that writing he proves only that the office is no such
monopoly for the tonsured [Beschorenen], that it could not be administered
either among unbaptized heathen on in case of necessity also by a layman.
But who denies this? This
is applicable then to Apollos, in whose case there is also this
circumstance, that he clearly possessed an immediate enlightenment or, for
all that, that he was furnished with extraordinary gifts, which were
peculiar only to the apostolic era. Only stupidity and maliciousness can
maintain that Spener had a different doctrine and developed it in his
tract on the spiritual priesthood. Concerning
students and candidates who also preach occasionally, this example is a
bad resource. For they preach for the very purpose that the ordinance of
the ministerial office be retained, not that it be upset; their sermons
are exercises, preparations, and examinations for the purpose of future
appointment and induction into the ministerial office. They do this
therefore not as laymen.... Besides that, their sermons are first
scrutinized and examined. They therewith cite [sistiren] themselves, so to
speak, for election by the church. When
the essay Kirke und Amt, page 24, says: "A layman shall not presume
to teach in the presence of bishops, except when they themselves request
it of him," this does not say there could not be cases in which such
a demand is justified. Who will deny that there could be such cases! The
question is whether such an arrangement might be made according to which
the pastor would grant the layman as a right occasionally to teach the
people publicly in his stead and to lead them publicly in prayer, and when
this is done customarily. Such action is so absolutely diametrically
opposed to the Scriptural doctrine of the office (1 Cor. 12:29; Acts 6:4;
Titus 1:5) and to Article XIV of the Augsburg Confession, to all
testimonies of pure teachers and against the constant practice of our
church, that we cannot comprehend how a person who is otherwise grounded
in God's Word and fairly well at home in the orthodox church can for one
moment be in confusion. To based such a matter on the spiritual priesthood
of Christians is nonsense, for if that procedure were followed, nobody
would have any reason to pay any attention to the calling of the pastor
[Herr Pfarrer]. Much less can such a procedure be based on a special call,
for the church cannot create a call according to its own discretion but
can issue only that call which God has instituted and which He alone
recognizes, not, however, through a human contract for a few hours and
days. Moreover, the matter cannot be founded, as is clear, on the case of
necessity. May
God give you good courage in your destined struggle! While we must defend
the rights of Christians principally against hierarchy and priestly
domination, to you it is perhaps ordained to guard God's ordinance against
Enthusiasm. Well, then, therefore in God's name go at it with a will! Your
foe is the devil, who often surrounds himself with a halo. Therefore be
confident and courageous! It is, of course, a great honor to contend for
the truth and to be allowed to suffer disgrace. By all means, do not let
yourself be beguiled by Satan to infringe on the rights of Christians for
the sake of the Enthusiasts. Keep in mind, the way of true doctrine is
narrow. God be eternally thanked that we have behind us a whole cloud of
witnesses! We want to join their train. Shall we be victorious? Yea, as
truly as the Lord liveth! The gates of hell shall not overpower His
church. God have mercy on poor Rasmussen! It will be easy to dispose of the miserable General Synod people and their stupid impertinence. Naturally, it will cost blood. But as Luther writes about the spirit of the Anabaptists: "Let them preach boldly and briskly whatever they can and against whom they will; for, as I have said, there have to be sects, 1 Cor. 11:19, and the Word of God must take to the battlefield and fight. Because of that the evangelicals are called hosts, Ps. 68:11; and Christ, the Lord of hosts, in the prophets. If their spirit is right, he will not be afraid of us nor of anybody. Let the spirits clash against one another and strike. If meanwhile some will be deceived, well, then, that's the way it goes in warfare: where there is strife and fighting, there some must fall and be wounded. But whoever fights honorably will be crowned." |