Cyberstones-A Lutheran Blog

Comments...

• Sep 23, 2005 07:36:00 Re: Servants of God - Anon
  I'm at the St. Louis seminary right now (seems like forever), and I can tell you that the difference between the two is overstated at best and a complete lie at worst. Both places are putting out good guys. If I were to comment on where this "pastors as servants" statement came, though, I'd guess it was from the practical department. If anyone's seen Todd Wilken's article about the "feminization of the church", that describes our Intro to Pastoral Ministry to a T. Don't give your opinion, don't change anything, be niiiiiiiiiiice. They never get to the part where sometimes you have to serve people by not letting them do something that could hurt them.
  • Sep 23, 2005 07:38:40 Re: Servants of God - Petersen
    This stuff is heard at Ft. Wayne as well. And at most official pastor conferences.
    
    Both seminaries are putting out good men. But there is a difference. They are not satellite campuses.
    • Sep 23, 2005 22:42:39 Re: Servants of God - Anon
      Sorry about the whole Anon thing (you probably understand), but I'd love to hear your take on the differences between the seminaries. I don't get past the ivory tower very often lately, so I'd like an outside view.
• Sep 22, 2005 12:29:09 Re: Servants of God - Pr David Speers
  Interesting thoughts here, but they seem to be a bit handicapped. Apparently you cannot see that while we are called to serve God, He commands us to serve our neighbor. Even as Jesus did not come to be served but to serve...so also we are to serve our neighbor. (cf John 13ff) To serve someone does not necessarily have anything to do with the "customer is always right" but rather, these are the people I want you to love and care for.
  
  pr dave speers
  dspeers@altamont.net
  • Sep 22, 2005 13:59:36 Re: Servants of God - Petersen
    I think it is rather apparent that that I do see that we serve God in serving our neighbor. I think this quote demonstrates that: "We are her servant only in accordance with the instructions from the Lord. We serve at His discretion." Clearly pastors are servants of the Church. Elsewhere in this little piece I said "She outranks us." The fact is that there is no way to serve God outside of serving neighbor.
    
    Nonetheless, defining pastors as servants of the congregation seems a bit strange to me. Again: this was casual conversation and did not come from either seminary. I am not accusing anyone of anything. The person speaking wasn't making a dogmatic statement.
• Sep 22, 2005 11:40:04 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
  Yesterday I heard our seminary in St. Louis contrasted with Ft. Wayne. I was told: "St. Louis prepares men to be servants of the congregation." The implied insult is that Ft. Wayne is preparing men who act like lords. That wasn't said and this wasn't an official rep of the sem... It is a common complaint from the bureacrats. Ft. Wayne men tend toward arrogance. They are elitists, etc.... But the answer to Ft. Wayne arrogance is not effeminate politicians.
  
  I don't see much distinction between the alleged "implied insult" from an unattributed quote and an implied insult labeling those having such a complaint as "bureacrats" and "effeminate politicians"?
  
  Consider those who have expressed such kind of complaints in the past.
  
  From 1996 - "Fort Wayne visitation" ( a "summary report from LCMS President A.L. Barry on the findings of his official visitation of Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, Ind., will appear as a "notice" in the June issue of REPORTER.--Ed.") (http://web.archive...VISITATION.-960531 )
  
  "It became apparent to the visitation team that there are certain theological issues that have caused problems in the past. These issues continue to be a concern at the seminary among the faculty and larger seminary family....
  
  "1) The relationship between the church and the office of the public pastoral ministry. In such discussions it needs to be recognized that in the matter of church and ministry our Synod and seminaries still stand clearly behind Dr. C.F.W. Walther's position as he articulated it in his book Kirche und Amt. Because of this, our Synod rejects both the errors in the positions of Loehe and Grabau positions, as well as the errors in the position of Hoefling."
  
  From 1998, in an excellent discussion of the pastor and the congregation given by the Rev. Dr. James Kalthoff, Missouri District President, in his "The Pastor: God's Servant for God's People", from Church and Ministry: The Collected Papers of The 150th Anniversary Theological Convocation of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (http://www.lcms.or...anniv%20essays.pdf ), edited by Jerald C. Joerz and Paul T. McCain, 1998, pp.123-161:
  
  "The Office of the Keys is entrusted to pastors for 'public' administration of them. But every Christian, as a priest of God, may use the Keys in private by sharing the Gospel with unbelievers and by absolving a brother or sister who confesses sin to them. This clearly is the teaching of Scripture and the Confessions In our day, we occasionally hear of controversy brought on by some pastors who are insisting that the work of the Great Commission of Matthew 28, that of 'making disciples of all nations,' was only given to the apostles and that therefore lay persons should not assume this responsibility belongs also to them. Or that only pastors may carry out the Great Commission."
  
  From a 2004 Lutherquest post about a conversation with CTCR Exec. Dir. Dr. Samuel Nafzger (http://www.lutherq...041119am#POST77199 )
  
  "Last conversation I had w/Dr Nafzger went like this 'anyone who teaches that the Great Commission etc does not apply to laity faces disicipline & removal. You do not have to argue with them. You simply state what the position of the LCMS is".
  
  And from the Sept 2, 2005, Reporter article, "Conferees `model` how pastors, laity might best relate" (http://www.lcms.or...nal.asp?NavID=8688 ):
  
  "In the question-and-answer time following Blomenberg's speech, Rev. Kurt Marquart, a professor at Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, said, 'We need to name the actual problems that bedevil us." One such problem, he said, is that some pastors, those in the "pseudo-confessional movement, drooling after Rome," have adopted "an elitist view of clergy.'"
  
  • Sep 22, 2005 14:14:06 Re: Servants of God - Petersen
    I did not mean to label the man who told me "St. Louis teaches pastors to be servants of the congregation" a bureaucrat or an effeminate politician. He is neither. I am very sorry if it sounded like that.
    
    Sacerdotalism is a heresy we reject. It also makes for a very good straw man when you don't like the way someone dresses. Anti-roman prejudice works well for demagogues and populists.
    
    Anticlericalism is a heresy as well. The Office of the Ministry was instituted by Christ. It is not adiaphora.
    • Sep 25, 2005 01:12:19 Re: Servants of God - Rev. George F. Borghardt III

      Quote:

      Anticlericalism is a heresy as well. The Office of the Ministry was instituted by Christ. It is not adiaphora.

      What a funny day. I survive a hurricane AND I agree with Petersen. Has the Lord returned? (smile)
      
      Pastor Petersen, you can make my joy complete by explaining further your opposition to the understanding of some that pastors are "servants of the congregation."
      
      Are you pointing us away from being man-pleasers and to the Lord Jesus who called us? Pastors are servants of Lord Jesus Christ ("as a called and ordained servant of the Word"). Is that what you are saying?
      
      Then, in serving Him, we serve the ones He has given to us serve. He came not to be served, but to serve. You first, then me.
      
      If one of your parishoners was in fix, you'd sacrifice yourself for them, wouldn't you? Since, in Christ, they are more important than you. That's the kind of pastor you are.
      
      And if they asked you point blank, "Who is more important, Pastor - us or you?" You wouldn't hesitate and say, "You are."
      
      But absolutely wrong is the "servant" talk that is all about power (greater/lesser) of hire/fire and "you work for me, pastor." Right?
      
      
      • Sep 25, 2005 04:51:44 Re: Servants of God - Petersen
        I agree.
        
        I'd probably been less disturbed by the phrase if it had been "servants of the Church" instead of "servants of the congregation." It is only nuance, but nuance is important. For all of that I am not disputing the pious idea behind "servant of the congregation." Pastors are servants of the congregation. But like all Christians they are servants of God first. We obey God, not men.
        
        FWIW, all things fall under the first commandment, but the second is like it. The second commandment (not:"You shall not take the Name of the Lord your God in vain" but "You shall love your neighbor as yourself") fulfills the first. The only way to love God is to love neighbor. Christians (clergy and lay alike) are servants of all.
  • Sep 22, 2005 13:16:39 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
    Is Carl Vehse your real name? Just curious.
    
    I really have never understood why we must say that individual Christians are exercising the office of the keys when they forgive their neighbor from their heart or when they tell someone about Jesus. To forgive someone from the heart is required in the Lord's Prayer (see Matthew 6) of every Christian, even pastors. Every Christian, therefore, including pastors, has the duty to forgive those who sin against them from their heart. But that is not exercising the Office of the Keys. That is just being a Christian.
    
    And there simply is no command to all Christians to preach the Gospel. The so-called "great commission" was spoken to the Apostles. All Christians are free to bear witness to Christ and to confess Him before men, but pastors have no choice. If the so-called "Great Commission" was intended to apply to every believer, then my wife is sinning against Jesus' Word.
    
    Finally, is it elitist to see the Office of the Ministry as the divinely appointed means through which God wishes to deal with His people for their benefit? I find this charge of elitism to be unfounded, with all due respect to Prof. Marquardt. Most of the people that have a high view of the Office have a low view of themselves in relation to it and to the people of God. It is quite the opposite, however, for those who have a low view of the office. They usually have a high view of themselves, and think that it is their own personal touch that makes the ministry what it is. This is true whether they graduated from Fort Wayne or St. Louis seminary.
    • Sep 23, 2005 10:57:50 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
      "If the so-called "Great Commission" was intended to apply to every believer, then my wife is sinning against Jesus' Word."
      
      The Great Commission was addressed to Christ's disciples representing the Church as a whole, not exclusively representing the clergy. This is the Scriptural understanding expressed in the writings of the Lutheran Confessions, Martin Luther and other Lutheran theologians, C.F.W. Walther's _Church and Ministry_, A Brief Statement of 1932, and in other LCMS doctrinal and explanatory statements and publications. The Church carries out the Great Commission through individual Christians and through the public ministry of mediately-called servants of the Word.
      It would be a sin to refuse or ignore the opportunities God gives all Christians daily, in their individual vocations, to tell others about the Good News. We all need forgiveness for such failings.
      
      "To forgive someone from the heart is required in the Lord's Prayer (see Matthew 6) of every Christian, even pastors."
      
      This red herring is not what Dr. Kalthoff, nor the Lutheran Confession, was referring to when he said "every Christian, as a priest of God, may use the Keys in private by sharing the Gospel with unbelievers and by absolving a brother or sister who confesses sin to them."
      
      As for Carl Vehse, it is an appropriate Lutheran nom de guerre against residual Stephanism within the Missouri Synod... on the left and the right.
      • Sep 24, 2005 07:14:22 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
        Okay, let's take this quote from 2 Cor. 5:20 - "We are ambassadors for Christ, God making HIs appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God." Now, I have heard this quote applied generally to all Christians by some pastors who share your view, as if the Apostle was saying to the Church, we (that is, all of us here including you Christians) are ambassadors for Christ. Of course, I've heard the same thing coming from the lips of various so-called evangelicals. Clearly the apostle is speaking about he and the other apostles when he says "we." Don't you agree?
        
        In Matthew 4 and 10 when Christ calls the disciples to "come and follow Him" do you not see this as establishing the ministry? I do. Proponents of your view talk about this as though Christ were calling the church into existence. If that is true, though, then there are no women in the church. And what about all the crowds who listen to Jesus? And what about Mary, who sits at the feet of Jesus listening to His Word. Are these not part of the Church? Christ's call to the Apostles is a special call, not merely a general call to faith, but a call into the ministry of that Faith. When Jesus calls Matthew, and James, and John, I do not see a call merely to believe, but I see him as calling men who will carry on His work of preaching repentance and forgiveness of sins within the Church and beyond. It is interesting when you look closely at Matthew 4. Jesus says: "I must go to other places to preach the Gospel" (or something like that) and then immediately after that he calls the first disciples. From the beginning of the Gospels to the end, Jesus calls, prepares, and sends His Apostles into the world. In some sense, yes, they do represent the Church even as pastors are representatives of the church. But in various mandates (Matt 28, JOhn 20, etc.) they represent the clergy. That is why Luther says in one of his writings (which I can produce) that Jesus was speaking to all pastors in the person of St. Peter when he said: "Feed my sheep." Is that a general mandate to every Christian? No. How do the sheep feed themselves?
        • Oct 05, 2005 08:27:55 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
          Rev. Beisel wrote:
          
          "But in various mandates (Matt 28, JOhn 20, etc.) they represent the clergy. That is why Luther says in one of his writings (which I can produce) that Jesus was speaking to all pastors in the person of St. Peter when he said: "Feed my sheep." Is that a general mandate to every Christian? No."
          
          Any alleged clerical exclusiveness of John 20 from Luther should be placed in context with his various sermons on John 20:19-31, and in particular, this sermon excerpt from Luther's writings found in the Erlangen edition, Vol. 2, p. 324; the Walch edition, Vol. 2, p. 989; and the St. Louis edition, Vol. 2, p. 724, in which Dr. Luther wrote:
          

          Quote:

          "13. The first and highest work of love a Christian ought to do when he has become a believer, is to bring others also to believe in the way he himself came to believe. And here you notice Christ begins and institutes the office of the ministry of the external Word in every Christian; for he himself came with this office and the external Word. Let us lay hold of this, for we must admit it was spoken to us. In this way the Lord desires to say: You have now received enough from me, peace and joy, and all you should have; for your person you need nothing more. Therefore labor now and follow my example, as I have done, so do ye. My Father sent me into the world only for your sake, that I might serve you, not for my own benefit. I have finished the work, have died for you, and given you all that I am and have; remember and do ye also likewise, that henceforth ye may only serve and help everybody, otherwise ye would have nothing to do on earth. For by faith ye have enough of everything. Hence I send you into the world as my Father hath sent me; namely, that every Christian should instruct and teach his neighbor, that he may also come to Christ. By this, no power is delegated exclusively to popes and bishops, but all Christians are commanded to profess their faith publicly and also to lead others to believe.
          
          14. Secondly, if you have exercised yourself in this highest work and taught others the right way of truth, then make up your mind to keep on and serve everybody. Then the example of your life and good works follows; not that you can thereby merit and acquire anything, seeing you have beforehand everything that is necessary to salvation. Furthermore Christ now gives a command, he breathes upon the disciples and says: “Receive ye the Holy Spirit: whose soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
          
          15. This is a great and mighty power which no one can sufficiently extol, given to mortal men of flesh and blood over sin, death and hell, and over all things...
          
          16. This same power belongs to every Christian, since Christ has made us all partakers of his power and dominion; and here his is not a civil but a spiritual rule, and his Christians also rule spiritually."

          The exclusiveness of Matthew 28 and John 20 to only clergy sounds like something coming from Loehe, Grabau and the Buffalo Synod, not Luther, Walther and the Missouri Synod. But then this takes us back to the concerns raised by President Barry, President Kalthoff, Dr. Nafzger, and Professor Marquart.
        • Sep 24, 2005 09:46:54 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
          Rev. Beisel,
          
          The Office of Public Ministry is established by Christ and explained in Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. But this is not the issue. The issue is your personal, stated position, though you are a pastor in the Missouri Synod, that Matthew 28:19-20 was given to the apostles exclusively representing the clergy and not the Church.
          
          Your personal view is in direct contradiction with the position of Scriptural understanding contained in the Lutheran Confessions, in the writings of Martin Luther and other Lutheran theologians, in the official Missouri Synod doctrinal statements from C.F.W. Walther's Church and Ministry and A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod, and in other LCMS doctrinal and explanatory statements and publications, several of which I have mentioned earlier.
          
          So I simply ask you, "Yes" or "No": Based on the above referenced documents, do you, as a Missouri Synod Lutheran pastor, accept and teach the Lutheran and Missouri Synod doctrinal position that Matthew 20:19,20 applies to the whole Church?
          • Sep 24, 2005 10:41:36 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
            As I suspected, you could not debate the Scriptures with me. And since you refuse to do that, I refuse to satisfy you with an answer to your question.
            
            I am trying to discuss theology and you are trying to back me into a corner. Last I checked, I was not bound to "A Brief Statement" or C.F.W. Walther's Church and Ministry, at least, neither of those were mentioned in my ordination vows.
            
            I will have to review the uses of Matthew 28 in the Confessions before I respond to your question, which is a serious one. You are basically trying to pin me to the wall, to bring me to the point that I disagree with the confessions so that you can bring charges against me. I will not give you the satisfaction of doing so.
            • Sep 24, 2005 14:22:40 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
              "Debate the Scriptures"?!? Not with unsubstantiated accusations about my motives, such as "trying to back me into a corner" and "trying to pin me to the wall, to bring me to the point that I disagree with the confessions so that you can bring charges against me."
              
              You say you have to review the uses of Matthew 28 before you respond. Yet you have already asserted:
              
              But in various mandates (Matt 28, JOhn 20, etc.) they represent the clergy. That is why Luther says in one of his writings (which I can produce) that Jesus was speaking to all pastors in the person of St. Peter when he said: "Feed my sheep." Is that a general mandate to every Christian? No.
              
              How does your accusatory response to me compare to how the Missouri Synod responded when ask the question Is it teaching false doctrine to say that passages that discuss the ministry, such as Matt. 28:18-20, John 20:19-23, 2 Cor. 5:17-21, apply only to pastors? Yes or no? In fact, the Synod's response refers to the 1932 official doctrinal statement of the Synod, A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod, and then states:
              
              "In this paragraph you will note that the Synod cites John 20:22-23 and Matthew 28:18-20 as proof texts for the doctrinal position of the Synod that "Christians are the Church" and that "they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church"... Thus, it would be contrary to the doctrinal position of the Synod to hold that such texts 'apply only to pastors.'"
              
              Also included in the Synod response is this regarding a thesis from the Synod's official A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles (1973):
              
              "'III. Mission of the Church: We believe teach, and confess that the primary mission of the church [emphasis added] is to make disciples of every nation by bearing witness to Jesus Christ through the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments.' Specifically cited in the study edition of this statement as the scriptural basis for this thesis are Matthew 28:18-20, 2 Corinthians 5:18-21, and Romans 10:17."
              
              "Last I checked, I was not bound to "A Brief Statement" or C.F.W. Walther's Church and Ministry, at least, neither of those were mentioned in my ordination vows."
              
              What about the promises you made on becoming a member of the Missouri Synod to abide by the confessional position and doctrinal statements of our church body?
              
              What about Resolution 7-17A of the 2001 Synodical Convention?
              
              Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod meeting in convention in the year of our Lord 2001 affirm the above referenced writings of C. F. W. Walther as the definitive statement under Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions of the Synod’s understanding on the subject of church and ministry; and be it further
              Resolved, That the LCMS in convention reaffirm the decision of the 1852 convention in recognizing C. F. W. Walther’s book, The Voice of Our Church on the Question of Church and Ministry, as the official position of the LCMS; and be it further
              Resolved, That all pastors, professors, teachers of the church, and congregations honor and uphold the resolutions of the Synod as regards the official position of our Synod on church and ministry and teach in accordance with them
              
              What about Synod Bylaw 1.6.2?
              
              "(a) Such [doctrinal] resolutions come into being in the same manner as any other resolutions of a convention of the Synod and are to be honored and upheld until such time as the Synod amends or repeals them.
              
              "(b)(7) Such adopted and ratified doctrinal statements shall be regarded as the position of the Synod and shall be “accepted and used as helpful expositions and explanations� (FC SD Rule and Norm 10). They shall be honored and upheld (“to abide by, act, and teach in accordance with� [1971 Res. 2-21]) until such time as the Synod amends or repeals them"
              
              This is not some recent doctrinal position foisted off on the synod by liberal or CGM advocates, but a position that the Missouri Synod has held since before you were born.
              • Sep 24, 2005 15:10:19 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
                I looked up the references to Matt 28:19-20 in the Confessions and the only one listed not in the context of baptism is in the Treatise (pgh. 31). [...] Christ gave to his apostles only spiritual authority, that is, the command to preach the gospel, to proclaim the forgiveness of sins, to administer the sacraments, and to excommunicate the ungodly without the use of physical force [...] Indeed Christ said, "Go...teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you." Everywhere in the Treatise it is made clear that when Christ is speaking to Peter and the other Apostles, he is speaking to them "as ministers" (that is the language of the Confessions). So that even in Matthew 18, where Jesus is forgiving sins, the Treatise says that Jesus, using the plural form "you" implies ALL THE APOSTLES.
                
                So, actually, the Confessions support my position with regard to Matthew 28. It is not a general call to all Christians to preach the Gospel and administer Baptism. It is an apostolic commission (which is what Chemnitz called it), which describes the work of the ministry.
                
                Having said that I am not saying that congregations don't have the right and duty to judge doctrine, or to choose their own pastors. But in the confessions the church is defined liturgically--preachers and hearers. And I certainly do believe that in the case of emergency, every Christian should baptize, etc. But I am not speaking in contradiction to the Confessions when I say that Matthew 28 is not a general call to every Christian to preach (Or Mark 16 for that matter; or Luke 24).
                
                It is true that in the same document the Confession says that the keys were given to the church. But by that I do not think it means what you think it means. It is clear from the Small Catechism (which is part of the confessions) what we beleive according to these words about the "special church power given to the Church on earth," namely, "that when the called ministers of Christ deal with us by his divine command, it is as valid and certain, in heaven also, as if Christ our dear Lord dealt with us himself." So, when we talk about the Office of the Keys being given to the church (Kirche), we understand this to mean that when we hear the word of the pastor who speaks "in the stead and by the command of Christ" we know that it is Christ's voice we hear, and not another.
                
                By the way, didn't Walther oppose Carl Vehse in the Altenburg debate? :)
                • Sep 24, 2005 21:34:25 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
                  "Everywhere in the Treatise it is made clear that when Christ is speaking to Peter and the other Apostles, he is speaking to them "as ministers"
                  
                  Not true. Paras 24, including Note 4 on the German text (Tappert, p.324), 67, and 68 explain that Christ spoke about the Keys to the apostles as representatives of the Church rather than as representatives of the clergy.
                  
                  "It is true that in the same document the Confession says that the keys were given to the church. But by that I do not think it means what you think it means."
                  
                  What I think the Confessions mean is what I have quoted from various Lutheran sources, including official synodical doctrinal statements that synodical pastors promise to honor and uphold. In his "The Pastor: God's Servant for God's People", from Church and Ministry: The Collected Papers of The 150th Anniversary Theological Convocation of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (edited by Jerald C. Joerz and Paul T. McCain, 1998, pp.123-161), the Rev. Dr. James Kalthoff explains further:
                  
                  "In its original context, the Great Commission given by Jesus, 'Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing . . . and teaching them' (Matt. 28:19-20) was indeed originally spoken only to the eleven apostles. But in the context of the whole New Testament we see that every Christian, as a member of the Priesthood of all Believers, has the responsibility to 'declare the wonderful deeds of Him who has called [them] out of darkness into His marvelous light' (1 Pet. 2:9 RSV).
                  
                  "We see this priesthood at work when we read in the book of Acts: 'On that day [the stoning of Stephen] a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. . . . Those who had been scattered preached the Word wherever they went' (Acts 8:1,4). For the spread of the Gospel, it is the matter of 'both/and'—Public Ministry and the royal Priesthood of all Believers in Christ." [pp.147-8]
                  
                  And from another Lutheran:
                  
                  "Though we are not all called into the public ministry yet every Christian may and should teach, instruct, admonish, comfort, and reprove his neighbor from God's Word whenever and whereever he is in need of it, just as parents must teach their children and servants or anyone his brother, neighbor, fellow citizen, and the like. For a Christian may teach and exhort form the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, etc., anyone who is ignorant, weak, and he who is so instructed should receive it of him as God's Word and confess it publicly.... Behold, in such a way every Christian has and exercises his priestly works, But in addition to this there is the pastoral ministry that teaches and inculcates doctrine publicly, and for that we need ministers and pastors." [Martin Luther, Second Exposition of Psalm 110, 1539, St. Louis Edition, 5:1036]
                  
                  "By the way, didn't Walther oppose Carl Vehse in the Altenburg debate?
                  
                  No, Dr. Carl Eduard Vehse, who left for Germany at the end of 1839, provided Walther with the correct idea. From Walter O. Forster's Zion on the Mississippi, p.520:
                  :
                  "It was in these dark days [prior to the Altenburg Debate] that C.F.W. Walther came forward with a series of propositions which were to prove the fundamental factor in saving the colonies. The idea he advanced was by no means a new one, for it was contained in more than an embryonic state in Vehse's writings. Walther was ready to admit his indebtedness to the Dresden archivist. Keyl and Burger joined in this acknowledgment. Later writers with a less meticulous sense of fairness, however, have given Vehse little credit."
                  
                  One wonders if the seminaries today give Dr. Vehse any credit. Following the 1841 Altenburg debate, Walther acknowledged his indebtedness to Vehse:
                  
                  "With deep gratitude I must here recall that document which, now almost a year and a half ago, Doctor Vehse, Mr. Fischer, and Mr. Jaeckel addressed to us. It was this document, in particular, which gave us a powerful impulse to recognize the remaining corruption more and more, and to endeavor to remove it. Without this document -- I now confess it with a living conviction -- we might have for a long time pursued our way of error, from which we now have made our escape. I confess this with an even greater sense of shame, because I first appeared so ungrateful toward this precious gift of God. But although many with me handled with great unfaithfulness the light which was granted to us, yet God did not cease to cause ever more beams of truth to fall into our darkness; to tear us away from many a point which we, in our perverseness, sought to hold; to uncover to us great and perilous injuries, and to lead our hearts more and more in the way of truth." (William J. Schmelder, "Walther at Altenburg", Concordia Historical Institute Quarterly, Vol. 34(3), October, 1961, pp. 65-81, referring to Walter A. Baepler, A Century of Grace, CPH, 1947, pp.47,48, quoting from J.F. Koestering, Auswanderung der saechsischen Lutheraner in Jahre 1838, ihre Niederlassung in Perry-Co., und damit zusammenhaengende interessante Nachrichten, A Wiebusch u. Sohn, 1867, pp.43-45)
                  • Sep 26, 2005 15:57:39 Re: Servants of God - Pastor Fickel
                    The so-called "Great Commission" is used only once, as far as I know, in the our liturgical rites. It is not baptism. It is not the installation of church officers or Sunday School teachers. It is not even the installation of Lutheran school teachers. It is ordination and installation.
                    
                    Matthew 28 is given in the ordination and installation rites under the heading: Installation of the Public Ministry. If Carl Vehse is correct, then this usage in our churches is completely wrong. The catechisms connects the passage with baptism, a sacrament administered by the called and ordained servants of the church (excepting serious emergencies). It all seems so clear in our liturgical and catechetical writings --- not to mention the Scriptures.
                    
                    -Fickel
                    • Sep 26, 2005 22:46:27 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
                      Rev. Erich Fickel opined: "If Carl Vehse is correct, then this usage in our churches is completely wrong."
                      
                      That is a false dichotomy! The church is free to use Matthew 28, or not, in its various ordination or installation rites. Furthermore, it is the Lutheran Church, including the Missouri Synod, and not Carl Vehse, that has repeatedly stated the Great Commission was given to the Church, both pastors and the laity:
                      
                      - It is understood from Scriptures as explained by Rev. Kalthoff in excerpts from his "The Pastor: God's Servant for God's People", who also quotes Hermann Sasse supporting the same position;
                      
                      - It is confessed in the Lutheran Symbols that the keys are a function and power given immediately to the Church by Christ, whereby even a layman may baptize or pronounce absolution;
                      
                      - It is explained by Martin Luther in his various writings, including that "every Christian may and should teach, instruct, admonish, comfort, and reprove his neighbor from God's Word whenever and whereever he is in need of it,... in such a way every Christian has and exercises his priestly works";
                      
                      - It is included in the explanations C.F.W. Walther provides in support of the theses in his Church and Ministry;
                      
                      - It is stated in "A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod" (1932), which specifically refers to Matt. 28 and other Scriptural texts as referring to the Church and not just pastors;
                      
                      - It is included in A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles (1973), that it is the mission of the church to make disciples of every nation, with its study guide including Matthew 28 as the Scriptural basis;
                      
                      - It is stated in The Mission 21st Century Task Force, which "affirms that the Great Commission was given to all the baptized people of God"; and
                      
                      - It is answered in a LCMS FAQ that John 20:22-23 and Matthew 28:18-20 are proof texts for the doctrinal position of the Synod that "Christians are the Church" and that "they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church", and that it would be contrary to the doctrinal position of the Synod to hold that such texts "apply only to pastors."
                      
                      But, just in case...
                      
                      In Der Lutheraner, Vol. 17(22) (June 11, 1861), pp.169-71, reprinted in The Congregation's Right to Choose a Pastor, translated by Fred Kramer, Concordia Seminary Publications, St. Louis, 1997, C.F.W. Walther wrote:
                      
                      "The church by no means receives God's Word and Sacrament first through her mediately called pastors, but these [pastors] rather receive them through the church....
                      
                      "God also did not found a mute church, which is condemned to permit only persons of a certain rank to preach the Word of God, while she herself has to keep silent. No, she is not only to have the Word herself she herself is to preach it. The church or the ordinary Christians can by no means say: 'What business is it of ours, whether the Word of God is preached or not. Let the pastors take care of that; they, not we, are responsible for that!' No, the command of Christ 'to preach repentance and forgiveness of sins in his name among all nations, Luke 24:47, is by no means given only to the apostles and to their successors in public office, but to his entire church on earth.'" [Kramer, pp. 137-8]
                      
                      "Is that which is according to those Bible passages every Christian's duty, and even more his right, by any means something different from that which a pastor or preacher or minister of the church has the duty and right to do? Must he by chance preach something different, preach, teach, and confess it admonish, comfort, rebuke with something else than common Christians? Clearly not. The difference consists only in this, that the pastor does this publicly and before the entire congregation, the common Christian however does it privately, as his calling and circumstances call for. Therefore the office itself, which the pastor and which every true Christian has, is entirely the same, only the manner of exercising and using it is different." [Kramer, p. 140]
                      
                      So do you think Walther had a little too much St Louis beer before he wrote this? If so how much do you think this guy had:
                      
                      "We hold fast to this, that there is no other Word of God save that only which all Christians are commanded to proclaim; that there is no other Baptism than the one which all Christians can give; that there is no other remembrance of the Supper of the Lord than that which Christians may celebrate. which also Christ has instituted to be kept; also that there is no other sin than the one which every Christian can bind and loose; likewisewe hold that there is no sacrifice except the body of every Christian; also that no one can or may pray, save only a Christian; in addition, that no one is to judge doctrine save only a Christian... (Cf. Luther's Works, Walch Edition, X, pp.1858,1859)" [Kramer, p.142]
                      
                      Walther then follows up with this comment:
                      
                      "Although there is of course a great difference between a pastor and a believing Christian, and a Christian never through his faith becomes a pastor or parish minister in the real sense of the word, it nevertheless by no means follows from this difference that the Christians do not possess this office originally, and that they are not to exercise it privately each according to his rank and calling which has been committed to ministers and parish pastors according to God's expressly made order for public administration on behalf of the congregation, as Luther generally expresses himself" [Kramer, p. 143]
                      
                      So, Rev. Fickel, I ask: Based on the above referenced official and unofficial Lutheran documents (and considering 1 Peter 3:15), do you, as a Missouri Synod Lutheran pastor, accept and teach the Lutheran and Missouri Synod doctrinal position that Matthew 28:19,20 applies to the whole Church, and not just pastors?
                      • Sep 27, 2005 07:39:02 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
                        Since when do we as Lutherans trust more in a magisterium than we do in the SCriptures? I feel like I'm speaking with a Roman Catholic. You speak about these documents like the Brief Statement, James Kalthoff's writings, and others as if these came down to us from on high. Is it at all possible, even in the slightest bit, that all the Synod's talk about the Great Commission is wrong? Or do you think that the Synod cannot err. I always thought popes and councils could err.
                        
                        Fickel is right--in order to understand what men like C.F.W. Walther meant by their statements you also have to look at their practice.
                        
                        
                        • Sep 27, 2005 08:53:22 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
                          "Since when do we as Lutherans trust more in a magisterium than we do in the SCriptures? I feel like I'm speaking with a Roman Catholic. You speak about these documents like the Brief Statement, James Kalthoff's writings, and others as if these came down to us from on high."
                          
                          Ahhhhh, if nothing else works, try some ad hominems.
                          
                          Well, Rev. Beisel, if you are not going to use the official writings of the Missouri Synod, whose writings are you going to trust more to explain the Synod's official doctrinal position on Matthew 28 to be "honored and upheld" by members of the synod? Or, what do you, as a synodical member, see as doctrinal error in the statements I have posted and referenced from various Lutheran theologians or in the official Missouri Synod doctrinal position which goes back to the founder of the Synod? Is Rev. Kalthoff wrong when he states in a synodical publication that Scripture itself supports the Missouri Synod doctrinal position on Matthew 28?
                          
                          Yes, councils and synods can and do err, but rather than just publicly raising doubt and suspicion (a la Gen. 3:1) about what has been consistently stated in the Lutheran Confessions and other Lutheran and synodical writings for more than a century, take a stand on whether you accept or reject the official Missouri Synod position on Matthew 28.
                      • Sep 27, 2005 06:30:34 Re: Servants of God - Pastor Fickel
                        You write:
                        "That is a false dichotomy! The church is free to use Matthew 28, or not, in its various ordination or installation rites. Furthermore, it is the Lutheran Church, including the Missouri Synod, and not Carl Vehse, that has repeatedly stated the Great Commission was given to the Church, both pastors and the laity..."
                        
                        And for all that Walther says belongs to every Christian, he wouldn't even let a layman pray at the end of a meeting; the pastor was to open and close meetings with prayer. In his absence, a layman could only read a prayer pre-selected by the pastor. (cf. Pastor Theology, Congregational Meetings).
                        
                        I don't understand. If Matthew 28 means what you say it does, and what you say the LC-MS says it means, then how is the LC-MS free to say in its Agenda rites for installation and ordination that Matthew institutes the Office of the Public ministry? Wouldn't the Synod be teaching against itself?
                        
                        -Pastor Fickel
                        • Sep 27, 2005 07:33:17 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
                          "the pastor was to open and close meetings with prayer."
                          
                          Since these were official congregational meetings to conduct the work of the church, having the called pastor of the congregation open with prayer would have been a proper and edifying policy for both Walther and the congregation to establish.
                          
                          If Matthew 28 means what you say it does, and what you say the LC-MS says it means, then how is the LC-MS free to say in its Agenda rites for installation and ordination that Matthew institutes the Office of the Public ministry? Wouldn't the Synod be teaching against itself?
                          
                          Rev. Fickel, again, it is not my words on what Matthew 28 means. I have presented the quotes, the references, and the links to what the LCMS and Lutheran theologians in the past have repeatedly and plainly stated it means as the Synod's official position on the Great Commission. If you seriously are concerned about this issue, or if you perceive a major contradiction between the Synod's official position on Matthew 28 and what you claim you see in the Agenda, or if you simply reject the stated Synod's doctrinal position on Matthew 28, then you, as a synodical member, need to deal with the problem according to the Constitution and Bylaws. The CTCR will address theological questions asked by synodical members.
                          
                          OTOH, if you publicly accept the referenced Synod's doctrinal position on Matthew 28 and the Great Commission, but still wonder about how some phrase in the Agenda fits into such a doctrinal position, then we can certainly discuss that on this web site.
                          
                          So which is it?
                          
                          • Sep 27, 2005 11:02:11 Re: Servants of God - Pastor Fickel
                            Mr. Vehse:
                            
                            The point wasn't that the pastor opened and closed with prayer. The point was that the layman, when the pastor was absent, couldn't offer a prayer of his own words or choosing. The layman was to READ a pastor selected by the pastor for the occasion. Given Walther's understanding of the laity as the primary possessors of the church's proclamation, why would the layman not be allowed to choose his own prayer, or to pray with his own words?
                            
                            Perhaps all this isn't as cut and dried as you think it is.
                            
                            -Pastor Fickel
                            • Sep 27, 2005 12:06:29 Re: Servants of God - Carl Vehse
                              Again, as you stated, this was done at congregational meetings. Whether the pastor was to give the prayer himself or have it read in his absence does not contradict what Walther has said regarding the LCMS doctrinal position on Church and Ministry, nor the Synod's doctrinal position on Matthew 28. Any other comments would depend on additional details or background from the reference document or book itself ("Pastor Theology, Congregational Meetings"?).
                              
                              "Perhaps all this isn't as cut and dried as you think it is."
                              
                              By "this" are you referring to the Missouri Synod's doctrinal position on Matthew 28 and the Great Commission?
                              • Sep 27, 2005 14:16:56 Matthew 28 - Paul Beisel
                                Since this has largely turned into a debate about the proper understanding of Matthew 28 and its application to the Church, I changed the subject heading.
                                
                                I will go on record in saying that whatever you say is the Synod's doctrinal position concerning Matthew 28 and its application to the Church is not in the best Lutheran tradition. I repeat my previous statement that nowhere in the Confessions is that text employed as a general command to every Christian to preach the Gospel. Neither is it used by Chemnitz in either his examination of the Council of Trent or his Loci in such a way. In fact, Chemnitz does not even hold that this command is applicable in its fullest sense to ministers of the Word. He says that only the apostles are commanded to go preach everywhere in the world, but that mediately called ministers of the Gospel are only called to specific places. How then, with this understanding, can it be taken as a general command for every christian to preach? Here is Chemnitz:
                                
                                "But what we have said above aobut the apostolic calling, that it should stretch into the whole world, we cannot also say now about those who are called mediately. For teachers, pastors, bishops, [and] presbyters are called to certain churches and do not have authority to teach everywhere or in all churches. Thus in Acts 14:23 elders are ordained for individual churches, and in Titus 1:5 Titus is left in Crete to establish churches in every city. And thus God, through a special call, ordinarily shows where He wants someone's labor to be used. Therefore by virtue of this call they do not have authority to teach in other churches to which they do not have a special call."
                                
                                And also:
                                
                                "Therefore let a comparison be made! Christ says, "Go, teach, preach, baptize" (Matt. 28:19-20; Mark 16:15) [...] These things, which Christ and the apostles declare to BELONG TO THE MINISTRY OF THE WORD, that is, the priesthood (here Chemnitz is speaking about the priesthood in the sense of the Predigtamt), the papalists remove from the substance of that priesthood. Also they do not want the dispensation of Baptism and the distribution of the Eucharist to belong properly to their priesthood. Therefore the papalists remove and separate from their priesthood all the things of which, according to the teaching of Scripture, the ministry of the New TEstament consists." Exam. Council of Trent, book II, p. 680.
                                
                                Also, from the Loci:
                                
                                In response to the Papal teaching that the Church is found only among those who acknowledge the Roman Pontiff as head, Chemnitz cites various texts, including Matthew 28:19-20, saying: "From these passages, it is clear, that the church of Christ is not bound to some certain seat or place in the world, but to the Gospel and the doctrine of Christ and the absolution pronounced in His name, to baptism and the Holy Supper of the Lord instituted by Him. And all these things are to be done in His name, according to His precept and command."
                                
                                But lest one think that Chemnitz sees these things as being functions that anyone has the authority to carry out, he also constantly cites Romans 10, "How can they preach unless they are sent." So to say that Matt. 28 authorizes all Christians to preach violates Romans 10 as well. He says: "All Christians are priests--not that all should carry out the functions of the ministry promiscuously, without a particular call, but that they should "offer up spiritual sacrifices" [1 Peter 2:5]. (Loci, vol. 2, p. 698).
                                
                                Again, he says: They (fanatics) object: Peter says that all the faithful are priests because they are to "proclaim the virtues of God," 1 Peter 2:9. And the heads of households have the general charge to instruct the members of their families, Deut. 6:20ff.; 1 Cor. 14:35. I reply: This is indeed a general call, common to all Christians, to speak among themselves about the Word of God, Eph. 5:19, to comfort one another with the Word of God, 1 Thess. 4:18, and to confess the Gospel, Rom. 10:9, and this is enjoined on heads of households by individual command. But to administer those things which pertain to the public ministry of the Word and the sacraments is not commanded to all Christians in general, as the two passages from 1 Cor. 12 and Eph. 4, cited above, teach clearly enough. Nor does the general calling which all receive in Baptism suffice to give a person the office of the ministry, but there is required a special call, as has been shown in the preceding [...].
                                
                                I didn't see Matt. 28 listed there.
                                
                                Those who take this text as a general command to every Christian, with or without a lawful call to preach and administer the sacraments, do so without the support of historic Lutheranism. Instead, they violate article XIV of the Augsburg Confession, which states that no one should publicly preach, teach, or administer the sacraments without a regular call. What a mother or father does in the home does not violate this, since fathers are commanded to teach their households the Faith.
                                
                                CONCERNING THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN
                                
                                To say that the Keys are given to the Church as the Bride of Christ does not mean that every individual Christian has the right or authority to administer them. It means that the Church, as the body of Christ, consisting of both preachers and hearers, has the duty, right, and command of Christ to call and appoint ministers of the Gospel in the churches to preach, teaching, and administer the Sacraments. The apostolic commission, as it should be called, was given as a specific command to the apostles as ministers of the Gospel.
                                • Sep 28, 2005 08:11:05 Re: Matthew 28 - Paul Beisel
                                  Here is another quote from Chemnitz' Examination of the Council of Trent in which he lists Matthew 28 as describing the duties of the Ministry of the Word:
                                  
                                  "Let us not fight about the question whether the term "priest" may be applied to the ministers of the New Testament. However, this foundation is firm and immovable, that we must judge and decide about the duties of the MINISTERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT on the basis of the Word, prescription, and command which has been handed down ABOUT THE MINISTRY in the New Testament Scriptures. These passages are found in Matt. 10:1-15; 26:13; 28:19-20; Mark 16:15; Acts 1:8,22; 6:2; 1 Cor. 4:1; 12:27, etc." (Chemnitz, Examen, vol. 2, p. 468).
                                  
                                  In another place under the section on Holy Orders, Chemnitz, speaking of the promises added to the ministry of the Word, includes Matt. 28:20: "Lo, I am with you always." John 20:22-23, "Receive the Holy Spirit", Matt. 16:19: "I will give you the keys..." In the paragraph following, he writes:
                                  
                                  "These very great and comforting promises concerning the ministry ought to be displayed, as it were, in a prominent place in the church; in order that the dignity of the ministry might be extolled against the fanatics, and that those to whom the ministry has been committed may go about their labors and bear their difficulties with greater eagerness, and that men may learn to use the ministry reverently. For without the preaching and hearing of the Word there is no faith, no calling on God, no salvation (Rom. 10:14). However, no one is able to preach in order that faith may follow hearing unless he be sent (Rom. 10:15)." Chemnitz then goes on to speak on the laying of hands as a public attestation or announcement of the person's call. It is apparent from these words and others I have quoted that Chemnitz saw the ministry of the Word as necessary for the salvation of people. "how can they believe if they have not heard, and how can they hear if there is no one to preach, and how can they preach unless they are sent?"
                                  
                                  It is irresponsible, to say the least, to teach that the commands and promises given to the Apostles in Matthew 28:19-20 also apply to every Christian individually. It is not given to every Christian to preach the Gospel. What they do and say privately about Jesus among their friends and family or other lost souls has nothing to do with this command in Matthew 28:19-20 which is spoken to those to whom Christ has committed the "ministry of reconciliation."
                                  
                                  Does this mean that lay people shouldn't reach out in love to lost souls? No, certainly not. But this outreach is not done to fulfill a dominical command by Jesus given to the Apostles, but out of love. Because the efficacy of the Word does not depend on the person speaking it, in cases of extreme emergency, lay people may administer baptism, and absolve another.
                                  • Sep 29, 2005 08:49:11 Re: Matthew 28 - Carl Vehse
                                    "I will go on record in saying that whatever you say... is not in the best Lutheran tradition."
                                    
                                    Again, Rev. Beisel, you have avoided stating whether you, as a synodical member, will "abide by, act, and teach in accordance with� the Synod's doctrinal position on the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20) that has been explain in the references I have previously provided. Instead your statement is another one of "attacking the messenger".
                                    
                                    Furthermore, the Synod and Lutheran theologians I have referenced have not denied that Matthew 28:19-20 involves pastors. From the previously provided statements of Martin Luther, C.F.W. Walther, and Rev. Kalthoff, the Office of Public Ministry is part of the Church and would be included within the Great Commission. And the Church, as part of obeying the Great Commission has established and supported the training, calling, and sending of pastors and missionaries into many nations to publicly preach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments.
                                    
                                    You state: "It is irresponsible, to say the least, to teach that the commands and promises given to the Apostles in Matthew 28:19-20 also apply to every Christian individually."
                                    
                                    Your statement can be contrasted to the understanding of Matthew 28:19-20 and the Great Commission by the individual and congregational members, both past and present, of the Missouri Synod:
                                    
                                    "Since the Christians are the Church, it is self- evident that they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church. Thus St. Paul reminds all believers: "All things are yours," 1 Cor. 3:21, 22, and Christ Himself commits to all believers the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 16:13- 19, 18:17-20, John 20:22, 23, and commissions all believers to preach the Gospel and to administer the Sacraments, Matt. 28:19, 20,; 1 Cor. 11:23-25. Accordingly, we reject all doctrines by which this spiritual power or any part thereof is adjudged as originally vested in certain individuals or bodies, such as the Pope, or the bishops, or the order of the ministry, or the secular lords, or councils, or synods, etc. The officers of the Church publicly administer their offices only by virtue of delegated powers, and such administration remains under the supervision of the latter, Col. 4:17. Naturally all Christians have also the right and the duty to judge and decide matters of doctrine, not according to their own notions, of course, but according to the Word of God, 1 John 4:1; 1 Pet. 4:11.
                                    
                                    You quote Chemitz as counterevidence, but if Chemitz claimed that Matthew 28:19-20 does not apply to the Church at all except to the clergy, then according to the published doctrinal position of the Missouri Synod he is as wrong as when you wrote Chemitz "says that only the [eleven] apostles are commanded to go preach everywhere in the world."
                                    
                                    
                                    • Sep 29, 2005 13:54:38 Re: Matthew 28 - Pastor Fickel
                                      Mr. Vehse:
                                      
                                      I don't understand your involvement in this conversation. There is a real desire here to talk about the Holy Ministry as it is taught in the Scriptures and in the Confessions. Instead of engaging in that conversation, you simply cut and paste the same quotations from the Brief Statement, Walther, and the Synod, over and over again. Then you cite papers that consist almost solely of those same quotations. Never once have you attempted to answer a single of Pastor Beisel's questions. All you seem able to do is repeat what you've already said.
                                      
                                      I really can't help but think of last Sunday's Gospel, wherein the Pharisees attempt to trap Jesus with a question. They have no desire to learn the Word of God, but they want to trap our Lord in His words. You seem to be doing the same with our Lord's called and ordained servant. Though I may misunderstand completely why you repeatedly ask over and over again about the "official" position of Synod.
                                      
                                      At any rate. I tip my hat to the Reverend Beisel. He's ably shown from the Scriptures, Confessions, Lutheran fathers that his position is the Lutheran one. He's stayed longer in is discussion that patience would demand. Good luck on your quest for answers. I, though, will no longer respond to your question, and or add to this conversation.
                                      
                                      -Pastor Fickel
                                      • Oct 02, 2005 16:58:02 Re: Matthew 28 - Carl Vehse
                                        I don't understand your involvement in this conversation."
                                        
                                        Rev. Fickel, this thread originated, not as a "talk about the Holy Ministry", but about Rev. Petersen's repeating of an unidentified person's comparison between the two LCMS seminaries, an accusation of an "implied insult", and references to the insult being a "common complaint from the bureacrats" and to "effeminate politicians" as the alternative to Ft. Wayne's "elitists".
                                        
                                        My response was to post three statements (and links) related to that topic from three LCMS leaders. It was against some references to the Great Commission in the statements from these LCMS leaders that Rev. Beisel voiced his disagreement.
                                        
                                        I have repeated various references and quotes on this website because they are the Lutheran doctrinal position on Church and Ministry, they are the Missouri Synod's doctrinal understanding of the Scriptural and Confessional statements, they are consistent with what I was taught in confirmation by my (LCMS) pastor, and by my pastors since, and they are what Missouri Synod pastors promise to "abide by, act, and teach in accordance with� when they become members of the Synod.
                                        
                                        If you and Rev. Beisel reject such references and quotes on the Missouri Synod doctrinal position regarding Matthew 28:19-20 and the Great Commission, and instead you "abide by, act, and teach in accordance with� a different doctrinal understanding, then, if not on this thread, you should at least acknowledge that to your respective Missouri Synod congregations.
                                        
                                        "Never once have you attempted to answer a single of Pastor Beisel's questions."
                                        
                                        Rev. Fickel, that is simply a lie. In his several responses, Rev. Beisel has asked me nine questions, four of which were rhetorical and answered by Rev. Beisel himself. Of those nine, I directly answered seven of them, including one ad hominem. If there are disagreements with my answers, they are still my answers. The question about 2 Cor. 5:20 was addressed later in a LCMS FAQ reference. I did not answer Rev. Beisel's question about Matthew 4 and 10; though the answer would be "yes".
                                        
                                        • Oct 02, 2005 20:54:28 Re: Matthew 28 - Paul Beisel
                                          I am not afraid to say publicly that I disagree with the LCMS FAQ that you referenced. I do not believe that Jesus is commissioning "all believers" to preach the gospel and administer the sacraments in Matthew 28, or that in John 20 Jesus is giving "all believers" the authority to forgive and retain sins. I think it is wrong and unscriptural to use John 20 and Matthew 28 as "proof texts" that "Christians are the Church." You simply CANNOT read these texts apart from Matthew 4 and 10, in which Jesus calls the disciples, (all men of course) in order to send them out to preach. If this makes me an LC-MS "heretic" then so be it. I believe Luther was looked at in the same way by his own church body because he disagreed with universally held "official positions" of the Church on the basis of the Scriptures. In this case, I believe that anyone who holds the view mentioned in the FAQ statement you cite is contrary to the Lutheran Confessions. It is precisely THIS understanding of those texts that has led to the lay ministry phenomenon in our Synod. That is a pietistic understanding. It grew out of Pietism, and it has never been adequately debunked. It needs to be.
                                          
                                          
                                          • Oct 04, 2005 21:42:36 Re: Matthew 28 - Carl Vehse
                                            Rev. Beisel, you claim: "I think it is wrong and unscriptural to use John 20 and Matthew 28 as 'proof texts' that 'Christians are the Church.'"
                                            
                                            So, in his Christian Dogmatics (CPH, 1934, pp.551-2), J.T. Mueller states: "Believers are instrumental causes (causae instrumentales) of the Church inasmuch as they preach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments, Is. 40, 9; Mark 16, 15.16; Matt. 28, 20."
                                            
                                            In addition to Dr. Francis Pieper referring to John 20 and Matthew 28 in his statements for the Brief Statement of 1932, Walther used John 20:22-23 and Matthew 28:20 as a "proof text" for his Thesis IV on the Church, in which the Church is identified as believers and saints to whom Christ gave the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
                                            
                                            C.F.W. Walther also notes their use as "proof texts" by Luther, referring to the keys: "But in Matt.18:18-20 and John 20:23 Christ gives them to the whole church." (Mueller trans., p.54), and a similar use of John 20 by Polycarp Leyser (Mueller, p.61), John Gerhard (Mueller, p.62-3), and John Meisner (Mueller,p.65).
                                            
                                            In his sermon on the first Sunday after Easter on John 20:19-31, preached in 1522 at Borna, a young Luther states:

                                            Quote:

                                            "Here the power of absolution is given to all Christians, although some, like the Pope, bishops, priests, and monks, have appropriated it to themselves alone. They say publicly and shamelessly that this power is given to them alone and not to the laymen as well. But Christ is speaking here neither of priests nor monks. on the contrary, he says: 'Receive ye the Holy Ghost .' This power is given to him who has the Holy Ghost, that is, to him who is a Christian. But who is a Christian? He who believes. He who believes has the Holy Ghost. Therefore every Christian has the power, which the pope, bishops, priests and monks have in this case, to forgive sins or to retain them... To be sure, all of us possess this power; but no one except him who was chosen by the congregation to do so should presume to practice it publicly. In private, I certainly may use this power. If, for instance, my neighbor comes and says: My friend, I am burdened in conscience, speak a word of absolution to me; then I am at liberty to do so. But in private, I say, this must be done."

                                            In his sermon on the first Sunday after Easter, 1540, in Dessau on the John 20 text, an older Luther states:

                                            Quote:

                                            "But who can express what an unspeakable, mighty and blessed comfort it is that a human being can with one word open heaven and lock hell to a fellow mortal? For in this kingdom of Grace Christ has founded through his resurrection, we do indeed nothing else than open our mouth and say, I forgive thee thy sins, not on my account, nor by my power, but in the place of, and in the name of, Jesus Christ, for he does not say: ye shall forgive sins on your own account, but: 'I send you, as my Father hath sent me.' I myself do not do this of my own choice or counsel, but I am sent by the Father. This same commandment I give to you unto the end of the world, that both ye and all the world shall know that such forgiveness or retaining of sin is not done by human power or might, but by the command of him who is sending you. This is not said alone to the ministers or the servants of the church, but also to every Christian. Here each may serve another in the hour of death, or wherever there is need, and give him absolution."

                                    • Sep 29, 2005 10:18:44 Re: Matthew 28 - Paul Beisel
                                      You are elevating the CTCR and other synodical documents to a status that they were never intended to be. Last I checked, the "official" position of the Synod supports Syncretistic services as well. Oh, and also Lay Ministry, which is clearly against AC XIV.
                                      
                                      The bottom line is this--the only "Great Commission Convocation" that should be taking place in our Synod is at the two seminaries.
                                      • Oct 02, 2005 16:59:35 Re: Matthew 28 - Carl Vehse
                                        "Last I checked, the "official" position of the Synod supports Syncretistic services as well."
                                        
                                        Rev. Biesel, the Missouri Synod's current position on syncretic services is a separate issue.
                                        
                          • Sep 27, 2005 09:40:34 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
                            I can't decide which is worse--the rampant contemporary worship, open communion, and lay ministry programs in our Synod, or the constant deferral to constitution and by-laws.
                  • Sep 24, 2005 22:04:53 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
                    Mr. Vehse:
                    
                    If you are right, then we do not need any seminaries. Oh, what a coincidence. Neither does the Ablaze initiative.
                • Sep 24, 2005 18:13:53 Re: Servants of God - Petersen
                  I believe that when the called ministers of Christ or whoever feels like it deal with us by His divine command, in
                  particular when they exclude openly unrepentant sinners from the Christian congregation and absolve those who repent of their sins and want to do better, this is just as valid and certain,
                  even in heaven, as if Christ our dear Lord or some Christian dealt with us Himself.
    • Sep 22, 2005 14:07:24 Re: Servants of God - Paul Beisel
      I want to reply very briefly to my own post because I want to clarify my comment about my wife sinning against Jesus' Words. I'm not saying that my wife never talks about Jesus. Certainly she bears witness to Christ and His Word to our children constantly. But in doing this she is not fulfilling the "Great Commission." She is doing what parents are commanded to do in Scripture "Bring up your children in the training and admonition of the Lord." This is not what Jesus was talking about when he told his apostles: "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing...and teaching them..." I think this is a specific command for the office of the Ministry. Okay, so it was not so brief of a post. Sorry.