LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1981, Page 157

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 157

continue to remain uppermost in the minds of all the members
of the Synod as they devote themselves to the proclamation of
Christ’s death and resurrection for the joy and edifying of His
holy people.

Karl L. Barth, Chairman
Norbert H. Mueller, Secretary

Appendix
A. Critique of the 1960 Catechism

In response to 1979 Res. 7-04A, “To Deal with Concerns
Regarding Translations of Luther’s Small Catechism,” the
CTCR presents the following:

1, Background

The subject of this critique is The Small Catechism by
Martin Lutherin Contemporary English (copyright 1960). This
version of the Small Catechism was adopted for use in
catechetical instruction by the 1967 convention of the Synod
(Res. 7-04) and is the version included in the Concordia
Catechism Series. Also currently in use in the Synod is the
synodically authorized translation contained in the 1943 inter-
synodical catechism. The 1979 synodical convention elected to
include the translation of the 1943 catechism in the new
hymnal, Lutheran Worship.

The 1960 catechism has been the subject of CTCR recom-
mendations to the 1973, 1975, and 1979 conventions of the
Synod. The commission received its assignment to consider
this version from the Board of Directors under the omnibus
resolution, after the 1971 convention failed for lack of time to
act on Res. 2-35 calling for inclusion of the word “true” in the
Catechism’s explanation of the Lord’s Supper: “This is the true
body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Although the 1973
and 1975 conventions failed to act on the CTCR recommenda-
tions, the 1979 convention (Res. 7-04A) instructed ‘“‘That the
CTCR make available to all congregations andschools by July
1980 a brief critique of The Small Catechism in Contemporary
English and any cautionary notes as to its use.”

2. Critique

Regarding the 1960 catechism, the CTCR in its report to the
1979 convention concluded: “The Small Catechism by Martin
Luther in Contemporary English (Copyright 1960) is not an
accurate translation of Luther’s German Catechism. There are
numerous omissions, deletions, rewritings, changes, and addi-
tions that preclude considering this version as a translation. It
is essentially a paraphrase, which at times does not correctly
present the meaning of Luther’s German Catechism” (CW,
1979, p. 74). As applied to the omission of the word “true,”
which prompted our study, this means that one should not
expect to find a word-for-word correspondence between
Luther’s Small Catechism and the 1960 version. As a result of
this conclusion, the CTCR recommended in its report: “That
the Synod undertake a revised translation of Luther’s Small
Catechism as soon as possible” (1979 CW, p. 74). It is the
opinion of the commission that the 1960 catechism, since itisa
paraphrase and at times an abridgment of the original, cannot
serve as the Synod’s modern-English translation of the Small
Catechism.

At issue is the fact that the 1960 catechism is substantially
different from what its title claims to be, The Small Catechism
by Martin Luther in Contemporary Engish. The Synod, in
requiring all its members—pastors, teachers, and congrega-
tions—to subscribe ‘‘without reservation” to the Lutheran
Confessions contained in The Book of Concord as a correct
exposition of Christian doctrine, is clearly obliged to provide
them, as a matter of trust, with accurate translations—not
paraphrases—of these confessions into contemporary lan-
guage. Moreover, in the case of the Small Catechism itself, a
child who has memorized an entire catechism obviously trusts
the authenticity of the translation the church has provided him
unless he is told otherwise, and the church is bound to honor
this trust.

The original edition of the 1960 catechism omits altogether
Luther’s morning and evening prayers, the table benediction
and grace and the table of duties. From the standpoint of
confessional subscription, these elements have much doctrinal

content and are implicit in that subscription. From the stand-
point of memory work, it is one thing for an individual pastor to
decide to tell his confirmation class not to memorize the four
prayers they see in their textbooks. It is an altogether different
matter for the church to decide not to display, as arightful part
of the Catechism, these most effective teaching means for the
encouragement of personal prayer. A ‘‘catechism” is a “hand-
book,” and one should know at least that Martin Luther
provided his handbook with prayers and a table of duties.

3. Iustration

The fact that the 1960 catechism is substantially a para-
phrase can readily be established by the reader through
comparison with the translation of the Small Catechism in the
generally available edition of Tappert and the 1943 intersynod-
ical catechism. However, the commission has also reported the
conclusion that the 1960 catechism does not always represent
the sense of the original. In order to illustrate both the extent of
paraphrase and this change in meaning, we shall present a
line-by-line comparison of the German text and its translation
in the 1943 intersynodical catechism, the 1960 catechism, and
Tappert of the answer to the question, “How can water do such
great things?” from the article on Baptism.

Wasser tut’s freilich nicht,

It is not the water that does these things, (1960)

It is not the water indeed that does them, (1943)

It is not the water that produces these effects, (Tappert)

sondern das Wort Gottes, so mit und bei dem Wasser ist,

but God’s Word with the water (1960)

but the Word of God which is in and with the water, (1943)

but the Word of God connected with the water, (Tappert)

und der Glaube, so solchem Wort Gottes im Wasser trauet.

and our trust in this Word. (1960)

and faith, which trusts such word of God in the water. (1943)

and our faith which relies on the Word of God connected with the
water. (Tappert)
r Denn ohn Gottes Wort ist das Wasser schlect Wasser und keine

aufe;

Water by itself is only water, (1960)

For without the Word of God the water is simple water and no
Baptism. (1943)

For without the Word of God the water is merely water and no
Baptism. (Tappert)

aber mit dem Wort Gottes ist’s eine Taufe,

but with the Word of God (1960)

but with the Word of God it is a Baptism, (1943)

But when connected with the Word of God it is a Baptism.
(Tappert)

das ist, ein gnadenreich Wasser des Lebens

it is a life-giving water (1960)

that is, a gracious water of life (1943)

that is, a gracious water of life (Tappert)

und ein “Bad der neuen Geburt im heiligen Geist,”

which by grace gives the new birth through the Holy Spirit (1960)

and a washing of regeneration in the Holy Ghost. (1943)

and a washing of regeneration in the Holy Spirit. (Tappert)

The 1960 catechism is clearly not a translation. More
serious, however, is the matter of omitted words. Observe that
the 1960 catechism omits the phrase ‘‘in the water” and the
term “Baptism” itself, even though these words do not increase
the burden of memorization. Moreover, these omissions have
consequences in meaning. The phrase “‘in and with the water”
(German: ‘“‘mit und bei dem Wasser”; Latin: “tuxta aquam et
una cum aqua’) is especially imortant to the explanation,
because it focuses on the sacramental union of Word and
element (the correct doctrine and point at issue between the
Lutheran and Reformed teachings on the Sacrament). The
twofold omission of the term “Baptism” destroys the distinc-
tion made by the Smal] Catechism between what is and what is
not a Baptism. As a result, the sharp clarity of Luther’s
explanation of what the Sacrament is as well as what it does is
lost in paraphrase.

Other examples of changed or omitted wording with serious
implications for the theological content are found in omission
of the word “true” from the definition of the Sacrament of the
Altar and the substitution of “given with” for “under” at the
same place. ”

The commission recognizes that these matters may well be
explained in Lutheran confirmation classes. However, it is the