LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1971, Page 226

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

298 PRESIDENT’S REPORT

account is not an article of faith, although those people that
hear it read from the Bible or read it themselves must be-
lieve it as a matter of faith (licet de fide) and an account of
the Holy Spirit Himself. . . . Indeed, he is a heretic who
denies an article of faith; however, not only he but that per-

that are less important, which errors the apostle compares
to stubble that is burned in the fire of tribulation, in such
a way, however, that the erring person himself is saved, since
he clings to the foundation of salvation, the Rock, Christ. His
work, of course, though built on the right foundation, suffers
injury. It is something different if somebody should say con-
temptuously: ‘For me the foundation of salvation is suffi-
cient, and I am satisfied if I fully accept this article,’ and if
such a person should refuse to receive fuller instruction in
the remaining doctrines. It is true that such a person would
err with regard to minor articles; however, his error would
not be insignificant but be connected with contempt of the
divine Word.” (Collog. Ratisbonae, hab. Lauingae, p.351
sqq.)

Buddeus also, after dwelling on the articles without which
the generation and preservation of true, justifying faith in
the heart, and hence salvation, is not possible, finally adds:
“It will be observed that we do not speak of that which must
be believed because it has been revealed by God but of that
which a person must believe in order to be saved; for in Holy

(even if they do not belong to the articles of faith), “which,
however, are not necessarily required for obtaining salvation,
Besides, many things are required and therefore necessary if
a person is to be a member of a particular Church, and still
more, if one is to be a pastor in that Church, even though
such matters are not at once required for salvation; and
hence we do not speak of them here.” (Institut. th. dogm.
Lips., 1724, p.41.) Here Buddeus expressly declares that in
the doctrine concerning articles of faith the question is not
considered what a person who has Holy Scripture and knows
it and has been shown what its teachings are must on ac-
count of its authority believe. When the question is asked,
Which doctrines contained in the Scriptures must be ac-
cepted? then it no longer is proper to distinguish between
the various doctrines [as to their importance], a distinction
which is justified when articles of faith are dwelt on. If a

ten” (par.95), and he removes all those Biblical doctrines
from the fundamental articles which are not inseparably
connected with the creation of true faith. Hence he writes:

Such a dogma
therefore is not a part of the foundation of faith. A person
may be ignorant of Christ’s birth in Bethlehem, of His teach-
ing in the Temple when He was twelve years old, and of
many other historical matters; he may be ignorant of the
fact that the evangelists and apostles wrote and of what they
wrote; he may deny that the prophesied Antichrist has ap-
peared or that the world in its substance will be destroyed.
All this does not jeopardize eternal life, and if one is igno-
rant of these doctrines or denies them, saving faith can
nevertheless continue. However, what belongs to the founda-
tion not only cannot be denied, but must not be unknown,
that is, faith must not be ignorant of it (a fide abesse).”
(Par. 237.)

In a later paragraph Hunnius writes: “Whatever dogma

may be unknown to a person without injury to his faith is

not fundamental either in the sense of constituting the foun-

ceases because the Originator of faith [God] has withdrawn,
although the foundation of it still stands. .. . If in the fol-
lowing the expression occurs: ‘This or that dogma may with-

since such a denial may destroy faith even though it does not
subvert its [doctrinal] foundation.” (§§ 351, 353.) To declar
everything that is non-fundamental an open question even if

difference.

But the question will be asked, Does it not happen fre-
quently, yes, is it not the universal lot of men, that they err
in weakness, and are we not to receive those that are weak
in the faith, and must therefore not their error, caused by

ship, be it ever so gross. Accordingly we see that in the
apostolic times even those people were not excluded from
the Church who owing to weakness in their understanding
of divine truth even taught the fundamental error men-
tioned Acts 15:1: “Except ye be circumcised after the man-
ner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” But although in the case
of an error caused by weakness the erring brother must be
tolerated, we have to say, in the first place, that the error it-
self must never be tolerated by the Church even if it appears

word of God. Such an error hence may never be treated as
an open question. Neither the Church nor its servants are
masters of the Word. On the contrary, to the Church are
committed for faithful administration the oracles of God,
Rom. 3:2; and its ministers are at the same time ministers
of the Word, Luke 1:2, who have been given the command,
“Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and