LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1973, Page 80

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

80 THE CONVENTION ESSAY

scription occurred when in 1855 the Definite Platform
appeared mysteriously and anonymously in the mail.
Soon the authorship of the document was attributed to
Schmucker, Benjamin Kurtz, an influential editor of
an'English Lutheran publication, and Samuel Sprecher,
president of Wittenberg College and of the General
Synod. The Platform rewrote the Augsburg Confession
so that any American Protestant could subscribe to it.
It pointed out five errors contained in the Augsburg
Confession, including the denial of baptismal regenera-
tion and the real presence of the body and blood of
Christ in Holy Communion.

The reaction was explosive! All Lutherans were
affected. The Missouri Synod, only 8 years old at this
time, at first reacted mildly. Almost a whole year later

August Hoyer issued the following analysis:

With deep sorrow and anxious misgivings, we declare:
that theology— which expresses itself in such mis-
handling of the doctrine of Holy Communion, of Holy
Baptism, and of Confession and Absolution or the Office
of the Ministry — is not merely the theology of the three
articles here adduced ... but the same which is con-
tinually praised by the Lutheran Observer as the genuine
theology of the American Lutheran Church . . . brought
forth by professors and doctors of theology with appeal
to scholarly Germans whose rationalistic bent and think-
ing are not recognized here. . . . [It interprets] Scripture
not with Scripture but with common sense, thereby de-
priving itself of the sole means by which it could attain
to a recognition of its own defects and to a_ blessed
reformation of itself. [A. Hoyer, “Ist das etwa Theologie
der Am.-luth. Kirche?” Lehre und Wehre, II (June
1856), pp. 182—183]

Missouri’s Confessional Platform

While these things were going on among Lutherans
in America, the Missouri Synod unequivocally com-
mitted itself to Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran Con-
fessions in a statement presently contained in Article II
of its Constitution. The first draft of the Constitu-
tion contained this commitment and has never been
amended. It presented the theological “power pack”
which, in the minds of those who subscribed to it, was
worth sacrificing “life, goods, fame, child and wife” and
needed to be transmitted to children and children’s
children. This subscription became a real shibboleth —
the heart and core of all synodical theology.

No other element in the synodical Constitution was
considered as highly important as the theological basis
for the union of the Synod. The complete acceptance
of Holy Scriptures and of all the symbolical books of
the Lutheran church was for the founding fathers the
banner of loyalty to God and to one another. They
took this position consciously and with determination,
and in direct contrast to most Lutheran church bodies
already in existence in 1847. It is this which made the
Missouri Synod, from its beginning, a church body
without geographical limits — in spite of its geographical
name — and different from other synods which had
been formed on the basis of state lines. Missouri was
organized because of its theological-confessional princi-
ple.

In opposition to some segments of America’s Lu-
therans, C. F. W. Walther, the first president of the

Missouri Synod, urged unwavering loyalty to the Con-
fessions in spite of popular opinion. As early as 2 years
after the founding of the Synod, he emphasized the
need for such an expression because of the widespread
theological confusion and laxity. He wrote:

Upon the doctrine contained in these books, and upon
none other, the first Lutherans were united in an eccle-
siastical fellowship. Upon this book of confession [Book
of Concord] therefore, the Lutheran Church is founded,
for through it she has come into being, and through it
she distinguishes herself from all factions and commu-
nions in Christendom. Therefore, he who says: “I want
to be a Lutheran” confesses thereby and professes ad-
herence to the Symbolical Books and to the doctrines
contained in them. And he who says that he wants to
be a Lutheran pastor confesses therewith not only that
he holds the articles of faith in these books to be true
and right but also that he will preach them, defend them,
and seek to spread them as God gives him grace and
power to do so. [C. F. W. Walther, “Warum sollen wir
an den Bekenntnisschriften . . . jetzt unerschiitterlich
festhalten?” Der Lutheraner, V (23 January 1849), 81]

Walther frankly addressed those who argued that
the Confessions were a coercion of faith, “a chain upon
the spirit” or “the children’s shoes of the past,” and
who were chafing under confessional subscription. In
response to the criticism that the Confessions were
merely “colored glasses through which a person sees
the Bible,” or “polluted channels through which the
divine truth is not brought” Walther denied that anyone
was coerced into joining the church and continued:

Actually for 300 years the Lutheran Church has been
accused of insisting too rigidly, too firmly, on the sym-
bols, on the very letter of Holy Scriptures, but seldom
has anyone dared to say —and never has anyone been
able to prove — that they have departed from the Scrip-
tures. If therefore we fell away from the teachings of
the Symbols, we should not be falling away from the
word of men but from the Word of God. We should not
be denying Luther but Christ. We would not only cease
to be true Lutherans but also yield the right to be called
Christian. [TIbid., p. 82]

In another article Walther blamed the Rationalists
and the Pietists for watering down and resisting sub-
scription to the Lutheran theological platform:

Not until the rise of Pietism ... was a determined
effort made to introduce a conditional subscription. The
seed for this type of subscription is found in Spener,
although he expresses himself very cautiously.

But when the Rationalists finally arose, they ruth-
lessly tore down the bulwarks of the church, which had
already been undermined, and planted the banner of
reason and “common sense” on its ruins. If our church,
which is now lying in the dust, shall rise again and not
gradually degenerate into a body which is Lutheran in
name only, without any characteristics of the church of
the Reformation, then all the fine words about eccle-
siastical propriety, about the reintroduction of ancient
rites and ceremonies, all attempts to invest the office of
the ministry with special glory and authority, all this
will be utterly in vain. The only help for resurrecting
our church lies in a renewed acceptance of its old ortho-
dox confessions and in a renewed unconditional subscrip-
tion to its symbols. [Western District Proceedings, 1858,
pp. 7—25, translated by A. W. C. Guebert in CTM, XVIII
(April 1947), 252—253]

In its position on Holy Scriptures, the Synod also
followed a steady line of commitment and fidelity.
God’s Word was the absolute foundation and source
of all preaching and teaching. Uniquely, Walther em-
phasized that the Holy Scriptures are God’s testimony

ACE SER TT NE ORNN NARA ESE PET OE NOTICES PERRO! ON RNS EEE URES A

teem cept teres oe ee Ne ee i ft meta