Reformed or Lutheran?

Transcription

1

2 Which Predestination: Reformed or Lutheran? 2

3 What s next on your reading list? Discover Your Next Great Christian Read Long for nourishing spiritual food? Get up-to-date notice of new releases. Sign Up Now 3

4 What s next on your reading list? Discover Your Next Great Christian Read Long for nourishing spiritual food? Get up-to-date notice of new releases. Sign Up Now 4

5 What s next on your reading list? Discover Your Next Great Christian Read Long for nourishing spiritual food? Get up-to-date notice of new releases. Sign Up Now 5

6 Which Predestination: Reformed or Lutheran? By F. W. Stellhorn, D. D. Professor in the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary, Columbus, Ohio. Translated from the German by Rev. Richard C. H. Lenski, A. M. LutheranLibrary.org 6

7 Copyright Information Copyright 2018 by The Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry LutheranLibrary.org All rights reserved. While the original text is in the public domain, the formatting and contents of this volume are under copyright. Please respect the labor that has gone into the restoration of this work. Originally published 1892 by The Lutheran Book Concern, Columbus, Ohio as a portion of Part 1 of The Error Of Modern Missouri: Its Inception, Development, And Refutation, Edited by George H. Schodde, PhD, Professor of Theology in the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary, Columbus, Ohio. Cover Image detail Drifting Clouds by Caspar David Friedrich, Unabridged. 240tc v2r1 7

8 Contents Copyright Information Contents Introduction to the Original [1892] Edition 1. What Is Predestination? 2. What Has God Regarded In Election? 3. What Is The Relation Especially Of Faith To Election? 4. In What Sense Does The Formula Of Concord Speak Of Election? 5. Is Man s Conversion And Salvation In Every Sense Independent Of His Conduct? 6. May We Speak Of Man s Decision Or Self-determination In Conversion? 7. What Is The Difference Between The Lutheran And The Reformed Doctrine Of Election? 8. How Must The Doctrine Of The Dogmaticians Of The Seventeenth Century Be Regarded? 9. How Is The Doctrine Of Modern Missouri To Be Regarded? For further reading About the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry Some Authors For You To Discover Great Narratives Topics How Can One Find Peace With God? If You Find Typographic Errors 8

9 Want to be notified of Future Releases? Benediction 9

10 Introduction to the Original [1892] Edition It is a matter of deep regret that the Synod of Missouri and other States has, for the past twenty-years and more, set itself against the faith it at one time was the chief defender and promoter of in this country. Whether the membership of that body are aware of it or not, it is not for us to judge; but the fact remains that their doctrine of a particular yet unconditional election unto salvation subverts the entire system of Gospel truth and deprives every doctrinal member of that system of its saving power and comfort. Whilst the Lutheran Church in entire conformity with Scripture teaches but one decree unto salvation the Missourians teach, as coordinate to it, a second and one whereby the first is logically set aside and practically emptied of its gracious content. Professing to believe with us that God by His mercy would have all men to be saved, they at the same time contend for the doctrine that God has decreed to save only a few by giving to them for reasons no man can know the faith adequate to that end. Never were two articles of belief more glaringly contradictory offered for acceptance to the mind of man; and, as this last, never was doctrine so utterly destructive of every well-grounded hope of salvation. The grave charge of heresy must stand against the synod of Missouri until it retracts. A mere correction of phrases cannot acquit that body; nor can it satisfy an offended church by any profession of belief in the universality of divine grace, however loud and unctious it may be in giving expression to it. Its official utterances on the doctrine of predestination as ultimately set forth in the thirteen theses of 1881, 1 when considered apart from their history, might be allowed to pass; but taken in connection with the controversy that has called them forth they have settled nothing, except that the Missouri Synod as a body has adopted the position of its leading men and made itself responsible for what 10

11 they have written. The theses themselves fail to cover the all important point in dispute. When, for example, in thesis ten they declare that the faith foreseen by God in the elect is not the cause which moved Him to predestinate them unto salvation, they simply set up a man of straw, be it to knock him down or, which is more likely, to have the impression go abroad that their opponents had in all sincerity set up a figure of that description. But, what is more and worse: by the terms of its preamble to its declaration of faith the synod demands the latter to be subscribed to as the doctrine set forth in its publications up to that time, to wit, the Lutheraner, the Lehre und Wehre, and the Minutes of its several districts, notably that of the Western District. In these publications the leaders and spokesmen of the body arraigned postulate a double grace in God: the one universal, being for all men alike; the other particular, specifically potent, and mysteriously intended for the elect few and bestowed on them alone. Strangely enough, the former alone never saves; whilst the latter, when concurrent to the first, shall and must save every man to whom for some reason unknown to us it is extended. By some eternal purpose and decree of God and without any regard on His part to anything whatsoever in man the God-given faith included this grace is extant for only the few God has ordained to salvation. Such, according to our Missouri opponents, is the grace of election. When in Dr. Walther formulated anew the controverted points, the first proposition he declared himself ready to affirm and defend was, that the faith foreseen by God flows from election; or, in other words, that the persevering faith without which no sinner can be saved has its source in election. This proposition he set up over against the other, that election flows from the foreseen faith an antithesis of his own invention; for what was really contended for and is today is the plain Bible truth that grace universal is for every man wholly and solely the source of the faith that can save him a fact and truth our opponents have completely ignored! From the position thus assumed by the leader his followers have never receded; and to defend the pernicious doctrine then and there enunciated they stand in arms against us to this very day. By the common consensus of Scripture teaching and of the belief of all parties concerned as well as by the very word employed to designate it, the grace of election is particular; and this limited grace Missouri declares to be the one 11

12 source of effectually saving faith. Aware of what such a doctrine implies, they ask men to forego the exercise of their prerogative to think and instead to adore the mystery divine they pretend to have discovered. Surely, poor mortals find mysteries enough in God s providential and gracious dealings with men to impress them with a due sense of His majesty; and to make souls stumble at mysteries which have no existence anywhere except in some people s imagination is a sin they will find it hard to account for. To thinking men, led by the Word and Spirit of God, the Missouri doctrine of an unconditional election of a limited number of sinners unto conversion and persevering faith vitiates the whole plan of salvation. Unless a poor sinner knows himself to be one of God s elect a matter he can have no certain and unmistakable knowledge of his soul must be tossed with doubts and fears all his lifetime. Neither the mercy of God, nor the merits of Christ, nor the witnessing of the Spirit are able to give him rest; for according to the Missourians these do not suffice to save any man unless the mysterious grace of election be added to them; that is to say, unless God have in His eternal council irrevocably resolved that the man shall and must be saved! Though a sort of truce seems to be observed at present by the parties to it, the controversy is not come to an end. It has been carried on for the most part by means of the German language; and whilst it has no doubt corrupted the faith of some and sorely afflicted the hearts of all who love the truth of God and desire His Church to prosper in peace, yet has the good Lord overruled the evil for good to thousands; for it cannot be denied that the battle has been the occasion of bringing to light many treasures of precious truth that might otherwise have remained hidden from the eyes of many who now rejoice in them. Bearing these facts in mind. President E. L. S. Tressel has rendered an invaluable service to the Church by publishing this volume, and thus making some of the choicest finds accessible to the English reading public. The volume thus introduced presents three lengthy treatises on the subject of predestination. The first, by Dr. F. W. Stellhorn and translated by Rev. R. C. H. Lenski, is a Contribution to the History and the proper Estimate of the recent controversy on the doctrine of Predestination. The Contribution covers three parts: the first, a dogmatic historical introduction to the subject; the second, the 12

13 Formula of Concord and the old Lutheran theologians; and the third, the doctrine of predestination in the Missouri Synod. The second treatise, Intuitu Fidei, is by Dr. F. A. Schmidt, and is translated by the brethren R. C. H. Lenski and C. B. Ghodes. In this the Rev. Doctor propounds and answers the three questions: first. What was the substantial content of the doctrine, that God made choice of the elect in foresight of faith, as taught by the fathers and teachers of the Lutheran Church? secondly. Did our fathers and teachers depart from the Confessions by teaching an election in foresight of faith? and thirdly. Is the doctrine of election in foresight of faith taught by the Lutheran Confession? The third and last treatise is A Testimony Against the False Doctrine of Predestination Recently Introduced by the Missouri Synod, and an Appendix by H. A. Allwardt on the history of the controversy in that body. The first part of this paper contains a series of theses prepared by the brethren H. A. Allwardt and Prof. H. Ernst, followed by a discussion of the same by the authors and ministers who had felt themselves constrained to withdraw from the Missouri Synod on account of the grave errors that body had set out to promulgate. These brethren subsequently organized what was known as the Northwestern District of our Synod, and now as the Districts respectively of Wisconsin and Minnesota. The translation is by the brethren R. C. H. Lenski and W. E. Tressel. The subject matter discussed in these several treatises is too vast and varied for even a synoptic review in these pages. Suffice it to say that the erudition, assiduity and conscientiousness of the authors, and of the translators as well, are the best guarantee any one can ask for that the book herewith recommended is a treasury of profound thought, nice reasoning and of rich information. May it find its way into the hands of many readers and prove itself of lasting good to them and through them to the Church at large. Columbus, O., October 28, A. D See Minutes of the Delegate Synod of that year. 2. See Lehre u. Wehre, Feb. 81, p. 54. C. H. L. Schuette. 13

14 Comparative Summary of the Doctrine of Predestination Before closing the discussion of the doctrine of predestination of the Missouri Synod, it appears to be in place to summarize briefly its chief peculiarities, and to compare them with the old Missourian, the genuinely Lutheran, and the Reformed doctrine. This we here undertake. We choose the form of questions and answers. 1. What Is Predestination? a. Old Missouri answers: Predestination is that act of God in which, before the foundation of the world, thus from all eternity, He determined, according to the purpose of His will, to save eternally, for Christ s sake and for the praise of His glorious grace, all those whose persevering faith in Christ He has foreseen. Eph. 1, 4-6; 2 Tim. 1, 9. 1 b. Modern Missouri: Election is the unalterable and eternal decree of God, by which, from the entire human race (fallen by its own fault from its original state of innocence into sin and destruction), according to the free purpose of His will, out of pure grace and mercy. He ordained unto salvation a certain number of individual persons, neither better nor worthier than others, lying together with them in the same universal destruction. ( Lehre und Wehre XIX, p. 140) 2 Note also the change made by the Wisconsin allies of Missouri in the old Dresden Catechism, the so-called Kreuzcatechismus. Here the answer to question 304: Who are the elect? reads: The elect are they of whom 14

15 God has foreseen in eternity that they would persevere in their faith in His Son Jesus Christ until their end. Eph. 1:3-4; 2 Thess. 2: This explanation, harmonizing completely with the doctrine of old Missouri and of the old Lutheran dogmaticians, the Wisconsinites have altered in their Catechism, prepared on the basis of the Dresden Kreuzcatechismus, to read as follows: The elect are they who are called by the Gospel, enlightened with the gifts of the Holy Spirit, sanctified in the true faith, and kept with Christ Jesus until their end, and thus saved eternally, according to the gracious purpose and pleasure of God in Christ Jesus (question 215) an explanation which the strictest Calvinist may adopt without the slightest reservation. c. The Calvinists, that is the strictest among them, who hold fast to the resolution of the Synod of Dort, answer precisely as does modern Missouri (above p. 29)! Indeed, the answer of the latter seems to be a translation of the passage concerned from the Confession of Dort! d. The old Lutheran dogmaticians: Election or predestination in the wider sense is that eternal decree of God, by which in His infinite mercy He determined to send a Mediator for all men, of whom He foresaw that they would fall into sin, and to offer Him by universal preaching for all to accept; also to impart to all, who would not resist, faith through the Word and Sacraments; to sanctify all believers, and to renew those continuing the use of the means of grace, and to preserve faith in them unto the end of their lives, and finally, to save those who believe to the end, for the glory of His goodness. Predestination or election in the stricter sense is that eternal decree of God, by which God in His infinite mercy determined to give eternal salvation to all those, and only to those, of whom He foresaw that they would believe in Christ till the end, and this for the sake of Christ s merits, which must be apprehended by persevering faith, and is foreseen as such, for the sake of their salvation and of His glory. (Baier, Compendium Theol. pos.) What Has God Regarded In Election? 15

16 a. Old Missouri answers: Also the conduct of man, especially his persevering faith, is the indispensable condition ; it is false Reformed doctrine that in the eternal counsel of God respecting man man s conduct was not at all regarded, not even faith. From the purpose of God to save only those who believe perseveringly their election is to be deduced, and this conjunction of the two is conceivable only as mediated by foresight. A blind predestination, not enlightened by knowledge, is unknown to the Confession 4 The subsequent will of God, from which personal election proceeds, conditions the antecedent, universal will of God s grace by that of the creature, although not at all in any synergistic sense 5 b. Modern Missouri: This will of God, however, according to which we are chosen, is also itself not determined by any other will. God has chosen some merely because He so willed ; according to His mere pleasure He gives us eternal life. 6 Therefore, because it is already certain through election that a person is to reach heaven, God foreknows it. As a judge s foreknowledge of the execution of a criminal is conditioned by his foreordaining the act, so also God s foreknowledge in election is dependent upon His foreordination, and not vice versa. 7 All regard to man s conduct must be excluded, also all regard to faith. 8 Also those who are not chosen are not chosen not for the reason that God foresaw their willful, contumacious resistance. 9 Election is conditional only in so far as God has regarded Christ s merit, obtained for all, and faith, in so far as He has determined to give it to the elect. 10 c. The Calvinists answer in the same way as modern Missourians, that God has had no regard whatever to man s conduct and faith; 11 they differ from Missouri, and to their own advantage, only in this that in consistency and honesty they do not speak of a conditional election. We read, for instance in Article X of the 2nd Helvetian Confession: God has foreordained or chosen from eternity, freely and of pure mercy, without any regard whatever to man, the saints whom He desires to save in Christ. d. The Lutheran Church: The reason that many are called, but only few are chosen is this, that the non-elect either do not at all hear God s Word, but willfully despise it, close their ears and harden their hearts, and 16

17 in this manner foreclose the ordinary way to the Holy Ghost, so that He cannot effect His work in them (Formula of Concord XI, Epit. 12, Jacobs Transl. 526); in other words, they do not conduct themselves aright toward the Holy Spirit and the means of grace, and do not permit faith to be wrought in their hearts. For God has ordained in His counsel that all those who, by true faith, receive Christ He will justify and save (Jacobs Transl., p. 656). An essential part belonging to predestination is the decree of God that the good work which He has begun in them, the believers, He would strengthen, increase, and support to the end, if they observe God s Word, pray diligently, abide in God s goodness, and faithfully use the gifts received (p. 653). The Lutheran theologians consider it Calvinistic, unchristian, and heathenish to teach that God has not regarded, cared nought about it, and determined nothing regarding it, how the children of men would conduct themselves toward the holy order which He Himself established for salvation, whether they would use it, or despise it. From this foreseen difference between men reprobation as well as election follows. Not all, but only some are reprobated, because of the difference of faith and its opposite, unbelief What Is The Relation Especially Of Faith To Election? a. Old Missouri answers: Faith, is an integral part of the order in which God offers the blessing of election to men. As election, i. e. the choice of persons, election, in the narrower sense, is neither the foundation nor the means, nor the condition of salvation (for these are Christ. His Gospel, and the faith given thereby)," so also it is not the cause of our faith, in so far as faith would be the effect of election; for the Word works faith. 13 God has also not elected us that we should believe, but because He foresaw that we would believe. 14 It is false doctrine of the Calvinists to say: Election is not out of the foresight of faith, but is unto faith

18 b. Modern Missouri: Even to consider faith only the middle link, so that the motive in election would not be faith in itself, but Christ and His merit apprehended by faith, is already Pelagianism, because faith is then not the middle link, but a condition, and a certain causality will still be ascribed to faith. 16 Election (in the Missourian sense, the choice of persons) is the cause of all that takes place for the salvation of the elect; it is the cause that any one comes to repentance; it is also the cause when one who has fallen away returns unto repentance. 17 This election is, as it were, the very fountain of the great, unsearchable mystery of our salvation. 18 Faith cannot bear the same relation to election as it bears to justification. Election is not, like Christ s righteousness, something obtained and existing for all men, something therefore for all men to embrace by faith, appropriate, and become partakers of. 19 God has predestinated us unto faith, not in foresight of faith. 20 c. The Calvinists: Election (as the choice of particular persons) did not take place in view of faith, but unto faith. Consequently, election is the source of every blessing belonging to salvation, whence faith, sanctification, etc., proceed. 21 d. The Lutheran Church: To election belongs the following, as the fourth decree, that all those who, in true repentance, receive Christ by a true faith He would justify and receive into grace, adoption, and inheritance of eternal life (Jacobs T., p. 652, etc.). All men should seek in Christ the eternal election of the Father, and this by faith (661). Hutter says, it is a horrible blindness or giddiness of mind that will not recognize the same condition and relation of faith in the article of faith as in the article of justification. 22 And herein all pure theologians on our side are united and agree with one accord and teach unanimously against the Calvinists, says Musseus In What Sense Does The Formula Of Concord Speak Of Election? 18

19 a. Old Missouri evidently was never entirely clear on this point. And this lack of clearness seems to explain to us also Dr. Walther s confusion and contradiction in so many places, and this not only when in the heat of controversy he resorted to very questionable weapons and subterfuges. b. Modern Missouri asserts, as all know, that the Formula of Concord speaks of election in the narrower sense, that is exclusively of the choice of persons; and it is compelled to do this, if it would give its doctrine even in part the appearance of agreeing with the Confession. 24 c. What the Lutheran Church thinks on this point, namely that the Formula of Concord speaks of election in the wider sense, is shown, in the first place, by the clear words of the Confession itself (especially p. 651, 9; 652, 13-24), 25 and secondly by the clear and repeated utterances of our old dogmaticians Is Man s Conversion And Salvation In Every Sense Independent Of His Conduct? a. Old Missouri answers: No. 27 Dr. Walther, Postille, p. 91: He who opposes not merely his natural resistance to the operation of the Holy Spirit, but also an obstinate and obdurate resistance, him God Himself cannot then help; for God will force no one to conversion, a forced conversion is no conversion. For, although all men are by nature equally sinful, and although God must first remove this resistance, yet on this account no one is lost; for when God comes with His Word He also comes with His Holy Spirit to remove the natural resistance. But he who then not merely, etc. Page 92: God could not choose many merely for this reason, because He foresaw, that many would obstinately resist His Holy Spirit, reject the means of grace and make them fruitless in their work, would not believe, or would not remain in faith, but would become obdurate and hardened. Synodical Conference: Now, however, God looks about in the world to see how people will conduct themselves 19

20 toward this redemption of Christ, etc. (Report of 1872, p. 36; compare Zeitblatter, 1889, p. 345.) b. Modern Missouri: Yea. 28 c. The Calvinists have essentially the same position on this point as the modern Missourians 29 entirely dependent upon predestination is man s conversion and salvation, and not in any or the least sense upon his resistance or nonresistance. d. The Lutheran Church teaches: If man is to be converted and saved, he must conduct himself aright toward the means of grace and the Holy Spirit operating through them, and this he is able to do through the grace and strength offered in the means of grace (Jacobs T., p. 561 sqq.). Otherwise the Holy Spirit cannot convert and save him (p. 526; compare 652, 17; 653, 21; 656, etc ). 30 To assume the contrary is Calvinistic, unchristian, and heathenish. 31 Reprobation as well as election proceeds from the foreseen different conduct of men in this regard. 32 When man is in the workshop of the Holy Ghost and offers no wicked resistance to the means of grace, God brings him to conversion. The decision of his will in conversion is not a thing of necessity or of irresistible compulsion, although, presupposing the divine order (the following of this order, right conduct toward it), it is infallible May We Speak Of Man s Decision Or Self-determination In Conversion? a. Old Missouri answers: Yea. 34 b. Modern Missouri answers: No. 35 Grace works irresistibly; wherever God wills, His grace forces its way, removes all resistance, even the most willful: Experience confirms the fact that He does not remove the resistance of millions of men against His Word, whereas He could 20

21 remove it from them as easily as from the elect ( Lehre und Wehre 1871, p. 172). It must be an easy thing for God to remove a man s resistance, so that this cannot hinder Him, when He determines to save a man... Hence when God turns to a man with His grace, all resistance gives way, as the snow melts before the rays of the vivifying sun in spring time.... God also often takes the most willful resistance from the elect. Theol. Monatshefte 1873, p c. The Calvinists, according to the above, agree very naturally with modern Missouri; nothing but the free will of God, decides conversion. 37 Grace works irresistibly 38 d. The Lutheran Church is determined to know nothing of an irresistible grace, as is shown already by the passages quoted under question 5; and therefore she cannot object to speaking of man s decision or selfdetermination after the manner of old Missouri. Compare furthermore the Formula of Concord (Jacobs T., p. 5G4), where we read among other things as follows: And although God does not force man to become godly (for those who always resist the Holy Ghost and persistently oppose the known truth, as Stephen says of the hardened Jews, Acts 7:51, will not be converted) etc. And what Baier says (Comp. Theol. pos. III., 1, 7), that God, by His saving grace does not irresistibly determine or decide (irresistibiliter determinet) us to use the Mediator aright, but that He wants to do only what is demanded on His, God s, part to make it impossible for no man to partake of the Mediator this is universally the doctrine of our dogmaticians and other theologians. Dieckhoff, in his noteworthy anti- Missourian work, Zur Lehre von der Bekehrung und von der Praedestination, (On the Doctrine of Conversion and Predestination) gives the following entirely correct summary of the discussion of this subject by Calovius, a strict Lutheran, (p. 105): Man does determine himself in conversion, from the indifference of his free-will, to will his own conversion by means of the powers received. This willing itself is wrought by grace. When man in conversion decides 21

22 for conversion, he does this determined thereto by grace, but not determined thereto praecise, so that he must, so that he could not resist the operation of grace, nor follow the contrary will of the old man. Nothing more than this was intended by Dr. G. Fritschel, whom the Missourians vilified so much, in his use of the term free selfdetermination of man What Is The Difference Between The Lutheran And The Reformed Doctrine Of Election? a. Old Missouri: It is distinctively Reformed, and therefore un-lutheran, to conceive of predestination as a decree in which man s conduct was in no way regarded, not even faith. 40 This is the point of difference, dividing the pure doctrine from the Reformed particularistic doctrine, namely, that the power of the divine Word unto conversion and regeneration has not predestination as its presupposition. 41 The theologians of Dort place the chief predestinating cause of the damnation as well as of the salvation of those born now in a sinful condition, absolutely in God and in His beneplacitum absolutum (absolute pleasure) without basing election with the Lutherans upon the foresight of persevering faith, i. e. conditioning the former in God upon the latter. 42 That God has elected a few according to His mere will and pleasure without regarding faith grounded in the merit of Jesus Christ, is the constant doctrine of all the Reformed, as many of them as bind themselves to their symbolical books and consent to the Synod of Dort; and although a few admit that election did not take place without all regard to the merit of Christ and to faith, yet they do not mean that God from eternity elected those of whom He foresaw that they would believe and accept Christ s merit, but that He elected some few according to His mere absolute will that they might believe in time. Hence faith is not considered among them as a cause or 22

23 condition of election, but as a necessary effect of election... God did not elect us because we believe, but that we may believe... Because faith is God s gift He did not foresee it and direct His election to it. 43 b. Modern Missouri: The very thing that makes the teaching of the Calvinists so horrible is now by Missouri said to be this that they speak only of the mystery of personal election, and not of the way in which God saves the elect, or carries out the election made without regard to man s conduct and faith; still in regard to the (mysterious, unknown) rule of election, and also in regard to the way in which it is carried out they agree in all essentials with modern Missouri (above, p. 95). At another time the difference between Lutherans (Missourians) and Calvinists is said to be: The Lutherans teach only one predestination, that unto salvation, none unto damnation; they teach universal grace and an earnest will of God to save all men; they teach that all men are redeemed through Christ; they teach that God has chosen to elect only for the sake of Christ, and for the purpose of bringing them to faith and salvation in the same way in which He desires to save all men; they teach that God earnestly and efficaciously calls also those who are not saved, earnestly and efficaciously offers them His Holy Spirit, grace, faith, perseverance, and salvation, and that they are lost only because they despise all this and obstinately resist the Holy Spirit till the end, etc. Where then do you find the Calvinistic doctrine of absolute election?.. How can election be absolute, i. e. unconditional, when it is conditioned by Christ s merit and by the faith God has determined to give the elect? ( Lehre und Wehre, 1880, p. 295, etc.) 44 Note that there is no mention made here at all of the difference stated by old Missouri, of the difference which must exist, if the Lutheran doctrine is to differ really and essentially from the Calvinistic, for the certain consolation of all poor sinners. In this Lutheran doctrine, which no longer warrants the old Lutheran conclusions of election in view of faith, and of conversion and salvation not without all regard to man s conduct, most men, all who are not elected in the Missourian and Calvinistic sense, are in reality, as far as all that is essential and decisive is concerned, left in the same miserable position as in the genuinely Calvinistic doctrine: without any 23

24 fault of their own that grace is denied them, without which all other grace saves no man. c. Our old Lutheran theologians give the difference precisely as did old Missouri; the latter only appropriated their expressions and thus acknowledged their doctrine. d. What the impartial M. Schneckenburger states as the essential difference between genuine Lutheran and genuine Calvinistic doctrine in regard to election, we have set forth at length above. 45 We here merely refer to the following points. For the Lutheran this eternal election (i. e. the choice of persons) is not the principle determining the entire development of the individual and his final goal (as this is the case with the Reformed): on the contrary, all the stress which the Reformed view, in order to carry out the idea of grace, places upon the eternal, pre-temporal act of election, is placed by the Lutheran view upon the fact of actual universal redemption and of individual justification, upon the efficacious power of the Holy Spirit influencing man s decision. The final issue is made to depend upon the preceding development, in which the individual acts as a true moral agent, and in which grace offers true means of grace whose use or abuse produces a decisive result. This view, however, appears inconsistent to the mind of the Reformed, and at the same time lacking in piety, and he opposes to it his dogma of predestination. 46 For the Lutheran the consilium salutis (the counsel of salvation) is in general that in which his interest concerning the eternal decrees of God concentrates; while the Reformed conceives of this concilum salutis only as connected with a predestination of individuals.... Yet in teaching a divine predestination on the basis of the Scriptures, the Lutherans make this dependent on faith, that is on the divine prescience of faith, and God s free grace does not consist in this that He gives faith and with this a 24

25 share in Christ and in eternal life, according to His pleasure (having regard to nothing in or about man), but in this that He imparts to the believer, who in himself is a sinner and merits condemnation, for the sake of Christ forgiveness and salvation. Of this grace man becomes certain in justification, and the thought of predestination is for him only an element in his assurance of salvation, wherewith he comforts himself in the battle and misery of the world. The Reformed has the following objections to make against the Lutheran dogma referred to: If faith were the condition of a predestination depending not upon itself alone, or upon the divine volition, then salvation, to which predestination admits, would not be a pure gift of grace.... Accordingly, the Reformed doctrine establishes a predestination of God unconditioned by His foreknowledge, rather conditioning this itself, producing its results with absolute, irresistible power in and among men." (P. 83 sq.) For the Reformed the element of justification, as an objective act of God, carried into effect through the media gratise (the means of grace), must recede behind the element of eternal election, in which the vocatio, regeneratio, and justificatio are already included as nothing more than stages in the development of the individual under the influence of grace. Justification, on the contrary, is looked upon by the Lutherans exclusively as a transcendent act, immanent in God, and intransitive, the result of which does nothing but enter the consciousness of the subject concerned, and is received with the same faith which for the individual forms the condition for bringing the divine act to pass How Must The Doctrine Of The Dogmaticians Of The Seventeenth 25

26 Century Be Regarded? a. Old Missouri answers, aside from its confession of this very doctrine, as contained in the teaching of Old Missouri herself, and this even in its transition to modern Missourianism, as follows: Our Synod confesses most positively that the theologians of our Church, also in the 17th century, taught the correct doctrine of predestination, and defended it against the Calvinists. 48 b. Modern Missouri: It is beyond all doubt that the dogmaticians of the 17th century in some way, although they define it very differently, make election depend upon faith.... And herein they have erred and have deviated from the Scriptures and the Symbol. Herein we do not agree with them. 49 c. The judgment of our old dogmaticians themselves is found in their statements regarding election in the wider and in the narrower sense. 50 Since the publication of the Formula of Concord, for some 300 years, the Lutheran Church has unanimously held that the doctrine of our Confession and of the following teachers of our Church harmonized perfectly also in the article of predestination. Modern Missourians are the first Lutherans who assert the contrary; it is to be hoped that they will also be the last. 9. How Is The Doctrine Of Modern Missouri To Be Regarded? a. Modern Missourians, of course, claim that it alone is genuinely Lutheran; whether this claim is made with a good conscience, we leave to the judgment of the omniscient God. 26

27 b. Every impartial man who has followed the above presentation with close attention, whoever he may be, must admit that in all essentials the modern Missourian doctrine is genuinely Calvinistic. It is not merely that single phrases are accidentally the same as those of Calvinism. It is not the play of chance that the modern Missourian definition of predestination is exactly the same as that of Calvinism. The entire modern Missourian view is Calvinistic, as the old Missourian was Lutheran. Calvinistic is, the idea of the position and of the all-decisive importance of personal election in the counsel of salvation; the idea of the relation of faith to election; the idea of the independence of election as far as the foreknowledge and all the conduct of man is concerned; the idea of the irresistible operation of the grace flowing from election; the idea of the justification of the individual as an element in no way especially prominent, and not in the least decisive, in the carrying out of the election which determines everything; the idea of grace as in its very nature, and therefore of necessity, bound to no order or condition etc. In short, when closely examined, with a view to its real essence and final result, the modern Missourian doctrine of election resembles that of old Calvinism as closely as one egg resembles another, and differs from it only in the inconsistency of its thinking and in the dishonesty of its polemics. This is especially true of the Amyraldine form of Calvinism; Amyraldism and modern Missourianism are genuine twin brothers. 51 For further reading Intuitu Fidei: Election in view of Faith Election and Predestination: The Blue Island Theses 1. Original text includes these references: (Above p. 58; compare p. 64 and 82 sq. and 129.) 2. Original includes: compare above p

28 3. Original includes: Compare above, p. 45 sq., 48 sqq., 25 sqq. 4. Original includes: (above, p. 54; 56). 5. Original includes: (above, p. 57). 6. Original includes: (Above, p. 72.) 7. Original includes: (p. 77) 8. Original includes: (above, p. 119) 9. Original includes: p. 130; Original includes: (P. 140 sq.) 11. Original includes: (above p. 80) 12. Original includes: (Above, p. 20 sqq.) 13. (above p. 55). 14. (p. 61) 15. (p. 65). 16. Original includes: (above, p. 66). 17. Original includes: (p. 67). 18. Original includes: (p. 72). 19. Original includes: (Above, p. 140 sq.; compare p. 153). 20. Original includes: (p. 119 sqq.). 21. Original includes: (above, p. 30). 22. Original includes: (above, p. 27). 28

29 23. Original includes: (above, p. 112). 24. Original includes: (above, p. 95 sq.; 115 sqq.). 25. Original includes: compare above p. 39 sqq. 26. Original includes: (above, p. 45 sqq., 48 sqq.). 27. Original includes: (above, p. 55 sqq.). 28. Original includes: (above, p. 79; 93 sqq.; 163 sq.). 29. Original includes: (above, p. 31: 30. Original includes: (above, p. 41; 43; 24 sq.). 31. Original includes: (above, p. 26). 32. Original includes: (p. 26 sq.). 33. Original includes: (p. 83). 34. Original includes: (above, p ). 35. Original includes: (above, p. 68). 36. Original includes: compare above, p. 141 sq.; 147.) 37. Original includes: (above, p. 32). 38. Original includes: (p. 34). 39. Original includes: (above, p. 68). 40. Original includes: (above, p. 51). 41. Original includes: (p. 55). 42. Original includes: (p. 58). 29

30 43. Original includes: (P. 61 sq.) 44. Original includes: compare above, p. 140 sq.) 45. Original includes: p Original includes: (above, p. 31) 47. Original includes: (p. 36). Compare in addition above, p. 72; 119; 128; Original includes: (above, p. ()7 sq.; compare p. 113). 49. Original includes: (Above, p. 149 sq.). 50. Original includes: (above, p. 48 sqq.; compare p. 29, where election in view of faith is taught as being indisputably contained in the Formula of Concord). 51. Original includes: (compare above, p. 37 sq.). 30

31 About the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry The Lutheran Library exists to promote knowledge, understanding and wisdom by finding, carefully restoring, and republishing accurate, well-written, and readable books suitable for self-learning. All titles are available at little or no charge in hand-formatted Kindle, EPUB, and PDF versions to work with most devices. The Lutheran Library editors believe, teach and confess the evangelical Christian faith as described by the Ecumenical Creeds, The Augsburg Confession, The Formula of Concord, and the other sections of the Book of Concord. Some Authors For You To Discover Jacobs, Henry Eyster, ( ) Krauth, Charles Porterfield, ( ) Lehmanowsky, John Jacob, ( ) Long, Simon Peter, ( ) Loy, Matthias, ( ) Schmauk, Theodore Emanuel, ( ) Great Narratives 31

32 My experiences in the mission field of South Dakota during the years by Frank Albert Kiess My Dogs in the Northland by Egerton Ryerson Young Dixie Kitten by Eva March Tappan Letters from a Cat by Helen Hunt Jackson Topics Biography Theology & History Devotional Missions & Service Extras! How Can One Find Peace With God? The most important thing to grasp is that one is made right with God not by any good things he or she might do. Justification is by faith only, and that faith rests in the one-time substitutionary death of Jesus Christ for one s sins. Read your Bible steadily. God works His power in human beings through His Word. Prayers are requested for the next generation, that the Lord will plant in them a love of the truth, and that the hard-learned lessons of the past will not be forgotten. If You Find Typographic Errors 32

33 No matter how pure our intentions, some typos do get through. Please report any you find. They will be corrected for the benefit of future readers. Want to be notified of Future Releases? Sign up now. LutheranLibrary.org Faithful to the Reformation 33

34 Benediction Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. Jude 1:

35 Table of Contents Copyright Information 7 Contents 8 Introduction to the Original [1892] Edition What Is Predestination? What Has God Regarded In Election? What Is The Relation Especially Of Faith To Election? In What Sense Does The Formula Of Concord Speak Of Election? Is Man s Conversion And Salvation In Every Sense Independent Of His Conduct? May We Speak Of Man s Decision Or Self-determination In Conversion? What Is The Difference Between The Lutheran And The Reformed Doctrine Of Election? How Must The Doctrine Of The Dogmaticians Of The Seventeenth Century Be Regarded? How Is The Doctrine Of Modern Missouri To Be Regarded? 26 For further reading 27 About the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry 31 Some Authors For You To Discover 31 Great Narratives 31 Topics 32 How Can One Find Peace With God? 32 If You Find Typographic Errors 32 Want to be notified of Future Releases? 33 Benediction 34 35