|
|
Ryan Fouts inspired me to compose an email that has been
dwelling and distracting me for the last few weeks. Before finals come, I thought it necessary to put some of it in writing. I would recommend you read his article first.
Little Loci - Logically Lutheran
Sometimes Lutherans talk about a “ministerial†use of reason vs. a “magisterial†use of reason. That is, we use logic “minsterially†in service to God’s Word. The Calvinists, the Romanists (and sometimes wandering “Lutheransâ€) use logic magisterially – that is, we allow our logic to force God’s Word to conform to our reason. The abuse of the later, however, doesn’t negate the use of the former! That is, simply because some people have abused logic, it doesn’t excuse us from using logic faithfully!
|
First off, I will probably meet some resistance for the ideas I am about to articulate. Be prepared!
Our faith is not a thinking man's faith. If it were so, the Christian understanding of incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection, Holy Trinity, baptism, and Holy Communion would drive a reasoning man to tears. Worse yet, if he thinks he has distilled these "doctrines" into inclusive and concise descriptions he more than likely has distorted, altered, or oversimplified the teaching of scripture. For example, the RC understanding of Holy Communion, Transubstantiation, is a result of reason. Christ said "this is my body" and so when we receive communion, it must be body and no longer bread. The Lutheran perspective is that is remains bread and is body as well. Discussions on this topic are further pursued as to
when the bread becomes body and when it ceases to be body, etc. For more see:
Against the Sacramentarians - Josh S in Here We Stand- Today, 10:10 AM
This process of elucidating doctrines is called dogmatics (or systematics.) Most often, the process of dogmatics is to apply principles, systems, and humanistic means onto the text of understanding on the text. The purpose is to discover that there is an absolute truth, and then do everything in our power to reinforce this absolute truth. It is our attempt to understand the inexplicable. Doctrine has the function of making sense of the word of Christ, found in our language of liturgy and prayer.
These attempts to systematize matters of faith using reason, rationale, doctrinal constructs are useful for teaching but limit the scope of understanding and the efficacy of the Gospel. Our reason holds the Gospel captive.
This is because a dogmatic textbook with doctrines is like looking at a cadaver in parts. It’s dead. It does not reveal the whole. We cannot create a living, breathing faith from the parts we receive. Doctrines are descriptive but not inclusive.
All our understanding of God in Christ is found in the words he has given and the actions did. These are in the scriptures. Better yet, we have a collection of preaching, epistles for further explanation of Christ's words and deeds in these self same scripptures. As well today, we do have two primary source means for
theology - preaching and liturgy. Christ is present and speaking in preaching. These allow the Bible to speak in the way of people.
Unfortunately we far too often rely on our doctrinal texts,
The Confessions et al as a substitute Bible. We believe we are too ignorant to understand the texts so we fall back on teachings of others, like Luther or the confessors to explain them for us. I am not saying this is entirely wrong but there is a definite attitude problem. The Spirit can reveal understanding, often new, to learned scribes of the scriptures. This does not come by our own reason or strength.
The danger of insisting or dogmatic usage becomes great. Those who are non-believers or non-denominational/anti-establishment see you as substituting
dogma for the pure Word of God. They want their personal Jesus, directly, mechanically inspiring them. We do not have to look far back into history to see where this can go wrong (using reason or mind to decipher the way of God.) They may have adopted and are operating in a cultural mindset of multiple paths to a single pinnacle. (We all worship the same One God but have different "understandings" of him.) This is clearly wrong in the context of the Bible and yet by seeking a relevant, personal faith we may be led (by Satan) to this very conclusion. In this situation, the process of systematizing faith into doctrines is and was useful for preventing heresy.
On the other hand, when we Lutherans are ordained as pastors we confess that the Book of Concord is the complete and utterly true exposition of the Bible. As I have witnessed, it becomes the "go to" book to explain matters of faith. Give me a break! God's Words aren't good enough? They aren't inclusive? They certainly are exclusive. Witness how often pastors preach on the epistles, especially Pauline which are often fundamentally dogmatic texts, or the Confessions and do not preach on the life and death of Christ.
So in closing (for now), the process of dogmatics is useful for preventing heresy, whether as a test or trial to put your sermons through or in daily speech. Refer the confessions for a most likely correct teaching of this same Word when need arises. Even so dogmatic texts and understanding are NOT an effective ministry tool. They do not create faith. They do not set those who are errant right. Only God's Word has this power. Confessions may be applicable but are nowhere near as efficacious. These words only "make sense" in light of Christ. Preach, teach, and witness the message of Christ crucified and let the Spirit work through the word.
--------
Update with further discussion:
Justification: Law and Gospel
Petersen david.h.petersen@att.net in Pastor Petersen's Blog
Today, 06:17 PM
