Concordia Journal | Summer 2015

Summ

er 2015C

oncordia Journal volum

e 41 |

number 3

COncordiaournal volume 41 | number 3J Summer 2015

Word Alive! Connections and Conversations

The New Obedience: An Exegetical Glance at Article VI of the Augsburg Confession Pietism on the American Landscape

Sanctification

Concordia Seminary801 Seminary PlaceSt. Louis, MO 63105

Exclusive subscriber digital access via ATLAS to Concordia Journal &

Concordia Theology Monthly:http://search.ebscohost.comUser ID: ATL0102231ps

Password: subscriberTechnical problems?

Email [email protected]

COncordiaournalJ

(ISSN 0145-7233)

Issued by the faculty of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri, the Concordia Journal is the successor of Lehre und Wehre (1855-1929), begun by C. F. W. Walther, a founder of The Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod. Lehre und Wehre was absorbed by the Concordia Theological Monthly (1930-1974) which was also published by the faculty of Concordia Seminary as the official theological periodical of the Synod.

Concordia Journal is abstracted in Internationale Zeitschriftenschau fr Bibelwissenschaft unde Grenzgebiete, New Testament Abstracts, Old Testament Abstracts, and Religious and Theological Abstracts. It is indexed in ATLA Religion Database/ATLAS and Christian Periodicals Index. Article and issue photocopies in 16mm microfilm, 35mm microfilm, and 105mm microfiche are available from National Archive Publishing (www.napubco.com).

Books submitted for review should be sent to the editor. Manuscripts submitted for publication should conform to a Chicago Manual of Style. Email submission ([email protected]) as a Word attachment is preferred. Editorial decisions about submissions include peer review. Manuscripts that display Greek or Hebrew text should utilize BibleWorks fonts (www.bibleworks.com/fonts.html). Copyright 1994-2009 BibleWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

The Concordia Journal (ISSN 0145-7233) is published quarterly (Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall). The annual subscription rate is $25 (individuals) and $75 (institutions) payable to Concordia Seminary, 801 Seminary Place, St. Louis, MO 63105. New subscriptions and renewals also available at http://store.csl.edu. Periodicals postage paid at St. Louis, MO and additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to Concordia Journal, Concordia Seminary, 801 Seminary Place, St. Louis, MO 63105-3199.

Copyright by Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri 2015www.csl.edu | www.concordiatheology.org

publisher Dale A. Meyer President

Executive EDITOR Charles Arand Dean of Theological Research and Publication

EDITOR Travis J. Scholl Managing Editor of Theological Publications

assistant editor Melanie Appelbaum

assistants Andrew Hatesohl Andrew Jones Emily Ringelberg

David AdamsCharles ArandAndrew BarteltJoel BiermannGerhard BodeKent BurresonWilliam Carr, Jr.Anthony CookTimothy DostThomas Egger Joel ElowskyJeffrey Gibbs

Benjamin HauptErik HerrmannDavid JohnsonTodd JonesJeffrey Kloha David LewisRichard MarrsDavid MaxwellDale MeyerGlenn NielsenJoel OkamotoJeffrey Oschwald

David PeterPaul RaabeVictor RajPaul Robinson Mark RockenbachRobert RosinTimothy SaleskaLeopoldo Snchez M.David SchmittBruce SchuchardWilliam SchumacherJames Voelz

Faculty

All correspondence should be sent to:CONCORDIA JOURNAL

801 Seminary PlaceSt. Louis, Missouri 63105

314-505-7117cj @csl.edu

2015 Concordia Publishing House Printed in USA 595247_02

A BIBLICAL, LUTHERAN VIEW OF HIGHER EDUCATION THATS ROOTED IN THE INTERACTION OF FAITH

AND LEARNINGThis is an extremely illuminating book that will be of great help to our universities and to the LCMS as a whole. At a time when synodical universities are struggling with Lutheran Identity, this book serves as a template for faculty, administrators, boards, and students for how that can be achieved and for how that identity can help colleges to be truly excellent at every level.

Gene Edward Veith, PhD, Professor of Literature, Patrick Henry College

cph.org/christianuniversity

595247_02 CJournalAd Sumr.indd 1 5/4/15 8:53 AM

Summer 2015

COncordiaournalJ

CONTENTS

volume 41 | number 3

EDITORIALs189 Editors Note

190 Word Alive! Connections and Conversations Dale A. Meyer 195 Ronald R. Feuerhahn: Historian, Theologian, Churchman, Pastor Jon Vieker 198 Encomium for William Carr, Upon His Retirement James W. Voelz

ARTICLES201 The New Obedience: An Exegetical Glance at Article VI of the Augsburg Confession Michael P. Middendorf 220 Pietism on the American Landscape Martin E. Conkling

236 Sanctification David P. Scaer

253 HOMILETICAL HELPS

275 BOOK REVIEWS

editoRIALS

COncordiaournalJ

189Concordia Journal/Summer 2015

Editors Note

This issue publishes the plenary presentations from the 2014 LCMS Theology Professors Conference, which centered around the theme of the new obedience of Article VI of the Augsburg Confession. The conference is a regular opportunity for the theologians of the Concordia University System and the two LCMS seminaries to engage in fruitful conversation, to learn from each other in continuing education and lifelong learning.

We talk a good game about continuing education, but it doesnt always seem to gain traction. What would it mean for clergy and church workers to be vitally engaged in lifelong learning? Or, perhaps a better way to put it, what would it look like? Educators and DCEs already know. They are engaged in continuing education as a natural, and in many cases mandatory, part of their vocation. On this score, clergy are behind the curve. Virtually all learned professions (the medical professions, law, engineering, et al.) have a process of continuing education built into the exercise of their work.

Why not pastors? In a society and culture that is moving with so much velocity, in so many different directions, why would we even want to persist in the myth that every thing we need to know we learned, if not in kindergarten, then in the four years we spentin what seems like a century agoearning the degree that made us eligible for a call? We certainly wouldnt want our primary care physicians to work that way. Why then those involved in the work of Seelsorge?

At the heart of a profession that values lifelong learningwhether it is required, encouraged, apprenticed, or simply part of the jobis a deeply personal value for curi-osity. Those who recognize that learning is a formative lifelong process that only ends when they are six feet underground have a vital interest in understanding the world. I am becoming increasingly convinced that the loss of a sense of curiosity is one of the most tragic intellectual symptoms of what many have diagnosed as affluenza. And it happens every time we act as if we know the answer before the question is asked.

For Christians, of course, our learning doesnt even end when were six feet under. Its end (telos) is in the certain hope that one day we shall know as fully as we are already fully known (1 Cor 13:12).

As such, it should be clergy who model the most vital sense of curiosity, because our curiosity doesnt just seek to understand the world. We understand more than most that faith alonefides quarens intellectumseeks to understand not only the world, but the God who is at work in the world to make all things new.

Travis J. SchollManaging Editor of Theological Publications

On the cover: Detail from The Good Samaritan (after Delacroix) by Vincent van Gogh (1890), from a significant body of copies van Gogh executed while he was institutionalized in Saint-Paul asylum in Saint-Rmy-de-Provence (image: Wikimedia Commons).

190

Word Alive! Connections and Conversations

President Matthew Harrison recently reported to the Concordia Seminary Board of Regents that The Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod has lost 18 percent of its membership in the last forty years. To be sure, were not the only mainline American denomination in serious decline, and cultural and demographic reasons can be cited, but thats little comfort to a church which has taken the Great Commission seriously since its founding. Im not setting out on a guilt trip here. There may well be valid reasons why some congregations are not growing, like the decline of 160-acre family farms in rural America. Growth is not the only measure of congregational health, as Peter Steinke writes knowledgably in A Door Set Open.1 That said, decline in any congregation and in the general synod saddens us and challenges us to strategic thinking for the future, espe-cially in our seminaries as we prepare the pastors who will take our places. When groups talk about our decline, the amazing growth of Christianity in other places, especially Africa, is usually brought up, but in my experience these discussions usually end in res-ignation and the meeting proceeds. The 800-pound gorilla of decline lumbers off to sit silently in the back of the room and watches us vainly put our energies into lubricating the machinery of an institutional church we love but is in serious decline.

I certainly dont have a silver-bullet answer, no one does, but we can gain insight by comparing todays culture to the culture of the early and growing church, which is one reason why our healthy, confessional seminaries are especially important in this time of decline. Professors who are scholars in cultures and historical times different than our own can help us understand the practical problems facing the church today. Most of what we do in serious Bible study has to do with overcoming the gaps that separate us from the original audience of the scriptural documents.2 Learning the differences between the cultures of the first and the twenty-first century can sharpen pastoral presentation of Gods gospel to all the baptized in sermons, Bible classes, and conversation. And the more insightful and incisive we are in our preaching, teaching, and visitation, the more our laity will be enabled to give persuasive reasons for the hope that is in them as they pursue their vocations in the world (1 Pt 3:15). Growth cannot be guaranteed, but we can sing with conviction, Save us from weak resignation to the evils we deplore.3

One key difference between then and now: the first century was an oral culture; ours is largely literate. It is estimated that only about 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire could read, and the percentage of literate Christians may have been even less.4 That has profound implications for our understanding of how the gospel of Jesus Christ got into the hearts of people in the first century and, pending our thought-ful reflection and strategic pastoral and parish action, how we can witness more effec-tively in the twenty-first century. Begin your thoughtful reflection with this: Ask your parishioners to locate the word of God and theyll most likely point to the Bible, which means the book or scroll containing Gods bound words. On Sunday the lessons are printed in the bulletin, projected on a screen or found on page whatever in

Concordia Journal/Summer 2015 191

your pew Bibles and many readers follow the print while the lector reads. The sermon explicates and tries to drive home the printed word, which is fine, but the result can be less than a direct interaction between the preacher and the hearer because the living and active word has been reduced to a printed point of reference (Heb 4:12). Bible classes gather around the printed word that literate people can read and discuss. Think about it, the very term Bible class is symptomatic of our Western-literate culture. Theres nothing wrong in all this, but it doesnt replicate the dynamism of the first-century church. Largely illiterate, they focused on hearing the spoken gospel, the viva vox evangelii. Jews, probably more literate than Gentiles because of their devotion to the Torah, heard texts read and expounded in their synagogue worship by someone who could read.5 Jesus did just that in Luke 4:1619 and notice the sequel, verses 2021: He rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing. After Jesuss ascension, the People of the Way continued in the synagogue but also gathered on the Lords Day (Rv 1:10) to hear from the eyewitnesses and their companions (see Acts 1:2122).6 Sometimes the witness would come in the person of the apostle or evangelist but because of the mul-tiplicity of worship sites the authoritative witness to Jesuss life and words came more often through the writings of the apostles and evangelists.7 Those writings, especially the works of the canonical New Testament, were read by someone to the largely illiter-ate congregation. When Mark 13:14 says, let the reader understand, it strikes us as strange (Well, Im obviously reading this and I am paying attention!) but it could well be a cue from St. Mark to the person doing the public reading to the worshipers in that first-century Christian synagogue or house church. Similarly, 1 Timothy 4:13, Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture isnt a bland encouragement to keep reading the Bible in worship but is an earnest plea to intentional oral read-ing of the Old and now the New Testament Scriptures because, absent reading, thats the only way the Spirit will take the authoritative gospel into the lives of the illiterate. This gives urgency to the plea that the Hebrews not neglect to meet together, as is the habit of some (Heb 10:25). Whoever is of God hears the words of God (Jn 8:47). Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ (Rom 10:17). The dynamism of the first-century church was, among other things, the orality of the gos-pel, the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes (Rom 1:16). The word wasnt bound and shelved, a source of religious information, it was a powerful agent of transformation, living and active, upon all who heard and believed.

Consider 1 Peter. Christianity had come to the Roman provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia through oral reports carried by religious pil-grims returning from Jerusalem.8 I doubt they brought home slick evangelism bro-chures! What these pilgrims did bring home to their fellow synagogue members was what they heard with their ears in Jerusalem, the announcement that Old Testament texts are fulfilled in Jesus. Wherever these Jews and the God-fearers fell on the scale of literacy/illiteracy, they did know Old Testament texts from worship. Illiteracy does not preclude familiarity with texts.9 That being the start of these Christian churches,

192

actually synagogues filled with People of the Way, Peter is concerned that they remain Gods peculiar people in the face of powerful peer pressures against the gospel.10 He sends what we call The First Letter of Peter, but calling it a letter already slants our understanding, suggesting that the members of those congregations actually read it, as we might read the bulletin before worship or the church newsletter at home. A more accurate picture of how the letter was received is one you may remember from your youth, before the internet instantly connected us, when communication was carried on by writing letters. Maybe Aunt Louise wrote to your mother. She gathered the family around to hear her read the letter out loud. Silas/Silvanus may well have been the per-son who read the letter to the congregations and no doubt shaped the form and many expressions of Peters content as he delivered Peters witness and encouragement over and over again (1 Pt 5:12). His reading would have conveyed Peters heart and his own, not like the lifeless readings we sometimes hear these days in church. The nature of manuscripts and scrolls, especially the lack of space between words and units, required the reader to be intimately familiar with the contents, making for a direct communica-tion to the congregation.11 In fact, the reader would have been so familiar that a short work like 1 Peter, 105 verses, would have been largely or completely memorized.

Peter never speaks about reading but his content and outline reflect the oral com-munication and rhetorical conventions that were so popular in the first century. After the salutation, Peter, through the reader, begins the body of the letter with a sweeping vision of the inheritance laid up for the hearers, climaxing in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look (1:12). Therefore in verse 13 alerts the hearer to a shift of thought (oral communication signals such moves) as Peter next presents motivations for holy living (hope in Christs return, future; the Fathers present judgment, present; and Christs saving work, past).12 Verses 13 to 25 climax with an authoritative quotation from Isaiah (the hearers knew the passage well) and the reader drives home Peters point: And this is the good news that was preached to you. Sit in your study twenty centuries later, read the entire epistle in this light, as an oral communication, and youll find rhetorical devices throughout.13

What does this mean for our gospel ministries twenty centuries later? Nancy Ammerman of Boston University has written about theological education in our changed times. Those who are on the margins of religious life . . . are more likely alienated because a congregation has failed in its relational work than [that] they have ceased to believe. Connections and conversations are the building blocks of the new kinds of religious communities our best students will learn to lead.14 In the first cen-tury the church grew because the word was alive through personal connections and conversations. Carrying that to our twenty-first century, pastoral and congregational ministries can be more effective through connections and conversations that use oral style more than literary style. From the most literate through the functionally literate to the illiterate, people respond better to imagery and narrative than to linear propositional presentations. And younger people who are native to new communication technologies are literate in a different way than older generations. Many of them wont abide long


lectures about the faith but they will give a hearing to someone they trust, connection, who speaks the viva vox evangelii with the transparency and eye-to-eye contact that marks oral style, conversation. That means we preachers, being thoroughly literate, will in our preparations make a special effort to lift the printed word off the biblical page and speak it into the hearers heart so that the word living and active surgically enters the hearers heart (Heb 4:12). Rote reference to printed passages is less effective than the voice of God speaking faithfully through us to our audience and then through our parishioners to the people in their lives.15 By the way, this invites us to the discipline of memory, to memorize biblical texts, the Small Catechism and also the incisive words, phrases, and sentences of devotional writers and theological thinkers. As important as our libraries are, the arsenal for witness must be in our heads and hearts that we take into connections and conversations.

When I first started at The Lutheran Hour, I was asked to attend sessions at, I think this is the name, the Broadcast Center. It was staffed by radio professionals and their purpose was to teach me the peculiarities of speaking on radio. One of the helpful things they taught me was not to use long quotations because long quotations lose the interest of the hearer. Thats true for radio but its also true for preaching and teaching and general pastoral communication. The problem with long quotations is that they introduce a third entity, an obstacle to the immediate interaction between speaker and listener. Think about it; reading a long quotation from the pulpit requires you to take your eyes away from direct engagement with the audience. It disrupts the connection and impairs the conversation. No matter how great the quotation is, even from the Bible, it can get in the way of direct interaction. A former CNN executive, a commit-ted Christian, once spoke about the Gutenberg captivity of the word of God. We are blessed to read the word in print and our theological tomes and treatises have their place, in our studies, but the living and active word goes into its mission through con-nections and conversations. The woman left her water jar and went away into town and said to the people, Come, see a man who told me all that I ever did. Can this be the Christ? They went out of the town and were coming to him (Jn 4:2830).

Almighty God, grant to Your Church Your Holy Spirit and the wisdom that comes down from above, that Your Word may not be bound but have free course and be preached to the joy and edifying of Christs holy people, that in steadfast faith we may serve You and, in the confession of Your name, abide unto the end; through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.16

Dale A. MeyerPresident

Endnotes1 Many churches . . . will not grow. Some are hospice cases. But, not one of them is outside the realm

of mission. I want to underscore that growth, as significant as it is for mission, does not alone define what mission is. To assign mission as a title exclusively to numerically growing churches is a mistaken understanding of mis-sion. Peter Steinke, A Door Set Open (Herndon, VA: The Alban Institute, 2010), 61.

2 Thomas M. Winger, The Spoken Word: Whats Up with Orality? Concordia Journal 29 (2003): 136.

194

3 God of Grace and God of Glory, Lutheran Service Book, 850, 4.4 William Harris in Harry Y. Gamble, Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian

Texts (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), 4, 7.5 Instruction in reading Hebrew was more widely given among Jews than instruction in Greek or Latin

was among Gentiles. Gamble, 7.6 People of the Way seems to have been the first designation for followers of Jesus, Acts 9:2. See also

Acts 19:9, 23; 24:14; 24:22. Christian was first used in Antioch, Acts 11:26.7 Elders (plural) of the church in Ephesus suggests more than one worship location (Acts 20:17).

The same may be suggested for Corinth, since the Lords Supper was celebrated in the triclinium and atrium of a believers home, which limited the attendance (see 1 Cor 11:1722).

8 Acts 2:5119 Cf. Acts 4:1310 For example, 1 Peter 2:410. 11 See F. R. Cowell, Life in Ancient Rome (New York: Penguin, 1961), 165.12 On the motivations, see Dale A. Meyer, More Lively Participation, Concordia Journal 41, 2015: 9498.13 See for example Kenneth J. Thomas and Margaret Orr Thomas, Structure and Orality in 1 Peter: A

Guide for Translators (New York: United Bible Society Monograph Series, 2006).14 Nancy T. Ammerman, Americas Changing Religious and Cultural Landscape and its Implications for

Theological Education, Theological Education 49, no. 1 (2014): 33.15 See Dale A. Meyer, PDAs and the Spirits Sword, Concordia Journal 29 (2003): 166176. 16 Collect for the Church, Lutheran Service Book, 305.


Ronald R. Feuerhahn: Historian, Theologian, Churchman, Pastor

Two months before our gracious Lord saw fit to translate Dr. Feuerhahn from this world into the life everlasting, Concordia Publishing House released the last of three volumes of Hermann Sasses Letters to Lutheran Pastors in English translation. In the foreword to that volume, Dr. Feuerhahn described Hermann Sasse as an historian with a breadth of learning, a theologian of thorough biblical knowledge, a churchman of wisdom, and a pastor of caring words.1 Written of Sasse, these words also most fittingly describe the academic and churchly service of Dr. Feuerhahn to both the church and the world.

As an historian, Dr. Feuerhahn focused his academic interests on the ecumenical movement of the twentieth century, with a particular emphasis on the life and works of Hermann Sasse. His doctoral dissertation at the University of Cambridge (1991) brought to a watershed nearly three decades of study, teaching, and writingboth as preceptor at Westfield House in Cambridge, and at his alma mater, Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, where he served as professor and archivist for over two decades. His groundbreaking bibliography on the works of Sasse (1995) became seminal for Sasse scholars worldwide, providing a meticulously assembled reference work to primary source documents on Sasse and a renewed energy to the Sasse renaissance of English translations launched by his colleague, Norman Nagel, a decade earlier. The thorough and careful nature of Feuerhahns scholarship is evident everywhere, but particularly in the footnotes to anything he wrote on Sasse. He also accumulated a personal library of some 6,500 volumes and thousands of periodicals, as well as hundreds of photocopies and originals of critical Sasse documentsall carefully organized and documented, as only an historian of his caliber could do. Last November, Concordia Historical Institute of St. Louis awarded Dr. Feuerhahn its Distinguished Service Award, its highest honor, for his exemplary historical and archival contributions to the cause of Lutheran history in North America and beyond.2

As a theologian, Dr. Feuerhahns lifelong study of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, particularly as they were played out through the life of Sasse and the ecu-menical movement, led him to confess and teach the church as truly catholic, not in some sectarian sense of LCMS-only or even Lutherans-only, but as the Lutheran confes-sors declared it to be made up of people scattered throughout the world who agree on the gospel and have the same Christ, the same Holy Spirit, and the same sacraments, whether or not they have the same human traditions (Ap VII/VIII 10). Agreement on the gospel in all the articles of the faith (FC SD X 31)that is, true catholicity and ecumenicitywas Sasses contention for church unity throughout his interaction with the ecumenical movement of the twentieth century, and so it became for Feuerhahn. For true unity, the gospel of Jesus Christ means everything to every article of doctrine, and is therefore all that matters. Dr. Feuerhahn was fond (as was Sasse) of referencing the hymn stanza by Nicolaus Selnecker:

In these last days of great distress Grant us, dear Lord, true steadfastness That we keep pure till life is spent Your holy Word and Sacrament. (Lutheran Service Book, 585, stanza 2)

As a churchman, the confession of pure teaching and confession of the faith was manifested in Dr. Feuerhahns clarity of thought and gentle spirit. For example, he served with distinction as a member of our synods Commission on Worship during the worship wars of the 1990s and the advent of the Lutheran Hymnal Project, when he wrote:

We pray that God would spare us from despair, from that great sin which lies on the verge of faithlessness (as Luther might describe it). For we do, at times, despair that the church will ever come to face the issues involved in these so-called worship wars. And we despair too when we see the faithful champions of a sacramental, means-of-grace churchmanship being put down. We are called to a renewed churchliness. There was a time when churchman seemed to mean a church politician or official; it was a negative designation. But that is the wrong impression. To be churchly is to be catho-lic (among other things) and to have a high regard for the tradition. . . . This also serves to remind us that the liturgy is not our propertynot the property of any one pastor, nor a single congregation, nor even the entire LCMSnot ours to do with as we please. The liturgy belongs to the church in the broadest sense, and we too are gifted by that tradition. For the liturgy was not formed by a man, but by those men who live together as saints in the church.3

Through challenging times, Feuerhahn called himself and those around him to a renewed churchlinessto a heightened awareness of the Lord giving his gifts through those who had come before, gifts of pure doctrine, of right teaching, and of the churchs liturgical treasures in word and song; and of the churchly task to faithfully hand them on to those who follow, with humility and in the confidence of knowing the Giver and whose church it really is.

Dr. Feuerhahns students and colleagues remember him as a scholar, theologian, and churchman, but perhaps more than anything, they remember him as a pastor. Indeed, at his funeral, one student described him as a pastors pastor. His many years of parish service in Great Britain had made him that. His regular use of a father confes-sor gave him that. Another student described it well: There was not a single seminarian or pastor who ever came to him, burdened and struggling under the load of end-time stress, to whom he failed to speak words of comfort, words of grace. Ron Feuerhahn served so many as a true Seelsorger, as well as a model of pastoral care for seminarians and pastors alike.

In 2002, Dr. Feuerhahns students, colleagues, and scholars from around the world prepared a Festschrift in honor of his sixty-fifth birthday.4 The Lord gave Dr.

196


Feuerhahn six more years on the faculty of Concordia Seminary, and seven more years in retirement, living on the seminary campus and interacting with students and col-leagues as historian, theologian, churchman, pastor . . . and friend.

Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. (Ps 115:1)

Jon Vieker

Jon Vieker is the senior assistant to the president of The Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod and was Professor Feuerhahns last doctoral student.

Endnotes1 Ronald R. Feuerhahn, Foreword, in Letters to Lutheran Pastors, 3 vols., trans. and ed. Matthew C.

Harrison (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 201315), 3:ix. Emphasis added. 2 http://www.lutheranhistory.org/2014awards.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2015. 3 Ronald R. Feuerhahn, Unified in Act and Song, in Through the Church the Song Goes On: Preparing

a Lutheran Hymnal for the 21st Century, ed. Paul J. Grime, D. Richard Stuckwisch, and Jon D. Vieker (St. Louis: Commission on Worship of The Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod, 1999), 222.

4 J. Bart Day, Jon D. Vieker, et al., Lord Jesus Christ, Will You Not Stay: Essays in Honor of Ronald Feuerhahn on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Houston, TX: Feuerhahn Festschrift Committee, 2002). Available through Concordia Publishing House. For more about Dr. Feuerhahns family, life, and career, see Scott A. Bruzeks introductory essay, Faiths Ancient Strength, 18.

198

Encomium for William Carr, Upon His Retirement

It is a privilege to honor Bill Carrs retirement from the faculty of Concordia Seminary. Bill has been a good friend and an exemplary colleague for many years. We became acquainted after he returned to campus in the 1990s, first in graduate courses, after years of parish experienceand all that after years of service in the US Navy. The formerhis parish servicehas given him a deep and abiding love for the Scriptures and for the gospel, on the one hand, and for our Lord and for his people, on the other. The latterhis Navy servicehas given him a deep and abiding interest in and ability to address problems, to craft solutions, and to get things done. If you doubt the former, listen to his chapel sermonsalways focused upon the text at hand, always engaging the specific message of that text, as it testifies to Christ, and always wanting to make sure that the impact of its saving message speaks to you. If you doubt the latter, ask him, for example, to spin out a new program for the Graduate School. Perhaps just one day later you will receive a mock-up of an entire evening course of MA studies, just as I did when I was dean of the Graduate School and he was helping in the office. Indeed, its that analytical, organizational, and problem-solving ability that has most delighted and amazed me. On April 29, 1962, President John F. Kennedy opined, at a magnificent dinner honoring the Nobel Laureates of the Western Hemisphere: I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent . . . that has ever been gathered at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.

I have often used that saying analogically with Bill with regard to administration. In fact, it reflects my own solution to most seminary administrative problems: Bill Carr and a bottle of Scotchor, more accurately, Bill Carr and a bottle of Jameson. Give Bill this type of problem, with a little encouragement or rewarddepending upon how you look at itand youre home free! It sure helped me during my administrative days.

Bill Carr will always be remembered as a fine Christian man, a fine Christian husband, and a fine member of this faculty. But most of all, he will be remembered at this place as a fine colleague. Do you need information on something that happened years ago? Ask Bill. He will take the time to research it thoroughly. Do you have an idea that you would like to bounce off of someone? Talk to Bill. Hes always got a ready ear, and probably something from the Chronicle of Higher Education to help you out. Do you need someone to fill out your golf foursome? Bill will oblige, and he might even have his clubs stashed in his truck. Do you need someone to work hard on a project that requires insight, effort, imagination, and a nimble mind? Ask this ex-Navy guy, who has a thousand analogies and just as many of his own ideas. Finally, do you need someone to interpret a biblical text, whether in the pulpit or in the classroomespecially an Isaianic onewith complete integrity, with the ability to find Christlegitimatelywithin its contours, and to listen to its meaning and to detect its impact, also for us today? Then I advise you to talk to this man, while you still are able.

Concordia Seminary is going to miss you, Bill. And so am I.James W. Voelz

ARTICLES

COncordiaournalJ


Mike Middendorf is a professor of theology at Concordia University, Irvine, California. This paper was delivered at the LCMS Theologians Conference on Article VI of the Augsburg Confession at Concordia University, St. Paul, Minnesota in May 2014. Limited modifications have been made for this article.

The New ObedienceAn Exegetical Glance at Article VI of the Augsburg Confession

Michael P. Middendorf

Introduction: Colloquy InterviewsOver the last decade, I have probably conducted more than forty teacher col-

loquy interviews. These have been through Concordia University, Irvine and the CUENet program. One of the questions these teachers usually answer for their final interview is: What about good works? The typical answer is brief: Yes, we are sup-posed to do them, followed by a paragraph of denunciations against thinking good works earn or merit anything before God. Thus the respondents typically spend much more time speaking against good works than defining what they are. Laying Article VI of the Augsburg Confession before Us

When asked to write this paper I re-read Article VI of the Augsburg Confession. I found these colloquy teachers were in fine company.

In the Kolb/Wengert edition of the Book of Concord, the article begins: It is also taught that such faith should yield good fruit and good works and that a person must do such good works as God has commanded.1 One wonders what would happen if the Confessors had stopped there. Would they pass muster (or doctrinal review) with words like should or must? The German even asserts we must do all such things (allerlei) as God has commanded.2

In the context of the sixteenth century and the abuses of the Roman church, the remainder of the article raises red flags against presuming these works earn or merit grace, while also reaffirming the truth of the gospel.

But we should do them for Gods sake but not place trust in them as if thereby to earn grace before God. For we receive forgiveness of sin and righteousness through faith in Christ, as Christ himself says [Lk 17:10]: When you have done all [things] . . . say, We are worthless slaves. The Fathers also teach the same thing. For Ambrose says, It is determined by God that whoever believes in Christ shall be saved and have forgiveness of sins, not through works but through faith alone, without merit.3

202

The quotations of Luke 17:10 and from Ambrose counter any misunderstand-ing of thinking our good works deserve anything toward justification before God. To be sure, those red flags should always be flying. They remain particularly relevant in a context like Galatians,4 in dealing with the Pharisees of our day, or when our own aca-demic prowess rears its head.

Yet the order of the articles in the Augsburg Confession, as we are covering them in these conferences, is pure genius. When one hears the second and third sentences here, they restate or, at least, reaffirm the previous two articles on Justification and the Ministry. Note, however, that AC VI does not swerve back into the second use of the Law, but simply reasserts the exclusive truth of the gospel, namely, that grace, forgive-ness, and righteousness come through faith in Christ apart from any of our works.

Defining the Terms and CategoriesLet us endeavor to hear the first part of AC VI through the theme of this con-

ference, The New Obedience.5 So, whats new? The commandments themselves are not new, something Jesus (Mt 19:19; 22:3440; Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20) and Paul (Rom 13:810) make clear (see also FC Ep VI 7). Rather, the person has been renewed and regenerated. As Titus 3:56 states, Not from works, the ones which we did in righ-teousness, but according to his mercy he saved us through [the] washing of rebirth and renewal of [the] Holy Spirit,6 whom he poured out upon us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior (cf. Rom 6:4, 6; 12:2; Eph 4:2124).

What then is biblical obedience? In English obey generally conveys the notion of something we must do. The Oxford English Dictionaries define the verb as:

(a) to comply with, or perform the bidding of; to do what is commanded by (a person); to submit to the rule or authority of, to be obedient to. (b) to comply with, perform (a command, etc.). (c) to submit to, subject oneself to, act in accordance with (a principle, authority, etc.).6

However, the basic biblical sense means to listen and respond appropriately. The underlying Hebrew is usually ma l, to hearken to, often to the word of Yahweh. The NT uses the Greek word group of similarly. When one hears Gods condemning law, the appropriate response is to acknowledge, that is, confess, that what God says about me and all people apart from Christ is true (e.g., 1 Jn 1:810). At times, however, what is mistranslated obey is intended to be a receptive response to the gospel. For example, Hebrews 5:9 declares that Christ became the cause of eternal salvation for all the ones who him (Heb 5:9). To translate with a form of obey here, as most translations do (e.g., ESV, KJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV), makes salvation contingent upon our obedience. The same appears to be true with the cognate noun in 1 Peter 1:22, Having purified your souls of the truth. Again, all the translations referenced above use forms of obey. But our souls could never be purified by our obedience; it happens, instead, by the responsive hear-ing of the truth of the gospel. Paul even uses the verb as a parallel for


in Romans 10:16. Thus, when one hears the gospel, the appropriate response of is to listen responsively, to heed or hearken to it with receptive faith (as in Rom 1:5; 6:16; 15:18; 16:26; cf. Rom 10:9).7 Well, that was law and then gospel confessed, as in Articles IV of the Augsburg Confession). So lets just get on with the church in Articles VII and VIII, and skip this pesky notion of the new obedience.

But to do so is to disregard much of Jesuss teaching and, typically, the latter portion of Pauls letters as well (e.g., Rom 1216; Gal 56; Col 34; Eph 46; 1 Thes 5; see below). Article VI affirms, It is also taught that such faith should yield good fruit and good works and that a person must do such good works as God has com-manded. Thus when we hear the Lord tell us what to do and not do, the appropriate response for the renewed believer is to obey, that is, to do and not do according to his word. Is there as much room for this in our teaching as there was in that of Jesuss? Is the new obedience as prominent in our proclamation as it was in Pauls? Does it have the same significance in our lives as it did in theirs?

Here, I think, our tendency to make all law second use in our proclamation and to be wary of most or even all third use obscures the matter of the new obedience we confess. For example, can we proclaim the parable of the Good Samaritan without changing the intended referent of the characters and, instead, affirm Jesuss own appli-cation: Go and do likewise! (Lk 10:37). Can we tell sheepwho have been re-created from goat hood and who inherit the kingdom by the Fathers grace (Mt 25:34)that they are to respond with new obedience, consciously and actively caring for the needy, unaware that they are doing it to Jesus himself (Mt 25:3540)? I recently heard a great sermon on these two phrases from 1 Corinthians 6. You are not your own; you were bought at a price (1 Cor 6:19b20a). Amen. Yet Paul reminds us of those precious gospel truths in order to lead up to this specific exhortation: Therefore glorify God in your body (1 Cor 6:20b).

In my own teaching, I have generally moved beyond the two categories of law and gospel, to use three, law, gospel and response.8 I like response better than the third use of the law since we still seem to be debating whether such a use even exists (cf. Article VI of the Formula of Concord). But the term response does what AC VI does. It raises the question, response to what? Not my merits, but for God and because of Christ. This is where the new obedience comes from. It is the focus of much of Scriptures teaching as will be highlighted briefly in the remainder of this article.

The New Obedience in the Old Testament In his recent article in Lutheran Forum, Scott Ashmon affirms that, particularly

in the prophets, the judgment-restoration pattern dominates so much that it appears to be the proper order of prophecy, a sequence equivalent to the law-gospel paradigm9 But Ashmon continues by observing other patterns in the OT, particularly a grace-law sequence. Genesis begins in just such a manner.

It recounts Gods gracious love toward creation in general, and human-ity in particular, by giving them life, making them exceptionally good

204

(b med), and giving them all they need for an exceptionally good life. It is only after God has graciously created humanity that He com-mands them to multiply, fill the earth, and have dominion over it, and, in Genesis 2, prohibits them from eating of the tree of knowledge.10

Similarly, he observes that in Genesis 12

God does not begin with Law in addressing Abram, even though he is a sinner, but with grace. Only later does God, based on His gracious elec-tion of and promises to Abram, obligate him to live uprightly (Gn 17:1).11

This grace-law pattern exhibits itself most prominently in the exodus, culminating at Sinai. Against any works righteous notions, God does not give the law to Israel in Egypt and declare that he will save them from their slavery if they obey the commands. Neither, however, does Yahweh give them the law, call them to confess their failures as poor, mis-erable sinners, and only then come to the rescue. Instead, God just delivers them! At the Yam Suph, Israel responds appropriately by trusting in Yahweh and in Moses, his servant (Ex 14:31). That sounds a lot like Articles IV and V of the Augsburg Confession.

Then, at Mt. Sinai, God gives what the Scriptures exclusively call the Ten Words.12 It is shocking for many people to hear that the Scriptures themselves never use the phrase, the Ten Commandments. Instead, whenever ten is used in reference to them, another noun is being modified. Exodus 34:28 identifies the words of the covenant appositionally as the ten words ( dir habbr, ere haddrm). The Septuagint renders the latter phrase literally as which pro-duces the transliterated term Decalogue.13 Why no Ten Commandments? Because the first word is gospel, reminding Israel that Yahweh has graciously chosen them as his own and already rescued them.14 I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of Egypt, from the house of slaves (Ex 20:2). Hummel affirms, Two later Jewish usages underscore the same general point: (1) continuing the Biblical usage of speaking of ten words, not commandments; and (2) counting [Ex 20] v. 2, which plainly is indica-tive, as word #1.15

Within the context of Israels salvation history as recounted in Exodus and later in Deuteronomy, the remaining nine words or, commandments, describe the new obedience, a way to live in response to mercies already received. The dominant use of imperfect verb forms corroborates the point. Hummel advises:

It is of utmost importance to underscore the fact that grammatically the Decalogue is in indicative, not imperative form (the negative lo, not al). These are statements of what the believer who has experienced Gods grace will voluntarily do, not commands of what he must do to deserve or earn Gods love. They represent perimeters or boundaries of Gods kingship, beyond which the believer will not stray, but within which He is essen-tially free to respond joyfully and voluntarily, as illustrated by the rest of the laws or codes of the Old Testament.16


Luthers explanations to the commandments in his Small Catechism nicely express the new obedience as well. For example, he explains the lone imperative in the Ten Words, Honor (kabb) your father and your mother (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16), as follows: We should fear and love God so that we do not despise our parents and other authorities, but honor them, serve and obey them, love and cherish them.17

Ashmon goes on to identify all of Deuteronomy, Psalm 78, and Ezekiel 36 as indicative of a similar grace-law or grace-law-grace pattern. For more information on the Old Testament, see Ashmons article. The New Obedience in the New Testament

As we segue to the NT, 1 Peter follows a similar grace-law pattern. Scharlemann expresses it with the catchy phrases, Be what you already are and Exodus Ethics.18 Peter essentially reminds believers, Heres who you are in Christ, so live like it! (e.g., 1 Pet 1:3-12 into 1:13-17; 1:18-21 into 1:22; 1:23-25 into 2:13; etc.). But I specialize in St. Paul and we are pretty much a Pauline church so well spend most of our remaining time there.

RomansInterestingly, St. Paul references specific commandments from the Decalogue

in only two letters. One of them, Ephesians, contains an echo of the command against stealing (Eph 4:28) and a direct citation of the commandment to honor your father and mother (6:2). The other letter is Romans whose argument the opening articles of the Augsburg Confession follows quite well. In fact, a book by Paulson titled Lutheran Theology simply walks through Romans!19

Walther contends that in Romans 13 we find the sharpest preaching of the Law.20 In Romans 2 Paul uses the Decalogue as a second use mirror. While address-ing a Jew who relies upon the law and boasts in God (Rom 2:17), he asks,

Therefore the one who teaches another, are you not teaching yourself? The one who proclaims, Do not steal! are you stealing? The one who says, Do not commit adultery! are you committing adultery? The one who abhors idols, are you robbing temples? You who are boasting in the Law, through the transgression of the Law you are dishonoring God (Rom 2:2123).21

This is the old obedience. Walther continues:

This [sharpest preaching of the law] is followed, towards the end of the third chapter and in chapters 4 and 5, by the doctrine of justificationnothing but that. Beginning at chapter 6, the apostle treats nothing else than sanctification. Here we have a true pattern of the correct sequence: first the Law, threatening men with the wrath of God; next the Gospel, announc-ing the comforting promises of God. This is followed by instruction regarding things we do after we have become new man.22

Note Walthers three parts. They sound like law, gospel, and response.

206

Romans 6:1119Romans contains sixty-two imperatives. But aside from 6:1119, only one

appears in the first ten chapters! And that lone form has God as its subject (Let God be true, , 3:4).23 Therefore the five imperatives in 6:1119 are significant. They exhort those who have become new man by virtue of the one-time aorist act of baptism to resist sin and, instead, to walk in the renewal of life which only now is possible (6:4).

Thus you also count () yourselves to be dead to sin (6:11). . . . Continually resist the reign () of sin in your mortal body (6:12) . . . and do not continue to present ( ) your bodily members to sin [as] instruments of unrighteousness; instead, pres-ent () yourselves to God as living from [the] dead and your bodily members to God [as] instruments of righteousness (6:13). . . . Now present () your bodily members as slavish to righteousness leading to sanctification (6:19).24

In keeping with AC VI, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession cites verse 19 to affirm that after penitence (that is, conversion or regeneration) must come good fruits and good works in every phase of life (Ap AC XII 13132).

My commentary on Romans asserts the following:

The 18 indicative statements which permeate [the last half of Romans 6] counter the notion of viewing it predominantly as imperative commands. . . . But to exclude Pauls exhortations to continually resist sin and, instead, to present ones entire self to God in righteousness which has fruit for sanctified living also obscures Pauls purpose. To choose either indicative or imperative presents a false alternative. The key, of course, is to consider both fully, with proper balance, and in the right order. The indicatives of God come first, as in 6:111, and also throughout 6:1223. They are passively received. But Paul also calls for, indeed, even com-mands, a response which entails active resistance against sin, as well as the offering of ones bodily members in righteous service and for fruitful holy living to God. Both Pauls indicatives and his imperatives are . . . not properly comprehended if one adopts a God-does-it-all attitude toward sancti-fied living. Yes, God-does-it-all in our justification (e.g., Rom 3:2126, 28). We do well to reject all moralism and legalism. At the same time, we ought to confess that a God-does-it-all attitude in sanctification is not what Paul teaches. As the Formula of Concord states,

From this it follows that as soon as the Holy Spirit has initi-ated his work of regeneration and renewal in us through the Word and the holy sacraments, it is certain that we can and


must cooperate by the power of the Holy Spirit, even though we still do so in great weakness. (FC SD II 65)

Christian living is our responsibility, yet, thankfully, not ours alone. It is possible only in Jesus Christ our Lord (6:23) and empowered by the Spirit who baptized us into his Name so that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, thus also we might walk in lifes renewal (6:4).25

Romans 7:148:4Of course, sin throws a wrench into our new obedience. As a result, Romans

7:1425 vividly depicts how the law performs a double function in the Christians life.26 Pauls portrayal of his own experience fits squarely within his theology of the now and the not yet.27 The believer is now no longer under the dominion and condemnation of the law (6:14; 7:4), but belongs, instead, to the age to come through the mercies of God. Therein, the renewed mind joyfully delights to enslave itself in obe-dience to the good which the law commands (7:22, 25). Yet believers also still live in the not-yet world into which sin entered and spread to all people (5:12). As a result, Paul the believer continues to admit, I am flesh ly, sold under sin . . . Sin dwells in me . . . this is, in my flesh (7:14, 17, 18). Here the formula observes how Paul himself learns from the law that his works are still imperfect and impure (FC SD VI 21). The frustration expressed by Paul in 7:1425 employs the first person singular to give his own perspective regarding himself, the law, and sin.

But what really counts is Gods perspective.28 Gods declaration regarding Pauls and our reality is that nothing is condemnation for the ones in Christ Jesus (8:1). This change of perspective explains why Paul moves away from first person language to speak authoritatively of Gods view in 8:14, rather than his/our own. The decisive change happened by virtue of God sending his own Son whose Spirit sets us free (8:23). This is why, even in the midst of the ongoing not-yet reality, all who know how God regards them in Christ can join Paul in declaring all of Romans 7:25. But thanks to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! Consequently, then, on the one hand, I myself am a slave to the law of God with my mind. But, on the other hand, with my flesh [I am a slave] to the law of sin.

Because sin continues to reside in our flesh (simul peccator; e.g., Rom 7:14, 17, 20), the law always accuses (lex semper accusat, Ap AC IV 128, 295). Indeed, to some degree, any standard reveals if one measures up or not, and to what degree; when one falls short, as is the case for all people (Rom 3:9, 22), the law properly exposes the shortcoming (Rom 3:1920; 7:711, 1425). But while the law may still function to accuse those in Christ for continuing to do what is wrong and failing to do what is right (7:1425), it cannot condemn. Surely God does not use the law to condemn those in Christ either. Instead, God sent Christ who has fully fulfilled the law for us (8:34a; cf. Mt 5:17).29 If the gospel is proclaimed clearly, repeatedly, and powerfully, as Paul does in Romans, his and our hearers will understand they are no longer subject to the laws condemnation. Christ who fulfilled the law is its (Mt 5:17; Rom 10:4).

208

Therefore, they can then hear the imperatives of Romans 6 and 1216 as exhortations to live out the new obedience while walking in accord with the Spirit (8:4).

The exhortations of Romans 121630Romans 58 largely gives theological expression to the renewal of life God gives

(e.g., 6:4); chapters 1216 then offer practical guidelines for the life a believer lives.31 Paul fleshes out the new obedience in great detail in Romans 1216 where, in marked contrast with the earlier chapters, he uses forty-nine imperatives.32 Raabe and Voelz point that out:

Pauls intent in paraenesis is not to accuse the Romans as sinners. He does that in chapters 13, where the tone is notably different. Paraenesis uses the language of urging, appealing, and beseeching rather than that of harsh demanding and condemning.33

Pauls opening appeal in chapter 12 comes through the mercies of God (12:1) which have been expounded at great length thus far in the letter. These mercies are for all (11:32) and graciously renewed for us each and every morning (Lam 3:23). What fol-lows is the new obedience. Here, the Formula of Concord says, the Holy Spirit employs the law to instruct the regenerate out of it and to show and indicate to them in the Ten Commandments what the acceptable will of God is (FC SD VI 12).

In addition to Pauls move from indicative toward imperative, his use of the word group in Romans also provides helpful validation. Thus far, except for 8:28, every use speaks of the love of God and Christ for us (5:5, 8; 8:35, 37, 39; 9:18, 25). But that changes in 12:9 where Paul begins a description of the believers authen-tic love in action toward others, a topic which runs all the way through Romans 13:10. In keeping with AC VI, the Formula of Concord refers to Romans 13:5, 6 and 9 as evidence that good works are necessary; these passages indicate what we are bound to do because of Gods ordinance, commandment, and will (FC SD IV 14). Then, in 13:810, when Paul admonishes those who have been born anew to do good works, he holds up before them precisely the Ten Commandments (FC VI 21) by citing four of them. In this way, the law reaches the loving fullness God lovingly intends. According to Schreiner,

Paul sees love and law as compatible in a wider way. . . . The specific com-mands cited help Christians discern how love expresses itself in specific situations, but the other moral norms of the law also help believers define love. . . . If love is cut free from any commandments, it easily dissolves into sentimentality, and virtually any course of action can be defined as loving.34

Then, in Romans 14:115:7, Paul deals with a situation where believers have different convictions about foods and holy days. As a result of the work and words of Christ, these OT regulations have now become adiaphora. Interestingly, the Augsburg


Confession mirrors the sequence of Romans here as well. Article VI on the new obedi-ence (cf. Rom 12:113:14) leads into AC VIIs assertion that having the same rites and ceremonies in worship is neither necessary for nor determinative of unity.35 The Lutheran Confessions do not insist upon, and Paul does not even seek, uniformity of practice as a desired outcome (see the Formula of Concord, Article X). In the new obedience, Dunn describes how the liberty of the Christian assembly should be able to embrace divergent views and practices without feeling that they must be resolved or that a common mind must be achieved on every point of disagreement.36 In addition to what he writes in Romans 14:115:7, the conduct of Pauls ministry further exem-plifies his incredibly flexible behavior, even in regard to the law, and all in service to the gospel (e.g., Rom 9:1314; 15:1521; 1 Cor 9:1923).

EphesiansAs indicated above, the only other letter where Paul cites the Decalogue is

Ephesians (6:2; cf. 4:28), probably the most generic or least contextual of his letters. In keeping with the creation account, the Ten Words, and Romans 1:117, Paul starts off with glorious gospel throughout Ephesians 1. Then the familiar chapter 2 concisely and universally articulates a classic expression of law and gospel. In so doing, it depicts who we were (past tense) apart from Gods loving kindnessdead in trespasses and sin; by nature children of wrath, as are all people (2:13). To be sure, it is always helpful to be reminded of who we were and where we would be apart from Gods rich mercy and love. But we are so no longer! God made us alive in Christ and saved us by grace through faith (2:410a). The remainder of chapters 2 and 3 affirm the eternal inheri-tance which belongs to all those who have been brought into Gods household. Jews and Gentiles alike are now one people in the body of Christ.

What then do we do with the second half of Ephesians? AC VI points us in the right direction: It is also taught that such faith should yield good fruit and good works and that a person must do such good works as God has commanded. But, as the rest of AC VI reminds us, as soon as one loses sight of by grace through faith as a gift of God (2:8), Ephesians 46 will likely be misunderstood and misapplied. Yet one should also not lose sight of the fact that Gods love and kindness call forth a cer-tain lifestyle in response. Ephesians 5:8 summarizes the entire letter and all of Pauls theology well: For you were formerly darkness; now [you are] light in the Lord; walk as children of light! ( , ). There we have itlaw in the past tense, gospel in the Lord, and response with an active imperative. To walk as children of light is the new obedience.

Ephesians 4 begins, I urge you, therefore . . . to walk worthy of the calling of which you were called ( ). Later in the chapter, Paul adds:

You . . . were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus,to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires,and to be renewed () in the spirit of your

210

minds,and to put on the new self ( ), created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. (Eph 4:2124, ESV)

So dont walk and talk like the old. Walk like a new person! Talk like a new per-son! To offer an analogy, are we like an inert bicycle sitting there until the Spirit puts us in motion? Or, are we more like a hiker who has been given life and lungs, body and breath? The Spirit implores, Get up and walk with me!

Ephesians imperativesIn the rest of the letter, Paul is not at all shy about giving specific directions and

repeatedly commanding us where to walk. As with Romans, indicatives dominate the first half of Ephesians which has only one imperative; but then, in the second half, after the gospel has been proclaimed, further indicatives are joined by lots of new obedi-ence imperatives. In fact, the lone imperative in Ephesians 13 issues an appeal to remember (2:11), sort of like to hearken to. In Ephesians 46, how-ever, Paul uses forty imperative forms! These tell believers how to respond properly to the gospel in their lives.37 Is this what we typically do with these imperatives?

For example, Ephesians 5:1 states, Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children ( ). In my own forma-tion, I was taught to shape a text like this into a proclamation of the second use of the law followed by the gospel. The malady would be: All of you fall short and fail miser-ably at living up to imitating God. Then the gospel: But you are Gods dearly loved children anyway. Amen. At this point in Ephesians, however, that is not Pauls point. You were dead in trespasses and sin; formerly you were darkness. By grace you are now dearly loved children. Respond intentionally to that gospel! Imitate the Father who loves you dearly because of who you now are in Christ (cf. Mt 5:4448).

In verse 2, Paul similarly pleads: And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God ( , ). The law/gospel tendency is to admonish our hearers for failing to walk in love, but then to assure them that Christ loves us any-way. Yet the past tense indicatives proclaim that Christ loved us and gave himself up for us. In response to having been so loved, Paul exhorts us to live love!

Later in chapter 5, verse 21, Paul writes, Submitting to one another in reverence for Christ ( ). The second use of the law accuses our hearers for failing to submit to their parents, spouse, boss, dean, presi-dent, pastor, and one another. But that does not communicate Pauls point. Instead, he presumes our reverence for Christ because he gave himself up for us (5:2). As a result, he urges us to respond submissively to others. My colleague Mark Brighton points out that the governing verb here is an imperative in Ephesians 5:18: But be filled with the Spirit ( ). From that point on, Paul describes how the Spirits filling is actively displayed in our lives by singing (5:19), giving thanks (5:20), and submitting (5:21).


In all three of these cases, Paul formulates his appeal as walk this way, followed by a gospel reminder of what God or Christ has already done. This is precisely what AC VI does. After affirming that a person must do such good works as God has command-ed, the rest of the article reaffirms the gospel as a gift from God. But neither Paul nor AC VI revert to the second use of the law, accusing us of falling short. Rather, the forty imperatives in Ephesians 46 function positively to identify and to call forth the new obedience by telling us what to do and what to avoid. We should, therefore, proclaim these imperatives as they are meant to be heard, as exhortations to respond actively and intentionally to the gospel.

Concluding Thoughts on the New ObedienceHomiletical ImplicationsIn his article Freedom of Form: Law/Gospel and Sermon Structure in

Contemporary Lutheran Proclamation, Schmitt observes,

Recently, Law and Gospel seems to summarize the predominant form of Lutheran preaching. It defines how the sermon is structured. This new type of sermon consists of two major divisions: the first part Law and the second part Gospel. . . . We might appropriately call it Law then Gospel preaching.38

He demonstrates that this fixed form is neither Waltherian or Caemmererian,39 and asserts,

Lutheran preaching can embrace much more. It is not bound by a formu-laic Law then Gospel pattern but recognizes and utilizes the freedom of sermon form for the sake of Gospel proclamation. . . . Within such broad homiletical horizons, Law and Gospel referred to how one offered a proper distinction of Law and Gospel in both the content and function of the sermon while using a variety of forms.40

So which form to use? Ashmon advises, let Scripture direct the form and func-tion of the sermon, rather than placing Scripture and the sermon into a fixed form-critical straightjacket. In other words . . . let exegesis predominate in interpretation and proclama-tion, not eisegesis.41 So if a law text is intended as second-use accusation, Let em have it! preach it to the peccator (e.g., Rom 1:183:20; Eph 2:13). But if a passage describes the new obedience (e.g., Rom 1215; Eph 46), neither Paul, nor AC VI, nor Walther calls us to turn it into second use. Instead, proclaim it as intendedGod calling his simul justus children to live in ways well-pleasing () to him (Rom 12:1, 2).

As demonstrated above with Romans and Ephesians, Pauls regular sequence is not so much imperative accusations of the law followed by gospel. Instead, he gener-ally articulates law and gospel indicatives followed, in Walthers words, by instruction regarding things we do after we have become new man.42 A similar use of new obedi-ence imperatives occurs in a number of Pauls other letters as well.43 Colossians 12

212

has only four imperatives (2:6, 8, 16, 18), while chapters 34 add twenty-six more. Philippians 12 has seven; chapters 34 contain eighteen. Galatians 14 has seven (four of them in OT quotes; 4:27[3], 30), and then thirteen in chapters 56. There is only one in 1 Thessalonians 14 (4:18), while chapter 5 has eighteen.44 According to Pauls regular pattern, these imperatives should be used to instruct and exhort believers to respond properly to the gospel. In summary, they urge us, and sermons on these sections should urge parishioners: Be imitators of God, as his beloved children (Eph 5:1).

An Analogy: Children of the Heavenly Father45The father/child relationship is dominant in Jesuss teaching and prominent in

Pauls portrayal of our relationship with God (e.g., father occurs fifteen times in the Sermon on the Mount, thirteen of which are your father; also Jn 5:3637; 17:15; 20:17; Lk 6:39; 11:113; Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6).46 What does this relationship tell us about the new obedience?

When earthly parents give commands to their children, they do not generally make rules and demand obedience in order to repeatedly convince children that they are disobedient and unworthy of anything good from their parents. Nor do they intend for such rules to drive their children to continually confess their failures or to despair of their unworthiness to even belong in the family. If so, or if they were perceived as such, a child would probably want to stay distant from such a parent and the relation-ship would become stunted. A childs perception of this kind of parents love would likely degenerate into seeing it mainly as something which tolerates failures and which is forced, again and again, to deal negatively with disobedience and somehow love the child anyway. The goal, from the childs perspective, might be to obey, but primarily the goal is to avoid anger and punishment. Thats the old obedience.

At least in healthy families, this is not generally the case. Good, though imper-fect, parents tend to give their children good rules to obey. When appropriate, they also impose loving discipline so that children see and suffer the consequences of their disobedience. But parents do this to benefit their children so that that they will become happy, healthy, content, and fulfilled as they mature to live a disciplined, godly life. Once children perceive this to be the purpose of the rules and even the reprimands, their relationship with their mother and father, established by birth and maintained by loving provisions freely given by their parents, will grow and deepen as the loving inten-tion behind the laws is acknowledged. Eventually, a new obedience to parental com-mands will come out of gratitude and respect, rather than fear of punishment.

If we continually assert that Gods law is always, or even predominantly, his instrument to catch and convict unruly children for their mistakes, how will people respond? Instead of drawing near, they may want to keep their distance from such a demanding and demeaning father. Or they may come to do their religious duty, and then try to obey mainly to keep their father from getting mad. Will a growing and maturing relationship likely develop with a father who makes such demands?

But does God continue to see his children in Christ as lost and condemned people who still deserve the full fury of his eternal wrath? Or does our heavenly Father


assure us that we are eternally his redeemed and dearly loved children because Christ has fully and completely finished () suffering our punishment (Jn 19:30) so that in him nothing [is] condemnation ( ) (Rom 8:1)? Thank God that the latter has become our reality. God, the Father of lights who graciously bestows every good gift and every perfect gift . . . determined to give us birth by his word of truth (Jas 1:17, 18; cf. Jn 3:3, 5; Ti 3:5). Through the renewing and adoptive work of the Holy Spirit we now call him Abba, Father! (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6).

Then, to paraphrase Jesus, if you who are evil know how to give good rules to your earthly children, how much more will your Father in heaven give positive, matur-ing guidelines for his children to obey (Lk 10:13)? Such a Father gives instructions and commands, as well as loving discipline when we fall short (Heb 12:511), for our ultimate good. He does so in order to build us up and mature us, as Paul describes it six times in Ephesians 4:1216.47 As we grow in our faith relationship with him, we join with St. Paul in willingly and joyfully doing his holy, righteous and good commands (Rom 7:12, 16, 21, 25b), while also being increasingly frustrated by our failures to live according to his Law (Rom 7:1415, 1820, 2324, 25b).48

Nevertheless, with the confident assurance that we remain his children by grace and in Christ, we persist in the new obedience, striving to live out his good, well-pleas-ing and perfect will (Rom 12:2) for the benefit of our neighbor (Rom 13:810), for our own good, and all to the glory of our gracious God. Indeed, those who really get the gospel eagerly join the psalmist in crying out,

Teach me, O Lord, the way of your statutes; and I will keep it to the end. Give me understanding, that I may keep your law and observe it with my whole heart. Lead me in the path of your commandments, for I delight in it. (Ps 119:3335; cf. Ps 86:11)

Divine Causation and/or Human Cooperation?All of this perhaps raises the question, Does this new obedience happen apart

from the conscious intent of our will, without any effort on our part? The notion that a sanctified life of good works consists solely of Gods work was rebutted in the discus-sion of Rom 6:11-19 above. Yet it seems to have been popularized in Lutheran circles through an essay by Gerhard Forde.49 There Forde defines a truly good work as being free, uncalculating, spontaneous.50 While commenting on Romans 12:1, Douglas Moo responds, That Gods mercy does not automatically produce the obedience God expects is clear from the imperatives in this passage.51 This is because appeals based upon grace and mercy are resistible and not coercive.

The active imperatives Paul addresses to Christians throughout his letters indi-cate that willing human involvement remains necessary. Thus the notion that a sancti-fied life of good works is totally the work of God or done solely by the Holy Spirit should be rejected. The Formula of Concord observes,

After the Holy Spirit has performed and accomplished this [conversion] and the will of man has been changed and renewed solely by Gods power

214

and activity, mans new will becomes an instrument and means of God the Holy Spirit, so that man not only lays hold on grace but also cooperates with the Holy Spirit in the works that follow. (FC Ep II 18; cf. FC SC II 65 cited above) But the believer without any coercion and with a willing spirit, in so far as he is reborn, does what no threat of the law could ever have wrung from him. (FC Ep VI 7)52

In order to explain the new obedience, I have used this musical analogy with stu-dents. Are we like a trumpet which can only sit lifeless in a case until the Spirit irresist-ibly picks it up and blows life into and through it? Or is the new obedience more like a singer to whom God has given life, breath, talent, and even songs to sing; who then says, Sing for me! or, better yet, Sing with me! The latter more accurately depicts the Christian. It also aligns with the very basic and practical [Pauline] anthropology articulated by Raabe and Voelz.

The hearers are assumed to be ordinary, concrete human beings who actively participate in their everyday living. They seem to be in a position to make decisions, to be led astray, to be reminded, to be encouraged, and to be persuaded, just as we all are. Paul addresses them as if they are a third party standing before two powers, sin and the Spirit, and he exhorts them to pay attention to the impulses of the Spirit and to resist those of sin. He urges them, for example, to be transformed by the renewing of their mind [Rom 12:2], to present their hands and feet, their intentions and actions, as weapons for Gods service, and to offer their bodies as liv-ing sacrifices to God.53

Paul urges us to respond actively and freely on the basis of mercies graciously given and already received (Rom 12:1).

Various definitions of the words used to label categories have caused some of the confusion. For example, Pieper defines sanctification in the following ways:

(1) In its wide sense, sanctification comprises all that the Holy Ghost does in separating man from sin and making him Gods own, so that he may live for God and serve Him. (2) In its narrow sense, sanctification designates the internal spiritual transformation of the believer or the holiness of life which follows upon justification. (3) In another respect good works are identical with sanctification, since sanc-tification in concreto takes place through the performance of good acts.54

Sanctification is commonly understood as the new obedience, namely, the Christian life of good works which flows from the gospel in the lives of believers (i.e., the end of definitions 1 and 2, as well as definition 3 above). Forde, however, defines the term this way: Sanctification is Die Heiligungwhich would perhaps best be translated as being


salvationed. . . . Sanctification is thus simply the art of getting used to justification. . . . It is the justified life.55 By his definition, sanctification belongs within the gospel category of justification and we are no longer talking about the new obedience at all.

The confusion in terminology is understandable. On the one hand, the Bibles use of holiness language predominantly expresses the gospel, rather than the new obedience. For example, Paul uses justification and sanctification in parallel fash-ion, asserting in 1 Corinthians 1:30 that Christ Jesus has become for us righteous-ness and also sanctification and redemption ( ). And in 1 Corinthians 6:11 he reminds believers of what sets us apart: But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God (, , ). Although such passages use sanctification lan-guage, they are articulating the gospel (so also in the OT; see Ex 31:13; Lv 20:8; 21:8).

At other times, however, believers are in fact called to live holy or sanctified lives (e.g., Lv 19:2; 20:7; 1 Thes 4:7; 1 Pt 1:17; 2 Pt 3:11; cf. Mt 5:48). Such passages express the new obedience; in Piepers words they depict the holiness of life which fol-lows upon justification.56 But such a life always and only flows from holiness already freely given by our sanctifying God and Father.

Jesuss PromiseIts always good to end with Jesus. The passage from Luke 17 in AC VI describes

slaves who work all day for their master out in the fields or with his sheep. Then they come in and, as expected, serve their master his dinner before receiving their own. Jesus asks,

Does [the master] have grace () for his slave because he did all the things which were ordered? No! Thus also you, when you might do all the things ordered to you, say, We are unworthy slaves, we have done what we ought to do. (Lk 17:910)57

No, we do not deserve grace, mercy, or forgiveness. But Jesus, in the way of the gospel, flips things on their head. At the Lords Supper, he is the master who serves his servants (Lk 22:2730). Indeed, he came not to be served but to serve (Mt 20:28) and tells his disciples, Whoever would be great among you must be your servant (Mt 20:26). To serve as we have been served, to love one another as he has first loved us (Jn 15:12; cf. 1 Jn 4:11)this is the new obedience. Thus Jesus identifies his family mem-bers as those who both hear and do () the Lords word (in Lk 6:47; 8:21; also Mt 7:21, 24); similarly in John 10:27, he characterizes his sheep as those who both hear his voice and actively follow him ().

While we have no warrant to place any obligation on Christ (Lk 17:910), our ascended Lord does speak of his return as a time when he will reward us for all we do in his name. In Matthew 16 Jesus predicts his passion and resurrection (16:21), and then describes the self-denial and forfeiting of life necessary for those who would follow after him (16:2426). But he adds this blessed assurance in Matthew 16:27, For the Son of

216

Man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his angels and then he will give back to each one according to his work (kai. to,te avpodw,sei e`ka,stw| kata. th.n pra/xin auvtou). Revelation 22:12 draws the NT toward its close with these words from Jesus, Look! I am coming suddenly and my reward is with me to give back to each one as is his work (kai. o` misqo,j mou metV evmou/ avpodou/nai e`ka,stw| w`j to. e;rgon evsti.n auvtou). (See also Mt 25:1423; Lk 14:14; 19:1219; 2 Cor 6:97; 1 Tm 4:8; Ps 62:12; Dan 12:3.)

It is always appropriate to remind ourselves and our hearers, as AC VI does, that Scripture always teaches that Gods grace, the forgiveness of sin, righteousness, and salva-tion come not through works but through faith alone without merit (AC VI). There is nothing to apologize for here and, fittingly, the Apology says nothing explicitly on AC VI. But, in closing, the Apology to Article 4 confesses this about the new obedience:

We teach that rewards have been offered and promised to the works of the faithful. We teach that good works are meritoriousnot for the forgive-ness of sins, grace, or justification (for we obtain these only by faith) but for other physical and spiritual rewards in this life and in that which is to come, as Paul says (1 Cor 3:8), Each shall receive his wages according to his labor. (Ap AC IV 194)58

Or, as Jesus will say, Well done, good and faithful servant (Mt 25:21, 23). And thats how our new obedience turns out in the end.

Endnotes

1 According to the Concordia Triglotta (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921), 4446, the Latin reads, Item docent, quod fides illa debeat bonos fructus parare, et quod operteat bona opera mandata a Deo facere propter voluntatem Dei. Note: citations from the Book of Concord other than AC VI are from The Book of Concord, trans. and ed. Theodore Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981); it is the version used in the Concordia Electronic Theological Library in Logos and by the Concordia Commentary series.

2 Concordia Triglotta, 44. 3 Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical

Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), 40; Tappert, 3132, translates as follows: It is also taught among us that such faith should produce good fruits and good works and that we must do all such good works as God has commanded, but we should do them for Gods sake and not place our trust in them as if thereby to merit favor before God. For we receive forgiveness of sin and righteousness through faith in Christ, as Christ himself says, So you also, when you have done all that is commanded you, say, We are unworthy servants (Lk 17:10). The Fathers also teach thus, for Ambrose says, It is ordained of God that whoever believes in Christ shall be saved, and he shall have forgiveness of sins, not through works but through faith alone, without merit.

4 See The Situation in Galatia in Andrew Das, Galatians, Concordia Commentary (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2014), 119.

5 The title, The New Obedience, is a later insertion. While titles were put in place as early as 1532, they were not included in the 1580 edition of the Book of Concord. Kolb and Wengert, 36, n. 26..

6 J. Simpson and E. Weiner, The Oxford English Dictionaries, 2nd ed., 15 vols (New York: Oxford University, 1989), 10:637. Though largely lost in contemporary usage, the English obey stems from the Latin verb to hear (audio). According to Simpson and Weiner, 10:637, obey is derived from the Latin ob audire, give ear, hearken, obey.

7 See Michael Middendorf, Romans 18, Concordia Commentary (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2013), 60, 6667, 500501; material in this paragraph has also been adapted from the authors forthcom-ing commentary on Romans 916, to be published by Concordia Publishing House.

8 See Michael Middendorf and Mark Schuler, Called by the Gospel (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2007), 155156, 322324.


9 Scott Ashmon, Preaching Law and Gospel in the Old Testament, Lutheran Forum 47:4 (Winter 2013): 12; he adds that this aligns with the motives of the Formula of Concord and Walther (see the section on Homiletical Implications).

10 Ibid., 12. 11 Ibid., 13. 12 This paragraph and the next were developed in relation to Romans 13:810 and are adapted from the

authors forthcoming commentary on Romans 916.13 The title The Ten Words is also present in Deuteronomy 10:4 (as well as in Philo, Heir 168;

Decalogue, 32; Josephus, Ant. 3.138). 14 Middendorf, Romans 18, 200. 15 Horace Hummel, The Word Becoming Flesh (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1979), 75. 16 Ibid., 74; though he continues by affirming an ongoing second use of the Law for those who remain

sinners as well as saints. 17 Lutheran Service Book (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006), 321322. 18 Martin Scharlemann, Gods Word for Today: 1 Peter, Gods Chosen People (St. Louis: Concordia

Publishing House, 1994), 73; the slogan, Be what you already are, is also adopted by Paul Deterding, Colossians, Concordia Commentary (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2003), 138, in commenting on Colossians 3:14, citing also 1 Corinthians 5:7a; Ephesians 5:8. See also Martin Scharlemann, Exodus Ethics, Concordia Journal, 1976: 165170; he rephrases the overall sentiment later, 169, as God has already declared you to be His saints; now show it.

19 Steven Paulson, Lutheran Theology (New York: T&T Clark, 2011). 20 C. F. W. Walther, Law and Gospel (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, n.d.), 93.21 Translation from Middendorf, Romans 18, 190.22 Walther, Law and Gospel, 93, emphasis added. For a discussion of the old and new man, see

Middendorf, Romans 18, 459462. 23 Romans 11 then contains seven imperatives. Yet three of these occur in the citation from Psalm 69 in

Romans 11:1011. The other four are addressed primarily to Gentile believers, stating how they ought and ought not to regard their own in-grafting into the people of God over and against Jewish believers and unbelievers (11:18, 20 [2], 22).

24 Translations from Middendorf, Romans 1-8, 443, 486.25 Middendorf, Romans 18, 509511. A portion of the omitted section, at the beginning of the second

paragraph here, states: Pauls exhortations make no sense to an unbeliever; they make no sense to those who are still slaves to sin, even if that slavery is cleverly masquerading itself as slavery to some supposed autonomous self. The ongoing struggle expressed in 6:1223 also betrays the notion that holiness of living is somehow completely attainable, rather than on enduring struggle. Yet they also do not make sense if our struggle against sin and our efforts to live for God are a matter of complete futility and, therefore, not to be energetically pursued. This is an improper misunderstanding of Luthers sin boldly and a simplistic misapplication of simul justus et peccator.

26 See Middendorf, Romans 18, 567576. James Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38, 2 vols (Dallas: Word, 1988), 392, calls it a two-dimensional character.

27 See Middendorf, Romans 18, 441442.28 See Middendorf, Romans 18, 49; this paragraph is adapted from the authors forthcoming commen-

tary on Romans 916. 29 Brian Rosner, Paul and the Law (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2013), 124; he adds, In Romans

13 and Galatians 5 Christ fulfils the law through us. Unfortunately, this would seem to imply a second or ongo-ing fulfilling of the law by Christ, something he has finished once for all (Rom 6:10; 8:3).

30 A significant portion of this section is abridged and adapted from the authors forthcoming commen-tary on Romans 916.

31 Paul Raabe and James Voelz, Why Exhort a Good Tree?, Concordia Journal 22 (1996): 161, develop their analogy by comparing two different approaches to physics, that of Newton and that of Einstein. There is an everyday sort of experiential and phenomenological understanding of the universe (= Newton), and there is a deeper, more theoretical, and ontological understanding (= Einstein).

32 Granted, sixteen of these imperatives occur in Romans 16 in requests to greet () various members of the Roman house churches. Additionally, all of Romans 111 contains only two hortatory subjunc-tives. Both are notions Paul vehemently rejects by responding to them with (Rom 6:1, 15). However, in chapters 1216, Paul uses three or four hortatory subjunctives positively to call forth proper conduct in response to Gods mercies (13:12, 13; 14:13; probably 14:19). See Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics (Grand

218

Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 464465. 33 Raabe and Voelz, Why Exhort a Good Tree?, 160; they previously, 158160, also assert the fol-

lowing: The first point that needs to be stressed is that Pauls exhortations are addressed to Christians, to those in Christ who want to and are able to live for God. Second, it is clear that, although the addressees are Christians, they cannot live for God by their own power and abilities. The power comes from the Spi

Documents

Concordia Journal | Summer 2015