Dear Issues, Etc. Listener:

In the name of Jesus, greetings.

Our listeners keep Issues, Etc. on the air. We believe this more and more every day.

June 30, 2011, marks the three-year anniversary of our return to radio, the Internet, and on-demand. For those three years (and for more than a decade before that) our listeners have kept us on the air. Thank you.

Please consider supporting Issues, Etc. for the years to come with a special three-year anniversary gift. Any size gift is deeply appreciated. You can make a secure online donation at www.issuesetc.org. You can also donate by check. Make your check payable to “Lutheran Public Radio” and send it to the address below.

LPR

P.O. Box 912

Collinsville, IL 62234

Thank you for listening and thanks for your support of Issues, Etc., past, present and future especially during the difficult summer months.

Wir sind alle Bettler,

Pastor Todd Wilken, Host

Issues, Etc.

A friend just shared this YouTube video with me. This little guy is three years old. I love how expressive he is. He may not understand every single word he is saying, but he sure does understand the point! Great stuff.

My friend, Aaron Lewis, sent me a photo he took in a museum of a painting, in Munich, depicting Cranach painting Luther, with Melanchthon looking on. Very nice! The painting is by Heinrich Stelzner, who lived from 1833-1910. He painted this painting in 1890. It is in the Alte Pinakothek museum at Munich, which, I’m told, has a general policy against displaying works from the 19th century or earlier, but they made an exception since it is such a unique portrayal of Lucas Cranach at work. I’m trying to figure out how to upload the full size version of the painting as a jpeg to this blog post, but have forgotten how to to that in WordPress. Any suggestions?

Here is a photo a tourist, Jaime Silva, took of Cranach in the painting:

Here is a shot Jamie took of the entire painting. Aaron Lewis tells me it is about four feet by six feet:

Well, at least virtually….check out this great resource, uncovered by Pastor Harrison.

Caravaggio: Martyrdom of St. Peter

The Martyrdom of St Paul c. 1556, by Tintoretto

Merciful and eternal God, Your holy apostles Peter and Paul received grace and strength to lay down their lives for the sake of Your Son. Strengthen us by Your Holy Spirit that we may confess Your truth and at all times be ready to lay down our lives for Him who laid down His life for us, even Jesus Christ, our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.

Scripture Readings for the Day:

Acts 15:1–12 (13–21)
Psalm 46 (antiphon: v. 11)
Galatians 2:1–10
Matthew 16:13–19

The Confession of Saint Peter (“You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God”) is commemorated on 18 January, and the Conversion of Saint Paul on his approach to Damascus a week later, on 25 January. On 29 June we commemorate the martyrdoms of both apostles. The date is the anniversary of a day around AD 258, under the Valerian persecution, when what were believed to be the remains of the two apostles were both moved temporarily to prevent them from falling into the hands of the persecutors. The Scriptures do not record the deaths of Peter or Paul, or indeed any of the Apostles’ deaths except for James the son of Zebedee (Acts 12:2), but they are clearly anticipated (see the readings below), and from an early date it has been said that they were martyred at Rome at the command of the Emperor Nero, and buried there. As a Roman citizen, St. Paul would probably have been beheaded with a sword. An early tradition claims that St. Peter was crucified head downward. The present Church of St. Peter in Rome replaces earlier churches built on the same site going back to the time of the Emperor Constantine, in whose reign a church was built on what was believed to be the burial site of Peter. Excavations under the church suggest that the belief that this is the true home of his burial predates Constantine.

People have suggested that Wilken and McCain have a dance off. I’m game.

Here’s a preview of the routine I’m going to be doing. Yes, this will happen.

I know this is going to make some people angry, but I think it is about time we realize that when some among us say that there is a certain “level” of liturgical activity that marks what is really Lutheran or really liturgical, they are just whistling Dixie. Appealing to older practices is fine, to a point, but I’ve noticed that in reacting to really, really BAD practices among us, such as Lutheran churches dropping the name Lutheran, and ditching the liturgy, the reaction against those errors winds up just causing a problem in the other direction.

In his work documenting liturgical practices in the territory of Braunschweig, Bodo Nischan shared a delightful incident when Luther let the prince in the territory have it with both barrels. For you see, this man was very concerned with making sure they had all the liturgical finery possible and that the preachers were draped in pretty, shiny chasubles. Luther had to remind the good man that there is more to worship, liturgy and the church’s life together than obsessing over rites, rituals and rubrics in the Divine Service. There were calls in the area for continued Roman practices, which Luther rejected, such as consecrating the elements first in church and taking them to communicants, or keeping them stored up in a ciborium. And then, Luther tried to calm the anxiety of a man who was feeling bad about being forced to continue to engage in elaborate rituals:

Provided the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached purely with no human additions and the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are observed, with no invocation of the saints, no carrying of the sacrament in procession, no daily masses and vigils for the dead, no holy water and salt, and provided that pure hymns are sung in Latin and German, then it does not matter if there be a cross of gold or silver, whether the cope be of saffron, silk, or linen; and if the Elector is not content to put on one gown, let him have three, the way Aaron wore them, one on top of another; and if doesn’t find one procession enough, let him go around seven times like Joshua with trumpets blowing; and if wants to leap with the harp, psalter, and cymbals, let him dance like David before the ark. Conscience is not to be bound, and if we have given up these practices in Wittenberg, we may have reasons which are not valid in Berlin. Except where God has commanded, let there be freedom. [Nichan, p. 22]

You see, dear reader, much as some among us would like to make you think that there is some certain “best” way to do the liturgy and that the wearing of certain vestments is the “most” or “more” Lutheran way of doing things, they are wrong and while they may want to give you the impression that unless you reach their “level” of liturgical correctness and hold your hands just so, and gesticulate in just the right way, they have no right to do so. They have no right to put themselves in the place of judging the content of the Synod’s hymnals or liturgies, or indicating that such content is not “good enough” or that there is some “better” way. Such things are every bit as damaging to our fellowship as Pastor Bob with his polo shirt and jeans parading around like a non-denominational preacher. And we must be willing to say it is or we have no credibility to criticize the other side of the coin.

Source: Prince, People, and Confession: The Second Reformation in Brandenburg by Bodo Nischan.

We pray:

Almighty God, You upheld your servant Irenaeus, giving him strength to confess the truth against every false doctrine; keep us, we pray, steadfast in Your Word and grant us the practice of true religion, that in constancy and peace we may walk in the way of eternal life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

Irenaeus (ca. AD 130-200), believed to be a native of Smyrna (modern Izmir, Turkey), studied in Rome and later became pastor in Lyons, France. Around 177, while Irenaeus was away from Lyons, a fierce persecution of Christians led to the martyrdom of his bishop. Upon Irenaeus’ return, he became Bishop of Lyons.

Among his most famous writings is Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies). This work condemned several errors but focused especially on Gnosticism, which denied the goodness of creation. In opposition, Irenaeus confessed that God has redeemed his creation through the incarnation of the Son. Irenaeus also affirmed the teachings of the Scriptures handed down to and through him as being normative for the Church.

Despite a few stray texts, very little suggests that he did not die a natural death. He was buried in Saint John’s Church, Lyon — a congregation later renamed in his honor. Iconoclastic Huegenot Calvinists destroyed his tomb and remains in 1522.

Read more…

Read more…

Saint Cyril (ca. AD 376-444) became Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt in 412. Throughout his career he defended a number of orthodox doctrines, among them the teaching that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is “rightly called and truly is the Mother of God” — Theotokos, “the God-Bearer” (Formula of Concord, Epitome, VIII, 12). In 431 the Council of Ephesus affirmed this teaching that the Son of Mary is also true God.

The Council was responding to the Nestorian heresy, which distinguished so completely between the divine and human natures of Christ that claims were made that the divine Christ did some things while the human Jesus did others.

Some of the differences are quite subtle; perhaps even Nestorius himself could not have foreseen the full ramifications of his position, including a “resurrection” of only the divine nature. Ephesus condemned the title of “Christ-Bearer” (Christotokos) for the Virgin, since the Nestorians would only claim that Mary bore the Christ, but not God Himself.

Cyril receives almost as many brickbats as he does bouquets, even from orthodox Christians, because he’s also known for being what one person calls “an ill-tempered, quarrelsome, hasty, and violent man.” This seems especially so during his early years as Bishop of Alexandria.

A particularly acute example of his extreme rigity comes from his closing of Novatianist churches, although the Novationists weren’t particularly unorthodox. Their “fault” was as much one of pride as of theology — they descended from those who’d stood firm in the persecutions of earlier years and refused to associate or worship with the heirs of those who recanted the Faith under persecution. Their main theological aberration were insisting upon rebaptism of converts from “lapsed” Christianity and an attitude that was, perhaps, less than Christ-like in dealing with erring brothers.

Cyril also ran the Jews out of town. The reason given was that they were seditious and violent, although we’re left with little evidence. This action likely contributed to an ongoing feud with Orestes, the imperial prefect. These disagreements seemingly spilled over into a quarrel with the prefect’s friend, the neo-platonist scholar Hypatia, who was later murdered by a mob.

Few have directly condemned Cyril for her death but the leaders of the mob certainly claimed the bishop as their leader. In modern times, Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, blamed Hypatia’s death (and the destruction of the great Library of Alexandria) on dogmatic Christianity’s desire to root out rational paganism. However, other scholars see the whole feud as an internal Church struggle and no one has yet established a definitive cause (or date) for the final destruction of Alexandria’s library.

At any rate, and despite the considerable rancor that accompanied his early years as bishop, the mature Cyril worked diligently to reconcile the Nestorian and Orthodox parties. His efforts led many of the less virulent Nestorians back to full communion.

The writings of Cyril on the doctrines of the Trinity and the person of Christ reveal him to be one of the most able theologians of his time. Cyril’s Christology influenced subsequent church councils and was a primary source for Lutheran confessional writings. He still speaks clearly to our age, especially as the old Christological heresies are trotted out under new guises.

Collect

Heavenly Father, You used Your servant Cyril to confess the mysteries of the Holy Trinity and of Your Son being one person with fully divine and human natures. Grant that we, also, might be constant in Your Word, bold in Your confession, and steadfast in Your worship, to the glory of Your holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

HT: Aardvark Alley.

We pray:

Heavenly Father, You used Your servant Cyril to confess the mysteries of the Holy Trinity and of Your Son being one person with fully divine and human natures. Grant that we, also, might be constant in Your Word, bold in Your confession, and steadfast in Your worship, to the glory of Your holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

Saint Cyril (ca. AD 376-444) became Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt in 412. Throughout his career he defended a number of orthodox doctrines, among them the teaching that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is “rightly called and truly is the Mother of God” — Theotokos, “the God-Bearer” (Formula of Concord, Epitome, VIII, 12). In 431 the Council of Ephesus affirmed this teaching that the Son of Mary is also true God.

The Council was responding to the Nestorian heresy, which distinguished so completely between the divine and human natures of Christ that claims were made that the divine Christ did some things while the human Jesus did others.

Some of the differences are quite subtle; perhaps even Nestorius himself could not have foreseen the full ramifications of his position, including a “resurrection” of only the divine nature. Ephesus condemned the title of “Christ-Bearer” (Christotokos) for the Virgin, since the Nestorians would only claim that Mary bore the Christ, but not God Himself.

Cyril receives almost as many brickbats as he does bouquets, even from orthodox Christians, because he’s also known for being what one person calls “an ill-tempered, quarrelsome, hasty, and violent man.” This seems especially so during his early years as Bishop of Alexandria.

A particularly acute example of his extreme rigity comes from his closing of Novatianist churches, although the Novationists weren’t particularly unorthodox. Their “fault” was as much one of pride as of theology — they descended from those who’d stood firm in the persecutions of earlier years and refused to associate or worship with the heirs of those who recanted the Faith under persecution. Their main theological aberration were insisting upon rebaptism of converts from “lapsed” Christianity and an attitude that was, perhaps, less than Christ-like in dealing with erring brothers.

Cyril also ran the Jews out of town. The reason given was that they were seditious and violent, although we’re left with little evidence. This action likely contributed to an ongoing feud with Orestes, the imperial prefect. These disagreements seemingly spilled over into a quarrel with the prefect’s friend, the neo-platonist scholar Hypatia, who was later murdered by a mob.

Few have directly condemned Cyril for her death but the leaders of the mob certainly claimed the bishop as their leader. In modern times, Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, blamed Hypatia’s death (and the destruction of the great Library of Alexandria) on dogmatic Christianity’s desire to root out rational paganism. However, other scholars see the whole feud as an internal Church struggle and no one has yet established a definitive cause (or date) for the final destruction of Alexandria’s library.

At any rate, and despite the considerable rancor that accompanied his early years as bishop, the mature Cyril worked diligently to reconcile the Nestorian and Orthodox parties. His efforts led many of the less virulent Nestorians back to full communion.

The writings of Cyril on the doctrines of the Trinity and the person of Christ reveal him to be one of the most able theologians of his time. Cyril’s Christology influenced subsequent church councils and was a primary source for Lutheran confessional writings. He still speaks clearly to our age, especially as the old Christological heresies are trotted out under new guises.

Collect

Heavenly Father, You used Your servant Cyril to confess the mysteries of the Holy Trinity and of Your Son being one person with fully divine and human natures. Grant that we, also, might be constant in Your Word, bold in Your confession, and steadfast in Your worship, to the glory of Your holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

In light of some recent comments I’ve run across again on this issue, it’s time once more for the “Aversion to Sanctification” blog post, since the problem persists and appears to have become part-and-parcel of what some perceive to a confessional Lutheran understanding of God’s Word. More recent examples of this problem in action include a pastor posting a picture of a guy giving “the finger” and claiming there is nothing wrong with that and defending it, continued comments about how no matter what good works are done they are still “sinful,” and the ongoing effort to turn every comment in the Scriptures about the good works to which we are called into a discussion about the second use of the law, virtually laughing off Proverbs 31 and saying that text does not really apply to individuals but is really about Christ and the Church. But, I think the comment that took the prize was posted on my Facebook wall where the text of God’s Word was actually twisted to the point that the that indicates that God has prepared good works for us to walk in, to read “good work upon which God has prepared us to work” thus not about good works, but about Christ. All these things are put forward with the best of intentions, but they betray an unhealthy lack of balance and understanding on these issues. So here’s an oldie but a goodie:

I was just in a conversation with two younger men who were seriously saying that listening to the audio pornography and vile filth of Eminem is appropriate for Christians. One suggested that because only what comes out of a man is what makes him sinful that it matters not what he sees, or hears, as a Christian. These two young men are sadly typical of a poorly formed understanding of the life of good works to which we are called as Christians that seems pandemic in the Christian Church, where apparently some can wax eloquent about how they are striving to be faithful to God’s Word, but then turn right around and wallow in the mire and squalor of sin. This all the more underscores for me the point that we have a serious lack of emphasis on sanctification in our beloved Lutheran church. There is much teaching that is not being done, that must done. Simply repeating formulas and phrases about justification is not teaching and preaching the whole counsel of God. Comforting people with the Gospel when there is no genuine repentance for sin is doing them a disservice. There is a serious “short circuit” here that we need to be mindful of. Let this be clear. Listening to the “music” of swine such as Eminem is sinful and willfully choosing to listen to it is sin that drives out the Holy Spirit. This is deadly serious business. Deadly. Serious.

Pastors who wash their hands of this responsibility claiming that they want to avoid interjecting law into their sermons when they have preached the Gospel are simply shirking their duty as preachers and are being unfaithful to God’s Word.

We have done such a fine job explaining that we are not saved by works that we have, I fear, neglected to urge the faithful to lives of good works as faithfully and clearly as we should. This should not be so among us brethren.

I’m growing increasingly concerned that with the necessary distinction between faith and works that we must always maintain, we Lutherans are tempted to speak of good works and the life of sanctification in such a way as to either minimize it, or worse yet, neglect it. I read sermons and hear comments that give me the impression that some Lutherans think that good works are something that “just happen” on some sort of a spiritual auto-pilot. Concern over a person believing their works are meritorious has led to what borders on paranoia to the point that good works are simply not taught or discussed as they should be. It seems some have forgotten that in fact we do confess three uses of the law, not just a first or second use.

The Apostle, St. Paul, never ceases to urge good works on his listeners nad readers. I recall a conversation once with a person who should know better telling me that the exhortations to good works and lengthy discussions of sanctification we find in the New Testament are not a model at all for preaching, since Paul is not “preaching” but rather writing a letter. This is not a good thing.

A number of years ago an article appeared that put matters well and sounded a very important word of warning and caution. It is by Professor Kurt E. Marquart of Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Indiana. I strongly encourage you to give it your most serious attention.

Antinomian Aversion to Sanctification?

An emerited brother writes that he is disturbed by a kind of preaching that avoids sanctification and “seemingly questions the Formula of Concord . . . about the Third Use of the Law.” The odd thing is that this attitude, he writes, is found among would-be confessional pastors, even though it is really akin to the antinomianism of “Seminex”! He asks, “How can one read the Scriptures over and over and not see how much and how often our Lord (in the Gospels) and the Apostles (in the Epistles) call for Christian sanctification, crucifying the flesh, putting down the old man and putting on the new man, abounding in the work of the Lord, provoking to love and good works, being fruitful . . . ?”

I really have no idea where the anti-sanctification bias comes from. Perhaps it is a knee-jerk over-reaction to “Evangelicalism”: since they stress practical guidance for daily living, we should not! Should we not rather give even more and better practical guidance, just because we distinguish clearly between Law and Gospel? Especially given our anti-sacramental environment, it is of course highly necessary to stress the holy means of grace in our preaching. But we must beware of creating a kind of clericalist caricature that gives the impression that the whole point of the Christian life is to be constantly taking in preaching, absolution and Holy Communion-while ordinary daily life and callings are just humdrum time-fillers in between! That would be like saying that we live to eat, rather than eating to live. The real point of our constant feeding by faith, on the Bread of Life, is that we might gain an ever-firmer hold of Heaven-and meanwhile become ever more useful on earth! We have, after all, been “created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). Cars, too, are not made to be fueled and oiled forever at service-stations. Rather, they are serviced in order that they might yield useful mileage in getting us where we need to go. Real good works before God are not showy, sanctimonious pomp and circumstance, or liturgical falderal in church, but, for example, “when a poor servant girl takes care of a little child or faithfully does what she is told” (Large Catechism, Ten Commandments, par. 314, Kolb-Wengert, pg. 428).

The royal priesthood of believers needs to recover their sense of joy and high privilege in their daily service to God (1 Pet. 2:9). The “living sacrifice” of bodies, according to their various callings, is the Christian’s “reasonable service” or God-pleasing worship, to which St. Paul exhorts the Romans “by the mercies of God” (Rom. 12:1), which he had set out so forcefully in the preceding eleven chapters! Or, as St. James puts it: “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world” (1:27). Liberal churches tend to stress the one, and conservatives one the other, but the Lord would have us do both!

Antinomianism appeals particularly to the Lutheran flesh. But it cannot claim the great Reformer as patron. On the contrary, he writes:

“That is what my Antinomians, too, are doing today, who are preaching beautifully and (as I cannot but think) with real sincerity about Christ’s grace, about the forgiveness of sin and whatever else can be said about the doctrine of redemption. But they flee s if t were the very devil the consequence that they should tell the people about the third article, of sanctification, that is, of new life in Christ. They think one should not frighten or trouble the people, but rather always preach comfortingly about grace and the forgiveness of sins in Christ, and under no circumstance use these or similar words, “Listen! You want to be a Christian and at the same time remain an adulterer, a whoremonger, a drunken swine, arrogant, covetous, a usurer, envious, vindictive, malicious, etc.!” Instead they say, “Listen! Though you are an adultery, a wordmonger, a miser, or other kind of sinner, if you but believe, you are saved, and you need not fear the law. Christ has fulfilled it all! . . . They may be fine Easter preachers, but they are very poor Pentecost preachers, for they do not preach… “about the sanctification by the Holy Spirit,” but solely about the redemption of Jesus Christ, although Christ (whom they extol so highly, and rightly so) is Christ, that is, He has purchased redemption from sin and death so that the Holy Spirit might transform us out of the old Adam into new men . . . Christ did not earn only gratia, grace, for us, but also donum, “the gift of the Holy Spirit,” so that we might have not only forgiveness of, but also cessation of, sin. Now he who does not abstain fro sin, but persists in his evil life, must have a different Christ, that of the Antinomians; the real Christ is not there, even if all the angels would cry, “Christ! Christ!” He must be damned with this, his new Christ (On the Council and the Church, Luther’s Works, 41:113-114).

Where are the “practical and clear sermons,” which according to the Apology “hold an audience” (XXIV, 50, p. 267). Apology XV, 42-44 (p. 229) explains:

“The chief worship of God is to preach the Gospel…in our churches all the sermons deal with topics like these: repentance, fear of God, faith in Christ, the righteousness of faith, prayer . . . the cross, respect for the magistrates and all civil orders, the distinction between the kingdom of Christ (the spiritual kingdom) and political affairs, marriage, the education and instruction of children, chastity, and all the works of love.”

“Grant, we beseech Thee, Almighty God, unto Thy Church Thy Holy Spirit, and the wisdom which cometh down from above, that Thy Word, as becometh it, may not be bound, but have free course and be preached to the joy and edifying of Christ’s holy people, that I steadfast faith we may serve Thee, and in the confession of Thy Name abide unto the end: through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Lord. Amen.”

Kurt Marquart

Concordia Theological Quarterly

The Augsburg Confession, the principal doctrinal statement of the theology of Martin Luther and the Lutheran reformers, was written largely by Phillip Melanchthon. At its heart it confesses the justification of sinners by grace alone, through faith alone, for the sake of Christ alone. Signed by leaders of many German cities and regions, the confession was formally presented to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at Augsburg, Germany, on June 25, 1530. A few weeks later Roman Catholic authorities rejected the Confession, which Melanchthon defended in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession (1531). In 1580 the Unaltered Augsburg Confession was included in the Book of Concord.

We pray:

Lord God, heavenly Father, You preserved the teaching of the apostolic Church through the confession of the true faith at Augsburg. Continue to cast the bright beams of Your light upon Your Church that we, being instructed by the doctrine of the blessed apostles, may walk in the light of Your truth and finally attain to the light of everlasting life; through Jesus Christ, our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.

Here is an interesting illustration of the articles of the Augsburg Confession. The much higher resolution, though much larger, version of the image may be found in the Wikipedia commons here.

Matthew Carver translated the Augsburg Confession hymn Lord God, Ever Keep For Us The Augsburg Confession Pure. Here is his post from his blog: Hymnoglypt. I see Matthew is using Creative Commons to license his work for distribution, for non commercial purposes, with proper attribution. You’ll see that notice at the end of this post. The extended entry contains the German text. Most Lutherans will recognize both suggested tunes, the first is familiar to us with Luther’s hymn, “Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Your Word” and the second tune is familiar to us as “Renew Me, O Eternal Light.” As Matthew says, you now have plenty of time to practice it for the next anniversary celebration of the Augsburg Confession, on June 25, from his blog:

“Here is my translation of the Augsburg Confession hymn, “Herr Gott, erhalt uns für und für / die reine Augspurgische… ” (C. Becker, 1631), after Helmbold’s “Herr Gott, erhalt uns für und für” (TLH#288), originally published with the title “The 21 articles of the Augsburg Confession summarized in song form.” This was later reworked by Sigismund von Birken, and appeared in that form in 1668. It is certainly more amenable to congregational singing in the divine service than a similar hymn with longer stanzas by Fabricius, though certainly at the expense of doctrinal precision. The melody appointed is, “Herr Gott, erhalt uns für und für,” or “Wohl dem, der in Gottes Furcht steht.” Other possible tunes would be “Erhalt uns, Herr, in deinem Wort,” and “Herr Jesu Christ, mein Lebens Licht.”

Please post any corrections or concerns over wording.

LORD, EVER keep for us secure
The Augsburg doctrine true and pure,
Which John th’ Elector did confess
Before the world with fearlessness.

Article I. Of the Divine Being.
2. That You are three in unity,
One God from all eternity,
The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,—
This is our clear confession’s boast.

Article II. Of Original Sin.
3. We further without fear confess
Our sin and gross unrighteousness
Inherited, for which, forlorn,
We perish would, unless reborn.

Article III. Of the Person and Work of Christ.
4. This also gives us hope and cheer,
That Jesus Christ, our Savior dear,
True God and Man came to us men
And all the world redeemed from sin.

Article IV. Of Justification of the Poor Sinner Before God.
5. A man is therefore saved and blest
If he believes in Jesus Christ,
Who makes our sin as white as snow,
And pays the debt He did not owe.

Article V. Of the Means of Obtaining Faith.
6. Such faith we surely too obtain
When we with eagerness remain
In Word and Sacrament, nor shirk;
The Spirit thus perfects His work

Article VI. Of the Fruits of Faith.
7. Where faith is found, there follow too
At every hour good works and true;
Yet only faith can justify,
Works to the neighbor help supply.

Article VII. Of the Christian Church.
8. The Church of Christ must there be sought
Where God’s whole Word is purely taught,
And Christ’s most holy Sacrament
Is given after His intent.

Article VIII. What the Church Is.
9. As in a flock strange sheep may go,
So in the Church it is also,
Where hypocrites may often lurk;
Yet this hurts not God’s holy work.

Article IX. Of Baptism.
10. Baptis’m’s font, the blessed bath,
Brings us God’s grace and stills His wrath;
It makes us children blest and new,
And washes off sin’s crimson hue.

Article X. Of the Supper.
11. Christ also therefore did ordain
The Holy Supper to retain:
Gives us His body and His blood
Under bread and wine for our great good.

Article XI. Of Confession and Absolution.
12. And of confession, it is taught
That none can know all errors wrought,
Yet one should come and humbly say
“Lord, loose the sins that on me weigh.”

Article XII. Of Repentance.
13. Repentance given was for them
Whose sins weigh heavy and seem grim,
And who believe in Christ their Lord,
And see what help it shall afford.

Article XIII. Of the Sacraments.
14. The Sacraments’ true, proper use
Our good confession also shows.
They are the tokens of God’s grace,
Faith’s aid of strength and resting-place.

Article XIV. Of Ecclesastical Order.
15. In church none teach, this we believe,
Save who a proper call receive,
And enter office orderly,—
A sheperd good they then will be.

Article XV. Of Church Customs.
16. Of useful customs, every one
In proper season may be done;
Your conscience only let think not
As if thereby you merit aught.

Article XVI. Of Civil Affairs.
17. All rulers, laws, and governments
Exist by God’s good ordinance,
And all their honor to sustain
Our good confession tells us plain.

Article XVII. Of Christ’s Return to Judgment.
18. The Final Judgment is to come,
When Christ shall raise His Christendom
In flesh to heaven’s hall, and send
The wicked to eternal pain.

Article XVIII. Of Free Will.
19. In outward matters man is free
To do or do not willingly,
But as for matters spiritual,
Man understands no thing at all.

Article XIX. Of the Cause of Sin.
20. Our God is not the cause of sin,
As unbelievers would maintain;
Sins only rise from Satan’s art,
With help of man’s perverted heart.

Article XX. Of Faith and Good Works.
21. Though we good works may well revere
The Word of God is very clear,
That we are justified, we own,
And saved by grace, through faith alone.

Article XXII. Of Saints, How They Should Be Honored.
22. Pray not to saints, nor them invoke;
For such a thing God does not look;
They are examples, so that we
May live and trust Him blamelessly.

Conclusion.
23. Thus is our doctrine summarized.
If you would be of more apprised,
Read Holy Scripture, as you can,
And guard yourself from lore of man.

Petition.
24. O God, grant those who lead our land
In this confessions firm to stand,
That our descendants may enjoy
Their doctrine pure without alloy.

25. Amen, O Holy Trinity:
All glory ever be to Thee,
The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost!
You teach the faith we need the most.

Each translation ( © Matthew Carver) / CC BY-NC 3.0
Read more…