Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Questions All Lutheran Churchs Must Answer

February 16th, 2014 Comments off

The first question which all Lutheran churches of the world, without exception, should ask themselves, and which for the delegates in Minneapolis must have the priority before all others, is the question of the article by which the church stands and falls.

Do we still teach faith alone correctly? That means not only: do we still have a correct theological doctrine of justification, but also: do we still correctly preach the saving article, which is the gospel itself? Anyone who surveys the Lutheran churches of the world – the small and the large, the old national churches of Europe and the young churches in the mission fields, the small free churches of the Old World and the large ones of the New World – knows that this literally is a matter of life and death for the Lutheran church. The unity of the Lutheran church and of the church in general is also dependent upon it. With this in mind, the Formula of Concord (Sol. Decl. III, 6; BSLK 916; Müller 611) cites Luther’s well-known statement: “If this one teaching stands in its purity, then Christendom will also remain pure and good, undivided and unseparated; … but where this falls, it is impossible to ward off any error or sectarian spirit” (AE 14:37 on Ps. 117).

For Luther this article hangs inseparably together with that of the Lord’s Supper; this is so – as was repeatedly noted by M. Reu – because to it applied the statement: “The sacrament is the gospel;” we will discuss this below. Minneapolis will serve the true unity of the church and render a true service to the Lutheran churches of the world, if it with great emphasis impresses upon all Lutheran churches that here occurs the decision of life and death, the decision concerning the right of a Lutheran confessional church to exist.

What is preached from our pulpits? What do our children learn in religious instruction? Are we raising them to be people, who live by faith alone, grace alone, in daily repentance, from the daily forgiveness of sins? If here something or perhaps much remains to be desired, then the unique opportunity which just such a conference presents must be used, so that the necessary things are said in the document it sends out into the world. For everything there is to say about freedom and unity in Christ must have its solid foundation here.

Sasse, Letters to Lutheran Pastors 44, Before Lent 1957.

Categories: Uncategorized

The Diaconate of the Ancient and Medieval Church by Caspar Ziegler

February 15th, 2014 Comments off


A new book just published by Concordia Publishing House offers a translation of what is truly a spectacularly good study of the history of the office of Deacon in the early and medieval Church. It is really fascinating.

It is available now in both book and eBook formats.



View sample here

Step back in time and explore the positions of deacon and deaconess from apostolic times to the Reformation. Engaging nearly 500 primary sources, Caspar Ziegler’s detailed study illustrates the life of the Church as recorded by interpreters of canon law. Church workers and laity curious about how these vocations of mercy have evolved through the years will appreciate this translation of the historic text.


  • Foreword by Matthew C. Harrison
  • An index of Latin and Greek terms relating to clergy and the diaconate
  • Hundreds of scholarly footnotes from many non-English, European resources
Categories: Uncategorized

How Churches Came to Embrace Women’s Ordination and Then Homosexuality

February 14th, 2014 2 comments


With just a few minor tweeks, this article speaks brilliantly to the tactics being pursued in any church body that has members pushing for the ordination of women. The way this kind of things works is that groups agitating for change in doctrine say that they are”just asking for more conversation” or “asking questions” or declaring that there never has been any sufficient discussion, blah, blah, blah. I added just a few words and phrases, in brackets, to make my point. The little group in my church body most openly pushing for the ordination of women has also published articles pushing for an acceptance of homosexuality.


The truth – it’s just that simple.

Thomas Oden, writing in his book Requiem way back in 1995, explains how it happens. What follows from here is all a quote from an article I picked up from The Gospel Coalition. It begins in 3, 2, 1 …


The first step is always a study committee.

In response to claims for moral legitimization of behaviors widely thought displeasing to God, each of the mainline denominations has dutifully appointed elaborate study commissions to report back to the general legislative body on how the church might respond to [the ordination of women, and then, using the same exegetical methods by which clear texts forbidding women's ordination, the church then studied how to accept] homosexuality [determining it to be just another] form of sexual orientation, practice, and advocacy. (152)

If the first study committee comes back with a traditional reading of the text, or if the legislative body dismisses the committee’s progressive interpretation, you can always assign another study committee amidst outcries that the recalcitrant conservatives suffer from “[anti-women attitudes] and then homophobia and reactionary stupidity” (153).

And if the traditional view cannot be overturned right away, try dismissing the whole controversy by telling people (with no small amount of chronological snobbery) that saner Christians understand this is nothing worth fighting over.

The fact that [the ordination of women] and homosexual practice is not a weighty moral matter was asserted by the United Methodist Sexuality Report as a “consensus among Christian ethicists,” yet without any evidence to support this curious assertion. All the conspicuous Christian teachers who have resisted [the ordination of women] and same-sex intercourse (John Chrysostom, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other consensual ecumenical teachers) are weighed in the debate less heavily than selected modern proponents of moral relativism and utilitarian permissivism. (153)

The next step is admonish “the people of God to wait for a firm [theological] and ‘scientific consensus’” on the matter (154).

Then some leading lights in the denomination can offer new exegetical avenues for avoiding the traditional understanding of familiar texts. Three evasions in particular are quite popular.

The first evasion is that the normative moral force of all biblical texts on [the ordination of women] and same-sex intercourse may be explained away by their cultural context. This leads to the conclusion that any statement in the Bible can be reduced to culturally equivocal ambiguity and indeterminacy on the premise of cultural relativism…

The second evasion hinges upon a strung out interpretation on Romans 1:26-27…

The third evasion argues that when Genesis 1:27 declares that God created male and female, the text has no normative significance for how [the orders of creation have anything to say about the ordination of women] and then how sexual behavior is to be understood, since it is merely a distinction with no further moral meaning. (154-55)

If all else fails, the final step is to announce triumphantly and with a terrific celebration of grace that “Christ is, in an amoral fashion, the end of the law” and charge others with legalism if they don’t share in your antinomianism (156).

Sadly, Oden’s warning has been prescient.

With a lesbian minister installed in an RCA classis in New Jersey, more than twenty open and affirming congregations, a prominent professor at our more conservative seminary publishing a new revisionist book on homosexuality, and a number of overtures heading to Synod asking for new study committees, we in the RCA find ourselves in the middle of so much that Oden lamented.

Categories: Uncategorized


February 10th, 2014 Comments off

Screen Shot 2014-02-10 at 9.19.05 AM

Categories: Uncategorized

CPH Spring Catalog Sale is Live!

February 6th, 2014 Comments off



Folks, don’t miss out on great sale pricing on essential Lutheran resources and gifts for a wide variety of occasions, including confirmation, graduation, etc.

Spring Catalog Sale.

Here’s a link to the various items in the catalog. Orders of at least $79, from the Spring catalog, receive free shipping.

Categories: Uncategorized

Spring Catalog Preview Sale: Ends at the Close of Monday

February 1st, 2014 Comments off

Screen Shot 2014-02-01 at 10.53.05 AM

Categories: Uncategorized

Who is Buried in Charlemagne’s Tomb? Answer: Charlemagne

February 1st, 2014 Comments off

January 31st, 2014: From the History Blog

That may seem obvious, but given how often he was exhumed and reburied and parts of him given away as relics, it’s actually quite notable that the collection of bones in the Karlsschrein, the Shrine of Charlemagne, and other reliquaries in the Aachen Cathedral all appear to come from the same person who matches contemporary descriptions of the Frankish king.

Charlemagne died almost exactly 1200 years ago, on January 28th, 814, and was buried in the choir of the Palatine Chapel in Aachen Cathedral. (See Einhard’s Life of Charlemagne, written 15-20 years after his death for a description.) In 1000, Otto III, keen to present himself as the successor of the great man, had the burial vault opened. According to German chronicler and bishop Thietmar of Merseburg who was a contemporary of Otto’s, when the vault was opened they found Charlemagne’s uncorrupt body seated upon a marble throne wearing a crown with a scepter in his hand and the gospels open in his lap. Otto reportedly Helped himself to some of the relics and brought them to Rome.

Frederick I Barbarossa was the next to disinter Charlemagne. In 1165, he had the remains exhumed and displayed as holy relics at the Aachen Court festival. Again this was a means for Frederick to establish a connection with the revered leader and to position Aachen as a center of pilgrimage like St. Denis or Westminster. To curry favor with Frederick, Antipope Paschal III canonized Charlemagne that same year, although this, like all of Paschal’s acts, was never recognized by the Vatican. Barbarossa had Charlemagne’s remains reburied, this time in an elaborate third century A.D. Roman marble sarcophagus depicting the Rape of Persephone, which may seem incongruous as a topic for Christian burial, but like many ancient myths was re-interpreted as a symbol of Christ’s resurrection.

He didn’t stay there for long. In 1215, Frederick II had Charlemagne exhumed yet again. He commissioned local goldsmiths to make a rich gold casket to hold the bones. That’s the Karlsschrein originally in the placed in the center of the Palatine Chapel underneath a chandelier donated by Frederick Barbarossa in 1168.

Nearly 200 years passed before the next king inserted himself into Charlemagne’s eternal rest. In 1349, some of his bones were removed to individual reliquaries by Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV. He had a gold reliquary made to contain a thigh bone, and the Bust of Charlemagne to contain the skullcap. Louis XI of France contributed to the trend in 1481 by commissioning the Arm Reliquary, a golden arm that contains the ulna and radius from Charlemagne’s right arm.

It was scientists who took over from the emperors and kings. In 1861, Charlemagne’s remains were exhumed again so they could be studied. His skeleton was reconstructed and a very generous estimate (1.92 meters, or 6’4″) made of his height. In 1988, scientists exhumed his remains one more time, this time in secret. This study covered the bones in the reliquaries as well, a total of 94 bones and bone fragments, and they spent years meticulously examining and testing the collection. On Wednesday, January 28th, the 1200th anniversary of Charlemagne’s death, the results of the research were announced.

One of the scientists studying the remains, Professor Frank Rühli, said: “Thanks to the results from 1988 up until today, we can say with great likelihood that we are dealing with the skeleton of Charlemagne.”

From studying the dimensions of the upper arm, thigh and shin bones, scientists have built up a picture of the man behind the skeleton, and it matches descriptions of Charlemagne.

At 1.84 metres (six feet), he was unusually tall for his time. The team also estimated his weight at around 78 kilograms, giving him a slim body mass index of around 23.

The average height for an adult male in the 9th century was 1.69 meters or 5’6″, which put Charlemagne in the 99th percentile. Einhard’s description of him fits the results of the study even in some of the smaller details, like the limp that struck him in his later years. Researchers found that the kneecap and heel bone had deposits consistent with an injury.

From Chapter 22 of the Life of Charlemagne:

Charles was large and strong, and of lofty stature, though not disproportionately tall (his height is well known to have been seven times the length of his foot); the upper part of his head was round, his eyes very large and animated, nose a little long, hair fair, and face laughing and merry. Thus his appearance was always stately and dignified, whether he was standing or sitting; although his neck was thick and somewhat short, and his belly rather prominent; but the symmetry of the rest of his body concealed these defects. His gait was firm, his whole carriage manly, and his voice clear, but not so strong as his size led one to expect. His health was excellent, except during the four years preceding his death, when he was subject to frequent fevers; at the last he even limped a little with one foot.

Categories: Uncategorized

Forty Years of eBooks: Infographic

January 30th, 2014 Comments off

HT: eBook Friendly via GalleyCat


Categories: Uncategorized

A Review and Critique of a Lutheran World Federation Book on Hermeneutics

January 28th, 2014 Comments off

My colleague, Rev. Dr. Christopher Mitchel, was asked by the LCMS’ President’s Office to prepare a review of a recent publication by the Lutheran World Federation on the subject of hermeneutics, using the Gospel of John as the starting point. I’m attaching Dr. Mitchell’s review. Feel free to share it. It in Microsoft WORD format.

Review of LWF Hermeneutics

Categories: Uncategorized

The Oxford Comma Infographic: When, Why and How

January 28th, 2014 Comments off
Categories: Uncategorized

January 27th, 2014 Comments off


From the Gospel Coalition, by Joe Carter:

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day, an annual international day of commemoration in memory of the victims of the Holocaust. Here are nine things you should know about one of the most horrific genocidal campaigns in history:

The term “Holocaust,” originally from the Greek word “holokauston” which means “sacrifice by fire,” refers to the Nazi’s persecution and planned slaughter of the Jewish people. The biblical word Shoah, meaning “calamity”, became the standard Hebrew term for the Holocaust as early as the 1940s, especially in Europe and Israel. The term “holocaust” became a household word in America when in 1978 NBC television aired the miniseries titled Holocaust.

2. The Holocaust began in January 1933 when Hitler came to power and technically ended on May 8, 1945 (VE Day). But the official genocidal plan was developed at the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942. Fifteen Nazi leaders, which included a number of state secretaries, senior officials, party leaders, SS officers, and other leaders of government departments, held the meeting to discuss plans for a “final solution to the Jewish question in Europe.” (The Nazis used the euphemistic phrases “Final Solution to the Jewish Question” and “Final Solution” to refer to the genocide of the Jews.) In the course of the meeting, Nazi official Reinhard Heydrich outlined how European Jews would be rounded up and sent to extermination camps.

3. The Nazis distinguished between extermination camps and concentration camps. The interchangeable terms extermination camp (Vernichtungslager) and death camp (Todeslager) refer to camps whose primary function was genocide. Unlike concentration camps, the Nazis did not expect the majority of prisoners taken to the extermination camps to survive more than a few hours after arrival. In the early years of the Holocaust, the Jews were primarily sent to concentration camps (where they would often die of torture and starvation), but from 1942 onwards they were mostly deported to the extermination camps.

4. Genocide at extermination camps was initially carried out in the form of mass shootings. However, the shootings proved to be too psychologically damaging to those being asked to pull the triggers. The Nazis next tried mass killing by blowing victims up with explosives, but that also was found unsuitable. The Nazis settled on gassing their victims (usually with carbon monoxide or a cyanide-based pesticide). Stationary gas chambers could kill 2,000 people at once. Once in the chambers, about one-third of the victims died immediately, though death could take up to 20 minutes.

5. The use of camps equipped with gas chambers for the purpose of systematic mass extermination of peoples was a unique feature of the Holocaust and unprecedented in history. Never before had there existed places with the express purpose of killing people en masse. These were extermination camps established at Auschwitz, Belzec, Chełmno, Jasenovac, Majdanek, Maly Trostenets, Sobibor, and Treblinka. For political and logistical reasons, the most infamous extermination camps were in Occupied Poland, since Poland had the greatest number of Jews living in Europe.

6. At various concentration and extermination camps, the Nazis conducted medical experiments on their prisoners, which included placing subjects in pressure chambers, testing drugs on them, freezing them, attempting to change eye color by injecting chemicals into children’s eyes, and various amputations and other surgeries that were often conducted without anesthesia. The most notorious of these Nazi physicians was Dr. Josef Mengele, who worked in Auschwitz. According to one witness, Mengele sewed together a set of twins named Guido and Ina, who were about 4 years old, from the back in an attempt to create Siamese twins. Their parents were able to get some morphine and kill them to end their suffering.

7. Churches throughout Europe were mostly silent while Jews were persecuted, deported, and murdered by the Nazis. As Holocaust scholar Victoria J. Barnett says, “In Nazi Germany in September 1935, there were a few Christians in the Protestant Confessing Church who demanded that their Church take a public stand in defense of the Jews. Their efforts, however, were overruled by Church leaders who wanted to avoid any conflict with the Nazi regime.”

8. The largest Protestant church in Germany in the 1930s was the German Evangelical Church, comprised of 28 regional churches or Landeskirchen that included the three major theological traditions that had emerged from the Reformation: Lutheran, Reformed, and United. Most of Germany’s 40 million Protestants were members of this church, although there were smaller so-called “free” Protestant churches, such as Methodist and Baptist churches. Historically the German Evangelical Church viewed itself as one of the pillars of German culture and society, with a theologically grounded tradition of loyalty to the state. During the 1920s, a movement emerged within the German Evangelical Church called the Deutsche Christen, or “German Christians.” The “German Christians” embraced many of the nationalistic and racial aspects of Nazi ideology. Once the Nazis came to power, this group sought the creation of a national “Reich Church” and supported a “nazified” version of Christianity. The Bekennende Kirche—the “Confessing Church”—emerged in opposition to the “German Christians.” Its founding document, the Barmen Confession of Faith, declared that the church’s allegiance was to God and scripture, not a worldly Führer.

9. The most commonly cited figure for the total number of Jews killed is six million — around 78 percent of the 7.3 million Jews in occupied Europe at the time. Additionally, the Nazis murdered approximately two to three million Soviet POWs, two million ethnic Poles, up to 1,500,000 Romani, 200,000 handicapped, political and religious dissenters, 15,000 homosexuals, and 5,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses, bringing the total genocide toll to around 11 million.

Categories: Uncategorized

The Two Natures in Christ and the Communication of Attributes – FREE DOWNLOADABLE CHART

January 27th, 2014 Comments off

I thought it was time to pull out the old “Communication of Attributes” chart, or as Professor Kurt Marquart liked to call it, the “fishbone chart,” that he liked to use to help us work our way through the absolutely profound presentation on the Communication of Attributes in the second volume of Francis Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics.

I prepared the attached chart, based on his lectures, during the class on Christology I took with him and he liked it so much he kept asking me for copies through the years to share with him. I’m glad it has been helpful.

So, in the solemn season of Lent, when our hearts are drawn to meditate and ponder on the suffering and death of the God-man, Jesus Christ, I offer this as a little gift to you. You may download the PDF version, or just click on the image below and do a “save as” of it on your computer. PDF version: Communication-of-Attributes


Screen Shot 2013-03-07 at 3.23.53 PM


Categories: Uncategorized

A Book “Worthy of Immortality and the Church’s Canon”

January 26th, 2014 1 comment


“Philip Melanchthon’s invincible little book on Loci Theologici in my judgment is worthy not only of immortality but even of the Church’s canon.”

(Martin Luther in Bondage of the Will [1525], WA 18:601)

“There’s no book under the sun in which the whole of theology is so compactly presented as in the Loci Communes. . . . No better book has been written after the Holy Scriptures than Philip’s.”

(Martin Luther from Table Talk, no. 5511, LW 54:440)

As any confessional Lutheran knows who has studied the history of the Lutheran Confessions and the Lutheran Reformation, Philip Melanchthon was both a gifted theologian and a man given to excessive worry and compromise. As a result, the fine work he did in the earlier years of the Reformation, when he was most closely and strongly influenced by Martin Luther, was his best work. Later on, particularly after Luther died, Philip went off the rails and ended up taking positions that led to severe compromises with both the Roman Catholics and Calvinists, and, particularly in the hands of his students, Melancthon’s later theology led to a series of very dangerous doctrinal errors that had to be condemned and rejected very specifically in the Formula of Concord. Talk about the ironies of history!

But … as I said, in his earlier years Philip was consistently hitting them out of the park, beginning with a book I read in a single day in the basement of the old library at Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne.

The book?

Philip’s first edition of his Loci Communes. I could not stop reading it and could not put the book down. Fortunately, because it is relatively brief, and I, in those days, had the luxury of uninterrupted hours simply to read and study, read it cover to cover and then, in the next few weeks, read it three more times. I can count on a couple hands the theological works I’ve read multiple times, but this is indeed one of them.

It blew me away. The writing is crystal clear. The Evangelical passion is powerful. The clarity of the Law and Gospel distinction running through the book is amazing.

It’s no wonder Martin Luther gushed on about this book, that it is “worthy of immortality” and that it should made part of the Church’s canon! Yes, Luther said that. Our dear Father Martin was given to a tad of excess in his rhetoric from time to time when he found a great book. I can identify with that inclination. I guess I’m doing the same thing here.

But, Luther was not far from the truth actually. Melancthon’s 1521 Loci Communes was the very first time Lutheran theology was written up in the form of a classic “systematic theology” or as close to one as was available then, but Melanchthon actually is responsible with this book for starting the Lutheran tradition of writing dogmatics, a tradition that would be carried forward by Martin Chemnitz, then John Gerhard, and all the great dogmaticians of the age of Lutheran Orthodoxy.

In other words, this is a “must read” book. And by “must” I mean, “must” and by read, I mean, “read.”

For many years, the only English translation of the 1521 Loci was only available in a book containing also a work by Martin Bucer, published in 1969. Go figure. But no more.

Dr. Christian Preus has now produced a truly masterful fresh translation that far exceeds the older translation, containing not merely a sparkling, crisp, clear and lively translation of Melanchthon’s work but a wealth of helpful footnotes that really opens the text to the reader. Concordia Publishing House will be releasing this translation in the next few weeks and it is available for preorder now. Yes, Kindle version coming as well, as per the usual.

Martin Luther called Philip Melanchthon’s most important work, Loci Communes 1521, worthy of immortality. This lively, accessible English translation by Christian Preus includes an introduction that delves in to the history of this important contribution to the Reformation movement, as well as extensive footnotes that explain the people and concepts used by Melanchthon to explain the Gospel.

You can take a look inside here.

Praise for Commonplaces: Loci Communes 1521

This book takes us back to the early stages and to the heart of the Reformation, so it is just wonderful that it has now once again become so accessible. The translation is as fresh as the content of the Loci of 1521, and that makes it just the kind of material we need for teaching and learning. Melanchthon’s book has been fundamental for church and theology in the Lutheran as well as the Calvinist tradition. And both will see through this new edition how relevant this reformer and his work still are today.—Herman Selderhuis (Director Refo500, Professor of Church History, Theological University Apeldoorn)

Christian Preus provides helpful historical and theological contextualization to the Loci Communes of Philip Melanchthon in his introduction. With the text itself, he gives us a clear, modern translation that both improves on the work of past translators and also includes judicious scholarly commentary. This is a welcome and useful tool for modern students of the Reformation.—Dr. Günter Frank (Director of the European Melanchthon Academy)

The lucidity that marked the first version of Melanchthon’s Loci communes is captured in this expert translation by a scholar equally expert in the nuances of humanist Latin and the principles of evangelical theology. Preus brings modern readers into contact with Melanchthon’s brilliant early work, augmenting his clear translation with helpful annotations and the perfect introduction to Melanchthon’s life and thought.—Ralph Keen (Schmitt Professor of History, University of Illinois at Chicago)

Melanchthon’s Loci Communes 1521 is available for preorder.

This is arguably Philip Melanchthon’s most important work. Anyone interested in the history of the Lutheran Reformation will find that this book, the first Lutheran work of “systematic theology,” is present in a very lively, accessible English translation, with extensive, helpful footnotes that explain the people and concepts used by Melanchthon to explain the Gospel.


  • Clear English translation
  • Scripture index
  • Index of subjects and names
  • Extensive historical introduction by translator Dr. Christian Preus
  • Extensive footnotes explaining terminology, history, and theology

Philip Melanchthon’s invincible little book on Loci Theologici in my judgment is worthy not only of immortality but even of the Church’s canon.
-Martin Luther

Categories: Uncategorized

May a Layman Administer the Lord’s Supper to His Family? Luther Says No!

January 24th, 2014 Comments off

IsayNO(A Letter to Wolfgang Brauer, Pastor at Jessen)

Grace and peace in Christ.

Dear Reverend Pastor, to the question that your kind friend, Sigmund Hangreuter has posed to you in writing, and which you have desired to have addressed to me, as you wanted to show this good man, your friend, that he would not be responsible to turn to such remedies as to commune him and his household and that it would also be unnecessary since he is not also called, nor has the command, to do so if some tyrannical servant of the church who was responsible to do that might refuse to administer it to him and his people, for he may just as well be able to be blessed in his faith through God’s Word and since it would also cause a great offense to thus distribute the sacraments willy-nilly in peoples’ houses, and would, at length, result in nothing good, but only give rise to division and sects; as the people now tend to act in such outlandish and absurd ways.

For the first Christians in the age of the apostles did not receive the Sacrament privately in their houses, but had rather assembled together, and even had they done that, such an example would no longer be applicable today, just as it does not apply today that we should all have our property in common as they were also doing at that time, for the Gospel is publicly extended now along with the Sacrament. But a housefather’s teaching God’s Word to his family is right and should be done, for God has commanded that we must teach and raise our children and household, and the Word is commended to each and every one of us.

But the Sacrament is a public confession and must have a public servant since along with it is stated, as Christ says, that it should be done in his remembrance, that is, as St. Paul says: to proclaim or preach the LORD’s death until he come; and this man also says that people should gather together and harshly rebukes those who individually use the LORD’s Supper privately.

So even if that is not forbidden, it is commended each person to teach his household privately with God’s Word, and to also use it himself, and yet no one is commanded to baptize himself, etc. For it is one thing to have a public office in the church and another to be the house father of his household, therefore they are neither to be mingled, nor separated.

Now since in this there is no emergency, nor calling, one must not presume to do anything without God’s definite command and only from his own pious thoughts, for nothing good will come of it.

This is how you might answer, my dear parson, on my behalf.

Be in this commended to God. Amen.

On St. David’s Day, 1536 AD.

Martin Luther

From: the November 1847 edition of “The Lutheran” edited by CFW Walther; translated by Pastor Joel Baseley, Mark V Publications.

Categories: Uncategorized

Great New Web Site for Arch Books! Check it out

January 16th, 2014 Comments off

Categories: Uncategorized