Attend College Close to Home
The Best Eulogy
It has been said after a Christian funeral in one of our ELS churches (and probably in more than one): “That was the most negative funeral sermon I’ve ever heard. I will never go to another Lutheran funeral!” This was heard in a telephone conversation after one of our funerals for a member. A woman who had attended registered her complaint and decision to the pastor who conducted the service. When asked why she thought it was so negative, she said: “You called the person who had died ‘a sinner!’” The pastor responded that we are all sinners and that we would welcome her to join us at the foot of Jesus’ cross and His empty tomb for the forgiveness of sins and life eternal. But this was insufficient in her mind, an opinion she was not about to change.
It is puzzling when unbelievers cannot hear the good news at a Lutheran funeral. Each time, it is clearly declared that through faith in Jesus the deceased’s soul is presently in heaven and that the body will be raised to perfection on the last day. But to the unenlightened mind, even the message that we all need a Savior can be offensive. Eulogies are generally expected among non-Christians because nice things are spoken about the deceased, and if anyone thinks there might be something like a heaven, almost anyone deserves to be there. The only exceptions would be the obviously infamous scoundrels like purveyors of genocide or mass murderers.
Consider this description of a proper Christian funeral:
“A good Christian funeral is not merely a memorial service. That is too small a thing for those who have already been crucified, buried, and resurrected with Christ. We should
never be satisfied with mere memories of those who have physically died. This is a trick of Satan. He wants us to be satisfied with a celebration of life, or some sort of thing. He wants to soothe us with a false comfort. He wants us to settle for sweet-smelling flowers, old pictures, and shared memories. ‘Not good enough!’ yells the Christian. ‘Not good enough!’ We do not bury reformed sinners; we only lay to rest those we will see again. We believe in resurrection. We will never be satisfied with memories. We dare to say, ‘We will see you again!’ … This confidence is not only for the moment we bury a loved one or face our own mortality. It is for every day. Every day is a new day. Every day is new because we are dead to sin and resurrected into life.”
Chances are, if you are Lutheran, you have already come to appreciate Christian funerals in faithful Lutheran churches. May we all value them not only for the comfort they give the mourners, but as effective evangelistic outreach to those outside Christ’s Holy Christian Church that would be in attendance. Sure, there are going to be those who will be offended by the message that is heard, but all will hear the Gospel of God’s love for all people in Christ Jesus, the Savior of all sinners. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17).
Pray for those who have rejected the voice of Christ in our Christian funerals and trust that it is the living Word which continues to work on hearts that remain hardened in unbelief. Support your pastors in this proper work and encourage them in the face of such criticisms and pray that all who hear might believe and be saved.
Attend College Close to Home
by REV. DON MOLDSTAD, Contributing Writer, Chaplain, BETHANY LUTHERAN COLLEGE, Mankato, Minn.
Studies conducted on young Christians indicate that the most likely time for someone to defect from the church is between the ages of 17 and 23 years old. Falling away from Christ can certainly happen at other points in life, but these tend to be the “make it or break it” years for many believers coming out of adolescence. In our day, many church bodies have seen a rapid decrease among their young adults. What is it about this period of life that seems to have such a high dropout rate when it comes to church?
Why is it such a challenging time?
For many young people, this is the first time they are out from under parental control and oversight. A new freedom accompanies this stage of life that can bring with it temptations that appeal to our sinful flesh and pride. It is also a time to begin focusing on earthly goals for one’s future... job, relationships, education, a career. The goal of “seeking first the kingdom of God” can begin to slip down the list of priorities.
During these crucial years, some struggle with challenging faith questions and do not always seek out proper guidance and direction. Non-Christian friends and professors typically encourage doubt and rebellion against the faith. The youth culture also intensifies its mockery of Christianity. It becomes increasingly difficult to be branded as a “hater” by your peers for staying with Scripture’s instruction on matters of morality. Standing with Christ and His Word becomes too difficult, so many have chosen to leave.
In addition, many colleges and universities, which are based on the principles of secular humanism, are not merely neutral on matters of religion but teach contrary to the precious truths we find in God’s saving Word. How many young Christians have had their faith ripped from their hearts at the feet of college professors? One of my confirmands called me in tears her first month in college due to ridicule by an instructor who called her an “idiot” for still believing in a sixday creation. She was attending a college that claimed to be “originally founded on the Christian tradition.”
Though in a lesser form, these present-day challenges were also seen in the early days of our ELS, which is why, at only its second convention in 1919, a committee was formed to investigate establishing a college. In the first decade of our synod’s existence, prior to the purchase of Bethany Lutheran College, our sister church bodies had permitted our ELS youth to train at their institutions. However, the leaders of the WELS and LCMS also impressed upon our little group that “our Synod could not properly perform its mission with-
out a higher institution of its own,” in the words of Dr. Sigurd Ylvisaker. Knowing all that might be at stake for the faith of our members and for the existence of our ELS, it is no wonder why our forefathers placed such a high value on establishing a college to provide specifically Christian higher education.
Today, when meeting with high school students who live far from the Midwest, I encourage them to “attend college close to home.” I don’t mean that in a geographical sense, however, but rather a spiritual sense. The wonderful baptismal faith that has been nurtured in their homes is what continues to be the focus and substance of higher education on Bethany’s campus today. As Paul wrote in his second letter to Timothy (3:15), “Continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Our dear college faces many, many challenges in our modern world from a variety of sources: cultural, political, and elsewhere. Yet our gracious God has still preserved this wonderful school in its Christ-centered mission through the years. What a blessing to have a faculty dedicated to the saving truth of God’s Word that keeps us with Christ both now and in eternity! Each day of classes, our students sit at the feet of those who confess, preach, and teach this truth. Our faculty strives to not only deepen each student’s faith in Christ, but guide them in properly defending that saving faith in a world so opposed to it.
There are also other side benefits to being on a Christ-centered campus beyond just a great Christian education. The important vocations of being a Christian spouse or parent are often addressed in class along with ways to serve in your church and community. Even though it may not seem to matter to a 17-year-old, a large percentage of people will someday marry someone they met during their years in college, and fewer things will have a larger impact on one’s life. Many alumni notice that Bethany friendships grow deeper as they go through life. We gravitate toward those with whom we have common Christian values.
A large portion of teenagers today, having grown up in a post-modern culture, lost in the haze of secular materialism, are looking for direction and purpose in life. As Gene E. Veith writes, “The intellectual culture is admitting that it has no foundation for truth; this may be a genuine opportunity for Christians who do have a foundation for truth.” May the students trained at our dear college grow in faith to become bold confessors of their Savior and His grace that many more can join to sing, “On my heart imprint Thine image, blessed Jesus, King of grace.”
What in the world is going on? transhumanism
What is Transhumanism?
In the science fiction thriller Transcendence (2014), an A.I. (artificial intelligence) scientist named Dr. Will Caster develops a sentient quantum computer. Not long after he predicts this computer will create a technological singularity (a point in time when technological evolution will become unstoppable), anti-technology terrorists shoot him with a radioactive bullet that will kill him in a month. Faced with losing Will forever, his heartbroken wife, Evelyn, decides to upload his consciousness into the new computer. However, his best friend, Max Waters, does not believe the digital Will is the real Will, resulting in a falling out between Evelyn and Max. Digital Will then asks Evelyn to be connected to the Internet so that he can further evolve. She only consents when they are threatened
by the terrorists again. Digital Will spends the rest of the film making all sorts of unprecedented breakthroughs, especially in nanotechnology, but his true motives appear increasingly troublesome as he begins to control everything from the stock markets to other people’s minds.
Despite the ethical questions this film and others have raised, there are still people who dream of becoming partially or fully transhuman. They are convinced it is the best way to advance what is most valuable about mankind. A prominent transhumanist spokesman, Max More, defines transhumanism this way: “Philosophies of life … that seek the continuation and acceleration of the evolution of intelligent life beyond its currently human form and human limitations by means of science and technology, guided by life-promoting principles and values.”
by the ELS DOCTRINE COMMITTEE
What is Right about Transhumanism?
If Christians believe that they have nothing in common with transhumanists (except a possible interest in science fiction), they are mistaken. Transhumanists want to alleviate the unnecessary suffering of mankind (Luke 10:25–37). They seek a more just world (Isaiah 1:17). Transhumanists are convinced that there must be a remedy for death as well (1 Corinthians 15:55–57).
In addition, it is not wrong to use organic and inorganic technologies to heal within limits (Luke 10:34; 1 Timothy 5:23; Hebrews 11:21; James 5:14–15). Examples include medicines, CT scans, and pacemakers. Nor is it wrong to use such technologies to cultivate human flourishing within limits (Genesis 6:14–22; Exodus 35:30–35; Mark 6:3). Agricultural science, advancements in transportation, and information technology are all good examples.
Transhumanists even recognize technology must be carefully and thoughtfully employed so that what is most valuable about mankind is not lost. Those with the best of intentions are still not immune from causing harm with technology.
What is Wrong about Transhumanism?
Even though God created people in his own image (Genesis 1:26–27; Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:10), the transhumanists do not consider the human being valuable enough to preserve. They want to use technology for more than just human healing and flourishing. Somehow, transhumanists maintain that human values can persist without a human body, mind, or soul, not to mention law, grace, and Christ. Such worldviews have certainly not served humans well in the past.
Transhumanists think this way because they have embraced a number of flawed ideas about the human condition. First of all, they are materialists through and through. They do not believe in God or the soul. The mind is nothing more than electric impulses of the brain and the nervous system. To put it simply, man is an organic computer. Christians are not the only ones who find this rejection of the immaterial puzzling (Genesis 2:7; Ecclesiastes 12:7; John 4:24; Revelation 6:9). There are many philosophers and scientists who cannot account for human consciousness in purely materialistic terms.
Second, transhumanists are evolutionists. If man once evolved from primitive organic lifeforms that were purely material, then he can evolve into more advanced non-organic life forms that are purely material as well. There is nothing divinely fixed about human nature or the rest of creation in their estimation. Of course, Christians do not deny that mankind lives in a historical world that has changed on the micro-level. This is a far cry from evolution on the macro-level (Genesis 1:1; 1:11; 1:24; Romans 4:17; Hebrews 11:3).
Finally, transhumanists see no need for reliance on God and have little interest in the Christian conception of freedom. The Bible teaches that God created man to live in a trust-based
relationship of dependence on his Creator (Genesis 2:16–17). Biblical freedom means Christians have been liberated from sin, death, and the devil so that they would freely choose to serve their fellow man (1 Corinthians 9:19). Transhumanists conversely maintain that people should have the autonomy to do whatever they want with their bodies. They further insist on an egotistical concept of freedom that posits humans should take charge of evolution itself. But this is exactly the sin that initiated the fall in the first place. Adam and Eve desired to be like God. But when they asserted their autonomy to transcend their finite limits, they forfeited the divine image and dehumanized the human race (Genesis 4:8; 4:23, 5:3, 9:6). This is not to say fallen man ceased to be human altogether. What it does mean is that as long as humans are enslaved to sin, they will continue to objectify and depersonalize their God as well as their neighbor (Jeremiah 7:4; Ezekiel 7:23; 34:2–6, 16; Hosea 1:2).
What is Better about Christianity?
The sad irony of it all is that transhumanists have it completely backwards. They are never going to cheat death by trying to artificially transcend their humanity. Death can only be destroyed, not transcended. Even God had to become man to make this happen. The so-much-more, which fallen man was always meant to become, is none other than fully human in Christ (Psalm 8; 1 Corinthians 15:49)! Who else but man has the Bible called bearer of the image of God?
Christ did not just become man so that He could redeem that which He assumed. His humiliated humanity was intended to be the ultimate Trojan horse. Death got cocky when he beheld the forsaken Christ. The more stricken Christ became, the more death was convinced he could take Him. However, when death finally swallowed the Crucified whole, Christ tore death in two and began making all things new.
The new sixth day of creation happens personally for each believer wherever they first encounter God’s recreative Word. Whether it be in oral, written, or sacramental forms, God’s recreative Word is “conform[ing them] to the image of his Son” (Romans 8:28 ESV). To be sure, believers will not experience the fullness of their recreated humanity until the last day. Nevertheless, believers are in fact experiencing it already. St. Paul writes, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17). There is no better picture of what it means to be fully human than Christ’s own transfiguration and resurrection. It is so amazing that it cannot quite be put into words: Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is (1 John 3:2). What creature could ever hope then to improve on the Creator’s inspired design? How could becoming a hivemind cyborg or a cyber spook ever compare with humanity fully alive? The Triune God does not just want what is best for humanity. He became incarnate to make it a reality.
The First Lutheran Martyrs
Part IV of IV
BRUSSELS
The Blood of All These Will Not Keep Silent
by REV. JACOB KEMPFERT, Contributing Writer, GLORIA DEI LUTHERAN CHURCH, Saginaw, Mich.
On July 1, 1523, Hendrick Vos and Jan van Essen became the first Lutheran martyrs, burned at the stake in Brussels for justification by faith alone, in Christ alone—but they would not die alone. More soon followed.
A week before they were arrested, their prior at the Augustinian monastery in Antwerp, Hendrick van Zutphen, had
also been imprisoned for preaching justification by faith alone and condemning the sale of indulgences. Jailed within the walls of St. Michael’s abbey, he was to be sent to Brussels for interrogation at the hands of the Inquisition.
That same night, however, a crowd angered by Zutphen’s arrest broke down the doors of St. Michael’s, freed him, then spirited him away from the city. First intending to join Martin Luther in Wittenberg, Zutphen ended up going to Bremen after being invited to preach there.
Two years later, in early December 1524, Zutphen traveled by invitation to preach a number of sermons in Dithmarschen. He garnered immediate admiration and support from the parishioners. Seeing this, local Franciscan and Dominican monks plotted to silence him however they could, conspiring to capture him in the middle of the night and burn him alive.
They assembled a mob in the village at nightfall, plied them with three barrels of Hamburg beer, ensured they were armed, and incited them against Zutphen. At midnight, they broke into his lodgings and threw him from his bed, naked except his nightshirt. They drank all night and dragged him through the cold winter streets, attempting to bind him in chains but failing, and eventually locking him in a cellar until a morning council could be called. While they waited, they drank and drank and mocked him as a fool.
In the morning, it was decided without any trial or hearing that Zutphen would burn as a heretic. But, as it was winter and as they were drunk, they could not keep a fire lit. They expressed their frustration by slowly beating Zutphen to death over the next two hours, then throwing his body on the smoldering embers. This December 10, 2024, will mark the 500th anniversary of his faithful martyrdom as a witness to the gospel of Christ Jesus.
Just as Luther sent letters of consolation and encouragement to the Christians in the Netherlands following Vos and van Essen’s deaths, so also in early 1525 Luther sent a letter to the Christians in Bremen (found in Luther’s Works, volume 32, pages 261-286). In his letter, Luther emphasized that dying for the gospel was no defeat and bore no shame, but instead was a shining testimony of the glory of God and the power of Christ at work in His people. To die for God’s Word is a priceless treasure, a precious gift, the noblest of deaths. Through their pastor, God “attested his Spirit and power in your midst so obviously that you can almost touch it.”
Luther also mentioned the shining example of other martyrs that came before Zutphen, first and foremost “John [van Essen] and Henry [Vos] at Brussels.” He informed the Bremen Christians that in between the executions of these three Augustinians, others also suffered martyrdom across Europe, kindling a radiant light for the gospel to go forth and bear witness to Christ in all the world. He knew also there would be more to come.
Only a month after the burning of Vos and van Essen, on August 8, 1523, Jean Vallière, another Augustinian monk, was martyred in Paris. Luther was once encouraged to flee to Paris—it was thought to be safe.
In Vienna on September 17, 1524, the merchant Caspar Tauber was beheaded and then burned on account of the Word of God. In Hungary. the bookseller George Buchführer was burned to death for selling Luther’s books. In Prague, a man was burned at the stake for leaving his monastic order and getting married.
George Winkler, a young pastor in Halle and a friend of Luther, was murdered while traveling on April 23, 1527, by an unknown assassin. Efforts to track down the killer and serve justice were minimal; with good reason, Luther suspected that one of Winkler’s former friends, an archbishop, was complicit in the murder. Leonhard Kaiser, another pastor and friend of Luther, was arrested under false pretenses and interrogated by an imperial commission, then burned at the stake on August 16, 1527.
Then there was…well, the list goes on and on and on. The story of the first Lutheran martyrs is, in essence, the story of the Church, pursued and persecuted through the wilderness of this world as it awaits Christ’s return (Revelation
12). Like Cain against Abel, this fallen world rises up against Christ’s Church time and again, inspired by the wickedness of sinful desire crouching at its door and prompted by the murderous loathing of the devil.
Luther recognized this and so was not surprised in his own time to see those clinging to Christ alone viewed with suspicion, mocked, hated, arrested, condemned, killed. Yet time and again, we see that Luther’s response to martyrdom is one of rejoicing, praise, and thanks—in a word, Luther’s response is singing! And not Luther alone: as Vos and van Essen were tied to the stake and the flames were kindled, the two jolly friars sang together, “Te Deum Laudamus!” “Lord, we praise You!”
We in America, who have suffered comparatively little by way of persecution (the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire lasted longer than America has been an independent nation), are apparently beginning to experience in increased ways and by intensifying means the world’s hatred of Christ and His people. Regarding the contemplation of martyrs of old, St. Augustine said, “We should not hesitate to emulate that which we like to celebrate.” Luther himself repeated these words in 1518, little knowing how soon the imitation and celebration of the martyrs would become a necessity.
Any such tribulation for Christ’s sake is not a curse, but rather a celebration, a cause for rejoicing among us, for, in Luther’s words of comfort to the Christians in Bremen after the martyrdom of their pastor (Hendrik van Zutphen), this only means “the quality of true Christian life has been restored,” for “these are precious and pleasing in God’s sight; as the Psalter puts it: ‘Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints’ [Psalm 116:15]; and, ‘Precious shall their blood be in His sight’ [Psalm 72:14].”
They will not be forgotten, for the Lord Himself knows all of them by name and has given each His glorious crown of life. Just as He tells us, “‘Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be His people, and God Himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.’ And He who was seated on the throne said, ‘Behold, I am making all things new’” (Revelation 21:3-5).
If we must bear the cross before the crown (as our Lord promises), if we must face fire before triumph and shame before splendor (as our Lord assures us), then what of it? We simply join the choiring chant of eternity. We simply join the cross and crown of Christ. We join the two young friars caroling from the flames, Te Deum laudamus! “God, we praise You!” We simply go on singing.
Waiting to Happen Martin Luther - 1524
by PROF. EMERITUS ERLING T. TEIGEN, Contributing Writer
BETHANY LUTHERAN COLLEGE, Mankato, Minn.
One of Luther’s most momentous and influential writings was his 1525 response to a treatise by Erasmus of Rotterdam. Luther’s response is entitled De Servo Arbitrio (Enslaved Will or Bondage of the Will). Its five-hundredth anniversary year will certainly occasion many articles on the Luther–Erasmus debate. This article will set the stage for that by discussing the relationship between Luther and Erasmus and what brought about Luther’s response to Erasmus’ De Libero arbitrio
By 1524, Luther had gained more than a little fame or notoriety. He had been excommunicated by the Pope, who also declared that those who accepted Luther’s teachings should bear the name “Lutheran” as punishment. The Emperor Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire had put a price on Luther’s head in 1521. Erasmus (1469-1536) had been a monk, a priest, and a classical scholar of Latin and Greek. During the centuries preceding the Reformation, many classical Greek and Roman texts, which had been lost or unknown during the early Middle Ages, were being recovered. One of Erasmus’ most recognized and significant projects was his work in recovering and restoring the Greek text of the New Testament as close to its original condition as he could. The version most widely known was the translation into Latin (called the Vulgate) by St. Jerome. And most translations of the Bible into other languages were translations of the Vulgate
In the late 1400s and early 1500s, there were voices in the Roman Catholic church criticizing the scandalous life
A Feud
and greed widely seen in the church hierarchy and its lower echelons. Erasmus was one of the voices. One of Erasmus’ best-known works was “In Praise of Folly,” a satirical essay critical of immorality and other abuses he saw. Luther seemed to like some of what he was hearing from Erasmus, and Erasmus was equally hopeful that good results could come from Luther. There was some hope that Erasmus and Luther would both play a part in effecting some reforms in the church. However, as time went on, both Luther and Erasmus were hearing about or reading the writings of the other, and it seemed both were having to reconsider their initial opinions. Hence the phrase used by Robert Kolb: “a feud waiting to happen.” It came out in the open in the fall of 1524. Luther was worried that Erasmus’ reforms aimed primarily at moral improvement. Erasmus thought Luther might be right on a few things, but could not abide Luther’s heated rhetoric and controversial style.
There were various causes behind the public dispute between Luther and Erasmus. In the days of the late Roman Republic and following the reign of Caesar Augustus, the Greek language was spoken by the aristocracy and the intelligentsia, and they read the Greek literature. As Rome declined, the culture decayed and much from Greek and Roman antiquity was lost or forgotten. Some Greek literature was saved because it was translated into Arabic. The Renaissance, which followed the Middle Ages, saw the recovery of Greek and the ancient writings.
Erasmus was a Renaissance Humanist (those interested in the human culture of the past). He had been introduced to Greek in Latin school as a child and mastered it so well that he was able to analyze the ancient texts of the Bible and restore the Greek text of the New Testament closer to its original. That attracted Luther to the work of Erasmus, because getting back to an accurate Bible text in its original language was an important part of reforming the church. Erasmus’ work on a Greek text of the New Testament made Luther’s translation possible.
The other thing that happened is that one writer of important Greek literature was Aristotle. Previously, many Christian scholars like St. Augustine were more attracted to Plato’s philosophy, which had some ideas consistent with Christianity. However, when the philosophy of Aristotle became more widely known, some theologians interpreted the Bible through the eyes of Aristotelian philosophy with disastrous effects on Christian doctrine. One teacher of the church, Thomas Aquinas, probably did more than any other to turn Christian teaching in an Aristotelian direction, which in part formed the Roman Catholic doctrine of the will.
By the time of Luther, the Roman Catholic theology that Luther studied was Aristotelian-colored. In fact, Luther earned his master’s degree at the University of Erfurt in a deep study of Aristotle. Erasmus too was deeply immersed in Aristotelianism, and when he and Luther came into contact, it was virtually inevitable that it would not end well— “a feud waiting to happen.”
When Luther first came to the attention of Erasmus, the latter was sympathetic to Luther and even spoke in Luther’s defense, asking in high places that Luther at least be given a hearing. He did so even after it became clear that they were headed toward a showdown. In March 1519, Luther wrote to Erasmus asking in friendly terms for support, and in 1519, Melanchthon wrote to Erasmus reporting that “Martin Luther is your convinced admirer and would like your approval” (Packer-Johnson, 28). Yet they never met face to face, and they corresponded with each other only on a couple of occasions. Their literary exchange, however, must count as a one-to-one communication, too. We also know that Luther wrote letters to certain of his acquaintances mentioning Erasmus, and the message would inevitably get to Erasmus’ ears. While Luther was thankful for Erasmus’ desire for reform of the church, he grew suspicious of him, and when Erasmus heard some of Luther’s rough condemnations of Aristotelian theology and had some strong words against the theologians who defended Aristotle, Erasmus’ blood pressure must have risen a few points. When Erasmus knew of Luther’s Ninety-five Theses, he was congratulatory. But when other theses, like Luther’s Theses on Scholastic Theology, came out condemning the Roman Catholic teaching that man has some power to assist the Holy Spirit in turning to faith, then Erasmus grew more
and more disturbed. It has been suggested that the friendship between the two reached its peak in 1521, and after Luther’s excommunication by the Pope and condemnation by Emperor Charles V, it was all downhill.
However, if there was a single event that precipitated the rift between Luther and Erasmus, it came in an incident between Ulrich von Hutten, a Franconian Knight hovering around the fringes of the Reformation. In 1521 Hutten, with other knights, declared war on the “unspiritual clergy.”
The uprising was a failure, and in fear for his life, Hutten fled to Basel, where Erasmus was then living. Hutten had admired Erasmus and sought sanctuary with him. Erasmus refused him, upon which Hutten wrote Expostulation, which Schwiebert describes as a “vitriolic attack…in which he accused Erasmus of being a turncoat, a coward, and betrayer of the true religion” (Schwiebert, 686). Erasmus had Hutten ejected from Basel, upon which Hutten went to Zurich and found refuge with Zwingli but died soon after. After some further communications, including a letter from Luther, Erasmus wrote a book entitled De libero arbitrio and wrote a letter to King Henry VIII:
“The die is cast.
My book on Free Will has seen the light. An audacious villany, as things now stand in Germany! I expect to be stoned.”
Erasmus wasn’t stoned and died at the age of 70 in Basel in 1536.
Recommended sources for further study:
Martin Luther. The Bondage of the Will. American edition of Luther’s Works, Vol 33. The Bondage of the Will, Introduction by J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston. Fleming H. Revel. Company, 1957.
Ernest F. Winter, tr. & ed. Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1961.
Robert Kolb. Bound Choice, Election, and Wittenberg Theological Method. Grand Rapids and Cambridge, 2005.
Ernst Schwiebert. Luther and His Times. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950.
Top LYA Panel Questions { }
112 questions were asked from 82 different participants. Many of these questions were similar in nature. The questions below represent not only the questions receiving the most “votes” during the discussion, but also an aggregate of similar questions asked. The questions below have not been copied verbatim from the live discussion but have been reworded or combined so as to try to get to the heart of the questions or concerns a majority of participants seemed to have.
What is the relationship between common mental illnesses and gender dysphoria?
There is no direct correlation between gender dysphoria and other common mental illnesses. However, those suffering from gender dysphoria often have other mental illnesses which predate their gender dysphoria.
How can or should a person deal with suicidal thoughts?
The first step is to take them seriously and seek help. Talk to your parents, pastor, and a mental health professional. You may not think that you would actually follow through and kill yourself, but if your mental and spiritual health decline further, you may.
How should a Christian view asexuality and aromantic feelings?
Asexuality is generally defined as a lack of sexual attraction and yet will also be spoken of as a spectrum. The broad use of the term “asexuality” makes it difficult to answer the question. There is nothing wrong with lacking sexual attraction. In general, outside the bonds of marriage, it might even be a good thing.
How should a Christian view asexuality and aromantic feelings?
Aromantic feelings can be responded to in a similar way. The lack of romantic feelings is not necessarily wrong or bad. Maybe you just have not met the right person yet.
Are people who have or experience gender dysphoria or same-sex attraction always those who “will not inherit the kingdom of God?
There is a difference between being tempted and acting on the temptation. Faith-destroying sin.
LYA CONVENTION / SUMMER, 2024 / CHICAGO
How can we talk to a person who is struggling with these things in a loving, evangelical way?
Be loving! Explore the thoughts and feelings of the person. Ask questions. Show them that you want to understand them and that you care for them. Express your concern for them and your talk about their struggles.
What are some steps parents can take in order to help their children be ready to face mental health problems?
Promote open communication is the simplest answer. How to do that is difficult. Encouraging children to share their thoughts and feelings is important. This can be done by asking questions. Sharing your own thoughts and feelings sets a great example. Judgmental responses are very detrimental to open communication. Carefully correcting a child when their thought process is not healthy.
How can we respond to the view that we should let people do what they want? Personal decisions don’t really hurt anyone else, do they? Is it wrong to be happy?
It is true that people can do what they want. They are free to make whatever decisions that want to make. They will bear the consequences, though. A person can choose to commit suicide. What should you do if one of your friends expressed that they were going kill themselves? Aren’t you bound to help them so that they don’t hurt themselves?
In like manner, when we can see the physical and spiritual harm that someone is doing to themselves through their lifestyle choices, we have an obligation to help them.
Do you think the medical and psychological professions have seemingly fully embraced the transgender movement? What about the Hippocratic Oath?
Yes, the medical and psychological professions have fully embraced the transgender movement. As to the Hippocratic Oath, they believe that what they are doing is best for the person.
The Bible clearly says that sexual sins are wrong, but why does it seem the church focuses on this genre of sin the most?
The church should not focus on sexual sins in such a way to give the impression that they are worse than other sins. In God’s court, gossiping is just as damning as homosexuality. Lying carries the same eternal sentence as sex before marriage. The church should be clear in its message that all sins are equal and deserve the same punishment of hell.
However, the church will speak against the sins of the times. Sexuality is an area of our lives that Satan seems to be attacking ferociously, and he is succeeding in separating Christian from Christ because of sexual sins. Christ’s church needs to be clear on the dangers that sexual sins pose.
How can I help a friend who is struggling with their identity or image? How can I continue to approach them in a kind and loving way even if he or she goes through a transition?
It appears that you are talking about gender identity and transgenderism. This is a very difficult situation. It can be hard to know what love requires. The specifics of the situation will determine the specific help needed.
The end goal is to help them see themselves as God sees them: created male or female, redeemed and sanctified. One approach would be to speak to them as God sees them. This may require that you don’t affirm the gender to which they are transitioning.
“Never Confounded”
by REV. SAMUEL GULLIXSON, Contributing Writer
PARKLAND
LUTHERAN CHURCH, Tacoma, Wash.
In John 21 we read the account of Jesus having a hard conversation with Simon Peter (hard for Simon, not for Jesus) on the beach of the Sea of Galilee. Just a few weeks before, Simon had boasted saying, “Even though [the other disciples] all fall away, I will not. (St. Mark 14L29) Simon had proven to be bold, pulling his to defend Jesus the soldiers; but when Jesus rebuked him, Simon was confounded and all his boldness and self-confidence melted away. Then, in the courtyard of Caiaphas, Simon denied knowing Jesus three times. Now, on the beach, Jesus asked Simon three times, “Do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?”
Jesus was showing Simon Peter where true strength really was to be found. When Simon relied on his own personal courage, he failed. But relying on Christ and following Him, Peter would go even where he did not want to go and glorify God in his death. Following Jesus and rusting God, Peter would never be confounded.
If Simon, a man who had walked and talked with our Lord, who had heard Him preach and had witnessed Him perform countless miracles, fell into the temptation of relying on his own strength, God’s ministers today can too. Should we be surprised when they are confounded…confused…frustrated in their work?
ITINERARY:
February 17
• Afternoon flights to Houston, TX
• Shuttles to the retreat center (no need to rent a car)
• Evening meal provided (6:00 - 6:30 PM)
• Evening Gathering
February 18 - 20
• Prayer offices and presentations
• Communion Service on Thursday
• Down time
• All meals provided
• Evening Gatherings
February 21
• Fly home after breakfast
• Shuttles to the airport
New Synodical Member
While certainly having its benefits, the pastoral office has always been difficult. Pastors deal with flesh and blood people with real world problems, including their own. It is often both a physical and spiritual battle. The devil is deceptive. The world is persuasive. And our own flesh is weak. Jesus never promised it would be easy.
But He does promise to be with His ministers and promises to hear their prayers. In the Te Deum Laudamus (ELH, pages 114-116), we find the last third of the canticle to be a list of many petitions: “O Lord, save Your people and bless Your heritage. Govern them and lift them up forever….Vouchsafe, O Lord, to keep us this day without sin. O Lord, have mercy upon us…” These are great petitions to bring to our gracious God on a daily basis. And it concludes with, “O Lord, in You have I trusted; let me never be confounded.”
In February (17th-21st), the Pastoral Support Committee is hosting a retreat for pastors. It is not an academic conference. It is not a business convention. It is a retreat, designed to refresh pastors through solid preaching, edifying services, encouraging presentations, and some down time for conversation with their brothers in office. We hope that congregations will support their pastors by gifting them with this opportunity (ie. giving him the time, paying the registration, paying his transportation costs, etc.)
$275
$300 $350
Early registration (Oct. 1 - 31)
It’s Pastor Appreciation Month!
Registration (Nov. 1 - Dec. 31)
A Thanksgiving or Christmas Present!
Late registration (Jan. 1 - Feb 3)
There’s still time!
Accomodations:
Holy Name Passionist Retreat Center Houston, Texas
*Single bedrooms with private bathrooms.
*All meals provided.
It is our goal to send the pastors back refreshed and strengthened by their Savior. Ready to serve, not because they are strong, but because our Lord is strong.
“O Lord, in You have I trusted; let me never be confounded.” Psalm 22:5
The ELS Colloquy Committee met on 7/1/24 for Part I and 8/16/24 for Part II, resulting in this resolve: Resolved that Rev. Burgess Huehn is in agreement with the Evangelical Lutheran Synod in doctrine and practice and recommended for permanent membership in the synod at the synod’s 2025 convention.
Question ...
I’ve noticed that some Bible translations still include the Apocryphal books written between the time of the Testaments while the versions of the Bible we commonly use in church and in our daily lives do not contain those books. This leads me to wonder:
How did the Christian Church decide which books to include in the canon of Scripture?
Answer:
If you’ve ever come across a copy of the Jerusalem Bible, the English translation of the Bible published by the Roman Catholic Church, and flip to the table of contents, you will immediately recognize most of the titles from the various books of the Bible. Yet you will also see the names of books you’ve never read before: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees… These “extra books” are the Apocrypha.
The word apocrypha originates from the Greek word that means “hidden,” referring to books whose authorship is disputed or unknown. The Apocrypha include fourteen or fifteen books (depending on who’s counting) written between 200 BC and roughly AD 100. The Jews never regarded these books as divinely inspired, nor did the apostles and evangelists who wrote the New Testament ever quote them as Scripture. The books contain some chronological and geographical errors, and some of the contents can only be described as legend and not history. Those who read the Apocrypha soon discover that they simply do not possess the same inerrant quality as the divinely-inspired books of Scripture.
So why are they still included in some versions of the Bible? In the fourth century, when Jerome produced his Latin version of the Bible known as the Vulgate, in his prefaces to each book went to great lengths to distinguish the Apocrypha from the canonical Scriptures. Yet he still included them in his translation of the Bible as material useful for Christians to read. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate became the “go-to” version of the Bible for the next 1,100 years until the time of the Reformation, but over time his careful distinction between Scripture and the Apocrypha was lost.
Interestingly, both Luther’s translation of the Bible into German as well as the original King James Version of 1611 also included the Apocrypha. The Lutheran reformers, however, recognized the importance of distinguishing between the divinely inspired books of Scripture and those that were not inspired, especially for establishing doctrine. Martin Luther’s German version included this important note: “Apocrypha: These books are not held equal to the Sacred Scriptures, and yet are useful and good for reading.” By the 1530s, publishers began to categorize the Apocrypha separately from the rest of the Old Testament. In 17th century England, minority versions of the King James Bible began to be published without
the Apocrypha, beginning a slow transition to the tradition we know today, where most English Bibles no longer include the Apocrypha.
Roman Catholic versions of the Bible, however, still include the Apocrypha as a reaction to the Lutheran reformers. On April 8, 1546, at the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic Church declared most of the Apocrypha to be canonical, condemning those who refuse to accept the books as sacred. They did this because a small number of passages from the Apocrypha provide support for unbiblical doctrines, such as the doctrine of purgatory.
In many cases, the books of the Apocrypha provide fascinating, worthwhile reading. From them, we gain insights into the history and thinking of God’s people between the Testaments. Some apocryphal texts are quite beneficial for devotional use, directing us to thoughts of thanks and praise to the Lord found in the Scriptures. The Apocrypha still fall short of the inspired words of Holy Scripture, however, in that they tend to lack a prophetic character pointing to the promised Messiah. In the end, all of the inspired Scriptures point the world to Jesus Christ as the Savior from sin and death. Only God’s inspired Word has the power, through the work of the Holy Spirit, to convert hearts from unbelief and lead people to their Savior.
Do you have a question for Pastor Van Kampen? ?
Send them via email: Send them via “snail mail”: pvankampen@holycrossmadison.org
Pastor Piet Van Kampen Holy Cross Lutheran Church
EDITOR’S DEVOTIONAL SERIES
The Last Word
It’s often said that Lutherans don’t like to brag. Maybe that’s true. It’s probably because we understand that we are saved, not by our works, but only through the “holy, precious blood, and innocent suffering and death” of our Redeemer, Jesus the Christ. That removes the opportunity, as St. Paul says, for boasting (Ephesians 2:8-9).
In these days of exponentially increasing advertising for this year’s elections, boasting has become de rigueur, every campaign does it. It’s felt to be a necessary part of convincing the electorate that this or that person has the qualifications, strength of character, wisdom, etc. to have earned your vote.
Some of those supporting these candidates also are prone to brag, too. They like to identify with their values and positions so closely that any political discussions with family or friends is avoided because we risk losing those relationships since supporter and contender are seen as one in the same. If you dislike the one, you dislike the other.
When your nominee wins, though, it’s as though the sun shines more brightly the next morning and the birds sing more sweetly. It’s as though you personally have won something, through your one vote actually did little to bring it about. Yours lost? Well, you feel as though you lost, too, and all the moods that go with failure have an effect on your days and even your nights.
This all would be completely understandable and defensible if such elections were the most important things in our lives. And, yes, they are important. Very important regarding how we live under the government as established by our Creator (see: The Fourth Commandment). But they are not ultimately important. More on that in a bit.
by REV. JAMES BRAUN, Editor, The Lutheran Sentinel TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH, Brewster, Mass.
It’s been a long-standing tradition in Christian churches to chant The Litany on Good Friday. I can remember how on that day, before our Christian day school was sent off for Easter break, it would be included it as part of the order of service. Back and forth, Pastor and congregation, asking the good Lord’s protection and deliverance.
The Litany is a series of prayers made to our God who sent His “only Son, our Lord” to offer Himself as a sacrifice for our sins and to give us the promise of sins forgiven and the hope of the “new heavens and the new earth” (Isaiah 65:17; 2 Peter 2:13; Revelation 21:1). These things do not make life here unimportant but put it into a perspective unique in this world.
In my time as a Pastor in our E.L.S., I’ve had occasion to use it also at other times of the year. Most often, it has been used in a “Service of Humiliation and Prayer.” It was to be a reminder that we are not in charge. We do not exist as Christ’s holy Church to “change the world” in ways other than new hearts being created by baptism and by preaching the Gospel. Yes, having been regenerated we show our love for our neighbor through our vocations, including the vocation of citizen, to help them in their daily lives. But for all other things, we trust that our God is in control and we express that in a service like this, by prayer and supplication leaving all things in His most gracious hands.
And so even though we may feel inclined to raise our arms in victory or bow our heads in sorrow this November; we still live every single day with the confidence that only the Good News can give regardless of the world’s condition.