Also, in a previous comment, Reiss frowns upon looking for the Spirit's sanctifying work in our lives as well as the Spirit's testimony that we are children of God as possible grounds of assurance.
However, Martin Luther said (emphasis mine):
Next, the Holy Ghost is sent forth into the hearts of the believers, as here stated, “God sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts.” This sending is accomplished by the preaching of the Gospel through which the Holy Spirit inspires us with fervor and light, with new judgment, new desires, and new motives. This happy innovation is not a derivative of reason or personal development, but solely the gift and operation of the Holy Ghost.Contextually, Luther is dealing with the doubts of believers. So how does he deal with these doubts? It appears Luther pointed out (at a minimum - I don't see baptism or communion mentioned here for e.g.) the same three grounds which John Frame pointed out (taking his cue from the WCF): the promises of Scripture that if a person trusts Christ alone he is saved; the sanctifying work of the Spirit in the life of the believer; and the witness of the Spirit causing us to cry, "Abba, Father!".
This renewal by the Holy Spirit may not be conspicuous to the world, but it is patent to us by our better judgment, our improved speech, and our unashamed confession of Christ. Formerly we did not confess Christ to be our only merit, as we do now in the light of the Gospel. Why, then, should we feel bad if the world looks upon us as ravagers of religion and insurgents against constituted authority? We confess Christ and our conscience approves of it.
Then, too, we live in the fear of God. If we sin, we sin not on purpose, but unwittingly, and we are sorry for it. Sin sticks in our flesh, and the flesh gets us into sin even after we have been imbued by the Holy Ghost. Outwardly there is no great difference between a Christian and any honest man. The activities of a Christian are not sensational. He performs his duty according to his vocation. He takes good care of his family, and is kind and helpful to others. Such homely, everyday performances are not much admired. But the setting-up exercises of the monks draw great applause. Holy works, you know. Only the acts of a Christian are truly good and acceptable to God, because they are done in faith, with a cheerful heart, out of gratitude to Christ.
We ought to have no misgivings about whether the Holy Ghost dwells in us. We are “the temple of the Holy Ghost” (I Cor. 3:16). When we have a love for the Word of God, and gladly hear, talk, write, and think of Christ, we are to know that this inclination toward Christ is the gift and work of the Holy Ghost. Where you come across contempt for the Word of God, there is the devil. We meet with such contempt for the Word of God mostly among the common people. They act as though the Word of God does not concern them. Wherever you find a love for the Word, thank God for the Holy Spirit who infuses this love into the hearts of men. We never come by this love naturally, neither can it be enforced by laws. It is the gift of the Holy Spirit.
The Roman theologians teach that no man can know for a certainty whether he stands in the favor of God or not. This teaching forms one of the chief articles of their faith. With this teaching they tormented men’s consciences, excommunicated Christ from the Church, and limited the operations of the Holy Ghost.
St. Augustine observed that "every man is certain of his faith, if he has faith." This the Romanists deny. "God forbid," they exclaim piously, "that I should ever be so arrogant as to think that I stand in grace, that I am holy, or that I have the Holy Ghost."
We ought to feel sure that we stand in the grace of God, not in view of our own worthiness, but through the good services of Christ. As certain as we are that Christ pleases God, so sure ought we to be that we also please God, because Christ is in us. And although we daily offend God by our sins, yet as often as we sin, God’s mercy bends over us. Therefore sin cannot get us to doubt the grace of God. Our certainty is of Christ, that mighty Hero who overcame the Law, sin, death, and all evils. So long as He sits at the right hand of God to intercede for us, we have nothing to fear from the anger of God.
This inner assurance of the grace of God is accompanied by outward indications such as gladly to hear, preach, praise, and to confess Christ, to do one’s duty in the station in which God has placed us, to aid the needy, and to comfort the sorrowing. These are the affidavits of the Holy Spirit testifying to our favorable standing with God.
If we could be fully persuaded that we are in the good grace of God, that our sins are forgiven, that we have the Spirit of Christ, that we are the beloved children of God, we would be ever so happy and grateful to God. But because we often feel fear and doubt we cannot come to that happy certainty.
Train your conscience to believe that God approves of you. Fight it out with doubt. Gain assurance through the Word of God. Say: “I am all right with God. I have the Holy Ghost. Christ, in whom I do believe, makes me worthy. I gladly hear, read, sing, and write of Him. I would like nothing better than that Christ’s Gospel be known throughout the world and that many, many be brought to faith in Him.”
Verse 6. Crying, Abba, Father.
Paul might have written, “God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, calling Abba, Father.” Instead, he wrote, “Crying, Abba, Father.” In the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans the Apostle describes this crying of the Spirit as “groanings which cannot be uttered.” He writes in the 26th verse: “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.”
The fact that the Spirit of Christ in our hearts cries unto God and makes intercession for us with groanings should reassure us greatly. However, there are many factors that prevent such full reassurance on our part. We are born in sin. To doubt the good will of God is an inborn suspicion of God with all of us. Besides, the devil, our adversary, goeth about seeking to devour us by roaring: “God is angry at you and is going to destroy you forever.” In all these difficulties we have only one support, the Gospel of Christ. To hold on to it, that is the trick. Christ cannot be perceived with the senses. We cannot see Him. The heart does not feel His helpful presence. Especially in times of trials a Christian feels the power of sin, the infirmity of his flesh, the goading darts of the devil, the agues of death, the scowl and judgment of God. All these things cry out against us. The Law scolds us, sin screams at us, death thunders at us, the devil roars at us. In the midst of the clamor the Spirit of Christ cries in our hearts: “Abba, Father.” And this little cry of the Spirit transcends the hullabaloo of the Law, sin, death, and the devil, and finds a hearing with God.
The Spirit cries in us because of our weakness. Because of our infirmity the Holy Ghost is sent forth into our hearts to pray for us according to the will of God and to assure us of the grace of God.
Let the Law, sin, and the devil cry out against us until their outcry fills heaven and earth. The Spirit of God outcries them all. Our feeble groans, “Abba, Father,” will be heard of God sooner than the combined racket of hell, sin, and the Law.
We do not think of our groanings as a crying. It is so faint we do not know we are groaning. “But he,” says Paul, “that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit” (Romans 8:27). To this Searcher of hearts our feeble groaning, as it seems to us, is a loud shout for help in comparison with which the howls of hell, the din of the devil, the yells of the Law, the shouts of sin are like so many whispers.
In the fourteenth chapter of Exodus the Lord addresses Moses at the Red Sea: “Wherefore criest thou unto me?” Moses had not cried unto the Lord. He trembled so he could hardly talk. His faith was at low ebb. He saw the people of Israel wedged between the Sea and the approaching armies of Pharaoh. How were they to escape? Moses did not know what to say. How then could God say that Moses was crying to Him? God heard the groaning heart of Moses and the groans to Him sounded like loud shouts for help. God is quick to catch the sigh of the heart.
Some have claimed that the saints are without infirmities. But Paul says: “The Spirit helpeth our infirmities, and maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.” We need the help of the Holy Spirit because we are weak and infirm. And the Holy Spirit never disappoints us. Confronted by the armies of Pharaoh, retreat cut off by the waters of the Red Sea, Moses was in a bad spot. He felt himself to blame. The devil accused him: “These people will all perish, for they cannot escape. And you are to blame because you led the people out of Egypt. You started all this.” And then the people started in on Moses. “Because there were no graves in Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness? For it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness” (Ex. 14:11, 12). But the Holy Ghost was in Moses and made intercession for him with unutterable groanings, sighings unto the Lord: “O Lord, at Thy commandment have I led forth this people. So help me now.”
The Spirit intercedes for us not in many words or long prayers, but with groanings, with little sounds like “Abba.” Small as this word is, it says ever so much. It says: “My Father, I am in great trouble and you seem so far away. But I know I am your child, because you are my Father for Christ’s sake. I am loved by you because of the Beloved.” This one little word “Abba” surpasses the eloquence of a Demosthenes and a Cicero.
That said, correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression from modern Lutherans is not only did Luther move on from Luther (e.g. I believe the Galatians commentary was one of Luther's earlier works, c. 1520), but modern Lutherans have moved on from Luther as well.
Of course, I'd hope the main reason they've moved on is because Lutherans believe there's better, more exegetically sound arguments in favor of their current position on the assurance of salvation.
In light of this, see the next post.
Pat
ReplyDeleteThis above brings me to comment:
"there are two things certain after reading that. Both God, Who is Eternal and unchanging, and the devils, are unrepentant. The One, because They are Holy and Eternal; the others, well there is no place found in them that would bring about repentance"!
Joh 12:27 Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.
Joh 12:28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.
Joh 12:29 The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him.
Joh 12:30 Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.
Joh 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Even among Lutherans the covert nature of demons operates, or else, how would you explain that modern Lutherans would walk away from that?
I shall cling to these Words then:
1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
1Pe 5:9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.
1Pe 5:10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.
1Pe 5:11 To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
How one can pass over the Truth, established by the Spirit, of one's predestination before the foundation of the world, by God saving to the uttermost His Elect, becomes apparent in here too:::>
2Pe 3:17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
2Pe 3:18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.
Notice, ironically, the "work" of man here, is in his "falling from his own stedfastness"; not, falling away from God's unconditional Gift of Grace!
I count the great Reformer, Martin Luther, as a true brother, who undoubtedly taught about the work of the Spirit of Grace, don't you?
Hmmmmmm.
There must be something to it then, these Words from Hebrews:
Heb 4:8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
Heb 4:9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
Heb 4:10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
Heb 4:11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Heb 4:13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
Heb 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
Your article here just refocuses me to strive to cease from my own works then and enter that Rest!
Aaaah
"That said, correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression from modern Lutherans is not only did Luther move on from Luther (e.g. I believe the Galatians commentary was one of Luther's earlier works, c. 1520), but modern Lutherans have moved on from Luther as well."
ReplyDeleteWell, Reiss describes himself a "Lutheran with "catholic" leanings."
Some of these ecumenical-minded Lutherans like Paul McCain (who writes for "First Things") seem to be lurching back to Rome and becoming less Protestant.
So it's no wonder that they might seem to be betraying Luther's own principles.
This is not a dogmatic statement of Lutheran doctrine but a statement of Martin Luther--the two are not the same. Luther is not our pope. Whereas I quoted actual Reformed confessions.
ReplyDeleteYou really need to improve your game Steve.
SWING and a miss! :-D
EDWARD REISS SAID:
ReplyDelete"You really need to improve your game Steve."
This is the second time you've misattributed a post to me. This is a group blog.
That said, if you're too Lutheran for Luther, that's fine with me. Put another way, if Luther is too Calvinistic for Lutherans, then so much the better for Luther and so much the worse for Lutherans!
Edward Reiss said:
ReplyDeleteThis is not a dogmatic statement of Lutheran doctrine but a statement of Martin Luther--the two are not the same.
As I said in the post, contextually, it reads as if Luther is trying to comfort fellow believers struggling with doubts. Why else would he make exhortations like, "Train your conscience to believe that God approves of you" and "Fight it out with doubt" and so forth? So even though it's not "a dogmatic statement of Lutheran doctrine," it is pastoral - which is where the rubber meets the road.
Luther is not our pope.
Of course, I never claimed he was.
That said, we would like to know where modern Lutherans derive their theology. Is Lutheran doctrine exegetically sound? Etc.
Whereas I quoted actual Reformed confessions.
Quoted but misrepresented - as Steve has documented in previous posts.
You really need to improve your game Steve.
I'm flattered you think my post was by Steve. It's not every day someone like me is mistaken for, say, Richard Feynman. I must be moving up in the world! :-)
Steve,
ReplyDeleteYou are correct, I misattributed this post to you. I apologize.
PAtrick Chan,
ReplyDeleteMy point about Luther not being our pope is to show that just because Luther says something, doe snot make it Lutheran doctrine. This principle applies when the Reformed try and use Bondage of the Will to show Luther was pretty Reformed. It is beside the point.
"That said, we would like to know where modern Lutherans derive their theology. Is Lutheran doctrine exegetically sound? Etc."
We certainly believe it is.
Please see the following link:
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2658
It is about this very topic. I am happy to say the LC-MS agrees with what I have been saying.
I wrote: "You really need to improve your game Steve."
Yeah I had to have a piece of crow on that one. :-)
Thanks for the response, Mr. Reiss.
ReplyDeleteEdward Reiss said:
My point about Luther not being our pope is to show that just because Luther says something, doe snot make it Lutheran doctrine. This principle applies when the Reformed try and use Bondage of the Will to show Luther was pretty Reformed. It is beside the point.
1. I understand the point. It's a fair point. But in this post, and elsewhere, I did allude to the fact that Lutheran doctrine doesn't necessarily rest on what Luther said (anymore than, say, Calvinist doctrine rests on what Calvin said).
2. Which raises the next question: from where does Lutheran doctrine on assurance come? And is it exegetically and theologically sound? Ultimately, like pretty much every Christian tradition including the Reformed, I'm sure you'd say the Bible. Of course, there are various historical, cultural, sociological, and other factors which influence and feed into an emphasis in this view or a de-emphasis in that view, how and why doctrine is formulated, etc. But ultimately the Lutheran view on how to have assurance rests on sound exegetical theology, doesn't it? If that's the case, then why not tackle key verses like Rom 8:14-17 and Gal 4:6 and others head-on and see which side has the better argument? At least that makes sense to me. But maybe I'm missing something or being too simplistic here.
3. As I pointed out in my above comment, Luther's commentary on Galatians isn't doctrine, but it is pastoral advice and exhortation. In his life, I presume Luther not only had to deal with the formulation of doctrine as a theologian, but he also had to deal with practical concerns people had as their pastor or minister. And what could be more practical than to know whether I'm saved? Like I said, being a pastor and taking care of God's flock is where the rubber meets the road. So even though Luther's remarks on the assurance of salvation in his commentary on Galatians isn't official Lutheran doctrine, it is very practical, pastoral advice, and as such it is ironic to note how Lutheran doctrine apparently diverges from Luther's pastoral exhortation. After all, what good is a doctrine on the assurance of salvation if it's not also at the same time relevant and applicable to people's lives? (Obviously I know you don't think Lutheran doctrine isn't applicable to people's lives though.) Perhaps there exist doctrines which we can appreciate without trying to understand their direct relevance to our lives. But not so the doctrine of assurance, right?
4. You've been spending quite a bit of time defending the Lutheran view on the assurance of salvation against the Reformed (Calvinist) view on the assurance of salvation.
a. But first of all, I don't think you've fairly represented the Reformed position.
b. Next, as John Frame mentioned, there's more than one Reformed perspective on the assurance of salvation. For example, the Heidelberg Catechism differs in its emphasis to the WCF. And not every Reformed believer subscribes to the WCF or the Belgic Confession or what not.
5. In fact, and most importantly of all, the assurance of salvation isn't a Reformed distinctive - as Steve has alluded. So why should we frame the debate as Lutheran vs Reformed stances on the assurance of salvation? Why not rather look at it as, how can any genuine Christian know whether he or she is saved? That seems like the reasonable way to go.
We certainly believe it is.
ReplyDeletePlease see the following link:
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2658
It is about this very topic. I am happy to say the LC-MS agrees with what I have been saying.
"Q. On what should we base our assurance of salvation? I know the Word and the promises of the Gospel are our rock, but how do we distinguish between real faith and mere intellectual assent? I ask this because many evangelicals make me nervous when they say that if one has doubts about one's salvation, one is probably not saved, because the Holy Spirit is supposed to provide inner assurance. (I guess this ties in to the whole Pietist problem.) But in the face of emotional ups and downs, moral failings, intellectual doubts, and confusion over doctrine, how can one know if one truly has faith in Christ?
A. Lutherans believe that faith is created and strengthened not by looking inside of one's self (to one's own faith and/or doubts) but by looking outside of one's self (to God's Word and promises in Christ). Therefore, assurance of salvation is to be sought by looking to God's Word and promises in Christ (which create and strengthen the faith through which one is saved), not by looking inward at the strength or weakness of one's own faith (which creates either pride and false assurance or doubt and lack of assurance). Anxiety regarding doubts, strength of faith and certainty of salvation are signs of faith (however weak it may be), not signs of unbelief, since the unbeliever has no concern or anxiety about doubts, faith or salvation. If you would like to study this issue further, I would recommend Martin Chemnitz's book on "Justification" available from Concordia Publishing House (1-800-325-3040, stock no. 15-2186)."
1. As I read it, the LCMS Q&A seems to more or less fit in fairly well with Reformed theology. The Reformed would agree that faith is strengthened by looking to the promises in Scripture.
2. But that's not all there is to your own position.
a. Your position has a certain amount of reliance on sacramentalism as well:
The "Lutheran" Syllogism works like this:
Christ said "I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit"
Christ never lies and always tells the truth
Therefore I am baptized
So your position seems to add more than what the LCMS has said here.
b. And as Steve has pointed out, sacramental grace is resistible grace. Just because I've been baptized and regularly receive communion doesn't necessarily mean I'm saved.
3. The Reformed position has never been that we look at our faith in lieu of looking at the promises of Scripture. These aren't substitutes for one another. The WCF points out three grounds of assurance, not one.
4. Of course, I also agree there's a problem with excessive self-introspection. But that's possible in any tradition, not only Reformed.
5. As we exercise faith in the objective promises of Scripture, we're doing so via our subjective reason, emotions, sensations, intuitions, and so on (as John Frame points out in a recent article). So a certain amount of subjectivity can't be avoided. Again, this isn't limited to Reformed theology.
Patrick,
ReplyDeleteBefore you say we rely on "sacramentalism" our view needs to be explained a bit.
We believe a sacrament is the word united with material objects according to Christ's command. This, e.g. Baptism isn't just a bath, but the water united with the word in according to Christ's command. And the word in both cases is the preached law and gospel. As long as you (and others here) insist in dividing sacraments from the word, you won't understand Lutheranism. This does not mean you have to agree with Lutheranism, it is just that we don't have a category of "sacramentalism" which means something which is not the gospel, which your remarks plainly imply.
For this reason I do not agree when you say "...your position seems to add more than what the LCMS has said here" because belief in the gospel is believing the gospel, whether it is verbal or verbal with material things according to Christ's command for the remission of sins.
You wrote: "And as Steve has pointed out, sacramental grace is resistible grace. Just because I've been baptized and regularly receive communion doesn't necessarily mean I'm saved."
And since we do not have a problem with resistible grace, this is a non issue for us.
"The Reformed position has never been that we look at our faith in lieu of looking at the promises of Scripture. These aren't substitutes for one another. The WCF points out three grounds of assurance, not one."
I have been speaking of subjective assurance. It has been acknowledged all around that the elect may not ever have subjective assurance, and the non-elect may believe they are assured. The touchstone is what you alluded to above: irresistible grace, and its cousin, perseverance of the saints. If one wants to know one is elect, one is pointed to "fruits". But the WCF itself allows for these fruits to be misinterpreted, and even allows for the elect to lose their assurance for a time, with the attendant advice to look for fruit to see if one is elect. In effect, the system is pointing one to one's self for proof to one's self--but that proof is not a solid as we would like.
Oops, sorry, I forgot to mention my latest post.
ReplyDelete