Cyberbrethren: A Lutheran Blog

Is it Sinful to Use Copyright Laws?

The other day I received a Google Alert on the Concordia edition of the Book of Concord. A pastor had referred to it in a blog post. I went to the blog site and read the following:

   One of my tasks is to develop and make available new ways of catechesis and discipleship. For this reason, I was thrilled when a compatriot of mine suggested the development of the entire Book of Concord (Concordia, the Lutheran Confessions,) be made available (for free) in mp3 and on CD audio, so that those who desired to grow in the mind of Christ might, say, listen to the Formula for Harmony on the way to work.

A wonderfully good idea, to be sure! There is just one problem. The project represents a violation of copyright law. I posted a comment on the blog site that the Concordia edition of the Book of Concord is copyrighted and thus can not be done without permission of the copyright holder. I also indicated that Concordia Publishing House would probably not grant permission because we have plans to do audio recordings of it ourselves. I suggested that he make use of the English translation of the Book of Concord that is in the public domain.

The pastor responded by saying that he believes it is sinful for Concordia Publishing House to use copyright laws, and that the laws are themselves sinful. He proceeded to indicate that he believes CPH is doing a disservice to the Gospel in copyrighting the Concordia edition of the Book of Concord.

Is it sinful for Christians to use copyright laws? In this post, I'd like to address a common misunderstanding that circulates around the church about copyright laws and their use. I hope I can do this in such a way as not to give the impression that I am being defensive. It is a challenge to address these issues without people receiving that impression, particularly when they have a firm opinion about the issue. But, I'll give it a go.

Mr. Really, Really Bad Preacher

Lucas Cranach: A Master of Irony and Ambiguity

By Souren Melikian

International Herald Tribune

Friday, April 25, 2008

LONDON: Five hundred years ago, Europe lost its innocence and discovered ambiguity. From north to south, its painters gave their female sitters expressions of laughing irony. In Germany, Lucas Cranach the Elder was the first to break with the past by portraying lovely princesses and saints with the same indescribable glint of amusement.

Smiling skepticism may have come naturally to Leonardo, a man of science, but Cranach's laughter that comes across some of his most admirable pictures in the retrospective on view at the Royal Academy until June 8 is more intriguing.

What little is known about his early years sheds no light on the matter. Bodo Brinkmann, the curator from the Städel Museum in Frankfurt who masterminded the show, found little to say apart from the fact that the artist, born Hans Maler in Kronach around 1472 was apparently the son of a painter, as indicated by the noun following the name Hans. No work by the artist can be dated prior to the early 1500s, by which time he was living in Vienna. In 1505, he moved to Wittenberg and became court artist to the Saxon Electors under three successive rulers. This would appear to suggest a smooth character nimbly working his way through the difficult times of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, an assumption borne out by his oeuvre.

Concordia Hexaglot: How to Use Libronix to Research and Study the Lutheran Confessions

Libronix library users: if you have the Triglotta in Libronix, from Northwestern Publishing House, and the Concordia digital edition from Concordia Publishing House, you can link the two resources in such a way that you can have the German and Latin original language.

Note: This is a huge "wow" factor! I have, for example, six windows open now as I read/study the Confessions: The older Concordia Triglotta English, the Concordia edition, the Tappert edition, the Kolb edition, then the German and the Latin of the BOC. Awesome!

Note II: This feature only works in the PC version of Libronix at this point. The native Macintosh version is still in Alpha stage and does not yet offer this functionality.

Again, thanks to Pr. Jeremiah Gumm for these instructions:

Here's the "How to" guide that I sent out to the "Logos for Lutherans" Group today:

To create a digital "Triglotta", here's what you do:

1. Open Libronix. Click on "My Library" and open the follow books:

    * Concordia Triglotta (Latin)
    * Concordia Triglotta (German)
    * Your Favorite English Translation of the Bible
    * Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions

For further comparison, you could also open the older, more literal translation of Concordia Triglotta (English).

2. Once you have these open, arrange your workspace, so you have the four texts displayed.

3. Look closely right below the titles of each of the books and you will find a chain link icon for "Links". (If you are new to Logos, that little link is very helpful, especially for exegetical work.) Click on that icon and a menu will drop down. In the menu, click on "Set A". Make sure to do that with each of the four books (though you may not have to do that for your English translation of the Bible). Now a chain link icon with an A underneath it should appear where there was just a chain link before.

4. Save your workspace! Be sure to save your new workspace so you can come back to it later. Go to the "File" command and choose "Save Workspace" and then give it a name, for instance, "Lutheran Confessions" and hit save.

5. Once you've done that, scroll down in Concordia and click on any one of the confessions. The German and Latin equivalents will automatically jump to that confession...and there you have it--A Digital Triglotta! Now it's your turn to keep searching.

For those in the Logos for Lutherans Group, I've also uploaded an example of this workspace in the "Files" section.

Need proof it can be done?

Here you go....a screen shot of my iMac's screen, with Libronix up and running with six windows, which are, right to left, top to bottom: Triglotta English, Concordia edition, Tappert, Kolb, Latin, German.

Concordia: The Digital Edition with a BIG bonus feature

A friend recently pointed something out to me which I was aware of but rather stupidly had not connected the dots with. The Libronix digital edition of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions comes not only with the Book of Concord, but includes along with it the Libronix edition of the English Standard Version, which Crossway kindly permitted us to include on the CD, for free. That's a $39.99 value, the going price for the English Standard Version in Libronix! So, when you buy the Concordia Edition, you receive not only the BOC, but the English Standard Version translation as well. Resources with a total price of $70 for only $29.99 or even less if you are a rostered church worker. Cool deal, huh? Want one?

And one more thing: if you do not already have the Libronix software on your computer, this product will install it for you, and install the Book of Concord and the Bible.

Be Ye Notified! The Hymnal Price is Going Up

I want to make sure that readers of this blog know that the price of Lutheran Service Book is going up on May 12. May 11 is the last day to purchase the hymnal at the introductory price of $18.50, for at 12:01 a.m., May 12th, the price goes to $23.00.

If your congregation has not purchased the LSB, and is thinking it will be purchasing it in the next couple of years, I would say, "Delay not."

A word to the wise is sufficient. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Strike while the iron is hot. Don't take wooden nickels Look both ways before crossing the street. Always eat your vegetables. Etc.

Call 800-325-3040.

Review of the Libronix Edition of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions

Pastor Jermiah Gumm posted this review of the Libronix edition of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions on his blog site, and I'm passing it along here. I asked him to consider posting the precise "how to" on linking the Concordia edition to the Triglotta edition, so you can have the original languages up at the same time for comparison and study. Here are Pastor Gumm's comments:

It finally arrived!

After weeks of waiting and then dealing with a shipping snag, this afternoon a new Lutheran addition to my Libronix Digital Library System arrived at my doorstep. I finally got my copy of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions on CD-ROM (The 2nd Edition)!

Earlier this month, Concordia Publishing House (CPH) released the Libronix version of their new Reader’s Edition of the Book of Concord. Since I just got it today, I’ve only been able to check out a few of its amazing tools, but personally, I’m blown away by what you’re capable of doing. Some highlights I’ve discovered already:

• A Book of Concord Reading Guide: The daily reading guide from the print edition can also be found in the digital edition AND can be easily used on your computer for your own daily confessional readings! The easy readability of this edition of the Book of Concord will, God-willing, make the Lutheran Confessions more accessible to called workers and laymen alike!

• Links to Luther’s Works: Back in late 2001, I was able to purchase Luther’s Works on CD-ROM, which tied right into Libronix. Besides saving me a ton of bookshelf space, it has proven time and again to be a fantastic resource to search the works of Luther in a quick fashion. In CPH’s Concordia Digital Edition you can find easy links between the Book of Concord AND Luther’s Works! Very cool!

• Woodcuts: One of the neatest aspects of the print edition of Concordia was the variety of appropriate woodcuts and artwork from the era of the Lutheran Reformation up through the 1580 publication of the Book of Concord. In the digital edition, CPH did include all the woodcuts that were in the text of the print edition, a fact I appreciate as these woodcuts were often included in printings of the Book of Concord centuries ago.

• Triglotta and Concordia Together: One of the desires expressed in our circles, including in the Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly and even in comments on this blog, was that the new Reader’s Edition might eventually replace the old, wooden English translation of Bente & Dau alongside the Latin and German in an updated Concordia Triglotta. Though such an update does not exist in print, if you own the Concordia Reader’s Edition and the Logos edition of the Concordia Triglotta from Northwestern Publishing House (now being updated and upgraded to mesh better with Libronix and soon to be part of The Northwestern Publishing House Electronic Library), you can actually link up the new English translation with the Latin and German editions from the Triglotta (as well as the more literal English translation of Bente & Dau, if one so desires!). It makes for a very cool setup for the study of the Lutheran Confessions.

As I said, these are just a few of the amazing tools I’ve discovered for myself. There’s plenty more I’m sure I’ll uncover in the future. If you use Libronix or even if you don’t have it (you can install the Reader’s Edition independently onto your computer), I would definitely recommend getting your hands on the digital edition of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions on CD-ROM.

One other reminder/encouragement/note: If you’ve used Libronix for a while or are just getting into it, I recommend joining the Logos for Lutherans group. Pr. Aaron Frey, who teaches Winterim courses on the use of Libronix for the pastoral ministry at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, started the group back in January and since then, the group has grown to nearly 100 members. The group was created to help confessional Lutherans, especially confessional Lutheran pastors and seminary students, in learning how to use Libronix for the study of the original languages. Besides joining in the discussions amongst the group, you’ll also find helpful links, various resources and great ideas as you use Libronix to study the Word of God and share its treasures with your flock. I’ve included the group site under my links.

Not a Bad Lutheran, Just a Bad Person

On another Lutheran blog site, a blogger posted his confession that he does not much like the writings of Martin Luther, the paintings of Lucas Cranach, or the music of J.S. Bach. He asked, "Does this make me a bad Lutheran?" A person responded by saying, "No, it doesn't make you a bad Lutheran, just a bad person." I thought this was one of the funniest quips I've read on a Lutheran blog site in a long time.

Worst Ever Vestments? You be the judge

Catherine Schori, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church USA, has taken to wearing vestments that can only be described, in my opinion, with one word: hideous. Here are a couple cases in point. I was reading an article just now about how Pope Benedict XVI is reviving classic vestments, with all sorts of speculation about the meaning of that. One can only but assume Schori, a well known advocate of gay and lesbian "rights" in the church knows she is making a statement by wearing a mitre that is in the gay rights "rainbow" colors. I think this outfit tops this other one. But, to be fair, let's also have some photos of men wearing hideously ugly vestments. Do you have examples that  compare, or beat, these? Send them on in and I'll post them.

Pope's Remarks at Ecumenical Prayer Gathering

Following is the prepared text of Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks at an ecumenical prayer service with Christian leaders at the Church of St. Joseph in Yorkville, Manhattan, on April 18, as supplied by the Vatican. I would note that the event was not what some would consider "ecumenical" in the sense that everyone is given equal time on a platform to represent his or her particular beliefs. It was a simple service, with an invocation, a couple of prayers, the Lord's Prayer chanted together, a hymn sung, a reading from Eph. 4:1-6, and a concluding prayer and blessing. The pope was wearing his ordinary garb, not worship vestments. Only Roman Catholics were in the chancel and leading the event. Here are the pope's remarks:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, My heart abounds with gratitude to Almighty God -- “the Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all" (Eph 4:6) -- for this blessed opportunity to gather with you this evening in prayer. I thank Bishop Dennis Sullivan for his cordial welcome, and I warmly greet all those in attendance representing Christian communities throughout the United States. May the peace of our Lord and Savior be with you all!

Through you, I express my sincere appreciation for the invaluable work of all those engaged in ecumenism: the National Council of Churches, Christian Churches Together, the Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, and many others. The contribution of Christians in the United States to the ecumenical movement is felt throughout the world. I encourage all of you to persevere, always relying on the grace of the risen Christ whom we strive to serve by bringing about "the obedience of faith for the sake of his name" (Rom 1:5).

Luther Before the Diet of Worms

Yesterday, on April 18 1521, Martin Luther took his stand against both Pope and Emperor. Here is a modern depiction of these events:

Here is a transcript of his remarks:

The World’s Famous Orations. Continental Europe (380–1906).  1906.

Before the Diet of Worms

Martin Luther (1483–1546)

(1520)

Born in 1483, died in 1546; became a Monk at Erfurt in 1505; published, at Wittenberg in 1517, his thesis against indulgences; excommunicated and his writings burned in 1520; proscribed at Worms in 1521; published a translation of the Bible in 1534.

MOST 1 SERENE EMPEROR, AND YOU ILLUSTRIOUS PRINCES AND GRACIOUS LORDS:—I this day appear before you in all humility, according to your command, and I implore your majesty and your august highnesses, by the mercies of God, to listen with favor to the defense of a cause which I am well assured is just and right. I ask pardon, if by reason of my ignorance, I am wanting in the manners that befit a court; for I have not been brought up in king’s palaces, but in the seclusion of a cloister.	1
Two questions were yesterday put to me by his imperial majesty; the first, whether I was the author of the books whose titles were read; the second, whether I wished to revoke or defend the doctrine I have taught. I answered the first, and I adhere to that answer.	2
As to the second, I have composed writings on very different subjects. In some I have discussed Faith and Good Works, in a spirit at once so pure, clear, and Christian, that even my adversaries themselves, far from finding anything to censure, confess that these writings are profitable, and deserve to be perused by devout persons. The pope’s bull, violent as it is, acknowledges this. What, then, should I be doing if I were now to retract these writings? Wretched man! I alone, of all men living, should be abandoning truths approved by the unanimous voice of friends and enemies, and opposing doctrines that the whole world glories in confessing!	3
I have composed, secondly, certain works against popery, wherein I have attacked such as by false doctrines, irregular lives, and scandalous examples, afflict the Christian world, and ruin the bodies and souls of men. And is not this confirmed by the grief of all who fear God? Is it not manifest that the laws and human doctrines of the popes entangle, vex, and distress the consciences of the faithful, while the crying and endless extortions of Rome engulf the property and wealth of Christendom, and more particularly of this illustrious nation?	4
If I were to revoke what I have written on that subject, what should I do…. but strengthen this tyranny, and open a wider door to so many and flagrant impieties? Bearing down all resistance with fresh fury, we should behold these proud men swell, foam, and rage more than ever! And not merely would the yoke which now weighs down Christians be made more grinding by my retractation—it would thereby become, so to speak, lawful,—for, by my retractation, it would receive confirmation from your most serene majesty, and all the States of the Empire. Great God! I should thus be like to an infamous cloak, used to hid and cover over every kind of malice and tyranny.	5
In the third and last place, I have written some books against private individuals, who had undertaken to defend the tyranny of Rome by destroying the faith. I freely confess that I may have attacked such persons with more violence than was consistent with my profession as an ecclesiastic: I do not think of myself as a saint; but neither can I retract these books. because I should, by so doing, sanction the impieties of my opponents, and they would thence take occasion to crush God’s people with still more cruelty.	6
Yet, as I am a mere man, and not God, I will defend myself after the example of Jesus Christ, who said: “If I have spoken evil, bear witness against me” (John xviii:23). How much more should I, who am but dust and ashes, and so prone to error, desire that every one should bring forward what he can against my doctrine.	7
Therefore, most serene emperor, and you illustrious princes, and all, whether high or low, who hear me, I implore you by the mercies of God to prove to me by the writings of the prophets and apostles that I am in error. As soon as I shall be convinced, I will instantly retract all my errors, and will myself be the first to seize my writings, and commit them to the flames.	8
What I have just said I think will clearly show that I have well considered and weighed the dangers to which I am exposing myself; but far from being dismayed by them, I rejoice exceedingly to see the Gospel this day, as of old, a cause of disturbance and disagreement. It is the character and destiny of God’s word. “I came not to send peace unto the earth, but a sword,” said Jesus Christ. God is wonderful and awful in His counsels. Let us have a care, lest in our endeavors to arrest discords, we be bound to fight against the holy word of God and bring down upon our heads a frightful deluge of inextricable dangers, present disaster, and everlasting desolations…. Let us have a care lest the reign of the young and noble prince, the Emperor Charles, on whom, next to God, we build so many hopes, should not only commence, but continue and terminate its course under the most fatal auspices. I might cite examples drawn from the oracles of God. I might speak of Pharaohs, of kings of Babylon, or of Israel, who were never more contributing to their own ruin than when, by measures in appearances most prudent, they thought to establish their authority! “God removeth the mountains and they know not” (Job ix:5).	9
In speaking thus, I do not suppose that such noble princes have need of my poor judgment; but I wish to acquit myself of a duty that Germany has a right to expect from her children. And so commending myself to your august majesty, and your most serene highnesses, I beseech you in all humility, not to permit the hatred of my enemies to rain upon me an indignation I have not deserved. 2	10
Since your most serene majesty and your high mightinesses require of me a simple, clear and direct answer, I will give one, and it is this: I can not submit my faith either to the pope or to the council, because it is as clear as noonday that they have fallen into error and even into glaring inconsistency with themselves. If, then, I am not convinced by proof from Holy Scripture, or by cogent reasons, if I am not satisfied by the very text I have cited, and if my judgment is not in this way brought into subjection to God’s word, I neither can nor will retract anything; for it can not be right for a Christian to speak against his country. I stand here and can say no more. God help me. Amen. 3	11

Note 1. From the version given in D’Aubigny’s “History of the Reformation”—the American edition of 1845. This speech was delivered at Worms on April 18, 1520, in response to a summons from the emperor, Charles V., who had assured Luther of a safe conduct to and from Worms. When the chancellor had demanded of Luther, “Are you prepared to defend all that your writings contain, or do you wish to retract any part of them?” it is stated in the “Acts of Worms,” that Luther “made answer in a low and humble voice, without any vehemence or violence, but with gentleness and mildness and in a manner full of respect and diffidence, yet with much joy and Christian firmness.” D’Aubigny says he took this speech, word for word, from an authentic document. [back]

Note 2. D’Aubigny says that after Luther had pronounced these words in German, “with modesty, yet with much earnestness and resolution he was desired to repeat them in Latin,” the emperor being not fond of German. The splendid assembly which surrounded Luther, its noise and excitement, had exhausted him. (“I was bathed in sweat,” said he, “and standing in the center of the princes.”) But having taken a moment’s breathing time. Luther began again “and repeated his address in Latin, with undiminished power.” The chancellor spokesman of the Diet, then said, “You have not given any answer to the inquiry put to you. You are not to question the decisions of the councils—you are required to return a clear and distinct answer. Will you or will you not retract?” Luther then proceeded with the answer given in the final paragraph. [back]

Note 3. A detailed report of this memorable scene describes how, at this point, Luther, after going out of the room, was again summoned, and asked whether he actually meant to say that councils had erred, to which he answered, they had erred many times, mentioning the Council of Constance. Luther was then told if he did not retract, the emperor and the States of the Empire would proceed “to consider how to deal with an obstinate heretic,” to which he answered, “May God be my helper, but I can retract nothing.” Pressed once more, and reminded that he had not spoken “with that humility which befitted his condition,” he said, “I have no other answer to give than that I have already given.” The emperor then made a sign to end the matter, rose from his seat, and the whole assembly followed his example. [back]

Record Setting Cranach

Do you remember a month ago when I mentioned that this Cranach painting was going up for auction? Well, it did and it sold for ... ready for this? ... over $7.6 million dollars. Here's the story.

Early African Chrisianity -- A New Web Site

I was made aware today of an interesting new web site, from the publishers of the Ancient Christian Commentary series: Early African Christianity. I think you will find it interesting.

Helvetica: A Documentary for Type Geeks and Interested Bystanders

I'm a typography geek. Always have been. Always will be. I love not only words, but the way words are put onto a page. And I discovered an abolute delight of a documentary: Helvetica. Yes, a documentary devoted to a typeface. Sounds boring, I know. But, it is not.

If you enjoy the art of typography, then you must see this documentary on the world's most ubiquitous typeface: Helvetica. It is one of the most legible typefaces ever created, arguably the most legible. You probably don't even notice it, but it is everywhere. Some find its ominipresence distressing, others regard it as comforting.

This documentary tells the story of the typeface and how it has been received, used, and either accepted or rejected. I've decided to switch this blog site over to Helvetica, and I like what I see.

Years ago I chose two main faces for as much of my work as possible: Optima and Minion. They are still two of my favorites, but press me on my favorite typeface of all time and it will always be Helvetica. I never knew why. Now I do. And, if you watch this documentary, just count how many times a certain brand of computer appears.

Why Separation from Rome is Still a Tragic Necessity

A month or so ago, word went out that the Papacy might be considering lifting the charge of heretic against Martin Luther. This rumor was squelched. In the course of talking about it with a friend, we were going back and forth about our feelings about Rome and the Papacy. I offered him these more personal reflections on my experiences with Rome and what a truly painful thing it is to recognize that Lutheranism and Romanism must be, and remain, separate. In light of the Pope's coming trip to the USA, I thought I would share these thoughts, with a few modifications, more openly here:

The reason I have such strong feelings of frustration and, yes, anger, with the errors of Romanism is precisely because there is so much in the Roman Catholic Church that I love and cherish. "Tragic necessity" is no mere polite soundbite to me, nor to many other faithful Lutheran Christians. We cherish the Gospel that is read and heard in Roman Catholic Churches whenever and wherever it is read, or preached. We cherish the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar which is given and distributed in Roman Catholic Churches. We love and cherish these things in spite of the errors that obscure the glory and grace of God in the mercy of Christ.

I developed close friendships with many Roman Catholics growing up in the Deep South where Lutheran and Roman Catholics were but two sides of the same coin in the view of Baptists, Pentecostals, etc. There was a shared history and experience of liturgy and church history that was unknown to many, if not all, Bible fundamentalists.

I attended a Roman Catholic High School and was so deeply moved and impressed by the nuns and priests there who taught us everything from typing (thank you Sister Mary Jean!) and drilled us to death in English and grammar (thank you Sister Mary Margaret!). I loved Latin class when Father Pine, S.J., would wander in and engage in Latin with our teacher, and when he actually corrected my writing one day, walking up and down the rows of desks, "Ah, excuse me, Mr. McCain, but you seem to have a certain fondness leaving your "t's" uncrossed and your i's undotted." As my face grew red, I was able only but to agree and say "Yes, Father. You are right."

And I recall Father Foley regaling us with tales of youthful episodes with a certain "fair lass" in Ireland, where he hailed from, and I recall listening to him and Sister Mary Ellen rattle away back and forth in Gaelic, their mother tongue, the mother tongue of my ancestors as well.

And they even gave a Lutheran kid best religion student of the year award, twice in a row! And I have the warmest memories of all of the many kind notes and remembrances from the priests, sisters and brothers who, in their own dear ways, encouraged me to become a Lutheran pastor, with quiet conversations, even whispered in some cases. We shared a love for Christ!

But as for the institution and public doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, here is where the tragic necessity of separation becomes a reality.

But I sat seething through four years of Masses where the Gospel was terribly obscured with all manner of nonsense that one can only imagine that would be possible in the mid-seventies, with people trying to impress teenagers attending Mass. (It became so bad the Bishop announced he would no longer conduct mass at our high school until the behavior in Mass got better!).

For these very personal reasons, in addition to my passion for theology, I've been deeply concerned and interested in Roman Catholicism for years and feel such a kindred spirit with the Roman Church, but also at the same time, such a heart-wrenching separation when I watch the Gospel not really proclaimed sweetly and clearly.

Tragic necessity, indeed. Lord, have mercy.

And so, in light of the visit of the Pope to the USA, lest anyone get too caught up in the moment, or forget precisely why we continue to reject the Papacy and its claims, we need to remember that the Roman Catholic Church still insists that it is the one, true church on earth and that all other Christian communities are either defective (the East) or not church at all (all us Reformation types).

I am not at all bothered by the Pope's pronouncement, actually quite pleased by such refreshing clarity and integrity in the expression of Rome's position: open and honest. Too bad liberal Lutherans can't be as forthcoming at times. It is troubling that there are groups about that stand for one thing, but hide their positions so as to try to deceive and mislead people.

So, big news! The Pope is a Roman Catholic! Here is the official statment from the vatican. Click through to the extended version to read it. And then, when you are finished reading the document, read the Smalcald Articles and the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope for a sound, Biblical and Gospel-centered refutation of these false claims.

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Bold italic portions are emphases added by PTM.

RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS
OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH

Introduction

The Second Vatican Council, with its Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, and its Decrees on Ecumenism (Unitatis redintegratio) and the Oriental Churches (Orientalium Ecclesiarum), has contributed in a decisive way to the renewal of Catholic ecclesiolgy. The Supreme Pontiffs have also contributed to this renewal by offering their own insights and orientations for praxis: Paul VI in his Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam suam (1964) and John Paul II in his Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint (1995).

The consequent duty of theologians to expound with greater clarity the diverse aspects of ecclesiology has resulted in a flowering of writing in this field. In fact it has become evident that this theme is a most fruitful one which, however, has also at times required clarification by way of precise definition and correction, for instance in the declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae (1973), the Letter addressed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church Communionis notio (1992), and the declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), all published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The vastness of the subject matter and the novelty of many of the themes involved continue to provoke theological reflection. Among the many new contributions to the field, some are not immune from erroneous interpretation which in turn give rise to confusion and doubt. A number of these interpretations have been referred to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Given the universality of Catholic doctrine on the Church, the Congregation wishes to respond to these questions by clarifying the authentic meaning of some ecclesiological expressions used by the magisterium which are open to misunderstanding in the theological debate.

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS

First Question: Did the Second Vatican Council change the Catholic doctrine on the Church?

Response: The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more fully explained it.

This was exactly what John XXIII said at the beginning of the Council[1]. Paul VI affirmed it[2] and commented in the act of promulgating the Constitution Lumen gentium: "There is no better comment to make than to say that this promulgation really changes nothing of the traditional doctrine. What Christ willed, we also will. What was, still is. What the Church has taught down through the centuries, we also teach. In simple terms that which was assumed, is now explicit; that which was uncertain, is now clarified; that which was meditated upon, discussed and sometimes argued over, is now put together in one clear formulation"[3]. The Bishops repeatedly expressed and fulfilled this intention[4].

Second Question: What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?

Response: Christ "established here on earth" only one Church and instituted it as a "visible and spiritual community"[5], that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.[6] "This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him"[7].

In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church[8], in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.

It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word "subsists" can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the "one" Church); and this "one" Church subsists in the Catholic Church.[10]

Third Question: Why was the expression "subsists in" adopted instead of the simple word "is"?

Response: The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are "numerous elements of sanctification and of truth" which are found outside her structure, but which "as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity"[11].

"It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church"[12].

Fourth Question: Why does the Second Vatican Council use the term "Church" in reference to the oriental Churches separated from full communion with the Catholic Church?

Response: The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the term. "Because these Churches, although separated, have true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds"[13], they merit the title of "particular or local Churches"[14], and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches[15].

"It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches that the Church of God is built up and grows in stature"[16]. However, since communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles, these venerable Christian communities lack something in their condition as particular churches[17].

On the other hand, because of the division between Christians, the fullness of universality, which is proper to the Church governed by the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him, is not fully realised in history[18].

Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense[20].

The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, ratified and confirmed these Responses, adopted in the Plenary Session of the Congregation, and ordered their publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 29, 2007, the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul.

William Cardinal Levada
Prefect

Angelo Amato, S.D.B.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
Secretary

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Bold italic portions are emphases added by PTM.

RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS
OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH

Introduction

The Second Vatican Council, with its Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, and its Decrees on Ecumenism (Unitatis redintegratio) and the Oriental Churches (Orientalium Ecclesiarum), has contributed in a decisive way to the renewal of Catholic ecclesiolgy. The Supreme Pontiffs have also contributed to this renewal by offering their own insights and orientations for praxis: Paul VI in his Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam suam (1964) and John Paul II in his Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint (1995).

The consequent duty of theologians to expound with greater clarity the diverse aspects of ecclesiology has resulted in a flowering of writing in this field. In fact it has become evident that this theme is a most fruitful one which, however, has also at times required clarification by way of precise definition and correction, for instance in the declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae (1973), the Letter addressed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church Communionis notio (1992), and the declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), all published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The vastness of the subject matter and the novelty of many of the themes involved continue to provoke theological reflection. Among the many new contributions to the field, some are not immune from erroneous interpretation which in turn give rise to confusion and doubt. A number of these interpretations have been referred to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Given the universality of Catholic doctrine on the Church, the Congregation wishes to respond to these questions by clarifying the authentic meaning of some ecclesiological expressions used by the magisterium which are open to misunderstanding in the theological debate.

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS

First Question: Did the Second Vatican Council change the Catholic doctrine on the Church?

Response: The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more fully explained it.

This was exactly what John XXIII said at the beginning of the Council[1]. Paul VI affirmed it[2] and commented in the act of promulgating the Constitution Lumen gentium: "There is no better comment to make than to say that this promulgation really changes nothing of the traditional doctrine. What Christ willed, we also will. What was, still is. What the Church has taught down through the centuries, we also teach. In simple terms that which was assumed, is now explicit; that which was uncertain, is now clarified; that which was meditated upon, discussed and sometimes argued over, is now put together in one clear formulation"[3]. The Bishops repeatedly expressed and fulfilled this intention[4].

Second Question: What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?

Response: Christ "established here on earth" only one Church and instituted it as a "visible and spiritual community"[5], that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.[6] "This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him"[7].

In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church[8], in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.

It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word "subsists" can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the "one" Church); and this "one" Church subsists in the Catholic Church.[10]

Third Question: Why was the expression "subsists in" adopted instead of the simple word "is"?

Response: The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are "numerous elements of sanctification and of truth" which are found outside her structure, but which "as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity"[11].

"It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church"[12].

Fourth Question: Why does the Second Vatican Council use the term "Church" in reference to the oriental Churches separated from full communion with the Catholic Church?

Response: The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the term. "Because these Churches, although separated, have true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds"[13], they merit the title of "particular or local Churches"[14], and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches[15].

"It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches that the Church of God is built up and grows in stature"[16]. However, since communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles, these venerable Christian communities lack something in their condition as particular churches[17].

On the other hand, because of the division between Christians, the fullness of universality, which is proper to the Church governed by the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him, is not fully realised in history[18].

Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense[20].

The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, ratified and confirmed these Responses, adopted in the Plenary Session of the Congregation, and ordered their publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 29, 2007, the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul.

William Cardinal Levada
Prefect

Angelo Amato, S.D.B.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
Secretary

Jesus Optional or Musings on the Conspicuous Absence of Christ in Pop-Christianity

Christ should be the main point of Christianity. Is He?

I recently attended an event involving a number of key leaders of Protestant church organizations, all established to advance the Gospel of Jesus Christ: to proclaim and publish His good news. Speaker after speaker gave lectures and workshops with a lot of "God talk," as I've come to call it, much talk about love, peace, justice  and God. But, I noticed a conspicuous absence of one word: Christ.

Now, I'm quite certain that most of the speakers had Christ in mind as they talked about God and the Bible and the Church, but...no Jesus. It is not a fluke. Anyone who spends much time examining popular Protestant literature and listening to popular so-called "Evangelical" preaching, quickly realizes that, apparently, in much of Protestantism, the Name above every Name, Jesus, is optional: the specific articulation of the Gospel appears to be optional in much Protestant church culture, unless it is some kind of evangelistic rally. I know that generalizations always fail, but, it is something I continue to notice across all sorts of media: books, magazines, videos, blog sites: Jesus optional. Christ should be the main point of Christianity. Is He?

And lest we Lutherans begin to pat ourselves on the back, let us instead confess our own sins of omission and commission on this point: is Christ the center and focus of al that we say and do? Let us take warning from this and strive all the more to proclaim the Gospel and to preach and teach and confess, in all our vocations in life, the Name above every Name: Christ.

And let us also pray that the Lord would bless and protect all our faithful shepherds in Christ who are leading us to the green pastures of Christ's holy Word and Sacrament. God bless these faithful men.

 

Here is an interesting blog post by Michael Spencer, an Evangelical blogger, who always gives me something to think about:

Recently I listened to a sermon. Preached by a Christian, a Baptist, a minister at a church, a graduate of a Christian school training ministers to serve and communicate Jesus.

This preacher gave a message that he had worked hard to prepare; a message he had presented before. A message he deeply believed in.

It was a message well organized, passionately delivered and completely sincere. It was a message with an application about having a purpose in living that many people need to hear.

So why am I writing about that sermon? Did it change my life?

I’m writing about that sermon because it was a perfect illustration of Christless preaching.

There was not a single mention of Jesus. Not once. Not in any way. Nowhere.

It was as if Jesus had never been born. It was as if Jesus never existed.

Jesus made no difference, made no contribution, determined no truth, solved no problem, offered no hope, performed no miracle, never interceded, never atoned, never taught, never lived the truth. Jesus made no claims, offered no invitations, defined no choices.

In fairness, the sermon was on an older testament story, but I am holding the preacher responsible for somehow preaching a Christian sermon, not a motivational talk. Christian preaching, no matter where it comes from, is necessarily oriented to the person, work and gospel of Jesus Christ in some way.

This was a talk about human motivation, with no more salvation than knowing God wanted you to change your own life, find a purpose and accomplish more in the future than you did in the past.

In short, here’s what we heard:

Your big problem is that you are tired, stressed and not doing much with your life.

What you need is a passion for the dream of what you can do with your life.

God wants you to trust him so that you’ll have a dream and a purpose.

The story of Joshua illustrates this.

And the premise: I’m going to tell you how to have a great life.

“Great life?” Sound familiar, anyone? Think “blinking teeth.” Think “Best Life Now.” Think “Becoming a Better You.”

People ask me all the time why I call myself post-evangelical. Reformed watchbloggers routinely refer to the term “post evangelical” with contempt. Many others seem to prefer some other term to more accurately map themselves on the journey of faith. Are critics of the term “post-evangelical” paying any attention to evangelicals?

Let me suggest that if the sermon I heard represents what we have to look forward to in evangelicalism, then being post-evangelical means that Jesus matters, the Gospel is the Biblical good news and faithfulness to either requires an intentional removal from what is happening in evangelicalism. Post-evangelicalism is a place to stand in the midsts of a tide that has washed everything out and left the flotsam and jetsam of a crumbling, degraded culture on the beaches of a vacillating, deluded church.

When a preacher can stand in the pulpit, hold the Bible, represent a significant church and the training of a major school, claim to expound the meaning of the Bible and never even once mention Jesus or the Christian good news at all, there’s something monumentally wrong at work.

“Houston, we have a problem….Jesus has left the sermon.”

Were this the latest version of the new age or even the leftist fringe of the mainlines, I’d not waste five seconds of my life pointing out such a sermon. But this preacher stands in the heritage of centuries of Baptist and Protestant preaching, a heritage that has been relentlessly Christ-centered and zealous for the Gospel. This was supposed to be Christ-centered Protestant preaching, preaching that answered the sign I have up in the back of our chapel: “Sirs, We would see Jesus.”

Yet that heritage was nowhere to be found in either style or content. The influences here were entirely stand up comedians and motivational speakers. The audience’s love of entertainment and felt need of amusement and motivation were sovereign. The motivation was self-improvement with God’s help.

What kind of Christian life was this speaking to? What kind of need for evangelism? Nothing I recognized. This was human effort to solve human problems, all done as a way of saying “I’m trusting God for a great life.”

Was Jesus less than clear on what he thought was a “great life?” Is the New Testament obscure on the “life” we’re talking about. It IS a sin to waste your life, but for Christians the value that’s added to life is JESUS and JESUS alone. There’s no way to relegate Jesus to the category of “no need of further mention” so we can get on with the motivational talks.

Where is the Kingdom of God and its crucified, risen and exalted King? Where is the centrality of Jesus Christ and his distinctive call to discipleship? Where was the uniqueness, the beauty, the worthiness and the radical revolution of Jesus? Where is the community Jesus is building and the New Creation Jesus is bringing?

I can no longer protest, or even properly lament, when those set aside by the “church” with the intention of proclaiming the Word so easily abandon and exchange it for a completely Christless motivational talk.

At the moment that preacher stood up, one person in that room needed desperately to hear the hope that is mine in Jesus. Despair stalks me. Satan and life dominating sins war against my soul. Religion, motivation, church, music, the pretense of piety, the rituals of synergistic schemes of salvation- all offer me nothing. Christians have failed me. Institutional religion mocks me. Friends do not know me.

Give me Jesus, give me Jesus, one soul cries.

Can someone sing “In The Cross of Christ I Glory” as I turn my back and walk away from this kind of religion? I’m looking for the one who, when asked for a great life, said sell all you have and come follow me to the cross.

Lutheran Wiki

I found this on the Internet and it looks interesting, a Lutheran Wiki. Already there are some very handy charts, timelines and collections of on-line resources. Check it out when you have a chance. While there are certain dangers to be aware of with a Wiki, I think this does look promising.

But, I leave you with Michael Scott's comments on Wikipedia, as fair warning:

A Paralysis of Analysis: Google Analytics

Have you ever woken up in the middle of the night wondering which version of Flash your visitors use? Or Java? Or how many screen colors they can display? No? Good, if you did you would be a very odd person.

I've used various statistical tracking services on my blog sites over the years. But then, I discovered Google Analytics the other day. Game over. 'Nuff said. That's all she wrote. The end. Hasta, la vista, baby. Once again, Google rules. All hail Mighty Google! Seriously, folks, if you have not heard about Google Analytics, you are in for a stunning surprise. To get started, go here and set your blog up in it and you are off and running. If you are using StatCounter, or SiteMeter, or any other service for that matter, Google Analytics blows them all away and, the best part? It's free.

I am particularly intrigued by the world map it shows, which you can zoom in on down to the level of individual cities. Here, for example, is where people came from who visited the Cyberbrethren blog site during the past four days:

Support Lutheranism: Buy These Envelopes

You know that I tend not to mince words or speak in vague generalities. So, I need to talk to you about something that’s on my heart and mind. It has to do with Concordia Publishing House. I think (I hope!) that the publishing task CPH is given to do on behalf of your ministry and your congregation’s ministry is important to you. We pray we are of service to you.

Over the years I have received a question that I’m always a bit shy to answer, but no more. Here is the question. “Paul, how can we help support you and the work of CPH?”

How? Simple. Use CPH resources. Now, before you say, “Oh, we are!” Please let me ask you to wait a moment before responding. I need to share some information with you that you may not know. There is an enormous misconception out there that CPH makes all its money by selling the wonderful theological books you know and love. We love all our books too! But, we rarely actually make money at the very bottom line on these books. So why do we do them? Because we are Concordia Publishing House. We publish books and resources uniquely and distinctly Lutheran. We publish books you can not find anywhere else. And I know you have a lot of choices.

So, how can we afford to publish these kinds of books? We are able to publish these sorts of books because of…are you ready for this….because we we sell offering envelopes! Yes, you read that correctly: offering envelopes. And every-Sunday bulletin covers and day school curricula. And Sunday School materials and Vacation Bible School. That’s how it works. Because we sell offering envelopes, Sunday School, VBS, and other curricular materials, we are able to afford to continue to deliver to the entire Lutheran Church, worldwide, and particularly The LCMS, sound, faithful treasures of Lutheran theology: either classics or new works.

Let me also clear up another misunderstanding. CPH is not subsidized by The LCMS. We receive no Synodical funding to do our work. We are required to be entirely self-funding and self-sufficient.

Therefore, may I respectfully make a request of you, and here I’m speaking most directly to you pastors: Please always consider making CPH your first, and only, choice when you purchase offering envelopes, and Sunday School materials, and VBS, etc.

I invite you to call our offering envelope department, if you are not already using us, and talk to them about the range of options we offer you. And there is an impressive range of services. And, if you are saying, “But we get our offering envelopes less expensively from Company X-Y-Z” I want to say this to you: We will work with you and do whatever it takes to earn, and to keep, your offering envelope business.

So, if you are not using CPH offering envelopes, please consider that, strange as it may sound, this is actually one of the very best ways you can support faithful Lutheran publishing. Please call our offering envelope team and talk to them. They are eager to serve you! Call 800-325-3040. I ask you to pass this message around, and among, your fellow pastors and wherever you can. I thank you for your help and support!!

Walther on Johann Gerhard

You might remember that a number of years ago I sent out a question to various e-mail lists asking if you would be willing, ready and able to purchase the English translation of the magnum opus by the famous Lutheran orthdox dogmatician, Johann Gerhard, his Loci Theologici. The response was very positive. I wanted to update you on the project and where things are. Two volumes have been released, the first On the Nature of Theology and Scripture and the second On the Nature of God and the Trinity. The third volume in the works now is On Christ.

I can not emphasize enough how significant this publication project is. It is the first time that this monumental work of Lutheran theology has ever been translated into English. Rev. Benjamin Mayes, the editor for the series has done simply an outstanding job on this translation, supplementing it with many useful resources. Here is how he describes his work:

We have carefully compared the English translation to the original Latin and added annotations, a glossary, indices, a list of the works cited, and other typographical improvements. In addition, Gerhard’s two dedicatory epistles, included in the first volume of Preuss’s edition of the Loci Theologici, have been translated by the Rev. Heath R. Curtis and included here.

With this message, I'm reminding you once again about this series and encouraging you to purchase these volumes, or, have the congrgation you serve purchase these books for you, as part of your continuing education. No, they are not inexpensive. They are priced at $54.99. Professional church workers receive a 20% discount from this price, roughly $11 or so off each volume. I believe it is a sound investment in your theological growth and education. Not light reading, to be sure, but a treasure-trove indeed, incomparable in its scope and depth.

Here are the volumes in production and in the works. We are releasing one a year and will be increasing that to two a year when this is possible. This is, and will be, the most thorough Lutheran dogmatics in the English language:

On the Nature of Theology and Scripture 
On the Nature of God and on the Trinity 
On Christ 
On Creation, Predestination, and Sin 
On the Law and the Gospel 
On Justification 
On Good Works and the Sacraments 
On Holy Baptism 
On the Holy Supper 
On the Church 
On the Ecclesiastical Ministry 
On Political Magistracy 
On Marriage and Celibacy 
On Death 
On the Resurrection and Judgment 
On Eternal Death and Eternal Life

Let me conclude with the words of Dr. C.F.W. Walther as he describes the importance of Johann Gerhard's Loci Theologici:

Among the works that deal with dogmatics in detail, one can ask which one is first and foremost just as little as one can ask which star outshines all the others. Just as in the latter question one can only speak of the sun, so in the former question one can only speak of Johann Gerhard’s Theological Commonplaces. . . . The proofs from Scripture are everywhere clear and exhaustive. The refutation of opponents is pervaded and pulses just as much with the spirit of love toward them as with the love of the truth; it seeks out the opponents in all their hiding places and always robs them of their last supports, so that no further contradiction seems possible. The application of the whole as well as of the particular is simple, illuminating, clearly arranged. Free from destructive fragmentation—at times an error of the later dogmaticians—the entire development of the doctrine flows along briskly with its linguistic, historical, and antithetical excursus like one great stream that describes pleasant bends in the river. Everything is all of a piece. Ethics here are not yet separated from dogmatics; the former appear here like grapes growing from a ripe vine. Biblical isagogics, hermeneutics, exegesis, history of dogmas, patristics, and polemics are added here not like a merely worthwhile appendage, but are organically woven into the whole like necessary beams, like adornments in this architectural marvel. The expression and style are so certain and thereby so simple and brisk; the development of topics, even with its exhaustive precision, goes forward without burdensome repetition so swiftly; even the most dry and subtle subjects are discussed with such exceptional freshness and facility; everything is handled with such holy seriousness; and the words are soaked with such devout meaning that the reader, being taken away by the speech of this precious man, does not know whether he has before him a work for the promotion of Christian erudition or a devotional book. One does not tire of it as long as he reads it and notes how light and warmth go forth from this speech of noble simplicity and true depth of spirit. In sum, in our