Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Hey, YouTube theologians. Welcome to the Theology Q and A podcast. I am Pastor Brian Wolfmuller of St. Paul and Jesus Deaf Lutheran Churches in Austin, Texas. That is Pastor Andrew Packer of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Collinsville, Illinois. And, Pastor Packer, I heard a rumor about you. You started studying duolingo Spanish, so you're ready for our men's retreat in Puerto Rico next week. True.
[00:00:21] Speaker B: I grew up on the border of Mexico for junior high and high school, so I know a lot of Spanglish already.
[00:00:25] Speaker A: Really?
[00:00:26] Speaker B: Not a lot of Spanish, but I know a lot of Spanglish.
[00:00:28] Speaker A: You don't say. Wow, I never knew that about you. Que bueno.
[00:00:33] Speaker B: Now you know
[00:00:34] Speaker A: tango. Preguntas.
Wait, how would you say that? Tienas preguntas.
[00:00:42] Speaker B: I hope we're not having to do this in Spanish down there. Okay,
[00:00:48] Speaker A: me too.
[00:00:48] Speaker B: All right.
[00:00:49] Speaker A: Yo.
Also, it also counts as Spanish.
Did I tell you one time I was lost in Mazatlan?
No. No, I was lost in Juarez, Mexico, for about eight hours because I didn't know that the word for map was mapa. I thought it was mapo.
Anywho,
[00:01:13] Speaker B: that's kind of amazing. Okay, this is a question consecrating the elements.
I recently attended an LCMS church where an elder consecrated the elements. If the pastor was there, too, is communion still valid? Do we still receive the body and blood and receive forgiveness of our sins?
[00:01:32] Speaker A: Oh, boy.
Look. So I don't think validity is the right question to ask. So, well, maybe. Okay, the Lord gives his body and blood to us to take away doubts, and so we should take away all practices that would invite doubt into the supper, including a pastor not doing it. So we have Augsburg 14, which says that we don't permit a man to preach or teach or administer the sacraments without being rightly called.
So the guy for this public work of preaching, even the public absolution and the public administration of the Lord's Supper, which is always public. The Lord's Supper is always public.
So there needs to be a man in the public office to do the public duties.
And that you would have a guy in the office there and he would not speak the words is just absolutely imbecilic. I mean, there's no excuse for that kind of nonsense.
[00:02:38] Speaker B: Tell me how you really feel
[00:02:41] Speaker A: that is. Like, what?
I don't even know. I have no idea how that gets on the good idea list.
But does it take? Can Jesus work through that stupidity to deliver his body and blood? I think so. I mean, he's always working through our stupidity to do to do stuff. But that doesn't mean we should do it. Like, if you have.
In a church that lets you, the women be the pastors and they're up, could the Gospel be preached so that someone's sins can be forgiven? And could the Holy Spirit show up and do the work of conversion or whatever? Yes, I think he works through our own kind of stupidity again, but that doesn't mean we ought to do it.
And it's undermining the confidence that the Lord wants us to have in His Word and in the sacraments.
So.
So we should not do that.
[00:03:38] Speaker B: Doesn't the fact that this person went to this church and has this question prove your point?
Like, this person went to this church and they could not. They had a hard time receiving the gifts in faith because of what happened.
That's why we got this question, because it introduced doubt into the whole thing.
[00:03:57] Speaker A: We need to open, okay, at the level of, like, pastors tempted to do stupid stuff.
We need to do some work there. Which is like, why? What is going on in the heart and mind of the pastors that are like, well, why don't you do it this week? I'm tired or whatever. I mean, I can't anyhow.
I think the problem is boredom.
We are tempted by the devil constantly to become bored with the normal stuff.
And we want something more different, exciting. We got to mix it up or whatever.
And we have to recognize that theological boredom is going to become a playground for the devil to get in there and wreck things.
So as I'm trying to think about what in the world is happening in whatever place where that is the plan, I just think that that's got to be how that weird idea gets in underneath is because I, you know, it's. I always consecrate. It'll be cool to mix it up or whatever. I don't know. Maybe there's something else. Maybe I just. I don't have the imaginative capacity to stretch to a place where this make any. Like, this makes any sense at all.
And I have a big imaginative capacity, but it does not stretch that far.
[00:05:42] Speaker B: And I was thinking about so Chemnitz and his end Caridian in the opening. The opening of that work starts with the call to the pastor in ordination installation. Right? Like, that's basically the beginning of the inquiry.
And so he says in there, though, that if you don't have.
If you're not rightly called, basically, that God will not bless your ministry.
So that even if a pastor. This is why I'm gonna ask a Question. Because of some things you said.
If a pastor is performing the office of the pastor, and even if he's doing it, like, correctly, he's doing it in line with the Bible. Chemnitz says if he's not rightly called that, he doesn't think God will bless that the way he would if. Because the guy's skirting the Lord's the way the Lord has it set up. And so because he's trying to do end around that, Chemnitz basically says he doesn't think it'll be. It's not going to be blessed the way it would be if he had done it the way God had told him to.
An interesting thing to wrestle with.
[00:06:45] Speaker A: Yeah, it's right. No, that's 100% right.
So what we don't want to do is put the efficacy on the sacrament on anything but the word.
So that word, spoken rightly in the context understood, that is the efficacy of the sacrament, no matter what kind of other surrounding stupid stuff is happening. But we can't let the. This is what I'm always worried about, is that we make the efficacy. The only argument like, well, if it's efficacious, then why would you put any other restrictions on it? And the answer is because the Lord does a lot of different things. I mean, and he can. He can work how he wants to work, but that doesn't.
That does not sort of free us for the abuse of freedom. And even. And there's. This isn't even a matter of freedom. It comes from Romans 10, by the way. How will they believe unless they're preached to? And how will they preach unless they're sent?
Faith comes on hearing and hearing by the word of God. So that sending, that is our doctrine, the call. There has to be a person put into the office. That's a technical term there, that sending. And so we build our understanding of the office on that word, which is why every Christian not only can, but ought to forgive sins, to preach the name or to speak the name of Jesus, to carry his name into all the world, to be a preacher in his own family, etc. A man, woman, child, every Christian. But that execution of the public office, which is connected to the Lord's Supper, which is always public. When Jesus says, this is my body given for you, it's the y'. All. It's always for the public distribution. It's never private. There's never a private Mass. So because of these things belong to the public office, there's a man who's sent into it. And this is by God's ordering of things and he's not authorized to us to mess with it.
I mean it, it's not, it's just not a good idea.
[00:08:42] Speaker B: Can we say it's kind of the height of arrogance to, to mess with that stuff. Right. Because it is kind of saying, I think I know better than Jesus how this ought to be done and at the very least better than the church body. You're a part of how it's laid out, how it should be done. So there is a level of arrogance that says, I know better than everybody else, so it's okay for me to do it this way. Right. Isn't that kind of what's going on? Like, I know better. I. Yet they're all wrong. I've. I've figured this out and rather than trying to make a case for it, you just do it like this is fine.
Right. And seems like there's some kind of level of arrogance there that doesn't want to be told, but that's not, that's not the proper order of things.
They don't be confined by that. Right. So I'm free of it.
[00:09:36] Speaker A: I think that's good. I think there's also, I mean this, this diagnosis of boredom could be the. In other words, like there could be a lot of things going wrong.
[00:09:45] Speaker B: Right? Yeah,
[00:09:45] Speaker A: that, that is, that is underneath this.
And arrogance is certainly one of them. And the result, it is an arrogant thing to do. It might not be done out of arrogance or motivated out of arrogance, but it turns out to be that way. Like if I.
What, What's a.
You know, like if I go to someone's house and I accidentally sit in dad's chair, like that's an arrogant kind of act. I might have done it out of ignorance, but it's still that kind of, you know, I took the place of another person.
So I think you could do it out of ignorance. But I think you're right. The act itself is that kind of.
It misses that humility of passing on what's been delivered.
[00:10:31] Speaker B: Alright, the next one's on the death penalty.
[00:10:33] Speaker A: Oh, okay.
[00:10:35] Speaker B: My wife and I are recent converts to Lutheranism from a Southern Baptist background. I know in the Roman Catholic Church they condemn the death penalty.
[00:10:41] Speaker A: Oh man, it's so frustrating because like you go to the pro life rally and all the monks are up there like, hey, no more abortion and no more death penalty penalty. And you're like, what are you guys. Get off of the stage.
You guys are crazy.
Sorry.
[00:10:58] Speaker B: Yeah, I was gonna say we haven't even finished yet. Okay. I'm personally torn on the matter, as part of me truly hates what some of these people have done in these heinous acts, while the other part wants to show the mercy I have been shown by Christ and has a hope that someday there is true repentance, whatever small likelihood there may be of that. I'm unaware if the LCMS holds an official stance on this, but I've been watching your videos for a while and I'm seeking your wisdom on this.
[00:11:19] Speaker A: Yeah, I'm not sure if the LCMS has a secret stance, but we do have the Bible, which tells us that the death penalty is authorized by God. And it's especially in Genesis, chapter nine, where the Lord says, if anybody sheds a man's blood by a man's.
His blood should be shed. I should probably look up the text, but the point is that there's capital punishment for capital crimes, especially intentional murder. And the Lord references there the creation in the image of God. So that's an important point, is that even though the image of God is lost after the fall, we still have laws that are reflective of that original creation. So that the Lord himself puts the death penalty, capital punishment, in place. And it's reinforced by texts like Romans 13:13, which says that the government, the rulers, bear the sword and not in vain. So that sword is pointed outward. That's the capacity to wage war, and that sword is pointed inward. That's the Justice Department or the law enforcement, and that includes being able to remove privileges and even the privilege of life. That's capital punishment. So that there is a way. I don't think that there's a way that you can be ethically and absolutely against the death penalty. Now, I think there's a way that Christians can be very constrained. For example, you could say, well, look, it's enough to lock someone up in prison for life with no parole or whatever. And that's the equivalent. And so you can have the same sort of effect, like you can have a capital crime that doesn't practically in life, or you could make it so rare and exceptional. In other words, you could argue for a minimal kind of execution of.
Oh, pun. A minimal execution of capital punishment. But I don't think that you can biblically make the argument that capital punishment should be taken off the table altogether.
[00:13:25] Speaker B: I think it's weird that people use the argument that, because one I hear all the time is, well, people are made in the image of God, so we shouldn't have the death penalty. And I'M like, but that's the very reason God said we should have it. That's literally the opposite of what God says. He gave it because of that. So I don't. I don't understand how that gets brought up. The second thing that gets brought up a lot is, well, Jesus has come, and so that's. That's changed everything.
But again, I mean, I think that's what's ironic is it'd be the same people that are very against Christian nationalism, right? I mean, it's somewhat ironic that they'd be like, but Jesus says we shouldn't have this, but he doesn't, though.
And like, yes, we want people to repent. But like, for example, in our country, like the time between your trial and, like, execution, there is a lot of time to repent, right? Like, the idea that these people aren't being given any time to repent, like, we're grabbing them off the street and executing them on the spot. But they've had, you know, like, there's zero chance of them to actually think about what they've done or repent. I. This literally doesn't happen.
So they've got plenty of time to repent. And if they don't use that, that's on them, right? I mean, that's like. If they don't repent, we can't be like, well, we gotta hold out. They haven't repented yet, so let's wait another 10 years and see if they repent. Like, if they haven't used the time God has given them to repent, that's not on the state to wait until or to give them more time, just in case they might.
[00:14:48] Speaker A: And it's
[00:14:48] Speaker B: a misapplication of that.
[00:14:50] Speaker A: And it's good. And just on this point, too, it's good that to understand that repentance doesn't undo the temporal effects of sin.
[00:14:56] Speaker B: Correct? Yeah.
[00:14:59] Speaker A: So say I commit a capital crime, I repent of that.
That is gone, that's suffered for by Jesus.
It's not going to condemn me on the judgment day, I die and go to heaven. But there's still temporal consequences for that particular sin.
That might be time in jail or prison or even the death penalty or whatever.
That's what's due because of the crime. And I think that part of repentance for a Christian is to recognize that I have a debt because of my crime that I am now willing to pay, trusting that the Lord doesn't hold it against me, but that the world does have to hold it against me. So I Can't say, man, I'm really sorry about that, whatever genocide I caused, but since I repented, you should forgive me.
That's not the way it works. Human justice and divine justice are working on a different way.
So we desire all people to come to repentance. And in fact, and we should pay attention to this, we should have a more intentional ministry to people who are in prison.
Because it's tricky when people are in prison because if they are confessing their crimes, they're admitting their own guilt and it becomes, it becomes a complicated sort of thing. But to know, hey, look, we want you to repent in the face of Jesus and to rejoice in his forgiveness, even though the whole rest of the world ought not forgive you, but hold you accountable. And that's how it goes.
That's how justice works.
[00:16:36] Speaker B: The only thing I would add is that as Christians, I think we need to be concerned about the death penalty is being administered justly.
Like one problem I see that Christians have brought up, and I think this is a fair point, like if you or I, for example, were charged with a capital crime that was worthy of death penalty and someone much richer than us was charged with the same crime, which of us is going to be put to death? It's not the really rich guy, right? They're gonna have all kinds of money and things to fight against that.
So we want to make sure it's being done, like on proper evidence and witnesses, things like that.
And that's being done justly across the board because the Bible says God hates unjust weights and measures in these things. Like it has to be done right and the way God says to do it, not just based on, like, how much money you have or whatever.
And it should be done with actual evidence of witnesses and all the kind of proper things. Like we shouldn't, we shouldn't want it just for the sake of having it. It needs to be done right and well. And that could be one if a Christian argued, hey, right now we don't do it justly. We need to fix some things first.
I don't 100% agree with that, but I could see at least where they're coming from, that our justice system is kind of a mess. And yeah, there's things that need to be worked out better for sure. So at least I could see where they're coming from and that there is room for improvement. And we should be concerned about that because we don't want people being put to death who are not guilty. That's a really awful thing.
And we want it to be done equitably across the board so it's not just targeting people that can't afford the fancy rich lawyers or whatever.
[00:18:13] Speaker A: Fine point. That's a really good point. But. So this is 100% right. And always recognizing that our justice system will only be an approximation of justice.
[00:18:22] Speaker B: Right. It's never been perfect.
[00:18:24] Speaker A: But we have to fight. We have to keep working on that. That's just one of the human endeavors that we have to be about.
So that's good that Christians are fighting for that, for justice, not for what, what's the new term for justice, equity or whatever? For justice. For real, actual justice. And that what you mentioned there is a big part of it that it shouldn't depend on our economic status or whatever, but to recognize that capital punishment is not a devaluing of human life, but in fact, the highest valuing. And that goes back to your point that you made from Genesis 9. It's connected to the image of God. So the higher we view our humanity, the value of our humanity as created in God's image, then the more capital punishment has to be.
If you destroy humanity, then you, you, you can't be alive anymore. You forfeit your.
You forfeit your life.
[00:19:32] Speaker B: All right, I think this is our first question. This next one from South Korea that I, that I'm aware of. I could be wrong, but I think this is our first one from South Korea.
This is from a seminary student, a Lutheran Theological Seminary in South Korea. A student. There's. Your channel has been incredibly helpful in deepening my understanding of Lutheran theology. I am deeply encouraged and challenged by your love for and commitment to the Word of God. I believe that the rich theological heritage of the Lutheran Church could be a great blessing to the Korean church and society. However, in a context where Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist churches have a much stronger presence, it can be challenging for Lutheran theology to take root, especially regarding the sacraments of holy Baptism and the Lord's Supper.
How can the Lutheran Church expand its missionary reach in South Korea while remaining faithful to the gospel and sound doctrine? Even when people learn about the sacraments in the Lutheran congregation, they often encounter different views among their families and friends from other denominations. When Lutheran beliefs and practices are regarded as strange, they begin to wonder, isn't it enough just to believe in Jesus? As a result, they can struggle to appreciate the gifts God gives through the sacraments.
How can we help people become firmly rooted in the biblical foundation of Lutheran teaching while communicating the gospel more effectively to the wider Christian community?
[00:20:47] Speaker A: So Good.
What a great question. And I think that kind of encapsulates everything that you and I are trying to do with the Q and A podcast and everything else. How can we.
How can we articulate the Gospel more clearly? And the helpfulness of our Lutheran confession here, I think, is always the main question when in the denominational discernment, apologetic situation.
And the question is, what does Jesus want to give?
So every church, every denomination, in one way or another should be understood as an answer to that question.
If it's not, it's something worse. But let's put the best construction on things. And so let's let, like the Baptist Church say, here's what we think Jesus wants to give his people. And the Reformed church says, here's what we think Jesus wants to give his people, etc. In the Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, here's what Jesus wants to and Mary want to give their people or whatever. So the Lutheran Church is then a confession. Here's what we think Jesus wants to give to his people. And that framing of the question is very helpful because it lets the whole conversation in some ways be sanctified because it's connected to Jesus and his gifts.
So I think that's the first thing. And then we say, okay, what's the difference? What is the difference between the Lutheran answer to that question and the Reformed answer to the question?
And the biggest difference when it comes to the Reformed is that we think that Jesus wants to give his mercy to everybody.
This idea that the atonement of our Lord Jesus, his sacrifice is only for a portion of humanity and not for all of humanity is a huge, big difference. So that's one of the critical places where the confessions are going to be different. It also comes to the sacrament where we say, hey, we are convinced that Jesus wants to give his people his body and his blood for the forgiveness of sins. And why would we think something so crazy? Because that's what Jesus says, take and heat. This is my body. Take and drink. This is the blood of the New Testament poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins. So we say, okay, okay. And we go to bring a critique to the Reformed because they say, hey, Jesus wants his people to have his body and his blood, and you don't give it to them.
You say, no, that's not what he wants to give.
We believe that Jesus wants to give new birth, new life, regeneration through the gift of baptism. And the Reformed say, nah, nah, we baptized, but it just joins the baptized to the people of God, not to God himself. And so we have a different doctrine about baptism regarding what does Jesus want to give to baptism?
So that the argument or the confession that the Lutheran Church is making, which becomes an argument as it encounters those other confessions, is that these are in fact, the gifts that Jesus wants to give to us for our benefit and for his glory, the glory of his name.
So I think that's the way to frame the whole conversation and the presentation of the teaching of the Lutheran Church, I think all over the world, but I think in South Korea, hopefully, that's where that lands.
[00:24:09] Speaker B: Yeah, I was actually thinking, as you're talking about that it's not any different than what we deal with here. Right. Like, it's the same. We're in a very similar context, ironically, as. As they are in South Korea. Like, we have the same struggles. Our people, I think, have the same struggles.
I think this is a constant struggle of Lutherans across the world. And I think framing it that way helps us. In fact, I just actually use that framing for. I just had, right before we started recording, I had a young woman who's Baptist who just started attending church like a week ago, joined the new members class. She has lots of questions, great questions, very thoughtful questions. And so I was answering those, and that's how I framed it. Like, she was asking some of the differences. I said, well, what we're trying to ask is the question, what does Jesus want to give us and where do we find it? And here's. Here's how we understand that. And this is what we think they're missing when they talk about this. Here's what we think they're lacking, you know, and for example, I think. I think it's very helpful because most of the groups he's talking about, they see like, the gifts of baptism, Lord's Supper, for example, as something we're doing for God versus something God's doing for us.
And that. That changes the whole discussion. Like, if baptism is something I'm doing for God, then, yeah, an infant shouldn't be baptized.
If all of these things are things we're doing for God rather than this is how God's delivering to us the means of grace and the things Jesus won for us on the cross and forgiveness, life and salvation. That's a whole different discussion.
And I think we need to frame it in that way of what does Jesus want to give and what are the actual gifts? And if these things are gifts, then we need to quit talking about them as if there are works and something we're doing to earn favor with God or something we're doing to show God how dedicated we are or whatever it is and rejoice to receive what Jesus actually wants to give us.
And I think that way of talking about does help them see one, the real differences, but also two, like how great what our teaching actually is. Like, it's actually pretty fantastic that Jesus wants to give you all these things and it's all gifts to you to receive by faith. And every Sunday he promises to be there to give you more gifts and he's not going to stop and he's not going to run out and it's just going to keep happening. So that's a pretty great way to talk to people about it, you know, like, who wouldn't want that?
[00:26:26] Speaker A: That's so great.
Yeah, Praise the Lord.
[00:26:31] Speaker B: Well, now I think I have to skip a question because I think you just answered it too. So I thought it'd be a good follow up question. But actually I think it's the same question. Just because they, I'll, I'll mention it now, but I'm probably gonna remove it. They were just asking, I'm in the Bible belt and when people say, what's a Lutheran? How do I answer that? Well, I think, well,
[00:26:50] Speaker A: that's a good question. I think we could take that up because especially we have Reformation.
[00:26:53] Speaker B: Let's go for it.
[00:26:53] Speaker A: Yeah, we have Reformation time now. And so this, the whole big question about, hey, what is, how do we think of Lutheran?
What does it mean to be a Lutheran and what is the distinction between the two?
So I used to, so I used to think of the, and talk about this. I think you still can. The argument of the, of Christianity, the argument of the Lutheran Church, of the Lutheran confession. But I think it's better to think of it as a confession.
And the name is just shorthand for, for a confession. So Christianity is shorthand for the confession of the triunity of God and the incarnation of the Son of God and the redemption that he's accomplished by his death and resurrection. That's kind of shorthand for Christianity. And if you are outside of that confession, you're a heretic by trinitarian standards or incarnational standards, or redemption standards, etc. So the Lutheran Church, the Lutheran name is a subset, that's a funny way to say it, of the confession of Christianity. So we are agreeing with this broader confession of Christianity, but saying that, look, we need some specifics when it comes to this redemption and specifically to the exclusion of man's will from salvation and the exclusion of God's will from damnation.
I mean, I think that's probably the essential part of what it means to be Lutheran. In other words, we don't save ourselves and nor does God desire for our condemnation.
So almost every other confession is going to say, you've got something to do with your salvation.
Rome says that, the Orthodox say that, and they've got a different idea of salvation.
The Charismatic church says that, the Evangelical Church says that. So the broadly kind of from the radical Reformation, the revivalized Church, they're all free will churches. So they all are putting the will into some work of salvation.
We say nah.
The other church that says nah is the Reformed. So we agree with the Reformed that we are totally depraved that our will, that salvation is a monergistic act of God, that our will is not part of our salvation. We do not choose to be saved. And so we go with them or they come with us. In this somewhat surprising theological point that our works need to be distinguished from justification.
That's the alone part of the sola scriptura, sola grati, sola fide, that faith alone apart from apart from works, grace alone apart from merit, that these have to be distinguished. So it's great. We in the Reformed are saying nah to the free will theology. That's everywhere else. But then they say, but look, if God chooses to save, he also chooses to damn. And to that we say, nah, Nope.
So they want the atonement to only apply to the elect, so that Christ didn't die for all people, that God's desire to save does not extend to all people, only to the elect, and so forth. And in doing that, they totally undercut any assurance, especially through the sacraments.
So that whole kind of Protestant side of things has lost the assurance of the sacraments. They're trying to find it in other places.
And we say, no. This call that happens in baptism, this call that happens in the absolution, this call that happens in the Supper, the call that happens in the preaching of the Word is a true call. It is a true expression of the will of God for your salvation.
So that's where we kind of stand alone in the middle. And that's one way of thinking about what does it mean to be Lutheran, what's under the hood of that particular word.
[00:31:01] Speaker B: I think this is related to something the seminary student from South Korea was getting at too.
What do you do?
It's related to this when people are like, well, those differences don't really matter. We all just believe in Jesus, so why should you And I debate about this. You Lutheran?
Yeah, we disagree, but it doesn't really matter a whole lot. Like, we both believe in Jesus. So how would you answer that? Follow up? Because I can see someone hearing everything you said. Like, she tells these people in the Bible about that, and they're like, yeah, but we believe in Jesus. You believe in Jesus. Isn't that enough? So how do you answer that?
[00:31:38] Speaker A: Is it enough? So I think the question is, is it enough for Jesus to just give us a simple faith in him and nothing else? And he's. That does not please him. He says to his disciples, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey all that I've commanded you. So that all that I've commanded you means that the apostolic doctrine is expansive, that Jesus wants us to have all of these things.
So the Lord Jesus is not content with just simply giving us a saving faith. He wants us also to confess his name and to hold to the true doctrine and to rejoice in. In these other gifts.
Jesus cares about us having his body and blood. That's why he said, take and eat it and do it often.
And he's not authorized us to despise his gifts. He says, look, be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins.
Rise and be baptized. Have your sins washed away that you're born again through the water and the Word. And he hasn't authorized us to despise any of these gifts or any of his words altogether.
So the Christian who's following after Jesus, it's like, If you want to. Can you imagine that you have a birthday party.
Let's see. And the kids have.
Let's say Your daughter, who's 6, has drawn three crayon pictures of you for your birthday. And she brings you one, and you say, oh, thank you so much. This is wonderful. And then she says, I did another one. And she says, I don't want that one. And you throw it away.
And, dad, I want you to have this, too.
You're not authorized to throw away the gifts. And so Jesus says, look, I want you to have baptism. I want you to have my body and blood.
You are not authorized to throw those away. You're like, well, look, I got the first one.
Well, he's going to keep giving.
And part of the joy of the Christian. It's a crazy thing that the joy of the Christian life, which is receiving grace upon grace upon grace, becomes despised in a false attempt to preserve grace alone. I think this is the motivation.
Because the evangelical says, look, we're not saved by our works. And that means that what we have to do is find the minimum requirement for salvation. And looking for that minimum requirement is going to protect us from thinking that we're saved by works. And you come and say, baptism saves. Well, that's got to be a work. Or the Supper forgives. That's got to be a work. I'm throwing those out in order to preserve grace alone when it's undoing it.
Because grace alone is not a reductionistic move. It's an exclusionary move.
It excludes merit, but it does not reduce grace.
And the Lord has grace in abundance for us.
[00:34:43] Speaker B: I ask sometimes if I'm feeling feisty about it.
Well, if that's true, then great, you should just join our church. Because your church differences don't matter then. So you're finally becoming a Lutheran, right? Or I'll ask, well, great, would your church let me then come and preach on why all your babies need to be baptized?
If it doesn't matter, then you should be able to say yes. We had a guy when I was in Colorado that was trying to start this thing called One Church. Pagosa, he called it. And he would send out emails to all the pastors telling them that all of our church bodies are wrong and we shouldn't be divided, but instead we should all follow him. Which I wrote him a long email about why he was delusional and what he was doing, and he didn't appreciate that and took me off his list. But he basically said, like, your differences don't matter. Right?
But he wouldn't.
He wanted to be the guy in charge, right? I think that's what happens people. And I've told people, like, if you're. If you really believe these things don't matter and your church believes they don't matter, then your church shouldn't exist.
Because if you really think it doesn't matter what God teaches on these things, then just don't exist as a church and join somebody who says, hey, Jesus taught these things and they're important.
Because why would you want to be a part of a church that's like, you know what? Nothing that Jesus teaches on baptism, the Lord's Supper, all these things, none of it matters.
Okay, well, then why. Why are we still a thing? Why are we still here? Why do we ever talk about these things, right? Like, if it matters, then it should really matter. Like the Baptist, if you really take it seriously, they should view us as heterodox. Just as we see them as heterodox, like, they should. And they should be willing to say that if they really, you know, I much rather talk to someone who believes that, like, I'm wrong and I get these things wrong, and they're willing to say, you know what? You're wrong in these things and they do matter. But I think you're wrong because at least I can sit down and open up the Bible and discuss with them, right? When someone's just like, yeah, they don't really matter, well, how do you even have a conversation about it? Like, if you just don't care that Jesus taught something and you're uninterested in learning what he actually taught, well, how do you talk about it? Whereas at least that guy who tells me, hey, I think you're wrong here. It's why I can say, oh, great, let's talk about it. Let's look at the Bible and look at those verses and have a real discussion about it. I'd much rather have that at least we can agree that we disagree and talk about it and have a real discussion and maybe actually come to see that the word of God is teaching something that maybe they didn't think at first. Because I can ask questions like, well, okay, you believe that. But why does the Bible say baptism now saves you?
[00:37:11] Speaker A: Why
[00:37:12] Speaker B: does Jesus say, this is my body, this is my blood?
Why does he say, to teach them everything that I've taught you if he didn't want us to teach everything that he taught? Like, why? And at least you can talk about it. So I get frustrated with that and ask. Because if you ask them, if I call up a church that said, these things don't matter, and said, let me preach on this topic that you disagree with us on, they would say what? They would say, no.
[00:37:37] Speaker A: Right.
[00:37:37] Speaker B: They're not gonna let you.
[00:37:39] Speaker A: I remember there was a guy who wanted to come to. He wanted to use space at Hope in Aurora, Colorado, for his chur. And he says, look, these differences don't really matter. And I said, well, look, if my people came to your church, would you tell them that they had to be rebaptized?
And he said, yeah.
And I said, that's rude.
So there are differences. And there's this kind of. What you're pointing out is there's kind of a hidden piety in the.
Like, it's a false holiness in the reductionistic idea of we're all just Christians.
Because first of all, that's not.
You hold to something, you know, and so. So you have two Options. Either you hold to distinctions that you're just not willing to admit, or you don't hold to distinctions, and then you undo your own purpose. This is the.
[00:38:38] Speaker B: Yeah,
[00:38:39] Speaker A: so let's just be honest. Here's. Here's what this. Here's what these things mean and why they matter.
And I think that takes us back to the question that's sort of governing all of this is what does Jesus want to give? Because that's the way to have that conversation. But to have it in a pious way, that's what we want to do. So it's not like, well, who's right, Luther or Calvin, who's right, the Orthodox or the Romanists, it's just, okay, what does Jesus give? And then we can let that be the template by which we are judging these things. And I think even the Romanists would say, well, how do you know what Jesus. We know what Jesus wants to give through the scripture and tradition, etc. So you can get into the little distinctions there. But at least it has a chance of keeping the debate on godly pious grounds.
So that in the debate, this is the danger is that in the theology debate debate, we end up like, coming up with right theology, right doctrine or sound arguments or whatever, but our souls are being emptied out at the same time. So we want to be drawn into the Scriptures and deeper into the affection of our Lord Jesus as we think about these things.
[00:40:02] Speaker B: All right, another one related to a few days out from Reformation Day. This one's on priestly celibacy. Is it wrong?
I'm a newly converted Christian and I'm trying to decide which tradition to join. I have a question about celibacy for priests. Could you explain why this practice was so disliked by the Reformers? On the one hand, the Apostle Paul in some places clearly assumes that most pastors are married. But on the other hand, he also clearly says that celibacy is a more suitable calling for this kind of work.
Is it a problem with the Roman Catholic Church that they forbade marriage? That is, if they had simply strongly recommended celibacy for priests, but had not imposed it as a divine law, would everything have been fine? This is one of those topics that I cannot figure out, because it seems to me that Protestants simply ignore First Corinthians 7, while Roman Catholics and Orthodox praise the Council concerning Virginity so highly that marriage becomes something inherently imperfect, earthly and secondary. As if one truly wants to serve God and give himself fully to him, he must despise marriage. I'm really not sure if there is some normal interpretation of Paul's words, because it really seems to say that marriage in New Testament times is not very useful or important if one can abstain from sexual sins.
[00:41:07] Speaker A: Great, great question. I would commend to our listener, sorry, the Augsburg Confession and apology to the augsburg Confession, Article 23 on the marriage of priests, where this whole thing is laid out and where Melanchthon there, surprising to a lot of modern Lutherans, actually commends the state of chastity as in fact a more blessed state, as St. Paul does, but also goes on to say, but it's not a chosen state, it's a given state. In other words, nature, it echoes in our flesh. Be fruitful and multiply, and you cannot turn that echo off by your own choice. So the Lord has given the gift of marriage as that right place where the echoing be fruitful and multiply is a good work and not a sin against the sixth commandment.
So that for almost everybody, that is going to be the state in which we find the most helpful life, the state of marriage, husband and wife joined together for life till death parts them.
If you have the gift by the spirit of constancy, where that echo in the flesh is very small and not a driving force in your life, then praise the Lord and you can, as St. Paul says, give your life over to the church and the study of God. And you don't have to be concerned with domestic things. You should do the dishes every now and again, but otherwise you're kind of free to chase after spiritual pursuits.
But that is not something that you can just choose and forcing it. This is where Rome gets things wrong. I mean, first of all, I mean, Paul says a bishop is husband of one wife.
That is very strange to come along and say, no, the bishop is a husband of no wife.
That proves Rome's point, which is you got to do what we say, not what the prophets and apostles say. That's our critical question for Rome. What do you require that the Bible does not? What do you require me to believe or do that the Scriptures do not? So it always has to give its own special requirements. And so that's just a picture of, of the sort of problem Paul says in the latter days, some are going to come forbidding marriage and certain foods. And Rome shows herself to be that forbidder of marriage and foods.
So that's a prophecy of the danger of asceticism which finds its way into the law of the Church that Paul warns about already. So it's Rome making that into a law and saying that the Priests must be celibate, which has led to all sorts of trouble. I mean, unmentionable trouble, disastrous results, where men who do not have the gift of constant chastity, it was required of them, and that broke them or broke other people around them.
[00:44:13] Speaker B: I think I want to reframe the way they put at the end. Is that not very useful or important if one can abstain from sexual sins? Every Christian is supposed to abstain from sexual sins.
Like. Like you said, it's not merely abstaining from sexual sins because we're all called to do that, whether married or unmarried or whatever. Like, everyone's called to abstain from sexual sins. It's a gift where those. Like, that's not a struggle for you, as you said, because what happened, like, during the Reformation, what do they call monasteries? They often called them basically like brothels, because you were forcing people right before they're. Before they hit puberty, basically, to make vows of celibacy before they, you know, have those urges and desires. Then you force them to take this vow. Then you put them in a place and say, all right, now you can't have this. And then they get those desires, and it creates all kinds of problems.
And so it turns into a disaster trying to do it that way.
Now, this doesn't mean they're absolved because they didn't abstain from sexual sin, but it just shows that, like, it's not.
You can't force this gift upon people.
It's a gift that some people have. And as you said, most people don't have this gift. And we just need to be honest about that. And if you do have it, realize that it is a gift that most people just do not have.
And that you can't look down and be like, oh, I'm better because I don't have those desires. Because our confessions also talk about, right? Like, the desire a man has for a woman is like a natural desire. It's not in and of itself sinful, right? That's why it's given to us in marriage.
But to act as if it's in itself bad creates all kinds of problems and doesn't do full justice to the. To what the New Testament says. Yes, we have Paul in First Corinthians 7, but we also have all kinds of other texts where God's blessing marriage and saying marriage is good, even though it's not the main point of John Chapter two. Like, Jesus is at a wedding blessing it.
Like, that's not only the main thing Jesus is doing there, but he Is there doing that for sure? And our fathers in faith always said, look, Jesus wants to bless your marriage too. Like, he wants to be part of your marriage in your home. So if Jesus wants to do that, it's clearly not less than or, like, not ideal for people. Which is very different than saying, hey, marriage is just like your second option if you can't control yourself. Guys, like, that's not. That's not what Paul's. That's not what Paul's saying.
That's the difference than the direction Paul's going. So
[00:46:44] Speaker A: I always warn people against wondering about the motivation, but I do wonder about the motivation of Rome here because. Because this has caused them so much trouble.
I just. I said, why don't you guys just change the rules so your priest can get married? You change the rules all the time.
But I think that there's two problems. One is that you have to admit that you were wrong or somehow say that you're changing without changing, which they're good at, that they could figure that
[00:47:16] Speaker B: out. Yeah, yeah.
[00:47:17] Speaker A: But I think the second. Oh, man, I don't even.
This is a moneyed problem.
You know, Catholic priests get paid pennies. I mean, the Catholic Church has this massive, huge amount of wealth. And I think that one of the main drivers behind that is celibate clergy, because you can, you know, put the guys in this tiny apartment behind the church or whatever and paying pennies and so that you are saving anyway. So I think that the motivations behind this are something interesting to me, even though I'm generally against investigating motives, I can't hardly help myself on this one, because it's so obvious. I mean, husband and one wife.
It's just like if you look at these obvious places where Roma's like, oh, no, no. What you read there on the pa, not what it means. You got to read something different. Like in the Middle Ages, take and drink. No, no, no, no. We're not taking and drinking. We got concomitants and the priests drinking and you can't have the blood, etc. It's like it says it and it's just a bishop. It says a bishop even, you know, if they were saying, well, the priest could be married, but the bishop shouldn't be. Like, the Orthodox say, that's. I mean, look, it says it. If you want to be a bishop, a husband and one wife, like, that's. I can read the page there, guys. Like, I found a copy of the Bible one time and looked at that page and look at what it said. And you Can't. How are you gonna. Like, what kind of weird thing do you force me to do to say that? That thing that I saw, it's like theological gaslighting. That thing that I saw there on the page, Husband and one Wife. It's like, ah, well, you know, that's.
I saw it though. I saw. I really saw the words.
[00:49:10] Speaker B: Because then you go from a vow of celibacy, right. To basically a vow of poverty. So it helps.
You can't be married. And also, you're not supposed to own anything.
We'll own it all we've got.
I mean, you know, you go to the Vatican and there's a. They're not hurting for wealth and resources over there, right? Not.
It's not in short supply. But hey, that is. That's everything.
[00:49:40] Speaker A: What? That's it.
Man, oh man, what an adventure today. Well, thanks everyone for your questions.
Let's see. I think the big announcement is Pastor Packer and I are going to be down in Puerto Rico in a couple of weeks. Look on the events page on my website, Wolfmeel Co. It's a men's retreat down there. That'll be a lot of fun. We have not done a conference together, Pastor Packer.
[00:50:02] Speaker B: We have.
[00:50:03] Speaker A: We've harked on conferences together.
[00:50:07] Speaker B: We literally did one at your church. But, you know,
[00:50:10] Speaker A: which one do we do?
[00:50:11] Speaker B: That was the Digital Underground thing in Austin.
It's not a real one.
[00:50:19] Speaker A: We've hardly done conferences together.
This will be exciting. Our second one.
[00:50:24] Speaker B: Yeah. There we go.
[00:50:27] Speaker A: So if you're hanging around Puerto Rico, make sure to come and visit. That'll be awesome. Otherwise, keep sending your questions. Wolfmeo Co. Wednesday whatnot is there as well. Pastor Packer's substack. We'll put a link to that. That's pretty good. Pastor's meanderings. What's it called? The View from the Pope.
[00:50:41] Speaker B: The Parish Notebook.
[00:50:42] Speaker A: The Parish Notebook. That's what it's called. There you go. Take a look at that. And God's peace be with you. We'll see you soon.
