Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Hey, YouTube theologians, theology Q and A podcast. I'm pastor Brian Wolfmother, St. Paul Lutheran Church and Jesus Deaf Lutheran Church in Austin, Texas. Pastor Andrew Packer over there. Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, Collinsville, Illinois. Pastor Packer, I heard a rumor about you, that you are going down to Puerto Rico for a men's retreat.
I can confirm this rumor, actually.
[00:00:20] Speaker B: Are you sure it's not Pastor Flemmy?
[00:00:24] Speaker A: Look, it says it right here.
[00:00:26] Speaker B: Oh, there. It's right there.
[00:00:28] Speaker A: Reverend Andrew Packer, this is Machulinidad central in Christo, which means the center of masculinity is in Christ. I know that from the Google Translate or masculinity. This is a Men's Retreat. November 13th and 14th. You and I are both going to be there confirming this rumor. So if anyone's hanging around Puerto Rico, there's the info. That's pretty cool. That'll be fun.
What are you going to talk about?
[00:00:58] Speaker B: I don't know. I don't remember.
[00:01:00] Speaker A: I don't know because I haven't thought of it yet.
[00:01:03] Speaker B: I've actually been thinking about it for a while, but I don't have it all put together yet. Yeah.
Are you ready for the first question?
[00:01:09] Speaker A: You got some questions? This is going to be the first time we've done a retreat together. Hopefully it is last. This will be great.
[00:01:16] Speaker B: We'll find out. We'll find out. Right,
[00:01:20] Speaker A: Mel?
That's what I.
[00:01:24] Speaker B: Why is foot washing not a sacrament?
So from the Lutheran perspective, what is the difference between foot washing and, say, baptism? In John 13, Jesus says, if I do not wash you, you have no part with me. Not trying to be controversial or have some sort of weird gotcha moment. I want to learn about my Savior through the Word. And I'm confident you all are committed to searching the Word for truth as well.
So why do we say, do this with baptism in the Lord's Supper? It's a sacrament.
Why do we not call foot washing that?
[00:01:56] Speaker A: Well, okay, so two things. Number one, we do do what Jesus said. So I want to distinguish between what Jesus institutes in the washing of the feet with what Jesus institutes in the supper. So the thing that's going to make a sacrament a sacrament is that it's delivering the promise of the forgiveness of sins.
So there's no promise of forgiveness of sins or mercy or a clean conscience connected with foot washing. The gift that's connected to foot washing is clean feet.
So Jesus has instituted baptism and the Lord's Supper as a washing of the conscience.
So we let those sacraments remain sacraments.
Foot washing is different. It's a call to service.
So we don't understand foot washing as the institution of a ritual, but rather as the institution of an attitude.
So that when Jesus washes his disciples feet, he says, look at what you're seeing me do. You will also do. So that means that the Christian is set to serve, and especially those who are put in office are set to serve the people. That that's what the office is. It's there. So if the people have dirty feet, then we wash them. But whatever else needs doing in service is what we do.
So we don't understand the foot washing to be a liturgical or ritual activity, but rather as a particular example of service which Jesus has given us as an example to follow.
[00:03:40] Speaker B: So no foot washing Lutherans, is that what you're saying?
Aren't there some Baptists that call themselves foot watching Baptists?
[00:03:48] Speaker A: I think I've heard of it. But this is the, I mean this is the thing, right? So like the reason Jesus washed the disciples feet was for two reasons. One is because their feet were dirty. And two, he wanted to show the example of what it meant to be the Lord who serves.
And so but we don't like if someone's feet aren't dirty, then you don't need to wash them.
That's kind of the point there.
So I think that's our answer in thinking about that. So we do want to. Again, if you find people who have particularly dirty feet, then you can go and serve them by washing their feet. But we want to try to capture the doctrine that Jesus and the practice that Jesus has put in place.
So some things are liturgically like Jesus says with the Lord's Supper, do this.
And what is the this that we do in remembrance of him is eat his body and drink his blood, rejoicing and believing in the forgiveness, the promise of the forgiveness of sins. But the do this of the foot washing is not just the washing the feet, but the serving and not thinking yourself over other people not thinking that you. I mean as Jesus himself says, look, the Son of Man didn't come to to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many. And then he says, the servant is not greater than the master. So if Jesus came to serve and still comes to serve us, he sets us in this world to serve others.
[00:05:14] Speaker B: What do you think about? I know some Lutherans also take this passage.
So humble service is the first part. And then by way of application, because Jesus talks about you're clean but not, not your Feet, so you don't have to have your whole. You don't have all of you wash just your feet. They've taken that to be a reference to, well, you're baptized and so now you just need to con, like confession, absolution, basically, like you've already been baptized and so now your feet are getting dirty as you like. They're. They take it humble service at first, but then apply it to the Christian life second. Yeah, I think okay with that move. Is that, does that work or what do you think about that?
[00:05:48] Speaker A: I think it's a fine picture.
Like we are washed and cleansed, but we go through this life and just like walking around makes your feet dirty, so living makes you. You're sinning.
And the Lord has kind of a minor cleansing for that. But I think that the absolution delivers the same exact punch that baptism does and vice versa. In some ways, baptism absolution is sending us back to our baptism that where the forgiveness that was lavished upon us there in that washing of regeneration is now brought back to our own minds again.
So, yeah, I don't want to, you know, the Catholic have this big error. Sorry, the Romanists have this big error.
Comes from who? Thomas Aquinas, who said that penance is the plank that we cling to once baptism is shipwrecked.
And that's bad and dumb.
So we don't want to have that idea. Like baptism is the big time forgiveness and absolution is like the minor forgiveness.
But I do think that the absolution is the regular sort of thing. It's the regular pattern of repentance and cleansing. And I, by the way, I learned this from our mutual friend Pastor Melius, who was studying the Book of Concord and took from Melanchthon's words where he says, we retain confession and absolution for the sake of the absolution to mean. And I think he's right that the main thing in confession absolution is not the confession part, but the absolution part. And if someone wants to just come and give a general confession and receive the absolution, then that's great.
So that I'll encourage that for all our new members and our confirmands, we have confession absolution on Wednesday afternoons before our evening prayer. And I'll say, hey, look, just come and give the general confession. And you don't need to tell me what's bothering you. Just confess all your sins and you'll hear the absolution.
It's great practice. It's really good. So it takes down that fear that I don't want to go to confession. Absolution, because I don't want to. I don't want to say what, you know, what I did, as if I'm going to be surprised. Like, I know already that you're a sinner because I read about you in the Bible. That's not the surprise. But anyway, the devil will use that to stop people. So just come and confess I'm a sinner and hear the absolution. Praise the Lord.
So it's great.
[00:08:21] Speaker B: Doesn't it seem like too, if you take foot washing as this thing that you have to do at church, so you make it some kind of sacrament that what you've done now is you actually turn the whole thing on its head. Because now it becomes a show before the congregation. Because I've seen this done at places, right? Becomes a show of the congregation. Like let's say you as a pastor go and wash people's feet. Where the people coming for that, are they really. Their feet really gonna be that dirty because they know you're gonna wash them, right? Like, it's not. It's a very. It turns into a very different thing. And rather than being an act of humble service, it becomes, I think, something else. Almost more like a show. Right. It's. It's no longer. So then you miss the whole point. So now it's not about humble service at all. It's about, I'm gonna do this thing in front of everybody. So everyone sees that I'm doing humble service, right. And that seems to. Seems to defeat the whole purpose. It just seems like it gets it all out of order. And so that.
Reading it that way, I think you just end up in a weird spot with the entire text. Like now it's not even humble service. Now it's. It's more of a show.
And like you just missed the whole point. And it doesn't. It doesn't do anyone any good.
[00:09:22] Speaker A: Yep.
So we want to. We want to copy the attitude that Jesus teaches in when he's there washing his disciples feet.
[00:09:32] Speaker B: All right, next one, the Lord's Supper. Why body and not just the blood?
[00:09:36] Speaker A: Wow. We are on Maundy Thursday today.
[00:09:39] Speaker B: Yeah, it worked out. I see. The reason for the blood wine and Lord's Supper. The blood is the means of forgiveness. So Leviticus 17:11. For the life of the flesh is in the blood. And I've given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls. For it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Hebrews 9. Indeed, under the law, almost everything is purified with blood. Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. But why do we also need the body bread? I want a better understanding. When I eat his flesh, does it correlate with the Passover, the resurrection, the Old Testament sacrifice?
Why do we need both?
[00:10:14] Speaker A: Well, so it's a great. I mean, a why question is not going to have a real answer, right? So unless the Lord tells us his own motivation. Here's why I've chosen. I mean, I wonder sometimes why he didn't choose the lamb and say, this is my body and give us the meat. But it's the bread that's the thing that he wants to give to us. It might be connected pretty closely to the preaching that Jesus gives us in John 6. I'm the bread of life.
I come down from heaven. And so he's showing himself to be that manna, the bread that doesn't come up from the earth, but the bread that falls down from heaven. And so the two natures are there confessed by the bread.
[00:10:57] Speaker B: And bread is also the priestly food. Throughout the Old Testament, it's like, what? The bread is a priestly thing. Wine is a kingly thing. And so as the prophet, priest and king, he doing both. So I think there's that, too. Sorry, go ahead.
[00:11:12] Speaker A: Yeah, that's nice, too. The showbread that's in the temple and David is.
That's that big controversy where David is eating that bread.
But I don't know, you know, the old. Is this in the didache, that old thing that talks about. As the wheat is ground up and made into one loaf.
So we are united in the.
In the body of Christ by eating that bread, which is his body.
So there's a poetic picture of.
I suppose that's also true with all the grapes being smashed up into one cup.
[00:11:50] Speaker B: But I don't know.
[00:11:50] Speaker A: Jesus wants us to have his body and to have his blood, to give them to us. Uniquely.
It's one of the problems.
The Catholic Church thought about this in the Middle Ages and said, well, if it's the living body of Christ, then it's got some blood in there, so we should just have the body and not the blood.
Weird.
It's weird to think that you've got the authority to sort of make that adjustment to the Lord's arrangement of things. But I think that's probably the essence of Catholicism to have that arrogance. But anyhow, the Lord says, no, it's in the bread that you get my body, and it's in the cup that you get my blood.
And how can they be separated in this way?
It points to his death, where the blood was poured out of the body.
And so I suppose it brings us back to that great gift of what he won for us and his atoning sacrifice.
[00:12:49] Speaker B: Well, you see that in the Old Testament sacrifices, right, you drain the blood, right? The blood gets poured out and then. But they don't, in the Old Testament, drink the blood, but they do eat the body. Because many of the sacrifices, right, they. They eat.
But then the. The blood, the life is in, the blood is saved till the New Testament. So I do think there's a. We have this picture throughout the Bible that the sacrifice is body and blood, right? So you have that continual picture all the way through.
And then. So it makes sense with the picture you've seen of sacrifice throughout the Bible, like, to have it now. Could he have done it with just one or the other? Sure, I guess. But that's not what he's chosen to do. I think it goes to your question about why, right? Like, he doesn't tell us exactly why, but you can at least see a pattern throughout the whole Bible. This is how he does it, which is you have a sacrifice, you pour out the blood until the coming of Christ, and you get to drink the blood, right? Because it was an abomination for them to. To have blood. In fact, the only place we see in the entire Old Testament where someone, like, where we see them, like, knowingly, willingly do this is after Saul's disaster when he doesn't let the men eat. Remember, like, they're like, starving. And Jonathan had the honey. And Jonathan's like, hey, we should have all had honey. Like, this is great. And the guys are, like, starving, and so they, like, start killing these animals and just eating them with the blood in there because they didn't want to take time to drain them. So this picture of Saul's utter failure. Outside of that, though, in the Old Testament, like, that's one thing they were very scrupulous about avoiding, right? The blood. The blood. And then they get to the New Testament and Jesus is like, tank Drake, this is. This is my blood for you.
So I do think they're both. All those things are connected. And we get pictures of them. But maybe the why is a little harder. Like, I can tell you how it's all connected, but, like, the why behind it is because this is what God wants for us. That's my answer.
[00:14:40] Speaker A: I think it's great to Ask the why question to. To know that it's going to lead to that it can lead to fruitful speculation.
Like as I wonder at the supper, I wonder why Jesus has this. For me, that can be helpful. But we would just want to be careful also that it doesn't lead us off into like, oh, here's why.
And we have some sort of secret revelation that the Lord hasn't given or that it leads us away from what the Lord has promised to. To do and to give in the supper.
[00:15:11] Speaker B: Also you mentioned the lamb. Like why not the lamb instead of the bread?
And I wonder. I think that might be for a few reasons if we're going to speculate.
I think one is that maybe even causes more confusion about the so called capronetic eating. Right. Like that may enter in like a whole different.
That takes on a whole new light if you're saying this is Jesus body and you're eating actual the flesh of an animal. Right. Like that seems to be pushing you in one direction or another. The other is, as I said, bread is the priestly food, but also to singing practically. It's much easier for people to have bread to provide for their churches throughout the entire world, no matter what period of history you're in, versus meat is much harder, much more expensive, etc. Right.
I think that's. That could be part of it as well, but.
Great.
I see changing the subtitles. Okay, be ready for the next one.
[00:16:13] Speaker A: Oh yeah, I'm always ready.
[00:16:16] Speaker B: What is the church? Let me read. This is a.
I found this one interesting because are you familiar with Redeemed Zoomer who quote here in a second. Okay, so that'll be helpful for you. As I read this, a popular argument is going around from the Reform side by a guy whose YouTube channel called Redeem Zoomer, who by the way, recently took a break because he said some really dumb things and needed to step away. Okay, what about he made some Nazi Jew jokes in Discord.
Also, also, I think some of his stuff that she's gonna mention also has gotten so out of hand. That's probably good that he stepped away for a little bit. Anyway, this argument is that it is sinfully schismatic to make a new denomination for anyone, regardless of qualification, unless they are excommunicated or physically persecuted. He defends this belief, citing the Old Testament temple, saying the prophets, the faithful, didn't leave during child sacrifice. The New Testament has no example to the contrary and that Athanasius was essentially against the whole church but did not break away. He also says the commands to not accept blasphemers are to be fulfilled by kicking them out, not by kicking yourself out, which seems to track well with Old Testament Athanasius. Just make. Just to make it extra clear, I think the argument is specifically for denomination breaks, not necessarily for individuals.
I don't know if that's true. I actually think. I think he thinks for individuals, too, but they continue. They've been growing up Lutheran and they haven't known another option.
So where do we draw our definition of the church in Scripture? And if we don't have communion with these other groups, how do we see them?
But I think maybe start with the schismatic thing, because I do think it's an interesting. I think it's an important question because the Bible does.
He's right. So here's where I think Regime Zumer's right. I think he's right that the Bible hates schism and that it sees as a very wicked, awful thing.
I think where he's wrong is not seeing that, like, for example, he's in the pcsa, that his church currently is in schism from the word of God. And that to say, like the pca, which I've seen him say is like, worse than a murderer because they.
They've broken away and are doing their thing. Now he will say. He will. The LC Messy does not see us in schism because of when we started. But it's also weird because, like, how can Mainline Piece usa. Like, I feel like his arguments, and I've seen him try to argue this, but I don't think it holds up. How does it not just lead you back to Rome?
Like, how can you say in any. Like, how can you say I'm not in schism? Because some Presbyterians in the 18th century started this church. Well, sorry, bud. Like, either schism is bad or it's not. I don't care what year it started if you're not in communion with Rome. But how do we as Lutherans wrestle with this? Because it comes up a lot.
[00:19:00] Speaker A: We go back to when Rome broke off of us in the Council of Trent and said, hey, we want to anathematize the Gospel. I think the key. So there's a couple of key texts, but the key, key, key, key text for all this conversation is says in Galatians, chapter one, where he says, look, if I or an angel from heaven preach a different gospel, I and that angel are anathema.
In other words, there is a theological standard that stands above everything, every person, every office, and that has to stand so any move to put an organization or an institution or an office or a person above the judgment of the Gospel, which Paul says there in Galatians 1, is illegitimate.
So it belongs to the nature of the Church to. To always look out for false doctrine both inside and outside, as Paul preaches in Acts chapter 20. Whereas Jesus warns when he says false teachers will rise up, there's going to be false teaching, and the false teachings are there so that those who are true can be proven. That's Paul in 1 Corinthians.
So the question is a question of doctrine before it's a question of office. It has to be. It has to be.
And the doctrine has to be simple enough that the faithful Christian can know the difference between a true teacher and a false teacher. This is one of the great dangers that Rome's argument, which leads to this ecclesiastical despair that we're seeing. They say, no, the Bible's not clear enough and the Christian's not spiritually equipped enough to be able to discern between what's true and false.
You have to rely on the Church for that. So you have to decide to not decide, which is still a decision.
You can't escape it. It's why some people are like hanging by a fingernail onto Protestantism, because they recognize that they would be the ones deciding to become Romanist, which is what Rome is against, is people deciding.
So it's like this weird irony, but blessed strange irony, of the fact that you can't escape the fact that each one of us is actually at some point saying, this is the truth. To which I can. This is the truth, I confess.
So as much as Rome wants to try to say that that ought not to exist, and apparently redeemed Zumer wants to say, that ought not to exist, it must exist for Galatians one to stand and for all the other, for all the other things to stand.
So the Church is. This is part of the essential question that leads to this.
It's defined beautifully by Luther in Small Cult, where he says, the Church is believers and holy lambs who hear the voice of their good shepherd and the good shepherd Jesus.
And that is, if we start there, then we are equipped to be able to say, okay, what's the role of the Lamb?
I mean, what, as Christians, what are we to do?
And we are to listen to the voice of Jesus and receive his gifts.
And that leads us to the question of, well, where am I doing that? What are the gifts that Jesus wants to give to me, and where are they being given?
And look, I might be born into PC usa. But I realized pretty quickly, Jesus wants to give me the gifts of his prophets and apostles, and the church is denying those gifts of Jesus. To me, the institution is cutting me off from the words of the prophets and apostles by making all the prophets and apostles like political activists and destroying the truth of the Scripture.
Or Jesus wants to give me his body and his blood.
And the whole Reformation Church, Reformed Church, is saying, no, no, you don't get the body and the blood. Or Jesus wants me to have a good clean conscience. I mean, these are the things that Jesus wants me as his sheep to have. And if the church is standing between me and the gifts of Jesus, I have no obligation to submit to that institution that's stealing from me the gifts of God.
And that institution has no legitimacy because the church, if it's instituted, is instituted by Jesus to give out his gifts.
And so as a Christian, I have to have the capacity to judge the institution, what it's doing and what it's giving based on the clear words of my Lord Jesus. Or else the whole thing makes no sense.
It's a complete slave mentality that would have us under the subjection of an institution or a man rather than being able to hear the words of my Lord Jesus.
[00:24:24] Speaker B: A couple of quick thoughts. One, for us, the pure preaching of the Gospel and the right administration of the sacrament is like foundation for what the church is. So if you lose that, then we can start questioning, right, whether or not you're actually church or not. If you don't have those two things, then it's a legitimate question. Now, I do appreciate Radim Zoomer, like his. His desire to fight and to try to win back his denomination from that stuff, I think is.
I think at least can be admired, you know, in one respect. Like, he wants. He does not want them to be off the deep end on this stuff. He wants him to come back to the word of God on things, which I think is admirable.
But his arguments in response to the things you've been saying would be essentially okay. That's all. He might even say, I agree with you. However, you can't just break off from the church because of that. You have to stay and fight and you have to preach and teach the word of God in that church, no matter how bad it gets. Because that's what they did in the Old Testament, right? That's what they did. He gives all these examples, right? They mentioned Athanasius here. Like, you don't leave and start your own thing.
You stay and Fight till the very end, no matter how bad it is or how bad it looks, even if there's only a few of you. Because you can't. Any starting of another church would be schismatic and you'd be violating Scripture.
That's like the core of his argument is, okay, you're right, this is what the church should be doing.
But even though this church is doing evil and wicked things and I'm vehemently opposed to them, I have to stay. Because for me to leave would be to cause schism, and I can't do that. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, our response would be, they're the ones in schism, not you. Like, they're the ones who have abandoned the word of God. So they're actually the schismatics. They've already started a new church. You just haven't realized it. That would be maybe how I'd approach it. What do you think?
[00:26:24] Speaker A: I think so too.
So two things. I think that it.
I mean, part of the problem of what redeemed Zumer suggests is that he makes it obligatory.
Like, can you stay and fight?
Maybe. Can you leave? Yes, you are free to leave. You do not have to be in the spiritual danger of being under the authority of a false teacher because. Because that abuse of the office, of the false teaching, both in the local congregation as well as in the institution itself, is an abandoning of the office. So this is the second thing. This is what Luther says. Let me see if I can pull this up. This is a small called Part three, Article seven on the church, which I think I quoted pretty good earlier.
And here's what Luther says. We do not concede that they are the Church, and in truth they are not the church.
Nor will we listen to those things under which, under the name of church, they enjoin or forbid. For, thank God, Today a child 7 years old knows what the church is, namely, holy believers and lambs who hear the voice of their shepherd.
For the church prays. Thus I believe one holy Catholic or Christian Church. This holiness does not consist in albs, tonsures, long gowns, other of their ceremonies devised by them beyond the Holy Scripture, but in the word of God and true faith, so that this idea of the Christian belongs to the Church. But when an institution shows itself to be not church, then there's not an obligation that we owe to them.
Now look, my family started in the elca.
I left. Well, I stepped way outside of the ELCA and was in Calvary Chapel in Southern Baptist Church. Although family, I guess my Membership was still over there and was involved in that whole thing.
And when we realized how far they were going from the word of God, it's this question, well, what do you do? And you want to stay and you want to be a voice for change and try to make a difference. I remember my dad writing letters to the bishops, the regional bishops, the whole church bishop going to these things, all these groups trying to make a difference.
That's fine. If you want to do it, it's fine. The problem is it also makes, it makes going to church this horrible thing because now there's no joy in it. There's only suspicion when you're listening to the gospel being, well, you weren't listening to the gospel, but there's only suspicion when you're listening to the preaching.
The whole situation becomes spiritually very dangerous.
And there is danger in the spiritual realm of being under the authority of a heretic.
And so there's all sorts of old rules about this. I think that if Regime Zumer would dig into some of the canonical laws about this, he would find some surprisingly flexible options when you find yourself under the jurisdiction of a heretic.
So I don't think that all these examples just simply stand out. Sometimes Luther's given as an example, they say, look, he didn't leave to start his own church, he was kicked out. But if they wouldn't have kicked him out, he would have left.
I mean, he talks about it later, about how ignorant he was of the evil in the church at the beginning.
And more and more he started to see it. And so it was an inevitable thing. So this like stay and wait to get kicked out, I think, I think if you are conscience bound to stay and stick it out and try to fight, I think you can do it. It's going to be hard and wearisome and dangerous.
But if you're like, no, look, I want to go to be under the spiritual authority of an orthodox teacher who gives who's in whose preaching. I can hear the voice of Jesus, praise the Lord. That's good.
[00:30:48] Speaker B: Yeah.
His arguments to me, like saying even people like in the PCA need to leave and come back to the PC usa. Like if you guys hadn't left, we wouldn't be this bad off to begin with kind of argument, I just, I don't buy and ironically there's some church buys what that I don't think he sees as schismatic. But like for example, the elca, they split off from us, so really they should be seen as schismatic. And he's in fellowship with them.
Right. Like, I just. I don't. I don't feel like it's very consistent, and I don't. But I admire the zeal to want to reform your church body a lot. It's like, I think that's commendable. But. And he's young, and I just hope that he sees eventually that the more important thing than the PCOSA is the word of God. And people hearing the word of God rightly not being attached to some denomination that no longer cares what the word of God says outside of pockets of people. I get that there's pockets of people there that do that. Thanks be to God for them, but that's not the denomination as a whole.
[00:31:56] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:31:56] Speaker B: Even in their. Their own confession at the institutional level is contrary to the word of God in so many ways. Like, I just don't. I don't know how you can make that argument with that being the case.
[00:32:08] Speaker A: Yep. There's something here, too. Let's see if I can get there. I've just. I've been. I've been kind of scratching on this, and I haven't even scratched off all the.
The stuff to see what's underneath it, you know, like, when you get the scratch off.
So I've just started scratching on this idea that one of the. One of the problems, if you don't. Okay, if you don't have the doctrine of the body and blood, you don't have the doctrine of closed communion, you can't. Those. Those always go together. And if you don't have the doctrine of closed communion, then you have to find another way of shaping the unity of the church, which is why the Reformed have three marks of the church, not two. So we have two marks of the church. The gospel rightly preached, the sacraments rightly administered. The Reformed tradition has three. It's those two plus church discipline.
And what church discipline does is it makes your relationship to the institution part. An essential part of.
The essential part of what the church is.
And if you do that, if you make church discipline a mark of the church, then you introduce this political or bureaucratic thing into the essence of the church. Which is why, like the Presbyterians are called the Presbyterians and Episcopalians are called the Episcopalians. They're defined by their organizational structure. That's always been an adiaphora, or indifferent point for the Lutherans, but for them, it's an essential part of it. And that means that your connection to the institution is much more part of your understanding of salvation than it ought to be. That would be my assessment. So even for, like in the Reformed tradition, baptism doesn't join you to Christ, it joins you to the people of Christ.
It makes baptism into a kind of bureaucratic thing.
And you have these levels of fellowship there. Like, you can be a member, but you can't be a leading elder unless you subscribe to the. Whatever. There's all these bureaucratic circles.
If you don't have close communion, then you are suddenly like a legalist according to the bureaucracy. And this kind of thinking that's there, I think, is the result of that.
When you make church discipline part of the essence of the church, you make your relationship to the Church an essential part of your understanding of salvation.
And we don't go there because we have close communion, so that the unity of doctrine is expressed sacramentally, not bureaucratically.
Anyway, I'm just starting to scratch on that. I don't know if that even makes sense.
[00:34:59] Speaker B: No, it does. I hadn't thought about it that way. I think it'd be worth developing more in the future.
All right, questions about the external and the internal in the Christian life.
So how do we understand the Lutheran emphasis on extra nos, that our righteousness and assurance are outside of us without with passages saying Christ and the Holy Spirit live in us? Romans 7:18 says, Nothing good dwells in our flesh, while 1 Corinthians 6:19 says, we are temples of the Holy Spirit? Galatians 2:20 says, Christ lives in me.
Romans 6 and Ephesians 2 say we've died and been made alive with Christ.
So what has actually changed in us already while still sin still remains? How can Christ and the Spirit truly dwell in us without turning inward for God's voice, presence, or assurance?
Or are we basically theological zombies waiting for the resurrection?
[00:35:49] Speaker A: Well, maybe that's not quite an either, or let's see if we can find some ground in between.
So we do have an inner life. We've got a mind, we've got a heart, we've got a gut. And so we've got memories and reason, and we've got will and desire and emotions and all of this. This is a true sort of thing. It's all part of us, and it's all part of our flesh. So that means as we are born, it's all sinful, we're corrupt and sinful, and it's unclean, it's unholy. But now we are given the Spirit.
That means the Holy Spirit dwells in us.
And now there's new motions, there's new feelings, there's new desires, new affections, new wants, new wills. Well, one new will.
So that there is a transformation that happens on our inner life.
The danger is not the inner life. The danger is that the inner life becomes the authority through which we judge the things that are outside of us.
So the Lutheran emphasis on the extra nos is that those things which God has put in place, especially His Word and His sacraments, these things are true. And they come to me as the true word of God, the true gift of God, the true work of God.
And it doesn't depend on me. It's true before I believe it. It's true before I hear it. It's true before I get it.
And that's. That is a grounding thing.
It's because we can't pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps. I was telling Bible class a couple weeks ago that I had this very vivid dream when I was a young man that I could actually put my hands underneath my feet and lift myself up.
And it was like all the dreams that I used to have where I was flying, where it would start with, just barely could do it, and then I would get stronger so that I could actually lift myself up into the air and float around by pulling myself up. I would get tired and I'd have to go back down, but I actually could lift myself up by my own bootstraps, which is an amazing sort of awesome thing, but also not true. You can't do it so that if we depend on our reason or our will or our feelings to determine what's true, to stand in judgment over the gifts of God, then we lose that assurance. We lose that comfort. So the Lutheran doctrine of extra nos is that the word of God outside of us before it strikes our inner life and our inner judgment. It is true. And it's my inner life's job to receive that truth. That's what faith is, actually.
It's the reshaping of my inner life to stand under the promises of God, just like obedience is the reshaping of my will to stand under the commands of God. And so it's not saying that we don't have anything going on inside. Christ dwells in us by faith. The Holy Spirit lives in us. I'm obsessed with this passage in Ephesians 1. I can't get where Paul says, I pray that God would send the Spirit so that the eyes of your heart would be open, so that you would recognize his grace and wisdom and power, the same power at work in you that was at work in Christ when He was raised from the dead and, and seated at the right hand. Above all authorities and principalities.
The Spirit is at work in us, to recreate us and to cause us to do good things and trust in God's Word. But it all depends on those things which are true outside of us first.
And it's the essential spiritual mistake.
We name it enthusiasm.
To give authority or precedence of the inner word or the inner life or the inner thoughts, and to put that above the Word of God.
That's enthusiasm, and that's the essential ingredients of every heresy.
[00:39:57] Speaker B: So maybe just to summarize what you said or reword it slightly, so extra nos for us then, isn't denying that the Holy Spirit's at work in us. This isn't denying the Holy Spirit's actually making us holy, isn't denying Christ lives in me. As they quoted Galatians 2, 20 there. It's not denying any of those things. It's saying that's not where you look for comfort, assurance. That's not where you look ultimately for Christ and his gifts. You don't look inward. You look outwards to those things coming to you through Word and sacraments. And then as you do that and receive them by faith, all that other stuff's happening. But that's not where the focus is, right? That's. That's what. That's what we want for people is to not be focused inwardly and to be obsessed looking inwardly, but we want them to be looking out at Christ and His gifts. And because we know if they do that, that the inward stuff is going to, I don't want to say take care of itself, but like the, the Spirit's going to be taking care of that, right? Like it's going to be happening. But we don't need you looking there. We want you looking to Christ because he's the one who's going to make those things happen.
[00:41:00] Speaker A: Here's the augsburg Confession, Article 5, where the first extra nose is spoken.
This is the extra nose, the external word there, where the Anabaptists are condemned, who think that the Holy Ghost comes to men without the external word by their own preparations and works. So apart from the Word, through my works or whatever, the Holy Spirit's coming. But look at this. Pastor Packer, if you would have asked me, I don't know, three months ago, hey, what's Article five say? And I would have summarized well, that the faith that's discussed in Article 4 about justification, that it would come, the Lord has instituted the ministry of the Word so that through the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments, the faith is given which believes the promises of God. But it doesn't say that. It says that through the Word and sacraments as through instruments the Holy Ghost is given, who works faith when and where it pleases God in them that hear. So the ministry is that the preaching of the Word and the sacraments is the administration of the Holy Spirit. It's the giving of the Holy Spirit, who then is at work.
So it does not deny this inner working of the Spirit who's there. It's just saying, how does that Holy Spirit, how does the Holy Spirit get into our own hearts? And the answer is through the means of grace, through the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments.
[00:42:21] Speaker B: This is why I try to emphasize when I'm teaching on the third commandment, like when you cut yourself off from church, what you're really doing is cutting yourself off from the Holy Spirit Spirit.
Because I don't think a lot of people put it in those terms as far as the way they think about it. They just think, oh, I'm ditching church.
But to cut yourself off from the Word and sacraments, to cut yourself off from the Holy Spirit, it's literally what we confess, right? If that's how the Holy Spirit's given and you refuse to receive those things, then you're not just saying, oh, I don't. I don't need the Word, I don't need the sacrament as bad as that is. You're also saying, I don't need the gift of the Holy Spirit anymore. That's what you're saying. Like, I. I don't. I don't have any need for that. Which just, you know, it's one of those things. They make that joke, right? Say it out loud. Say it slowly.
So before you start dishing church, tell yourself, I don't need the Holy Spirit, and I don't need.
I don't need that. And then. And then see if you still want to follow through with your plans. That's. That's my recommendation.
All right.
Are you ready for the last one?
[00:43:22] Speaker A: Last one. Wow. Sure.
[00:43:25] Speaker B: Worldly issues in a Lutheran school, I should note this is not. Because it's gonna say kindergarten teacher, and we have two kindergarten teachers, so it's not one of my kindergarten teachers. Just so people know.
[00:43:35] Speaker A: Okay?
[00:43:35] Speaker B: I don't want them to think like, this is from them.
They're asking us anyway.
I'm a kindergarten teacher in a Lutheran school. I'm wondering how to best address worldly issues in a Lutheran setting. Last year we had a preschool student with two moms. They didn't send their child to kindergarten this year. I'm not sure how many family students were aware of this, but last year my students were talking about getting married. A boy to his best friend, also boy. Then the argument started about if a boy could marry a boy. I ended up saying something like, in America, a boy can marry a boy and a girl can marry a girl. But in the Bible, God made marriage to be between a boy and a girl. Then we went to recess.
At that point in the year, I wasn't sure if the preschool students would be coming to kindergarten and was thinking about how I would address the issue while being compassionate to the child but affirming God's words.
Any thoughts? This is also a school like most Lutheran schools. She mentions, just as a aside, that they do have to sign a waiver that says they understand they teach Lutheran doctrine. About half their families are not Lutheran.
[00:44:35] Speaker A: Yeah, there's a. There's a deal here. I, I do not know if you guys have policies about this about allowing families to send their children who are in a complete state of disarray. Like if there's two dads or two moms. Of course there's not. I mean, of course gay parents or whatever that this becomes a.
It's actually, I think a legitimate question about what kind of disruption it brings to the school community.
You have to know that it's going to bring disruption in there and to be ready for it is really good.
I don't think I would have conceded this idea that in America, two men, two boys and two girls can. Can marry each other.
Because that's just a. That's just a sham. It's not real marriage, whatever it is. It's something totally different.
I think I would have. I think what. The second part of how that was addressed was really well done, that God designed marriage for a mom and a dad, for a man and a woman to come together in marriage for family. And it's a great gift.
And if anything else is happening, it's people pretending to be married but not really being married.
Children, praise the Lord, are not part of the six commandment question.
You know, for them, they're not yet an adult. And so the idea of being husband and wife is not possible yet for the children. So they just see love and affection and say, well, if that's what it is, then these two boys are great friends and they love each other, so why not get married? Or the two girls or whatever. That's just, you know, kids have always thought that way. I mean, it doesn't even kind of make sense. So Dr. Sinkbile has, in this Catechism for Kids book, has a really nice way of describing it. He says mommies and daddies love each other with their bodies in ways that are very special.
And so because they love each other with their bodies in ways that are special, it doesn't belong to anybody else, and it just belongs to moms and dads. And through that special love with the body that moms and dads have for one another, then babies come along.
And so this is, I think, a really good way to teach that marriage and what we could then identify as intimacy and children again all belong together.
This fraud of two men pretending to be married or two women pretending to be married is an act of despair.
And while we're tempted to be angry when we look at it, we should probably tempt it. We should be tempted to be sad.
Of like, what happened to the people who are tempted in this way and who have just given up the fight such that they think that they should never be parents, should never have children, should never think of their bodies as anything more than that which is a tool for their own pleasure and fulfillment, who think of the institution of marriage as an act of self expression.
It's such a fantastically small, diminished, sad way of being a human being that it should. I mean, our hearts should absolutely break.
For anybody who's even tempted in this way, much less gives up the fight against this temptation and would claim this diminished identity of being gay or lesbian or whatever. I mean, it's like eating despair and letting it define your whole life.
And it's a complete break from the future.
It's tearing up the past.
It's making sure that.
That your meaning and purpose are. Are so diminished that you could probably put them in your back pocket.
And we should weep for this as a culture that we've said that this is okay because it's just such a kind of a. Well, it's just a diminished life.
So. So I don't know. We got to fight against it because we got to fight against despair. The Lord has not let us.
He has not.
He will not let the darkness overcome the light. But this, like. This is like trying to ingest the darkness, this homosexuality stuff. So anyway, that's a few thoughts.
[00:49:34] Speaker B: I'm gonna focus on Lutheran schools more than on that issue, because I think you covered that really well. But I've only ever had calls at
[00:49:41] Speaker A: schools you're gonna answer the question. Okay. Okay.
[00:49:43] Speaker B: Well, I've only ever had calls at schools, which is harder than having two congregations. By the way, that's a joke for Pastor Wolfgang because something he said earlier. Sorry.
So some just things on having a Lutheran school, and I'm glad your school has the thing that they have to sign that part of the way to deal with all of this is to be up front, like, with everything. I think Lutheran schools need to be upfront. This is who we are. This is what we believe from the get go. So it's never a surprise to any families. So they never, like, are like, oh, I didn't know you guys taught this. Like, it's just gotta be upfront in everything you do and say, this is who we are. This is what we teach. With the attitude of, if you don't like that you're choosing to go here, you don't have to choose to go here. Like, if you, if you don't like this, if you don't want me teaching your children this, then the. An. The. We're not gonna stop.
So you can, if this is bothersome to you, then take your kids out of the school. Like, this isn't. This is a choice you're making. There's other school options, so don't give an inch on that stuff. Like, I see sometimes Lutheran schools, like, want to, like, give in to these families or like, think, oh, we'll lose them. Okay, you lose them.
And if, if they're gonna cause problems about it, then that's probably better for your school if you do lose them. Right? Like, it's, it's not worth seeding any of this stuff to try to get more people or to grow your school.
It's just gonna make things worse in the long run. So. So just stand firm on that. And I think, like, her desire, right, is to.
She wants to teach him the kindergartners, that this is what it is.
And I think with preschoolers and kindergarteners, emphasizing that marriage is a good gift and it's for men and women repeatedly, right? And that one day, most likely you're gonna grow up and get married is really great. Like, we don't have to talk about, like, you were talking about the sixth commandment. They don't need to know a lot of the stuff that they're gonna be facing when they get older. They just need to know, hey, marriage is a good gift from God for a man and a woman. And Lord willing, you're gonna get married one day, and that would be fantastic. Like, that's what they need to know.
And so emphasize those things with them, Teach those things, and don't be afraid to say those things. Even if you've got kids in the school or whoever that might go home and say, hey, my teacher said marriage is only between a man and a woman.
That's okay. Like, out of the mouths of children. Right. So I think that's fantastic.
[00:52:01] Speaker A: And somebody's got to say it, too. I mean, right.
Like, it's because.
Yeah. Someone says we have to be bold
[00:52:09] Speaker B: and we have to say these things, and we have to be unafraid of saying them.
You know, like, we had chapel recently on the Sixth Commandment. They're good, right? Yeah. This is what's best for you and your family, even if your family can't see it yet. And that's okay. But don't be afraid of those things. Say them. Say them boldly.
Doesn't mean we have to be jerks about it. Obviously, she wants to be compassionate, which is great, but part of being compassionate is saying, this is how God created reality. This is the world we live in, and he does it for your good.
That is being compassionate.
[00:52:42] Speaker A: There's this danger that we say, well, doesn't the school exist to do evangelism? Well, okay, sure, maybe. I mean, maybe not. But sure, let's say it does. But that evangelism is converting the unbeliever to the. To the truth. Converting the world to the church, not converting the church to the world. So we oftentimes take evangelism and then convert ourselves.
Like, that's the opposite way. We want people to come in here.
So we do want to lower the barriers that we can lower, that we're authorized to. In other words, you know, we want to, like, wash the floors and be kind.
But we're not.
We're not becoming like the world to attract the world, because then there's nothing to convert to.
[00:53:28] Speaker B: Yeah. What's the point then?
[00:53:32] Speaker A: I'm very sympathetic to the teacher.
This is hard, especially when you're. I mean, any sort of Six Commandment stuff with kids is already hard. And then if you're in a disordered family, it becomes particularly hard if there's divorce, if there's abuse, if there's any sort of dysfunction or whatever, particularly difficult. But, you know, the Lord has also promised to give us wisdom. So that's that. James one promise. If anyone lacks wisdom, let them ask the Lord who gives to all freely. So we lean on that promise as well. So thanks for your service to the kids and to the family and to the school. Praise the Lord. Pastor Packer, thank you for your questions, for your answers and insights. Thanks all the listeners for sending the questions in Wolfmuller Co slash Contact is the place to send more questions. Are we running low? I haven't looked lately.
[00:54:20] Speaker B: We are not rain low. That's we are not in danger of rain low.
[00:54:25] Speaker A: Keep them coming. It's great. And comment below on the video when you like and share. That's helpful. It lets the algorithm know that you're enjoying the shows. Plus, I found out that on the Line has more subscribers than we do Pastor Packer, so we're failing out those hit that. I know you guys subscribe. That's my I always had the goal of having more than Jordan Cooper, but apparently now I'm trying to catch up with on the Line before I catch up with him. So if you subscribe, it helps my ego. So you can do that. That'll be great and we'll see you soon.
