tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post475293548647770405..comments2024-01-23T10:37:14.372-08:00Comments on Surburg's blog: Mark's thoughts: The Church's institutionalized fornicationSurburg's bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07471674105191295804noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-8979119652117078462018-06-14T13:00:17.576-07:002018-06-14T13:00:17.576-07:00How is marriage effected? Do we have clarity on t...How is marriage effected? Do we have clarity on that? It seems as if Dr. Luther at times treats betrothal as tantamount to marriage.Shawn Barnetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10218297630109977895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-42861765807639605702018-06-06T12:53:48.714-07:002018-06-06T12:53:48.714-07:00Thank you for not only verbalizing this issue of P...Thank you for not only verbalizing this issue of Pastoral Care, but for giving us good answers to arguments posed by the couple as to why they can't live separately. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13243164391397145733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-64077236349365639742017-05-13T21:48:47.655-07:002017-05-13T21:48:47.655-07:00Pr. Surburg in your post you rightly instruct the ...Pr. Surburg in your post you rightly instruct the couple to separate and enter into confession and absolution. You also point the couple to the court for a legal marriage. As the definition of marriage by the state also includes same sex couples or marriages that embrace abominable fornication should we send all our couples to court to marry. How can we with the legal definition of marriage change of June 25, 2015 Obergefell v Hodges act as Pastor of the church an agent of the state? "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and God unto God's!" "And we shall obey God over the rule of men!" <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11877707296538851542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-10380155516031338802017-05-12T07:21:44.306-07:002017-05-12T07:21:44.306-07:00Hmmm. I don't know about that. It's clear ...Hmmm. I don't know about that. It's clear that a unity is established by sexual intercourse, yes. But to say that this is to the one-flesh unity of marriage seems to go beyond what Scripture warrants. One-flesh unity is a necessary but not sufficient condition of a marriage. Not every one-flesh unity is a marriage. <br /><br />Marriage, though most truly an icon of Christ and the Church, is ratified and effected by civil law— it is an act of God through the ministers of state. As much as we may be loathe to admit it given the currently degenerate state of civil law in the U.S., it is a civil rite. Or so it seems to me. <a href="http://www.pseudepigraph.us/2015/07/07/pastors-stop-performing-weddings-maybe/" rel="nofollow">See here.</a> YMMV. (I'm only linking to my blog here because it's easier than restating everything that I have already written once....which might not have been <i>worth</i> writing once!)T. D. Demaresthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11195713477127666504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-31636337037090519752017-05-12T07:06:00.026-07:002017-05-12T07:06:00.026-07:00Any thoughts on how 1 Corinthians 6:16 applies (or...Any thoughts on how 1 Corinthians 6:16 applies (or not) in these situations? My thought is that with sexual intercourse, perhaps one could argue that a unity/marriage is already established. I'm not trying to excuse or justify sin here, but to explore the meaning of Scripture.Tim Bodehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12377064731566981887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-598447058891116122017-05-10T18:58:07.900-07:002017-05-10T18:58:07.900-07:00"Excommunication is an act of the congregatio..."Excommunication is an act of the congregation" I have been Lutheran 9 years and never knew that! <br /><br />Congregational vote? How can this be? Of course, I've never known anyone excommunicated, either...Katyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00238246037896274014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-66167070066696743572017-05-10T08:57:16.026-07:002017-05-10T08:57:16.026-07:00There is an unfortunate reality. Excommunication ...There is an unfortunate reality. Excommunication is an act of the congregation. Though I can place a minor ban, I cannot excommunicate, and the congregation will not.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-74157335136718422522016-12-17T10:09:46.920-08:002016-12-17T10:09:46.920-08:00Thanks Pastor Surburg. The Issues Etc. broadcast ...Thanks Pastor Surburg. The Issues Etc. broadcast and this article are very good. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-10503039967613527432016-10-07T17:17:20.300-07:002016-10-07T17:17:20.300-07:00"Roman Catholic priests perform weddings for ..."Roman Catholic priests perform weddings for cohabiting couples."<br /><br />Not in my parish. Cohabitors are told to separate and to stop fornicating.Ahuehuetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12733614363242347332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-896828802373431092016-04-06T11:43:38.997-07:002016-04-06T11:43:38.997-07:00(continued, Part 2)
I would never deny the new cr...(continued, Part 2)<br /><br />I would never deny the new creation, the forgiven sinner working toward the new life, cooperating with the Spirit in their sanctification. And yet, we must stress the following:<br /><br />“we die unto sin and live unto righteousness, BEGINNING and GROWING here on earth”<br /><br />These are oftentimes weak, feeble, failing attempts, and most times impossible to see, much as one cannot sit and look at a tree and notice fruit growing. Personally, I have seen the Spirit enable me to cease gross sin in some areas of my life, but no matter how much I struggle with other sins and beg and pray for growth, I see little forward movement [although my wife (with whom I never cohabitated, by the way, nor with any other woman!) sees growth]. Moreover, while the active sin has ceased, the desire remains, and the battle is a daily one.<br /><br />I’ll not go into it, but of course we know when Luther uses the term Antinomians he is speaking about pastors (e.g. J. Agricola and, in a different manner, N. von Amsdorf) who felt the preaching of the Law had NO USE WHATSOEVER for the Christian, which is ridiculous and rightfully condemned.<br /><br />Finally, regarding the definition of repentance, I get this from Higher Things, 6 Apr 2016, Pastor J. Ehrhard:<br /><br />“Repentance. Two parts: contrition and faith. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruit of repentance (Augsburg Confession XII.6). Notice that good works and the fruits of faith are not, properly speaking, a part of repentance. Your work neither begins nor completes your repentance. Repentance is God's work. He works contrition; He works faith. And, therefore, good works--the fruit that repentance bears--are likewise not your works, but the work of God. He renews your heart and gives you the mind of Christ, who emptied Himself, became a servant, humbled Himself to the point of death, even death on a cross--and God raised Him up to glory (Philippians 2:5-11).”<br /><br />And I got this response from another pastor with regards to the FC SD “definition” of repentance you cited:<br /><br />“I think you’re right in identifying the function of this section of the Formula. The authors are pointing out that “repentance” in various passages of scripture may mean different things. In some passages it includes faith. In other passages it does not. FC V intends to clarify what the law does and what the gospel does (see SD V: 1-2 and 27). The definition of “repentance” in the paragraphs you cite is approached through the lens of law and gospel. I think what drives the narrow definition you cite is the message of the law. Immediately after the passage you quote it reads “This knowledge comes from the Law,” suggesting that this narrow definition of repentance is a summary of what the law says. Then, the article switches to the gospel in a narrow sense as the proclamation of the forgiveness of sins. That is, here repentance is being limited to what the law says and does. So, repentance seen as the function of the law corresponds to the law’s message to acknowledge sin and cease to sin, and the law’s work of producing contrition. Note that this is a narrow sense of “repentance.” In the Augsburg Confession Melanchthon’s definition is a broad one, including faith.”<br /> <br />From this, I maintain a separation of the definition of repentance and the fruits. The Formula authors were simply defining the use of the term repentance more thoroughly, to differentiate between the narrow (seldom-used) and broad (often-used) uses of the word; these distinctions are absent from any other part of the Book of Concord. Regardless, I agree fruits must follow repentance, I’m just questioning how much and how long meets the criteria for repentance amongst men. <br /><br />Hope to hear a response. Peace.<br />jwskudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15641383927216557610noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-32137206238771748022016-04-06T11:43:18.199-07:002016-04-06T11:43:18.199-07:00Hi again Mr. Demarest,
This is an old thread, b...Hi again Mr. Demarest,<br /> This is an old thread, but I'm going to try re-engaging, regarding your closing comments about repentance. Lots to say but I'm honestly trying to be brief; also typing very haphazardly, so please forgive anything which is not clear:<br /><br />"If the necessary effects aren’t there, then neither is the cause." We can say that and see that it is true. This parallels James’ discussion of spurious faith, and how we (i.e. humanity) see faith/justification through its fruits, as we cannot see faith itself. By extension, we only know someone is repentant if we can see the fruits of this repentance. But here I must ask, "How much fruit, for how long, is enough to satisfy the demands of the onlooker?" Would it be safe to say that for most/all people, the fruits we demand of others would far exceed the fruits we would hope others would recognize in our own repentance? From others we will demand the proverbial "pound of flesh," but from ourselves, extracting said flesh is a painful and unpleasant process, and so could they please take this quarter-ounce? Our standards change when looking at others (who have wronged us) compared to looking at ourselves (when we wrong someone else) due to our self-centered, sinful natures, no?<br /><br />Moreover, as opposed to "us" seeing, we know that God operates differently. As Luther says, we judge a person by their works, whereas God judges works by the person. Thus, only God knows whether one is truly repentant or not. Where fruit is lacking (to our eyes, although it is probably present nonetheless), true repentance may indeed exist. Where fruit abounds, repentance is not guaranteed, as people are often phonies.<br /><br />Going on, here's another big question: when Luther says above, “he who does not abstain from sin,” what's he really getting at? Let me ask another way. It's easy to say, “Ahh, I've not raped, murdered, committed adultery, stolen goods, etc. So I have abstained from sin.” But what if you look at your sin the way God does (i.e. not through the lens of “cheap Law,” to quote the vilified G. Forde)? Were you working your hardest all day? No? Then you have stolen from your employer (and God). Did you settle for your necessary 1800-calorie intake today in order to sustain your life? No? You had an extra 600 calories? You are a glutton and idolater who does not trust God. Did you look at a pretty woman and think about how she's a child-of-God, or did you simply focus on her physical attributes? I could go on and on. What I'm getting at is, if we're to “abstain from sin,” are we talking gross sins, or all? Obviously not all. Your statement, “it most certainly is to say that we no longer live in sin” is, to me, Roman Catholicism. As I understand it, concupiscence IS sin (Ap II 38). So while I agree with your point that active sin is a greater transgression than sinful thoughts and desires (and to be avoided, as Pastor Surburg’s article rightly states), I disagree that those same thoughts and desires are not sin themselves. <br /><br />jwskudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15641383927216557610noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-43740298396377196322016-01-26T08:54:49.686-08:002016-01-26T08:54:49.686-08:00Lest we think that the Augsburg Confession's t...Lest we think that the Augsburg Confession's two parts of repentance yield some notional and incorporeal definition, the Formula of Concord makes the following statement:<br /><br />"The term repentance also is not employed in the Holy Scriptures in one and the same sense. For in some passages of Holy Scripture it is employed and taken for the entire conversion of man, as Luke 13:5: Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. And in 15:7: Likewise joy shalt be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth. But in this passage, Mark 1:15, as also elsewhere, where repentance and faith in Christ, Acts 20:21, or repentance and remission of sins, Luke 24:46-47, are mentioned as distinct, <b>to repent means nothing else than truly to acknowledge sins, to be heartily sorry for them, <i>and to desist from them."</i></b> (FC SD V.7-9)<br /><br />So, too, Dr. Luther writes in <i>On the Councils and the Church:</i><br /><br />"<b>[T]here is no such Christ that died for sinners who do not, after the forgiveness of sins, desist from sins and lead a new life.</b> Thus they preach Christ nicely with Nestorian and Eutychian logic that Christ is and yet is not Christ. They may be fine Easter preachers, but they are very poor Pentecost preachers, for they do not preach <i>de sanctificatione et vivificatione Spiritus Sancti,</i> 'about the sanctification by the Holy Spirit,' but solely about the redemption of Jesus Christ, although Christ (whom they extoll so highly, and rightly so) is Christ, that is, he has purchased redemption from sin and death so that the Holy Spirit might transform us out of the old Adam into new men— we die unto sin and live unto righteousness, beginning and growing here on earth and perfecting it beyond, as St. Paul teaches. Christ did not earn only <i>gratia,</i> 'grace,' for us, but also <i>donum,</i> 'the gift of the Holy Spirit,' so that we might have not only forgiveness of, but also cessation of, sin. <b>Now he who does not abstain from sin, but persists in his evil life, must have a different Christ, that of the Antinomians; the real Christ is not there,</b> even if all the angels would cry, <i>'Christi Christi'</i>! He must be damned with this, his new Christ." (LW 41:113-114)<br /><br />He goes on:<br /><br />"[O]ur Antinomians fail to see that they are preaching Christ without and against the Holy Spirit because they propose to let the people continue in their old ways and still pronounce them saved. And yet logic, too, implies that a Christian should either have the Holy Spirit and lead a new life, or know that he has no Christ."<br /><br />If the necessary effects aren’t there, then neither is the cause. One can only separate them logically or abstractly, not in concrete reality. The view which regards repentance as a merely notional or mental event which can be said to exist without fruits worthy of it is, in a word, gnostic. Repentance is not the acquisition of the mere <i>gnosis</i> that you are bad and that Christ's grace covers your badness. Not at all. Pastor Surburg's article is spot-on.T. D. Demaresthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11195713477127666504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-33124521399680410792016-01-26T08:54:44.416-08:002016-01-26T08:54:44.416-08:00Johan,
Even though many Lutherans today are quick...Johan,<br /><br />Even though many Lutherans today are quick to remind you, “Don’t worry— repentance is just a change of mind, nothing else!” the Lutheran Confessions don’t leave any room for that kind of reductionism, nor does Dr. Luther. In reality it’s impossible to separate the necessary effects (amendment of life) from a cause (repentance). This isn't to say that Christians are freed from their evil desires (concupiscence), but it most certainly is to say that we no longer live in sin. We have been granted the Spirit. We are not slaves to our evil desires. This is what C. F. W. Walther is driving at in Thesis XVIII of <i>Law and Gospel.</i> Pr. Mark Preus <a href="http://bit.ly/1JDqgcY" rel="nofollow">explained this well in his post over at Gottesdienst some months ago.</a> So, no, of course one is not able simply to "stop lusting"— this is most certainly true; however, one is <i>not</i> therefore unable to stop <i>cohabitating.</i> Unfortunately, we Lutherans seem to have convinced ourselves that "the simul" means we're powerless to perform even civilly righteous works...such as the work of "not cohabitating." That is false. But some even go a bridge farther and say that we shouldn't even bother <i>trying</i> to live according to God's Law, as trying to do so would be "pietistic" and counting God's grace cheap. Since the lust of the eyes is "just as bad" as fornication <i>coram Deo</i> (such thinking goes), there's really no <i>difference</i> between the two, so, on balance, it doesn't really "matter" if we avoid the latter, or any gross outward sins, for that matter. I'm sorry, but...no. In my opinion <a href="http://bit.ly/1MWhZ1e" rel="nofollow">Adolf Köberle's assessment of this evil distortion of <i>sola gratia</i></a> demands our sober consideration and reflection.T. D. Demaresthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11195713477127666504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-22712820432710932662016-01-26T07:56:31.664-08:002016-01-26T07:56:31.664-08:00Pr. Surburg, thank you for putting into words that...Pr. Surburg, thank you for putting into words that which I have been trying to verbalize over and over again for the 30 years since my ordination but which has become epidemic in the Church especially for the last 20+ years. I believe that the TV show "Friends" is largely responsible for corrupting the thinking of young and old alike. I have copied your blogpost and plan to share it with at least one couple whom I long with all my heart to rescue from what I believe is there impenitence. There is a great need for this to be clearly and pastorally addressed in Christendom.Rev. Alan J. Wollenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06753189129488408333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-5671550900594816592016-01-25T18:11:40.857-08:002016-01-25T18:11:40.857-08:00I had an young man, raised in the LCMS, who had mo...I had an young man, raised in the LCMS, who had moved to Baltimore with his girlfriend for work and was cohabitating called me about marrying them. When I told him I won't do the wedding because they are cohabitating, he asked me if I would tell him the name of an LCMS pastor in the area who would. Pastor Sharphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01979023326739465973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-6498285664723521902016-01-25T13:55:22.754-08:002016-01-25T13:55:22.754-08:00There is indeed a distinction between a tree and i...There is indeed a distinction between a tree and its fruits. I simply meant that I did not find the OP to be particularly confusing on this point or denying justification by faith alone. I simply understood the OP to be expanding upon what the fruits of repentance look like, as Ap XII does on this very issue:<br /><br />Ap. 12:174: “What these fruit are, we learn from the commandments—prayer, thanksgiving, the confession of the Gospel, the teaching of the Gospel, obedience to parents and magistrates, faithfulness to one’s calling, peaceable conduct instead of murder and hatred, the greatest possible generosity to the needy, **restraint and chastisement of the flesh instead of adultery and fornication,** truthfulness—not to buy off eternal punishment but to keep from surrendering to the devil or offending the Holy Spirit. These fruits are commanded by God, they should be done to his glory and because of his command, and they have their reward” (Tappert 210).Rev. Joshua Hayeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05265502288700164812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-53604306660420812352016-01-25T10:11:38.866-08:002016-01-25T10:11:38.866-08:00Here I would say you've answered correctly, bu...Here I would say you've answered correctly, but failed to make the distinction. Johan is right, and so are you, Rev. Hayes. But the distinction is thus:<br /><br />One part is description of repentance (contrition, as given by the Holy Spirit in the heart and mind of a believer, coupled with faith, believing your sins are forgiven for Christ's sake)<br /><br />The other is descriptions of FRUITS of repentance (amendment of life and such), and is the natural result of the indwelling Spirit on the life of the believer.<br /><br />However, to confuse repentance with the FRUITS of repentance is to confuse the definition of repentance.<br /><br />I would add that, based on personal experience, repentance can and should (and does) lead to fruit, but sometimes does not. Why? Lack of faith, not lack of will.<br /><br />At least, that's how I've come to define the terms based on Lutheran teaching.jwskudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15641383927216557610noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-72191659596747938262016-01-25T08:01:32.915-08:002016-01-25T08:01:32.915-08:00Pr. Surburg would be referring to the second half ...Pr. Surburg would be referring to the second half of the article you mentioned:<br /><br />"Amendment of life and the forsaking of sin would then follow, for these must be the fruits of repentance, as John says, “Bear fruit that befits repentance” (Matt. 3:8)."Rev. Joshua Hayeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05265502288700164812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2447271489594435093.post-50292896997799467292016-01-25T06:37:45.847-08:002016-01-25T06:37:45.847-08:00I'm sorry but I think your definition of repen...I'm sorry but I think your definition of repentance that you used in this article is wrong. Article XII defines repentance as consisting of two parts, I) Contrition, that is terror striking the conscious and II) Faith, which is born of the gospel.<br /><br />If, as you say, repentance involves the person "stopping and turning away from that sin" we are all condemned to hell. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com