Luther

Over the past few days, when I've had a few free moments, I've been watching a really interesting series from Concordia Seminary titled, "Paul Through the Ages" (click here to download it on iTunes).

It explores how Paul's discussion about the relationship of the Law and the Gospel in Galatians has been understood at different points in history. It explores early heresies and reactions to them, Augustine, the Roman Catholic interpretation throughout the ages, and then on into Luther. I still have a few shows left so I'm not sure how far it will go, but it provides a really interesting look into theology, the Law, and it's impact on the Christian life.

"Christian participation in public debate requires the use of language, argumentation, and strategies that -- according to Scripture itself -- are most appropriate and effective for interaction in the public realm, where God's Word is not regarded as authoritative."

According to an email I received last night, this is the key sentence in a new document that the CTCR (Commission on Theology and Church Relations) of the LCMS (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) is publishing.

The impetus for the document that contains this quote was a resolution from the Wyoming District at our last Synodical Convention that suggested a previous CTCR document on discussing cell stem issues in the public sphere wasn't strong enough on Scriptural argumentation. This sets the stage for the interesting question of how Christians should engage in debate with those who aren't Christians ... or on what basis Christians of different stripes should debate.

It reminds me of a recent discussion I had in a string of comments with a Roman Catholic guy from New Zealand in response to a YouTube clip. Much like Luther almost 500 years ago, I said, "Let's talk based on what we supposedly agree on, the Bible." He said we can't understand the Bible without the Councils. I suggested that's why we have something else we agree on, the Creeds. He was willing to move towards the Early Church Fathers, but again, those guys vary as much in their decrees as the Councils so it's really a matter of which one you want to pick to make your argument. The point being, unless you're standing on common ground, fruitful discussion is never going to happen. The same is true when Christians talk in the public square. The 10 Commandments don't carry any weight. Neither does the rest of Scripture. To make an argument based upon a chapter and verse turns you into background noise.

So, how should Christians talk in the public sphere? I think the CTCR nails the answer. We begin in private and allow Scripture to shape our thinking, but we then carry over those thoughts into the empirical realm, find evidence from a publicly authoritative source that affirms our beliefs and challenges the beliefs of those on the other side of the debate. The result is Scripture remains normative for us and we have creditable arguments in public.

As a tangent, this plays into evangelism as well, where you can find a publicly authoritative source to speak the Law before introducing the Bible as the only authoritative source when it comes to the Gospel.

One of the members of Christ Lutheran sent this to me and I hit the floor laughing. I have to say, of all the things that have distracted me from my sermon prep for tonight, this has been the most entertaining. Now if it would only help me to preach like Luther tonight and tomorrow morning!