Specifically, how do churces like the Lutheran - Missouri Synod reconcile
justification by faith alone with baptismal regeneration. They seem to
teach justification by faith alone PLUS baptism. This would seem to me to
make the LCMS/WELS not Christian churches. How can you hold to both
positions at the same time?

__________________
Joe
4C's
Boston, MA

The orthodox Lutherans believe that original sin is handled in baptism. Hence, as a gospel-word and promise, "baptism doth save." They are very objective and literalistic here.

But, not being committed to systematics as expressing as nearly as possible the coherence of Biblical teaching, they do not place any sort of salvific priority on God's FREE electing decree. And they believe (despite a strong monergistic commitment regarding salvation) that men can fall away utterly, even with their original sin debt wiped out through baptismal regeneration.

So they say, "God does everything to save and to keep, absolutely everything, including giving faith. And still man can fall away. That a hard mystery, but the Bible teaches it (just like we believe it!) and so it must be true." So, they insist on the indispensability of faith, and the gift of faith, and yet they criticize the Reformed (which include us, and a huge basket of unReformed religion) for laying too much emphasis on faith?!? Go figure.

Of course, they also have their own unique harmonization techniques for some things. They do care about avoiding (where possible) apparent and real contradictions. So, they have categories for justification called "objective" and "subjective". And they divide up verses they find on justification according to which each "must" refer to.

We handle our difficulties very often within the context of the covenant and its internal and external administrations. I happen to think ours does a much better job at handling the challenges of systematics, and the category of mystery.

But in the end, the Lutherans seem to get justification right, along with Luther. They get the cross and the necessity of the gospel right. Their doctrine of baptism doesn't seem to overthrow their core and more fundamental commitments. And so, I don't see that any perceived inconsistency on their part pushes them out of a part in the successful Reformation of the Church.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

I must be an un-orthodox Lutheran, because I do not believe that.

And if you read Luthers Catachism, it seems neither does Luther, his point in the Catechism, as I read it, is that baptism (infant and otherwies) puts you under the covenant, but unless God gives you faith and thereby seals you the water will do you no good.

So not even Luther believed in baptismal-regenaration.

__________________
Martin - Reformed
Husband to the most godly, honorable and loyal wife Line
Searching for a Church
Webpage www.5solas.dk
Free Online Reformed Seminary - http://www.tnars.net
Soli Deo Gloria

Speaking as a former member of the LCMS, they would say there is no need to reconcile the two. It's like asking the question, "why do Presbyterians believe that one must be regenerated and have faith?" In other words, Lutherans believe that baptism is not the work of man, but it is the work of God.

For Lutherans, both Word and Sacrament are the "objective" means of Grace whereby the Spirit always works through these means. The work of the Spirit
and the Sacraments themselves are never separated, but always work together. It is through the means of Baptism that the Spirit works regeneration along with the Word.

__________________
JD Ketterman
Member of Grace OPC, Vienna VA