Full Text for Confessions 2- Volume 25 - Did Luther and Melanchthon agree on conversion and sanctification? (Video)

ROUGHLY EDITED COPY CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY EDUCATION NETWORK CUENET LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS 2-25 DR. ROBERT KOLB CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY: CAPTION FIRST, INC. P.O. BOX 1024 LOMBARD, IL 60148 800-825-5234 *** THIS TEXT IS BEING PROVIDED IN A ROUGH DRAFT FORMAT. COMMUNICATION ACCESS REALTIME TRANSLATION (CART) IS PROVIDED IN ORDER TO FACILITATE COMMUNICATION ACCESSIBILITY AND MAY NOT BE A TOTALLY VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS. *** LC2-25 >> DR. KOLB, IN YOUR RESPONSE TO JOSH YOU MENTIONED MELANCTHON AS WELL AS MARTIN LUTHER, OF COURSE. DID THESE TWO REFORMERS ALWAYS AGREE ON ALL ISSUES? WELL, SUCH AS CONVERSION AND SANCTIFICATION, FOR INSTANCE. >>DR. ROBERT KOLB: OH, THERE'S QUITE A LITERATURE IN SCHOLARLY CIRCLES TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, NICK. AND THE LATEST PIECE THAT WILL BE PUBLISHED WITHIN A FEW MONTHS OF OUR FILMING THIS COURSE ARGUES THAT IN FACT LUTHER AND MELANCTHON HAD THE BASIC -- THE SAME BASIC POSITION EVEN THOUGH THEY ACCENTED DIFFERENT PARTS OF IT IN DIFFERENT STAGES OF THEIR TEACHING. MELANCTHON CAME TO VITENBURG IN 1518. WAS IMMEDIATELY TAKEN BY LUTHER. LUTHER IMMEDIATELY FOUND IN MELANCTHON A GREAT DEAL OF HELP WITH LINGUISTIC PROBLEMS AS WELL AS I THINK YOU COULD SAY HE ALSO FELT A GREAT DEAL OF HELP IN MELANCTHON'S THOUGHT AND IN HIS WRITINGS FOR HIS OWN THEOLOGICAL FORMULATION. SO THEIR RELATIONSHIP IS NOT ONE OF ONE BEING DEPENDENT ON THE OTHER. NOR IS IT A RELATIONSHIP IN WHICH THEY GRADUALLY DIVERGE. THOUGH, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE TRUE ON AT LEAST ONE ISSUE. BUT IT WAS A RELATIONSHIP IN WHICH THEY REALLY FED EACH OTHER AND BUILT EACH OTHER UP. THE ONE PLACE WHERE I THINK THE LATEST SCHOLARSHIP PROBABLY SHOWS THAT INDEED THEY DID DIVERGE MAYBE NOT AS MUCH AS SOME PEOPLE SOMETIMES THOUGHT BUT THEY DID INDEED DIVERGE IS ON THE LORD'S SUPPER. IN PARTICULARLY THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO CHRISTOLOGY THAT WERE A PART OF THE LUTHERAN DEBATE, THE DEBATE WITH THE CALVINISTS ESPECIALLY IN THE 16TH CENTURY. BUT MY OWN READING OF THE TEXTS THAT MELANCTHON AND LUTHER WROTE ON THE "BONDAGE OF THE WILL," THE "FREEDOM OF THE WILL," AND THE "DOCTRINE OF FREE DESTINATION," WHICH IS, OF COURSE, QUITE CLOSELY RELATED TO THOSE TWO, MY READING SUGGESTS THAT IN FACT, THEY WERE PRETTY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER AND REMAINED CLOSE IN THEIR BASIC CONVICTIONS EVEN THOUGH THEY EMPHASIZED DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WHOLE QUESTION AT DIFFERENT TIMES IN THEIR LIVES. MELANCTHON IS USUALLY ACCUSED OF SYNERGISM. THAT MEANS THAT THE HUMAN WILL HAS TO COOPERATE IN SOME WAY WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT BEFORE THE HOLY SPIRIT CAN WORK. IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE DON'T OPEN OUR HEARTS SOMEHOW TO THE HOLY SPIRIT, THE HOLY SPIRIT CAN'T GET IN. LUTHER QUITE CONSISTENTLY MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT IS THE ONE WHO OPENS OUR HEARTS SO THAT HE CAN COME IN AND TURN OUR MIND AND HEARTS TO FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST. AND LUTHER TALKS ABOUT THAT CONSISTENTLY. ON THE OTHER HAND, ESPECIALLY IN HIS SERMONS, YOU CAN QUOTE PASSAGES IN WHICH YOU THINK LUTHER IS NOT ONLY SYNERGISTIC, THAT HE'S CALLING FOR THE HUMAN WILL TO COOPERATE WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT, THERE ARE PASSAGES IN WHICH WHEN HE'S PREACHING GOOD WORKS HE SOUNDS FLAGELLANT OR AT LEAST SEMI-FLAGELLANT BECAUSE HE'S INSISTING THAT WE DO GOOD WORKS, WE HAVE TO DO GOOD WORKS, WE SHOULD AND MUST DO GOOD WORKS. ACTUALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GOOD WORKS IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT KIND OF VERBS WE USE. WE'RE STILL PUTTING THE BURDEN ON THE HUMAN BEING. WE FIND MELANCTHON MOST CONCERNED ABOUT THE HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. HE'S ALWAYS GOT AN ACCOMPANYING LINE THAT EMPHASIZES GOD'S TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY. HE ALWAYS HAS SOME REMINDER THAT WE ARE SAVED BY GRACE ALONE WHEN HE GOES OFF TO REMIND HIS READERS OR HIS HEARERS THAT INDEED, FAITH IS NECESSARY. IF YOU COULD SINGLE OUT ONE ELEMENT THAT GUIDES MELANCTHON'S THEOLOGY FROM EARLY ON, FROM 1521 THROUGH HIS DEATH IN 1560 IT DEFINITELY IS JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. AND BECAUSE HE WAS A PROFESSOR OF RHETORIC, THAT IS HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT HUMAN COMMUNICATION, HE WANTED TO GET ACROSS HOW THE WORD OF GOD ACTUALLY DOES MOVE OUR HEARTS AND MINDS. SO HE WAS MORE OR LESS FORCED BY HIS DISCIPLINE I GUESS YOU COULD SAY, DISCIPLINE OF COMMUNICATIONS OR RHETORIC AS IT WAS CALLED IN THAT DAY, HE WAS FORCED BY HIS OWN SUBJECT MATTER TO LOOK AT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL SIDE. TO RECOGNIZE THAT AS CREATURES OF GOD, WE DO HAVE THOUGHTS. WE DO HAVE A WILL. WE DO HAVE EMOTIONS. AND THAT THE WORD OF GOD REALLY DEALS WITH US AS WHOLE HUMAN BEINGS. SO THERE ARE SOME PLACES WHERE HE USED LANGUAGE THAT LUTHER PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE USED. AND THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE RAISED THE SUSPICION OF MANY OF HIS STUDENTS. AND THAT'S WHY WE THINK OF HIM AS THE SYNERGIST. AND THERE ARE PLACES WHERE I THINK HIS STUDENTS WERE JUSTIFIED OF BEING SUSPICIOUS OF THE KIND OF LANGUAGE HE USED. BUT EVEN IN THOSE PLACES AT LEAST IN THE BROADER CONTEXT HE ALWAYS TALKS ABOUT THE GRACE OF GOD AND THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT IS NECESSARY FOR OUR COMING TO FAITH. THE WHOLE QUESTION IS A TOUGH ONE TO SOLVE AT THE DISTANCE OF 400 YEARS PLUS. BUT IT DOES SEEM TO ME THAT PROFESSOR HARTMAN GUNTA (PHONETIC) WHO TAUGHT AT OUR SISTER SEMINARY IN OBERURSEL FOR MANY YEARS WHEN HE WROTE HIS DISSERTATION 40 YEARS AGO, 40 PLUS YEARS AGO AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ARLANGAN (PHONETIC), HE ARGUED THAT AT THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE HUMAN WILL LUTHER AND MELANCTHON REMAINED VERY CLOSE TOGETHER. HEAVEN ISN'T MADE FOR GEESE. WE ARE NOT DUMB ANIMALS. BUT WE ARE THINKING, WILLING HUMAN BEINGS MADE IN THE IMAGE OF A THINKING AND WILLING GOD. AND IT IS WITH THAT KIND OF RAW MATERIAL THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT COMES TO WORK. THAT'S A CONVICTION THAT YOU SEE IN LUTHER. IT'S A CONVICTION YOU SEE IN MELANCTHON. AND THE TWO OF THEM SHARED THE CONVICTION THAT WE'VE JUST BEEN TALKING ABOUT IN THIS SMALL CATECHISM TEXT. THEY BOTH SAID, "LOOK TO THE MEANS OF GRACE FOR YOUR ASSURANCE OF SALVATION. LOOK TO THE PROMISE OF GOD IN YOUR BAPTISM. LOOK OR LISTEN TO THE ABSOLUTION PRONOUNCED BY YOUR PASTOR. LISTEN TO THE PREACHED WORD OF GOD. RECEIVE THE BODY AND BLOOD. THERE YOU KNOW WHAT GOD'S ETERNAL PLAN IS FOR YOU." YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPECULATE ABOUT WHAT GOD DID, THE HIDDEN GOD BEHIND THE CLOUDS OUT OF YOUR SIGHT. YOU CAN KNOW UP FRONT THAT THE CHRIST WHO DIED FOR YOU AND ROSE FOR YOU AND WHOSE BENEFITS ARE DELIVERED TO YOU BY THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE MEANS OF GRACE, THAT IS THE GOD WHO IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE HIS MIND BUT IS COMMITTED TO YOU TO KEEP YOU AS HIS CHILD FOREVER. THAT'S THE GOSPEL OF COURSE AND BOTH LUTHER AND MELANCTHON WERE VERY, VERY STRONG, VERY INSISTENT THAT LAW AND GOSPEL HAVE TO BE DISTINGUISHED. WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT ASSURANCE SAYING "I CAN SEND THEM MORE THAT GRACE MAY ABOUND," THEY WERE IMMEDIATELY READY TO COME AND SAY, "OH, NO, YOU CAN'T." AS PAUL SAYS IN ROMANS 6, THAT'S NOT YOUR BAPTISMAL IDENTITY. THEY WERE VERY READY TO SAY AS LUTHER SAYS IN THE SMALL CALLED ARTICLES IF YOU REMEMBER THAT DAVID DROVE THE HOLY SPIRIT OUT OF HIS HEART WITH HIS SIN. BUT THAT'S -- THAT'S THE DISTINCTION OF LAW AND GOSPEL. NOTHING CAN SEPARATE US FROM THE LOVE OF GOD IN JESUS CHRIST. THAT'S A MESSAGE FOR THE REPENTANT. REPENT OR YOU WILL DIE. THAT'S A MESSAGE FOR THE UNREPENTANT. AND SO MELANCTHON AND LUTHER WERE VERY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER IN THAT MESSAGE AND THEIR VIEW OF THE MEANS OF GRACE. AND WHEN THEY DIVERSE ON THE QUESTION OF THE FREEDOM OR THE "BONDAGE OF THE WILL," IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE ACCENTING DIFFERENT PARTS OF THEIR COMMON LARGER UNDERSTANDING. I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE OF GOOD REASONS WHY THEY DIDN'T ALWAYS SAY THE SAME THING. BOTH OF THEM WERE SCARED OUT OF THEIR WITS IN 1528 AND '29 WHEN THEY VISITED THE CONGREGATIONS OF SAXONY. LUTHER WAS VERY DISCOURAGED. HE DIDN'T EVEN GO INTO THE PULPIT MUCH FOR A WHOLE YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF. HE WAS ILL, TOO. BUT HE WAS VERY DISCOURAGED BECAUSE THE GOSPEL HADN'T CHANGED THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE IN THE SAXON VILLAGES MORE. MELANCTHON WAS ALSO VERY DISCOURAGED IN DIFFERENT WAYS. THEY TRIED THEN TO BRING THE PREACHING OF THE LAW TO PEOPLE IN A SHARPER WAY SO THAT THEY WOULD LEAD THE LIFE OF REPENTANCE. ANOTHER BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO WAS THAT LUTHER BECAUSE HE WAS AN OUTLAW COULDN'T LEAVE THE DOMAINS OF SAXONY. SO HE ALMOST NEVER AFTER SOME TIME IN THE EARLY 1520S LOOKED A ROMAN CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN DIRECTLY IN THE EYE AND CONVERSED ABOUT THEOLOGY. MELANCTHON WAS THE ECCLESIASTICAL DIPLOMAT OF THE PRINCES OF SAXONY. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THE PRINCES OF THE WHOLE SMALL CALLED LEAGUE, THE WHOLE EVANGELICAL OF PRINCES AND CITIES. SO MELANCTHON WAS CONTINUALLY INVOLVED IN DISCUSSIONS WITH PARTICULARLY ROMAN CATHOLIC THEOLOGIANS. HE WAS A PART OF THE ATTEMPT OF THE LUTHERAN PRINCES TO FIND A POLITICAL SOLUTION TO THE THREAT OF IMPERIAL PERSECUTION THAT FINALLY CAME THROUGH IN THE SMALL CALLED WAR IN 1546 AND '47 AND LED TO THE CONTROVERSIES THAT PRODUCED THE FORMULA OF CONQUER. SO MELANCTHON HAD TO BE LISTENING TO OTHER PEOPLE'S CONCERNS AND HAD TO BE TRYING TO EXPLAIN AND MEET THEM. AND OF COURSE THE ROMAN CATHOLICS FROM THE BEGINNING ON SAID, "YOU VITENBURGER. YOU ARE A BUNCH OF STOICS AND MANICHEANS." AND BY USING THOSE TWO TERMS FOR ON THE ONE HAND AN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOL AND ON THE OTHER HAND ANOTHER RELIGIOUS SYSTEM THAT ALSO HAD SOME CHRISTIAN AFFILIATIONS IN SOME REMOTE WAY, BY USING THOSE TERMS, THE ROMAN CATHOLICS WERE SAYING, "YOU'RE JUST A BUNCH OF HER PARTICULARS." SO MELANCTHON HAD TO VERY CAREFULLY EXPLAIN HOW WHILE INSISTING IN GOD'S TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY, BY EMPHASIZING GOD'S GRACE AND FAVOR, LUTHERANS ALSO RECOGNIZED THAT THE BIBLE TALKS ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HUMAN BEING TO TRUST IN GOD AND TO OBEY HIS COMMANDMENTS. AND SO OUT OF THOSE DIFFERENT CONTEXTS LUTHER AND MELANCTHON ACTUALLY CAME TO SOMETIMES ACCENT DIFFERENT PARTS OF THIS COMMON DOCTRINE. BUT I THINK PROBABLY A CAREFUL READING OF THE TEXT SHOWS THAT THERE WASN'T AS MUCH DIVERGENCE AS THEIR STUDENTS SOMETIMES SUSPECTED. *** THIS TEXT IS BEING PROVIDED IN A ROUGH DRAFT FORMAT. COMMUNICATION ACCESS REALTIME TRANSLATION (CART) IS PROVIDED IN ORDER TO FACILITATE COMMUNICATION ACCESSIBILITY AND MAY NOT BE A TOTALLY VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS. ***