Worship Wars Part 2: A Quick Fact-Check to ‘Slow the Spread’
GUEST POST from Rev. Stanley Lacey of St. Thomas Evangelical Lutheran Church-UAC , Magnolia.
The words of Mr. Christiansen and Rev. Kieschnick that I quoted in my previous post openly express an aversion to worship customs and practices found throughout Scripture, commanded in the Old Covenant by God, and continued in various forms in the New Covenant by men, angels, and the four living creatures in Revelation. This is a spiritually dangerous disposition to have, but it is unfortunately common among Christians in the LCMS. In my estimation, it is more dangerous than the falsehood that Lutherans historically haven’t practiced these ceremonies.
Still, I believe we should respond to the erroneous historical claim. The more a falsehood is repeated unchallenged, the more convinced people are that it must be true. This relates to the illusory truth effect, which Wikipedia defines as “the tendency to believe false information to be correct after repeated exposure.” This may be a lie, since it comes from Wikipedia, but if we say it enough…
LCMS Christians have heard it said over and over that many practices which confessional Lutheran pastors and laypeople advocate for are “too Roman Catholic.” Karsten Christiansen went so far as to say, “Some in LCMS national and district leadership, and others, including pastors and laypersons, continue seeking to restrict the worship practices of all congregations to a singular worship form described as traditional, but which is, in actuality, a form that has never historically been used within the LCMS. Some of these ‘traditional’ worship practices are more Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox than historically Lutheran, such as genuflecting, kneeling, incense, head coverings for women, elimination of women’s public reading of scripture or children’s messages, etc.”
These days, it's easy to find out how untrue Mr. Christiansen’s claim is. I want to believe he is speaking from ignorance, but it takes very little time or effort to show how historically inaccurate Truth and Light Media's statement really is.
It is easy enough to fact-check those who say the Gottesdienst Crowd advocates customs and practices that are more Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox than historically Lutheran, but repeating something over and over, without your readers or listeners hearing the historical facts, has power. People begin to believe the claim is axiomatic. It feels as obvious as “Where there’s smoke, there’s a fire” or Poison’s “Every rose has its thorn.” If decent people with an internet connection do nothing, who will stop the spread of this illusory truth effect?!
You can probably search the Gottesblog for more examples of quotations showing how Lutherans have viewed old church practices and customs. You should also check out Ernst Zeeden’s Faith and Act, where I get one of the quotations below.
What follows are words from a Reformed guy visiting Wittenberg in 1536, Martin Luther teaching on Genesis in 1545, C.F.W. Walther, and our Synod’s original Constitution that refute the claims of Mr. Christiansen and similar claims by Rev. Kieschnick that the sorts of church customs and practices that Gottesdienst advocates for have never been practiced in the LCMS and are more Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox than historically Lutheran.
Wolfgang Musculus (Reformed guy):
“At 7:00 we entered the church where the Office of the Mass, as they call it, was held in the following manner:
“First the boys and the headmaster sang the Introit for Cantate Sunday in Latin, set apart in the chancel in an entirely papistical fashion. Then came the Kyrie eleison with the organ being played in alternation. Thirdly a deacon, dressed entirely according to the papistical fashion and standing by the altar, which was likewise adorned with candles and other things, sang in Latin ‘Gloria in excelsis Deo’ (Glory to God in the highest); this canticle the choir and organist again completed. When this was finished the deacon sang a collect, as they call it, in German, facing the altar with his back turned toward the congregation, and appended a reading from the Epistle of James, facing the congregation, also in German.
“Again the organ was played while the choir sang, ‘Victimae paschali’ and the congregation sang responsively, ‘Christ ist erstanden!’
“Upon this the deacon sang a portion of the Gospel in German, ‘But now I am going to Him who sent Me,’ etc. (John 16:5), while facing the congregation. After this reading the organ was played as the congregation sang, ‘We All Believe in One True God.’
“When this was finished Justus Menius preached, dressed in the usual manner, not in any special robe.
“After the sermon the deacon, standing at the altar in priestly garb, exhorted the people to prayer for some particularly enumerated concerns and closed with Christ’s promise: ‘Whatever you ask the Father,’ etc. (John 15:16, 16:23). Next he briefly recalled the institution of the Lord’s Supper, then he sang the Words of Institution first over the bread, whereby he elevated it entirely according to the papistical fashion while genuflecting away from the people; then over the chalice, which he likewise elevated after finishing the Words of Institution. When this was over the organ played and the choir sang the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God). Meanwhile Communion began. A deacon dressed in the usual manner administered the chalice. Not a single man was seen going to Communion, but a few little women were communed. Following this, the deacon communed himself at the altar, after having first adored the bread, although he did not do so with the chalice. This he carefully emptied and then washed with newly poured wine, so that nothing of the blood remained.
“After Communion he sang a prayer while facing the altar. When this was finished he dismissed the people with a benediction that he sang while facing them.
“Finally, as the congregation left the church the choir sang Da pacem, Domine in German. And with that this celebration was ended.
“Vespers was held at 1:00 in the afternoon, entirely after the papistical fashion, in the chancel, except that a boy sang the Sunday Gospel down to the congregation from the loft in the ordinary manner. After Vespers there was a sermon on the Second Commandment, ‘You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain,’ etc., after which ‘Christ is arisen’ was sung” (Ernst Zeeden, Faith and Act (Kindle Edition), loc 697ff).
Martin Luther:
“When we hear the Word of God, we should receive it with special reverence and piety, if not with bended knees, at least with humble hearts. Thus it is good that the Sacrament of the Altar is honored with bended knees; for the true body and blood of the Lord are there, likewise the presence of the Holy Spirit and the promise or the Word of God, which should be heard reverently. For God works there, and the Lord shows Himself. In Moses this is sometimes called the face of God. He means that God is present and appears to me. Here it is certainly fitting for me to rise or to fall on my knees. And the appearances and faces of God we experience are equal to, yes, superior to, all the appearances in the Law of Moses. When I approach Baptism, I must certainly conclude that nothing human is being done there. But the water is a veil or a means. So is the Word with which God is veiled. Behind these stands our Lord God, and they are the faces of God through which He speaks with us and works in every person individually. He baptizes me; He absolves me and gives me His body and blood through the tongue and the hand of the minister. For God works salvation in Baptism. And this is the presence or form and epiphany of God in these means. Therefore we do the right thing when we bow and revere God when He speaks with us. If we do not do so with our bodies, we should at least do so with all our hearts.
And in Baptism, of course, our eyes and hearts should always be directed to the manifest appearance in the Jordan, where the voice of the Father is heard from heaven, the flesh of the Son is seen, and the Holy Spirit appears in the form of a dove. Thus also in our Baptism. And what is primary in the Lord’s Supper is the means by which Christ gives me His body. Thus it is actually God, not the minister, who nourishes and feeds us. In Baptism the voice of the Trinity is heard, and the words of Baptism must not be understood or received in any other way. Therefore this adoration is necessary, if not with a bending of the body, at least with spiritual reverence.
Today, however, when the Word and the sacraments are held in such contempt, few people care whether they sit or rise when the Word is read and preached. Under the papacy, just as among the people of Israel, the true knowledge of the Word and of godliness has been neglected, and we have devoted ourselves only to the observance of ceremonies both when the text of the Gospel is read and when the sacraments are celebrated and administered” (LW AE 8:145-146).
C.F.W. Walther:
“We know and firmly hold that the character, the soul of Lutheranism, is not found in outward observances but in the pure doctrine. If a congregation had the most beautiful ceremonies in the very best order, but did not have the pure doctrine, it would be anything but Lutheran. We have from the beginning spoken earnestly of good ceremonies, not as though the important thing were outward forms, but rather to make use of our liberty in these things. For true Lutherans know that although one does not have to have these things (because there is no divine command to have them), one may nevertheless have them because good ceremonies are lovely and beautiful and are not forbidden in the Word of God. Therefore the Lutheran church has not abolished ‘outward ornaments, candles, altar cloths, statues and similar ornaments,’ (Ap XXIV) but has left them free. The sects proceeded differently because they did not know how to distinguish between what is commanded, forbidden, and left free in the Word of God. We remind only of the mad actions of Carlstadt and of his adherents and followers in Germany and in Switzerland. We on our part have retained the ceremonies and church ornaments in order to prove by our actions that we have a correct understanding of Christian liberty, and know how to conduct ourselves in things which are neither commanded nor forbidden by God.
We refuse to be guided by those who are offended by our church customs. We adhere to them all the more firmly when someone wants to cause us to have a guilty conscience on account of them. The Roman antichristendom enslaves poor consciences by imposing human ordinances on them with the command: ‘You must keep such and such a thing!’; the sects enslave consciences by forbidding and branding as sin what God has left free. Unfortunately, also many of our Lutheran Christians are still without a true understanding of their liberty. This is demonstrated by their aversion to ceremonies. It is truly distressing that many of our fellow Christians find the difference between Lutheranism and Roman Catholicism in outward things. It is a pity and dreadful cowardice when a person sacrifices the good ancient church customs to please the deluded American denominations just so they won't accuse us of being Roman Catholic! Indeed! Am I to be afraid of a Methodist, who perverts the saving Word, or be ashamed in the matter of my good cause, and not rather rejoice that they can tell by our ceremonies that I do not belong to them?
It is too bad that such entirely different ceremonies prevail in our Synod, and that no liturgy at all has yet been introduced in many congregations. The prejudice especially against the responsive chanting of pastor and congregations is of course still very great with many people—this does not, however, alter the fact that it is very foolish. The pious church father Augustine said, ‘Qui cantat, bis orat—he who sings prays twice.’
This finds its application also in the matter of the liturgy. Why should congregations or individuals in the congregation want to retain their prejudices? How foolish that would be! For first of all it is clear from the words of St. Paul (1 Cor. 14:16) that the congregations of his time had a similar custom. It has been the custom in the Lutheran Church for 250 years. It creates a solemn impression on the Christian mind when one is reminded by the solemnity of the divine service that one is in the house of God, in childlike love to their heavenly Father, also give expression to their joy in such a lovely manner.
We are not insisting that there be uniformity in perception or feeling or taste among all believing Christians—neither dare anyone demand that all be minded as he. Nevertheless, it remains true that the Lutheran liturgy distinguishes Lutheran worship from the worship of other churches to such an extent that the houses of worship of the latter look like lecture halls in which the hearers are merely addressed or instructed, while our churches are in truth houses of prayer in which Christians serve the great God publicly before the world. Uniformity of ceremonies (perhaps according to the Saxon Church order published by the Synod, which is the simplest among the many Lutheran church orders) would be highly desirable because of its usefulness. A poor slave of the pope finds one and same form of service, no matter where he goes, by which he at once recognizes his church. With us it is different. Whoever comes from Germany without a true understanding of the doctrine often has to look for his church for a long time, and many have already been lost to our church because of this search. How different it would be if the entire Lutheran church had a uniform form of worship! This would, of course, first of all yield only an external advantage, however, one which is by no means unimportant. Has not many a Lutheran already kept his distance from the [Calvinist] sects because he saw at the Lord's Supper they broke the bread instead of distributing wafers?
The objection: ‘What would be the use of uniformity of ceremonies?’ was answered with the counter question, ‘What is the use of a flag on the battlefield? Even though a soldier cannot defeat the enemy with it, he nevertheless sees by the flag where he belongs. We ought not to refuse to walk in the footsteps of our fathers. They were so far removed from being ashamed of the good ceremonies that they publicly confess in the passage quoted: It is not true that we do away with all such external ornaments’” (Walther, Explanation of Thesis XVIII, D, Adiaphora, of the book The True Visible Church, delivered at St. Paul's Lutheran Church in Indianapolis, Indiana, Beginning August 9, 1871, at the 16th Central District Convention, translated by Fred Kramer, printed in Essays for the Church, I:193-194).
“Whenever the Divine Service once again follows the old Evangelical Lutheran agendas (or church books), it seems that many raise a great cry that it is ‘Roman Catholic’: ‘Roman Catholic’ when the pastor chants ‘The Lord be with you’ and the congregation responds by chanting ‘and with thy spirit’; ‘Roman Catholic’ when the pastor chants the collect and the blessing and the people respond with a chanted ‘Amen.’ Even the simplest Christian can respond to this outcry: ‘Prove to me that this chanting is contrary to the Word of God, then I too will call it “Roman Catholic” and have nothing more to do with it. However, you cannot prove this to me.’ If you insist upon calling every element in the divine service ‘Romish’ that has been used by the Roman Catholic Church, it must follow that the reading of the Epistle and Gospel is also ‘Romish.’ Indeed, it is mischief to sing or preach in church, for the Roman Church has done this also…
Those who cry out should remember that the Roman Catholic Church possesses every beautiful song of the old orthodox church. The chants and antiphons and responses were brought into the church long before the false teachings of Rome crept in. This Christian Church since the beginning, even in the Old Testament, has derived great joy from chanting…For more than 1700 years orthodox Christians have participated joyfully in the divine service. Should we, today, carry on by saying that such joyful participation is ‘Roman Catholic’? God forbid! Therefore, as we continue to hold and to restore our wonderful divine services in places where they have been forgotten, let us boldly confess that our worship forms do not tie us with the modern sects or with the church of Rome; rather, they join us to the one, holy Christian Church that is as old as the world and is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (C.F.W. Walther, writing in Der Lutheraner July 19, 1853, issue, volume 9, number 24, p. 163).
LCMS Original Constitution:
“14. Synod holds in accordance with the 7th article of the Augsburg Confession that uniformity in ceremonies is not essential; yet on the other hand Synod deems such a uniformity wholesome and useful, namely for the following reasons:
a. because a total difference in outward ceremonies would cause those who are weak in the unity of doctrine to stumble;
b. because in dropping heretofore preserved usages the Church is to avoid the appearance of frivolity and a desire for innovations; and is, as much as possible, to exhibit outwardly its connection with the Church of all time.
c. because this is also required for the necessary purification of the Lutheran Church in America; that the emptiness and the poverty in the externals of the service be opposed, which, having been introduced here by the false spirit of the Reformed, is now rampant.
All pastors and congregations that wish to be recognized as orthodox by Synod are prohibited from adopting or retaining any ceremony which might weaken the confession of the truth or condone or strengthen a heresy, especially if heretics insist upon the continuation or the abolishing, of such ceremonies. To this belongs the breaking of bread in the Lord's Supper; the formula of distribution: Christ says; the taking of the consecrated bread and cup with the hands; the use of ordinary bread instead of the host except in an emergency; and others.
Where private confession is in use, it is to be kept according to Article 11 of the Augsburg Confession. Where it is not in use, the pastor is to strive towards introducing it.
The desired uniformity in the ceremonies is to be brought about especially by the adoption and use of sound Lutheran agendas (church books)” (“Our First Synodical Constitution,” Concordia Historical Institute Quarterly 16, no. 1 [April 1943]: 11-12).