New

First Look at Pastoral Ministry: Theology and Practice

December 11, 2017 By Hannah Osborne

Pastoral ministry is much different now, in the twenty-first century, than it was a hundred or even fifty years ago.

Certainly, pastoral ministry is still the same at its core: preaching the truths of the Bible to God’s people. But as our cultural context changes, active pastors and seminarians need guidance in addressing uniquely twenty-first-century issues. That’s where Pastoral Ministry comes into play.

This forthcoming book, written by Dr. Richard H. Warneck, speaks to the struggles, disappointments, frustrations, and failings of parish ministry. But at the same time, it inspires and restores the vision of parish ministry.

As the gulf between American culture and Christianity widens, new and experienced pastors alike need wise counsel on how to address this cultural shift. Dr. Warneck, who served at Concordia Seminary in St. Louis as the director of vicarage and field education, understands the culture we send our pastors into. His work in Pastoral Ministry speaks to that culture, while holding fast to the descriptions of the pastoral ministry found first in Scripture and then in the Lutheran Confessions.

You can read a free excerpt of Pastoral Ministry by filling out the form below.

Q&A with Rev. Matthew Harrison and Rev. John Pless, General Editors of Closed Communion?

October 31, 2017 By Barbara Shippy

Rev. Matthew Harrison and Rev. John Pless teamed up together to offer the Church a wonderful collection of essays that brings together the best of the old and the new on the topic of closed Communion. Featuring essays from Luther, Elert, Sasse, Pieper, and a variety of contemporary authors—including practical essays that address today’s ministry context—this book serves to assist pastors and laity in understanding the biblical and confessional basis for closed Communion.

We recently caught up with Rev. Harrison and Rev. Pless to talk about their new book, Closed Communion? Admission to the Lord’s Supper in Biblical Lutheran Perspective, now available at cph.org.

What can readers expect in this volume?

Closed Communion is the historical practice of the Lutheran Church, so we’ve tried to let Lutherans, beginning with Luther, speak on this topic. In the nineteenth century, pressures toward unionism were especially strong, so we have a number of articles by theologians such as Walther, Loehe, and Zezchwitz. Many of the essays are from the great champions of Lutheran doctrine in the twentieth century, such as Elert, Sasse, Hardt, Hopf, and Pieper. There are also essays by living theologians. There is a good balance between exegetical, doctrinal, historical, and practical topics.

Why is it important that essays included in this book are both old and new?

Historical perspective is always important. We wanted to demonstrate that the practice of closed communion is no novelty or something that is unique to the Missouri Synod. It is biblical and catholic. At the same time, there are challenges particular to our age. We needed articles that would address religious pluralism and how we navigate the life of a faithful Lutheran church in an age that has been labeled “post-denominational.”

Who did you have in mind while compiling this collection of essays?

We thought of several audiences. First and foremost, there are parish pastors who have the weighty responsibility before God as stewards of His Means of Grace. They are on the front line and need to be able to clearly articulate what our church teaches and why it does so on the basis of the Scriptures. It will certainly fill a gap as a textbook in our seminaries. District presidents who are responsible for ecclesiastical supervision will find it immensely useful in their work. Lay leaders who want to better understand our church’s practice will have a “go-to” resource. I think it will also serve an ecumenical purpose in giving a biblical, historical, and doctrinal basis for our confessional position.

Why is it important that all Christians—whether or not their churches practice closed Communion—have a proper understanding of closed Communion?

Dr. Luther reminds us that it “is the Lord’s Supper, not the Christian’s Supper.” We practice closed Communion because we confess that in this Sacrament we eat and drink with our mouths the very body and blood of Christ. The apostle Paul warns all Christians in 1 Corinthians about the spiritual danger involved to those who eat and drink the Lord’s body and blood without discerning His bodily presence. Christians from churches that practice open communion need to be challenged with the biblical and historical evidence.

How do you see the faithful practice of closed Communion being challenged today both culturally and ecclesiastically?

Culturally, we are adrift in a world that accents autonomy. Each person is thought to be entitled for him or herself what he or she will participate in spiritually. Ours is an individualistic age that fails to see the communal dimension of faith. In the Lord’s Supper, Christ is dealing with us both individually and corporately. Closed Communion affirms this, open Communion does not. We are also faced with what has been called “denominational ambiguity.” People move easily and often without much thought to doctrine from one church to another. It is for these reasons that the practice of closed Communion is especially important today. Even in conservative Lutheran churches, these cultural and ecclesiastical themes are having an impact.

Where does closed Communion find its origins?

It is a biblical practice, as we can see from the apostle Paul’s extended discussion of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians. The great theologian of the last century, Werner Elert, has convincingly demonstrated that closed Communion was the practice of the Early Church. We have several of his essays in the book. The practice of closed Communion was common throughout the Christian church until the nineteenth century. It begins to break down under Pietism and unionism in Europe and attempts to avoid “denominationalism” in North America with the founding of such groups as the Disciples of Christ.

Let’s talk about some practical applications regarding this practice. What are some ways a church can clearly articulate its beliefs about Communion in a way that visitors can understand this practice?

A brief statement in the worship folder is helpful. Such a statement should not be too wordy or complex. It should succinctly state that visitors should speak with the pastor before communing. In some settings, an oral announcement is a good thing. Laity should be well-catechized regarding the Lord’s Supper, so they are in a good position to explain to their visiting friends and relatives why it is that we practice closed Communion. In this regard, we’re pleased that the forthcoming synodical explanation of Luther’s Small Catechism has a more complete section on closed Communion. Our book will be a resource for more articulate catechetical instruction.

How would you respond to a visitor who asks, “I believe in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. Why can’t I take Communion?”

The practice of closed Communion does not deny the saving faith of individuals who are not communicants. In fact, the faithful practice of closed Communion is really an invitation to come and learn the “all things” that our Lord gives His disciples to teach in Matthew 28 so that they can be one with Him and us at His altar.

To order your copy of Closed Communion? Admission to the Lord’s Supper in Biblical Lutheran Perspective, visit cph.org or call 800-325-3040.

First Look at Concordia Commentary: 2 Samuel

October 19, 2017 By Hannah Osborne

Following closely on the heels of the commentary on 1 Samuel, the next volume of the Concordia Commentary series will be 2 Samuel.

Andrew Steinmann, author of 1 Samuel as well as Daniel, Proverbs, and Ezra and Nehemiah in the Concordia Commentary series, returns to write this forthcoming volume. He extends his work from 1 Samuel, building off that commentary to deliver an exceptional theological analysis of this text.

Steinmann seeks to translate the original Hebrew text in a way that maintains the integrity of the original words and constructions, with consideration of the ancient versions, rendering the meaning of the chosen text into idiomatic English. In addition, he takes into account the historical nature of this narrative, identifying when and where specific events took place.

The Book of 2 Samuel continues the story of King David, and Steinmann reminds readers that this story is also a record of God’s love and mercy toward Israel and ultimately toward all humankind in the Son of David, Jesus Christ.

Praise for 2 Samuel:

“A welcome addition to the outstanding Concordia Commentary series. As in his work on 1 Samuel, we find meticulous interaction with the Hebrew text, skillful exegesis, and mature theological insights, all undergirded by the belief that inspired Scripture is authoritative for faith, life, and practice.”
—Robert B. Chisholm, Jr., Senior Professor and Chair of Old Testament Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary

“What an accomplishment! Andrew Steinmann’s work on 2 Samuel is impressive in every sense. Brimming with relevant information, Steinmann’s work reveals the careful scholarship, sound exegesis, and theological sensibility that have come to characterize his writings. Scholars will appreciate his translation of the text, detailed textual notes, and a truly august bibliography. However, there is much here for the engaged pastor or student as well. Anyone seeking an aid in understanding the meaning and message of 2 Samuel will find Steinmann to be a sure and faithful guide.”
—William R. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biblical and Theological Studies, College of the Ozarks, Branson, Missouri

Download a free excerpt from 2 Samuel by filling out the form below.

How Healthy is Your Church?

October 18, 2017 By Ted Kober

How healthy is my church?

The answer depends on one’s perspective. Some describe a healthy church from a psychological viewpoint. They evaluate how well the congregation works together as a family system. This can be a useful way to evaluate any group of people in a system.

Others describe a healthy church by its characteristics. Does it have a visionary leader? Are its worship services inspirational? Has the church defined its mission statement? Is it growing numerically? One can assess church health based on how many “healthy” indicators it possesses.

I look at it from a spiritual perspective. Healthy churches are those whose leadership and membership are solidly grounded in Christ. Nourished by God’s Word, they apply it to their lives. Their spiritual maturity evidences itself when they practice confession and forgiveness in their relationships with one another.

In Built on the Rock: The Healthy Congregation, I approach church health reviewing four factors:

What the Scriptures say
What I learned over 25 years as a reconciliation consultant
A qualitative study
A quantitative study

To conduct the qualitative study, I asked ten district presidents for referrals to pastors of healthy churches. I didn’t define for them what I meant by “healthy churches.” I eliminated those I personally knew. I interviewed senior pastors from eleven different churches, asking the following questions:

What has been your average worship attendance for the last ten years? What are the trends you have observed in attendance?
What is your congregation’s total number of baptized and communicant members? Are there any trends you have observed in membership changes over the last ten years?
What is the total number of individual adults who regularly attend Bible study during the week? (This may be different than the total attendance of Bible studies throughout the week, since some individuals may attend more than one Bible study, and others may not attend every week but are regularly involved.) Have there been any trends in attendance over the last few years? How many lay leaders do you have? How many lay leaders are involved in Bible study?
Describe your Bible study opportunities, including descriptions of what is done during your Bible studies.
Briefly describe your congregation’s organizational structure.
What do you believe are contributing factors that make your church healthy?
What are some of the greatest strengths of your church?
Every church encounters conflicts, whether between key leaders or among the membership. Describe a situation involving a serious conflict and how your church responded.
If you could change anything in your church, what would it be?
What do you hope to do to maintain or improve the spiritual health of your church?
Anything else you would like to share?

You can compare your congregation’s health with the healthy churches I interviewed. Check out what I learned from this study in chapter 2 of Built on the Rock: The Healthy Congregation. Then share this book with your leaders to discuss ways you can maintain or improve the spiritual health of your church, regardless of how healthy it is today.

“Now may the God of peace, who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen” (Hebrews 13:20-21 ESV).

Q&A with John Pless

October 4, 2017 By Lindsey Martie

Rev. John T. Pless is assistant professor of pastoral ministry and missions at Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and is a visiting professor at Lutheran Theological Seminary in Pretoria, South Africa. He is also the author of Handling the Word of Truth: Law and Gospel in the Church Today, Praying Luther’s Small Catechism, and Martin Luther: Preacher of the Cross. He is also the co-editor of Closed Communion? and The Necessary Distinction.

We recently caught up with Pless to talk about The Necessary Distinction, which is now available on cph.org.

Why is it important to make a clear distinction between Law and Gospel?

We distinguish between God’s Law and His Gospel because the Scriptures make this distinction. This is not a distinction superimposed on the Bible; rather, it flows from the fact that God speaks two different words to us in the Holy Scriptures. God speaks both commands and promises.

It is important that the Law be distinguished from the Gospel for three reasons. First, so that Christ Jesus alone is trusted in for salvation, not our own good works. Second, the distinction between the Law and the Gospel clarifies the two ways that the triune God is working in the world. Through the Law, God is restraining the effects of sin in creation. Through the Gospel, He is forgiving sin and enlivening forgiven sinners to live before Him by faith. Third, Law and Gospel are to be rightly distinguished for the sake of articulating God’s message of salvation to unbelievers. We need to be clear that salvation is through faith in the promises of Christ Jesus and not in our own moral or spiritual achievements. Where the distinction between Law and Gospel is not made, people will fall into the trap of “lawfulness” or “lawlessness.” They will either believe that they are righteous because they have kept the Law, or they will set God’s Law aside and live by their own standards.

What impact does it have on an individual Christian if the two are not properly distinguished?

Where Law and Gospel are confused, individual Christians are caught in confusion, doubt, anxiety, and uncertainty. Confronted by the Law, they can see only their sin, and if the Gospel does not follow they will be left in either despair or arrogance. Either they will conclude that it is impossible for them to be a Christian because of their own sins, or they will misuse the Law to justify themselves. Law and Gospel are properly distinguished to guard against both despair and arrogance. Only when the Law is properly distinguished from the Gospel are we able to see that while the Law does not save it shows us God’s will for the lives of His human creatures in creation.

Why did pastors drift away from this clear distinction between Law and Gospel?

Martin Luther once commented that the distinction between the Law and the Gospel is a most difficult art taught only by the Holy Spirit in the school of experience. Sometimes pastors are tempted to take what they perceive as an easier path, reducing preaching into a generic declaration of God’s love without regard to sin and the Law. Others might, in frustration over the spiritual apathy of their people or the moral chaos of our decadent culture, wrongly conclude that stronger and stricter application of the Law will change things. Both of these approaches bypass the arduous work required of those who would rightly handle the Word of truth. It is the hope of the editors of The Necessary Distinction that our book would challenge and encourage pastors both in the work of preaching and pastoral care. Like any good art, it must be honed, sharpened, and practiced. We believe that this book will help refine that art.

Where the art of distinguishing Law and Gospel properly is put into play, preachers will avoid the notion that the Law is just preached to make people feel guilty and the Gospel is then proclaimed to make the guilty feel good about themselves. When the Law is preached incisively as the prophet Nathan preached it to David (see 2 Samuel 12:1–15), it functions as a mirror to show us the reality of our sin so that our hearts are open to God’s Gospel, which declares the forgiveness of sins, imparting the power of the resurrection for a new life in Christ. The authors of The Necessary Distinction demonstrate that there is nothing formulaic about this functional use of God’s Law and Gospel.

How does the failure to properly distinguish Law from Gospel affect the Church’s mission, the carrying out of His mandate to make disciples of all nations by baptizing and teaching?

Genuine mission work requires the preaching of both the Law and the Gospel. The Law identifies and crushes whatever false gods the human heart is looking to for meaning, security, and direction. The Law, however, does not have the capacity to restore broken sinners to life with Gospel. Only the Gospel creates Christians; it is exclusively the Gospel that is the power of God for salvation (see Romans 1:16–17). The Law brings about the knowledge of sin, but no human being will be declared righteous by the Law (see Romans 3:20). We proclaim God’s Law not to make disciples but to show how people of whatever background have sinned and fall short of His glory. But the word that makes disciples is the word of the cross, the good news of forgiveness of sins through the reconciling work of Christ.

In your opinion, would a resurgence of (or return to) the proper distinction between Law and Gospel help to reunite the Christian Church? If so, how?

Every division among Christians can, in one way or another, be traced to a confusion of Law and Gospel. The great Lutheran theologian of the last century Franz Pieper once commented that there are finally only two religions in all the world—the religion of the Law and that of the Gospel. As the Augsburg Confession reminds us, it is sufficient for the true unity of the Church that the Gospel be preached purely and the Sacraments be administered according to this divine Word. The Gospel is not preached purely if it is mixed with the Law. If the Law is dismissed, there is no need for the Gospel, which alone unifies the Church.

How could a congregation be impacted by a return to a clear distinction between Law and Gospel?

Where God’s Law and Gospel are rightly distinguished, the Gospel will predominate. This means that people are set free from the bondage to sin, delivered from the fear of death, and given the confidence to live in faith in Christ and love for their neighbors. Knowing the difference between Law and Gospel means that Christians are not looking to their own spiritual lives as a means of achieving salvation. Instead they are liberated to live by faith in Christ (see Galatians 2:20) and devote themselves to caring for their neighbors according to God’s commandments. When Christians know that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to those who believe (see Romans 10:4), they are freed from trying to rely on the Law for self-justification. To paraphrase a line from the chapter by James Nestingen, then the Holy Spirit harnesses the Law so that it is rightly used in creation, identifying the good works that God has designed to serve the neighbor. Only then can we do good works from a “free and merit spirit,” to borrow language from the Formula of Concord. Where Christ Jesus is exercising His lordship over believers through the Gospel, there you will find Christians living under Him in His kingdom and serving Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, to use the words of the catechism. It is no wonder then that C. F. W. Walther referred to preachers who rightly distinguish Law and Gospel as “helpers of joy.”

To order The Necessary Distinction, visit cph.org or contact CPH at 800-325-3040.

New