WHENEVER the absolution is spoken, whether it is the Confessionally preferred individual absolution or the more problematic general absolution, it is customary among many Evangelical-Lutherans (and those in the Missouri Synod particularly) to preface the declaration of forgiveness with these words: "in the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus Christ."1
In their plainest meaning, these words state the basis for a called and ordained man to declare authoritatively and most certainly the forgiveness that God alone speaks and gives. That authority is twofold: first, the called and ordained man speaks in Christ's stead; secondly, he speaks according to Christ's command or, better, mandate.
These words are not unique to contemporary Evangelical-Lutheran liturgical books but are found in some of the earliest Evangelical-Lutheran church orders. However, the words "in the stead and by the command" are unique to the Evangelical-Lutheran church and today are not found in any of the church orders of other liturgical denominations. How this formula found its way into Evangelical-Lutheran liturgical heritage cannot be determined with absolute certainty. But that it is confessional (if not a very slight adaptation of the very words of the Evangelical-Lutheran confessions) cannot be denied. Therefore, this particular liturgical formula is binding upon all who subscribe to the Evangelical-Lutheran confessions. Furthermore, it can also be employed to shed light on the Evangelical-Lutheran doctrine of the Office of the Holy Ministry.
Article XXV of the German version of the Augsburg Confession reads in part:
Confession is not abolished by the preachers on our side. For this practice is retained by us: the Sacrament is not offered to those not previously examined and absolved. Besides, the people are diligently instructed [about] how comforting the word of absolution is, how great and precious the absolution is to be esteemed. For it is not an actual human voice or word, but God's Word which forgives sin. For it is spoken in God's stead and at God's behest (an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl). About this behest and authority of the keys, we teach with great diligence how comforting, how necessary they are for the terrified conscience. Moreover, [we teach] how God requires [that] this absolution be not lightly believed because the voice of God rings out from heaven and the absolution cheerfully comforts us so that through such faith we get the forgiveness of sins.2With these words the Evangelical-Lutheran church confesses (among other things) that the absolution spoken in God's stead and by His command is actually God's forgiving Word. Furthermore, this absolving Word from God spoken by the preacher in God's stead and by God's command is the one upon which faith must depend.
To understand better what is meant here, one needs to place the article in its context. Augustana XXV is one of the "articles about matters in dispute in which an account is given of the abuses which have been corrected."3 Unlike the other "disputed articles" which are primarily content with listing abuses, article twenty-five simply expands the twofold argument in article eleven.4 The first argument is that Lutheran pastors administer absolution individually; and they do so because of both its instructional value and the great comfort it gives.5 The second argument is that Evangelical-Lutheran pastors do not demand an enumeration of sins because it is impossible and makes the absolution conditional. While this second argument addresses an abuse evident in private confession, that is not the main thrust of the article. Both the opening and closing words of the article6 make clear that the first argument--retention of private absolution because of its great benefit--is key.
The eleventh and twenty-fifth articles clearly state, then, that the chief sticking point on private confession between the Romanists and the Evangelical-Lutherans is not that it is practiced but that sins are enumerated during the confession.7 Enumeration of sins, the Evangelical-Lutherans argue, places the emphasis on the act of confessing rather than on the absolving Word which is the chief thing (Hauptstuck) precisely because therein troubled consciences are comforted. Therefore, Evangelical-Lutherans insist in strong words that private absolution not be abolished or allowed to fall into disuse but that it be retained, not for the sake of the confession but because of the absolution spoken there. The argument for retention relies on what is confessed in the third, fourth and fifth articles of the Augsburg Confession. Absolution is the practical application (the delivery) of the passion, death and resurrection of Christ (CA III) which justifies before God the man who holds to Christ's work and goods (CA IV) won in His death and resurrection and for which the Holy Preaching Office was established by God (CA V). Bjarne Teigen describes the linkage this way:
Absolution is closely connected with the doctrine of justification described in Articles IV and V. Justification by faith and through the Gospel word of faith are intimately united by St. Paul [in Rom. 10:6-8]. Justification by faith is to be sought in the Word of the Gospel, where it is offered to mankind. Jesus Christ and everything He has won for our salvation are in the holy Gospel, and as close as that Word comes to us, so closely the Lord Jesus comes to us with His grace and gifts.... In applying absolution, the Lutheran church accepts the institution of Christ to proclaim the Gospel to a single person so that he may receive consolation for the sin that rests upon his conscience.8The absolution which is of concern in article twenty-five is not just any absolution but that absolution which is spoken in God's stead and by God's command (or "it is the voice of God and pronounced by God's mandate" in the Latin). Instructing the penitent that the absolution is truly God's forgiving Word spoken in God's stead and by His command assures the sinner that he has not heard just temporary human noise or just more words (des gegenwortigen Menschen Stimme oder Wort) but (sondern) that he has actually and truly heard God's sure and lasting word of forgiveness (Gottes Wort der die Sunde vergibt). Furthermore, the penitent is taught that hearing that Word spoken in God's stead and by His command is like hearing God Himself speak from heaven (denn so Gottes Stimme vom Himmel erschulle). In Augustana XXV, the contrast is not so much between God's work of forgiveness and our work of confessing as between God's Word and voice and a human voice and word.9 The phrase "an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl" is important, then, because it guarantees that what is heard is truly God's forgiving Word; secondly, it is through this way that God's heavenly, absolving, believable, and comforting voice is heard.
Does this mean that speaking "an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl" is essential to the absolution? According to Augustana XXV alone, the answer must be in the affirmative. For standing as it does between "Gottes Wort der die Sunde vergibt" and "Gottes Stimme vom Himmel erschulle," "an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl" clearly states that God's forgiving, heavenly Word is given only through the means of him who speaks in God's stead and by God's command.
Augustana XXV, then, envisions this situation: For a person to know that he is forgiven, he must be able to trust a sure and certain word. That sure and certain word must not be any human word, one person saying to another "I forgive you" or even "Let me assure you that God forgives you." Such human words may be momentarily or temporarily comforting, but their comfort will not stand up; neither will they last, in the face of the accuser's chief question: "Are you sure God has forgiven you?" Consequently, the sure and certain word necessarily must come from God Himself. Faith must hear and grab onto God saying "I forgive you." Of course, God no longer speaks His forgiving Word immediately to men. He now speaks and works through means. In other words, God speaks His sure and certain Word of forgiveness through someone else; or, put another way, God authorizes someone else to stand in for Him and speak the forgiveness only He speaks.
Speaking the absolution in God's stead and by God's command is necessary for the sake of the absolution. Otherwise sinners will not know for certain that God's forgiving Word has been spoken to them. For the certainty that the absolution is the Word of God rests upon the fact that it is spoken in God's stead and by His command. This is the argument of article twenty-five of the Augsburg Confession. But how are we to understand the one who speaks "an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl?" In other words, what does it mean to be absolving in God's stead and by His command?
There are two things which must be distinguished but not separated. First, the one who absolves speaks in God's stead. According to the plain meaning of these words, this man stands in for God. How he stands in for God - whether he is God's representative or His substitute--must be determined. Clearly, one does not hear the actual physical voice of God but the physical voice of the one who speaks. Secondly, the one who absolves speaks by God's command. In other words, he is not self-appointed, speaking because he feels it right or speaking whatever words seem adequate to the situation. The absolver dispenses not his word but God's Word, not his forgiveness but God's forgiveness, not his opinion or what he hopes may happen ("may God forgive you") but what God actually and truly says ("I forgive you"). In God's stead, the absolver declares God's Word. To do so he must be authorized by God. He must speak at God's behest, by His command. So there are two things to consider: "an Gottes Statt" and "aus Gottes Befehl." But in considering them, they must not be pulled apart. For the little word "und" which stands between the two phrases indicates that one cannot speak for God unless he is also authorized by God to speak; neither does God authorize one to speak without also placing that man in His place, in His stead. So the two go together: speaking in God's stead implies authorization from God, and authorization from God implies being permitted to say what God alone says.10
Having said that, let us do some distinguishing. A clue to understanding what it means to speak "an Gottes Statt" may be found in the Latin text of Augustana XXV. There "vice," the Latin equivalent to "Statt," is not used as one might expect.11 Instead,"vox" is used, and in an highly unlikely manner.
Our people are taught that they should highly prize the absolution, because it is the voice (vox) of God and it is pronounced by God's command.12The absolution is actually God's voice. The German speaks the same way: "it [the absolution] is not an actual human voice or word, but God's Word" (es sei nicht des gegenwortigen Menschen Stimme oder Wort, sondern Gottes Wort) and "this absolution [is] not lightly believed because the voice of God rings out from heaven" (dieser Absolution zu glauben, nich weniger, denn so Gottes Stimme vom Himmel erschulle). But, of course, an absolution itself cannot be a voice since it does not make a sound. The use of the word "voice" (vox; Stimme), then, strongly implies an inseparable connection not only between the absolution that is heard and God's own voice but also between what is spoken (the absolution) and the one who speaks it (the absolver). Or, to say it another way, the use of "voice" not only emphasizes that God's own Word is said in the absolution but also that God Himself is speaking through the absolver.13 This suggests that to be in God's stead is something more than just speaking for God, more than simply representing God by saying what God would say in the same situation. The relationship appears much tighter. If the absolution actually is God's voice, then when the absolver absolves he becomes God speaking. In this vein one cannot help but think of the Old Testament prophets. They also stand in for God, speaking His Word; and the relationship is described as the Lord putting His Word into their mouth14 with the idea being that they no longer speak their own words but God's Word. (This is of comfort to Jeremiah; for it assures him that he need not worry about what he says or to whom he speaks since he is simply the mouth God is using to get His Word said.) What is envisioned is not mere representation: the prophet representing God and speaking for God in the same way a congressman or delegate represents and speaks for the people. Rather, what is envisioned approaches (if not is) a notion of substitution: when the prophet speaks, God is truly speaking; for they are not the prophet's words but God's Word put into the prophet's mouth. In speaking specifically of the call of Moses in Exodus 3, Dr. William Weinrich describes this substitutionary relationship in this way:
The prophetic messenger is in the place of God. God binds himself to Moses, as it were. If one were to ask the question, "Where is God?" the answer would have to be, "With Moses!" However, this response would not simply mean that God is with Moses as a comforting and encouraging companion. God is with Moses in the sense that He has given Moses His own task so that in and through Moses God Himself is a present agent, accomplishing His purpose of redeeming His people.15The understanding is one of agency, instrumentality and means: through the mouth of Moses or Jeremiah God says what God says. Moses and Jeremiah use their vocal chords but the voice is God's. That the confessors use "vox Dei" strongly suggests that they have this Old Testament prophetic notion in mind. The link paralleling God's use of the immediately called prophets as His voice with His present day use of mediately called pastors is further strengthened in this argument employed by Martin Chemnitz against the Tridentine fathers:
Now when God Himself speaks immediately to men and with His own voice makes known His will, as He often did in the Old Testament, and as later, in the time of the New Testament, He spoke through a Son (Heb 1:2), then there is no doubt about the efficacy of the Word. However, God did not always want to set His Word before the church without means, with His own voice, but determined by sure counsel to use the voice of the ministry as His ordinary means or instrument. Nevertheless there remains also in this medium what is appropriate to the prophets: "Thus says the Lord: ...because I have put My words in your mouth... (Is 59:21). "... God making His appeal through us" (2 Cor. 5:20). "Do you seek proof that Christ is speaking in me?" (2 Cor. 13:3). That these things are right and proper in those who are called immediately by the divine voice, not through men but by God Himself, as were the prophets in the Old Testament and the Baptist and apostles--this no sane person is able to doubt. ... Now are the things which Scripture teaches about the presence and efficacy of God through the ministry doubtful, uncertain, or false in the case of a mediate call? Surely, this is a very great and comforting promise, that Scripture declares that also that call which is issued by the voice of the church is divine, or from God. [Chemnitz then cites Eph. 4:11; Acts 20:28; the Pauline signatures in 1 Cor., 2 Cor., 1 Thess.; 1 Cor. 3:9; 2 Cor. 5:19-20; 1 Cor. 3:6; 1 Tim. 4:16] ... The promises [of Scripture] are most delightful, and very necessary, namely, that the call also of those who have been called by the voice of the church is divine, that God is present with and works effectively through their ministry.16This notion of the absolver being the voice of God is not without merit within the German text. The German argues that the absolution is comforting, precious and honorable because it is "not an actual human voice or word, but God's Word which forgives sin."17 Here the "voice" (Stimme) belongs not to God but to a man. Yet the contrast is between the "voice or word" of a man and the "word" of God. While it is problematic to argue from the absence of words, word order and context demand that "Gottes Stimme" stand beside "Gottes Wort." The Latin text legitimizes this claim. Therefore, what is contrasted is not just a man's word and God's Word, but also a man's voice and God's voice. A few lines later this notion is repeated: "God requires [that] this absolution be not lightly believed because the voice of God rings out from heaven."18 The absolution is the way in which God's voice rings out. Or, to say it more dynamically, the voice of God in heaven is located on earth in the absolution.19 At this point one may argue that these words mitigate against a substitutionary understanding of "an Gottes Statt" since here the voice of God is located in the absolution rather than in the absolver.20 However, the article "dieser" expressly refers not to a disembodied absolution but precisely to that absolution which is spoken by the absolver who speaks in God's stead and by God's command. So the context makes clear that the absolution cannot be divorced from the one who speaks it. This conclusion is upheld and strengthened from these words in the Apology:
The power of the keys administers and presents the Gospel through absolution which is the true voice of the Gospel. Thus we also comprise absolution when we speak of faith, because faith cometh by hearing, as Paul says Rom. 10,17. For when the Gospel is heard, and the absolution is heard, the conscience is encouraged and receives consolation. And because God truly quickens through the Word, the keys truly remit sins before God according to Luke 10,16: He that heareth you heareth Me. Wherefore the voice of the one absolving must be believed not otherwise than we would believe a voice from heaven.21Understanding "an Gottes Statt" as meaning that the voice of the absolver is the voice of God indicates that something more than mere representation is in mind. Instead, following the Old Testament prophetic pattern, the notion of agency and instrumentality, possibly even approaching a substitutionary relationship, is in view. The use of "Statt" in the other confessional writings confirms this conclusion. According to Luther, parents and (by extension) masters and rulers, are also in God's stead, who do His will and keep His order by meting out His punishment (when necessary); "therefore we are not to regard their persons, how they may be, but the will of God who has thus created and ordained" for He could have just as well "set up wood and stone before us, whom we might call father and mother."22
When it comes to ministers of the Gospel, the relationship is described in similar terms:
Baptism is a work, not which we offer to God, but in which God baptizes us, i.e., a minister in the place of God [vice Dei; an Gottes Statt]; and God here offers and presents the remission of sins, etc., according to the promise...23Martin Chemnitz expands on this point further:
This above all is the thrust of those words [the baptismal formula], that in the administration of Baptism a minister does not function in his own name, but that God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Himself present, deals through the outward ministry with the one to be baptized, so that God the Father, because of the merit of the Son, receives him into grace and sanctifies [him] by the Holy Spirit unto righteousness and life eternal, so that "in the name" is the same as "in the stead and place of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit," as Paul says in that same passage regarding the preaching of the Gospel and absolution (2 Cor. 2:10; 5:20).24It is not surprising, then, that Chemnitz and the other writers of the Formula of Concord later follow the same line as Melanchthon and strengthen it further. For when speaking of the assurance of election one has, the formulators adduce two key biblical passages which underline the notion that God's ministers do not simply function as official message-bearers but that through them God also speaks His word of reconciliation.
Now, God does not call without means, but through the Word, as He has commanded repentance and remission of sins to be preached in His name, Luke 24:47. St. Paul also testifies to like effect when he writes: We are ambassadors for Christ (Botschafter an Christus Statt; pro Christo legatione), as though God did beseech you by us (Gott vermahnet durch uns ; Deo exhortante per nos); we pray you in Christ's stead, Be ye reconciled to God. 2 Cor. 5:20. And the guests whom the King will have at the wedding of His Son He calls through His ministers sent forth, Matt. 22:2ff....25The key to this understanding of "Statt" as (substitutionary) agent and instrument, however, is the use of "Statt" and "vice" in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession. The question is whether the sacraments administered by evil ministers (as distinguished from false teachers) are effective. Melanchthon's answer is that they are because the ministers represent not their own persons but the person of Christ based on Christ's own words in Luke 10:16.
Neither does the fact that the Sacraments are administered by the unworthy detract from their efficacy, because, on account of the call of the Church, they represent the person of Christ, and do not represent their own persons (repraesentant Christi personam propter vocationem ecclesiae, non repraesentant proprias personas ; nicht fur ihre eigene Person, sondern als Christus), as Christ testifies, Luke 10:16: He that heareth you heareth Me. When they offer the Word of God, when they offer the Sacraments, they offer them in the stead and place of Christ (Christi vice et loco porrigunt; reichen sie dieselben an Christus Statt). Those words of Christ teach us not to be offended by the unworthiness of the ministers.26Later, in the same article, Melanchthon adds yet another qualifier:
...the Sacraments are efficacious even though dispensed by wicked ministers, because the ministers act in the place of Christ (vice Christi; an Christus Statt}, and do not represent their own persons, according to Luke 10,16: He that heareth you heareth Me. Impious teachers are to be deserted because these do not act any longer in the place of Christ (non funguntur persona Christi; nicht mehr an Christus Statt) but are antichrists.27This says more than that the efficacy, reliability, and comfort of the Gospel lies not in the person administering but in the Word of God. It pointedly states that the "person " of the pastor is in some way involved in this relationship between God's Word and the minister who speaks it. In other words, speaking in Christ's stead is not simply to say faithfully what He says, not simply to be an honest and true repeater of words; rather, it is to be the means through which Christ's word is dispensed and delivered.28
This, according to David Scaer, is the Christological character of the office of the ministry:
This ministry is Christological not only because it proclaims Christ as its chief and ultimate function, but because those who possess this office stand in Christ's stead. This is the view of the Apology. The ministers preaching the Gospel are hardly saints speaking to themselves, but their voice is Christ's voice speaking to saints. From this concrete reality of being Christ's representatives, the ministers proclaim the one whom they represent.29The meaning of an "Gottes Statt" in Augustana XXV can be summarized in this way. The absolution is God's Word of forgiveness. It is also His heavenly voice. That absolution of God is delivered by the man who speaks in God's stead. To speak God's absolution in God's stead means to have God's forgiving word and voice spoken through the absolver. As Luther says, "[God] absolves me of my sins through a word placed in the mouth of a man."30
Therefore, if there is no man speaking "an Gottes Statt" God's absolution is not delivered to man. Or, put another way, God uses the one who speaks "an Gottes Statt" to speak His own absolving, heavenly Word. Furthermore, since he is "an Gottes Statt," the absolver is to be believed as if God Himself were speaking; for what the absolver delivers is not his own word and he speaks not his own temporary noises; instead, he delivers and speaks nothing more and nothing less than what God Himself gives him to say, says through him, and even says Himself as He locates His absolution in the speaking of the absolver. The Small Catechism's question, as striking as it may sound, is therefore quite correctly put: "Do you believe that my [the absolver's] forgiveness is God's forgiveness?"31
Speaking in God's stead is one thing. But what does it mean to be authorized by God to speak in His stead? That is the question that underlies the phrase "aus Gottes Befehl."
It must first be noted that the word "Befehl" is chosen rather than another synonym such as "Gebot." The latter leans more heavily toward a requirement of the Law, behavior required according to a constraint or command. The usage of the former, however, suggests a mandate rooted in the givenness of the Gospel, behavior that conforms faithfully to the nature of God's promise and forgiveness. Again, "Gebot" seems to indicate the demand to fulfill some precept which man would do naturally were he without sin, a command given to check sin; while "Befehl" seems to indicate the God-given permission and authorization to do what is truly proper to God, the necessary directive(s) to continue what God has graciously given.32 Properly understood, the phrase "it is given" may idiomatically convey the sense of "Befehl."
"Befehl" is used twice in Augsburg XXV, first in the phrase under consideration and then immediately thereafter.
For it is not an actual human voice or word, but God's Word which forgives sin. For it is spoken in God's stead and at God's behest (Befehl). About this behest (Befehl) and authority of the keys, we teach with great diligence how comforting, how necessary they are for the terrified conscience.33In the second usage "Befehl" is qualified and explained by the phrase "Gewalt der Schlussel." The mandate of God is the authority He has given to forgive the sins of the penitent and retain the sins of the impenitent (Jn 20:23). Without this mandate given by God there can be no certainty that God's forgiving Word has been truly spoken. Furthermore, it is this mandate to carry out the office of the keys which is the starting point of instruction for the terrified in the comfort and necessity of the absolving Word. What bolsters the certainty of faith which hears and clings to the absolution, then, is the fact that the one who is God's voice (an Gottes Statt) speaking God's forgiveness has been legitimately given by God (aus Gottes) the right and authority (Befehl) to speak for Him. For the forgiveness belongs to God alone (Mk. 2:7); but in His Son and by His Spirit He permits, allows and gives certain men the duty and mandate to say what He alone says. Furthermore, this mandate is not a burdensome constraint tied to the Law, but an authority grounded in the nature of the forgiveness itself.
Addressed by the phrase "aus Gottes Befehl" is the rightness and legitimacy of the absolver to speak God's forgiveness. A cursory examination of the use of "Befehl" in the Augustana bears out this conclusion. It describes the authority to administer the office of the keys.34 In a parallel way, it describes God's establishment of the apostolic/preaching office35 and, negatively, His mandate to spurn false preachers.36 This use of "Befehl" to indicate God's mandate for the preaching office suggests that what lies behind "Befehl" is already present in the word "eingesetzt" (institutum) in the fifth article of the Augustana. In other words, the establishment of the preaching office (predigtamt) cannot be accomplished without and depends solely upon God's "Befehl".
Where is such a "Befehl" given? Jeremiah and the other prophets are commanded by God to speak His Word of comfort. The mandate is coupled with their being sent while freeing them from the fear of speaking (both in terms of content and ability). With the mandate comes the promised delivering presence of the God who sends.37 In the New Testament the same is true. The disciples do not preach or perform miracles without first being authorized specifically by Christ,38 even to the point that they are not permitted to baptize, teach, forgive or preach the Gospel of Christ's resurrection until they have first received the mandate and been duly set apart.39 But no such promise or help rests on those who go of their own accord, without being given the mandate; in fact, they are summarily condemned.40
For the Confessions, the biblical weight for the giving of God's "Befehl" rests on Christ's authorization of the apostles to speak, forgive sins, baptize and commune in His name.41 There the following conclusions are drawn about God's "Befehl": (a) the mandate and authority, which alone is Christ's, is given by Him to His apostles and ministers; (b) this mandate and authority pertains only to the "spiritual matters," i.e., the forgiveness of sins, and not to civil (political or governmental) authority; (c) because of this mandate and authority, one can be certain that the forgiveness he receives from a minister in preaching or the sacraments is truly Christ's forgiveness; (d) while the personal piety of the minister does not negate or undo the benefits given in Christ's "Befehl", false teaching does; (e) false teachers have not received or have rejected Christ's "Befehl" by virtue of their false teaching and therefore should not be believed or heard (by virtue of another "Befehl" of Christ).
"Befehl," then, is the mandate and authority from God which sends men to do what is only proper to God,42 i.e., to be in God's stead and as His voice pronouncing His absolution, speaking His Word, baptizing in His name, and administering the Supper which is the Lord's. This mandate and authority, and its rightful exercise, is articulated in the fourteenth article of the Augsburg Confession. There, after the purpose of God's "Befehl" (CA V), the fruits of that Befehl (CA VI), where and for whom that Befehl is accomplished (CA VII.VIII), what shape that "Befehl" takes (CA IX.X.XI.XII) and the proper use of that "Befehl" (CA XIII) have been delineated, the ones to whom that "Befehl" is given (i.e. those who rightly lay claim to God's mandate and authority to speak in His stead) are clearly and succinctly identified. Only those can legitimately and rightfully claim to have received God's "Befehl" of openly teaching, preaching or serving the Sacraments who have been called according to the usual order (ordentlichen Beruf; rite vocatus).43
Martin Chemnitz provides this comprehensive summary of what is entailed in God's "Befehl."
[I]t is certain that no one is a legitimate minister of the Word and the sacraments - nor is able rightly and profitably to exercise the ministry for the glory of God and the edification of the church - unless he has been sent, that is, unless he has a legitimate call (Jer. 23:21; Rom. 10:15).... God, the author, preserver, governor, and (if I may use the term) husbandman of the ecclesiastical ministry, has reserved for Himself the right and authority of calling and sending those whom He wants to receive as co-workers in this ministry, and wants it to belong to Himself as Lord of the harvest.... Therefore it is necessary for a legitimate call to the ministry of the church that the person who is to be a legitimate minister of the Word and the sacraments be called and sent by God, so that both the minister and the church can truthfully declare, as it is written in Is. 59:21, 2 Cor. 5:19-20, Luke 10:16, John 20:21. These things must be considered in a call of the church, in order that both the minister and also the church can state with certainty that God is present with this ministry and works through it, as He says in Mt. 28:20, John 20:22, 2 Cor. 3:6, 1 Cor. 3:5-9, John 20:23, Mt. 16:19. Therefore Paul says in Rom. 10:14ff that those who are not sent by God cannot preach in such a way that faith is received from that preaching - faith which calls upon the name of God, so that we are justified and saved. These things are certain from Scripture.44"The chief thing of the ministry is that God wants to be present in it with His Spirit, grace, and gifts and to work effectively through it."45 Therefore He speaks His "Befehl" and, in that way, sends out ministers to preach in His name. The necessity of such a mandate, and its proper continuance, derives not so much from good form and churchly order as from the benefit it gives the penitent. Augstanna XXV states that the "Befehl" and authority of the keys is the basis for the comfort given in the absolution and its necessity for the terrified conscience. For the "Befehl" and authority assures the penitent that the absolution he hears is truly the voice of God ringing out from heaven. Hence, the "Befehl" is necessary for faith. For if there is no mandate of Christ to speak the absolution, if He has not authorized certain men to give what He says, then a terrified conscience can easily be thrown into doubt and despair about whether he has truly received God's forgiveness and not just some comforting words that people (or a person) felt was good and helpful.46 But with Christ's Befehl all such doubt can be assuaged; for
on this basis the hearers are stirred up to true reverence and obedience toward the ministry, namely since they are taught from the Word of God that God, present through this means, wants to deal with us in the church and work effectively among us.47
The chief concern of Augustana XXV is the certainty and faith of the penitent. On what shall that faith rely: the fact that all sins have been accounted for, the ability of the penitent to satisfy all the conditions the priest lays down, or the knowledge that he once heard about Christ's death and resurrection for the justification of mankind? The answer is that the terrified conscience cannot rely on any of these things, and that faith which clings to such anthropocentric notions is no real faith at all. So the Evangelical-Lutheran church confesses that the penitent must find comfort in and base his confidence on nothing other than God's own forgiveness spoken to him. Yet with that answer another human element is introduced; namely, the absolver whose integrity can always be questioned and who, for that reason, cannot be relied on by faith. Not his person, say the confessors, but what God has given him to say, the fact that He is placed by God Himself to speak God's own Word of forgiveness. For only that which is given by God, approved by God, done in God's name, and ordained by God as His Self-chosen means is the truly trustworthy and sure foundation upon which faith can be firmly grounded. The penitent, then, must be sure that the forgiving Word which he hears, which he believes to be from God Himself, is spoken in God's stead and at God's behest.
In the twenty-fifth article of the Augsburg Confession, the confessors maintain that the absolution is to be spoken in God's stead and at God's behest. That means that the one who speaks must be the authorized one through whom the very forgiveness of God sounds forth. He must be the one who falls under the mandate of God to represent not his own person but the person of Christ. He must be the one to whom the penitent can point and say to God, "I heard Your forgiveness spoken by Your man; Your voice coming out of the mouth You not only approved, not only ordered to speak, but also gifted to speak the Word which is only Yours to say." Therefore, it is more than mere delegation, more than the relaying of a message. For if that were all, one could always question whether the messenger got it right. Instead, to hear the absolution spoken in God's stead and at God's behest is to hear God Himself pronounce His sure and true forgiveness. Then, and only then, can the impenitent take heart; for he has not heard "an actual human voice or word" (des gegenwortigen Menschen Stimme oder Wort) but the very "voice of God ringing out from heaven" (Gottes Stimme vom Himmel erschulle).
1 See "The Order of Holy Communion" (16), "The Order of the Confessional Service" (48) in The Lutheran Hymnal; "Divine Service I" (137), "Service of Corporate Confession and Absolution" (309) in Lutheran Worship; and "The Order for the Communion of the Sick" (63) in The Lutheran Agenda. It is interesting to note that, following Luther's Small Catechism, the formula is abbreviated to simply "by the command of our Lord Jesus Christ" in "Ministry to the Sick and Infirm" (151), "Communion of the Sick and Homebound" (155) in Lutheran Worship Agenda; in "Individual Confession and Absolution" (311) in Lutheran Worship; in "Individual Confession and Forgiveness" (197) in Lutheran Book of Worship. The phrase is further abbreviated to "by His authority" in "Brief Order for Confession and Forgiveness" (56, 77, 98), "Corporate Confession and Forgiveness" (193) in Lutheran Book of Worship; "Confession and Forgiveness" (82) in Occasional Services: A Companion to the Lutheran Book of Worship; and "The Order for Public Confession" (252) in Service Book and Hymnal. The words "by the authority of God and of this our office and ministry" are used in "A Brief Order for Public Confession" in Service Book and Hymnal. The word "in obedience to our Lord's command" are found in "Order for Private Confession and Absolution" (32) and "Order for the Communion of the Sick" (56) in The Occasional Services from the Service Book and Hymnal. Finally, when the new Christian Worship: A Lutheran Hymnal provides for absolution by the pastor, it employs this formula: "as a called servant of Christ and by his authority" (16, 26).
2 Translated from Die Bekenntnisschriften der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche (BKS), (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), 97-98. In the original it reads as follows: Die Beicht ist durch die Prediger dieses Teils nicht abgetan. Dann diese Gewohnheit wird bei uns gehalten, das Sakrament nicht zu reichen denen, so nicht zuvor verhort und absolviert seind. Darbei wird das Volk fleissig unterricht, wie trostlich das W ort der Absolution sei, wie hoch und teuer die Absolution zu achten. Dann es sei nicht des gegenwŠrtigen Menschen Stimme oder Wort, sondern Gottes Wort, der die Sunde vergibt. Dann sie wird an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl gesprochen. Von diesem Bef ehl und Gewalt der Schlussel, wie trostlich, wie notig sie sei den erschrodenen Gewissen, wird mit grossem Fleiss gelehret; darzu, wie Gott forder, dieser Absolution zu glauben, nicht weniger, denn so Gottes Stimme vom Himmel erschulle, und uns der Abso lution frohlich trosten und wissen, dass wir durch solchen Glauben Vergebung der Sunde erlangen.
3 Theodore G. Tappert, et al., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 48 (German).
4 "[The article's] independent existence can only be explained by the diverse origins of the two sections of the Confessio Augustana. CA 25 simply describes how evangelical pastors administer confession and absolution." Wilhelm Maurer, Historical Commentary on the Augsburg Confession (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 181.
5 The "instructional value" of absolution apparently was an emphasis of Luther. "Luther did not intend to set up a new ordinance by the introduction of a pre-Communion interview. He saw it [private confession] as an 'old, praiseworthy, Christian and necessary discipline' which was to teach Christians how to live and how to confess Christ. It was the theme of confession that stood out for him in catechetical training. To receive instruction was to confess oneself a Christian; the church that conducted it demonstrated itself to be Christian, as is evident from CA 24.6 and CA 25.1." Maurer, 210.
6 Respectively: "Confession in the churches is not absolished among us; for it is not usual to give the body of the Lord, except to them that have been previously examined and absolved"; and "Nevertheless, on account of the great benefit of absolution, and because it is otherwise useful to the conscience, Confession is retained among us." Concordia Triglotta, (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921), 69, 71.
7 Nearly every commentator on the Augsburg Confession agrees with this conclusion. One notable exception is Holsten Fagerberg who sees the Evangelical-Lutheran protest on confession fueled not so much by a different view of repentance as a different view of the pastoral office. He says in part: "According to the Evangelical [Lutheran] position, repentance is God's direct work in man without human mediation or co-operation; according to the Roman Catholic position penance is a divine work in which the priest joins as an intermediate authority. Forgiveness of sins is given to the penitent not directly for Christ's sake, but on the basis of the authority Christ has given to His servant, the priest, to bind and to loose." (A New Look at the Lutheran Confessions: 1529-1537[St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1972], 207.) On this point Fagerberg is simply chasing the wrong tail. The chief abuse listed in CA XXV, as well as CA XI and XII, is not how the priestly office is viewed but the way the "confession" part of penance is understood and practiced. In CA XXV, not one word of protest is voiced concerning the nature of the priestly office. In fact "an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl" clearly states that the Evangelical-Lutheran position is that absolution "is " administered through a mediating priest. The difference does not lie, then, in whether the pastor is "in the stead and by the command" but rather how he functions "in the stead and by the command of Christ." The contrast is between the Roman priest who stands in Christ's stead as primarily as a minister of the Law, gathering evidence (enumeration), judging the worthiness of confession, and handing down a penalty (satisfaction), and then dispensing a conditional absolution; and the Lutheran pastor who stands in Christ's stead as a minister of the Gospel primarily concerned with dispensing the Christ-won forgiveness.
8 Bjarne W. Teigen, I Believe: A Study of the Augsburg Confession and the Apology of the Augsburg Confession (Mankato, MN: Lutheran Synod Book Company, 1980), 56.
9 In his "Brief Exhortation to Confession," Luther goes the other way contrasting God's forgiveness and man's confession: "We should set little value on our work but exalt and magnify God's Word." (Tappert, 459)
10 Here is where the question of ordination--women's as well as men's--impinges upon the absolution. For, according to CA XXV, the absolution depends upon the absolver speaking both in God's stead and by God's command. There cannot be one without the other. Hence, to all who claim to speak God's forgiveness the question must be put: "Have you been authorized by God to do so? Has God given you the right, authority, command, and mandate to speak His forgiving Word?" Likewise, to those who claim to be authorized by God to speak, the question must be put: "Are you suitable to stand in for God? Is there anything that disqualifies you from speaking God's Word in God's stead?" If either one of these conditions are not met or, worse yet, are called into question, then the absolution is affected because it is no longer dependable and trustworthy. An unreliable absolution is no absolution.
11 See, for example, Apology VII.47 (BKS, 246; Triglotta, 243).
12 Triglotta, 69. The Latin text reads as follows: Docentur homines, ut absolutionem plurimi faciant, quia sit vox Dei et mandato Dei pronuntietur (BKS, 98).
13 St. Augustine (Sermo 293.3) presents the same sort of argumentation when describing the relationship between John the Baptist and Christ: John is the voice, but the Lord is the Word who was in the beginning. John is the voice that lasts for a time; from the beginning Christ is the lWord who lives for ever. Take away the word, the meaning, and what is the voice? Where there is no understanding, there is only a meaningless sound. The voice without the word strikes the ear but does not build up the heart.
14 Jeremiah 1:9; Ezra 1:1; see also Exodus 4:12.
15 William Weinrich, "Called and Ordained: Reflections on the New Testament View of the Office of the Ministry," LOGIA, II.1 (Epiphany/January 1993), 21.
16 Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, translated by Fred Kramer (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971-1986), II.706-707. (hereafter referred to as Examen)
17 Dann es sei nicht des gegenwšrtigen Menschen Stimme oder Wort, sondern Gottes Wort, der die Sunde vergibt. (BKS, 98)
18 "darzu, wie Gott forder, dieser Absolution zue glauben, nicht weniger, denn so Gottes Stimme vom Himmel erschulle." (BKS, 98). At this point Tappert's translation of the German text leans heavily on the Latin: "God requires us to believe this absolution as much as if we heard God's voice from heaven."
19 This equation of "voice of God" with "absolution" is also made in the Apology. Cf. Apology IV.257; XI.2; XII.2; XII.39; XII.105; XXVII.13.
20 See, for example, the use of vox (Stimme) in Apology XII.2.
21 Apology XII.39-41; Triglotta, 261 (emphasis added). In Latin, the emphasized portion reads: Quare voci absolventis non secus ac voci de coelo sonanti credendum est.
22 Large Catechism, I.108, 125-126 (Triglotta, 611, 617). See also Large Catechism I.142, 181-182. The example of parents and rulers is especially striking since their God-given authority to discipline negatively parallels that of ministers of the Gospel.
23 Apology XXIV.18 (Triglotta, 389).
24 Martin Chemnitz, Ministry, Word, and Sacraments: An Enchiridion (St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1981), 113. (hereafter referred to as Enchiridion)
25 Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration, XI.27 (Triglotta, 1071).
26 Apology VII.28 (Triglotta, 237).
27 Apology VII.47-48 (Triglotta, 243-245).
28 This is far from arguing for character indelibilis which is a sign which, in terms of the ministry, sets apart an ordained man from others by giving him certain spiritual powers for performing something in the church. However, as the Latin phrasing in Apology VII.47 indicates, it does approach the in persona Christi theory. In Evangelical-Lutheran terms, however, it is best to speak in terms of the pastor repraesentant Christi personam propter vocationem ecclesiae.
29 David Scaer, "The Integrity of the Christological Character of the Office of the Ministry," LOGIA II.1 (Epiphany/January 1993), 16.
30 "Brief Exhoration" (paragraph 15) in Tappert, 459.
31 "Glaubst Du auch, dass meine Vergebung Gottes Vergebung sei?" (BKS, 519; emphasis added). Lutheran Worship greatly weakens the meaning and intent of these words, especially in light of CA XXV, when it renders them: "Do you believe that the word of Christ's forgiveness I speak to you is from the Lord himself?" (311).
32 A few examples of this use of Befehl in the Augustana: the authority to administer the office of the keys (CA XXV.3,4; XXVIII.5); the directives of Christ in the Words of Institution for the proper use of His Supper (CA XXII.1); the establishment of the apostolic/preaching office (CA XXVII.13; XXVIII.6). Also, it is against God's Befehl to misuse the Gottesdienst for self-rigteousness (CA XXVII.36), hear false preachers (CA XXVIII.23), and makes laws that demand satisfaction (CA XXVIII.35).
33 Dann es sei nicht des gegenwortigen Menschen Stimme oder Wort, sondern Gottes Wort, der die Sunde vergibt. Dann sie wird an Gottes Statt und aus Gottes Befehl gesprochen. Von diesem Befehl und Gewalt der Schlussel, wie trostlich, wie notig sie sei den erschrockenen Gewissen, wird mit grossem Fleiss gelehrt. (BKS, 98).
34 CA XXV.3,4; XXVIII.5.
35 CA XXVII.13; XXVIII.6.
36 CA XXVIII.23.
37 Jeremiah 1:7. See also Exodus 3:10, Isaiah 6:8-9, et al.
38 Luke 10:1-24; Mark 6:7-13; Matthew 9:35 - 10:42.
39 Matthew 28:16-20; Mark 16:14-20; Luke 24:36-53; Acts 1 & 2. Commenting specifically on this Befehl to the apostles, David Scaer has this to add: "This authorized sending of the apostles deals not with personal piety, but is a public, officially authorized sending empowered by the Holy Spirit, so that the apostles who are sent speak not merely of what is in them but to the higher reality of the crucified and risen Lord. Only after they have observed his wounds and are convinced of his resurrection are they sent. Mention can be made here that Jesus is authorized to speak only that which the Father has authorized. Not only is this an exegetical conclusion, but it is a necessary dogmatic correlation of our understanding of the Trinity. Augustana XXVIII sees in the Johannine citation establishing the apostolate the mandate for the office of the ministry. Our concern here is not establishing the apostolic character of the ministry... but its Christological origin and character. (LOGIA, II.1, 16)
40 Jeremiah 23:16-40. In his commentary on Jonah, Martin Luther adds these comments: "It is utterly futile and wrong for man to undertake a project of his own choosing and will without God's command and word. Moreover, this second commission [of Jonah] contains the added command to preach what God tells him. Thus both the office and the Word employed in the office must be comprehended in the divine command. If that is done, the work will prosper and bear fruit. But when men run without God's command or proclaim other messages than God's Word, they work nothing but harm. Jeremiah, too, drives both these facts home, saying (Jer 23:21), 'I did not send the prophets, yet they ran; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied.'" (AE 19:83)
41 Among the biblical references are Luke 24:47 (Apology 12.30, et al.); Luke 10:16 (Apology 12:40 et al.); Mark 16:15 (CA 28.7); Matthew 28:19-20 (Tractate 31); John 20:21 (CA 28.6, Tractate 31 et al.).
42 In a number of places Martin Chemnitz ascribes God's "Befehl" to each person of the Trinity: The right to call and to send laborers into the harvest belongs to Him who is the Lord of the harvest, and it is good to note in Scripture that the right and administration of this call are ascribed expressing to the individual persons of the Trinity. For the Son says of the Father, Mt 9:38, "Pray ye the Lord of the harvest to send laborers into His harvest"; Paul testifies of the Son of God, Eph 4:8, 11-12: "He ascended on high [and] gave gifts to people. . . . And He gave some [as] evangelists, and some [as] pastors and teachers . . . for the upbuilding of the body of Christ"; the same is also attributed to the Holy Spirit [in] Acts 13:2, 4; 20:28. (Enchiridion, 30. See also Examen II:705-706; and Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1989], 699.)
43 "[I]t is worthwhile to ponder for what reasons it is so important that a minister of the church have a lawful call. Now, we must not think that this takes place out of some human arrangement or only for the sake of order, but the reasons are very weighty. . . [First] the ministry of the Word is that of God Himself, which He Himself wants to carry out through ordained means and instruments in His church. [Luke 1:70, Heb 1:1, 2 Cor 5:20 are cited]. Therefore it is absolutely necessary, if you want to be a faithful pastor of the church, that you be certain that God wants to use your labors and that you are such an instrument of His. For in this way you can apply also to yourself these statements of Scripture: such as Is 49:21; 2 Cor 13:3; Luke 10: 16. And as John the Baptizer says in John 1:23 `I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness,' which Luther renders thus: Ich bin eine Stimme eines Rufers (I am a voice of a crier), in order to indicate that it is another who is crying through John." (Loci, 699.)
44 Examen II:705-706. See also Loci, 698 where Chemnitz, after saying the same thing, then adds that the legitimacy of the call to preach resides neither in the desire for the office nor in the general call which all receive in Baptism, "but there is required a special call" which is given by God Himself "through regular means in a lawful way" (698-700). In another place, Chemnitz summarizes the teaching of Luther on this point: "Luther taught from the Word of God that Christ has given and committed the keys, that is, the ministry of the Word and of the sacraments, to the whole church, not however in such a way that everyone might usurp and appropriate this ministry to himself by his own will and personal rashness, without a legitimate call, but that, after the immediate calling ceased, God sends ministers of the Word and of the sacraments through the call and choosing of the church, if it is done according to the command of His Word, so that the highest power of the Word and of the sacrament is with God; then, that the ministry belongs to the church, so that God calls, chooses, and sends ministers through it." (Examen II.97)
45 Enchiridion, 29.
46 Martin Chemnitz adds this additional benefit to God's "Befehl": The assurance of a divine call stirs up ministers of the Word, so that each one, in his station, in the fear of God, performs his functions with greater diligence, faith, and eagerness, without weariness. And he does not let himself be drawn or frightened away from his office by fear or any peril or of persecutrion, since he is sure that he is called by God and that that office has been divinely entrusted to him. (Enchiridion, 30)
47 Enchiridion, 30.
21 September 1996
the reverend john w. fenton is a 1989 graduate of Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Indiana.
