Time for a New Reformation?

There are several Martin Luther’s around these days – trouble is, the promises of health and wealth are too appealing to people today for them to want to abandon it – even if it doesn’t work! I’m not sure what it will take to shake people out of their lethargy – maybe 95 Theses posted on the front door of the Trinity Broadcasting Network?

I have sensed an undercurrent in today’s churches that makes me very excited. Younger people such as myself are not satisfied with the powerless preaching and confused theology of today’s churches. This discontent is leading to new church plants but also to people leaving the church (not God mind you) altogether. I believe the Holy Spirit, right now, is setting about bringing these people of like mind together.

I am seeing young preachers being raised up who are returning to the creeds, confessions and old theology, not because of tradition, but for stability. From this stout platform sermons are beginning to be preached with power and authority once again.

I believe a renewing is beginning. It will be considerably smaller in nature than the mainstream churches, but it will be powerful and God will be glorified.

Post Tenebras Lux!

I agree with Bror Erickson.
Luther still teaches those who listen. The Gospel (the Reformation; the Truth!) is out there.
The Lutheran Reformation never really ‘ruled’, did it? It simply did enough to take hold, hasn’t yet died, and, where the Gospel is, the Lutheran (not merely ‘the Protestant’) Reformation still is.
For every New Reformation, there would always be a Counter-Reformation. It’s like thinking the latest tent revival will save a town or rally believers irrevocably, when in reality it’ll just move on.

Dr. Veith:

Your book The Spirituality of the Cross and your article “Evangelical Catholics and Confessional Evangelicals” are examples of how to bring about a “new Reformation”.

Confessional Lutherans are not very good at getting the Word out. We are almost invisible on TV, radio and the web (except for maybe one radio station and a small niche of blogs). In the local bookstore, especially “Christian” bookstores, you will very rarely find any of our books or resources.

We have what the disaffected evangelicals are looking for. We have solutions for what is so wrong with modern American evangelicalism.

However, how will they find us? How will they hear or read about our “solutions”?

EC

RE: #2

The Church needs a restoration of God’s Word. The United States of America needs a restoration of constitutional values. They are not the same thing.

We should love our country; God has given it to us for our good. I used to confuse this love with worship. Ameica is just another nation of the earth. God holds no special dispensation for her. Confusion on this point is part of why the Church needs a reformation.

America is not the Church and the Church is more then America.

Jay from Cleveland,
You have a lot of guts to compare Luther to Wesley, Whitefield, Asuza Street, or the Toronto Airport.
I think this is the whole problem Lutheranism faces. People think they know what Luther stood for, but never actually care to read his works, or even portions of them. He was markedly different than any of those other names you mentioned. The Lutheran Reformation was not a pentecostal revival.
No Lutherans don’t have a monopoly on salvation. But we do have the Gospel.
As far as the church goes, it has always had an institutional side, and yet it has always been something quite more than an institution. The tension will always be there.

Jay’s comment’s interesting and less offensive as it progresses (!).

Movements must put down roots to become in any way permanent. The Reformation needed the succeeding scholastic period to propagate itself. A problem enters when the institutionalization of a movement loses the fire of the original movement. This does not necessary happen, but quite possibly tends to.

Another point: when a movement puts down roots, if it only puts them deep enough to capture the movement, the institution will soon be lost (along with the movement). The institution of a movement MUST capture a much broader chunk of the whole than than just the mere movement. That is, the roots have to go deeper than the movement in order to retain the movement. This dovetails with what Bror said: the church has ALWAYS had its institutional side. Any movement that will last as an institution MUST come to grips with itself in the broader context of the institution of Christ’s church on earth. That’s why the Reformed Scholastics, who institutionalized the movement of the Reformation, didn’t just parrot Luther, Calvin, et al. They drew from the pre-Reformation church, from the medieval and early church, and ultimately, of course, on the Scripture.
In order to grow and mature, we need much deeper roots.

I’m afraid I’m with Bror on this one. Comparing what God accomplished through Martin Luther with so-called revivals is an insult to the reformation, though I don’t believe you intended it that way Jay.

Revivals are demonstrations of outward signs and behaviors, usually quite short-lived. The Reformation was about returning the church back to a belief in salvation through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ through grace alone…and not through self-proclaiming actions like speaking in tongues.

I just found this good point while perusing WELS.net on the subject of revivals:

God promises to use his word whenever and wherever it is faithfully used and proclaimed (Isaiah 55:10-11). Our privilege and duty is to use that word faithfully and share it with people around us. And leave the converting to the Lord. This is our public confession: “Through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, the Holy Spirit is given, who works faith when and where it pleases God” (Augsburg Confession, Article V).

Robert Perry,
lest you think I jump on Wesley’s case for visiting the frontier and riding horseback. No. That is one thing I commend him for, and no doubt many were saved through those efforts. ( For thank God that the Holy Spirit works despite us, through the word of God. And at least Wesley preached the word of God, albeit sometimes a little skewed.)
What I jump on him for is writing “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection,” in which he turned Gospel into law, and unashamedly resurrected the Armenian heresy. This book in which he attempts to explain his doctrine as lucidly as possible, shows how different a spirit he had from Martin Luther.

Bror, I’m glad somebody got that reference. :^)

But seriously, I was not addressing you alone, or necessarily you at all, but rather the all too common tendency of assuming that those who seem to be very successful at reaching the lost are engaging in mere revivalism–and then neglecting to reach for their own saddle, so to speak.

And I assume you mean “Arminian”, not “Armenian,” right? It’s correct that Wesley certainly tended to Arminius’ theology, though I hesitate to call it a heresy without examining it myself further.

Jay from Cleveland,
“Theresa’s distinction between revival and reformation is good, but my point basically was that the Holy Spirit is like a wind and transforms people’s lives, and doesn’t enshrine itself in human institutions”
Hmmm. But the Holy Spirit does attach itself or bind itself to the Word of God, and the Sacraments. Therefore if the institution preaches the word, and administers the sacraments, it has the Holy Spirit, even if there is no apparent transformation of lives of those in the pews. I would no more associate the Holy Spirit with the Toronto Blessing, or the Asuza Street revival than I would the Zwickau Prophets, or Thomas Muntzer. I do not associate its work with speaking in unintelligible tongues, or even moral reform. and neither would luther which is wherei object to him being compared to the names you mentioned.
However I do rest assured that the Holy Spirit has been at work and is working to this day in the Lutheran Church and where ever else the Gospel is preached in its purity.
Robert Perry,
Yes I meant Arminian, and it is a heresy teaching works righteousness. It is not by accident that the church he spawned was named “Methodist.” As in method of salvation.
And I do try to reach for my saddle when I can pull myself away from this blogging addiction I have developed.

Bror:

It feels so good to know that we have pastors in the LC-MS like you who doesnt claim to have ALL the answers, yet knows so very much, and most importantly knows that all questions are resolved so sweetly by grace in Jesus.

I think that the seeds of a new reformation are starting to germinate. Many young prople are leaving evangelicalism and searching out theology and worship with more substance. Willow Creek Community Church just released a report stating that their programs for discipleship have been abject failures and they are rethinking the whole thing. Sally Morgenthaller admitted that the whole evangelistic scheme based on contemporary worship was a failure, and shut down her website. People are hungry for something more, and the time is ripe for a change. If the Lutherans can get their act together we can really provide answers to those who are searching. Already there are several projects or individuals stepping into the gap and facing these challenges. Our gracious host Dr. Veith has written several books that are impacting those outside our circles. The Whitehorse Inn radio program has had a huge influence among discouraged evangelicals. (www.whitehorseinn.org) There are several good blogs that are trumpeting the reformation doctrine and engaging in spirited debate. Organizations like http://www.surfoutsider.net and http://www.newreformationpress.com are laboring tirelessly to bring the truths of the reformation to those who have never heard them.
This doesn’t include the many efforts of fine Pastors like Bill Cwirla who make this doctrine a living reality in their church and parishoners. Pastor Cwirla’s “Four Concentric Circles” lecture is one of the finest overviews of theology and a place where the modern Lutherans stand on the shoulders of our forefathers and sow the seeds of a new reformation.
While things may look dark, there are several bright spot on the horizon and I don’t think we are without hope.

CRB,
Thankyou. I hate when I get into that habit. I don’t know where I developed it. But if I was given the choice between bad habits to quit. “Thinking of the Holy Spirit as an it” or smoking, I would definately quit referring to the Holy Spirit as it. Thanks. maybe this helps.

Brother Bror, keep in the saddle, bro.

However, the term “Methodist” doesn’t refer to works salvation, but rather to the methodical way Wesley and his followers went through the New Testament in their early meetings–it might have even been a term of mockery from Anglicans jealous at what they were doing, if I remember correctly. (I’m a former Methodist–with certainly reservations about Arminian theology and its episcopalianness in theology and current doctrine)

Again, the circuit riders didn’t make it across the American continent because they were preaching works righteousness. Prominent Methodists like Bob Jones would take that up with you very quickly.

I cringe at that aspect of modern Arminianism, too. I’d split the hair and call it “works assurance” instead of salvation by works, but I must admit that I cringe. I have friends whose church (ironically) simultaneously preached the tulip bulb AND works assurance.

In regards to child like Faith, I think what Jesus was referring to was that if you give a child a free gift, he will certainly have a good thought about you, but he won’t think that he owes you anything. You told him it was free. If you try to give an adult a free gift, he going to think that he owes you something. Yes, we owe God. But that would be the case even if there were no salvation.

great put up, very informative. I wonder why the opposite experts of this sector do not realize this.
You must proceed your writing. I am sure, you have
a great readers’ base already!