_18_Theology and Doctrinal Liberty
Christian liberty consists in this, that Christians are freed from their own will and are now servants of God (Rom. 6:22). Likewise, doctrinal liberty consists in this, that Christian teachers are freed from human opinions and bound only by the Word of God. That is Christ’s own definition of the freedom of doctrine: “If ye continue in My word, then … ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31 f.). When the theologian accepts and regards as Christian doctrine what the human Ego, his own or that of other men, has produced, he has become the slave of men. Under the watchword “academic freedom” our age demands for the theologians freedom from the bondage of the Word, Holy Scripture, “submission to the letter,” “shameful academic coercion,” “legalism,” etc. But this is the liberty of the flesh, the license demanded by the “superman,” who sets himself above God’s Word and will.
The following considerations will set forth the monstrosity of the universal demand for theological freedom.
1. Until the end of time the Christian Church has but one Teacher, Jesus Christ. “One is your Master (
), even Christ, and all ye are brethren. One is your Master (
), even Christ” (Matt. 23:8, 10). What He, Christ, has commanded His disciples, they are to teach all men to the end of time (Matt. 28:20). Even though Christ in the state of exaltation has withdrawn His visible presence from the Church, He is and remains the one Teacher of His Church; through His Word, which He gave the Church in the Word of His Apostles, He teaches the Church to the end of time (John 8:31-32; 17:20). The Apostles, too, declare that Christ is the sole Teacher of the Church. They bind the Christians to their doctrine (2 Thess. 2:13-15; Gal. 1:6-9), but do that only because they know that their word is Christ’s Word (1 Cor. 14:37: “… the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord”; 2 Cor. 13:3; 1 Tim. 6:3). And after the days of the Apostles all orthodox teachers of the Church viewed the situation in the same way. Luther: “If any man would preach, let him suppress his own words. He may speak them in the family and State. But here in the Church he must speak nothing but the Word of the rich Head of the family; else it is not the true Church. In the Church the rule should be: God is speaking.” (St. L. XII: 1413.) It is thus a monstrous thing when men who would be the teachers of Christendom demand “academic freedom.” Whoever demands doctrinal license places himself on a level with Christ and, eo ipso, in opposition to Christ. For that reason all false teachers are called antichrists (1 John 2:18): “Even now there are many antichrists.” 187
2. The Christians are commanded by Scripture to hear only such preachers as speak out of the mouth of the Lord — in our day that means: out of Holy Scripture — and not out of their own spirit (Jer. 23:16: “They speak a vision of their own heart and not out of the mouth of the Lord”; v. 31). It is a clear command and repeated again and again. The Christians must deny the greeting of Christian fellowship to all those who do not bring the doctrine of Christ (2 John 7-11), must regard them as bloated ignoramuses (1 Tim. 6:3 ff.), and avoid them (Rom. 16:17). It is, therefore, a stupendous folly for preachers to refuse to subscribe to the Confessions of the Christian congregation on the ground that that would unduly restrict their doctrinal freedom. They reveal by such an attitude that they do not know the first thing about the regulations God made as to what should be preached in the Christian Church. And the theological professors who claim “academic freedom” as their privilege are in worse condemnation. They are to train the future teachers of the Church and do not know the prime qualifications of the Christian teacher! He is not qualified for a theological professorship who claims “academic freedom” in the name of “theological science” contrary to Christ’s clear statement that the truth is learned and known only by continuing in His Word.
The history of the Church reveals the fact that in the European State churches the so-called scientific theology has been enjoying this freedom of doctrine for a long time and quite generally. That has been one of the main causes of the chaos prevailing in these churches. And what is the situation in the American “free” churches? There, too, “academic freedom” has made great headway in the schools controlled by the churches, even in circles claiming the name Lutheran. And professors of State universities, which naturally do not have theological faculties, claim the right to make propaganda for their “religious convictions.” 188
In recent times it has almost become axiomatic to say that unqualified subjection to Christ’s Word is incompatible with the “inward freedom” which the theologian requires. They say that if the theologian must regard himself as absolutely bound by the word of Scripture, Scripture would become for him a codex of laws fallen from heaven, a paper Pope, etc., in short, a return to Catholic authoritarianism. If the “evangelical” spirit of Protestantism is to remain unhampered, it must abandon Holy Scripture as the source and norm of theology and rely upon the “living,” “ardent” Ego of the theologizing subject. That is the position taken by the entire modern theology; here all parties, from the extreme left wing to the extreme right, are in substantial agreement. It has been said that the right thing for present-day theology to do is to shed “the armor of Saul worn by the old theology,” especially the verbal inspiration of Scripture. Then it will be able, like David, to “leap over a wall.”189 The answer to this is, first, that according to Christ’s view — which certainly should be authoritative — submission to God’s Word and doctrinal freedom agree very well with each other, in fact, they go together, that is to say, only continuance in the Word of Scripture will lead to the knowledge of the truth and theological freedom. Christ states this expressly: “If ye continue in My Word, then … ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32). Second, Christ points out, in this connection, that there are two classes of hearers of His Word: The first class knows and willingly accepts His Word as God’s Word; the second class refuses to accept His Word as God’s Word, but regards it as an oppressive “external authority” and rebels against it. And the reason for this dissimilar attitude towards His Word is stated in these words of Christ: “He that is of God heareth God’s words” (John 8:47); in figurative language: “The sheep follow Him [Christ], for they know His voice, and a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him; for they know not the voice of strangers” (John 10:4-5). Of the other class, of those among the Jews who turned away from His Word as an intolerable “external authority,” Christ says: “Ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of God” (John 8:47); “Why do ye not understand My speech? Even because ye cannot hear My Word” (John 8:43). Briefly, Christ says: God’s children know Christ’s Word to be God’s Word; those who are not yet God’s children are not in a condition to know and receive God’s Word in Christ’s Word. There is but one way to stop the Jews from murmuring at the Word of Jesus. Jesus tells them: “Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come to Me except the Father which hath sent Me draw him” (John 6:43-44).
In dealing with an unbeliever we cannot begin with an attempt to convince him of the divine authority of Scripture. We must first bring him to the knowledge of his sins and to faith in Christ, the Redeemer from sin. We should preach to him on the basis of Scripture — without discussing the authority of Scripture — repentance and remission of sin. If a man has in this way — and there is no other way — become a Christian, a sheep of Christ’s flock, a child of God, then he will know that the Word of Scripture is God’s Word, just as the children of God among the Jews knew and received the word Christ spoke as God’s Word. If the camel has first gone through the eye of the needle (Hofacker’s phrase), that is to say, if a man has by way of the contritio and fides wrought by the Holy Ghost become a Christian, he will refrain from criticizing anything in Scripture, even if he does not understand certain portions of it; the truth of the entire Scripture is guaranteed to him by the authority of Him (John 10:35; 17:14, 17) whom he adores in faith as his Lord and Redeemer. That is the Christian attitude toward Scripture. Luther describes it thus: “If you cannot understand how it could have been six days [at creation], then accord the Holy Spirit the honor that He is more learned than you. For you are so to deal with the Scriptures that you bear in mind that God Himself is saying this.” (St. L. III:21.) And this submission to God’s Word is not an “enforced” subjection to an “external authority,” unbefitting the Christian, but a childlike, willing, glorious submission to God; even as the Christian in his entire life submits to God’s ways and permits God to guide him.