_9_Theology as Aptitude

Theology in the sense of aptitude, or “personal qualification,” is defined in all those Scripture passages which describe the persons to whom according to God’s will and ordinance the teaching office in the Church may be committed. Walther, following the earlier Lutheran theologians, correctly says: “Since theology, in the subjective sense, is the proficiency which the incumbents of the teaching office in the Church should possess, it is clear that when Scripture describes the true teacher, it describes the true theologian” (Lehre und Wehre, 14, p. 10). These qualifications are described in Scripture as follows:

1. The theological aptitude is a spiritual aptitude (habitus spiritualis, supernaturalis), that is to say, an aptitude which in every case presupposes, besides natural gifts, personal faith in Christ (faith in the forgiveness of sins by grace for the sake of Christ’s satisfactio vicaria). In other words, it presupposes the conversion of the theologian. Unbelievers may be able to apprehend the whole body of Christian doctrine intellectually, and they may be endowed with a natural ability to teach it. But that does not make them theologians in the Scriptural sense. There is no “theologia irregenitorum.”75 Scripture distinctly states that the aptitude to administer the public teaching office is not a natural gift and attainment, but that it is of a spiritual nature, a gift of God: “Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament” (2 Cor. 3:5-6). And all unbelievers are dwelling places and workshops, not of the Holy Ghost, but of the prince of this world: “In times past ye walked according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2). Note, too, that when Scripture speaks of the qualifications for the public ministry, it always describes the minister as possessing not only the special pastoral gifts, but also the common Christian virtues; it invariably describes him as a Christian. For example, according to 1 Tim. 3:1 ff. the must not only be “apt to teach” (), but also must “not be given to wine,” etc. And in 2 Tim. 2:1 ff. the aptitude to administer the public ministry is traced back to the grace of God in Christ. “Thou, therefore, my son, be strong in the grace of God that is in Christ.” Unbelievers hold the office of the public ministry only by God’s toleration, against God’s will and ordinance. — A remark: it can and will happen that men are converted and saved through the ministry of an unconverted preacher, provided that he preaches the truth of God’s Word. The reason for this is that the efficacy of the means of grace is not affected by the character of the administrant.

Our old theologians expressed the truth that the theological aptitude always presupposes personal Christianity by defining this aptitude as habitus spiritualis, supernaturalis, , a Spiritu Sancto per verbum Dei collatus. Baier, for instance, says: “Theology, then, is essentially a supernatural aptitude, acquired by the powers of grace and through the operation of the Holy Spirit, the theologian himself, of course, making use of these powers” (Baier-Walther I, 69), and then adds the remark that a “theology” which consists merely in an external knowledge and teaching of the Scripture truth and lacks the “genuine,” “supernatural” assent wrought by the Holy Ghost, a theology which unregenerate, wicked man may have, is called theology only in an improper sense.76 Luther on the spiritual character of the theological aptitude: “We see that there is more of heathen and human conceit than of the holy, sure teaching of Scripture in the writings of the theologians. What shall we do about it? The only advice I can give is to humbly pray God that He would give us doctors of theology. The Pope, emperor, and the universities can make doctors of art, of medicine, of jurisprudence, of the Sentences; but be assured that no one can make a doctor of Holy Scripture for you but only the Holy Ghost from heaven, as Christ says John 6:45: ‘They shall all be taught of God.’ ” (St. L. X:339 f.) – An important element of the spiritual aptitude is, of course, the Christian conviction that the Holy Scriptares are the infallible Word of God, a conviction wrought by the Holy Ghost through the Word of Scripture. Let us elaborate this point at once.

2. The theological aptitude includes the ability of the theologian to confine himself in his teaching entirely to God’s Word; he must be able to suppress his own thoughts about God and divine matters and put aside the thoughts of other men, deriving the doctrine exclusively from the Word of God, from Holy Scripture. The theologian who refuses to do this is, in the words of St. Paul, a bloated ignoramus (). “If any man teach otherwise and consent not to the wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ … he is proud, knowing nothing” (1 Tim. 6:3). And bear in mind that the “words of our Lord Jesus Christ,” according to John 17:20, 1 Pet. 1:10-12, Eph. 2:20, are the writings of the Apostles and Prophets. Scripture thus declares all those to be theologically incompetent and disqualified for the Christian ministry who are not willing to take their doctrine exclusively from Holy Scripture, but in addition set up other sources, such as alleged private revelations (“enthusiasm”), the so-called “Christian consciousness,” “faith consciousness,” “the regenerate Ego,” “the Christian experience,” the decretals of the Pope and of “the Church,” “history,” and so forth. Let us hear Luther on this point: “Jeremiah has an entire chapter on the false prophets (Jeremiah 23). Among other things he says this (v. 16): ‘Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you; they make you vain [they teach you vanity, R. V.]; they speak a vision of their own heart — and not out of the mouth of the Lord!’ Behold, all prophets who do not preach out of the mouth of the Lord are deceivers, and God forbids us to hear them. Does not the text state clearly that where God’s Word is not preached no one dare, under pain of God’s wrath, listen to it, for it is pure deception? O Pope, O bishops, O priests, O monks, O theologians, how are you going to escape here? Do you consider it a trifling matter when the Supreme Majesty forbids whatever does not proceed out of the mouth of the Lord and is something else than God’s Word? It is not a thresher or herdsman who is saying this. When the servant hears the master say: ‘Who told you to do that? It is not what I have commanded,’ he will certainly realize that he should not have done it as being contrary to the master’s orders.” (St. L. XIX:821 f.)

3. Another theological skill is the ability to teach the whole Word of God, the entire truth of Scripture. Only he is an able minister of the Church who can say with the Apostle Paul: “I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). If the minister fails to do this, souls entrusted to his care may be eternally lost. Only he who declares all the counsel of God can say with the Apostle: “I am pure from the blood of all men” (Acts 20:26). — Let us remind ourselves in this connection that since God requires the theologian to teach the entire Christian doctrine, without subtraction or addition, “publicly and from house to house,” therefore theological students should apply themselves very diligently to acquire the theological fitness, and pastors in office should strive to retain and increase it. The Apostle admonishes Timothy and all theologians: “Take heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine; continue in them; for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee” (1 Tim. 4:16).

4. Again, only he is a fit minister of the Church who is able to refute false teachers. That is listed as one of the necessary qualifications of an elder or bishop: “Holding fast the faithful Word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers … whose mouths must be stopped” (Titus 1:9-11). The popular demand that the public teacher refrain from polemics is not supported by Scripture. Scripture admonishes pastors to “avoid foolish questions and genealogies and contentions about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain” (Titus 3:9).77 Nor dare we engage in polemics from carnal motives, in carnal zeal. “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh” (2 Cor. 10:3). It is also to be noted that in Titus 1:9 the words “able by sound doctrine to exhort” precede “able to convince the gainsayer.” That means that the clear presentation of the true doctrine must come before the refutation of the false doctrine. The hearers will thus be in a position to see that the polemics are justified and will be able to make the condemnation of the false doctrine their own. And they will hardly suspect the teachers of being contentious and unjust. Scripture thus warns us against false polemics. But the demand that polemical theology be excluded from Christian theology is contrary to Scripture. The duty of refuting false doctrine and rebuking false teachers is laid upon the teachers of the Church in Titus 1:9-11 and many other passages of Scripture. All Prophets and Apostles and Christ Himself have both proclaimed the true doctrine and condemned the false doctrine.

Walther does not go too far when he writes: “A man may proclaim the pure doctrine, but if he does not condemn and refute the opposing false doctrine, does not warn against the wolves in sheep’s clothing, the false prophets, and unmask them, he is not a faithful steward of God’s mysteries, not a faithful shepherd of the sheep entrusted to him, not a faithful watchman on the walls of Zion, but, as the Word of God says, an unfaithful servant, a dumb dog, a traitor. The terrible consequences of the minister’s failure to use the elenchus are before our eyes — many souls lost and the Church deeply hurt. Polemics are absolutely needed. Not only because a doctrine is more fully comprehended in the light of its antithesis, but mainly because the errorists so craftily mask their error behind a show of truth that the simple Christians, if not forewarned, are despite their love of the truth only too easily deceived. The pastor cannot wash his hands in innocence, pleading that he has always preached the full truth, if he did not at the same time warn against the error and, when necessary, identify it by naming the errorist; if his sheep, either while he is still serving or after he had to leave them for another field, become the prey of the ravening wolves in sheep’s clothing, he is guilty of their blood.” (Walther, Pastorale, p. 82 f. [Fritz, Pastoral Theology, 1945, p. 336 f.].)

When men here invoke the “spirit of tolerance,” we must remind them of the difference between Church and State. Tolerating false teachers in the State is something different from tolerating them in the Church. The Christian Church of the New Testament has no command to expel false teachers from the State or the civil community; that would call for the use of force, and the Church is enjoined from employing force. But the Church may not tolerate the false teachers in the Church. God has commanded the Church to take up arms against them and oppose them with the Word of God. This means that the Church must (a) realize that he who departs from the Word of the Apostles is a false teacher (Rom. 16:17: “Mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned”); must (b) disprove their teaching (Titus 1:9, 11: “Convince [convict] the gainsayers … whose mouths must be stopped”); and finally (c) must isolate them, that is, have no church fellowship with them (Rom. 16:17: “Avoid them”; 2 John 10: “neither bid him Godspeed”), and eventually, if they do not themselves sever their connection with the Church, formally excommunicate them (1 Tim. 1:20: Hymenaeus and Alexander expelled from the church; cp. 2 Tim. 2:17; 4:14).

5. The theological aptitude includes, finally, the willingness and strength to suffer for the Christian doctrine. Scripture distinctly includes the readiness to suffer for the sake of Christ and His Word as a necessary part of the theologian’s equipment. The Apostle Paul tells Timothy: “Thou therefore endure hardness [“hardship,” R. V.] as a good soldier of Jesus Christ,” “suffer trouble even unto bonds” (2 Tim. 2:3, 9). The minister of the Gospel cannot escape trouble because the Gospel, which he preaches, salvation by faith in the crucified Christ without the deeds of the Law, does not at all appeal to the world, but is “a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks” (1 Cor. 1:23). The Christians’ lot therefore, is described by Christ Himself: “Ye shall be hated of all nations for My name’s sake” (Matt.24:9). It is but natural — and experience confirms it — that this hatred should be directed principally against the teachers of the Church. What Jesus said concerning Paul applies in some degree to all faithful ministers of the Gospel: “I will show him how great things he must suffer for My name’s sake” (Acts 9:16; cf. Acts 26:21). And if the minister is not willing to suffer the loss of his goods, of honor and rank, yes, even of his life, he is not a profitable servant of the Church: he will, for the sake of ease, compromise with error; he may even deny Christ, and thus be denied by Him (2 Tim. 2:12). — The Christian ministry requires strong men, men able to “endure hardship”: “Thou, therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 2:1).