Christian doctrines, or doctrines of the Church, are such only as are in
exact harmony with the Scriptures. They alone, too, are able to serve
the purpose for which the Scriptures are given, _viz_., to convert and
save sinners, and to comfort troubled Christians. Scriptural doctrines
are always profitable, and detrimental doctrines are never Scriptural.
This is true also of the article of eternal election. It is a truly
edifying doctrine as also the _Formula of Concord_ is solicitous to
explain. (1092, 89ff.) However, it is comforting only when taught in its
purity, _i.e._, when presented and preserved in strict adherence to the
Bible; that is to say, when both the _sola gratia_ and _gratia
universalis_ are kept inviolate. Whenever the doctrine of predestination
causes despair or carnal security, it has been either misrepresented or
misunderstood.
In the introductory paragraphs of Article XI we read: "For the doctrine
concerning this article, if taught from, and according to the pattern of
the divine Word, neither can nor should be regarded as useless or
unnecessary, much less as offensive or injurious, because the Holy
Scriptures not only in but one place and incidentally, but in many
places thoroughly treat and urge the same. Moreover, we should not
neglect or reject the doctrine of the divine Word on account of abuse or
misunderstanding, but precisely on that account, in order to avert all
abuse and misunderstanding the true meaning should and must be explained
from the foundation of the Scriptures." (1063, 2; 1067, 13.)
"If it is treated properly," says also the Epitome, the doctrine of
predestination "is a consolatory article" (830, 1); that is to say, if
predestination is viewed in the light of the Gospel, and particularly,
if _sola gratia_ as well as _gratia universalis_ are kept inviolate.
Outside of God's revelation in the Gospel there is no true and wholesome
knowledge whatever concerning election, but mere noxious human dreams.
And when the universality of grace is denied, it is impossible for any
one to know whether he is elected, and whether the grace spoken of in
the Gospel is intended for or belongs to him. "Therefore," says the
_Formula of Concord_, "if we wish to consider our eternal election to
salvation with profit, we must in every way hold sturdily and firmly to
this, that, as the preaching of repentance, so also the promise of the
Gospel is _universalis_ (universal), that is, it pertains to all men,
Luke 24, 47," etc. (1071, 28.) By denying that universal grace is meant
seriously and discounting the universal promises of the Gospel, "the
necessary consolatory foundation is rendered altogether uncertain and
void, as we are daily reminded and admonished that only from God's Word,
through which He treats with us and calls us, we are to learn and
conclude what His will toward us is, and that we should believe and not
doubt what it affirms to us and promises." (1075, 36.) If God cannot be
trusted in His universal promises, absolutely nothing in the Bible can
be relied upon. A doctrine of election from which universal grace is
eliminated, necessarily leads to despair or to contumaciousness and
carnal security. Calvin was right when he designated his predestination
theory, which denies universal grace, a "horrible decree." It left him
without any objective foundation whatever upon which to rest his faith
and hope.
In like manner, when the doctrine of election and grace is modified
synergistically, no one can know for certain whether he has really been
pardoned and will be saved finally, because here salvation is not
exclusively based on the sure and immovable grace and promises of God,
but, at least in part, on man's own doubtful conduct--a rotten plank
which can serve neither foot for safely crossing the great abyss of sin
and death. Only when presented and taught in strict adherence to the
Bible is the doctrine of election and grace fully qualified to engender
divine certainty of our present adoption and final salvation as well,
since it assures us that God sincerely desires to save all men (us
included), that He alone does, and has promised to do, everything
pertaining thereto, and that nothing is able to thwart His promises,
since He who made them and confirmed them with an oath is none other
than the majestic God Himself.
Accordingly, when Calvinists and Synergists criticize the _Formula of
Concord_ for not harmonizing (modifying in the interest of rational
harmony) the clear doctrines of the Bible, which they brand as
contradictions, they merely display their own conflicting, untenable
position. For while professing to follow the Scriptures, they at the
same time demand that its doctrines be corrected according to the
dictate of reason, thus plainly revealing that their theology is not
founded on the Bible, but orientated in rationalism, the true ultimate
principle of Calvinism as well as synergism.
In the last analysis, therefore, the charge of inconsistency against
the _Formula of Concord_ is tantamount to an indirect admission that the
Lutheran Church is both a consistently Scriptural and a truly
evangelical Church. Consistently Scriptural, because it receives in
simple faith and with implicit obedience every clear Word of God, all
counter-arguments to the contrary notwithstanding. Truly evangelical,
because in adhering with unswerving loyalty to the seemingly
contradictory, but truly Scriptural doctrine of grace, it serves the
purpose of the Scriptures, which--praise the Lord--is none other than to
save, edify, and comfort poor disconsolate sinners.