A Reply to Marquart's Letter of April 25th.

Reverend Herman Otten is to be thanked for giving me the opportunity to continue a public dialogue with the most esteemed Professor Kurt Marquart, whom I regard as the Synod's finest theologian. His paper at the "2000 Congress on the Lutheran Confessions" was outstanding and should be read by the entire Synod.

In Professor Marquart's last response he assures us "that polity is important." It is just that he keeps his polity a secret.

Yes, I did reread the last paragraph of his April 22nd letter where he equates Voter Supremacy with Voter Tyranny. He writes: "But surely we must also oppose the tyranny of crowds, which in the name of 'voter supremacy' want to intimidate, control, or get rid of faithful pastors."

The last time I checked it was the clergy who ordered Christ's death. Yes, lay people and Voters do sin. Does this refute Voter Supremacy? Should we get rid of alcohol because people get drunk, or get rid of marriage because people get divorced, or get rid of cars because people speed? Anything can be abused.

Regarding the "Called and Ordained" article by Rev. Chad Bird in Fort Wayne's "Life of the World" I questioned what spiritual gifts the pastor received through the laying on of hands at ordination that a preschool child did not already possess. Marquart replied by quoting Walther about the reception of heavenly gifts at ordination, but called them spiritual gifts.

I responded that I counted my paycheck as a heavenly gift. Marquart responded that this was sophistry on my part. I responded that it might be sophistry as long as we agree we can't identify any spiritual gifts through the laying on of hands at ordination.

Now, Marquart says he was not making claims about spiritual gifts, through the laying on of hands in ordination. Then why did he quote Walther on this issue about heavenly gifts but call them spiritual gifts? Now he says, "...I too, made it quite clear that the gifts are not attributed to the 'laying on of hands'?" I dare say this is the first time Professor Marquart has made this clear. I pray that the entire faculty at Fort Wayne would convince their graduates that no spiritual blessings are received through the laying on of hands at ordination.

Professor Marquart says, "I am well aware of the passages in the 'Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope,' and vigorously assert them." This is wonderful. The Treatise uses the word "supreme" in reference to the local congregation, not the pastors. Then why doesn't he use the Confessional word and say the "Voters are Supreme" like Walther does?

If it is total fiction to say, "Marquart makes adiaphora the major work of the Voters' Assembly" then why doesn't he say that the primary work of the Voters Assembly is to judge doctrine and their pastor as Walther says it is?

Theology cannot retreat from practice. Theology without application is like a hole in the Communion Cup. The God given contents cannot be retained without a proper container. The Church on earth must have a clear doctrine of Church and Ministry.

Pieper and Walther are not contradicting each other or themselves. Walther says the Voters are Supreme. Fritz, in his Pastor Theology, which was my textbook at the Seminary says, "in general the Voters are supreme." My congregational constitution from 1921 says the same thing, as did nearly all the church constitutions in the LCMS before 1969. Marquart could settle the whole thing if he would simply agree to the official polity of the LCMS and say, "Yes, the Voters are Supreme!" Why won't he do that?

In Europe, the birthplace of the Lutheran Church, the State was responsible for the Lutheran faith. In America the State claims no recognition of any faith. This means the Voters are Supreme in America or else it is the clergy who are supreme.

Professor Marquart has quoted many fine statements from Walther as if Walther contradicted himself when he said, "Finally the congregation is represented as the SUPREME TRIBUNAL, Matt.18:15-18...." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W. Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.24)

"In public church affairs nothing should be concluded without the vote and consent of the congregation." (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W. Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.48)

Walther was not schizophrenic. Walther saw no contradiction in his quotations offered by Professor Marquart and those he made on Voter Supremacy.

In the same way, we don't teach that Matthew's words "given and shed for the remission of sins" are invalid because Luke doesn't use them.

We cannot teach theology as if the congregations had no identifiable structure. Marquart will not identify any polity for the congregation. He only rejects "Voter Supremacy."

No only does Walther teach that the laity should judge the clergy but in his "The Sheep Judge Their Shepherds" they must judge the clergy for the sake of their soul's salvation.

At this time, 6 of the 33 professors at Fort Wayne have agreed with Walther's Voter Supremacy.

If Professor Marquart will not agree with Voter Supremacy then exactly what does he say should take place when the Voters' meet if he indeed thinks that they should meet all?

May 13, 2000

[ Back ] [ Home ] [ Up ] [ Next ]