Congratulations to Sheldon Juncker!

On June the 10th I posted a Congratulations to some in my family . Today I am focusing on one grandson, Sheldon Juncker, who is part of a "Quizzing Team" which won 5th place in the international competition.

There are many different quizzing groups. As a teenager, many years ago, I did some quizzing with Youth for Christ. Sheldon's team is part of the Missionary Alliance Churches.

The teams start out competing locally. The members memorize whole books of the Bible. They are given very minor clues and members jump to their feet in order to be the first to say the right verse.

Its a great way for young people to learn Scripture. The group, Life Impact Ministries sponsored the competition.

Here is a picture of Sheldons team:

You can also look at a U-tube video of quizzing .

Once Again congratulations to Sheldon and his team.

The Church within a Church: The Lordship of Christ and the form of the Church 3

Some Churches in the Presbyterian Church (USA), who have gone to court to keep their property, are losing court cases around the issue of whether or not the denomination is a hierarchical institution. Whether one agrees or disagrees with going to court over property, the issue of the Church being hierarchical is also a part of the history of the German Church struggle.

The Lordship of Jesus Christ, the form of the Church and a hierarchical view of the Church were all intertwined in the confusion that existed before and during the rule of Hitler’s Nazis.

It was for this reason that many of the confessional statements written in the few years before the Declaration of Barmen had as their concern how the form of the Church must grow out of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. And it was for this reason that during the synod that produced the Declaration of Barmen a resolution was also approved that contained this statement about the Church:

“It is impossible to divorce the Church’s outward order from the Confession of Faith. …

The unity of the German Evangelical Church is also not achieved by recklessly setting up a central authority that is based upon a worldly Führerprinzip foreign to the Church. A hierarchical structure of the Church is contrary to the Reformation Confession of Faith.” (emphasis mine)1

As has been stated this statement grew out of a dispute about the Lordship of Christ over the Churches. In Germany it was a dispute about placing a Reich bishop along with lesser bishops over the Church.

The writing of faith statements and confessions of faith began before the free synods and accrued until members of the Barmen Synod wrote and accepted the Declaration of Barmen. In this posting I deal with two statements written before the beginning of free synods and in the next I will look at two that were written during the free synod meetings. They are all concerned with the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the form of his Church.

There is not an English translation of the first one but Arthur C. Cochrane explains its content in his book The Church’s Confession Under Hitler. The “Altona Statement,” or “A Word and Confession to the Need and Confusion in Public Life” was written “a few weeks before Hitler assumed power.” One of its authors, Hans Asmussen, would later give the sermon that explained the Declaration of Barmen to the members of the Synod of Barmen.

This statement simply explained what the Church was, how Christians were to function in the public forum and the relationship between the Church and the State. It stressed the sinfulness of humanity and the forgiveness given by Jesus Christ to his people.

The second statement is the “Düsseldorf Theses,” written in May 1933. It began with a statement from the “Ten Theses of Berne,” written in 1528. “The holy, Christian Church, whose only head is Christ, is born of the Word of God, abides in the same, and hears not the voice of a stranger.”

The Theses emphasized that Jesus Christ was the head of the Church and that the ministries within the Church are “ordered by him." The statement speaks to each ministry, preachers, elders, teachers, etc., explaining what the duties are and that it is only in the grace of Jesus that they have their usefulness. The offices are always referred to as ministries and their authority is grounded in the grace of Christ.

Number 12 of the Theses is “Jesus Christ is the only ‘spiritual leader’ of the Church. He is its heavenly King who lives on earth through his Spirit in every one who is obedient to his commission in serving him in the Church.”

Only Jesus Christ has ultimate authority, any other ministry is just that a ministry. The authority of each ministry is established as it functions in the Spirit through the grace of Jesus Christ.

The Confessing Church appealed to the Reformation Confessions and declared that any other form of the Church grew out of arbitrary human ideals and was an unacceptable way of ordering the Church. Within the free synods a hierarchical Church was denied on the ground that Jesus Christ alone was head of the Church. It is with this denial that they stood against a corrupt German institution, a heretical Church.

1 “Declaration Concerning the Legal Status of the German Evangelical Church,” in The Churches Confession Under Hitler by Arthur C. Cochrane, 242. It seems to me that since we have the Declaration of Barmen in our Book of Confessions and since this statement is based on that and other Confessions that should be proof enough that we are not a hierarchical Church.

The Church within a Church: Free Confessional Synods as Witness 2

Over the weekend my husband and I re-watched the movie “Witness.” The movie centers on an Amish community and a little boy who is the only witness to a murder in a train station. As I was watching the movie I realized that not only was the boy a witness to the evil of a corrupt police department, but the whole Amish community was a witness to the invasion of the corrupt officials as they invaded the peaceful community.

Because of the community’s witness, as a group, the murderers were not able to complete their unspeakable deeds.

I am reminded of this as I write on the witness of the free synods of the Confessing Church in Germany during the time of Hitler. I am also reminded of this as I think about those in the PCUSA who hold an orthodox view of the Christian faith and choose, out of obedience to Jesus Christ, to stay in the denomination. Often, all that is required of a witness is to observe and state the truth. Or conversely to state the truth and observe.

Beginning very early, in 1934, the Reich bishop, Ludwig Müller, committed many “dictatorial acts” by eliminating many pastors from their positions. “Over two hundred ministers were subjected to disciplinary measures, suspensions, and dismissals.” Martin Niemöller was the first of this group to lose his position. This was the beginning of the call for free synods which were not official synods of the Church in Germany, but rather began with local meetings of those who had protested but now needed to simply stand in faithfulness.

The first free synod was a Reformed synod. It met in Barmen-Gemarke on January the 3- 4th. 1 There were “320 elders and ministers representing 167 congregations.” The next meeting was in “Pomerania on February 4.” The third free synod was held again in Barmen and was a Free Evangelical Synod consisting of Reformed, Lutheran and United ministers and elders. That was in February the 18 and 19th.

Next, members of the Council of Brethren of the Pastor’s Emergency league meeting on February 20 asked to become members of the free Evangelical Synod of the Rhineland and brought with them the congregations of the league. On March the 7th, congregations from Berlin met for a “Free Evangelical Synod for Berlin and Brandenburg.” Arthur C. Cochrane, author of The Church’s Confession Under Hitler, gives some interesting statistics here. He writes that four laymen and two ministers from each Church attended; “four hundred men and forty women altogether.” (My emphasis; a new history project for someone!)

The next meeting also has an interesting piece of data beside it. In March the 16th “the day the Secret Police dissolved the regularly called [official] Synod of Westphalia,” the First Westphalian Confessional Synod was held in Dortmund. On April the 29th the Free Evangelical Synod of the Rhineland met with the Westphalian Confessional Synod.

With further manipulative actions by official Church leaders in takeovers of Churches and dismissal of pastors many more congregations in Germany joined the Free and Confessional synods. By April 22 the Ulm Conference was held which had delegates from, “Bavarian and Württenburg Churches, the Free Synods in the Rhineland, Westphalia, and Brandenburg, as well as many ‘confessing’ congregations throughout Germany.”

Of course the most important meeting was held in Barmen on May 29-31 when the "Declaration of Barmen" was formulated, presented and accepted.

Several actions occurred within these free synods. The first was the formulating and acceptance of several confessional statements. The first statement was the “The Declaration Concerning the Right Understanding of the Reformation Confessions of Faith in the German Evangelical Church of the Present.” This, like the later “Declaration of Barmen” was written by Karl Barth. Another Confession was the “Ulm Declaration.” I will write about these statements in my third posting on this subject.

The Second action was the formation of leadership groups in the form of councils of brethren. The third inevitable action happened in the midst of severe crisis and persecution. Members of the synods came to the conclusion that they were the “legitimate” Church in Germany. This recognition of their own legitimacy can be traced to their stands on the faith and confession of the Church rather than any political viewpoint.

The members of the free synod and confessional gatherings were certainly witnesses to the German Church, the German people and later to the worldwide Church. They shared a witness to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in the midst of a Church which wanted to share his Lordship with other gods. In gathering together they stood as one against an egocentric culture within Germany. And they spoke truth when everywhere lies and manipulation were the norm. Because of their witness paganism never totally engulfed the whole Church.

But, most important, it was the unique act of calling together "free synods" as a way of addressing the crisis within the official Church which allowed the confessing Christians and congregations to bring orthodox teaching and structure to the churches while speaking confessional truth to the German people.

1 All of the material about the free synods is taken from The Church’s Confession Under Hitler by Artur C. Cochrane.

The Church within a Church: a possibility 1 A revisit of the subject

Over at A Classical Presbyterian we have been having an interesting discussion on the Church, and various groups within the Church. Exploring Covenanted Fellowships, Part Four: The company we keep. As I was writing my last answer I remembered this series of postings and have decided to re-post them. Besides I noticed I didn't finish them-has anyone else ever done that? Anyway I hope this will contribute to the conversation.


This series will deal with how the Confessing Church in Germany, during the Nazi years, dealt with its position as a Church within a Church and how that is relevant to the orthodox in the PC(USA) today.

The official Church was a combination of the Lutheran, Reformed and United Churches gathered together under a Church government shaped, promoted and used by the Nazi Government. Many will see this as a non-relevant subject for the orthodox within the PCUSA today, and clearly the differences are vast. But surprisingly the most basic issues, the Lordship of Jesus Christ, revelation, atonement and ideas about the form and nature of the Church are the same.

With this beginning post I lay out the vast differences, the similarities, and the Confessing Church’s path of resistance that I believe offer some clues toward the future.

Certainly the most serious differences were the dictatorship the Church struggled under and the real issues of life and death. The most serious symptom of the real theological issues within the Church was the German Church official’s refusal to allow Jewish Christians a place within the Church as well as the end of missionary activity to the Jewish people.

Confessing Church pastors and officials faced loss of their ordination; they faced prison and death. All of those involved in youth ministry faced the despair of watching their organizations be dissolved into Hitler’s youth organization. Theological professors lost their university jobs. But one Professor, in particular, noted that the problem was much deeper than the militant dictatorship that existed in his day.

Karl Barth understood that the Church's theological problems began in Germany two-hundred years before and stated that after the, “Church will have finished with the public, savage heretics [the German Christians],” …”who will save her from the blandishments of those who seem correct as to the standards of the Church, Bible and Reformation. And yet, in principle do not think differently from those heretics.”

So, for similarities the most basic sameness in the two Church struggles has to do with revelation. Without dictatorships, without Nazis or any other evil ideology some fail to see that the two struggles are the same. The theologians of Germany for two hundred years had prepared the Church of Germany to recognize other forms of revelation beside Jesus Christ as he is found in Holy Scripture. Today it is reason, science, culture, gender, community, etc. Then, culture, soil, community (volk) and the events of history became the revelation German Christianity placed beside Jesus Christ.

Christianity became Germanic; Hitler and National Socialism were the great gifts and revelation that God had supposedly given to Germany. This is why the German Christians rejected the Jewish people and the Hebrew Bible. This is also why many of the German Christians rejected the atoning death of Jesus Christ on the cross. For them Jesus became a kind of super hero, some one to emulate rather then kneel before. The culture of Germany became more important than the blood of the cross.

Ideas about the Church changed with the new revelation. The Church was seen as a means to unify the community, the volk. The Church was to be an instrument for building up people and culture. The Church took on a new appearance. The German officials rejected the Reform understanding of parliamentary governance. Leaders of the German Faith movement wrote in their "Guiding Priniciples":

“The time of parliamentarianism has outlived itself even in the Church. Ecclesiastical parties have no religious sanction to represent Church people and are opposed to the lofty purpose of becoming a national Church.”1

The leaders believed parliamentary governance destroyed the unity of the Church and the nation. Instead they opted for a hierarchical structure that went well beyond the Lutheran tradition since it was shaped on an administrative rather than a spiritual foundation.

The orthodox in the midst of the Church crisis began to call for free synods. Arthur Cochrane writes:

"There remained for Christ’s flock the one thing possible—the one thing the Church can do when all other possibilities have been exhausted, namely, a common Confession of Christ in the face of a heresy that threatens the life of the Church as the true bride of Christ. Thus in the early months of 1934, a new movement appeared on the scene, in which the laity played as important a part as the clergy. A.S. Duncan-Jones has called this the ‘synodical movement, because it took the form of local synods of clergy and laity who expressed their mind on the dangers that threatened the Church.’”

As part of this movement and alongside it several declarations were formulated which eventually led to the Declaration of Barmen. Beyond this, at the same synod that produced the Declaration of Barmen, the Confessional Synod voted for a resolution that dealt with such things as the Confessing Church's legality, their practical work, the spiritual renewal of ministers, education and the mission of the Church, (which included among other projects ministering to Storm Troopers and Hitler Youth!).

With further postings I intend to deal with the “free Synods,” the gathering declarations and finally with the various resolutions the members of the Synod of Barmen approved to guide them as they became a Church within a Church.

1 “The Guiding Principles of the Faith Movement of the ‘German Christians,, June 6 1932” Appendix II in The Church’s Confession Under Hitler, Arthur C. Cochrane, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press 1961) 222.

The Confession of the Church 10

In this, my last posting on the nature of a Confession of faith, taken from Arthur C. Cochrane’s book, The Church’s Confession Under Hitler, I intend to simply quote the author. The text is extremely important; hopefully others will be encouraged to read this book with some interest in the history of that period in Church History and some thought toward the future.

I intend to follow this series up with another on how the Confessing Church survived as a Church within a heretical Church. The information will come mostly from a document attached to the Declaration of Barmen found in The Churches Confession Under Hitler. As I have stated in a footnote, “Those who formulated the Declaration of Barmen also laid out some practical steps for being the Church in a time of division and crisis. This can be found under Barmen as “III. Resolution of the Confessional Synod of the German Evangelical Church.”

The 10th characteristic of a Confession of Faith:

“A Confession of Faith possesses a relative and subordinate authority and freedom. They are founded upon and limited by the absolute and unique authority and freedom of God’s word in Holy scripture. When the Church confesses Jesus Christ as attested in Holy Scripture in the name of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church and in continuity with the Fathers, when its confession fulfills both the dogmatic and ethical requirements of a Confession, and when it comes forth with an unequivocal Yes and a No, such a Confession exercises authority. …”

Referring to the confessional authority as spiritual authority Cochrane goes on to write of the nature of that authority:

“The authority of the creeds and Confessions is not due to the fact that they have been adopted in the constitutions of certain Churches. Conversely, the authority of a Confession is not abolished or lessened by the fact that certain Churches have refused to recognize their validity in Church law.”

Cochrane asks the important question, “Who will deny that the ecumenical Creeds and the Confessions of the Reformation still exercise authority even in so-called confessionless Churches?”

Cochrane shows how the true Confession of Faith is in fact a Christological act. He writes:

“The primary condition of a Confession, the possibility of a Confession, is not that men decide to confess Christ for a variety of reasons—say, for the sake of a Church union—but that Christ for no reason at all, that is, in his sovereign freedom, has decided to confess himself to us. A Confession is Christological not only in the fact that its articles are related to Christ but in the sense that he is the confessor. The Church confesses only in him! The Confession occurs not when we think we have discovered the truth, but when the truth has found us.”

Cochrane writes of the possibility of another or new Confession of Faith by the Church in other lands in his and now our day. He asks some questions. I will finish with some of his questions:

“Are we on the threshold of a day when the Church knows that its only weapon and defense will be its Confession of Faith? Are we conscious of some great heresy by which our Churches are ‘grievously imperiled’ and of some great truth by which we are possessed? Are we prepared to make dogmatic and, much more important, ethical decisions as a Church, and for the sake of them to lose our life in order to find it?”

The Confession of the Church 1
The Confession of the Church 2
The Confession of the Church 3
The Confession of the Church 4
The Confession of the Church 5a
The Confession of the Church 5b
The Confession of the Church 6
The Confession of the Church 7
The Confession of the Church 8
The Confession of the Church 9

Just One More

I am linking to just one more posting on Sarah Palin (and others). Barb Moody on her blog I was just thinking" has posted what ought to be done and said for all. "Wednesday Review: Sarah Palin." Prayers for everyone! Thank you Barb.

Driven Mad on My Anniversary

Forty-seven years ago Viola May Trotter married Jack Bradford Larson Jr. Today we are going somewhere, Napa Valley, the Bay Area? and have a nice day. But first I am being driven mad by the media's hate-filled focus on Sarah Palin. I am linking to two very different and very good postings about her and the media.

The first is Rev. Kim's Saddened at Called to be the Pastor's Wife and the Pastor.

Rev. Kim writes among other things:

"I'm saddened that smart, accomplished people are presuming that this woman has nothing to offer her country and this country's women, simply because of the views she holds and the party she represents.

I'm saddened that smart, accomplished people who call for diversity of thought and belief on a wide range of issues only seem to welcome such diversity of thought and belief when it aligns with their own."

The other is on the Anchoress, entitled "Sarah & Bristol Meltdown the Haters."

The Anchoress' words include:

"They’re in trouble over there. [forums of the far-left], They’re in serious trouble of the mind, and trouble of the heart and trouble of the soul. They are so paranoid, and so full of hate, at this point, that they are clinging to an insane idea - one that betrays a sort of soul-sickness that leaves me feeling both incredulous and chilled.

How much do you have to love your hate in order to surrender your reason, and your humanity, to it?"

It is also helpful to go to Get Religion . Org and read some of their articles.