The Controversy Concerning Predestination - C.F.W.

Walther

The Controversy Concerning Predestination

The Rev. Prof. C.F.W. Walther, D.D.

Trustworthy advice for pious Christians that would like to know whose
doctrine in the present controversy concerning predestination is Lutheran,
and whose is not.
ST. LOUIS, MO., 1881. Translated by AUGUST CRULL.
(THIS TRACT IS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN)
Dear Reader: If in a doctrinal controversy we wish to find out which
side contends for the truth, and which side contends for error, it is
necessary above all things to understand thoroughly, which is the actual
controverted point in question.
For this reason false teachers have at all times endeavored to shift and
misstate the actual controverted point in the doctrinal controversies
stirred up by them. Some Zwinglians of old, for instance, acted upon
this principle. The chief controverted point in the dispute between them
and Luther was this: whether the true body and the true blood of Christ
is present in, with, and under the blessed bread and wine, is
distributed by the ministers and therefore also taken and partaken of
with the mouth by all communicants. This Luther had affirmed, but the
Zwinglians had denied it. However, when Luther proved his doctrine so
clearly from the Word of God and confuted the Zwinglian doctrine so
powerfully, that everybody saw and the Zwinglians themselves perceived,
that they had been defeated: some of the latter shifted the controverted
point, asserting that they had only contested the doctrine, that the
body of Christ is present in the Lord's Supper like an ordinary body and
is crushed by the teeth of the communicants. Luther, it is true, had
really used this expression once; but he had added at the same time, how
he meant it, namely not in that gross manner which the Capernaites of
old had imputed to Christ (John 6, 52-60), but in this sense that the
essential body of Christ is really and truly present and is really and
truly eaten with the bodily mouth.
The teachers of the pure doctrine, however, have always above all things
stated precisely the actual controverted point in question, whenever
controversies had arisen. A plain proof of this, among other things, is
our dear Formula of Concord. For when after Luther's death serious
controversies concerning certain points of doctrine had arisen within
our Lutheran church, which controversies were to be adjusted by means of
the Formula of Concord, the latter in the first place always stated the
actual controverted point in every one of these articles. If we look
into the Formula of Concord, we find that the first ten articles of this
book always begin with the words: "Status controversiae. The chief
question in this controversy." However by the word: "The chief question"
nothing else is understood but: "The chief controverted point." Only the
eleventh article, treating of predestination, does not begin thus; and
why not? For no other reason but because (as the first Part of the
Formula of Concord expressly states in the very beginning) at that time
"no public controversy had arisen (yet) among the theologians of the
Augsburg Confession." (Compare the new Jubilee edition of the Book of
Concord, page 378. New Market edition page 353.)
But because now, within the American-Lutheran church, a "public
controversy has arisen" concerning the doctrine of predestination, it is
of course necessary, in order that no one may "fish in troubled waters",
and that all pious Christians, even the most simple, may see their way
clearly in this "controversy", that has arisen, to state in the first
place and above all things the actual controverted point in the present
controversy. What, then, is the actual, and at the same time the chief
controverted point?
It consists simply in the following twofold question: 1st, whether God
from eternity, before the foundations of the world were laid, out of
pure mercy and only for the sake of the most holy merit of Christ,
elected and ordained the chosen children of God to salvation and
whatever pertains to it, consequently also to faith, repentance, and
conversion; or 2nd, whether in His election God took into consideration
anything good in man, namely the foreseen conduct of man, the foreseen
non-resistance, and the foreseen persevering faith, and thus elected
certain persons to salvation in consideration of, with respect to, on
account of, or in consequence of their conduct, their non-resistance,
and their faith. The first of these questions we affirm, while our
opponents deny it, but the second question we deny, while our opponents
affirm it.
However our opponents may shuffle, this is and remains the actual and
chief controverted point in the present controversy, as long as our
opponents do not retract.
The principal means by which our opponents endeavor to support their
doctrine, consists in continually quoting passages from the private
writings of the fathers of our Church, published subsequent to the
Formula of Concord. But whenever a controversy arises concerning the
question, whether a doctrine is Lutheran, we must not ask: "What does
this or that 'father' of the Lutheran Church teach in his private
writings?" for he also may have fallen into error; on the contrary, we
must ask: "What does the public Confession of the Lutheran Church teach
concerning the controverted point?" for in her confession our Church has
recorded for all times, what she believes, teaches, and confesses, for
the very reason, that no controversy may arise concerning the question,
what our Lutheran Church believes, teaches, and confesses in reference
to certain doctrinal points, or that such controversy may at least be
adjusted without difficulty. Thus, for instance, the Formula of Concord
in its second part expressly declares as its object that in setting
forth its views "a public and positive testimony might be furnished, not
only to those who are now living, but also to posterity, showing what
the unanimous opinion and judgment of our churches were, and perpetually
ought to be, concerning those controverted articles." (See Jubilee
edition of the Book of Concord p. 391. New Market edition p. 596.)
If, therefore, many pious Christians suppose the doctrine concerning
predestination to be too difficult for them to know and decide whose
doctrine in the present controversy concerning this article is Lutheran
and whose is not, such dear Christians are sadly mistaken. Nothing is
easier for a pious Christian than to know and to decide this. He only
must take care not to leave his Lutheran castle and not to be decoyed
upon the slippery soil of human reason; he only must abide by the clear
words of our Lutheran Confession. Then be will soon be able to know and
to decide whose doctrine is Lutheran and whose is not.
Since, however, just the eleventh article of the Formula of Concord,
which treats of predestination, is rather lengthy, we will give our
pious readers a plain, trustworthy advice, which they can follow without
difficulty, and by following which even a simple Christian is enabled to
form a settled opinion in regard to the present controversy concerning
predestination, even though a hundred ever so learned philosophers would

argue with him.

Our advice is this:
In the first place, dear reader, bear in mind only TWO SHORT SENTENCES
which the time-honored Confession of our Church premises, before
entering upon the lengthy explanation of the doctrine concerning
predestination, and in which it clearly and plainly states those points,
to which we must cling chiefly and above all things, and from which
absolutely nothing must lead us away, if in the doctrine concerning
predestination we are not to fall into errors, but to abide in the
straight path of the Holy Scriptures. The first of these sentences is
the following:
I. "In the first place, the difference between the eternal
foreknowledge of God and the eternal election of His children to
everlasting salvation must be accurately observed. For praescientia
vel provisio, that is, that God foresees and foreknows all things
before they come to pass, which is called the foreknowledge of God,
extendeth to all creatures, whether they be good or wicked &c. But
God's eternal election vel praedestinatio, that is, the ordaining of
God unto salvation, doth not at once pertain both to the good and the
wicked, but only to the children of God who have been elected and
ordained to eternal life, before the foundations of the world were
laid; as St. Paul (Eph. 1,5) testifies, saying: 'He hath chosen us in
Christ Jesus, and predestinated us unto the adoption of children.'"
(See Jubilee edition of the Book of Concord p. 478. New Market edition
p. 711.)
From this, my dear Lutheran Christian, whose desire it is to abide until
death with our dear Lutheran Church and by her pure doctrine also in
these latter perilous times, thou canst clearly see, in the first place,
that the doctrine of our opponents evidently is not Lutheran, when they
say, that the Formula of Concord treats of predestination in a wider
sense.  Our opponents indeed know very well how much depends upon this.
Their entire system is based upon the assertion, that the Formula of
Concord treats of predestination in a wider sense. Upon the truth or
falsity of this assertion depends everything they affirm and deny in
opposition to us. But their assertion is positively false. The Formula
of Concord does not treat of predestination in a wider sense. On the
contrary, as thou canst see from the above-cited words, the Formula of
Concord in the very beginning bases its whole doctrine upon this, that
predestination, unlike the foreknowledge and consequently also unlike
the general decree of God concerning man's salvation, does not at once
extend to the wicked as well as to the good, and consequently does by no
means refer to both, but that it refers "only to the children of God",
and only to those children of God "who have been elected and ordained to
eternal life, before the foundations of the world were laid", who,
therefore, will surely be saved.
To this, therefore, dear Lutheran Christian, thou must firmly adhere
first of all, for this is the point of which also the Formula of Concord
says that it must be observed "in the first place." Let nothing induce
thee to leave this castle. If any one attempts to make thee believe,
that the doctrine of a so-called predestination in a wider sense, which
refers not only to the chosen children of God who have been ordained to
eternal life, but "at once" to the good and the wicked,  if any one
attempts to make thee believe that this doctrine is Lutheran, do not
lend thine ear to the voice of the tempter, but say: My dear Confession
teaches quite another doctrine, and by that I will abide. 
But, my dear Lutheran Christian, bear in mind also the second principal
point which our Lutheran Confession places likewise at the head of its
explanation of the doctrine concerning predestination. For thus our
Confession intends to make also this second principal point a
guiding-star, as it were, for all Lutherans, which is to keep them from
all errors in regard to this doctrine, and to which, therefore, they
must adhere also in the first place and above all things. This second
principal point in the doctrine concerning predestination is the
following:
II. "The foreknowledge of God (praescientia) foresees and foreknows
evils also, but this is not to be understood as if it were God's
gracious will that they should occur &c. The foreknowledge of God is
not the origin or the cause of evil (for God does not create or cause
evil, nor does He aid or promote it) &c. But the eternal election of
God not only foresees and foreknows the salvation of the elect, but
through His gracious will and good pleasure in Christ Jesus, is also a
CAUSE which procures, works, aids, and promotes our salvation and
whatever pertains to it; and upon this our salvation is so firmly
grounded that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; for it
is written: 'Neither shall any pluck my sheep out of my hand', and
again; 'And as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed'.
Matth. 16, 18. John 10, 28. Acts 13, 48." (See Jubilee edition of the
Book of Concord p. 478 sq. New Market edition p. 711. sq.)
From this, my dear Lutheran Christian, thou canst clearly see, in the
second place, that the doctrine of our opponents is not Lutheran also
for this reason, because they declare predestination to be nothing more
than the following: in the first place, the foreknowledge of God that
certain persons will receive the gospel in true faith and persevere in
this saving faith unto the end, and secondly the decree that He will
actually save the persons that thus persevere in faith. Now it is indeed
undeniably true that God from eternity has foreseen all persons that
persevere in the saving faith unto the end; it also cannot be denied,
that God has made the decree to grant everlasting salvation to all those
and only to those that persevere in the saving faith; but this is not
the doctrine of predestination which, according to the Formula of
Concord, as we have seen, "pertains only to the children of God who have
been elected and ordained to eternal life, before the foundations of the
world were laid;" but it is rather the general decree concerning man's
salvation which God has made concerning all men, the wicked as well as
the good. Predestination, however, which refers only to the chosen
children of God, is, as our Lutheran Confession has it, "through God's
gracious will and good pleasure in Christ Jesus, also a CAUSE, which
procures, works, aids and promotes our salvation and whatever pertains
to it; and upon this our salvation is so firmly grounded that the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it." According to our Confession,
therefore, predestination is not only a decree of God according to which
He is willing to save men, provided that they persevere in faith unto
the end, but it is rather such an ordination of God, which is such a
CAUSE of the salvation of the elect, as to "procure, work, aid and
promote" at the same time "whatever pertains to it," namely, to their
surely obtaining salvation, consequently also, to their being led to
repentance, conversion, and faith, and to their persevering unto the
end. And besides, according to our Confession, the salvation of the
elect "is so firmly grounded" upon the eternal election "that the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it"; for it is written: 'Neither shall
any pluck my sheep out of my hand'." That, however, also faith is
included in this statement, that the eternal election is a cause which
procures everything pertaining to our salvation or to our obtaining
salvation, is not only self- evident, since faith is the only means of
appropriating that salvation which Christ has earned for all men; but
the Formula of Concord does also expressly declare that faith is
included, by adding: "For it is written: 'And as many as were ordained
to eternal life, believed'."
This accounts for the obstinacy with which our opponents assert that the
Formula of Concord treats of predestination in a wider sense, namely of
such a one as comprises the general decree which God has made in regard
to the salvation of all men, the good as well as the wicked. This they
assert, in order not to be compelled to acknowledge that predestination
is also a cause of every thing that pertains to the obtaining of
salvation, consequently also of faith, as our second principal sentence
from the Formula of Concord affirms. But how sensible people can say:
"The Formula of Concord does indeed in the very beginning say clearly
that predestination doth not pertain both to the good and the wicked,
but only to the chosen children of God, but it treats of predestination
in a wider sense, extending to all men"  this would be a riddle indeed,
if the Formula of Concord in our second principal sentence did not say
so clearly that predestination is also a cause of faith. This solves the
riddle. For since our opponents have set their minds on the notion, that
predestination cannot be a cause of faith, but that, on the contrary,
faith is rather a cause of predestination, and that affirming the
reverse is Calvinism: the first principal sentence of the Formula of
Concord faces them like a huge rock which they can neither pass over nor
pass by. For since, according to the first principal sentence,
predestination refers only to the chosen children of God and not also to
the wicked, that predestination of which the Formula of Concord treats,
cannot be predestination in a wider sense. But what do they do now? They
exercise all their art of reasoning and skill of logic, in order to
prove that the first principal sentence does not say, or at least does
not mean at all what it says! that it indeed speaks of a predestination
referring not to all men, but that it means a predestination referring
to all men, because it speaks of predestination in a wider sense! 
Others, however, among our opponents try to extricate themselves in the
following manner. They maintain that the Formula of Concord speaks of
predestination in quite different ways; that it speaks now of a
predestination in a wider sense, extending to all men, now of a
predestination in a stricter sense, referring only to the chosen
children of God; that the reader must find out himself which of these
two kinds of predestination the Formula of Concord is speaking of in one
or the other passage, namely, that he must always put that construction
upon the words "election" or "predestination" in the different passages,
which suits his idea. Of course, these opponents do not amend the
matter. For what Lutheran can or will ever believe that our Confession
is so confused a writing that it means by a word now this, now something
else, without always adding in what signification it uses this word in
the different passages; yea, without even mentioning, that it uses this
word in quite different significations, and means by it now this, now
something else? So confused a writing would be utterly unqualified to be
a Confession which, above all other writings, ought to be clear, plain,
distinct, and quite unmistakable.
The two principal sentences, therefore, which we have quoted from the
Formula of Concord, like two strict wardens stand before the entrance of
the doctrine concerning predestination and admit no one that seeks to
put a different construction upon this doctrine. If some one asserts,
that that predestination of which the Formula of Concord speaks, is a
predestination in a wider sense, the first principal sentence, as the
first warden, immediately confronts him, saying: Predestination doth not
refer to all men, to the good and the wicked, but only to the chosen
children of God. If another asserts that that predestination of which
the Formula of Concord speaks, is not a cause of faith, the second
principal sentence in which predestination is called the cause of faith,

as the second warden, immediately confronts him. These two wardens also
assist each other. For if an opponent says that the second principal
sentence does indeed declare predestination to be a cause of faith, but
that this is to be understood only of predestination in a wider sense:
the first principal sentence which states, that predestination refers
only to the children of God, as the first warden assists the second. But
if an opponent says, that the first principal sentence indeed does not
speak of predestination in a wider, but in a stricter sense, that,
however, it does not say anything about the doctrine, that faith results
from this predestination: the second principal sentence speedily comes
to its relief by confessing this doctrine in plain terms. In short, our
opponents are inclosed between the two principal sentences of the
Formula of Concord as between two fires: if they try to escape the one,
they are burnt by the other, and if they try to escape the latter, they
are burnt by the former. There is no way of getting out of the dilemma:
our opponents must either admit that ours is the Lutheran doctrine, or
they must renounce the Formula of Concord as being an erroneous,
Calvinistic book.
God be praised for having given us such a glorious Confession, which
resembles a castle well-fortified on all sides!
O ye dear faithful children of God within our beloved Evangelical
Lutheran church! Do then in the first place indeed adhere steadfastly 
in opposition to all Calvinistic errors  to the doctrine, that God is
willing to grant faith, perseverance in faith, and finally everlasting
salvation to all men; that through the word He offers all this
earnestly, strongly, and efficaciously, and that, consequently, it is
not the fault of predestination, but of man himself, namely of his
obstinate resistance, if so great a number either do not obtain faith,
or do not persevere in faith unto the end, and thus are lost eternally.
But adhere also firmly to this: That ye believe and persevere in faith,
of this not ye yourselves are the cause; it is not the consequence of
your having been better than others and therefor [sic.] more willing to
determine for the way to heaven, consequently also for faith itself; on
the contrary, the cause of this is, according to the Formula of Concord
(p. 483), that God, "before the foundations of the world were laid, in
His counsel and purpose, ordained the manner in which He would bring me"
(consequently you also) "to salvation, and preserve me therein," and
that "in His eternal purpose, which cannot fail or be overthrown, He
ordained your salvation, and to secure it, placed it into the omnipotent
hands of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, out of which none shall pluck us."
Those that perish, do not perish, because God, as Calvin in
contradiction of the plain word of God does impiously teach, assigned
them to eternal damnation (for God "will have all men to be saved"), but
through their own fault; not because God excluded them, but because they
excluded themselves; not because God with His grace passed them by, but
because they passed by God's grace which desired to save them. Those,
however, that are saved, do not owe it to themselves, but only to God's
mercy in Christ; for God Himself in the prophecy of Hosea comprises
these two truths in the following few words: "O Israel, thou hast
destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help." (Hos. 13, 9.) Whoever,
therefore, tries to make you believe that we teach that horrible
Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, grossly transgresses the eighth
commandment, in bearing false witness against his neighbor and
slandering us; and God will judge it hereafter; for with heart and soul
we condemn Calvin's doctrine of predestination, so help us God! 
Now then, ye Lutheran readers, remember: Last year all of us celebrated
a jubilee, because 300 years ago God bestowed upon our Church her
glorious last public Confession, namely the Formula of Concord, in which
the doctrine of the Reformation, the pure doctrine of Luther, purified
from all corruptions that had crept in after Luther's death, has been
for all times treasured up for all Lutherans, as in their ark of the
covenant, and by God's gracious dispensation has been handed down to us
also. O then let us prove also by our conduct that we did not act the
hypocrite in celebrating this jubilee; for in the year of this very
jubilee of our Confession God has permitted assaults to be made out of
our own camp upon an important doctrine of our Confession, in order to
put us to the test whether we would prove faithful wardens of the
treasure which in our Confession He intrusted to us. O do let us prove
 faithful! As in other doctrines let us also in the doctrine concerning
predestination return to our Confession which in this point has been
departed from so soon. For we need but two short sentences of our dear
Formula of Concord which, if firmly adhered to, are fully sufficient to
keep us from all corruption of this doctrine. These two sentences which
on pp. 7 and 9 [in the original (ed.)] we have caused to be printed in
large type, shine like stars in our Confession, that no Lutheran may
allow the pure doctrine of his church to be perverted or explained away
by any sophistry, subtlety, or the plea: "The fathers! The fathers!"
These two sentences, therefore, every Lutheran ought to commit to memory
now, in order to have them always at hand, and along with the word of
God to use them as his good, bright, Lutheran sword and his good,
impenetrable, Lutheran shield. 
In the above, dear Lutheran readers, we have offered you our plain
advice, if you would like to know whose doctrine in the present
controversy concerning predestination is Lutheran, and whose is not. We
can assure you from experience that this advice has stood the test
already in many cases. Examine it, therefore, and if you find it good,
follow it! But if someone offers you another advice as a better one, I
beseech you: Examine it also and inquire with care, whether that advice
really is a better one! For not every advice is a better one, which is
recommended as a better one. When, for instance, in Luther's days a
controversy had arisen concerning the meaning of Christ's words: "This
is my body," the fanatic Schwenkfeld desired also to offer a better
advice than all the rest, for adjusting the controversy. But what was
his advice? It was this: "We must pay no heed to these words: 'This is
my body,' for they hinder the spiritual meaning!!" Of course, nowadays
hardly any one will dare to offer so foolish an advice without disguise,
but clothed in more subtile words this advice of Schwenkfeld is offered
alas! only too often. We therefore warn you, dear Lutheran brethren! If
any one advices you not to be so very particular about the words of our
Confession, and endeavors to prove by all kinds of crafty devices that
the words of the Confession mean something else than they read, then
think of Schwenkfeld! 
Perhaps you will say now: "But what after all is the true
biblical-Lutheran doctrine concerning predestination? For shall I be
anything the better for being able to confute all erroneous doctrines
concerning this article, if I do not know what doctrine is the true
one?" There you are quite right. We therefore intend, with the help of
God, to issue soon a second tract on the doctrine concerning
predestination and to expound the pure Lutheran doctrine concerning
predestination in the most simple manner. For this purpose we ask you
for your faithful prayer in the name of Jesus.
HOME | Who We Are | Contact Us | Support Us
Resource Catalog | Guestbook | SiteSEARCH | Links
Modern Reformation | Publications | Radio Programs | Conferences &
Seminars

©1998 - 2001 Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

site designed and created by Susan West
Comments & Criticism: Carl E. Geiger <[email protected]>