Pattern of Sound Words: Lutheran Confessions

Large Catechism: Holy Baptism (Part Two)

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Thu, 04 Jun 2026 19:15:22 GMT

Below is my translation of Luther’s explanation of the purpose, power, and benefit of Holy Baptism in the Large Catechism. The German text comes from the 1580 Dresden Book of Concord. Square brackets indicate my own notes and additions.

Triptych of the Cleansing of Naaman, by Cornelis Engebrechtsz

Concerning Baptism (Part Two)

Translation

^[23] Second, because we now know what Baptism is and how it is to be regarded, we must also learn why and to what end it has been instituted, that is, what it benefits, gives, and creates. Such cannot be grasped better than from the words of Christ, namely, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved” [Mark 16:16]. ^[24] Therefore, grasp it in the most simplest way in this manner, that this is the power, work, benefit, fruit and end of Baptism: to save [see also 1 Peter 3:21]. For no one is baptized for the reason that he would be a prince, but rather, as the words say, that he would “be saved.” ^[25] Now one knows well that to “be saved” means nothing other than to be redeemed from sin, death, and the devil [Colossians 1:13–14], to come into Christ’s kingdom [John 3:5], and to live with Him eternally.

Translation

^[26] Here, you see once more how precious and worthy Baptism is be considered, because we obtain such inexpressible treasure therein, which also indicates that it cannot be a poor pure water, for pure water could not do such; however, the Word does such, and (as said above) God’s name is in it. ^[27]Now where God’s name is, there must also be life and salvation so that it is called a divine, blessed, fruitful, and grace-rich water; for through the Word it receives its power so that it is a “bath of rebirth” [λουτρόν παλιγγενεσίας] as St. Paul also calls it in Titus 3[:5; see also Ephesians 5:25–27].

Translation

[28] Now, as for what our clever fellows, the “new spirits” [i.e., the Anabaptists] profess that “faith alone saves, but the work and external thing do nothing to this end.” We answer, “Certainly, nothing does anything in us other than faith,” as we will still hear further [in the third part]. ^[29] But the blind-leaders [see Matthew 15:14] do not want to see this, that faith must have something that it believes, that is, to which it holds onto, and upon which it stands and rests. In this way, faith only clings to the water and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life; not through water (as said enough) but as a result that it is incorporated with God’s word and ordinance, and His name adheres in it. Now, when I believe such, what else is it than that I believe in God, as the one who has given and planted His Word therein and has set forth this external thing for us in which we could grasp such a treasure?

Translation

^[30] Now they are so brilliant that they separate from one another faith and the thing to which faith adheres and is bound, even if it is external. Indeed, it shall and must be external so that it one might grasp and comprehend it with senses, and so that it thereby can be brought into the heart; just as the entire Gospel is an external oral preaching. In summary, whatever God does and works in us, He wants to work through such external ordinances. Where He now speaks, indeed, wherever and through whatever means He speaks, there faith ought to look and ought to hold onto. ^[31] Now here we have the words, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved” [Mark 16:16]. To what else are these words spoken other than to Baptism, that is, the water grasped in God’s ordinance? Therefore, it follows that whoever rejects Baptism [also] rejects God’s Word, faith, and Christ, who directs us to it and binds us to Baptism.

FC SD V: Concerning Law and Gospel

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Mon, 11 May 2026 22:32:29 GMT

Below is my translation of Article V of the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord, “Concerning Law and Gospel.” The German source text comes from the 1580 Dresden Book of Concord. Square brackets indicate my own notes and additions.

Law and Gospel, by Lucas Cranach the Elder

V. Concerning Law and Gospel

^[1] Since the distinction between the Law and the Gospel is a particularly glorious light which serves to the end that God’s Word is rightly divided [2 Timothy 2:15], and the Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles are properly explained and understood, therefore [this distinction] must be maintained with special diligence so that these two doctrines are not mixed with one another or that a new law be made from the Gospel, thereby obscuring the merit of Christ and robbing troubled consciences of their consolation, which they otherwise have in the Holy Gospel when it is clearly and purely preached and can uphold for themselves in their greatest afflictions against the terrors of the Law.

^[2] Now, here in a similar manner, a dispute has come between some theologians of the Augsburg Confession. One party claimed that the Gospel is properly not only a preaching of grace, but rather at the same time a preaching of repentance, which rebukes the greatest sin, namely, unbelief. But the other party maintained and argued that the Gospel is not properly a preaching of repentance or rebuke, which properly belongs to the Law of God that rebukes all sins, and thus also unbelief; rather, that the Gospel is properly a preaching of the grace and favor of God for the sake of Christ, through which the unbelief of those converted to Christ, which had previously been stuck in and which the Law of God had rebuked, is pardoned and forgiven.

^[3] When now we rightly consider this dispute, such has chiefly been caused for this reason, that the little word “gospel” (Euangelium [εὐαγγέλιον]) is not understood ubiquitously in a singular or like way in Holy Scripture and in the old and new teachers of the Church, but rather, in a twofold manner. ^[4] For sometimes it is used that thereby is understood the entire doctrine of Christ our Lord, which He carried out on earth in His Preaching Office and has commanded to be carried out in the New Testament, and in this way, it grasps the explanation of the Law and the proclamation of the favor and grace of God, His heavenly Father, as it stands written, “This is the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1[:1]), and soon thereafter the summary of the chief points is set forth, “repentance and forgiveness of sins” [Mark 1:4]. In this way, Christ then commanded the apostles after His resurrection to preach the Gospel in all the world (Mark 16[:15]) and then grasps the sum of His doctrine together with a few words when He says, “Thus it is written, and thus must the Christ suffer and be raised from the dead on the third day and repentance and forgiveness of sins be preached in His name among all heathens” (Luke 24[:46–47]). In the same way, Paul calls His entire doctrine of the Gospel but grasps the sum of His doctrine in these chief points: “repentance toward God and forgiveness of sins” (Acts 20[:21]). ^[5] And in this understanding is the general definition (Generalis definitio, that is, the description of the word “gospel”) correct when it is used in a wide sense and apart from the proper distinction of Law and Gospel. ^[6] For John [the Baptist], Christ, and the apostles began their preaching concerning repentance and, in this way, they laid out and urged not only the grace-rich promise of the forgiveness of sins, but also the Law of God. In addition, the word “gospel” is used in another way in its proper sense, namely, when it grasps not the preaching of repentance, but only the preaching of the grace of God, as when Christ says, “Repent…,” and then it follows afterwards, “…and believe the Gospel” [Mark 1[:15].

^[7] Indeed, just as also the little word “repentance” (Buß [μετάνοια]) is not used in a singular understanding in Holy Scripture. For in some places in Holy Scripture it is used and taken as the entire conversion of man, such as, “If you do not repent, you will all also thus perish” (Luke 13[:5], and “In this way there is more joy over one sinner who repents” (Luke 15[:7]). But in this passage (Mark 1[:15]) as also elsewhere, when repentance and faith in Christ (Acts 20[:21]) or “repentance and forgiveness of sins” (Luke 24[:46–47]) are set forth in a distinct manner, then “to repent” means nothing other than to truly acknowledge sins, to be heartily sorrowful for them, and to abstain from them, ^[9] the knowledge of which comes from the Law, but it is not sufficient for conversion to God if faith in Christ is not added to it, whose merit the comforting preaching of the Holy Gospel offers to all repentant sinners who are terrified by the preaching of the Law. For the Gospel preaches forgiveness of sins not to course, secure hearts, but to broken and repentant hearts ([Isaiah 61:1], Luke 4[:18]; [Psalm 34:18, 51:17]). And so that repentance or terror of the Law one may not turn into despair, the preaching of the Gospel must be added to it, so that it might be a “repentance unto salvation” (2 Corinthians 7[:10]).

^[10] For because the mere preaching of the Law without Christ either makes presumptuous people who think that they can fulfill the Law with external works, or it makes them fall into despair, therefore Christ takes the Law into His hands and interprets it spiritually (Matthew 5[:21–48]; Romans 7[:14] and 1[:18]). And in this way, He reveals His wrath from heaven over all sinners and reveals how great His wrath is; thereby, sinners are instructed in the Law and from it first rightly learn to recognize their sins, the recognition of which Moses could have never compelled from them; for as the apostle testifies, ‘Even though Moses is read, nevertheless the veil which he hung over his face remains unlifted’ (~2 Corinthians 3[:14–15]), so that they cannot know the Law spiritually, and what great things it demands of us, and how deeply it curses and condemns us because we cannot neither keep it nor fulfill it. “But when one converts to the Lord, then the veil is taken away” (2 Corinthians 3[:16]).

^[11]Therefore, the Spirit of Christ must not only comfort, but also must rebuke the world on account of sin through the office of the Law, and in this way do in the New Testament as the prophet says, Opus alienum, ut faciat opus proprium [~Isaiah 28:21 Vulgate]), that is, “He must perform a strange office (which is to rebuke) until He adds to it His proper work (that is, to comfort and to preach concerning grace).” Therefore, He then was obtained and sent by Christ to us and for this reason is also called “the Comforter” (der Tröster; [ὁ Παράκλητος]), as Dr. Luther has explained in the exposition of the Gospel for the Fifth Sunday after Trinity with the following words:

^[12]“Everything that preaches about our sins and God’s wrath is the Law’s preaching, no matter how or when it happens. On the other hand, the Gospel is the preaching that shows and gives nothing but grace and forgiveness in Christ. It is true and correct that the apostles and preachers of Gospel (as Christ also Himself did) confirmed the preaching of the Law, and began with this among those who did not know their sins and were not frightened of God’s wrath, as Christ says, “The Holy Spirit will rebuke the world because of sin,” etc. (John 16[:8]). What is a more serious, frightening pointing out and preaching of God’s wrath at sin than the suffering and dying of Christ, His Son? However, as long as all of this preaches God’s wrath and frightens people, it is not yet the Gospel’s or Christ’s own preaching, but Moses’ and the Law’s [preaching] to the impenitent. The Gospel and Christ were not instituted or given to frighten and condemn, but to comfort and raise up those who are frightened and fearful.”[1]

^[13] And once more:

“Christ says, ‘The Holy Spirit shall rebuke the world concerning sin,’ (John 16[:8) which cannot happen except through the explanation of the Law.”[2]

^[14] And he also says in the Smalcald Articles:

“The New Testament maintains and urges the office of the Law that reveals sins and God’s wrath… but to such office it immediately adds the promise of grace through the Gospel.”[3]

^[15] And the Apology says:

“For a right salutary repentance, it is not enough to only preach the Law… but rather the Gospel must also be added to it.”[4]

Thus, both doctrines must be with one another and also be urged next to one another, but in a certain order, and with proper distinction. The Antinomians (Antinomi) or the “Law-stormers” (Gesetzstürmer)[5] are properly condemned who throw out the preaching of the Law from the Church and want that sin should be rebuked and contrition and sorrow to be taught, not from the Law, but only from the Gospel.

^[16] In order that it everyone may see that we conceal nothing in the aforementioned dispute, but rather present the matter to the Christian reader quite clearly before the eyes of the Christian reader…

^[17] We therefore unanimously believe, teach, and confess that the Law properly is a divine doctrine, in which the righteous unchangeable will of God reveals how man ought to be created in his nature, thoughts, words, and works so that He is pleasing and acceptable to God; and it also threatens its transgressors with God’s wrath and temporal and eternal punishment, for as Luther says against the “Law-stormers”:

“Everything that rebukes sins is and belongs to the Law, whose proper office is to rebuke sins and lead to knowledge of sins”[6] (Romans 3[:20] and 7[:7]).

And since unbelief is a root and fount of all rebukeable sins, so the Law also rebukes unbelief.

^[18] But, at the same time, this is also true, that the Law along with its doctrine is illustrated (illustrirt) and explained by the Gospel, and, nevertheless, it remains the Law’s proper office to rebuke sins and to teach good works.

^[19] In this way, Law rebukes unbelief, when one does not believe God’s Word, because now the Gospel is God’s Word which alone properly teaches and commands to believe in Christ. So, the Holy Spirit also rebukes Holy Spirit through the office of the Law that they do not believe in Christ, of which nevertheless only the Gospel properly teaches concerning saving faith in Christ.

^[20] The Gospel however is properly a doctrine (since man has not kept the Law of God, but transgressed it, and since his corrupted nature, thoughts, words, and works strive against it, and for that reason he is subject to the wrath of God, death, all temporal plagues, and the punishment of hellish fire) which then teaches what man ought to believe that he may obtain forgiveness of sins from God, namely, that the Son of God, our Lord Christ has taken upon Himself and bore the curse of the Law, atoned for all our sins, and paid for them, through whom alone we obtain a way to come into grace with God and forgiveness of sins by faith, are discharged from death and all punishments for sins, and are eternally saved.

^[21] For everything that comforts, which offers the favor and grace of God to transgressions of the Law is and is properly called the Gospel, a good and joyful message that God does not want to punish sin but forgive for the sake of Christ.

^[22] Thus, every repentant sinner ought to believe, that is, place his trust, only in the Lord Christ, that He “was given for the sake of our sins and raised again for the sake of our justification” (Romans 4[:25]), who “became sin for our sakes who knew no sin, so that we in Him might be the righteousness that counts before God” (2 Corinthians 5[:21]), “who was made for us righteousness” (1 Corinthians 1[:30]), whose obedience is recognized to us as righteousness before God in God’s strict judgment, so that, in this way, the Law, in the measure explained above, is an office that kills by the letter and preaches condemnation (2 Corinthians 3[:6, 9]), but the Gospel is a “power of God unto salvation for all those who believe in it” (Romans 1[:16]) that preaches righteousness and gives the Spirit (1 Corinthians 1[:18]; Galatians 3[:2]), as Dr. Luther then urged this the distinction with special diligence in nearly all his writings and properly showed that the knowledge of God is which comes from the Gospel is very different than that which is taught and learned from the Law, because even the Heathen, from the natural law, have, to a certain extent, the knowledge of God, although they neither knew Him rightly nor honored Him rightly (Romans 1[:19–32]).

^[23] These two preachings have ever and always been urged from the beginning of the world in the Church of God next to one another with a proper distinction. For the ancestors of the beloved patriarchs, as then also the Patriarchs themselves, not only continually remembered how man was originally created by God righteous and holy and how through the deceit of the serpent he transgressed God’s command, became a sinner, and corrupted and cast himself along with all men into death and eternal damnation, but also uplifted and comforted themselves by preaching of the woman’s Seed, who was to tread on the head of the serpent [Genesis 3:15]. Likewise, by the preaching of Abraham’s Seed, in whom all peoples were to be blessed [Genesis 22:17–18, 26:4, 28:14]. Likewise, by the preaching of David’s Son, who was to restore the kingdom of Israel again [Psalm 110:1] and be a light to the heathen [Isaiah 49:6; Luke 1:79, 2:32], who was “struck on account of our sins, and wounded on account of our misdeeds… by whose wounds we are healed” [Isaiah 53:5].

^[24] Both such doctrines we believe and confess that they ought to be diligently urged in the Church of God forever and ever until the end of the world, yet with a good distinction, so that in the ministry of the New Testament the hearts of unrepentant men might be terrified, come to recognize their sins, and brought to repentance through the preaching of the Law and its threats , but not sin such a way that they lose heart and despair, but rather, because “the Law is a disciplinarian unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3[:24]), and because the Law directs and leads us not from Christ, but rather to Christ who is the “end of the Law” (Romans 10[:4]), ^[25] so that they in such a manner might in turn be comforted and strengthened through the preaching of the Holy Gospel of our Lord Christ, namely, that, for those who believe the Gospel, God forgives them all their the sins through Christ, receive them as children for His sake, and justifies and saves them out of pure grace, without any merit from them; but nevertheless, not in such a way that they abuse the grace of God and sin in it [Romans 6:1], ^[26] as Paul thoroughly and mightily demonstrates the distinction between the Law and the Gospel (2 Corinthians 3[:6–9]).

^[27] Thus and so that both doctrines of the Law and the Gospel are not mingled with one another and mixed, and that what belongs to the one is not ascribed to the other, thereby obscuring the merit and the benefits of Christ, and, in turn, making the Gospel into a doctrine of the Law, as happened in the Papacy, and in this way that it robs Christians of the true consolation which they have in the Gospel against the terrors of the Law, and opens the doors in the Church of God once more to the papacy, the true proper distinction between the Law and Gospel must therefore be urged and maintained with all diligence, and whatever may give cause to a confusion between Law and Gospel (Confusion inter Legem et Euangelium, that is, so that both doctrines of Law and Gospel are mixed and mingled into one doctrine) must be diligently prevented. Therefore, it is dangerous and wrong when someone wants to make a preaching of repentance or rebuke out of the Gospel when it is called in this way as it is distinguished from the Law. Thus, the Apology says several times that the gospel is a preaching of repentance and forgiveness of sins. However, the Apology also shows right along side it that the Gospel, properly, is the promise of forgiveness of sins and justification through Christ, but the Law is a word that rebukes and condemns sins.

[1] AE 78:216; WA 22:87, 3–18.

[2] “Answer of Dr. Martin Luther to Lord Wolf von Salhausen,” WA 15:228, 15–17. To my knowledge this letter has not appeared in the American Edition of Luther’s Works.

[3] SA III III.1, 4.

[4] Ap V.136.

[5] In the 1584 Latin edition, it reads “adversaries of the Law” (adversarii Legis).

[6] Cf. Thesis 18–19 in Theses Against the Antinomians (1537–40), AE 73:54–55.

Large Catechism: Concerning Baptism (Part One)

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Thu, 07 May 2026 18:40:23 GMT

Below is my translation of Luther’s explanation of the Institution of Holy Baptism in the Large Catechism. The German source text comes from the 1580 Dresden Book of Concord. Square brackets indicate my own notes and additions.

The Baptism of Christ, by Andrea Sacchi

Concerning Baptism (Part One)

Small Catechism: The Ending of the Lord's Prayer

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 18:34:35 GMT

Here are my translations of the Small Catechism’s explanation of the Ending of the Lord’s Prayer from the original text of the Book of Concord (1580/1584). For those who wish to compare my translations, the text of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions may be found here. My translation of the previous petition may be found here:

The reader will note that t…

Small Catechism: Seventh Petition of the Lord's Prayer

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 17:14:55 GMT

Here are my translations of the Small Catechism’s explanation of Seventh Petition of the Lord’s Prayer from the original text of the Book of Concord (1580/1584). For those who wish to compare my translations, the text of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions may be found here.

Illustration for the Seventh Petition of the Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 15:21–28), a…

Small Catechism: Confession and the Office of the Keys

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Sat, 11 Apr 2026 15:10:54 GMT

A Church Interior with Women at the Confessional, by Ludwig Johann Passini

In preparation for Quasimodogeniti, which deals with the institution of the Preaching Office, I thought I would track down and translate the original texts of the section in the Small Catechism on Confession and the Office of the Keys.

The text for the section on Confession comes s…

Small Catechism: Sixth Petition of the Lord's Prayer

Rev. Alexander Blanken — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 19:49:23 GMT

Here are my translations of the Small Catechism’s explanation of Sixth Petition of the Lord’s Prayer from the original text of the Book of Concord (1580/1584). Of particular interest to me is the Latin text, which has several differences. For those who wish to compare my translations, the text of Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions may be found here.

Je…