Baptism is nothing else than the Word of God in the water, commanded by His institution, or, as Paul says, a washing in the Word; as also Augustine says: Let the Word come to the element, and it becomes a Sacrament. And for this reason we do not hold with Thomas and the monastic preachers [or Dominicans] who forget the Word (God’s institution) and say that God has imparted to the water a spiritual power, which through the water washes away sin. Nor [do we agree] with Scotus and the Barefooted monks [Minorites or Franciscan monks], who teach that, by the assistance of the divine will, Baptism washes away sins, and that this ablution occurs only through the will of God, and by no means through the Word or water. Of the baptism of children we hold that children ought to be baptized. For they belong to the promised redemption made through Christ, and the Church should administer it [Baptism and the announcement of that promise] to them.

Martin Luther; Smalcald Articles III.5

I’m in one of those frustrated moods. Finals start today. Nathan comes in on Friday, but I just realized how stupid his flight schedule is. I’m listening to Belle and Sebastian (Get Me Away From Here, I’m Dying), and it’s the only thing that’s keeping me sane.

Ever felt like you’re in a boiling pot of water, and you see a beautiful green field in the distance? All you have to do is climb out of the pot. It’s not that deep. Just climb out. No, you have commitments to the boiling water.

Okay, shift gears (honestly, I really am shifting gears here, so don’t get any ideas). Did you read the letter from Gerald Tritle on why he went from Presbyterian to Roman Catholic? He had some pretty darn good reasons. Now, I admit he had some pretty sad logic and I think he’s leaving boiling water for dog doo, but nonetheless, I understand some of the reasons he’s attracted to Rome. They’re some of the same reasons I am attracted to Lutheranism…not to say that I think Lutheranism has it all together. It doesn’t. But here are a few snippets.

After much thought and prayer, I have come to the conclusion that I and my family wish to seek a broader communion of God’s covenant people in this world. For your information, we are pleased to join the communion of the Roman Church for the following brief reasons:

Broad and vast opportunities to do good toward many Christian saints and toward those outside who are in need.

I don’t agree that the Roman Church does all those things perfectly, or even well, or well, even at all. But I do understand why he desires those things. I often wonder what it would be like to again be a part of a communion that takes seriously the need to serve the community.

Tritle continues,

In my opinion, God instituted great and necessary reforms in Romanism by means of the Protestant Reformation. That great revival was not meant to perpetuate escalating divisiveness among those who name the name of Christ. Yet, that is what I am seeing and can foresee for decades to come. This confirms the fears of many 16th century members of the Roman Church’s conciliatory movement that Protestants would splinter themselves into oblivion.

*sigh* Even the best Protestants have splintered themselves into oblivion. Continuing on, Tritle says,

My protesting days are over. I am not spending my life fighting my brethren who are obsessed with arguments over words or narrowly defined dogmas. The entire Protestant movement identifies itself in terms of protest and ecclesiastical division vs. the church which is safeguarding the deposit of faith presented in the Scriptures. Yes, the Roman Catholic Church is reforming still, even by admission of Pope John Paul II. I’m willing to work toward that end as a member of the Church vs. trying to reform the church from the outside. How would we ever know when our protesting is done? When every Roman Catholic becomes a member of the Presbyterian Church, the Baptist Church, the Pentecostal Church? Let’s be rational.

I think he has some flawed logic there when he says, “I’m willing to work toward that end as a member of the Church vs. trying to reform the church from the outside.” However, it does seem pretty silly for us to continue to go by the name of Protestant…unless that’s really how we want to define ourselves. Division. Protest. *groan*

Another thing that I noticed as I was reading through all the passages I’d found (in my below post) was that the thing or person that saved was referred to as many different things. We’re saved by grace (Eph. 2:5). We’re saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21). We’re saved by a living faith (James 2:14). We’re saved by Jesus (Matt. 1:21, 1 Tim 1:15). We’re saved by people (1 Cor. 7:16, 9:22, 1 Tim 4:16, James 5:20). We’re saved by the word (James 1:21). Do any of these passages deny that salvation comes ultimately from God? I strongly doubt it. The language that certain things/people save is completely Scriptural and not any contradiction to the fact that we’re saved by Christ’s blood.