Herberger on the Exaltation of the Cross (Sept. 14)

Crucis Jesu Exaltatio, Firma Cordis Consolatio

The Exaltation of Jesus’ Cross is the Devout Heart’s Sure Comfort.

In the name of our Savior and Redeemer Jesus Christ, who on the tree of the Holy Cross was lifted up between heaven and earth, that we in body and soul might be lifted up from earth into heaven on the Last Day,—forever Blessed and Adored with God the heavenly Father and the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Heraclius bearing the cross to Jerusalem.

DEVOUT HEARTS! This day in the Calendar is called Exaltatio Crucis, or Exaltation or Lifting Up of the Cross. This feast is older than the year 980 [?380], and has a very noteworthy origin, wherefore I will provide a brief report of it. But that it may be done with much benefit, let us join together and pray from the heart: “O LORD, be merciful unto me, and raise me up” (Ps. 41:11).

Hear the appointed Gospel from the John 12:31–32: “The Lord Jesus said, Now judgment comes upon the world, now the prince of this world shall be cast out,  And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw them all to Myself.”

(You will find these same words, along with the remainder of this chapter,  explicated in the first part of Stoppel-Postille, pp. 529ff.)

Devout hearts! In the days of Emperor Phocas, Christians had a horrible foe in the person of Chosroës, the heathen king of Persia. In the year of Christ 615 he made war on the Promised Land and took many Christians captive. The heathen bought from his soldiers and savagely murdered some 90,000 Christians. He took away with him also Zacharias, the bishop of Jerusalem, as well as the wood of Christ’s cross, which in those days Christians did not worship but rather held in great honor, as it were ancient token of His monument; for children of good upbringing commonly have a special fondness for the things of their ancestors. Now then, after Heraclius became Emperor in Phocas’ stead, he sent envoys to Persia exhorting Chosroës to peace. The arrogant king mockingly answered, “I will give you no peace until you renounce your crucified God and with me worship the sun.” Heraclius set out with great force to save Christendom, and God granted him several fortunate battles, but Chosroës was ever too powerful for him. Hear, then, by what wonder God saved His people: God struck Chosroës with a manner of blindness, such that he stirred strife between his children (whereas it is the way of wise parents to direct all their thoughts toward preserving concord among their children). Having two sons, he had it put down in his testament that the younger should inherit the crown, at which the elder was sorely vexed. Wherefore he, taking both father and brother captive, caused the latter to be hacked to pieces before his father’s eyes; howbeit his father he had kept in a pit, fed on bread and water, made a sport of the courtiers, and at last shot with arrows. Behold, no man was strong enough for the contest, wherefore the devil’s kingdom had to be divided and work its own ruin. The new king, Siroës, became a good friend of Christians, and returned all the prisoners, including the Bishop Zacharias, as well as the Holy Cross, which had been taken away by his father twelve years earlier. Heraclius came with great splendor to Constantinople, bearing the cross of Jesus in his imperial hands as he rode to the gate on his victor’s car. After two years, being of a mind that the Cross of Christ belonged not in Constantinople, he arose with a great multitude of people and brought the Cross with the priest Zacharias to Jerusalem. On the 14th of September, then, laying aside his imperial regalia, he carried the Cross of Christ on his shoulders, entering barefoot into the gate, and so put the whole matter right again. Thereupon there was great merriness, for God had bestowed peace on the land, and had restored to the Christians of Jerusalem their faithful minister, and because the Cross of Christ had come to its place. With one accord they approached the Emperor, beseeching him at once to establish a memorial of this great benefit. And so this festival was ordained in Christendom in the year of Christ 629. This is a certain and noteworthy account which our forefathers were very pleased to write down.

We see from this, firstly, that it is no new thing in our day that Christians fall into trouble and distress; we are not the first, neither shall we be the last. So do not despair: Sanguine fundata est ecclesia, etc. In blood the Holy Church was founded, etc.

Secondly, there was never any advantage gained by pious Christians being attacked. It is not good to jest with the name of Christ; it did Chosroës as much good as grass does a dog. With the Lutheran religion it goes: “Noli me tangere, Touch me not,” as Stephen Bathory, king of Poland, said. Yea, so says the psalm: Nolite tangere Christos meos, Touch not Mine anointed ones [Ps. 105:15; cf. 1 Chron. 16:22]. Dr. Luther sings, “They yet have won no (or at least, very little) gain” [“Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott,” st. 4, l. 8]. In our day, while our enemies clean out our purse, God is able to provide (for we should have henceforth learned more to put aside the Gospel at our own expense), but as soon as they deal too roughly, and take our conscience captive, and seek to drink our blood, then they will knock the floor out from under them and, like Chosroës, get themselves a bloody head.

Thirdly, behold what wondrous ways God takes when He wills to help. Here one devil was made to gobble up the other so that the Christians might have peace. When we do not know which way is out and which way in, God takes His own way and does it better than we could conceive.

Fourthly, we also see what uncanny means God employs when He wishes to punish. Chosroës was slain by his own son, even as Sennacherib was murdered by his own children [2 Kings 19:37; Is. 37:38]. Whether Siroës was just or unjust cannot be disputed here at length, but God’s just punishment must be acknowledged: what Chosroës did not merit from his children he merited from poor Christians. Therefore the ancient theologians say: Actio saepe est injustissima, et passio tamen justissima, The foregoing deed is often utterly wicked, but God’s punishment of the wicked is justly free from blame. In Wittenberg, a thief once said to the chaplain, Master Fröschel, “I say, is it just for a man to hang another?” Whereat the good Master quickly replied, “I say, is it just for you to have stolen so much?” So in this case, too, it was not patently unjust for the son to have murdered his brother and father, but the latter was unjust in murdering so many innocent Christians. God paid him back with the same coin, and gave him a full measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over into his bosom [Luke 6:38]. Seldom is one so severe that he is not met with one severer still.

Fifthly, we learn how becoming it is for God’s gracious works to be remembered with care, as David says in Psalm 103:2ff. These Christians were all of one accord that God’s great benefits should not be forgotten. It was one year ago this day that a storm struck our great city church and ground certain of its rafters into so much sawdust and toothpicks, and yet it was not damaged by the fire. For this and other benefits were are duly grateful. Alas, how the other matters of the church have cracked since that time! It has often seemed as if Chosroës were about to take away Christ’s cross from us. God be praised, who has sustained us, and may he make His old faithfulness new unto us every moment.

Now because the Emperor Heraclius not only lifted up the Cross of Christ in his imperial hands but also in his heart (for had he not highly esteemed in his heart the Cross and death of Christ, he would no doubt have been content with this outward exaltation of the Cross; the work of his hands is a clear window to his heart), therefore our dear forefathers allowed these words to stand in the place of the Gospel. For the Lord Jesus said plainly that He would be lifted up from the earth on His cross. But because they are beautiful words, it would be an eternal shame if they were not familiar to us. For this reason let me direct my words and your thoughts to two points:

1. For what reason the Lord Jesus had to be lifted up and exalted on the cross, and how the exaltation of His cross helps us.
2. How all godly hearts lift up and exalt the Cross of Christ, and how it will help them…

(V. Herberger, Evangelische Hertz-Postille… [Leipzig, 1721] vol. 2, pp. 323–325; translation copyright © 2012 Matthew Carver.)

Friedrich Balduin, Commentary on the Pauline Epistles (1655)

Friedrich Balduin's Commentary on the Pauline Epistles (first published in 1655) is a major 17th-century Lutheran commentary on St. Paul's epistles. This volume covers Romans through Galatians. For each chapter of Paul’s epistles, Balduin gives the following sections:

* Summary and general outline.
* The text in Greek and Latin.
* Analysis and explanation.
* Paraphrase.
* Questions that arise from the text, with their answers. (These seem to address apparent contradictions.)
* Theological aphorisms.

Here are the questions from 2 Cor. 3:

Herberger on Arbogast, Praxedes, and Mary Magdalene

Feasts on July 21.

ARBOGAST, Bishop of Strasbourg, in his childish humility, requested in his will that, since Christ had lain not far from Golgotha, his body should be buried under the gallows. This is like the actions of Celestine V., the Roman pope, who insisted on riding on a donkey in keeping with Christ's example; or else like Wulfstan, who only wore a robe of lambskin, declaring, "In the Church we always sing Agnus Dei, 'Lamb of God'." Richard, duke of Normandy, wished simply to be buried before the Church door, that he might be trampled upon by all men and drenched by the dripping from the roof.

PRAXEDES, a God-fearing Roman virgin, daughter of St. Pudens, joined her sister Pudentiana in distributing all their wealth to the poor. When the persecution of Christians increased, she besought God to deliver her from misery by a blessed death, and was taken to everlasting blessedness.

The Feast of St. Mary Magdalene (July 22).
Poenitentium lacrymae; Dei et angelorum deliciae resipiscentium lacrymae reputantur pro baptismate.
The tears of penitent hearts are surely able to still the wrath of God.

In the name of Jesus Christ, the Consolation and Joy of all repentant hearts, who not only received mournful Mary Magdalene to grace, but will also have mercy on us, should we but seek it in due humility; who for which humility is most blessed and adored together with the heavenly Father and the Holy Spirit, one God in eternity. Amen.

Devout hearts: we turn our attention to the comforting Gospel of penitent Mary Magdalene. Now therefore, in order that we may with all our heart oppose the sin which afflicted Mary Magdalene, and, where we have erred, yet not despair, but repent with her and, having received the forgiveness of sins, endeavor the more fervently and deeply to love the Lord Jesus, let us pray sincerely: Save me, O God, in Thy name; O God, give ear unto my prayer, hearken to the utterance of my mouth (Ps. 54:3-4).

Attend to the comforting Gospel, which Luke describes in the 7th chapter, verses 36–50. "One of the Pharisees invited the Lord Jesus… Go in peace."

Devout hearts: the ancient doctors of the Church are mostly of the opinion that Mary Magdalene was the same sinful woman of whom Luke writes in this passage. Scholars may read what Dr. Major relates in Farragine annexa vitis Patrum. Gerard of Nazareth, Bishop of Laodicea, wrote a whole book, Contra Salam Presbyterum, in which he attempts to show that this Mary Magdalene was Mary, the sister of Lazarus. We will not turn our hair gray over this dispute, but rather go straight to what was just read, which is a choice, delectable, and comforting text for all poor, afflicted sinners. For in it is displayed for God's children the highest art whereby they may be united with God and be absolved of their sins. Qui peccare desinit, iram Dei facit mortalem, says Lactantius. He that ceases to sin makes the wrath of God to have an end. Per miserere mei tollitur ira Dei, said our forefathers: Through my repentance, God's wrath is allayed. Isaiah gives this clearly in chapter 1, verses 16–18: "Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean, put away your wickedness from My sight, cease from evil; learn to do good. Though your sin be as red as blood, yet it shall become as white as snow; and though it be as the color of a rose, yet it shall become as wool."

In this text we have clear proof that God was true when He said (Ezek. 33:11–12), "As truly as I live, I have no pleasure in the death of the sinner, but that he turn and live" Here we have a manifest example of the words of St. Paul in 1 Timothy 1:15): "This is most certainly true, and a precious, worthy saying, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners."

This account is also necessary for us pastors to know, that we may not deny any truly repentant heart Absolution, nor succeed in making the grace of God too cheap, as the devil reproached St. Martin. (Read Gloria Lutheri, or Luther's Crown of Glory, which may be found under the title Martin in the appendix to my Epistolary Heart-Postils, p. 233.) Why would we ministers delay and indulge ourselves when our Lord Himself, who obtained the Absolution with His blood, was so kind and gracious?

Yet no one is to abuse this blessed consolation. Non est exemplum imitationis, sed consolationis; It is not an example that we should follow but one from which we should derive comfort. One should learn from Mary Magdalene not to sin but to part from sin by true repentance. Whoever impudently sins against God's grace should look to it, that he is not repaid with eternal disgrace. Today, if ye hear God's voice, harden not your hearts (Ps. 95:8). Multum diligere Jesum, to love the Lord Jesus much, will be our last lesson today.

Let us train our thoughts upon the kernel of the account and examine three points:

1. What kind of sin Mary was in.
2. How she rightly repented the sins that she had done.
3. How her repentance was heartily pleasing to the Lord Jesus.

The Lord Jesus herewith fruitfully stir our hearts by His Spirit. Amen…

[For further excerpts from this sermon, see Treasury of Daily Prayer (St. Louis, 2008), pp. 548–549]


Translation © 2012 Matthew Carver, from Valerius Herberger, Herzpostille II, pp. 242–244.

Johann Gerhard on John the Baptist

In honor of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, here's a selection from the latest volume of Johann Gerhard's classic work of theology, Theological Commonplaces: On the Ministry, Part One (St. Louis: Concordia, 2011). Gerhard has an interesting section about how the Jews at the time of Jesus believed in the transmigration of souls. This explains a number of NT passages, and it is plausible that the Jews came to this wrong understanding by misunderstanding verses like Mal. 4:5.

§ 20. In this place the question arises: (I) In what sense and respect is John the Baptist called “more than a prophet” (Matt. 11:9; Luke 7:26)? We respond. The reason is given in the same places: because “he went before the face of the Lord, preparing the way before Him” [Matt. 11:10; Luke 7:27]. That is, the prophets of the Old Testament prophesied about the Messiah, who would finally come after many centuries. For instance, Balaam says, “I shall see Him, but not now; I shall behold Him, but not near” (Num. 24:17). Malachi, the last prophet of the Old Testament, prophesied 466 years before Christ was born. But John pointed his finger at Christ, who was present; he began the ministry of the New Testament; by divine authority he instituted the new sacrament of Baptism. This did not happen to any prophet of the Old Testament. Irenaeus, bk. 3, ch. 11, p. 185: “All the other prophets announced the coming of the Father’s Light. But they deeply wished to be worthy to see Him whom they were preaching. John, however, prophesied similarly to others but saw His coming, showed Him, and persuaded many to believe in Him, such that he himself held the position of both prophet and apostle.”

(II) [The question arises:] In what sense does this same [John the] Baptist deny that he is a prophet (John 1:21), even though he was considered as and honored with the title “prophet,” not only by his father Zechariah (Luke 1:76) but also by all the people of Israel (Matt. 14:5; Mark 11:32)? We respond. Some people take the question of the messengers from Jerusalem as referring to the outstanding prophet promised in Deut. 18:18. However, because they had already asked John if he was the Christ, the question of whether he was that great prophet would have been repeated uselessly. You see, it could be said only about the Messiah that He was that outstanding prophet who had been promised through Moses, unless we wanted to say that those messengers and the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem had completely erred from the true meaning of this prophecy, something that anyone who notices their stupidity and blindness would easily believe. Some respond by saying that John denied that he was a prophet because Christ said he was greater and more excellent than the prophets. Some claim that when John denies that he is a prophet, he was regarding the fact that he is not one of prophets of the Old Testament, about whom it was said in Matt. 11:13: “For all the prophets prophesied until John.” Some claim that the messengers asked and John replied about Elisha, who himself had ordered Naaman to be dipped in the waters. Some think that John denied that he was a prophet because of his humility, even though he truly was a prophet. Some people suspect that John refused to accept the honor of prophet because he was not undertaking a duty of the political office, which the prophets in the Old Testament used.

But it is more simple to respond that John adjusted his response to the question of the messengers. They were asking him if he was a prophet, that is, if he was one of those ancient prophets, long dead already, who had been recalled to life through a Pythagorean transmigration of souls. You see, Elias Levita testifies in Thisbi that the Jewish leaders at that time had embraced the idea of the transmigration of souls, something we also conclude from the words of Herod (Matt. 14:1; Mark 6:14), where he makes this judgment about Christ: “John the Baptist has risen from the dead. That is why these powers are at work in Him.” However, the sense of the question is revealed especially from what comes before it. They are asking whether he is a prophet in the same sense as they ask whether he is Elijah. But they are asking if he is Elijah in this sense: Is he that Elijah, the Tishbite, who was carried into heaven by a fiery chariot and whose return in his own person they were awaiting, according to the misunderstood prophecy in Mal. 4:5? Therefore they are also asking him if he is a prophet in this sense: Is he one of the ancient prophets recalled to life by a divine miracle? This we conclude very clearly from the words of Luke 9:7–8: “Now Herod the tetrarch heard all that Christ was doing, and he was perplexed because it was said by some that John had been raised from the dead, by some that Elijah had appeared, and by the others that one of the ancient prophets had risen.” Therefore John had first denied that he was Elijah in that sense in which the messengers had asked if he was Elijah in his own person, even though the angel (Luke 1:17) and Christ Himself (Matt. 11:14) call him “Elijah” in a different sense: because he went ahead of the Messiah in the spirit and power of Elijah. In the same way, he denies that he is a prophet in that sense in which the messengers had asked him if he was a prophet, that is, one of the ancient prophets brought back to life, even though in a different sense he truly was a prophet: a herald of repentance and righteousness, the forerunner of the Messiah, a minister of the New Testament, etc.

Valerius Herberger on St. Vitus, Martyr (June 15)

Devout hearts! Just as our Savior Jesus was already a wondrous mirror of unprecedented wisdom at twelve years of age (Luke 2:42), so the godly boy Vitus was a wondrous mirror of Christian constancy at twelve years of age. Therefore it is well worth the labor for our dear young men and women to be told of him so that they may devote their tender hearts to the Lord Jesus while they are still in their early years, in keeping with that saying of Solomon in Ecclesiastes 12:1 which Discipulus treats on the feast of St. Vitus: “Remember your Maker in your youth, before the evil days come, and before the years approach when you will say, They please me not.” Those young persons are worthy of praise who have the mind, manner, and character of pious, old, wayworn men. “For surely age is not that which lives long or has many years. Wisdom among men is the true gray hair, and an unspotted life true old age,” as it says in Wisdom 4:8–9.

St. Christina too, when she was only twelve years old, gave glory to Christ with her death. Flocellus, in the days of Caesar Anthony, was only ten years old. Mammes of Caesarea was only seven. Agrippitus, in the days of Alexander of Mammea, was fifteen, as also was Agapetus (in Marullus, bk. 5, ch. 5). In Nicephorus, a little boy climbs up to his mother at the stake and yields himself to burning. Another mother of Edessa took her boy with her to church that he might be a little martyr at her side. (See the appendix to the Vitae Patrum Majores.)

The faithful schoolmaster Modestus carefully instructed Vitus in the catechism, which angered his pagan father. Therefore he struck the dear child. At last the matter came before Diocletian, who had Vitus, his tutor, and his mother [nurse] Crescentia put in jail, and afterwards boiled into bubbling pitch and molten lead, and (since God performed miracles as He did with John), thrown before wild beasts. At last, however, he was mercilessly matyred on the gallows. But when the innocent boy prayed with a loud voice: Domine, libera me! “O Lord, deliver me!” a great storm arose and the earth shook, so that Diocletian was compelled to leave the martyrs and escape. Meanwhile, the child was released by an angel and, being taken from this life by a blessed death, was transported to a better one.

What a veritable Vitus! Jesus meae vitae ipsius scopus, “Jesus has been the aim of my life,” as Emperor Jovinian's motto runs. Vitus was a friend of the Lord Jesus, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and died to His glory, refusing to be stained by idolatry. Vitavit vitia idolatrica, et spe vitae aeternae superavit omnes dolores in hac vita. He shunned idolatry, and by hope of eternal life he endured all the sorrows of this life in Christian patience. Neither did the span of his life depend on the will of his enemies, but it rested in the hands of the Lord Jesus. For him, too, Christ was his Life, as St. Paul says in Philippians 1:21.

In former times the Gospel for this day was Matthew 10:16[–22]: “Behold, I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves,” etc. But since I treated this in Funeral-Bands, part 2, let us on this occasion look at the meaning of the name Vitus and examine the noble saying of the Lord Jesus, Ego vivo, et vos vivetis, “I live, and ye too shall live” [John 14:19]. But that it may be done prosperously, pray with me: God be gracious unto me, deliver me feet from slipping, that I may walk before Thee in the light of the living. Amen.

(Translated from Valerius Herberger, Hertz-Postilla… [ed. Leipzig, 1721], vol. 2, p. 190. Text: © 2012 Matthew Carver.)

Baptism and Emergency Situations (Johann Gerhard)

Lutherans now and in the age of Lutheran Orthodoxy held that any Christian may perform a Baptism in a case of emergency, whether he is a pastor or not. But does this mean that there is no need for the office of the ministry? And how should the institution of Baptism in Matt. 28:16-20 be understood? Johann Gerhard comments on this issue in Theological Commonplaces: On the Ministry, Part One (St. Louis: Concordia, 2011), § 74, pp. 97-98.

Ordinarily the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments according to divine institution belong to the ministers of the church, who have been legitimately called to that office, as we have shown [§§ 51–63]. Against this divinely established order one cannot and should not set forth extraordinary examples of extreme necessity, which are indeed exempted from the common law but which do not at all overturn the general rule. Thus in the case of extreme necessity when either a man must die without Baptism or a private person must confer Baptism, it is better for a private person to administer Baptism than that the man die without being baptized. Nonetheless the administration of Baptism ordinarily belongs to the ministers of the church, as is gathered from Matt. 28:19 and Mark 16:15, where the duty both of preaching and of baptizing is committed to the apostles.

The Holy Spirit, Author of the Holy Ministry (Johann Gerhard)

From Johann Gerhard, Theological Commonplaces: On the Ministry, Part One (St. Louis: Concordia, 2011), § 50, p. 70.

In time past the Holy Spirit spoke through prophets, who were divinely stirred up and sent as teachers to the church. 2 Sam. 23:2: “The Spirit of the Lord has spoken through me.” Acts 28:25: “The Holy Spirit spoke well to our fathers through the prophet Isaiah.” 1 Pet. 1:11: “The Spirit of Christ in the prophets predicted the sufferings.” 2 Pet. 1:21: “No prophecy ever was given by human will, but holy men of God spoke, φερόμενοι” (“moved and driven”) “by the Holy Spirit.” It is the Holy Spirit who anointed Christ according to the flesh “above His fellows” and “sent Him to preach” (Ps. 45:7; Isa. 42:1; 61:1; Luke 4:18). It is the Holy Spirit who was visibly poured out upon the apostles so that, “clothed with power from on high,” they would preach the Gospel to all nations (Acts 2:1[–4]; Luke 24:49). It is the Holy Spirit who, as the apostles were serving the Lord and fasting, orders them to “set apart Barnabas and Saul for the work to which He called them” (Acts 13:2). For this reason they are said to have been “sent by the Holy Spirit” (v. 4); and this is also affirmed regarding the bishops of the church at Ephesus. Acts 20:28: “The Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops to rule the church of God, which He obtained by His own blood.” It is also He who equips ministers of the Word with the gifts necessary to carry out their ministry correctly and salutarily. 1 Cor. 12:4–9: “Now there are diversities of gifts but the same Spirit; there are diversities of servings but the same Lord; and there are diversities of workings, but it is the same God who works all in all. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for usefulness. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith in the same Spirit, to another the gift of healings in the one Spirit,” etc. Verse 11: “All these are worked by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one as He wills.” From this, the ministry of the Gospel is also called “the ministry of the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:6), not only because the Holy Spirit is given through the word of the Gospel (Gal. 3:2) but also because the Holy Spirit is the Author and Preserver of the ministry and equips ministers with the necessary gifts. Thus when Christ wished to commit the ministry to His apostles, He first gave them the Holy Spirit by means of breathing on them (John 20:22). The result is that all that ministers of the church do correctly and salutarily in their office is correctly attributed to the Holy Spirit, who acts effectually in them and through them. Matt. 10:20: “For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.”