Confessing Evangelical

I've already posted this in the comments over on Bunnie's blog, having lifted it from the comments on Chris's blog, but on reflection it deserves better than being buried in people's comment sections.

This comes from a friend of Chris who provided the following response to the question, "Why use divisive labels like 'Lutheran'? Why not just call yourself a 'Christian'?" I read this when I was just becoming a Lutheran, and found it immensely helpful:

I have heard that it is wise for us to refer to ourselves as "Christians first and Lutherans second." Why would I want to use the word "LUTHER" instead of the word "CHRIST" to identify myself? There is nothing wrong with calling yourself a Christian first and a Lutheran second. However, in a world where the meaning of the word "Christian" can mean almost ANYTHING (its linguistic sphere is rather broad, isn't it?), I would rather specify that I am a person who believes what the CONFESSIONAL Lutheran Church teaches.

To say that I am a Christian only could mean that I support the Social Gospel groups who deny the atonement, the neo-anabaptists (who deny the work of the Trinity in baptism), the Reformed (who teach that Christ died only for the sins of the mysterious elect), or the Roman Catholics (who teach that a man is saved by works). But by saying that I am a Lutheran, I, by definition, believe very specific things.

In this age of doctrinal division and of many heretical sects trying to attach the name "Christian" to their followers, it is more beneficial to all involved if I be known as a Lutheran - not to the exclusion of being called a Christian, but as an explanation of what THIS Christian man believes.

This is most certainly true.