Northwoods Seelsorger

Is the Rhetoric on This Site "McCarthy-like"?

2012-01-27T07:44:00.000-08:00

In response to a post I made back in August of last year, one reviewer noted that "Clearly, the rhetoric on this site is Macarthy like." The comment was in response to material I have written regarding Dr. Matthew Becker and what he teaches. Since most readers of this site may not see Cheryl's comment, I wanted to bring attention to it so others could read and respond themselves. The post under review is here. After reviewing it and others, let me know if you think that the writing here reflects McCarthy and unnecessarily accuses someone short of the facts and draws unfair conclusions. I'm curious as to what others might think.

Good Sermon on the Proper Role of Sex

2012-01-18T07:52:00.000-08:00

I will admit that I did not preach on the difficult Corinthian text this past Sunday. Not that it didn't need to be preached. In fact, given the culture in which we now live it needed to be preached more than ever. I hope that, given its straightforward epistolary nature, the reading of it still communicated sufficiently to those who needed most to hear.

I was quite pleased, though, with one sermon on this text. It was preached by Archbishop Dolan of New York. Although delivered by a Roman Catholic cleric, I venture to suggest any Lutheran could nod approvingly to its message. At least those conservative enough to appreciate the exclusive role of sex within a life-long, monogamous, heterosexual union. Archbishop Dolan is to be commended for framing the subject in the context of divine love, thus allowing the gospel to predominate.

If you would like to hear the sermon, go to this page of his archived homilies. Click on January 15.

An Agnostic Writes Religious Songs

2012-01-14T05:27:00.000-08:00

Many of you probably remember Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel's 1970 Grammy-winning song “Bridge Over Troubled Water." Radio stations still play it. Apparently the song was influenced by gospel music, and some have felt inspired by the lyrics (although the key line about the bridge was actually inspired by a Claude Jeter song from 1958). Nevertheless, one of the authors, Paul Simon, now age 70, remains an agnostic. One of his recent albums, "So Beautiful or So What" contains many spiritual images including God, angels, creation, pilgrimage, prayer and the afterlife. One Irish blogger suggested it could be the best Christian album of 2011. Who would have thought an agnostic could do that?

Raised in the Jewish faith through his bar mitzvah Simon admits he had no interest in religion at the time. However, he claims that there has always been a spiritual dimension to his music, and it was especially evident in this latest collection of songs. According to a Religious News Service article "Simon says the religious themes were not intentional—he does not describe himself as religious. But in an interview with the PBS program “Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly,” he said the spiritual realm fascinates him.“I think it’s a part of my thoughts on a fairly regular basis,” he said. “I think of it more as spiritual feeling. It’s something that I recognize in myself and that I enjoy, and I don’t quite understand it.”

For those who recognize the power of natural revelation as doorway toward potential faith, Simon's story may offer encouragement. The article notes "Simon said the beauty of life and of the earth often leads him to thoughts about God.'How was all of this created? If the answer to that question is God created everything, there was a creator, than I say, Great! What a great job,' he said. But he said he won’t be troubled if it turns out there is no God. 'Oh fine, so there’s another answer. I don’t know the answer,' he said. Either way, he added, I’m just a speck of dust here for a nanosecond, and I’m very grateful.'”

Simon has not yet arrived at faith, however, and we pray that one day he will. God has granted to him sufficient exposure to the Word, it seems, but he is still resistive. At age 70 time is no loner on his side. In a day when entertainers become lost in the morass of self-indulgence, Simon's journey is taking him in another direction. Hopefully that journey will end at Christ.

To read more go to "The long spiritual journey of Paul Simon" on the RNS site.

Did the Synod Actually Once Support the Historical-Critical Method?

2012-01-13T16:04:00.000-08:00

According to a post on another blog, a document from 1967 shows that the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod actually once commended the historical-critical method. The document, produced by the Synod's Commission on Theology and Church Relations, is entitled "A Lutheran Stance Toward Contemporary Biblical Studies." It can be found on the Synod's website here. Having read the document I am not convinced that it does support the historical-critical method, even if it acknowledges that certain aspects of it may provide helpful insights for the interpretive process. As one who studied for the ministry in the mid to late 80's and was instructed thoroughly in the historical-grammatical method, it was news to me that an official document of the Synod had been in existence then for 20 years that supported a methodology at variance with the way I was taught at a synodical school. To claim that it supports the historical-critical method undermines the continuity of the Synod's official convictions and proclamations on biblical studies over the last several decades. It also potentially legitimizes teaching against Synodical stances on such issues as women's ordination and evolution.

One of the arguments from the left is that the Synod was highjacked by hard-leaning conservatives who took the Synod in a direction different than it intended to go (see the recent article on the Daystar site by Domsch.) The usual culprits, of course, are the Preus brothers, J.A.O. and Robert who came from the ELS. It is true that many scholars from St. Louis were leading the church down a path different than where the Preus brothers were. The question, however, is whether those in St. Louis in the 60's and 70's reflected the true spirit of Missouri, or those who worked to correct what they perceived as a liberal course-change. Looking back to the roots of our church body which find their genesis in men who broke with the rationalism rampant in the church of their own time, I see the events preceding the Walk Out of 1974 as of a different spirit than what we find in our founding fathers.

Read the CTCR document for yourself and see if you believe it endorses the historical-critical method. The entire text is only eleven pages long and will only take a short time to read.

Daystar Journal Publishes Spring Articles

2012-01-13T15:28:00.000-08:00

For those so interested, the liberal online journal Daystar has published two articles for its Spring issue. The first is a reworked article by Dr. Matthew Becker entitled "An Argument for Women Pastors and Theologians." The second is a response by Mr. David Domsch to concerns raised about his Fall article on fear in the LCMS. The first article contains no surprises, but rather articulates again a liberal defense for women's ordination. I find it interesting that Dr. Becker does not engage the work by established scholars in the LCMS and others who have written several substantial studies that argue against women's ordination, especially those printed in the CPH book Women Pastors: The Ordination of Women in Biblical Lutheran Perspective, now in, I believe, its third revision and printing.

The second article gives some insight into the reasoning of those who are liberal yet remain within the LCMS. Mr. Domsch, a layman, willingly admits that as a layman he is not a member of Synod and if the church to which he belonged left the Synod, so would he. Yet he also paints a picture of the Synod as a place of broad belief and varied convictions (which no doubt reflects to some degree where many of our churches and clergy are truly at today), and a history marred by what he views as a political approach to theology. Majority votes determine truth it appears. It is true that majority votes do not determine truth and we probably rely on this too heavily when defending it. Nevertheless, many of us hold to certain teachings of our church body not because they passed a vote at a convention, but because they reflect sound, scriptural truth. We are not as concerned about a given convention as we are about the long, ongoing continuity of our confession. Novelty often spells trouble in doctrine, and certain teachings, such as women's ordination, are historical novelties, as my previous post in December addresses.

The Baptism of Our Lord

2012-01-08T04:39:00.000-08:00

According to Mark they came to the Jordan as sinners looking for forgiveness. A stream of hurting, broken humanity journeyed from all over Judea and Jerusalem to find a new beginning in the water. Then one day another came. He had no sin. He had no need of forgiveness. And yet he came to the water. Here in the Jordan he willingly established his solidarity with sinful man. Made to be sin who knew no sin. One man set his face toward death that he might die in their place. His life for theirs. Today the ministry begins, the reverse journey back to death that there might be life. Today the heavens open knowing they will close in darkness for a time on that hill called Skull. They will open looking to the day the curtain finally tears asunder and the sacred space revealed, the place where man met God for atonement, atonement through blood sprinkled upon a seat called Mercy. It will open showing where Jesus will ascend to the right hand of the Father, the place he has prepared for us, the home to which he wishes to take us. Today the Spirit descends as a dove, the Spirit who hovered over the primeval waters bringing life out of empty darkness. The dove that was released from the ark to find dry ground has returned, for the flood has ended. We were buried with him through death, buried in those waters that sin's power might die. We have arisen to walk in newness of life. The Spirit has come to bring the life of Christ to our death-filled lives. Today the Father speaks. He declares his love for his Son, proclaims he is pleased. We who stand in Christ by faith hear the voice too. We are among the beloved of God. Because of him the Father looks with pleasure upon us. Just as the angels sang on Christmas day, peace to men with whom he is pleased. Our life is hid with God in Christ. Our sinful humanity clothed in his righteousness. Today we step again into the river of life. We return to the font to remember where we were reborn, remade, regenerated, renewed, where the Spirit descended, where the Father spoke, where we were buried and raised, where it all began....

How to Disagree Well

2012-01-06T18:23:00.000-08:00

Disagreeing comes naturally to everyone. We all have cherished opinions, views we often hold to be on the level of indisputable truth. Unfortunately when two contrasting opinions meet contention frequently results. Some avoid conflict altogether by simply keeping their opinions to themselves. Others strive to resolve the apparent contention by giving in and conceding their point, another means of avoiding conflict. Still others argue to the death in a win at any cost, take no prisoners approach. One would hope that there might still be another option that does not need to fall to either extreme.

On the Crossings website a view was offered on "How to Disagree Well" by the Rev. Dr. S. John Roth. His advice on how to disagree well is summarized in the following three points:

1) Fairness. I am disagreeing well when I can state the position of the person I am disputing with accurately enough that that other person recognizes that position as genuinely his/her position.

2) Intellectual integrity. I am disagreeing well when I can state the strongest, most compelling argument against my position. In other words, I am disagreeing well when I can recognize and acknowledge where my own position is most vulnerable and where a contrasting position makes valid points.

3) Honest humility. I am disagreeing well when, after thinking through my position and expressing it with true conviction, I acknowledge that as a fallen, flawed human being I myself may be wrong.

There is much here to commend. Too often we become so caught up in our own opinions and views we forget that it is still necessary to be polite, respectful and fair no matter how passionate we might be about the topic. As a technique of debating it is always good to be aware of the vulnerable areas of your own argument. We can have a blind spot to our weaknesses because our our self-assured certainty. And, as Dr. Roth notes, we must always be conscious of our human sinfulness, realizing that even with the best intentions we can end up treating people rudely, forgetting to see them as fellow children of God. How often we have all deplored the violation of Luther's principle in the 8th commandment to "put the best construction on everything," or "explain everything in the kindest way." It never serves our purpose to disparage the motives of our opponent, painting them as a villain just because they believe something with which we vehemently disagree. Sometimes people have blind spots of their own and simply can't see the flaws of their views. Patience to help the person see this may take time, but in the end it will certainly leave you with a chance of disagreeing yet not descending into the rancor of hate-filled rhetoric.

As one who has labored in the church I have seen more than my share of poor disagreements. Unfortunately with election season upon us we are afforded a daily opportunity to see this phenomena played out in bold and living color. Perhaps at the beginning of a new year it is a good time to remind ourselves that disagreeing can actually be done well, but we will have to work at it for it to be that way.

The Year Ends and Begins With the Shedding of Blood

2012-01-02T05:55:00.000-08:00

Given such a title one might rightly wonder if this post concerns more violence and bloodshed in the world. However, the reference is first and foremost to the church's calendar. While the world takes time for its annual break to party and relax before gearing up for a new year, the church realistically recalls the need for a savior to a still dying world. The day after Christmas finds us at the funeral for Stephan, stoned for his brave confession of Christ. On the 28th we then remembered the horrible slaughter of those innocent victims of Herod's jealous wrath who tragically died in Bethlehem. Then, just as we are beginning a new year we talk once more about the "shedding of blood" in the circumcision of our Lord. The year ends in blood and begins again in blood. It might feel like a dark image with which to remember a festive time, but it reminds us the true necessity of the incarnation. "Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven," the Creed intones. Christmas points to Good Friday from the very first moment. The name given Him sets the stage immediately: Jesus, "Yahweh saves," for "He will save His people from their sins." And then, at the tender age of only 8 days, He submits to the Law, beginning the process of being "obedient unto death." As the door posts in Egypt were marked with blood to spare them death from the passing angel, we mark the doors of our new year with the blood of the Lamb as well, that in this dying world we will know life and hope through Him who died for us and rose in victory, the first born of all who rise from the grave.

A blessed new year to all, a year soaked in the blood of the Savior!

Seelsorger Discovers the Advantage of the E-reader

2011-12-31T12:27:00.000-08:00

For my 51st birthday my wife blessed me with the gift of a Nook, the e-book reader created by Barnes and Noble. Many of you have probably long since discovered this technological tool, but the Seelsorger often lags behind the pack (Confession: I have yet to send a text message from my phone. Goal for 2012.) At any rate I have come to truly appreciate the benefits of this device. Not wanting to spend a lot and finding the Barnes and Noble site very workable to find books, I began to explore the many offerings available for bargain prices. What an amazing treasure trove of classics! Works by Luther and other reformers, plus an abundance of works by several church fathers, are all accessible for just under a dollar. Admittedly, the translations are not the most recent, and many of the books are public domain, some dating back many decades. Nevertheless, for a small budget you can amass a nice portable library with the flexibility of adding many other documents and books as you are able. I have only begun to explore, so I'm sure there are several undiscovered features yet to be found. Now, if I can just master texting...

Repristination Press

2011-12-26T12:57:00.000-08:00

My wife also blessed me with a couple of smaller works from Reprisination Press, Why? A Layman's Guide to the Liturgy by Burnell Eckardt and Johann Konrad Wilhelm Loehe: Portrait of a Confessional Lutheran by D. Richard Stuckwisch. I have purchased books from Repristination before and have watched as their inventory has grown over the years, eventually branching out from reprints and translations into more recent original publications. I get regular updates and sales offers, so I see the works as they become available. They have been especially helpful in providing valuable reprints and translations of Gerhardt and other authors from the Age of Orthodoxy. If you are unaware of them or have never visited their site, take a moment and peruse the many fine offers at Repristination Press.

The introduction on their main page reads:

Repristination Press was started in Fort Wayne, Indiana in June of 1993, beginning publication with several books by Wilhelm Loehe, Charles Porterfield Krauth, and other works by 19th century Lutheran theologians. Over time, Repristination Press has become a leading publisher of English translations 16th and 17th century Lutheran theology, including works by Johann Gerhard, Nicolaus Hunnius, David Chytraeus, and J.A. Quenstedt. Repristination Press has been located in Texas since 1998.

My New Reading Project for The New Year

2011-12-26T12:38:00.000-08:00

After seeing the book at conferences and bookstores and passing it up, I finally determined that it was high time to stop neglecting it. So when my dear wife asked for suggestions for Christmas I put Charles Porterfield Krauth's The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology on the list. Even as the holiday quickly approached she was able to locate a copy on Amazon.com and I am now the proud owner of this 800+ page tome. Having given her the CPH information I was surprised when I opened it up and looked for Dr. Larry Rast's preface and it was not there. Come to find out this theological gem is part of the public domain and more than one publishing company has printed it. My copy comes from Nabu Publishers, published in 2010, and is a public domain reprint. One reviewer of the CPH reprint notes that "They simply reprinted the old book, they didn't bother scanning it, OCR-bridging it and then using a cleaner typeface, which would make this much more readable." Apparently my copy was from one that was scanned and the typography seems good. Google Books also has a free ebook copy for those who wish to take this route. For myself I still prefer an actual bound book in my hands. However I am open to the e-readers out there such as Kindle. Eventually I'll break down and buy one.

By the way, do any of the readers that stop by here know where I could find a copy of Dr. Rast's preface? I would like to read it.

I know many others long ago discovered Krauth's gem. However, it's still nice to find new treasures and I look forward to benefiting from this theologian's insights.

White Christmas Not Scarce in This Part of the North

2011-12-24T10:52:00.000-08:00

According to an AP article today, "Dreams of a white Christmas are hanging by a thread in the North, where unusually mild weather has left the ground bare in many places...." Well, for those suffering with a green or brown Christmas, those of us up here in the "Northwoods" tundra section of the lower 48 will have a white Christmas. Sorry to rub it in if your place is unseasonable mild, but northern Wisconsin is once again magically blanketed with a pleasant covering of frosty white. To all who stop by to read - Merry Christmas!

Church Participates in Gun Buy-Back Program

2011-12-17T06:13:00.000-08:00

Recently a Lutheran church participated in a gun buy-back program in New York in the wake of the tragic shooting of a career police officer. It is run by the New York Police Department in an effort to get more guns off the streets. As an NRA member such programs admittedly raise questions for me, especially regarding effectiveness. I believe that guns should be used safely and legally and support any effort that will strengthen that discipline. However, it would seem that this well-meaning (but misdirected) effort is not as effective as supporters would like it be. On the site NewYorkDefenseLawyer.com the author notes: "It’s true that offering $200 for a weapon will likely draw people to bring in their firearms. But, more interestingly, how many of these people are bringing in all of their weapons and how many are simply bringing in the ones they don’t have a desire to use anymore? It is difficult to measure the actual effectiveness of these programs and there are differing opinions about their effectiveness. Law enforcement typically says that these programs do work. Any firearm they collect is a firearm not being used on the street. The likelihood that the firearms turned in would have been used in a violent crime is probably very rare."

As one who remains active in my own community with concern for others outside the walls of my church, I would encourage churches to be discerning in how they choose to offer their services to the governing authorities. It is not always a matter of engaging in symbolic gestures that look good to some, but end up simply lending our support to efforts that have no proven track records of success. As Christians we all want to see a lessening of violent crime. To that end we support our law enforcement departments with prayer that the Almighty would protect them and use them as effective instruments of defense on our behalf. A gun buy-back effort, though sponsored by a law enforcement agency, carries more political baggage than we may realize and in the end may not truly contribute to their safety or our own.

We have many laws in this country governing the use of firearms, some of them quite strict. Enforcement of these laws should be the greater priority of our authorities, not attempts to take from the citizens the ability to protect their own lives under the Second Amendment. I highly suspect that true criminals are not turning their guns in at these collections, and that very few of these collected guns, if any, would ever have been used in violent crimes. We need to go after the criminals directly, not indirectly.

Atheists' 'Navivity Scene' Counters Christian Scene with Blatant Insensitivity

2011-12-16T15:11:00.000-08:00

As reported in an earlier post, the Freedom from Religion Foundation decided to put up a 'nativity scene' at the Wisconsin capital to counter one placed by a Christian group. They put up their 'scene' on Wednesday. According to a recent AP article it depicts Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein. What the article did not report were the other figures and captions, including a child in a manger with the sign "Heathen's Greetings," and a female figurine announcing "It's a girl!" According to The Blaze: "In the atheist version of the nativity, Thomas Jefferson, Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein are the three wise men. The baby, an African girl, is intended to represent the birthplace of mankind. The beloved angels are an astronaut and the Statue of Liberty."

Because the Christians put up a display the atheists insist they needed to have their views represented as well. So, let's see if we can interpret their message as apposed to the Christian one. Given the fact that it is a deliberate spoof on the traditional nativity scene, the clear message to me is that they believe in ridiculing things sacred to people of faith. Of course, they wouldn't think of doing such a thing for those embracing other world religions such as Islam or Judaism. That would be insensitive. But Christians are a different story. They invite ridicule, right? Well, let's see if the Christian scene was insensitive to people who choose not to exercise faith in a deity. I can't see that it was. As reported before its really an historical representation. As Christians we believe that the baby in the manger is God in human flesh. But that's our interpretation. We do not insist they interpret it that way, and no sign is provided to announce that. In no way does it insult atheists - unless, of course, they choose to be insulted. Yet that should mean that any depiction of the miraculous would be a deliberate insult to them and they should stage counter demonstrations wherever they find such depictions, especially if they should be on public land.

The whole spectacle is a telling commentary on the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Insensitivity and ridicule seem to be their primary message. How sad....

Ordain Women Now Adjusts to Reactions

2011-12-14T07:03:00.000-08:00

As I reported earlier, OWN opened a Facebook page for the purpose of supposedly fostering discussion, even though the title of their group indicates the opposite. As of yesterday they felt constrained to 'turn off' regular posting to the wall because of what they termed "spaming." Experienced FB uses corrected this observation and noted that what was occurring, for the most part, was simply a spirited discussion, exactly what they were aiming for, or so it seemed. Unfortunately, for them, much of the discussion was not supportive of their goal. As of today the reported "likes," a FB attribute to indicate popularity, is now at 222, up significantly from a few days ago when it was first launched. It's hard to determine, however, where all those 'likes' originate, as some posters willingly admitted that they are LCMS refugees now living and working in the ELCA. So, one would be cautious about concluding that this is a groundswell of support for their cause.

In reaction to the closing of the wall posting a parallel group was launched just yesterday, playing off of their name and logo: ORDAIN MEN ONLY in the LCMS. Their "like" category is quickly catching up, now registering 171 as of today. So, are there more who want ordination for women than do not? I certainly wouldn't use FB as a barometer. Still, it's interesting to watch the debate.

A comment from the group's organizer notes: "Jayne, we're hoping that conversations will occur in congregations and throughout the Synod. CS." How they will stimulate such 'conversations' in most local congregations remains to be seen. Pastors, by and large, are 'gatekeepers' for mail coming into the parish, so a major push in this way will accomplish little, as those in Jesus First and Renewal in Missouri undoubted discovered in a past era. Internet media is still largely untapped by many parishoners, especially those of the older generation (some of my elderly members hadn't even heard of it!). Then we must factor in whether most of our younger women will even discover this site, let alone their main web site, and if they do whether they will be catalysts to inject a debate in their own churches. Unless they could launch a major media campaign that would have maximum exposure in the average congregation, I seriously doubt that their 'movement' will gain any meaningful traction. So, in the end, the desire to impact people at ground level will probably fall far short of its intended goal. Their best hope is that the pastors themselves will champion their cause, and from my vantage point it does not seem that there are enough sympathetic to their cause to make even a dent.

For now it therefore remains just another localized internet phenomenon.

Seasonal Attack on Nativity Scenes

2011-12-12T14:34:00.000-08:00

'Tis the season to object to outdoor nativity scenes, especially those in public places. Here in Wisconsin the Madison-based Freedom From Religion Foundation is once again working to counter the Christmas spirit. In reaction to a conservative group setting up a nativity scene at the capitol building, they are applying for a permit, the AP article reports, "for an opposing display." They claim that the nativity scene isn't appropriate for a state building. So what will their display be? One that's "slightly blasphemous" with an "irreverent tweak" on the nativity scene.

Let's think about this for a moment. First of all what is there in a typical nativity scene that should be so objectionable? The article claims the scene includes "six statuettes." That probably means there is one representing Joseph and Mary, three for the Magi, and one for the baby Jesus. Or it could be Mary, Joseph, a shepherd or two, the baby Jesus and an angel. As I remember most nativity scenes the figures are not labeled. Now most people realize who the figures represent, but the point is that it is left to the viewer's interpretation. There are no crosses or other overt religious symbols anywhere to be seen. Just the figures, and maybe a star, but that certainly can't be construed as a distinctive religious symbol. The scene makes no claims about what it represents. It is, strictly speaking, simply an historical representation and no more. Unlike icons and other traditional religious art, I don't even think that the Jesus figure is usually represented with a halo. While some of the figures are often seen kneeling in the direction of the Christ-figure, the purpose of the kneeling is again left to the viewer's interpretation.

Yet, the atheists, in the true spirit of mean-spiritedness, have decided to erect something that is "blasphemous" and "irreverent." And this from the people who pride themselves on being "freethinking." A quick look at their website reveals slogans that are intended to ridicule faith. I thought that freedom of religion meant mutual respect. How naive I must be. Well, I think their efforts speak volumes about the direction and tone of their organization. It's just sad that a strong belief in the separation of church and state has to result in an attack on religion itself.

When Churches Started to Ordain Women

2011-12-10T12:53:00.000-08:00

I found an interesting chronology on the Religious Tolerance site regarding when churches started to ordain women. This timetable begins with the early 1800's, which is interesting in itself. One of the arguments against women's ordination is its historic novelty, not its ancient roots. Given the more liberal nature of this site, I wonder why they didn't try to trace women's ordination further back? Could it be that the church did not know such a novelty in previous eras, except in cases of heretical sects? Furthermore, it is interesting to see how some of those initially ordained to the ministry in the 1800's, outside of the Quakers, either gravitated toward the Unitarians or came out of this group. The Unitarian Universalist denomination, the site notes, became "the first large denomination to have a majority of female ministers. In 1999-APR, female ministers outnumbered their male counterpart 431 to 422." Looking at the remainder of the chronology, one wonders how close an association there is between the ordination of women and the liberal decline of theology in a given denomination. No doubt there is already a study on this worthy reading....

"Ordain Women Now" (OWN) Opens Facebook Page

2011-12-09T20:48:00.000-08:00

Today it became official, according to website manager Carol Schmidt. The name is changed, as is the mission. Initially the purpose was discussion surrounding the CTCR document "The Creator's Tapestry." Such discussion did not occur, as was hoped. Now the direction has changed. As Ms. Schmidt notes:

While we have no idea how many people in the Missouri Synod want to advocate for the ordination of women, some of us believe there can be no hope for discussion without a place and voice for such advocacy. Without a voice for advocacy, all voices who desire true discussion will be silenced even if an appearance of discussion is projected.

To widen their push for "advocacy" they have also opened a Facebook page. Under the mission of the group the following is posted:

There are many theological perspectives on the role of women in the LCMS, but not all aspects have been heard or considered. Studies conducted over the last four decades by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) on the topic of women in church have created confusion and unnecessary division within and among congregations due to a lack of thorough study of the issues and of relevant Biblical texts.

For discussion to occur, all positions on an issue must be voiced or put forth. While there are many groups that ironically speak in favor of the silencing of women, there has never been a group in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod that has advocated the ordination of women. Therefore, the purpose and mission of LCMS OWN is twofold:

1) To help create a space where the voices and writings of people in favor of the ordination of women can emerge and
2) To openly call for the public discussion, within congregations and synod-wide, of the ordination of women.

Obviously those desiring women's ordination in the LCMS do not intend to go away quietly. In fact, they would like to see their agenda and debate spill over into our local congregations. Such is the direction of "advocacy." Respect for decades of responsible scholarship from our trusted theologians has been exchanged for a call to seek answers until we find the one we were looking for all along. Obviously the seminaries are not on board. Obviously officers in the highest place do not show a willingness to champion their cause. So to the streets they go. Create a space for local unrest until it rises high enough to force the hand of those above. Or so it appears from my vantage point.

While this is being couched in terms of "discussion," the title of their group and website say it all. Only one outcome is acceptable, so all "discussion" will ultimately have to arrive there. This was the agenda all along, but only now is the impatience and boldness fully evident. How does one "discuss" an issue impartially when the other side is screaming in capital letters: "ORDAIN WOMEN NOW!"?? No, discussion is not the goal. But then again it hasn't really been so from the other side either. While one can discuss theology to learn, their idea of discussion is to open up the matter for change. Unfortunately to do so only creates the very confusion about which they complain. I can only imagine if my seminary training had been nothing more than endless discussions of this sort. Until very recently, historically speaking, women were not ordained to the office of the public ministry. Two Millenia of theologians held that Paul and the church did not approve. We have accepted their seasoned wisdom. So, no, it is not a topic open for "discussion" if the purpose is to seek overthrowing centuries of hallowed practice for the sake of current sociological change.

Whether this new initiative gains traction remains to be seen. Their first attempt fell flat. So far the Facebook initiative is mere hours old. I will keep watching.

Addendum (on 12-10): After at least 20 hours of being published, the Facebook page has only 8 "likes." In FB reality this seems awfully slow and small. Apparently the ideas are not necessarily going "viral" yet....
Addendum (on 12-11): They now have 50 "likes," and a few people have begun to comment, although not all in favor of WO. Still a bit slow for Facebook....

"The Creator's Tapestry" Transitions into "Ordain Women Now"

2011-12-04T20:01:00.000-08:00

A while back a website was formed in reaction to the LCMS's Commission on Theology and Church Relation's document "The Creator's Tapestry." This document discussed the roles of women from a biblical point of view as understood in the Missouri Synod. Predictably some disagreed with this document and established a site to address it, having been largely unsuccessful in getting the powers that be to seriously change their views or revise the document. Although one could readily guess the underlying sentiment of the website and its author's, it appeared that the initial goal was simply to open the discussion about the role of women in the church. That has now changed. Although the address still lists the site as "www.thecreatorstapsetry.com," the new title proclaims: "Ordain Women Now in the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod." To their credit they are at least fully honest about their true intent.

Although it is no surprise to me, the site is now clearly linked with Dr. Matthew Becker and his blog, as well as the Daystar Journal, both of which have been reviewed by the Northwoods Seelsorger. In the past such views were kept largely hidden from public view. Now they are very much in the open. Dr. Becker has commented on multiple discussion boards/blog sites, being very forward in his conviction that women should be ordained. The reaction from conservative/confessional lay people and pastors has been resistive, and the reaction of officials in the Synod....well, it appears silent for now. He is free to proclaim contrary to Synod's positions very publicly as often as he desires without any repercussion.

By following the link above you can visit and review the site for yourself. The rhetoric remains predictable, so no new review is needed here. One point, however, can be noted. A couple of the articles ascribe "fear" to the motivation of the LCMS for not moving forward with desired change in the synod, especially in ordaining women. Unfortunately this demeaning interpretation is applied to all who oppose the changes for which they clamor, assuming we are just too afraid to do what is right. In other words, we are cowards, holding back to save face. To correct this misinterpretation, let me state as clearly as possible that many of us in the Missouri Synod oppose the ordination of women, not out of craven fear of change, but out of deep commitment to the Word. If anything we are fearful of offending our holy God and the Truth. It is too bad that they cannot respect this motivation, even if they disagree with it. I have no doubt that many of those who desire this change may be equally committed to what they view as truth. They are wrong, and I am will call it as such. But to ascribe further motivation is often risky, as we must delve into the unseen reaches of a person's mind and heart. So, please, at least give us credit for our convictions and leave fear out of it.

Advent

2011-11-27T15:32:00.000-08:00

We often think of Advent as the beginning of the church year. However, the church's calendar is more cyclical than linear. Thus, one does not so much observe a beginning and ending as an ongoing cycle moving from one theme to another. The traditional Advent Wreath may be an appropriate way to illustrate this, as we move toward Christmas by moving in a circle, a symbol of eternity.

One half of the year reflects on the life of the church, the other on the life of Christ. Advent does make us think of beginnings and endings as it points us in anticipation to the end of time and the return of Christ, as well as the birth of Jesus. Yet the best way to think of Advent is to see it in terms of the fulfillment of prophesy. How do we know that Jesus will come again in glory, as He promised? The answer is found in His first coming, the incarnation. In a sense past, present and future are collapsed and made a single whole. As we look back we find assurance to look ahead in hope. The entire story comes together and we see not only the fulfillment of God's purpose from the beginning of time, but we also enjoy the assurance of a future already fulfilled as well. Eternity has broken into time. The church may often be seen as simply repristinating, always trying to live in the past. However, this is far from the truth. The past points us to the future, thus informing how we live in the present.

We often talk about Advent in terms of the various "comings" of Christ. This Sunday's Old Testament lesson from Isaiah 64 offered a great example of this. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) was the first to talk about the threefold coming: 1.) His visible coming in the incarnation, 2.) His coming into our hearts in an invisible way, and 3.) His coming at the end of time in glory, again in a visible way. Cyril of Jerusalem from the fourth century added a fourth: His coming in the beginning - a birth from God before the ages. Lutherans often talk about a threefold coming similar to Bernard's, yet different. Instead of the invisible coming into the heart they usually speak of His coming in Word and Sacrament. Given the tendency toward becoming overly subjective in matters of the faith, this last scheme seems preferable.

The actual origins of Advent remain obscure. Its entry into the church's calendar comes much later than the other prominent festival times, arriving around the sixth century. Rome was very conservative about this season and resisted it to some degree. The length of the season has varied over time, ranging from four to six weeks. Gregory the Great fixed it at four as symbolic of the 4,000 years of waiting for the Messiah. According to Gregory the world was also created 4,000 years prior to the Messiah.

The penitential aspect of Advent came from Gaul and Spain, although it arrived in Rome only in the twelfth century. Gaul also emphasized the eschatological aspect of the season. This might be a result of the work of Irish missionaries at that time. Although we tend now to accent the hopeful anticipation of the season, historically it seems to have been more penitential in nature, a season much like Lent. Some have thus referred to it as the "Winter Lent." Many of us probably remember that the color of the Advent paraments were always purple/violet, just like Lent. Only recently has the Lutheran church seen blue, a practice borrowed from Sarum use and introduced with the Lutheran Book of Worship in 1978. It just took off from there. Although retaining its Lenten character with the omission of the Gloria and other practices, Advent is also different in that the Alleluia is not technically omitted. The Alleluia is a perpetual song of the church only to be silenced in Lent.

Traditionally the Gospel for the First Sunday in Advent was the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem. This was eliminated with the revision of the lectionary (but restored again in LSB, as this Sunday testified). Perhaps those who revised the lectionary felt that it was more properly located in the Lenten season. Yet its place in the Advent season showed how the church deals with history. Advent should properly be seen in light of the events of the Redemption as much as the Incarnation. Again, it is about the 'coming' of God among men and what that means in the work and mission of God's Son. As Emmanuel God comes to be with us for the purpose of saving us.

In our current culture Advent can be an awkward season. Christmas songs have been playing at Walmart since Halloween or even before. Yet the church is not ready for Christmas and resists arriving too soon. We also want to prepare for this celebration properly, recognizing that the incarnation is an event far removed from the mystical-magical nature of folklore and the commercial excesses of actual practice. Although it seems as if we are swimming against the current here, it is more necessary than ever. May the Lord use this time to help our people recognize why we even pause to celebrate the birth of God's Son!

The ideas of this post came in large part from notes taken at a summer course entitled "History and Practice of the Church Year" taught by the Rev. Dr. Philip Pfatteicher at Nashotah House.

DayStar Journal Publishes Fall Articles

2011-11-26T07:11:00.000-08:00

In the continued interest of keeping all informed of theological discussions on both sides of the fence within Missourian circles, please note that the Daystar Journal has published a new set of articles for the fall. I have not had a chance to fully read and review all of them, and will report my reflections as time and opportunity allow. After going to the Daystar Journal site click on "Recent Articles" for the current selection.

The introduction to the articles, however, indicates that the journal has decided to tackle topics in a "social gospel' direction this time around, a theme reminiscent of the 70's. Still, the first article by David Domsch begins the offerings by taking a direct swipe at the LCMS under the accusation that it is a synod run entirely by fear. After reading this brief selection one would be led to believe that Missouri is a dictatorial state. Domsch also takes aim at the seminaries, which he obviously believes are failing to fulfill their duty. He states: "We spend more to educate a single pastor than any other denomination in the US – with too often questionable results." Ouch! It would be interesting to have him expand on this accusation and help us understand how miserably our newer pastors are faring out there. I suspect his problems are with those who come out with a conservative bent and run contrary to the Daystar philosophy of ecumenical openness and theological liberalism.

It is a shame that the positive efforts of Missouri in the area of mercy could not at least be acknowledged. While we are feeding the hungry and assisting the devastated throughout the world, we must be chastised now for not being political activists trying to change policies in Washington. Under President Harrison's leadership over the years we have made tremendous strides in being a leader in diakonal ministry. Too bad charity would not allow this to at least be noted in passing....

Topography of Religion

2011-11-22T16:33:00.000-08:00

Thanks to the former dean of Nashotah House, I discovered this little piece by way of his own blog "To All the World..." The 'tool' is an interactive map of the U.S., that shows the percentage of faith groups represented by each state in the union. Simply pass the cursor over the state and the bar graph to the right will immediately register the percentage of various religious groups. What was interesting to me is how many "unaffiliated" there are, sometimes equaling the number of Evangelicals and Catholics in certain areas. Check it out here.

Swedish Lutheran Church Hosts 'Techno Mass'

2011-11-12T06:24:00.000-08:00

I shouldn't be surprised or shocked anymore. When it comes to worship many churches assume that the form and music of worship remain neutral, and therefore subject it to whatever manipulation will attract the next crowd. The Church of All Saints in Stockholm has simply applied that to the latest trend among the young, celebrating the upsurge of numbers while oblivious to the injury they inflicted on the spiritual life of God's people. Take a moment and read the Associated Press article here reprinted by the Washington Post and judge for yourself.

Even the writer noted early on that the so-called service resembled a "disco at a youth center" more than worship. With increasingly fewer worshipers the church felt it needed to so something to attract the younger crowd and turned to the tools of the entertainment industry. That the participants were entertained is a given. "It was an awesome feeling," said one. “It was superfun, it was really kicking..." said another. Yet did these young people have any sense of coming into the holy presence of God, humbly contrite for their sins, needful of the healing power of forgiveness in Christ? Can't say. No one apparently thought to offer that comment for the writer to copy.

As churches continue to play around with worship and mold it into something more attractive, they will reap exactly what they sow, to borrow a biblical metaphor. They will fill pews, to be sure, but they will not gain worshipers cognizant of the real miracle in their midst, namely the true presence of Christ with gifts of grace. They will only walk away with hyped up emotions always looking for more. How sad.

Thoughts on Purgatory

2011-11-01T18:30:00.000-07:00

Purgatory presented Martin Luther with one of his early theological challenges. I suspect that some Catholics today would claim that purgatory is among those practices of the past that possess little meaning for the modern believer. In Luther's day purgatory featured prominently in the believer's mind. It was also tied directly to indulgences which became a major fundraiser, especially for those trying to raise much needed capital to build St. Peters and pay off debts resulting from the purchase of titles and positions. Given this state of affairs it makes sense that such a practice was ripe for abuse.

However, past abuses aside, is purgatory a doctrine of the current Catholic Church? The answer is yes. Yet how central to Catholic teaching is purgatory? Admittedly, purgatory also does not list among the primary and central teachings or truths of the church. Alan Schreck (author of Catholic and Christian, 1984) sees part of the problem with Catholic-Protestant interaction coming either from non-Catholics who focus too heavily on these secondary truths, or from Catholics who make too much of them and thus unset the balance. Rather than accusing Catholics of being 'un-Christian' he would like to see more charity in recognizing their shared commitment to such teachings as the divinity of Christ, and other more central doctrines.

This is a reasonable request and Protestant-Catholic dialog will begin on a more positive note if common ground is first established. That said, we still must wrestle with the reality of this teaching and what it means to the overall theological picture. While doctrines may be ranked in a secondary manner, they must still be complimentary to the whole body of theological thought.

So, let me present a brief summary of the essentials of purgatory as I understand them:

Purgatory is not for the condemned, or hell-bound soul. Those in purgatory are said to have died in a "state of grace." Thus, they are technically speaking, already heaven-bound. It is not a 'second chance' for salvation for those who have already rejected God. Prior faith is assumed.
Those who are in purgatory are not yet free from imperfection and therefore must make expiation for unforgiven venial sins and mortal sins which have been forgiven. Another way this is expressed is to say that the person is still 'in bondage to sin.'
As the name implies, purgatory is a place where heaven-bound souls are 'purified' or 'purged' of sinfulness and are then able to fully enter into the presence of God in heaven. Purgatory is presumed on the basis of God's holiness. Nothing impure or unholy can enter into his presence.
Direct scriptural support for purgatory comes primarily from the Apocrypha or Deutercanonical books which are included in Catholic bibles but usually omitted from Protestant ones. (Note: Luther did include the Apocrypha in his Bible, but did not assign it the same canonical status as the other 66 books of the Old and New Testament.) The Catholic church, however, does appeal to the other canonical books as well.
The Catholic church sees purgatory as a necessity to provide a place where "temporal punishment" for already forgiven sins can be accomplished. Sin is said to possess a "double consequence." In some cases it can result in the abandonment of faith altogether and thus result in the eternal consequence of hell. On the other hand, it can have a more 'temporal' consequence of leaving the person with an unhealthy attachment to the things of this world. Some saintly people can, in this life, live in such a way as to remove that attachment and die 'purified' of the effects of sin and thereby avoid further 'punishment.' Through works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, the believer effectively "puts of the old man" and "puts on the new," as Paul notes in Ephesians 4.
The Catholic Church sees support for the teaching of purgatory in the Church Fathers. However, it seems that they appeal mainly to those of the 3rd century on.
Purgatory is related to the practice of praying for the dead. It is noted that praying for the dead would make no sense without purgatory. They point to the practice of praying for the dead which they observe in the Early Church.

Certainly others will be able to add to this list or even correct parts of it. Please feel free to point out where I have missed the point. I have consulted the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as popular works by Schreck, as mentioned above, and Fr. M.J. Stravinskas in The Catholic Answer Book (1990).

Reflecting on the point listed above, I offer my thoughts and questions as reasoned by a Luthean:

The concept of 'punishment' for sin, biblically speaking, is an aspect of God's justice, the result of which is complete condemnation of the sinner. The heart of the gospel is that God's Son took all this upon Himself on the cross making total expiation for the sinner. Forgiveness means that the guilt of this sin is removed from the sinner for the sake of Christ's prior sacrifice. Isaiah is 'purged' of the guilt of his sin by God's declaration of forgiveness.
Holiness in the presence of God comes through our putting on of Christ (Gal. 3:27) through baptism. Our life is "hid with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3). When Jesus talks about heaven as a wedding banquet he refers to those accepted in as the ones properly clothed with the wedding garment, which obviously is the garment of salvation, the very holiness of Jesus himself. If we needed to be purged of all sinfulness before entering into the presence of God, how were prior believers able to stand in God's presence even during their living years?

I will offer additional thoughts in future posts as I continue to study and read. Chemnitz is on my list (Examination of the Council of Trent). Future posts will also address prayers for the dead.

The Rehabilitation of Pelagius?

2011-10-25T14:51:00.000-07:00

My attention was recently drawn to a resolution by the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta proposing a study that would lead to "honoring the contributions of Pelagius." Resolution R11-7 reads:

Contributions of Pelagius

Whereas the historical record of Pelagius’s contribution to our theological tradition is shrouded in the political ambition of his theological antagonists who sought to discredit what they felt was a threat to the empire, and their ecclesiastical dominance, and whereas an understanding of his life and writings might bring more to bear on his good standing in our tradition, and whereas his restitution as a viable theological voice within our tradition might encourage a deeper understanding of sin, grace, free will, and the goodness of God’s creation, and whereas in as much as the history of Pelagius represents to some the struggle for theological exploration that is our birthright as Anglicans, Be it resolved, that this 105th Annual Council of the Diocese of Atlanta appoint a committee of discernment overseen by our Bishop, to consider these matters as a means to honor the contributions of Pelagius and reclaim his voice in our tradition And be it further resolved that this committee will report their conclusions at the next Annual Council.

Submitted by the Rev. Benno D. Pattison, Rector, the Church of the Epiphany

For those unaware, Pelagius' views were soundly condemned by the Council of Carthage of 418 as heretical. The followers of Pelagius, in the early part of the fifth century, taught that man is not sinful by nature and that he can be saved by an act of his own will, albeit aided by God's grace. The confessions of the Lutheran church have long recognized the error of Pelagius and have therefore condemned it as well:

"Our churches condemn the Pelagians and others who deny that the vice of origin is sin and who obscure the glory of Christ's merit and benefits by contending that man can be justified before God by his own strength and reason." - Augsburg Confession, II, 3 (Original Sin)

"Our churches condemn the Pelagians and others who teach that without the Holy Spirit, by the power of nature alone, we are able to love God above all things, and can also keep the commandments of God in so far as the substance of the acts is concerned." - Augsburg Confession, XVIII, 8 (Free Will)

"Against the Pelagians, Augustine maintains at length that grace is not given because of our merits." - Apology, IV, 29 (Justification)

"We likewise condemn the Pelagian error which asserts that man's nature is uncorrupted even after the Fall, and especially that in spiritual things its natural powers remained wholly good and pure." - Epitome, I, 13 (Original Sin).

"We also reject the errors of the crass Pelagians who taught that by his own powers, without the grace of the Holy Spirti, man can convert himself to God, believe the Gospel, whole-heartedly obey God's law, and thus merit forgiveness of sins and eternal life." - Epitome, II, 9 (Free Will)

Given these sound, historic, condemnations it never occurred to me that Pelagius would have his defenders in this day of age, at least among those in Christian denominations. Yet I would not be surprised either, especially in a time when heretics are rediscovered and promoted as possessors of hidden and suppressed truths. The blog Sojourning Spirituality even posted an article entitled "Thank You, St. Pelagius." Like the resolution printed above, they also claim that "Pelagius' wisdom has been ignored and suppressed because of his label as a 'heretic' by the Roman Church. But modern scholars are discovering that he wasn't as radical as the Roman Church made him out to be. And his theology wasn't as naive as Augustine made it out to be. So it's high time for a re-claiming of Pelagius and his theology." Still, they readily admit that "our human condition isn't defined by original sin." So is denial of Original Sin heresy or not?

Another article claims that "two ecclesiastical synods, two popes, at least thirty-two bishops and several influential Christians could not find anything wrong with Pelagius' doctrinal stances." If such is the case it doesn't remove the fact that for nearly 1,600 years the church has upheld the condemnation of his teaching.

Of course the resolution above is only proposed. One can hope that sane minds will see the confusion here and reject it.

Published

2011-10-08T07:25:00.000-07:00

I love to write (which is why I started this blog). However, going the next step and submitting something for publication always seemed like too big of a step. This past January, however, one of my professors handed back a paper I'd written the previous summer and made the comment that he thought what I had written was "publishable." That finally gave me the impetus to give it a try. What did I have to lose? I reformatted the paper, doubled checked it again, and sent it off to LOGIA: A Journal of Lutheran Theology. What a surprise when the Reformation issue arrived this past week and I saw that they had published it! The article is entitled "Romans 7: Personal Struggle, Defense of the Law, or Israel's Struggle?" It arose out of a class studying the "New Perspective on Paul." As one of the 'token' Lutherans in the class (at this Anglican seminary) I decided to defend Luther against the newer 'perspective.' My professor did not entirely agree with my final conclusion, but he was gracious enough to appreciate my argumentation.

If you have ever considered publishing something, be it a full length academic treatise, an article for a popular magazine, a poem, or anything else, I encourage you to take the step and go for it. For most of my life I left what I wrote tucked away in file folders or among the countless documents on my hard drive. My professor gave me the push late in life to make that next step, and that is one of the benefits of going back to school, regardless of your age. We need to be challenged to push ourselves, especially as we get older and more inclined to 'play it safe.' Will I ever submit something for publication again? I'm not sure, but at least I know I can, and that was an accomplishment in itself.

Imprecatory Psalms

2011-10-03T07:36:00.000-07:00

Imprecatory psalms present a challenge. The call for judgment and punishment on one's enemies, to the Christian ear, sounds harsh and excessive. This morning my devotions involved Psalm 109, a primary imprecatory psalm. Obviously the verses contain very harsh calls for hardship and suffering upon the "wicked man," possibly more than most psalms. The 'psalm prayer' at the end in my breviary tried to soften the tone as it reminded the hearer that Jesus "blessed" those who cursed him and asked the Father to forgive those who nailed him the cross. Still, the psalm does not bless the wicked man. In fact, it asks that his "sin be always before the LORD." How do we reconcile such language with our faith?

Although in no way coordinated with the cycle of readings, it so happened that one of the lessons to be read for today was from James 2. The final verse of the reading seemed to throw light on the dilemma posed above: "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; yet mercy triumphs over judgment." A careful reading of Psalm 109 will reveal that the "wicked man" of this psalm is a godless man devoid of mercy. He "loved cursing," and put it "on like a garment." He "did not remember to show mercy, but persecuted the poor and needy and sought to kill the brokenhearted." The psalmist does not come before God to seek revenge for his bruised feelings or to even the score. He simply recognizes that those who reject the mercy of God and treat others with a harsh and unfair judgment should be judged by their own standards. They do not recognize the mercy of God, so clearly they do not want it. So let them be subject to the same conditions they impose on the world. One might recall at this point Jesus' parable of the unmerciful servant in Matthew 18:23ff. When the servant was initially brought before his lord for a settlement of his accounts, he begged for mercy. Out of compassion the master forgave the servant's debt. However, when that same servant later found a fellow servant who owed him money, he showed no mercy, even though the man begged just as sincerely. And how does the Lord respond here? "'You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought me; and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?' And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt."

The wicked man of Psalm 109 seems no different than the wicked servant of Matthew 18. God shows mercy to the humble of heart who desire mercy. However, to those who harden their hearts and reject His mercy, He gives them up to their base mind and allows them to face the conditions under which they wish to subject the world. They have chosen this judgment, not God, for they chose the conditions. Of course, those who cannot accept a God who is both loving and just will still find such judgement inconsistent and unfair. They will see in Psalm 109 yet another reason to reject a God who seems almost hypocritical. Yet that would be unfair in itself and also contrary to how we respond. Justice, properly served, not only punishes the lawbreaker, but it ultimately serves to protect the innocent. To have no justice in our world would result in chaos. Thus, true love seeks to protect the innocent, even when it means punishing the wicked. But note that the punishment is equal to that which the wicked chooses for others. God merely says, if you want to live in a world of no mercy, then so be it. I would have shown you mercy, if you asked. But since you don't, I give you your request.

Patron Saint for National Coffee Day?

2011-09-29T06:52:00.000-07:00

Today is my day. Coffee has been part of my life as long as I can remember. We even grind our own beans to get the freshest taste possible. How much do I consume each day? You measure that? Come on! As it is National Coffee Day it occurred to me that it should have its own 'patron saint.' Giving it the most shallow reflection possible, I thought how about James and John, the "sons of thunder"? Works for me. Any better ideas out there? We only have today....

An Interesting Experience

2011-09-28T07:42:00.000-07:00

If you follow the ALPB's "Your Turn" discussion board, you may have seen my name in several posts over the last week or two. After following various discussions over the years I finally decided to dive in and actively participate. What prompted my involvement was the postings from Dr. Matthew Becker. Dr. Becker's writings on ALPB, his own blog, and on the Daystar Jounal have been documented and reviewed on this blog many times. Until recently I had only commented on his public writings, but had never actually engaged him in active discussion. The time seemed overdue to take that next step. The discussions on the topic "Valparaiso University and the LCMS" are now closed. Pastor Speckhard, the site monitor, realized that it had more than run its course. I agree. However, while it lasted it did prove to be a lively, at times contentious, but very revealing discussion. It often surprised me how open Dr. Becker was about his views since he freely embraces Evolution, Women's Ordination and the Higher-Critical method of biblical interpretation, to name only a few of his beliefs that are at odds with the public confession of his denomination. To his credit he is a highly intelligent and well-informed scholar. He could be dismissive, at times, of his opponents, seeing their defense of conservative and confessional viewpoints as narrow minded and ill-informed. One had to be ever vigilant to catch the tricks of debate that diverted you from the topic. For me it was a good exercise in theological reflection and defense.

Having graduated from Concordia Seminary - St. Louis in 1988, I find it amazing how liberal his views have now become. I graduated from the sister seminary in Ft. Wayne the year prior, and knowing graduates from St. Louis from this time and since, it was not my impression that a wave of liberalism was active in those years. It would seem that his studies at the University of Chicago had a lot to do with the turning of his theology, not to mention his admiration and friendship with liberal scholars outside the LCMS (such as Dr. Ed Schroeder.) As is typical of those within the ELCA, he strongly insists that he is within the mainstream of Lutheran thinking, often invoking Luther and the Confessions to show that his convictions are all well supported by the sources. He utilizes the "Gospel Reductionism" of a previous era, easily dismissing some sections of scripture he feels are in conflict with the gospel, even going to the point of proposing the "abrogation of the law," seeing the books of Moses as having little value to the theological enterprise today. As one can see from his review of Dr. Scott Murray's book, he is among those who take issue with the Third Use of the Law, although they will still embrace FC, Epitome VI and insist that the conservatives simply misinterpret the whole point.

As was made evident by more than one poster Dr. Becker's theology is clearly that of the current ELCA. Some questioned how he could feel comfortable in the LCMS considering his highly conflicting views of many theological areas. I also pondered on this prior to my involvement with the ALPB site. My reflections then still seem to hold. To be honest, I am not really sure why he stays. Part of me wonders, as I did before, if he sees himself at the vanguard of a movement to recapture the LCMS and direct it back to those old days before the Walkout. He does not, however, give an indication that this is necessarily his plan. He insists that there should be room for people such as him and for people such as me. We should all be able to coexist together. What is troubling, though, is that this is not a matter of simple differences on practice. His theology was clearly condemned in New Orleans in '74, and were he on the faculty of Concordia-St. Louis today, I cannot see a reason why they would not bring him up on charges of false doctrine as they did the faculty then. Is he then 'baiting' the LCMS to see what it will do? Is he looking to be a modern day martyr of liberalism to make the Synod look bad if and when they finally take official action? Or is he flaunting his freedom before the rest letting them know there is absolutely nothing they can do? I don't know. But it troubles me.

I am comforted by the fact that our seminaries are solid and that the theology Dr. Becker holds does not represent the mainstream of the Synod's ministerium. As I noted before on this blog, those who still hold to the old Seminex theology are aging and passing from the scene. The "Battle for the Bible" represents another era long gone. So, perhaps I should just put this one to rest and chalk it up to an interesting experience. Feel free to review the Valparaiso discussion site and let me know if I missed something. It was, at times, a bit confusing to keep up with all the issues.

Nice Post from "Pastoral Meanderings"

2011-09-28T06:52:00.000-07:00

Like Pastor Peters I am now old enough to ponder that question as well: How did we get to this point? The good pastor reflects on the changes he has observed in the Missouri Synod over the decades and wonders out loud why we need the diversity we now have. I pass it on for your review:
"How did we get to his point?" at Pastoral Meanderings.

The Lamb's Supper: A Review

2011-09-21T08:37:00.000-07:00

Earlier this year a reader recommended a book by Dr. Scott Hahn entitled The Lamb's Supper (Doubleday, 1999). In light of my upcoming research and the fact that my papers were finished, I finally secured a copy by inter-library loan and read it. Dr. Hahn's book attempts to offer a fresh approach to the Mass by returning to the last book of Holy Scripture for insights. He does admit that while seeming to be somewhat novel, his book actually borrows from the ancient fathers and thus rediscovers the past as much as provides new understandings. The first portion of the book offers a primer on the Mass, obviously anticipating readers who may be less knowledgeable about the liturgical forms. He writes as a Catholic convert and thus seems conscious of others like himself who may be looking for encouragement to change. He also writes for Catholics in need of rediscovering the old forms and learning again a meaning they may never have been taught. To these ends the book is well suited.

I approached the book looking for more extensive connections between Revelation and worship, which Hahn only briefly treats. Again, one must appreciate that this work is geared toward a broad audience and does not promise to offer deep academic insights. Nevertheless, he offered some interesting observations worth further research and study. For example, understanding that Revelation is a book filled with allusions and references to worship, he suggests that the book is divided much like the liturgy into Word and Sacrament (121). Chapters 1 to 10 concern the liturgy of the Word, while chapters 11 to the end concern the Sacrament. This is in keeping with his central thesis that "If we want to make sense of the Apocalypse, we have to learn to read it with sacramental imagination" (118). He notes that "If you go back and read Revelation end to end, you'll also notice that all of God's great historical interventions - plagues, wars, and so on - follow closely upon liturgical actions: hymns, doxologies, libations, incensing...." (120). On the page prior to this he offers a helpful chart with references to various chapters coordinated with a variety of worship allusions. Although I was aware of connections between Revelation and worship, it did not occur to me that the Eucharistic liturgy may actually provide a 'grid' upon which the myriad of apocalyptic details might be better comprehended.

For Hahn this approach provided the key that made sense of a book he had studied for years prior to converting to Catholicism. It was in attending the Mass that the pieces finally came together. As a Lutheran I could read this book sympathetically and often nod in agreement, even while maintaining a respectful disagreement with certain Catholic doctrinal points expected of such an author. His other basic theme of the Mass as "heaven on earth" was a theme heard prior from Dr. Just and resonated easily with my view of the sacramental experience. More than once I found myself thinking, 'I'm going to have to reread some of this and think more about it.' While I was intrigued by his view, it was just different enough from the approach many of us have been given for years as to create moments of struggle as I tried to adapt the somewhat new hermeneutic to this book. Still, as Dr. Hahn stressed, this is nothing new. The ancient fathers said it all before. Unfortunately we have too often distanced ourselves from the earliest centuries and treated exegesis as if it needed none of the older guides. The fathers were steeped in the sacramental mysteries and it should not surprise us that they should see it in Revelation where our modern eyes are not as well focused.

As mentioned before, I need to soak this in and process it further. Hahn has given us a way of viewing this too often confusing book of scripture with a fresh vision that avoids the misguided approaches of the evangelical community, and brought it back to its rightful home in the church's worship. Perhaps if it wasn't divorced from its place in the worshiping assembly, we might never have wandered so far into such strange fields of interpretation.

Functional Marcionism

2011-09-05T10:18:00.000-07:00

In light of an ongoing discussion over on the ALPB site, I would like to recommend a fine article on the use of the Old Testament by Dr. Daniel Gard of Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne. It is entitled "The Church's Scripture and Functional Marcionism." (CTQ, 74: 2010, pages 209-224). The concluding paragraphs are worth noting here in summary:

The core and center of the Scriptures is the person of Jesus. All that the Old Testament conveys points us to him. The Old Testament is more than a series of specific prophecies that find their fulfillment in the person of Jesus, with everything else simply "filler." All of the Old Testament, just as the New, is focused on him. He is "Israel reduced to one." The offices of Christ-Prophet, Priest and King-are understandable only in light of the Old Testament offices. Conversely, the Old Testament offices are understandable only in light of the incarnation. Everything that took place before the incarnation is focused on him as much as everything that has happened since or will happen in the future is focused on him.

The continuity of the two testaments, and the continuity of the ongoing people of God, is all about Jesus. Reading the Old Testament is reading the word of Jesus who spoke by the prophets.He connects the history of ancient Israel with modern Israel, the church. From Genesis to Revelation, there is one narrative, one story, one Scripture. Marcion erred not just in the breadth of his de-canonization of the entire Old Testament but in his de-canonization of any of it. If the church is to be faithful to her own understanding of the Scriptures as the only source and norm for faith and life, the Old Testament must be an equal partner to the New Testament. For, indeed, they are not two but one Scripture, united in their witness to Christ.

As can be seen with some scholars today, there is a tendency to reduce the canon to a "canon within a canon." Parts of the OT become subordinate to the NT and thus the unity of the Scriptures is dismantled. Dr. Gard's article is worth reading in light of this current trend.

ABT

2011-09-01T06:50:00.000-07:00

Well, another milestone was reached early this morning. At around 1:18 a.m. the last of my graduate papers was sent out to my professor. I am now A.B.T. - "All but thesis." What a relief! The papers didn't sound too interesting to my high school aged son, but I enjoyed them. They both revolved around the theme of my upcoming thesis. For my course in History and Practice of the Church Year with Dr. Pfatteicher I wrote a paper entitled "The Apocalypse in the Revised Common Lectionary: An Analysis of Its Use in the Church Year." The second paper, written for History of the English Hymnal with Dr. Herman, was "Allusions to the Apocalypse in Selected Hymns in English." I am gaining a new appreciation for the book of Revelation and its relationship to the worship of the church. One of the books recommended by a past comment on this blog, The Lamb's Supper by Scott Hahn, is one of my next projects to read. I plan to spend the next few months doing preparatory reading on Revelation with the intent of beginning thesis work after the first of the year. I'll keep you posted on the progress.

BTW, many, many thanks to my dear wife who stayed up way past midnight to proofread the last of my papers. What would I do without her?

Where the Lutheran Church Is Truly Growing

2011-08-30T12:21:00.000-07:00

Most of us realize that the era of church growth has come to an end. In fact, it never really existed. The mega churches simply recycled the disgruntled church shoppers by luring them in with promises of entertainment and feel-good services. The current number of Lutherans in this country rests at 7.4 million. That number represents a 10% drop during the years 1990 to 2010. So, all those efforts to "grow the church" did little to nothing to stem the tide of loss. Truth be known we probably sent as many to other denominations as out the back door. Now compare that figure with a place like India which has enjoyed a 1,379% growth rate in the Lutheran Church in that same 20 year period. They currently have 1.9 million members in a country known more for its Hindus and other non-Christians as for Christians in general. Ethiopia gave me another surprise. They have 5.6 million total Lutherans and have registered a growth rate of 495%. Not surprising is to discover that countries such as Germany and Sweden have lost Lutherans in the double digit percentage rage. I am not aware of all the reasons for the differences, but I can't help but wonder if liberal trends are simply a church killer. Look at the mainline churches today such as the Presbyterians and Episcopalians and the ELCA. Each of these is in decline. Africa is known for its more conservative Lutheranism. Nigeria has grown by 390% in 20 years, with a total membership of 2 million. Perhaps they cherish what we are discarding and finding that in places torn up by war and bloodshed watering down the faith simply does not bring any real comfort. I think we should be studying the church in these places. They have much to teach us.

Reflections on an Anniversary

2011-08-29T07:10:00.000-07:00

Yesterday my parish celebrated its 125th anniversary. In 1886, gathering in a log cabin structure, they made a beginning in the yet unbroken wilderness of northern Wisconsin that would later become a thriving rural parish. Times such as this give pause for reflection and an opportunity to gain perspective. Many congregations, like people, are known to go through periods of panic and concern, especially when giving wanes and pews are empty. They look to the unknown future and predict a dismal outcome. Unfortunately such forecasting is terribly shortsighted. Looking back we realize that we have lived through times far more challenging than anything recently experienced. Certainly the Great Depression should have signaled our demise when economic distress reached its critical heights. Yet still St. Peter congregation survived.

Anniversaries remind the parish that it is all about God's grace. Looking back they should be humbled to realize that they could never have accomplished what they did without God's enduring help.
Anniversaries keep the congregation connected with their past and thus inoculated against too much innovation. We are the stewards of treasures entrusted to us, not wrecking crews just waiting to dismantle the old structures.
Anniversaries remind communities that stable and faithful parishes are often the ones that have lasted the years, not the new upstarts that occur with each new trend.
Anniversaries help people recapture the spirit of their ancestors who possessed a true sense of mission. They existed to keep the gospel before isolated immigrants and scattered homesteaders. Today we too often allow our churches to be self-serving and far too introspective.
Anniversaries allow us to have a true sense of joy and celebration when darker voices wish to pull the parish down in negative thinking.

Certainly more thoughts will come to mind later, but these are a few on the day after....

The Changing Nature of Christian College Presidents?

2011-08-27T11:37:00.000-07:00

Recently news came in that Concordia University - St. Paul (my alma mater, class of '83) has a new president: the Rev. Tom Ries. Although a graduate of the seminary his passion seems to lie as much with financial management as with theology. His post-graduate education involves a MBA from the University of Minnesota, along with an almost earned Ph.D, the emphasis being finances in higher education. After a time with the LCMS Foundation as president, CSP recruited Ries as its own 9th president in its 118 year history. I have never had the privilege of serving on a search committee for a college, university or seminary, so my knowledge of the criteria used to choose a president is next to zero. However, looking back at the various presidents of the institutions where I have studied, I wonder if the criteria is changing. When I was in college the president was a former chaplain and two-star general in the U.S. Army. Other successors, as I recall, were credentialed scholars and professors in the Synod. This latest candidate seems to have been chosen for his expertise in fund-raising, as I suspect many presidents may now be selected as well. Raising money for institutions of higher education, especially in the Synod, has changed. Gone are the days when one could expect a check from headquarters, funded by the goodwill offerings of rank and file members from the Synod's churches. While they retain a connection with the mother church, the financial tethers have long since disappeared. Thus, I suspect that search committees now look for a master of fund-raising to keep the dollars flowing from the endless variety of donors.

This was probably inevitable. Still, as one views the selection of these future leaders, one wonders how much time is spent evaluating the candidate's theological insights and views, considering whether that candidate best represents the institution's goals in service to the Synod. Recently Concordia Theological Seminary - Ft. Wayne chose a new president as well. The Rev. Dr. Lawrence Rast certainly brings impeccable credentials as a theologian. Maybe things are different with seminaries as opposed to the universities. Yet should they be? We prepare our future teachers and other professional church workers at these institutions, so we have a stake in their theological maturity. Why should a president here be any less of a leader in the teaching of the faith than at a seminary. I have nothing against the Rev. Ries. Nevertheless, he does not impress me as a theologian. His service to the college has been in administrative and financial roles. Likewise was his service to the church-at-large. When talking about his church experience the main things touted was the tremendous growth his congregation experienced. Then again, his pastor-mentor was the Rev. Dr. Guido Merkens, one of the early mega-church pastors.

I have not examined the other Concordias to see what different directions may be afoot, but I do wonder. My fear, though, is that with faculty charged with the instruction of our future church leaders, we need leaders prepared to hold them to account and supportive of the Synod's overall theology. I pray that Ries can be such a man for his own time.

Evangelism and Guilt

2011-08-24T07:17:00.000-07:00

Over the years I have wrestled with evangelism. Not so much the doing of it, but the guilt of it, or better said, the guilt of not doing it. Looking back in the history of my congregation as we prepare for our 125th anniversary, I noticed huge evangelism pushes back into the 1960's, and no doubt beyond. It was "Church Growth" and "web evangelism" and things of this sort by the 80's when my ministry started. I remember going down to Ann Arbor to be trained in the Dialog Evangelism II program that had just been launched. They took D.James Kennedy's work and reworked it again from Biesenthal's prior reworking, changing the "dialog questions" to reflect the new realities they observed in the population. By the time I arrived out here in the country in 2000 Evangelism as a 'program' seemed much on the wane. At any rate, one finds it difficult to carry out traditional door-to-door methods when your neighbors are mostly a half mile separated from each other, not to mention the fact that catching people home in the evening no longer is a given. Nevertheless, St. Peter congregation has not ceased proclaiming the Gospel, and last Sunday I brought into membership a man who had spent much of his adult life outside the church. This Sunday or maybe next I might bring in a couple who went through adult instruction and found our church as people who lived in the area and felt at home here since he was a Catholic and she was Nazarene. Both are educated with graduate degrees. People of all types come to the faith and grow in the faith even when we don't go knocking on their doors every Wednesday, and despite the fact that we don't have an organized program. Amazing. Along those lines I appreciated a recent piece posted by Pr. Weedon on his blog:

What I have come to rejoice in is this: our Lord did not command, "Go, fish for men!" He rather promised, "Follow me and I will make you a fisher of men." He did not say: "Go, witness!" He promises, "Stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high and you will be my witnesses...to the ends of the earth." And He does make us so: fishers and witnesses. As we follow Him, as we seek to love Him and to love our neighbor, serving them and honoring them and opening our mouth whenever they ask us to account for the hope that is in us, the Lord actually has use of us in bringing others to faith. But He solidly keeps His hands on the verbs for conversion. Not only is it true that I cannot believe by myself; I cannot give faith to a single other person out there - no matter how clever I may be in my attempts. But I can love them, serve them, rejoice in them, and whenever they ask an account - open my mouth to declare this great joy in which we live with our sins forgiven, our death destroyed, secure in the love of a Savior who loves them too and did all this for them as well.

Have you ever been in a conversation where you had the distinct impression that the other person asked a question of you, but really wasn't listening, wasn't interested, was only waiting to talk? How frustrating that is? And yet that's how we've made evangelism come off too often. What a different critter it is when our witness to the Savior comes as a result of genuine inquiry. And with no need to pressure the person - just to share with them the love that we have come to know and rejoice in and live from - and to assure them that it is for them as much as for us. I see that as the Lord's keeping His gracious promise to us - to make us fishers, to make us witnesses. Gift, not demand. Promise, not burden. Peace, not pressure.

Close(d) Communion and the Confession of the Church

2011-08-10T07:46:00.000-07:00

Dr. Matthew Becker recently highlighted the case of Pr. Robert Stuenkel who admitted to communing with his wife in an ELCA church and now finds himself under the cloud of discipline for his actions. However, beyond Stuenkel's personal situation, Dr. Becker takes the opportunity to expand his discussion to the Synod's overall policy and practice regarding Close Communion. Having faced this issue in my own parish with all the emotion and divisiveness that it can often bring, I understand the difficulties involved in the actual application of this policy. It is not my intention of arguing the pros and cons of the Synod's close(d) communion practice or the general tenets of our fellowship practice, although such would be a useful discussion. I simply wish to ponder the implications of dispensing with our policies in these areas and what it would mean, long term, for our churches. Now I do not propose strict avoidance of all worship settings in other churches, or the WELS policy regarding prayer, as Dr. Becker implies has been the case in Missouri at times. My concern, at this point, mainly concerns fellowship at the altar. Dr. Becker argues that agreement in the essential elements of the doctrines of the Creed and Catechism proper as sufficient for fellowship at the altar. I suspect in stating this that he exempts from this confession the currently divisive teachings between some of our churches such as differences on sexual orientation and origins, that he would see as not taught explicitly in the Catechism (despite their relationship to a confession of the Decalog and the Creed).

Beyond the above another issue that comes to mind involves the reason for membership in a congregation and that congregation's membership in a given denomination. Does membership in a denomination imply nothing more than a 'brand' leaving churches no more than differing franchises that happen to offer the same product but under a different name? Or are they mere fellowships not unlike a service club, like the Optimists or Kiwanis, where one joins together for a common cause without the need for common agreement? Or is this simply a matter of minimalistic agreement where we avoid issues that we know will be divisive? I understand the struggle involved in the Stuenkel case as it has been argued energetically in my own parish. I understand that many of our rank-and-file members probably don't even understand many of the divisive issues separating our given parishes. But again, does this mean that our denominational membership is for all practical purposes meaningless? American denominationalism is a difficult reality to grapple with, especially when compared to the seemingly simpler conditions in prior historic eras. Still, we need to answer the question of what it will mean for the future. Denominations exist for fellowship and confession. If we ignore that on the local, parish level, then what does that membership ultimately mean for any of us?

Dr. David Scaer's Article on the Validity of Churchly Acts by Ordained Women

2011-08-08T21:30:00.000-07:00

Pastor H.C. Curtis, in addition to referencing C.S. Lewis, who I included in the previous post, also mentioned what he termed the "seminal" article on the subject by Dr. David Scaer. Predictably Dr. Becker scoffed at the 'seminal' idea of it all, suggesting that even his peers at St. Louis had issues with what he wrote. At any rate, for those who may not have read this essay, a pdf copy of the CTQ article, "The Validity of the Churchly Acts of Ordained Women" from 1989 can be found here. It is worth reading, despite Becker's disapproval. Dr. Scaer does refer to his writing as "an exploratory essay," recognizing that responses to the issue of women's ordination is a relatively new challenge for the church to face (perhaps much more then than now.) He notes well how the movement toward WO may also bring about adjustments in other theological areas, including our view of God Himself (as in the intrusion of inclusive language substituting for that of scripture).

Recognizing that how one views ministry determines in large part how one approaches the question of WO, Scaer writes:

With certain views of the ministry, to be sure, it would be perfectly proper to ordain women. If the ministry is viewed merely as function (i.e., activities which the church is required to carry out irrespective of the agent)," then there can be no ultimately effective argument against giving this function to any man, woman, or child. If the ministry is seen as an extension of Christian faith and sanctification and not as a unique office, then the same tolerance of any lay person is not only proper but even encouraged. One may add to this view the idea that Christians are endowed with spiritual gifts which they are encouraged to discover. Each has his or her own ministry. Thus, if one's mother, wife, sister, or daughter discovers that she has the gift of leadership, she and the whole congregation with her may with good logic conclude that she may serve as minister or at least exercise some of the functions commonly assigned to this office. The problem is not helped by the lack of clarity about the word "ministry."

To understand the approach of Dr. Becker, and undoubtedly many proponents of WO today, you must understand that their view is largely functional.

The view one has of the church, likewise, determines how one approaches WO. Scaer again writes:

Another factor in whether one finds women acceptable as public ministers is one's view of the church. If the church just happens to be any ad hoc gathering of Christians gathered for devotions, Bible study, or prayer, then women leaders or pastors might be acceptable.

Ultimately the reality of the living Christ must drive the discussion more than the approach of proof-passaging your opponent into submission. It is at the heart of the issue. Scare writes:

Should a functional view of the ministry be seen as correct in the sense that the pastor is a representative not of Christ in His church, but of the church members themselves, then there is little which can be said against the validity or legitimacy of the churchly rites administered by women. The only wall left standing in the functional view preventing the introduction of women pastors are some Bible passages which hang suspended as prohibitions behind or under or over which nothing substantive exists. The biblical and confessional principle that behind the divine word of revelation there exists an even greater divine reality which supports the divine word must prevail. This greater reality is the incarnation. This view must prevail over a fundamentalist type of Barthianism which refuses to go behind the word of revelation to the reality of the incarnation....

The argument against women pastors cannot be that God simply forbids women to preach the word and administer the sacraments because He takes some kind of sadistic joy in seeing us weak humans saddled with still another negative commandment. The prohibitions against women pastors rest in a prior, deeper understanding of the incarnation and the divine reality of God Himself. Even the quite valid argument that women may not be pastors because Christ chose only men as apostles rests on the prior more fundamental reality of the incarnation. God did not choose to become incarnate in a male, as if He had a choice between male and female, but rather because He was the Son of the Father...

Where women serve as pastors, the doctrines of God and Christ are distorted, because women cannot represent God and Christ in His incarnation. God is of such a nature that He could not have become incarnate in a woman and He could not have chosen women to represent Him as apostles and pastors.

In these last comments Scaer illustrates well the real divide in the debate with Becker, especially since he tends to view God in more 'androgynous' terms and uses gender-specific labels only as incidental and critical to the issue at hand.

In the end the issue must be seen in the full sense of what it means to be the Church, not in the isolated sense of personal rights or other such arguments. Scaer thus notes:

Resolving the difficulty by saying that the women pastors have the word and sacraments is at best a superficial and finally an inadequate judgment, because such a resolution of the problem looks at rites by their outward appearances and not as integral parts of the whole of the church and its theology. The Formula of Concord in denying the Supper to the Reformed at least alerts us to the possibility that what looks like a sacrament may indeed not be a sacrament. Preaching, just because something is being proclaimed, is not necessarily the word of God. Speaking and performing ritual acts inside of a church building do not necessarily qualify as word and sacrament. Here is a case in which what looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, flies like a duck, eats like a duck, and swims like a duck may indeed not be a duck after all. Gnostics simply were not Christians, though they called themselves Christians and engaged in what appeared to be certain New Testament rites and were Bible scholars. Ordained women pastors are not a phenomenon isolated from the remainder of a church's theology.

After rereading Scaer's article I can see how Dr. Becker foams in disgust. The two men are miles apart and so, too, the church at present. Although I have excerpted sections for your review, I still commend the article to your review in its entirety.

Luther and the Confessions Used to Argue 'Gay is O.K.'

2011-08-08T11:29:00.000-07:00

Dr. Ed Schroeder of the Crossings website certainly represents the left side of Lutheran thinking. Thus, one should not be surprised if he champions liberal topics and issues (e.g. women's ordination, ecumenism, etc.), or if he refuses to embrace items like the inerrancy or infallibility of Holy Scripture. After all, Dr. Schroeder left the LCMS many years ago in disagreement over many of those very issues. It did seem surprising, however, to see his willingness not only to support homosexuality, but to allow the argument that the Confessions and Luther could be used to defend the idea that a person is "wired to be gay." The thinking asserts that Luther would discuss the issue from the point of view of this theology of Creation (First Article) and given his opposition to forced celibacy in the priesthood would find homosexuality simply a 'left kingdom' item outside of the dictates of Scripture. I would encourage readers to review the article "Topic: Gay is OK. An Argument from the Lutheran Confessions. What!?" a reflection on Mary Zeiss Stange's article "When it comes to gays, 'What would Luther do?" Since Dr. Matthew Becker lists Crossings under his "Recommended Blogs and Links," it may well give additional insight into his own willingness to support such theological thinking. It also gives insight into the way liberal Lutherans and others defend their position on homosexuality in the ministry.

C.S. Lewis on the Distictions of Man and Woman

2011-08-08T08:44:00.000-07:00

Pastor H. R. Curtis, in responding to Dr. Becker, recommended to the latter that he read the short article by C.S. Lewis entitled "Priestesses in the Church?" Given the limitations of his venue of response he could not reproduce the source. However, below, I share with you some passages quite pertinent to the current discussion on the relevance of gender when speaking of the Office of the Holy Ministry, or as Lewis puts it in Church of England terms, the role of priest. I encourage anyone to read the article in full which can be found here, among other places, I suspect.

Suppose the reformer stops saying that a good woman may be like God and begins saying that God is like a good woman. Suppose he says that we might just as well pray to "Our Mother which art in heaven" as to "Our Father". Suppose he suggests that the Incarnation might just as well have taken a female as a male form, and the Second Person of the Trinity be as well called the Daughter as the Son. Suppose, finally, that the mystical marriage were reversed, that the Church were the Bridegroom and Christ the Bride. All this, as it seems to me, is involved in the claim that a woman can represent God as a priest does.

Now it is surely the case that if all these supposals were ever carried into effect we should be embarked on a different religion. Goddesses have, of course, been worshipped: many religions have had priestesses. But they are religions quite different in character from Christianity. Common sense, disregarding the discomfort, or even the horror, which the idea of turning all our theological language into the feminine gender arouses in most Christians, will ask "Why not? Since God is in fact not a biological being and has no sex, what can it matter whether we say He or She, Father or Mother, Son or Daughter?"

But Christians think that God Himself has taught us how to speak of Him. To say that it does not matter is to say either that all the masculine imagery is not inspired, is merely human in origin, or else that, though inspired, it is quite arbitrary and unessential. And this is surely intolerable: or, if tolerable, it is an argument not in favour of Christian priestesses but against Christianity. It is also surely based on a shallow view of imagery. Without drawing upon religion, we know from our poetical experience that image and apprehension cleave closer together than common sense is here prepared to admit; that a child who has been taught to pray to a Mother in Heaven would have a religious life radically different from that of a Christian child. And as image and apprehension are in an organic unity, so, for a Christian, are human body and human soul.

The innovators are really implying that sex is something superficial, irrelevant to the spiritual life. To say that men and women are equally eligible for a certain profession is to say that for the purposes of that profession their sex is irrelevant. We are, within that context, treating both as neuters.

As the State grows more like a hive or an ant-hill it needs an increasing number of workers who can be treated as neuters. This may be inevitable for our secular life. But in our Christian life we must return to reality. There we are not homogeneous units, but different and complementary organs of a mystical body. Lady Nunburnholme has claimed that the equality of men and women is a Christian principle. I do not remember the text in scripture nor the Fathers, nor Hooker, nor the Prayer Book which asserts it; but that is not here my point. The point is that unless "equal" means "interchangeable", equality makes nothing for the priesthood of women. And the kind of equality which implies that the equals are interchangeable (like counters or identical machines) is, among humans, a legal fiction. It may be a useful legal fiction. But in church we turn our back on fictions. One of the ends for which sex was created was to symbolize to us the hidden things of God. One of the functions of human marriage is to express the nature of the union between Christ and the Church. We have no authority to take the living and semitive figures which God has painted on the canvas of our nature and shift them about as if they were mere geometrical figures.

This is what common sense will call "mystical". Exactly. The Church claims to be the bearer of a revelation. If that claim is false then we want not to make priestesses but to abolish priests. If it is true, then we should expect to find in the Church an element which unbelievers will call irrational and which believers will call supra-rational. There ought to be something in it opaque to our reason though not contrary to it - as the facts of sex and sense on the natural level are opaque. And that is the real issue. The Church of England can remain a church only if she retains this opaque element. If we abandon that, if we retain only what can be justified by standards of prudence and convenience at the bar of enlightened common sense, then we exchange revelation for that old wraith Natural Religion.

It is painful, being a man, to have to assert the privilege, or the burden, which Christianity lays upon my own sex. I am crushingly aware how inadequate most of us are, in our actual and historical individualities, to fill the place prepared for us. But it is an old saying in the army that you salute the uniform not the wearer. Only one wearing the masculine uniform can (provisionally, and till the Parousia) represent the Lord to the Church: for we are all, corporately and individually, feminine to Him. We men may often make very bad priests. That is because we are insufficiently masculine. It is no cure to call in those who are not masculine at all. A given man may make a very bad husband; you cannot mend matters by trying to reverse the roles. He may make a bad male partner in a dance. The cure for that is that men should more diligently attend dancing classes; not that the ballroom should henceforward ignore distinctions of sex and treat all dancers as neuter.

An Interesting Discussion/Debate with Dr. Matthew Becker

2011-08-07T13:21:00.000-07:00

On many occasions this blog site has highlighted and critiqued Dr. Becker's own blog posts and other comments. Recently one of his posts spilled over into the realm of the Brothers of John the Steadfast site. He also made an appearance on the ALPB site under the thread "Women's Ordination in the LCMS." The dialogues have been spirited, to say the least. After reading many of the posts on both sites (which I encourage readers here to review as well), a few thoughts occur to me:

Dr. Becker expresses a theology that more and more resembles what I thought we battled and put to rest in the 1970's (more or less). He does not seem to like the idea of a fully infallible and inerrant scripture, preferring to retreat instead to a culturally conditioned message of questionable relevancy (for some sections of scripture, at least.)
Although he quite willingly airs his views publicly and forcefully (on his blog and in other forums such as Gottesdienst, ALBP and Steadfast Lutherans), knowing that they are in opposition to the official stance of the Synod, he seems nevertheless quite defensive and indignant that his views would be challenged to such a degree. Does he realize that the appeal for women's ordination, according to Synod, is no longer an issue of debate? As Dr. Gard expressed on the ALBS site: "Please try to understand that for the vast majority of Synod this is a dead issue. It is settled. Missouri does not and will not ordain women."
He seems to believe that certain topics of theology are never quite decided in a definitive way, such as the issue of the role of women in the church. I am all for open discussion in order to learn. Yet even the ancient church drew a line at some point and said: "Decided!" It reminds me of children who believe that an absolute "no" should always be open to appeal, at least until they get it changed to a "yes."
Although Dr. Becker believes that Luther and the Confessions support his convictions, one might still legitimately question whether his theological home is more comfortable with the ELCA or the LCMS. Unless one believes that a sizable number of people in the Synod agree with him and it is up to him to fight for the right to change. Or, is it a matter of "This is my home too and I should be able to stay whether the powers that be agree with me or not"? In the end what does Dr. Becker hope to gain? Any reasonable look at Missouri will tell you that if his view were to prevail and the Synod did eventually ordain women, many, many pastors and laity would most likely leave. I can hardly think of a more divisive decision at present. This, for a number of clergy, is the 'deal breaker' of whether to stay or leave the LCMS (although some would argue that other issues should have long ago fulfilled this role.) Does Dr. Becker want to push the issue until this happens? Obviously he is not content simply to achieve an "agree to disagree" stalemate in the debate. To stop at this would still leave the apparent injustice in tact. He must push until the goal is reached. Yet many women who wished to be ordained have quietly moved on to other denominations that were open to this, and it would seem that they are pleased with their move. Or do they feel disenfranchised and wish to have someone like Dr. Becker rectify the injustice? Is he the chosen champion, the one elected to be the public voice for an unseen mass that are simply waiting for the chance at victory? The questions elude me.
Some of his thinking, especially as it touches on Christology, appears to be wandering into areas that do not seem at all orthodox. A while back I commented on his remark about an "androgynous Christ." Recent remarks on sites referenced above move in similar directions where the maleness of our Lord is considered, philosophically speaking, an "accident" to the real "substance" of what it means to be the Redeemer. In other words, the fact that He was born a man is really neither important nor critical to who He is or what He did. To assert that Jesus' maleness is at all important to the essence of who He is, Becker would claim, is itself to wander into areas less orthodox. I do not see how, considering the very clear biblical identity of God as Father and the second person of the Trinity as Son, that we can claim his maleness as "accidental" to who He is. Am I missing something here?

Dr. Becker might well be commended for his honesty and forthrightness, and seeming courage of entering into realms usually found more comfortable by conservative, confessional Lutherans. Nevertheless, I remain confused as to his ultimate purpose and goal. That would be most revealing in light of the nature of his higher profile in the last year or so. There must be a larger or broader agenda at play here.....

Abstractions?

2011-08-06T07:51:00.000-07:00

The Rev. Dr. F. Dean Lueking, a noted name from a past era in LCMS battles and current personality supporting present efforts to see certain liberal topics find acceptance, wrote an article on the renewed Daystar Journal website that offers interesting insights into a time of importance in Missouri's history. I leave you to read the whole article, "Lutheranism: A Confessional Movement in the Church Catholic," and draw your own conclusions on its overall message (follow the link above.) For my part I wish to extract but one section for comment. Toward the end of his article in a concluding section entitled "SO, THEN...," Dr. Lueking states:

Current hot button issues before LCMS Lutherans, women’s ordination and sexual ethics come to mind, are abstractions until and unless met by real people of faith, women and men, gay and straight, who wrestle them through in the power of the Word in the congregation. Denominational resolutions devoid of what is learned in congregations where gifted people, women and men, gay and straight gather, do more harm than good - especially when “doctrines” about each are made matters of majority vote. Similarly, what is learned in congregation by leaders, women and men, by believers, gay and straight – all doing courageously and faithfully what they’re called by Christ to do - is what congregations owe their church bodies.

It is a risk to exegete the words of someone else, but I think a summary interpretation is in order. If I understand what he is saying, it seems that the point is: issues like women's ordination and homosexuality are not governed by strict time-honored and ancient doctrine, as such. How the contemporary church responds to these issues in a larger (national) way should be generated by insights and interpretations from rank-and-file people from the midst of our local congregations first. Until they have had a 'say' on the issue - pro or con - pontifications on these 'issues' from on high are mere 'abstractions' detached from the real life of the church. Interesting....I suspect we could take this further on other 'issues' or teachings of the church, but I will resist the temptation for the moment. I do agree that doctrine in the church is not determined by "majority vote." Unfortunately, it appears that Dr. Lueking views the stance of the national church body as purely driven on these issues by the relative swing of a vote. Hardly. If one simply takes a serious look at the scriptures and the witness of nearly two millenia of the church fathers, the conclusion is anything but a mere arbitrary vote at a convention. Instead, it is the confirmation of what the church has taught historically and faithfully until modern inclinations decided that personal choice trumps truth. Instead of praising false teaching as "courageous," we ought to be speaking about confessing truth, which is, supposedly, what the original article wished to address. Still, Dr. Lueking has caught the spirit of much of what still divides us, and unintentionally helped us to again see clearly that the issues still involve the truth of the Gospel.

Nashotah House Summer Intensives - Part II

2011-08-01T08:11:00.000-07:00

Well, it didn't take long to jump back into parish work. Since the pastor scheduled to preach for me yesterday finds himself suffering from acute back issues, I returned to the pulpit a bit earlier than planned. The past two weeks, however, offered a wonderful respite and sabbatical from regular parish responsibilities, so resuming work didn't bring the stress it might otherwise have. Nevertheless, this session, like the one last summer, did bring challenges, at least in the ability to sit for extended periods of time and remain alert. Between the two courses I logged around 60 hours of class time. Dr. Pfatteicher and Dr. Herman provided much to think about and gave me a nice closure to the coursework part of my degree work. I also took time to meet with my thesis advisor Dr. Arnold Klukas, to discuss preliminary work on the capstone of my degree. As mentioned earlier I will be researching the use of the Apocalypse in the worship of the church. To narrow down my field it looks like the parameters will encompass the period from the NT to around 1054 AD. Initial work indicates a paucity of material from Revelation in this era, yet the research will hopefully uncover heretofore neglected research. At the moment I am trying to tract down my first lead by working my way backwards from Vatican II. The lectionary remained relatively unchanged, at least in Western Christendom, for at least 500 years before the massive reforms of this council. According to Annibale Bunini in The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 I discovered some research carried out by Fr. Fontaine around 1964 which should include numerous charts mapping out the use of the scriptures in a variety of early and modern lectionaries. Unfortunately the author fails to offer further documentation regarding where this voluminous research now exists, and I am on a detective mission to find it.

On the other end of the research I am also attempting to tract down what appears to be a fairly scarce work by Ned B. Stonehouse, entitled The Apocalypse in the Early Church: A Study in the History of the New Testament Canon. It was published in 1929, yet remains an oft quoted reference even to the present. I discovered it initially in a footnote of the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Vol. XII - Revelation, edited by Dr. William Weinrich of CTS-Ft. Wayne. If any of the readers out there have a lead on these subjects, let me know. I'm open to any assistance.

To close out my course work, however, I also have a couple of papers left to write by Sept. 1. In an effort to have this work assist my thesis I am gearing each in this direction. For Dr. Herman my final paper will be Allusions to the Apocalypse in the Church's Hymnody, and for Dr. Pfatteicher I will be writing a paper about the Revelation pericopes in the current Revision Common Lectionary and other ancillary texts for special festivals. It turns out that the lectionaries that came out of the revisions of Vatican II, while opening the scope of scripture to include the Apocalypse, included only six readings from this book, offered only during the Easter season in Series C, including material from a mere 5 chapters. While these papers may not contribute immediately to my thesis research, they will contribute to what may yet become a wider reach of research stretching to possible doctoral work, or even extended writing beyond the degree.

My time at Nashotah, as I indicated above, offered a needed respite and sabbatical from the routine of normal parish work, despite the rigors of classroom work. Twice daily chapel services took me back to a quiet corner where I could meditate on the mysteries apart from the distractions of parish responsibilities. While not being able to participate in the Eucharist, the exposure to the richness of the liturgy and Word offered ample refreshment. The rhythm of the Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer from the Book of Common Prayer would probably be seen by some as mundane and uninspiring, but for me it was quite the opposite. As I worked my way through countless lines of Anglican chant it occurred to me that one of the benefits of such music is that it slows down our responses enough for us to actually meditate on the Word. So often the words blur past our minds, but slow and rhythmic chant allows us to see it and hear it more easily.

Aside from worship I also enjoyed the opportunity to expand my horizons and meet a variety of people I would never encounter in my normal travels. Sitting in one class I discovered an Anglican bishop from Kenya (The Rt. Rev. David Mugangi Mutisya), who was sitting next to an archdeacon from Nigeria. I suspect that little Nashotah is becoming a bit of an international haven for conservative Anglican clerics to study, although these churchmen are coming from what we used to see as Third World countries. With opportunities available throughout Europe and in England, I wonder what keeps pulling them to the states. CTS-Ft. Wayne has also drawn a fair number of internationals as well, I suspect it is because they need to come here to find places uninfected with liberal theology, places they can still study the scriptures where God's Word is seen as holy and inspired. Africa is now the place where the church is being reborn, it seems. Archbishop Walter Obare of Kenya remains a powerful reminder of this new leadership.

Nashotah also attracts scholars from outside its own tradition, as is evidenced in many of my fellow students who come from such traditions as Methodist and even non-denominational. One student in both of my sessions this summer was a baptist scholar from Carley Theological College in Vancouver Canada. Having already earned a Ph.D from Baylor University, she was now working on a D.Min at Nashotah. It was nice to see a mix of such scholarship in our classes, as it enriched the discussion overall.

Although kindly chided at times as "Dr. Luther" for being the token Lutheran clergyman in these sessions, I enjoyed my place as a representative of my faith. It afforded me the opportunity to share insights into the Lutheran church that many outside seldom receive. Being a member of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod offered an even rarer glimpse for many still, since clergy from this denomination seldom make their way into Anglican enclaves for advanced study. Nevertheless, I found nothing but respect and camaraderie from my fellow students. Anglicans are much like Lutherans, in some ways. They show a healthy sense of self-deprecation. I will miss many of these people.

The time at Nashotah is going by with amazing speed. It is hard to believe I only started last summer and have taken five courses in that time. I am looking forward to the thesis and for occasional return trips to Nashotah for consultation and research. For now, though, I need to get back to my "day job"......

Nashotah House Summer Instensives - Part I

2011-07-25T21:15:00.000-07:00

It's hard to believe that these two weeks represent my final courses in the program. Although I will return again to work and consult on my thesis later this year and into 2012, I seems strange to realize I will not enjoy the same community experience as one has during regular class sessions. In part this tempts me to think about the possibility of continuing on for D.Min work. I have enjoyed the convenience of distance (3 1/2 hour drive from home), and the unique mix of students and professors, some coming from far distant corners of the globe to this tiny outpost in southern Wisconsin. In one of my classes we have students from Nigeria, Kenya, and Barbados in the Caribbean, as well as a Chinese professor from a seminary in Canada on sabbatical. Besides my professors they are privileged to have on campus a visiting scholar who serves as principal of St. Stephen's Hosue at Oxford, teaching on their theology faculty, the Rev. Canon Dr. Robin Ward.

My professors this year are also both visiting scholars, with additional connections to the Lutheran church. Dr. David Herman, who teaches The History of the English Hymnal recently retired from the University of Delaware and is a very accomplished recitalist and composer. Although now a practicing Anglican, Dr. Herman has served in the past as an organist and music director in a Lutheran parish. He is also the author of the biography of Jan Bender, under whom he also studied. The Rev. Dr. Philip Pfatteicher, who teaches The History and Function of the Liturgical Year, is actually a rostered Lutheran clergyman in the ELCA, although I believe he and his wife now attend an Episcopal church in Boston. Dr. Pfatteicher is the author of several books on worship and liturgy, which a search on Amazon will provide you with titles and descriptions. He has long served as a recognized expert in this field and it is a rare opportunity to study under a man of his stature and reputation. You can read more about their backgrounds on the Nashotah site at this link.

I will post additional observations in the days to come. For now I have to return to work. A paper awaits....

Corem Deo Conference - Part II

2011-07-25T20:24:00.000-07:00

More than a week has passed since returning from the Higher Things conference in Illinois. After regrouping at home for Sunday worship and a voters' meeting to follow (yeah!), I packed up again and headed off to Nashotah House for my two week intensives. A separate post will follow on that subject. Before moving on to my Nashotah experiences this year, it seems appropriate to wrap up my reflections on Higher Things first. As noted in the previous post, my impressions for a first time attendee were positive overall. I extend my commendations and gratitude to the hardworking staff of pastors and laypeople who managed to pull off what can only prove at times to be a logistical nightmare. Yet the reward of seeing so many young people engaged in God's Word and participating fully in the liturgy more than compensates. For the record they handled the predictable glitches with competence and kept the program running in smooth fashion the whole week. Lord willing I will see many of you next year at the conference in Missouri. To those I connected with, it was was a pleasure to meet new friends and renew the friendships of old acquaintances. Thank you for a great week of good Lutheran relaxation!

What follows are a few pictures I managed to take before leaving. The first shows the group gathered for one of the plenary sessions (mass gatherings held each day.) It was truly impressive to see so many youth together to take in good Lutheran theology!

The next picture, although a bit blurry (my apologies), shows the youth gathered for one of the many worship services. Attendees had the opportunity to attend Matins, Evening Prayer and Vespers every day. Compline was to be handled by individual groups in their dorms. Imagine youth worshiping three or four times a day - and with traditional liturgy and hymns!

The last two pictures simply show the dorm where I and my son stayed that week. We were on the 15th floor of a 16 floor skyscraper. I didn't know dorms came in these gargantuan sizes. Since waiting for the two operating elevators could take a while, I sometimes descended on foot all the way to the ground level. Feeling rather ambitious I also tried to ascend all 15. I made it as far as floor 6. A massive coronary did not seem a good enough reason to push it....

The room I shared with my son was small but comfortable. Looking at the city from that height provided a rare view. Thankfully the air conditioning worked well - at times too well! I believe that the temperature went down as low as 63 or 64 degrees!

Coram Deo Conference - Part I

2011-07-14T14:29:00.000-07:00

After an absence from the computer since Monday, I finally gained access to one here at the Illinois State University Library. I left my laptop with my wife at the motel and decided to go free of technology for a few days. Now that I have a moment before supper it seemed a good opportunity to post a brief initial update on my experience here at the Higher Things conference in Bloomington. In general I have only good things to say. Although billed as a youth conference, let no one fool you - this is great for adults! The plenary sessions with Pr. Cwirla the first two days offered both theological stimulation and great entertainment. Who thought that Lutheran clergy with collars could be so fun? The sections have proved equally engaging and I have personally found the two I took in with Dr. Joel Heck of CU-Austin to be exceptionally informative. I purchased his most recent book on Creation at the first session and will post separately on that work along with other insightful information he offered to us regarding Creation and Evolution.

To look out at the crowd of over a thousand youth and parents willingly singing the historic liturgy and soaking up good, solid Lutheran theology gives me renewed hope for the future of the LCMS. I commend those who started the Higher Things phenomenon back in 2000 as brilliantly proactive and forward-thinking regarding how to deal with the challenging state of Lutheranism in our time. Instead of merely fighting and scratching out small victories in endless conventions, they set about launching a movement that may very well preserve a true Lutheran identity among us, sowing seeds in that generation that waits to replace us in the years to come. One can only wonder what deep and lasting changes have already occurred through this ongoing mass catechesis. I hope I live just long enough to see some of those fruits born as these HT youth begin to assume positions of leadership at the highest levels of Synod.

Supper is now just around the corner and given all the walking we do on this huge campus eating is a true necessity for this diabetic. So off I go for now. Future posts to come detailing more of the experience.

My First Higher Things Conference

2011-07-07T21:21:00.000-07:00

By this time next week I will already be well into my first Higher Things conference - Coram Deo. Although a general invitation was offered to participate possibly as a sectional leader, I elected to pass this time around. I am hoping to do something I seldom do: sit, listen, enjoy, reflect, relax. It's also a goal to gather information and impressions to take back to the other youth of my congregation and maybe even a neighboring parish or two. Perhaps next year we will have to commandeer a large van to transport our group. It's a hope. My group this time around consists of my son David.....and me. Big group! He will be a senior next year and given that my daughter was able to experience one of the conferences in 2006 ("The Feast") at about the same age, it seemed time again. I am truly looking forward to the experience and connecting again with fellow Lutherans. Perhaps one of the readers who drops by this blog will be there and I can put a face and name with the predominantly anonymous readership known only by the numbers collected at Sitemeter. If you recognize me, please say hello. BTW, I am going to the conference at Illinois State University.

Why We Remain in Our Denominations

2011-07-04T09:50:00.000-07:00

Last summer while at Nashotah I met some wonderful people, the majority of them Anglicans, many of those Anglicans members of the Episcopal Church. Like some of the confessional folks I have met within the ELCA, the people who came to Nashotah seemed rather conservative compared to some of the high profile actions of their own denomination. Naturally I wondered what kept these fine people within a church body so filled with liberal theology and practice. I don't have a clear answer to that question and suspect that the answer varies from person to person. Some may see themselves as positive leaven hoping to change the substance from within. Others may stay out of a sense of ownership, as in "This is my church too, why should I leave?" Others fight small concentrated battles with liberal leadership keeping the voice of dissent alive for future generations. Still others may stay because it is convenient and comfortable compared with the insecurity and disruption of leaving.

Of course such questions of staying and leaving concern many of us in the LCMS too - from both conservative and liberal sides of the aisle. The reasons outlined above would likewise apply, although others could be given. Some conservatives would stay claiming that as long as the published and public doctrine of the church body remains orthodox the practice can still be reformed. For some within this subset an additional criteria is put forth concerning 'make or break' teachings such as the ordination of women, acknowledging that they can endure other lesser aberrations as long as this line is not crossed.

And for those on the liberal side of the aisle - How might they answer? Dr. Matthew Becker, thankfully, has been a higher profile figure willing to answer publicly, so we can use his response as one indication possibly shared by others. In the comments section of one of his posts he noted the following in answer to why he doesn't resign from the roster of the Synod despite his disagreements with the public teaching of the LCMS:

I was baptized on 30 Sep 1962, by my grandfather at St. John Lutheran Church,
Salem, Oregon.

My parents faithfully took me to the divine services. There I first heard the gospel. There I was instructed in the faith. There I first received the Lord's body and blood for the forgiveness of my sins.

My pastor, Dr. Hempelmann, selected Second Peter 3:18 as my confirmation verse. Through my grandfather and Dr. Hempelmann I was encouraged to prepare for the pastoral ministry in the LCMS.

St. John provided me with both financial and evangelical support to attend Concordia College, Portland. There I encountered perhaps the best cohort of professors the LCMS has ever assembled at the undergraduate level. For other historic examples of scholarly, critical, and evangelical individuals in the synod's history, see "About Daystar" at http://www.thedaystarjournal.com/

These have been my role models.

When I studied for four years at Concordia Seminary, at no point was I ever approached to stop my studies or remove myself from consideration for ordination. In fact, I was encouraged to pursue graduate theological work by several sem professors, notably Dr. Norman Nagel.

St. John also supported me during my years at the University of Chicago. During summers I returned to Salem and served as a summer vicar. The pastors, Dr. Frederick Niedner and Pr. Dale Koehneke, both from families with long histories in the LCMS, were very helpful to me in my preparations.

When I was ordained in July 1989, I freely, willingly, and publicly vowed to teach in accord with the doctrinal content of the holy Scriptures and in accord with the Lutheran Confessions as a faithful exhibition of the doctrinal content of the holy Scriptures. I have sought to fulfill this vow to the present day. On that hot July day I did not make any vows with regard to the LCMS.

When I was installed as pastor at Bethlehem, Dundee, Ill, I made the same vows. At that time I signed the Constitution of the LCMS. I was especially pleased to do this because of the crucial importance of Article II.

The Synod, as a human institution, remains subordinate to and normed by the doctrinal content of the Holy Scriptures and the witness to that doctrinal content by the Lutheran Confessions. Semper ecclesia reformanda.

As a human institution, the LCMS has changed its practices and understandings and applications of Scripture over time. Sometimes these changes have been for the better--that is, in accord with the gospel and Christian love--and other times, for the worse--that is, legalistically, unevangelically, with evident short-sightedness and a lack of Christian love.

As an errant, sinful theologian who continues nevertheless to try to live out his calling faithfully within the LCMS (the Board of the NW District of the LCMS, on which I served for many years, has labeled me "the NW District's LCMS missionary to Valparaiso University"), I will continue to study the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions to discern how the Spirit might be leading us to continue to reform the LCMS as one small part of the much larger Ecumene.

So far I have not been given any clear indication from the Lord that I should remove myself from the LCMS clergy roster.
So what can we glean from this to help us understand why those on both sides of the aisle remain entrenched, even while disagreeing on what seems like fundamental articles of the truth? Dr. Becker reflects the reasoning of the older Seminex professors and students of past years. To my eyes it is a minimalistic approach, although I would suspect that Becker would disagree with this assessment. I say 'minimalistic' because he lays claim to the Scriptures and Confessions while indicating that they do not address certain teachings within the LCMS with which he disagrees. For example, he would claim, I believe, that neither the Scriptures nor the Confessions would prohibit the ordination of women or the teaching of Evolution. This is a 'synodocal thing,' he would claim, not a 'Bible thing.'

I cannot disagree with Becker in that the Synod is not above error, unlike the Scriptures. Yet we part ways in our interpretation of the above two items (among others) and that disagreement concerns in large part how we approach the scriptures. Becker's hermeneutic is much different than the founders of the LCMS, and much more in line with the higher-critical post-war theology imported into Missouri 50+ years ago. He may be right in claiming that the Confessions do not specifically address these particular issues, but they do address the substance of them, and that is the critical point. Once he adopts Evolution he also adopts an approach to scripture which places it under reason and allows science to dictate its interpretation. As I demonstrated in a prior post one cannot have it both ways. You cannot embrace Evoution and still ultimately keep the cardinal doctrines intact, such as Original Sin and thus Salvation itself. Supporting the ordination of women also impacts our view of the scriptures as we must choose whether to see them as slaves to their own culture and time or enduring truth.

Becker remains within the LCMS, as do others who share his views, for the reason that they believe they can lay claim to the primary sources of doctrine in support of their teaching while also seeing the Synod as a mere human organization prone to error, especially when it concerns issues with which the broader contemporary society takes issue. Yet what is clear beyond the words quoted above and printed elsewhere, Becker also remains in order to change the Synod - the 'leaven' reasoning noted before. He hopes and waits for the day when his views will be accepted practice just as they are within the ELCA and TEC. He knows that history is partly on his side as many of the mainline denominations have gone down this familiar path of liberalization. Why should Missouri be different? Why should he leave his home if it will change anyway?

Many like myself remain to hold the line and keep Missouri from slipping into that abyss. It may be a losing battle, but this is also my church in which, like Becker, I was taught the faith and recited the very same ordination vows (a couple years before him in 1987.) I have a stake in where it goes. Two of my children have been confirmed in this church, and one is one the way. I fight for their future more than my own. It is a shame in this sinful world that those who lay claim to the same confessions of faith should end up in opposition. I do not question Becker's faith, but I question the orthodoxy of his approach and some of the things he teaches. To that end I will continue to challenge them in this medium.

Teacing Theology Through Hymns

2011-07-04T08:03:00.000-07:00

Reflecting the old maxim of Prosper of Aquitaine Dr. David Scaer noted that "Dogmatics springs from the liturgical life of the church and dogmatics find its ultimate fulfillment in the liturgical life of the church" (Springfielder, Dec. 1971). He specifically applies this to the hymnody which he said "serve(s) to broaden out the people's theology." They do so for the simple reason that they contain solid theology. "Hymns from the earliest centuries of the church and from the Reformation reflect the highest degree of doctrinal development," he writes. "Ambrose, Luther, Origen, John of Damascus and others were also great theologians of their time. They were aware that the best way to teach dogmatics or doctrine to the people was through the hymns. I would even endeavor to say that more can be done through hymns than through sermons; and the liturgical life of the church in some centuries and generations was the church's only salvation."

We might think Scaer's comments a bit exaggerated, especially concerning the idea that hymns could teach more than sermons. However, we should not discount the simple power of hymns to penetrate the memory, especially through years of repetition, versus the tendency for people to forget most of the sermons they hear. Given that we should also be cautious about the songs and hymns offered on Sunday morning. Proponents of contemporary worship avoid hymnals and traditional hymns out of a claim that they are boring and irrelevant. Yet they substitute tunes and texts either lacking any substance or containing 'theology' which contradicts the faith we have taught. I fear for where these parishoners will be a decade or two from now, especially as some drift into that shadowy place of dementia.

John L. Bell, in his book The Singing Thing (2000), writes: "Consider a child born in the 1970's, finding himself coming toward the end of his life in a geriatric ward in the 2060's, and as he prepares to make his peace with God summoning up such a deeply spiritual ditty as: If I were a fuzzy wuzzy bear, I'd thank you, Lord, for my fuzzy wuzzy hair. Children's hymns should never been seen as a form of entertainment to keep the kids happy. These songs, in the future, will be evocative of God."

Dr. Bell makes his point well. How sad it will be when the pastor struggles to minister to the elderly of another era because he cannot bring to mind a single hymn verse, save the vapid refrain from a contemporary ditty...

Slavery and the Bible

2011-07-02T15:47:00.000-07:00

For one raised in the shadow of the Civil Rights Movement of the last century, the topic of slavery remains a sensitive issue. With the official emancipation of African-American slaves in the 19th century, dealing with the issue of slavery in modern America concerns discussions of past events more than present realities. Recently Dr. Matthew Becker, in a tribute to Harriet Beecher Stowe (1811-1896), decided to invoke the subject while inserting a passing jibe at the founder of his synod. He writes:

At a time when people like the first president of the Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod, C. F. W. Walther, who was born in the same year as Stowe, argued that slavery was ordained by God and a positive, biblically-grounded good, Stowe set forth a minority position that was also biblically-grounded: slavery is contradicted by the Bible's teachings about human equality and dignity, about human freedom and responsibility, about Christ's love for "the lowliest members of society."

It was tempting to simply pass over these comments recognizing Dr. Becker's inclination to take a jab at the Missouri Synod if given the chance. However, in rereading the above statement it occurs that clarification is needed. We will affirm that C.F.W. Walther did not outright condemn all slavery as sin. He surveyed the many instances of slavery in the Bible, both Old and New Testament, and demonstrated that a slave-master relationship is not considered intrinsically sinful. Abuse of slaves is a sin and masters guilty of hurting and harming those serving under them are rightfully called to account and condemned. However, to jump now to the conclusion that Walther "argued that slavery was ordained by God and a positive, biblically-grounded good" seems at best a stretch and at worst a misrepresentation of this honorable leader. He wrote that God did not institute slavery any more than he instituted absolute monarchy. Walther differentiates between the relationship and the conditions under which that relationship exists. He recognizes that these things came into being in a sinful world. They are not perfect any more than any relationship in this world is, including governments of any type. In fact, he quotes a Lutheran theologian who states: "Slavery is indeed a yoke under which one suffers. It is a lowly and terrible state, for nothing is lower and more terrible than to be given to another as his own, and if one obtains something, it is obtained for the other" (Friedrich Baduin, d. 1627).

If, as Becker claims, "slavery is contradicted by the Bible's teachings about human equality and dignity, about human freedom and responsibility, about Christ's love for 'the lowliest members of society,'" what is one to say of all that Paul himself wrote in the New Testament regarding the relationship between slaves and masters, especially the situation of Onesimus and Philemon? Furthermore, slavery needs to be examined and discussed in a complete historical context, not in a vacuum or single historical instance. Slavery in the Bible sometimes involved people who deliberately sold themselves into that condition for the sake of debts or security. Many slaves enjoyed a relationship with their masters that was much like family (See the article "Does the Bible condone slavery?" for more detail.) To simply state that "slavery is contradicted by the Bible's teachings...." is to offer poor biblical teaching on the matter. This demands a far better survey of the material and a more nuanced examination of the subject. Given our natural sensitivities to this subject in light of our checkered history on the matter, it is easy to draw simple conclusions that fail to fully wrestle with all the details.

Well, this was not intended to be a full treatment of such an exhaustive subject, merely a note clarifying a comment elsewhere. We'll leave it at that.

Now the Same Point From an Atheist

2011-06-28T19:43:00.000-07:00

Living in denial may offer a comfortable way to avoid the ultimate dilemma. However, eventually one must face the difficult truth that the faith which we confess simply does not square with true evolutionary theory. You cannot have it both ways. Even theistic evolution cannot solve the core issue: Why does Jesus have to die if a literal fall never occurs? As an atheist Austin Cline may best see the logical inconsistency with retaining a traditional Christian viewpoint and trying to hang on the evolutionary conviction. In an article entitled "Does Evolution Contradict Christianity" he writes:

The central message of Christianity is that Jesus' death and resurrection pays for our sins — we deserve death and eternal punishment, but Jesus paid the price for us. To paraphrase Paul: without that, the Christian faith is in vain. Without these sins, there would be no need for Jesus to be punished and killed. The question then becomes: is this notion of sin tenable from a naturalistic perspective? We have to approach it from a naturalistic perspective because our central question involves evolution, and the process of evolution is supposed to describe the development of our species in a purely naturalistic manner.

If the evolutionary account of human origins is true, then there was certainly no literal Fall from Grace — no Adam and Eve disobeying the Christian God and no Original Sin. But without Original Sin and expulsion from the Garden of Eden, then there is no reason to think that anything called "sin" (which is supposed to be disobedience to God) suddenly entered the world. If sin instead "evolved" into our ancestors through the natural development which God set into motion, why would God hold us accountable? A naturalistic development of sin should mean that insofar as we are "naturally" sinners, we simply are what our creator caused us to evolve into being.

Mr. Cline goes on to point out the further inconsistency with trying to insist on metaphors for the sin event while still maintaining the need for a literal death and resurrection:

All of this is obviously true if the Bible is read literally as the fundamentalists do, but what if the Bible is read metaphorically or allegorically? The problem is that it's difficult to argue that a metaphorical Fall required a literal death and resurrection. One might argue for a metaphorical death and resurrection, but few if any Christians believe in that and doing so would mean rejecting some very important, orthodox facets of Christian theology.

Some might argue that "sin" should be read as simply "transgressing moral codes" and "original sin" is really the "original self-awareness" of moral codes, but whose moral codes? If we are the creators of the moral codes, then what we have is the assertion that God needed Jesus to die because we have trouble following rules we create for ourselves. Not only doesn't that make much sense, but it doesn't look much like traditional Christianity anymore.

Within the framework of evolution, sin does not appear to have any tangible, real existence. We are supposed to have sin, but did Neanderthals? Homo Habilis? Homo Erectus? Is is possible to logically argue that this "sin" was dependent upon some specific piece of genetic code which evolved into our species? There is evidence that other primates, like chimpanzees, not only have rudimentary rules within their groups but also an awareness of when they are and are not following them. Are chimps sinning? Did Jesus die for them, too? Should we be sending missionaries to them in zoos and jungles?

Some might also argue that "sin" is still "disobedience to God," but only where it concerns those moral rules God has given us. This eliminates the Fall of Original Disobedience, but it still has problems. For one thing, these same people are unlikely to argue that the moral rules from God have reached us unadulterated by human interests — so the situation begins to look a lot like the previous. For another, it would be hard to argue that disobeying this limited set of rules would justify a literal death and resurrection. Again.

None of this can be easily argued. Sin, our alleged disobedience to God, appears to be nothing except one more religious concept created by some human beings and imposed upon other human beings. That, however, would mean that Jesus died for nothing, and no devout Christian can really accept that.

Why can an atheist see this so clearly and theologians like Dr. Becker cannot? Or could it be that Dr. Becker truly does realize the consequence of adopting evolution yet knows that a denial of the cardinal truths it engenders simply comes at too high of an ecclesiastical price? Or could it be that facing the truth of this dilemma is too painful for Dr. Becker and he must work to reconcile that which cannot be reconciled simply for his own peace of mind? I don't know. What I do know is that the choice is clear, and blending the two will not work because in the end you will be forced to explain away what you know you must keep to maintain the integrity of the Christian faith. Either you adopt naturalism or you maintain a true biblical viewpoint. Those are the choices.

A Quote from Dr. John D. Morris

2011-06-28T15:02:00.000-07:00

The quote that follows explains further the concern I expressed in a previous post regarding Evolution and the Christian faith. Dr. John D. Morris is the president of the Institute for Creation Research and an avowed young earth proponent. Dr. Morris' words demonstrate the incompatibility of Darwinian evolutionary theory and classic Christian theology. One cannot embrace Evolution and not change the Faith.

"Evolution and the Bible most seriously conflict at this point (their respective views of death, which are central to each viewpoint). If evolution (or even just the concept of an old earth, with death and fossils predating man's sin) is correct, then death is natural, death is normal, death produced man. Most importantly, in this view, death is not the penalty for sin, for it preceded man and his sin. But if death is not the penalty for sin, then the death of Jesus Christ did not pay that penalty, nor did His resurrection from the dead provide eternal life.

While belief in creation and the young earth may not be essential for salvation (many Christians wrongly believe and do many things the Bible teaches against), if evolution is right, if the earth is old, if fossils date from before man's sin, then Christianity is wrong! These ideas destroy the foundation for the Gospel and negate the work of Christ on the cross. Evolution and salvation are mutually exclusive concepts.

Many times evolutionists understand this issue better than Christians. In his article, "The Meaning of Evolution," atheist G. Richard Bozarth claims that "Christianity has fought, still fights and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, for evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus' earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of God. Take away the meaning of his death. If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing" (American Atheist, September 20, 1979, p. 30).

Thus the issues of death and time reveal the utter incompatibility of evolution, in any form, with Christianity."

From: "Evolution and the Wages of Sin" on the ICR website

Predictions

2011-06-28T13:16:00.000-07:00

At the end of A New Christianity for a New World, John Shelby Spong looks to the future and contemplates a possible scenario for the church of tomorrow. In a previous work the former bishop declared that Christianity must change or die, and now he takes the next step in that forecast. While admitting that "many churches, if given choice, choose to die rather than change," he does not see a wholesale death of the faith, as such. He believes that "faith-communities will emerge...inside our existing structures," eventually separating and beginning new forms. Now one may rightly argue that these new "faith-communities" will bear no resemblance to Christianity as we now know it or it has been known since its inception. The point is, that despite the radical overhaul and transformation of the existing church he looks for, the existing church will change. Personally I think that the former bishop's predictions sell short the resolve of orthodox churches to survive even in a turbulent sea of revolution (as history demonstrates their past resolve through thousands of years of upheaval, persecution and change.) His vision may very well become a reality, but not in a widespread fashion. Such fringe movements remain on the edges. The "gates of hell will not prevail" against the church, despite Spong's dream of dragging it down the primrose paths of denial into that very realm.

Spong's words reminded me of another prediction from the proponents of women's ordination within the LCMS. On June 11 a fictitious sermon was posted on the The Creator's Tapestry site (borrowed from the Daystar Journal site), attributed to the "Rev. Stephanie Zimmerman." Prefaced to that 'sermon' on the latter site was the following note:
The following is a sermon by LCMS pastor, Stephanie Zimmerman. She is perhaps your great-granddaughter, or a young woman who is presently studying at one of the Concordias. She is an ordained LCMS pastor who is preaching on some future Pentecost Sunday. And this is one of many such sermons being preached that day, as the whole denomination is celebrating the 25th anniversary of the ordination of women in the LCMS. Consider how we celebrate the Reformation and you will have an idea of the feel that day will have.

The text is Acts 2:1-21. The title of her sermon is "As the Spirit Gave Them Ability" with a subtitle that notes the celebration of twenty-five years of ordaining women in the LCMS. Stephanie is not the ordinand but one of many LCMS pastors who are women.

Interesting prediction. The 'sermon' unfortunately resounds with frequent snipes at current LCMS policy and leadership, so it's certainly not a positive attempt at bridge-building to those with whom they currently disagree. Obviously they are assuming that those who oppose the ordination of women will simply die off and be replaced bit-by-bit with a more 'progressive' leadership. While I have been among those who have pessimistically predicted we would arrive at a similar point some day, I would also admit that this is a risky prediction. Politics swing from one side to the other in the LCMS, and one cannot forget that the liberalizing trends of the latter half of the last century that were curtailed. While we have a ways to go, commitment to our current confession remains strong in many quarters. That said, even if the LCMS should swing over and adopt this change, it would effectively cease to be the LCMS as we know it. The ordination of women, as testified in the ELCA, brings with it additional changes which would further erode other practices and doctrines (e.g.: sexuality and marriage.) As with Spong's prediction I am inclined to think that such forecasts are at this point more 'wishful thinking' than true predictions born of serious research and study.

On a side note: One thing I fail to understand is why opposition to certain teachings and practices must always be accused of doing so out of fear. Our so-called Pr. Zimmerman declares:
In the early decades of this 21^st Century, the LCMS was at a low point in its brief history. At a time of dramatic social change and turmoil worldwide, Missouri Synod leaders used the fears of people to manipulate and dominate through their own particular and official interpretation of scripture. Their primary targets at that time were women and their main objective was to keep them out of the pastoral office. But the motivating fear in their ferocity against and denial of women pastors was their fear of homosexuality.

For many of us opposition to the ordination of women is based entirely on our commitment to a faithful and accurate interpretation of Holy Scripture. If there is any fear involved it is a 'holy fear' of offending the God whose Word this change would violate. Furthermore, attributing opposition to women's ordination as coming from a "particular and official interpretation of scripture" is to ignore the painfully obvious witness of the church's history stretching back two millenia. The orthodox fathers of the faith opposed this practice and we have recognized their opposition in studying the issue ourselves. Finally, why must the discussion degenerate into having someone become a "target"? Why this paranoia? And more so, why must we further cloud the issue by dragging in issues that while related are not determinative in the argument (e.g.: homosexuality)? This little diatribe attributes unfair and inaccurate assumptions on the part of those with whom they disagree. It is unfortunate that those who decry a so-called unwillingness to have an open discussion would muddy any possibility of future discussion with these aspersions of character.

The Results of Evolutionary Belief for Christians

2011-06-26T18:08:00.000-07:00

Many Christians attempt to hold in tension a belief in Evolution and a commitment to the creator God. At best this results in a felicitous inconsistency. Despite embracing a doctrine with the potential to unravel the foundation of their faith, they fail to follow through on the logical consequences, content to allow two disparate concepts to stand together as if they agreed. On the other hand some follow where the logic leads and end up in place quite different than where they began. Such is the case with John Shelby Spong. In his book A New Christianity for a New World he demonstrates where the path leads once one entertains a denial of the Creation account and embraces Evolution in its place: "I now regard the traditional Christian interpretation of the account of the fall of humanity, told in the narrative of the Garden of Eden, as the ultimate example of distorted negative thinking. I prefer to look at the wonder of humanity and to celebrate the incredible gift of self-conscious life that has emerged form our earliest living ancestor, which as nothing more or less than a bit of protoplasm constituting a single cell in the midst of the sea" (150). Spong openly now denies many cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, not least of which is the very divinity of Jesus and his salvific work on the cross. That the former bishop still considers himself within the boundaries of Christian faith remains an incredulous assumption. The point here, though, concerns where the path begins and ends once the decision is made to place scientific theory above biblical truth or to allow the former to define the latter.

Reading Spong reminded me of the ongoing debate in the LCMS and in particular the more vocal supporters of Evolution in the synod such as Dr. Matthew Becker. Aside from the issue of women pastors addressed in my previous post, Evolution easily occupies second place in the list of concerns regarding this theologian. My concern ultimately rests on the impact embracing Evolution has on the cardinal doctrines of the Faith. Can one embrace Evolution and not ultimately end up denying such teachings as Original Sin? For Spong the answer is "no." His chapter heading says it all: "Original Sin is Out." Yet where might Becker fall in this discussion? In his article "The Scandal of the LCMS Mind" Becker acknowledges the impact belief in Evolution has in defining these doctrines, yet insists that no damage comes to the orthodoxy of their statements even in revision:

Of course a “figurative” interpretation of Genesis 1-9 (not to mention the many other passages in Scripture that speak of God as creator, of the world as God’s creation, and of the new creation) does entail a revision of the traditional “creationist” manner of articulating the doctrines of creation, anthropology, and sin, and many Christians are deeply uncomfortable with such a prospect. This “discomfort” is at least as great as the discomfort many 16^th-Century Christians must have felt in view of the revision to traditional teaching that the Copernican Theory entailed. As then, however, so also now: such modification would not necessarily undermine an orthodox understanding of creation, human beings, sin, and grace. For example, scientific data about the reality of physical death in the animal and plant kingdoms prior to origin of human beings (e.g., fossils of animals that lived long before the origin of human beings) must lead those who interpret the Bible in light of scientific knowledge to restate the nature of God’s good creation prior to the advent of human sin (e.g., such a good creation must have included the reality of death prior to the existence of human beings) and the character of the historical origin of sin (e.g., the advent of sin is to be traced to the first hominids who disobeyed God’s will but not necessarily to their having eaten from a tree in an actual place called the Garden of Eden several thousand years ago).

In reaction to this statement one is tempted to respond with "Come again?" It seems that Becker is caught in that bind which many prefer not to resolve, yet which must be faced with all the implications it entails. How do we define Original Sin without a real Adam and Eve clearly violating a direct command of God? What "Word of God" do we attribute to those misty years to which these early "hominids" could respond in faith? And how does one explain suffering and death without sin? Becker clearly does not desire to go where Spong has led, but is there a true 'middle path' for him and the like-minded to take instead? Again, the logical path lies before us with its choice. I fear that travel down the Evolutionary road only bodes great evil for all that we hold near and dear within our Faith, if those traveling it remain fully aware and honest with its direction as did Spong.

The Ordination of Women and Dr. Matthew Becker - Again

2011-06-23T20:05:00.000-07:00

Dr. Becker clearly wants a reaction. His continued rhetoric on the topic of women's ordination begs for a response. However, one wonders whether the powers that be in the LC-MS have paid any notice, which, I suspect, is what he most desires. He seems to be a rather lone voice in the wilderness on this one - at least in the cyber-wilderness of the Missouri Synod. It is tempting to respond, yet the approach of Dr. Becker makes it hard to address the issue without falling into the morass of emotionally-laden rhetoric. He appeals to all those crushed spirits denied what their hearts have told them was good, right and salutary. They have felt the call, so who can deny them? He lists testimonials and sympathetic cheers to bolster the appearance of a groundswell of support from the grassroots. An accusation of legalism makes an attempt to cast a disparaging light on the opposition. Add to this an appeal to the Hebrew form for Spirit in the feminine voice for scriptural ammunition, only to admit a neutral form in the Greek. We proved what? God is still the Father and Jesus is still the Son. His use of the Trinity unfortunately falls short of convincing us to adopt female pastors. So this will suffice for a response from this corner. The discussion has spent itself long ago, although looking to Germany Dr. Becker admires those who continue the seeming dialog, no doubt with the hope that given enough time the tides will turn in his direction. Given his logic it seems that all theological topics should be open for debate. Perhaps for this we can eventually adopt a 'fill-in-the-blank creed' so as to always remain current with the prevailing winds of change...

Bill O'Reilly a Universalist?

2011-04-27T07:32:00.000-07:00

Normally I enjoy listening to Bill O'Reilly - when he sticks to political themes. However, the otherwise erudite commentator strayed into theological waters too deep for him the other night. The topic: Is there a hell? Mr. O'Reilly, a card-carrying Roman Catholic, argued for a limited hell, unfortunately confirming the universalism inherent in post-Vatican II theology. His view, though, may best be labeled "semi-universalism" as he does not want to admit all to heaven, especially the notoriously evil dictators known to slaughter millions. Thus, Hitler was up for serious judgment, as were others of his kind. Yet when one came to Gandhi the rules shifted. The God he was taught to believe in was far too merciful to exclude this sterling example of peace and goodwill. Thus, Gandhi was almost certainly 'in.'

Mr. O'Reilly made several theological mistakes in his assessment of hell. Eternal punishment or eternal life is not based on behavior, even the worst of it. It is based on the presence or lack of genuine faith in Jesus. "Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live" (John 11:25b). Although it may be difficult for him to accept, any sin may be forgiven if repentance is genuine. No one wants to think about a Hitler or Stalin being in heaven given the atrocities they committed. Of course, we don't have to worry much in their case since evidence seems to point heavy in the direct of unbelief for both of these men. Nevertheless, if we go the route of Mr. O'Reilly and concede heaven for good behavior, then the entire argument of Romans itself fails (not to mention the doctrine of justification as revealed throughout scripture.) Abraham is not saved based on works, but faith. Thus our commentator has made a rather egregious law-gospel error of the first rate. Furthermore, although men such as Gandhi may be seen in the eyes of the world as virtuous, they are still far from perfect, a standard demanded by the Almighty for those wishing to attain heaven's glories by their own efforts. Gandhi required forgiveness for his sins the same as you or I. Unfortunately, from what we know of him he seemed to have respect for Jesus, but does not appear to have embraced him as his savior. While God alone knows the eternal fate of mankind, we are not given much faith evidence in his case to allow for great hope.

I am disappointed in Mr. O'Reilly's universalistic views, but even more disappointed that as a man of faith educated within the church he would not know better. Then again, may we assume that many modern post-Vatican II Catholics share the same convictions? Mr. O'Reilly remains content to ignore the clear witness of Holy Scripture in favor of his rationalized argument based on personal wish. When our Lord Himself declares that He is THE Way, THE Truth and THE Life, we are hard-pressed to look the other way and pretend He means something else. Still, this is what Mr. O'Reilly has done and in the process has become a universalist, embracing a dangerous false teaching as old as the church itself.

Although I have yet to read Rob Bell's book Love Wins, it seems that Evangelicals are far from immune to the same problem. Perhaps one of the readers here has information on his book and can comment.

What Makes a Good Theologian

2011-04-26T11:25:00.000-07:00

"Neither the accumulated wisdom of all the earth and the skies, nor languages, the Church Fathers, and daily reading of the Holy Scripture, nor immense learning and eloquence make a good theologian or pastor if the cross is not added. Through the cross God purifies, cleanses, strengthens, and perfects the light of His true knowledge of true faith in Christ, of true understanding of the divine promises, proper prayer, hope, humility, and all the virtues which He has first planted in the heart through the Word. Those are secure spirits rather than real Christians who live each day happily and joyfully, thinking that when they read the lament of an Ezekiel, the prayer of a Jonah, and other Psalms, they are hearing only empty words and vain dreams; therefore they can neither understand these descriptions of a faith struggling under the heaviest of trials nor can they speak of them to others. Accordingly we should equip ourselves for the Cross, which is just as necessary for those who wish to serve the Church as air and food are for the maintenance of the body...How can a person be able to understand the Gospel or teach it to others if he himself has not experienced the power of the Gospel in the midst of sorrows and trials?"

--David Chytraeus (1531-1600), " A Meditation on the Cross"

Luther on the Passion

2011-04-22T06:33:00.000-07:00

"He has shown us great kindness and we should never forget it, but always thank him and find comfort for ourselves, confessing, His pain is my comfort, his wounds, my healing; his punishment, my redemption; his death, my life. No one can preach it sufficiently; no one can be sufficiently amazed that so great a person came from heaven, stepped into our place, and suffered death for us. We have been visited graciously and redeemed with a great price."

--Luther's Good Friday sermon, preached 1533, at home in the Lutherhalle

Regarding the Survival of the Lutheran Church

2011-04-21T07:03:00.000-07:00

In response to the posed question: Will there be a Lutheran church in the 21st century?

"When Hermann Sasse tried to wake his slumbering fellow-Lutherans with the question about the very survival of the Lutheran church, he had in mind something else [than the presence of a Lutheran church in the future]. What is the meaning of this question? For one thing it cannot mean a glib recipe for success, like the popular sacrilege of 'goal-setting,' with the goal of Lutheran survival assured by keeping abreast of the most up-to-date trends with a Pandora's box full of clever methods and techniques. What will 'survive' in this way may well call itself 'Lutheran,' but it will have nothing to do with the Lutheran confession, which on the contrary will be happily-clappily trampled underfoot to the soft seduction or the raucous savagery of 'Christian music.' Or course, 'right doctrine and church' will survive - it is built on the Rock and cannot fail. The question is, will we? With us or without us, through us or despite us, God will see His 'right doctrine and church' through. Shall we, by God's grace, have a part in this survival? Will our long-suffering Synod and seminaries? The answers to these questions lie hidden in the inscrutable counsels of God. But as the mystery of the election of grace is meant not to paralyze us into inert passivity, but rather to nerve and steel us for the bedlam of the fray (Rom. 8:30, 31), so too the mystery of the church."

From: Dr. Kurt Marquart, "The Church In the Twenty-First Century: Will There Be a Lutheran One?" All Theology Is Christology: Essays in Honor of David P. Scaer, 2000, pages 181-182.

The Value of a Calendar of Commemorations in the Church

2011-04-20T17:51:00.000-07:00

"The calendar of commemorations is a kind of genealogical exploration of who one's spiritual ancestors have been. It is a way of encouraging people to examine the personal stories of certain women and men to learn of the richness and the potential of human life lived by the grace of God in Jesus Christ. A study of the calendar is at once a course in theology, church history (and sometimes political history as well), spirituality, and prayer. Such a calendar can convey something of the breadth of Christian history and provide a rich assorted variety of the young and the old, learned and ignorant, people of action and contemplatives, whose common denominator is simply that the grace of God worked mightily within them."

-From: Philip H. Pfatteicher, Festivals and Commemorations: Handbook to the Calendar in Lutheran Book of Worship, Augsburg, 1980, 16.

Chesterton on Tradition

2011-04-19T18:28:00.000-07:00

"Tradition may be defined as an extension of the franchise. Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of death...Tradition asks us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our father."

From: G. K. Chesteron, "Ethics of Elfdom," 48 as quoted by Maschke in Gathered Guests.

Worship and History

2011-04-19T07:53:00.000-07:00

"We Americans are a-historical. Most of us know very little about history and probably care even less...Unfortunately, most churches in this country have the same mentality. This is especially true of conservative Protestant churches...Unfortunately, when it comes to worship, there is a terrible price to pay for this attitude. When we cut ourselves off from the rich treasury of resources and from the collective spirituality of God's people through the ages, we diminish our vision of God. We isolate ourselves from what God would do in the world through his church."

From Robert Webber, Signs of Wonder: The Phenomenon of Convergence in Modern Liturgical and Charismatic Churches (Nashville: Abbot-Martyn, 1992), 9-10 - Quoted from Dr. Timothy Maschke's book, Gathered Guests: A Guide to Lutheran Worship

Looking into the Future

2011-04-15T18:17:00.000-07:00

If the trends remain where churches continue to adopt alternate worship forms, while distancing themselves more and more from their inherited traditions, what might the future look like 10, 20, 30 or more years from now? Prediction is always a risky and tricky business, and what follows certainly does not reflect the insights of a trained sociologist. It is simply a sense of what might be based on personal observations over the last couple of decades.

Larger congregations - those with memberships in the thousands - will generally continue to move away from the inherited traditions and will embrace cutting edge change. Those with blended worship and the few that still accommodate some semblance of a traditional service will abandon those transitional forms as the baby-boomer generation dies off. Within about 30 years many of these 'mega-churches' will appear little different than any other Evangelical mega-church. Of course, there are numerous churches that are already at this point. With the departure of those who may still cherish the old forms (a largely aging group well into their retirement years) there will no longer be a need to retain anything of traditional, liturgical worship. Exceptions will exist, but I predict they will be very few.
My sense is that if traditional forms survive - and they will! - it will be in the smallest congregations (300 and under), some of them in predominantly rural settings. The rural churches, unfortunately, will suffer the greatest attrition as family farms disappear and the population to sustain these churches becomes so thin as to make it impractical. Pastors in these small churches may well have to become bi-vocational in order to remain at these posts. Fortunately, if these smaller churches are in cities with an adequate industrial base or other vocational options, pastors will be able to find occupations sufficient to support their families. The long-term future may therefore be with small congregations in cities large enough to support a sustainable economy.
It may be necessary for some to become specialized church planters, planting mission starts that are committed from the beginning to a traditional-liturgical worship setting. These 'missions' may very well remain small for their entire history, but they will provide additional 'outposts' to keep the traditions alive in a living congregation. We need to shed ourselves of the thinking that 'bigger is better.' In fact, smaller parishes, such as those in the earliest history of the church, are best able to maintain internal discipline.
At present our institutions are not equipped or committed to prepare this type of church planter, so this too may need rethinking. With the aid of technology and the ability for online learning, new academies or institutes may need to be formed to develop such specialized leaders. Although I realize that residential communities provide the best environment for formation, this model will have to be modified to accommodate a geographically diverse group. In some ways I think that Nashotah House, where I am currently pursuing graduate work, may be providing a model worthy of looking at further. They are deeply committed to residential learning, especially since the chapel is the center of their life as a community. However, they are blending in semi-residential programs with intensive formats in order to work with students who cannot relocate for a full-time education. I realize that our own seminaries are also adapting similar programs as well. However, in 30 or 40 years will the existing institutions still be committed to training traditional pastors? I don't know. With the change in leadership swinging one way and then the other, it is hard to predict where the denomination will be in several decades, especially with additional institutional pressure to survive.

I very much want to see the church of my youth survive to future generations. However, I realize that it will not survive the same way as it has for me. I grew up in a congregation of 3,000. It is here I first learned the liturgy, beginning with TLH. Yet the world has changed dramatically, even within my 50 years lifetime. Demographics have shifted and communities are changing to meet new economic challenges. The church of tomorrow must take this all into account, but not for the sake of changing its identity, but rather to determine how best to keep these churches staffed and sustained. Like the Celts in the darkest centuries of the Middle Ages, we may be called to preserve the traditions the rest of our world is losing; preserving them for a time when they can be appreciated and utilized by larger communities of believers. However, this preservation will occur in much smaller communities, not unlike the monasteries of old that existed in the very midst of the predominant pagan culture.

Some Thoughts on Music and Trends in Worship

2011-04-15T15:36:00.000-07:00

If you are following my latest posts you see a trend here. Worship and the forms and music we use in its service lie close to my predominant concerns for the church. Given this concern I did a bit of 'surfing' on the net to see what others thought on this matter. What follows is a reflection on this and other thoughts.

Is music style a neutral issue? One blogger noted: "There’s nothing inherently profane about rap, hip hop, country and western, or any other style of music." I respectfully disagree. I listen to a lot of the newer styles that my son enjoys, so I believe I am not yet completely out of touch. Many of the styles this author notes evoke emotions and reactions quite foreign to the spirit of worship, especially Hebrews 12:28 which reminds us: "let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe...." I fail to see how rap and hip hop can convey any sense of holy reverence. Anyone who listens to such music knows that its primary intention is quite different. Given our culture can we hope to effectively divorce musical styles from the way they are used? Hardly. If you doubt this just try singing something sacred to a tune such as the theme song from "Gilligan's Island."
This same blogger also talks about "an emotional attraction and power [people] do not experience with traditional church music." Emotion is the bane of worship music in our time. We value emotion in such a way as to place it virtually on par with faith itself. At the conference this week one of the participants talked extensively about the need to tap into this area, especially for the younger crowd. He made note of the old worn out idea that we are too head oriented and not sufficiently heart oriented. The dichotomy is false and misleading. Emotions vacillate wildly and thus remain very unpredictable measures of faith. When we serve emotion we ultimately must sacrifice truth.
Another site writes: "Change will happen anyway, with or without us; it is a fact. Instead of refusing change and thus provoking revolt, we should become part of it, and make it happen in a responsible manner." In a similar vein the oldest living American who recently died encouraged people to embrace change, even when change slaps you in the face. "Every change is good," he said. Not true. Many changes, especially in the last few decades, have been disgraceful and revolting, particularly in the area of sexual freedom and experimentation. Not all change is good. This goes as well for changes in worship. Many changes now occurring are jettisoning our valued traditions and leaving behind the collective wisdom of generations. We are allowing the tastes and preferences of people to dictate our choices, creating a new way of leading by holding a moist finger in the air to see which way the prevailing winds are blowing today. Some of the changes in worship import a foreign and false theology into our midst attempting to blend Charismatic and Baptistic practice with Lutheran theology. The mix isn't working and we are eroding our identity and corrupting the faith of future generations.

These are just a few of my thoughts and I will probably post another post or two along these lines. Thank you for listening to my thoughts!

Hymnondy as Teacher of the Faith

2011-04-15T07:21:00.000-07:00

As I reflect on this past week's conference I admit I am deeply frustrated with many in the Lutheran church today who see little to no value in the venerable old hymns. Still, in all honesty, one can not forget the many who also value and treasure them and use them as part of the church's ongoing catechesis. Which reminded me of an article published in Concordia Theological Quarterly nearly 18 years ago. For those interested in the hymns as "teachers of the faith," I commend to you an article by Kantor Richard Resch of Concordia Theological Seminary - Ft. Wayne. It is entitled "Hymnody as Teacher of the Faith."

Resch's biography from the seminary website is as follows:
Richard C. Resch is a native of Rochester, New York. Kantor Resch graduated from Valparaiso University (B.Mus.), the Eastman School of Music (M.M.), and Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne (M.Div.). His organ study began in the Eastman School of Music Preparatory Department and then continued with the following organ professors: Paul Bunjes, Charles Ore, Philip Gehring, Russell Saunders, and David Craighead. He studied hymnology with Theodore Hoelty-Nickel and M. Alfred Bichsel and composition with Richard Wienhorst. He is Kantor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministry and Missions at Concordia Theological Seminary. In 1978, he founded the Seminary Kantorei and has since traveled and recorded six CDs with this choir. In 1999, he became director of the Seminary's Schola Cantorum. In 2000, he became the Co-Director of the Good Shepherd Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary. Reverend Resch is also the Kantor at St. Paul's Lutheran Church in Fort Wayne. He served on Synod's Commission on Worship from 1992–2001 and as Chairman from 1998–2001. He served on the LCMS Hymnody Committee for Lutheran Service Book. He was the Executive Producer and Narrator of The Good Shepherd Institute’s DVD “Singing the Faith: Living the Lutheran Musical Heritage” (2008). Kantor Resch is a frequent speaker and writer on topics concerning the relationship between theology and practice, as well as matters of church music.

Bored with the Liturgy

2011-04-13T10:34:00.000-07:00

Continuing my observations from the same conference, I was surprised to hear a layperson formally trained in the organ express a tendency to be bored with the repetition in the hymnal's order of services. In discussing worship we touched on the impact technology is having on the younger generations and how this affects their reception of the liturgy. It should be expected in a day of instant messaging and texting that some would find themselves impatient with the pace of historic forms. Yet boredom often arises from a lack of understanding. It became apparent to me in our discussions that a major culprit in the loss of this generation involves the unwillingness of church leaders to teach the forms of worship. Over and over again we are told that we need to meet people where they are at and accommodate their tastes, especially in music. Multiple services are offered at various times, creating a kind of segregation where the folks at 7:30 become a church separate from the folks at 9:00. This segregation eventually insulates the worshiper from contact with the ancient forms, and in short order these people loose contact and familiarity with it entirely. Thus, if they should be exposed to it later on it seems foreign in its unfamiliarity, and unable to understand it and lacking patience and the willingness of their leaders to teach it, they quickly become "bored." How sad.

Despite the fact that the conference attempted to initiate a discussion to bring the two sides in the worship debates closer, my fear is that we have arrived at a point in which "ne'er the twain shall meet." Pastors infatuated with the 'methobapticostal' forms (term invented by someone else, but appropriate here), have no intention of going back and reclaiming what they have thrown away. Those committed to the historic forms likewise have no intention of abandoning the tradition. We are on not two parallel tracts, but rather two diverging roads whose distance becomes wider with each passing decade. I wish that I could muster up more optimism for the future some desire to imagine, but my realistic side knows better. I fear that it will not be long before our ability to communicate with the same shared vocabulary will also fade with time.

Kyrie eleison.

German Liturgy?

2011-04-13T10:13:00.000-07:00

Over the last couple of days I have been at a district conference on worship modeled after the synodical one in 2010. Participants from the district offered brief talks on a variety of topics in an attempt to address, in part, the ongoing tension in Synod over the differences in worship. One speaker, obviously supportive of contemporary worship, made observations about the historic liturgy that unfortunately perpetuate the tendency to repeat stereotypes with no basis in fact. One of those stereotypes is the so-called the "German liturgy." Because our forefathers worshiped using the German tongue back in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it has become popular to thereby label the entire liturgy as Germanic. Ironically, the historic liturgy does not receive a similar label in the Catholic tradition when other cultures use it, yet the same historic divine service lies at its core. However, by thus labeling the liturgy detractors thereby enjoy the opportunity to disparage it in the eyes of others who see it as counterproductive to outreach and evangelism.

Another related caricature used by the same presenter was the so-called "High Church Liturgy." Left undefined the label causes the hearer to inaccurately differentiate between liturgy which includes chanting and spoken liturgy. Here again, at the core, we find the same essence, the only difference being presentation. Nevertheless, by adding the words "High Church" the speaker conjures up images of incense-waving deacons at a Catholic Mass, thereby prejudicing the hearer against the liturgy itself.

I suppose I should not be surprised that debates on worship should not escape the over generalizations and misinformation so common in political rhetoric as well. It simply disappoints me when this comes from clergy who should be sufficiently educated and informed to know the difference.

Outdated Words?

2011-04-08T06:35:00.000-07:00

The May 2011 issue of Reader's Digest recently reported: "The New American Bible is missing some words with outdated connotations, reports UPI, and now maybe young children will stop snickering when they hear them. Booty has become spoils of war, and virgin has become young woman." This move to deliberately change the meaning of a word was successfully tried way back when the RSV came out and eliminated "virgin" from Isaiah. I suspect that its removal from the New Testament is now complete as well. Young children may indeed 'snicker' out of embarrassment from certain words, but they of all people probably know the inherent difference in these words better than we realize. This is simply dishonest and ultimately attacks the very doctrine of the virgin birth. Of course, current culture little respects abstinence, so there is little wonder why the word has lost not only its lexical meaning, but its moral one as well. Another sad day for translation work.....

What Is Casual Worship?

2011-04-03T11:38:00.000-07:00

In a local paper a church ran an advertisement describing their worship as done in a "casual atmosphere." This atmosphere was further defined as "friendly, uplifting and relaxed." Somehow it seems that there is an inherent contradiction at work in the combination of "casual" and "worship." The word "worship" is of Old English derivation, meaning "worth-ship," "worthiness" or "honor." Obviously it indicates the respect and honor we render to another, which is still reflected in British usage today. The book of Hebrews calls on us to "offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire" (12:28,29). Elsewhere worship is described in terms of bowing down and kneeling, clearly references to deep respect and reverence.

Casual, as indicated in the ad, is a state of being relaxed and at ease. Casual is what I think of when I am lounging in my living room in front of the TV. Perhaps they would like me to have that image of their worship. Do they provide comfy couches instead of those unforgiving hardwood pews? Yet, can one ever be entirely relaxed and at ease when we are confessing our sins? How does a person stand in awe of the Almighty God and not be humbled? Relaxed describes time with friends and family, not with the creator of the Universe.

What ultimately makes "casual worship" at a church any better than something I could do in my own home? Somehow church should be different. Dr. Arthur Just's book on worship is entitled "Heaven on Earth." Isn't that what worship should evoke? The ancient cathedrals endeavored to create an 'atmosphere' of transcendence that lifted the eyes to heaven above through soaring spires and grand architecture. Yes, God is also very close, close enough to 'taste and see' as we encounter Him in Word and Sacrament. Yet even here the mystery of his presence brings us to that line between the earthly and heavenly that we struggle to understand, let alone adequately describe. Casual doesn't come close to touching this.

I guess I'm not quite ready for casual worship.

Nashotah House Updates Their Website

2011-04-02T17:27:00.000-07:00

Nashotah House Theological Seminary, the place where the Northwoods Seelsorger has chosen to pursue his post-graduate studies for the present, recently updated their website with a much more attractive and interactive setting. Faculty profiles include video introductions from the dean of the seminary as well as the associate dean of academic affairs, one of Northwoods' professors during the last two terms. While the site is a vast improvement over its previous one, it is obvious that it is still in a state of development.

Nashotah House positions itself within the Anglo-Catholic tradition, emphasizing the Benedictine Rule as the specific discipline of its spiritual and communal life. Although my initial intentions last year included centering my studies in the Biblical Studies emphasis, it turns out that as much of my studies will end up in the area of liturgics, specifically liturgical history, an area that happens to be a unique strength at Nashotah. This summer I will be registering for a class on the history and practice of the church year and an additional course on the history of English hymnody. These will be the last two required courses of my degree (S.T.M.), and I am awaiting approval of my thesis topic. The proposed topic concerns the Apocalypse and Worship, with an examination of the role and early omission of the Apocalypse in the lectionary and liturgical rites of the church along with a study of the inclusion of the Dignus Est in the later liturgy of the church. My intent is to combine my biblical studies efforts with my work in liturgics, utilizing an interdisciplinary approach instead of a single discipline. Stayed tuned for further developments....

The Ethics of War

2011-03-30T07:34:00.000-07:00

As our country enters into yet another military conflict, the debate again renews on whether or not such war efforts should be pursued. President Obama indicated in his presentation to the nation that the US was was justified in exercising military force on the moral grounds of protecting the people of this nation from the brutality of its current dictator. For the church the question has historically centered on the Just War Theory. Scripture clearly reveals the right of government to use deadly force (Romans 13), but it stops short in defining the precise parameters of that force, especially outside the boarders of the nation itself. One would hardly object to the need to protect the immediate safety and welfare of ones nation. However, to what degree is any given nation obligated to protect the safety and welfare of other nations, or to protect the citizens of these nations from their own leaders? Obama said that a massacre in Libya would have "stained the conscience of the world." Yet, should then not any unjustified violence against the citizens of the globe likewise affect our collective conscience and spur us into an immediate military response? Protecting my neighbor is a question that offers an obvious answer. Such an ethic is at the basis of the second table of the Law. However, does the second table also inform how a nation should protect the rights of its neighbors throughout the world? Here we stand on different ground and the answers seem more illusive. I raise the questions but admit that I don't have firm, well-reasoned answers at this point. What do you think?

The Power of Repitition

2011-03-28T17:28:00.000-07:00

Closing night for my son's high school musical came this past Saturday. My wife and I saw it several times and enjoyed every minute of the light-hearted play Guys and Dolls. However, ever since then those show tunes keep popping up randomly in my mind. Perhaps it speaks in part to the simple catchiness of the songs.Yet part of it is also due to sheer repetitiveness. This reminds me of the broader power of repetitiveness in matters of the faith as well. Carolyn Arends in "Going Down Singing - Why We Should Remember That We Will Die," an article in the April 2011 issue of Christianity Today, tells about the efforts of retired professor Margaret Guenther to ingrain the well-known Jesus Prayer into her daily routine by repetition in preparation for the time of her death. Guenther writes, "I hope that by imprinting [the Jesus Prayer] on my subconscious, it will be with me for the rest of my life, especially at the end, when other words will perhaps be lost to me."

In a recent visit to the local hospital I offered the Sacrament to an elderly member deeply in need of spiritual encouragement. Due to her difficulty in hearing the usual extra devotional reading from Scripture, with its corresponding homily, was waived and we concentrated on the liturgy alone. I did this knowing that even if she could not hear my every word, she could participate from memory. These words of our ancient worship forms were imbedded in her heart and mind through decades of use, reinforced monthly in my shut-in visitations. In the days ahead I will be called to minister to her in what appears to be the final days of her earthly journey, and I know that familiar words learned through a lifetime of repetition will form the foundation of my ministry to her.

When my life nears its own earthly end, I pray that the years I have spent in the repetition of the sacred liturgy, singing hymns first sung by my distant forefathers, will also comfort my heart in preparation to the final journey to depart and be with Christ.

R.C.H. Lenski (1864-1936)

2011-03-25T16:56:00.000-07:00

Decades after its release, the 12 volume commentary series by R.C.H. Lenski still finds avid supporters. When I graduated from the seminary over 20 years ago it would have been considered a standard resource for the new pastor. For the most part his theology was acceptable, although there were some issues, especially with Romans and what would be termed "Objective Justification." Lenski was born in 1864 and died over 71 years later, apparently of complications due, in part, to diabetes. A graduate of Capital University, he earned a BA degree in 1885, and then graduated from the affiliated seminary two years later, a shortened term due to the great need for pastors in the Ohio Synod. Like other well respected scholars highlighted on this blog in earlier posts, Lenski never received an earned doctorate. He did receive, however, a Doctor of Divinity degree at some later time. Nevertheless, he became, in his own time and much later, a recognized scholar on the New Testament. Ordained in 1887, Lenski served as a parish pastor for at least 22 years in four different parishes, three of them in Ohio. In 1909 he was elected president of the Western District of the Joint Synod of Ohio, a position in which he served for the next four years. In 1911 he was then called to Capital University where he taught for the next 11 years. Within 8 years he then became dean of the seminary. Initially called as Professor of Languages, he offered courses over the years in exegesis, dogmatics, apologetics, and homiletics. Lenski was a prolific author and a very self-motivated student of the scriptures. Reviews of his commentaries still receive positive marks, as is evidenced by those left on Amazon. As one who has used his books throughout my ministry, I am impressed by his attention to the intricacies of the original, being quite conversant with the tools of his time. Obviously we can see where he would benefit from the scholarship in subsequent generations, yet even now many of his astute observations on the text benefit the student.

Given the opportunity I would like to examine his work in a much more thorough fashion, especially his book on preaching, The Sermon: Its Homiletical Construction. For those desiring more information I would recommend the article "Richard Charles Henry Lenski: The Exegetical Task," by Stephen Geiger. Lenski is a model for the truly self-made scholar-pastor with a thorough love of God's Word in its original. My efforts pale against his.

President Harrison on the Tragedy in Japan

2011-03-13T15:47:00.000-07:00

A video message from President Harrison is available on the Witness, Mercy, Life Together blog site regarding the recent tragedy in Japan and the response of the LCMS. Information is also available on the LCMS web page, including updates from our missionaries. From the headlines it appears that our missionaries and staff from our partner church are ok. We give abundant thanks to God for his tremendous mercy. However, we continue to pray for all those in need as well as those who minister to them. The strength needed for such service will great indeed. Kyrie Eleison.

A Lost Generation?

2011-03-11T16:06:00.000-08:00

Today I was working on delinquent letters, not a very encouraging and uplifting experience. My church, while smaller on Sunday morning than a decade prior, still resonates with the sound of children, so calls for its demise remain premature. Nevertheless, tracking down the 20 and 30-somethings who have quietly drifted from the scene demoralizes you and you begin to ask yourself: Are we losing a generation? A question which caused me to google my frustration looking for answers. Lo and behold I found an insightful article in Christianity Today from November 2010 entitled "The Leavers: Young Doubters Exit the Church." Author Drew Dyck offers a reasoned and balanced examination of the situation that is worth reading. He does not present a 'magic bullet' to solve the problem or present a shallow hope filled with mere wishful thinking. Knowing we ultimately have no real control on the outside culture, he encourages to take a hard long look at the world inside the church and how we deal with people there. Truly, the old solutions of presenting more modern music and a more casual atmosphere in the sanctuary offer nothing to stem this tide. In the end we realize we need to keep proclaiming and preaching and teaching and trust as always in the greater wisdom of God and in his gracious will.

Remember the Church in Japan

2011-03-11T13:35:00.000-08:00

As with our brothers and sisters in New Zealand, now our prayers turn also to those in Japan. Recently a young man from our area was called to a position in Niigata and is scheduled to leave in about a week (his blog, for those interested in following his work this coming year, is "Mission in Japan.") I was curious about whether our sister church in Japan was affected there, so using the internet I was able to determine that at least in this city the effect seems to be on the lighter side (as far as the earthquake is concerned.) However, the Japan Lutheran Church also has a church in Tokyo where the damage is much greater.

The USGS has a map indicating the intensity of the quake in the various cities of Japan. Although the epicenter appears to be off the coast to the north-east, the greatest affect seems to be in the major metropolitan area around Tokyo and a bit south of there. The Lutheran Church in Japan has several congregations throughout the island and I have not yet determined where all of them are in relation to the damaged areas. This denomination is composed of 35 separate congregations, numbering 2,645 members. Wikipedia has an article about the church and its background, as well as a list of the cities where the various congregations are located.

Hopefully more information will be available soon, especially on the condition of our brothers and sisters in the Lutheran Church in Japan. Not only is the earthquake a great concern, but the tsunami is of equal if not greater concern. One map indicates that the effect of the tsunami was mainly in the area of Sendai to the north-east. There does not appear to be a congregation in the city of Sendai.

The King James Version (1611-2011)

2011-03-11T08:43:00.000-08:00

Dr. Becker draws attention to an anniversary many of us would probably have missed in a blog article entitled "The AV at 400." It turns out that 2011 is the quadricentential anniversary of the King James Version. My parents came of age with the KJV, but as for me it was the RSV. Nevertheless, the KJV has been part of my library and world, especially since I grew up with the Lutheran Hymnal in which much of the language is old Anglican/KJV. When I read Becker's article two books in my library came to mind that had received little to no attention in years, save being moved from one shelf to another:

White, James R. The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1995.
Moynahan, Brian. God's Bestseller: William Tyndale, Thomas More, and the Writing of the English Bible - A Story of Martyrdom and Betrayal. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2002.

It occurred to me that the 400th anniversary of the KJV might be a great excuse to finally pull these off the shelf and give them the attention they have deserved. White's book received endorsements from J.I. Packer and Bruce Metzger, the latter who recommended the book for anyone who is "troubled by criticisms of the English translations." It addresses an issue that was probably more prevalent back in the 90's, namely, that the KJV was the only divinely-endorsed translation, seemingly on par even with the original Greek itself.

Moynahan is a former history scholar at Cambridge and his book lays the historical foundation that leads to the KJV. I'm thinking that this might be the book to read first (once I finish the other tome I'm reading by former President Bush.)

The KJV remains as an historical landmark in literature, and regardless of subsequent developments in biblical studies and translations the beauty and art of its language cannot be surpassed.

Civil Discourse

2011-03-10T14:22:00.000-08:00

Fists thrust in the air in angry defiance. Faces contorted with enraged shouting. Noise so deafening that law enforcement is reduced to wearing earplugs. A Lybian protest against Muammar al-Gaddafi? Not quite. Think Madison instead. Regardless of the issues in debate at the moment, it is the behavior of those involved in the debate that has revealed a very ugly underside of our society. Overall it seems that our culture is being reduced to its lowest common denominator when it comes to how we communicate. Social network mediums such as Facebook bring out the most surprising narcissistic tendencies in people who seem completely uninhibited about sharing every thought, even those that are vindictive, mean-spirited, and vulgar. Of course, such behavior is hardly new. Still, it feels as if technology has given it a boost. Once content to vent their rage from the seeming anonymity of a car rushing through traffic, the new antagonist need only log on and spew through a keyboard in the comfort of their home.

The debate in my state, though, has also revealed something about our devolving society that should raise more than a passing concern. Increasingly polarized and rigidly entrenched, we fight more and more not for the basic rights of life and safety, but for our self-perceived entitlements. Sacrifice is a word best left to the Great Depression generation and those who weathered the struggle of World War II, abroad and stateside. We simply do not know what it means to do without and be content. The world owes us a standard of living to which we would like to become accustomed. Once condemned by more than one commandment, coveting has become a new virtue. Those who disagree with us are caricatured as heartless and oblivious to basic human need. It all appears to be the natural development, surprising at it may sound, of a society committed to the seeming ideal of relativism. To challenge something is to challenge everyone's right to be right, which is unacceptable and unfair. Truth is always the greatest casualty in such times, and all the more so now as the goal is to capture the sentiments of the common voter and thus tip the balance of yet another poll.

Our rhetoric betrays an embarrassing unwillingness to take responsibility. If all politics are local, then our current debate is reduced to a smaller circle yet: the fulfillment of personal perceived need and desire. All this, of course, does not avoid the world of the church. We are citizens of both kingdoms and influenced by each. To insist on standards and absolutes and boundaries seems so outdated to the person of the new era. Everyone has a right, and every right, however defined and developed, is absolute. The world revolves around me, but I want you to think it revolves around you. It's all in the way we spin the story and craft the image. Still, in the end the serpent can be found there just as he was at the beginning, sewing seeds of doubt, questioning the clear Word, leading us all too willingly to rebel for our own interests. And where does it end? Disarray, dissension, division, and disunity. Chaos. And we all know where this will eventually go if left unchecked and uncontrolled.

After a while the issues simply do not matter. The cloud of vile anger and selfish preoccupation has obscured the original point. If we care not for how we treat one another and how we communicate with one another, all else seems pointless. Can we find a way to talk again without yelling? Can we rediscover the means of disagreeing without assassinating character? Can we debate while still holding on to respect? We need to look long and hard at our communications and ask if we really are communicating, or merely pontificating to hear the echo of our own voice and view. This is the greater issue. But is anyone listening?

What is the Purpose Behind the Pre-Lent Sundays?

2011-03-05T08:44:00.000-08:00

In the old historic one-year series one encounters three Sundays prior to Lent that neither belong to Epiphany nor fully to Lent. They were dispensed with when the newer lectionaries came into being, although they are retained in the 'revised' one-year series as found in LSB (I say 'revised' since a comparison with the original historic series will reveal obvious changes in the lections from one to the other.) Having never grown up with these Sundays, and having never observed them in my over two decade ministry, I wondered what their purpose was. Epiphany I understand, and Lent makes sense to me, but why would one need a kind of "pre-Lent" season? It would seem according to one source I found that these Sundays are tied to the need for 40 fast days in the season. At one point in history not all the days of the week were designated as fast days, such as Thursday and Saturday, and of course, Sunday. With two extra days 'off the calendar,' so to speak, one needed to push the season back a bit to pick up the requisite number of fast days.

With the concept of 'fast days' changed in the passing centuries, one wonders what function the old pre-Lent Sundays fulfill. Lent prepares us for the Easter celebration, but does Lent itself need a time of preparation? The Gospel for Septuagesima is from Matthew 20, the parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard. In the three-year series that lection is placed in the latter part of the post-Pentecost Sundays (proper 20). At this point Jesus has left Galilee and is moving toward Jerusalem. Following this parable He openly predicts his suffering and death. Naturally, this would fit a Lenten theme. The following Sunday, Sexagesima, the Gospel is the Parable of the Sower from Luke 8. This lection is omitted from Series C where Luke is normally used. Since this is one of the parables recorded in each of the Gospels, it is not surprising that it would be included instead in Series A, but again in the post-Pentecost season. It seems that the organizers of the three-year series saw these periocopes more in keeping with the second half of the church year, than in the first. This, of course, could be a debatable point.

So, again I come back to my original point: What is the purpose of these three Sundays? My sense is they had a more obvious use in former times when fasting was more prevalent, although one wonders why the season of Lent was simply not extended to include this period. Yet is there still a use for a kind of transition period between post-Epiphany Sundays and the Sundays of Lent? And if so, why? Perhaps someone who knows more of the background of these Sundays might wish to offer an enlightened insight.

How I Concentrate Best

2011-02-28T13:53:00.000-08:00

Everyone works out their best method of studying. It's truly an individual thing. For me? I prefer a cat on the shoulders.

Gregory the Great on the Burdens of the Pastor

2011-02-28T13:06:00.000-08:00

"Some things, even though openly known, ought to be tolerated for a while. That is, when circumstances afford no suitable opportunity for openly correcting them. For sores by being cut at the wrong time are the worse inflamed; and, if medical treatments suit not the time, it is clear that they lose their medicinal function. But, while a fitting time for the correction of subordinates is being sought, the patience of the church leader is exercised under the very weight of their offenses.

Therefore, it is well said by the psalmist, 'Sinners have built upon my back' (Psalm 128:3; LXX). For on the back we support burdens; and therefore he complains that sinners had built upon his back, as if to say plainly: those who I am unable to correct I carry as a burden laid upon me."

Gregory the Great (c. AD 540-604)

The above quote was included in CPH's The Lord Will Answer (2004), described as "a daily prayer catechism." Gregory's words resonate with my own experience, although I have to admit that I struggle taking his advice completely to heart. I understand well that sometimes an easy solution to a problem does not always present itself, and we must bear with it until one is found. However, I can see how his advice that although something is "openly known" it should still be "tolerated for a while", might seem as if the pastor is being asked to essentially 'look the other way' for a time. Yet, do we know if he was referring to obvious sins within the congregation, or to circumstances, though undesirable, might still be tolerated, not as "openly known" sins, but rather as examples of sinful human weakness? Obviously, we cannot willfully "tolerate" open sins, especially those which are offensive to the church, although we often do this, pastor and people alike many times. And if he might be referring to human sinfulness, which to some degree he must, might he differentiate between those circumstances based upon the seriousness of the sin?

P.S.: The psalm verse to which Gregory quotes is quite different in the ESV, which is based on the Hebrew. It reads (Psalm 129:3): "The plowers plowed upon my back; they made long their furrows." This is quite different than the LXX. Might this present a problem for the 'proof text' he thus provides regarding his stated argument?

Loehe on Worship and the Liturgy - Part II

2011-02-27T10:44:00.000-08:00

"The Christian desires to draw near to God in humble, acceptable worship. He comes, in company with his fellow Christians, from the conflicts of the past week, bearing on his heart the burdens of many defeats and the joys of few victories. He knows, that in spite of his best efforts his conduct has not been wholly pleasing to God. Before him lies now a new week with its thousand hopes and fears; and before he dares enter upon this new week, he must hold communion with God his heavenly Father. But how shall he approach his God who dwells in unapproachable light? First of all he must be pardoned of his sins, and be made sensible of such pardon. For this purpose there is no form better adapted than that given in this Liturgy for Confession and Absolution. The Confiteor is therefore the first part of a normal Order for public worship.

In the Confiteor the soul has been delivered from the burdens of the past defeats, and is now prepared to take a further step in its approach to God. The worshiper is now prepared to enter upon the meaning and character of the particular day, which are announced to him in the Introit. To the peace, experienced in hearing the Absolution, are thus added the joys of the particular festival.....

Beings cleansed from sin, and having entered upon the peculiar joys of the particular festival, the worshiper finds that earth has still other burdens and sorrows which prove a present and future hindrance to holiness. Life, death and eternity, upon each of which sin has cast its dark shadow, are things well able to make the soul tremble whenever it contemplates them. To be cleansed from the sins of the past week is no assurance of immunity from failure for the next. Therefore, the Kyrie, comprehending, in spite of its brevity, a prayer for temporal and eternal deliverance, comes next in the Order."

(Same reference as previous post, pages XII - XIII)

Loehe on Worship and the Liturgy

2011-02-26T11:34:00.000-08:00

"In public worship the Church experiences an especial nearness to God; she approaches into the very presence of the Bridegroom, and tastes the blessedness of Heaven even here below. Public worship is the prettiest flower that can bloom on human stems. The Order or Liturgy in which this worship is expressed ought therefore to be the image of the inner unity and harmony of the spiritual life - an ecclesiastical aesthetic in concrete form. In the Church's inner life, as well as in the public expression of her worship, Word and Sacrament constitute the center. Like the waves of the sea, breaking and falling upon the rocks, the various forms of the Liturgy must be determined by this central point; they cannot be arbitrarily chosen, but must be ordered and arranged according to the relation which they bear to Word and Sacrament. This center determines the steps in the Plan of Salvation, and this in turn determines the Order of public worship. A spirituality which disregards the fixed order in the Plan of Salvation is inconceivable, so also is its expression impossible in an Order of public worship which does not logically follow these same steps.

The arrangement of the parts in the Order for the Chief Service on the Lord's day may be compared to twin mountains, one of whose heights is a little lower than the other. The former of these heights, and the lower, is the Sermon; and the other, and the higher, is the Sacrament of the Altar, without the celebration of which no public worship is complete. In public worship the soul is engaged in an ascent, the goal of which is reached at the Table of the Lord, than which there is nothing higher - nothing diviner on earth, only Heaven remains above. In the Holy Supper the deepest longings of the soul are satisfied, as the humble worshiper joyfully declares in the Nunc Dimittis."

--Willelm Loehe, Liturgy for Christian Congregations of the Lutheran Faith,Third Edition by J. Deinzer, translated by the Rev. R.C. Longaker - 1902 (Reprinted in 1996 by Repristination Press), pages XI - XII.

Concordia Theology

2011-02-26T08:23:00.000-08:00

Some of you probably already discovered this. According to the archives activity goes back to this past September. At any rate, if you haven't discovered it, this appears to be a site worth bookmarking (Concordia Theology). Concordia Seminary - St. Louis constructed a very appealing and interactive page in which one can engage the seminary, its faculty and unearth some theological gems along the way. When I have a bit more time I will explore further.

The Future of Theological Education

2011-02-23T07:19:00.000-08:00

Discussions as of late have again turned to the future of theological eduction. Gottesdienst Online waded back into the fray with the article "Economics in One Lesson - or - My Plan to Save the Seminaries," a followup, of sorts to a related article in 2010, "Don't Go to the Seminary." At the center of the debate one finds the recurring issue of the "Specific Ministry Program," adopted by the Missouri Synod at its convention in 2007. The Brothers of John the Steadfast recently supplied yet another article, this one by Issues, Etc's Todd Wilken, entitled "A New Category of Pastor: A Prescient Warning." A review of the above writings will bring you up to speed with the discussion, at least among those concerned for the current state of theological education.

When the SMP program was initially proposed and approved, I had my own concerns. Having witnessed the weaknesses in the old DELTO program (Distance Education Leading to Ordination), it seemed that a replacement of the program might lead to much needed improvements. However, when I heard that the requirement for Greek was waived in this new adventure, my concerns raised considerably. Was this yet another shortcut to fast track men to the finish line? Having had a discussion with a man a couple of years ago who wished to take advantage of the program, I remember stressing at the time that this was intended specifically for special situations, such a ethnic ministries, where options were limited and one needed to identify the man from within the local culture itself. Since that time reports have drifted my way of situations where larger parishes are using the program, it seems, in ways not originally intended. For the sake of the Synod a full and complete review of the program is in order, along with a detailed report to the next convention. I hope someone is on that one.

All this brings to the fore the ongoing question of what theological education should look like in our new era. Having recently entered back into post-graduate theological education myself, I remember weighing the various options and debating with myself which choice offered the best education. For a long time online programs were tempting. They offered convenience. Reputable institutions now offered them. With access to the internet the promise of an advanced degree of my choice seemed only a keystroke away. In the end I chose a more residential program that was only 3 1/2 to 4 hours away, an important criteria for me. Having now experienced the program, I realized again the value of ones education occurring in the context of community, with the dynamic of discussion between student and professor as well as between the students themselves. Admittedly, with the technology available to us, it can be argued that the same can be reproduced via chat rooms and such. Perhaps. Still, something seems missing, not to mention the additional benefit of community worship. This cannot be reproduced electronically.

I realize that the future of theological education will involve more of a distance component than in previous generations. Many students come as second career men, some with families and debts in tow. The unique challenge of ethnic ministries also presents challenges that sometimes are best met by extension-based education. The article referenced above on Gottesdienst presents some interesting solutions. However, some of the solutions simply will not occur in this Synod, in this time. SMP, for good and/or ill, is no doubt here to stay for the indefinite future. The Association of Theological Schools continues to endorse higher and higher percentages of distance components for accredited institutions. Class sizes may also remain smaller in future years, forcing the seminaries into creative solutions that may not always appeal to us, as they try to attract new students who simply will not consent to a complete residential program. Add to this the larger, mega churches, whose influence (disproportionate though it be in respect to the fact that they represent a small minority of parishes overall), will continue to press for changes to suit their own needs. Where will this all lead? Who knows? Still, I think we must anticipate where it is going and ask the hard questions.

I remain concerned for the future of theological education. Hopefully I will have a voice in the decisions that determine changes yet to come. As one who continues to be academically involved in the process I am prepared to work for better solutions.

Earthquake in Christchurch

2011-02-22T09:51:00.000-08:00

By now many who watch the national news are no doubt aware of the devastation at Christchurch, New Zealand. Pr. Henderson, of Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia (Dr. Marquart' former home) has provided some information and video footage at his site (Glosses From An Old Manse), and I am sure will keep us up to date on any developments as he learns of them. I have seen nothing at the LCMS website, although I assume something will be forthcoming, especially from Lutheran World Relief. They are in our prayers.

One Year vs. a Three Year Lectionary

2011-02-21T14:25:00.000-08:00

In anticipation of doing some research on the lectionary I stumbled across the issue of the One Year (Historic) Lectionary vs. the Three Year Lectionary. For the entirety of my 23+ years of ministry I have used the Three Year series. This stems simply from the fact that the churches which I served had this tradition prior to my arrival and the inserts or pre-printed bulletins they used included this series. Over the years I have heard repeated promotion and defense of the One Year series, so this is not something new to me. However, I don't remember hearing it discussed at seminary, at least not in a very in-depth way. Furthermore, this is not a topic that captured my interest. Perhaps that is due to the fact that I haven't understood the finer points of the debate.

My recent interest in the lectionary, by the way, comes from a proposed master's thesis on the Apocalypse (book of Revelation) and the liturgy. A decision from Nashotah on my proposal will not come until after the first of March when the committee next meets. What I hope to explore concerns the historic omission of the Apocalypse from the liturgy and lectionary, with its inclusion coming only in the 20th century. Stay tuned. Maybe I'll have something intelligent to offer down the road.

But let me get back to the original issue. One argument I read in defense of the One Year series regards the greater opportunity this series offers the church to learn and commit to memory God's Word. While an original intent with the Three Year series (coming out of reforms in Vatican II) was to expose the church to a larger selection of scripture, some believe that with changing patterns of attendance, where people no longer consistently and sequentially come Sunday after Sunday, this intent has fallen far short of delivering what it desired. That may be true. The exposure of people to the Word is truly 'hit and miss' whatever series you employ. Perhaps the argument is strengthened for the One Year series in that over an extended period of time the odds of people hearing sermons on a given text are improved, versus the chance they might not hear it again for another three years - or longer.

Another argument could involve the antiquity of the series. Obviously the core of the One Year series goes back, it would seem, to Luther and maybe beyond. Antiquity in the lectionary, as in the liturgy itself, demonstrates a potential connection to the wisdom of the ancient fathers. It would be interesting to see a paper or thesis which studies this lectionary and whatever patterns can be detected which lend greater credence to its use. Do we know substantive reasons behind the original selection of the lections? Questions to ponder.

On the other hand does a good defense or study of the Three Year series exist? I am not sure if my own research will delve into such areas. Nevertheless, they are intriguing questions to explore....

A Reminder of Past Suffering

2011-02-21T07:14:00.000-08:00

How much could we endure for the sake of Christ? Can we even begin to imagine years separated from our families, beatings where inhuman torture nearly crushed both mind and body, despair-inducing isolation in dark, dank cells, or the sheer hatred that evil can produce? As I flipped through the pages of Richard Wurmbrand's Tortured for Christ and Harlan Popov's Tortured for His Faith, books I had read years ago and nearly forgotten, images of unbelievable suffering came back into clear view. Even though people of my generation came of age in the era of the Iron Curtain and the Cold War, the memories have faded, except for reminders in old films. Yet men like Richard and Harlan, and countless others both in Russsia and the other satellite states of Eastern Europe, endured unspeakable atrocities in the name of their Savior at a time when the USSR became the grand experiment of the perfect atheistic state. Of course these sufferings still exist and many attempt to keep them before our eyes lest we lose sight of their sacrifice. As we pack stadiums and mega-churches with thousands, counting success in the church by size and wealth, and wring our hands when some slight opposition to the faith arises, we should stand humbled in the presence of these suffering saints who found greater honor and glory in the cross than in earthly comfort. This Thursday we observe the feast day of St. Mathaias, the apostle chosen to replace Judas. Since outside of the Acts of the Apostles no scriptural evidence exists of his life and work, we are left with secondary sources, many of which differ. On my calendar, however, the color is red, indicating that the church believes him to have ended his life as a martyr. The Eastern Church celebrates his feast day on August 14, and now the Catholics, it seems, have since moved it to May 14, so we lack consensus even on the day of his remembrance. Nevertheless, Matthias is believed to be a saint who gave his life in service to his Lord, suffering well beyond what many of us may ever be called to do. May his feast day remind us of the suffering church, the church called to sacrifice for the sake of the Gospel, the church willing to endure injustice and loss that it might serve the world by giving it life in Christ.

For more information on current persecution of the Christian Church, go to International Christian Concern or Voice of the Martyrs, as two places to begin. BTW, you can get a copy of Wurmbrand's book at the VOM site. For a map of the restricted nations, places that actively oppose and persecute the church, go here.

The Concept of the Fundamental Human Right

2011-02-19T21:11:00.000-08:00

Right now my state has taken front stage in the news as thousands of people protest outside our capital. The issue revolves around our governor's proposal to remove collective bargaining as a right of most unionized state workers, which includes public school teachers. Given the loud and heated rhetoric on the subject, one is led to believe that this "right" to "collectively bargain" -in this case for health care and other fringes on the state level - is an inherent, fundamental human right. In doing some brief internet research I discovered that such a belief indeed exists, but it appears to be something connected more with Europe and the UN, than with the US as such. Obviously, some of the largest corporations in the US lack any provision for collective bargaining: Walmart, IBM, McDonalds, to name a few. Now given the premise of collective bargaining as a fundamental human right, one would feel compelled to therefore condemn these companies as in grave moral danger. Which is where this issue impacts this blog. I do not normally deal with national political issues since my focus is mainly theological in nature. However, the issue of fundamental human rights brings up questions of ethics, and ethics is a topic of which the church takes interest. I do not wish here to enter into the political nature of the debate, as such. The questions at this level concern economics and legislative protocol. Whether the governor should open up the issue to a public referendum or utilize his own powers independent of public debate is not my concern. My concern is whether the right of workers to collectively bargain as a union rises to the level of a fundamental human right equal to other rights such as those protecting people from violence, abuse and exploitation. Does the government have the right itself to impose limits on benefits to its own workers such as other businesses do? Or is the government morally obligated to provide the right for its workers to participate in determining these benefits? Notice I said "morally obligated." Interesting to note is an article written by Roy Adams of McMaster University in Canada in 1999. His conclusion is that collective bargaining is a fundamental human right and that opposing this is a moral "violation." I suspect that many protesting outside the Wisconsin capital right now would agree. Yet I am not so sure. A Christian, while appreciating his national rights and giving thanks to God for his freedom, is still primarily concerned for his responsibility to his neighbor in love, not his rights. Considering that many who are protesting feel they are fighting for the rights of others, does such a Christian ethic come to bear? Furthermore, is the right to bargain with one's employer for one's benefits a "right" for which a Christian will also violate his responsibility to his vocation in order to protect that right? I ask this as several schools in my state have shut down because their teachers did not show up, and where several state senators left the state to avoid being compelled by the state police to do their job. Or are these questions the concern at all of people of faith?

A Code of Honor

2011-02-17T06:08:00.000-08:00

After a hiatus from my involvement with our local Boy Scout troop, I spent three days in a row reengaging, beginning with an Eagle court of honor and ending with a board of review for yet another Eagle scout. Watching these emerging young men make the final step in their scouting journey is always encouraging, especially if you have been part of that journey as an adult leader. However, it should be noted that in scouting the Eagle rank, the highest of the ranks in scouting, does not represent an end in their involvement, but rather a new beginning. It also carries with it a new burden, the burden of being an icon of the highest ideals of scouting. Both young men were reminded repeatedly of this burden and the charge to now step forward as a leader of the generation to follow them, exhibiting more than ever the ideals of the movement as they have confessed them countless times before in meetings and ceremonies.

As a scout leader I too have joined in these pledges beginning with the familiar "on my honor...." Yet as a pastor and community leader these words always carry additional weight. Honor represents a code of conduct that reflects back on all that I represent. Even though I will never be perfect, I realize that my behavior must always strive to be respectful of what I represent rather than bringing shame to those with whom I am joined by common cause. I pray I may live up to this in the days my Lord still allows me to serve.

As I wore the uniform and saluted the flag, I felt that familiar sense of national pride and was pleased to carry its honor. Yet as I reflect back on my church I wonder, do others who represent the fellowship to which we belong feel as much a sense of being honored? Over the years the initials LCMS have sometimes been uttered with barely veiled contempt, or have been stated as a contradistinction to some larger ideal of Christian virtue the synod seemingly failed to uphold. Likewise the label "Lutheran." How often has the phrase been heard "I am a Christian first and a Lutheran second," as if the first is somehow different or less than the second. As an officer of my synod I know only too well that the denomination with which I am joined lacks perfection. We are sinners. Yet the confession we proclaim remains grounded in a scripture independent of my own moral failings or the foibles of those in the membership. It is still an honor to represent that confession, not a shame, and I strive to be faithful as its representative.

Of course, such an effort does not come easily. Popular opinion and personal desires rebel against its principles constantly, making association with the fellowship appear at times as almost less than Christian. "Missouri Synod" carries with it in some circles a sense of narrow-minded isolationism or a kind of religious bigotry that looks down on others and wishes only to exclude those different. Faithfulness brings boundaries, and boundaries naturally exclude, and exclusion, even if done with respect and concern, still manages to be interpreted as less than loving. Thus, many distance themselves from the identity with the group, veiling the label, avoiding association, changing practice to be more accommodating to whatever may be desired.

Still, as I spent time among the Anglicans, especially last summer, I found my differences, even in open practice, to offer an opportunity for teaching. Was it awkward to always step out of the way as everyone else went forward to receive the Eucharist? Yes. Yet I was pleasantly surprised when one of the Episcopal clergy, who was in my dorm, later expressed his respect for my actions. He may not have completely understood or even agreed with what I felt I needed to do, but he respected it. He respected the honor with which I held my confession. I also endeavored not to reinforce stereotypes as I upheld my confession. One can be faithful without being obnoxious or pompous. That is also an ideal we want to see in our scouts: humility. You carry a burden of honor, not a personal mantle of praise.

A battle rages even today in the church over what this code of honor will eventually become. I fear in a world that tends to weaken commitment and dilute identity that the trend will be to distance rather than confess. Yet I pray nevertheless that courage will still remain, conditioned by a love for all.

Presbyterians Weigh in on Gay Clergy

2011-02-12T07:28:00.000-08:00

It's only a small meeting of about 75 representatives from central and northeastern Wisconsin. Nevertheless, their meeting today, about an hour drive from my home, will decide to support or oppose homosexuality within Presbyterian leadership. According to the Associated Press a majority of the 173 Presbyterian regional organizations must ratify or reject the issue. The Wausau Daily Herald interviewed the local Presbyterian pastor for his reaction, and he indicated that prohibiting people from serving the church based on sexual orientation "runs contrary to Christian theology that no one is perfect." Come again? I hope that the paper simply misinterpreted or misunderstood what he said. If this is accurate, I guess it means two things, neither of which will certainly be acceptable to either side: 1.) homosexuality is a human imperfection, and 2.) homosexuality is an imperfection no different than any other physical or psychological abnormality common to man, but not prohibitive to competent functioning. Oh, and don't forget, that is part of "Christian theology." I'm lost.....

Theology on Ground Level

2011-02-11T06:26:00.000-08:00

Going back to graduate school placed me into the heady invigorating world of academic theological deliberations. Keeping abreast of ongoing debates among scholars conservative and liberal alike allows me the chance to continually sharpen those reemerging skills. However, as I was reminded yesterday in the basement of my church with six students at the adult instruction class, theology must ultimately address issues affecting the real-time lives of God's people. Last night we discussed the age-old question of sin and the Fall in Eden and the ancient tactics of the evil one. Parish work affords ample opportunity to wrestle with the most difficult theological dilemmas, as sin continually poses challenges to the application of law and gospel in the most fundamental way.

In my corner of the world two of the challenges that most frequently complicate the life of the parish involve issues impacting morality (e.g. cohabitation) and fellowship (e.g. close communion). While the answers often seem clear and obvious to me as a pastor, the solutions are another story. Parish-level theology is complicated in large part because of the fellowship in which it must be practiced. The law's hammer crushes the pride of sin and checks our selfish desire to be our own god, but its impact also sends unintended reverberations throughout family units in ways that too often obscure the real message. Nothing is more personal than ones family, and when issues cause people to break their fellowship in a church where family ties go deep, the fallout sends waves of hurt into many lives, including the pastor. How can we refuse to commune someone's daughter whose parents know to be a 'good Christian girl'? How dare we judge the private decisions of people who are faced with economic challenges that prohibit the luxury of independent living! Sure, there is the 'letter of the law,' but what about the exceptions every law is afforded for the sake of real people with messy, complicated lives? Are we heartless?

If you have ministered at this level you know only too well the spirit of these quandaries. As I often remind my people, there is a reason the hymnal has a section entitled "The Church Militant." Satan has constructed his chapel next to our cathedral and will not be closing any time soon. As he cracked the door with his first question of doubt and sowed the seeds that bore the fruit of rebellion against the very Word of God, so this well-worn pattern is employed with tireless application day in and day out. Pastors remain at the heart of a battle and must never relax so long that they forget their own vulnerabilities and inherent weaknesses.

With that in mind I realize I must retire for a time to God's Word and to prayer. Every day the evil one works to keep me from it, and I confess has secured a good record of victory on too many days. May the Lord bless you in this battle as you minister in the kingdom. Theology on ground level is tough work.

Allowing Murray Equal Time

2011-02-10T16:41:00.000-08:00

Since Dr. Becker has resurrected his swipe at Murray's book, it seemed only proper that somewhere Dr. Murray be given equal time in response. Unfortunately when someone regularly blogs, those to whom they refer are not afforded the opportunity for rebuttal. The venue may or may not be widely read, and thus the subject of a post may not even know he or she became the center of a discussion. For those who may have picked up on Becker's argument and would like to hear the "other side" of the issue, may I propose a good response from Murray's own pen? If you are so inclined I would suggest reading his paper "The Third Use of the Law: The Author Responds to His Critics," which was published in CTQ, vol. 72, 2008. Dr. Murray does a masterful job at examining not just the concerns of his critics, but the reason why some are so negatively inclined toward the subject of the third use of the law in the first place. One would think, from Becker's scathing review of Murray's book, Law, Life, and the Living God (CPH, 2002), that the reactions to this work are all negative. However, as happens with any book, the reviews were predictably mixed, representing polar opposites in some cases. Obviously this subject still generates heat, and when it comes to the interpretation of history, especially the history of the LCMS in the darker days of the mid-70's, many have a horse in the race. To gain a better understanding of this aspect of the debate I would recommend Dr. Lawrence Rast's brief article "The Third Use of the Law: Keeping Up to Date with an Old Issue" (CTQ, vol. 69, 2005).

O.k., I feel better now. But does anyone really care? :)

Becker's Not So Thinly Veiled Disdain of Scaer and Murray

2011-02-10T06:38:00.000-08:00

Dr. Matthew Becker reveals his not so thinly veiled disdain for Missouri's right in his latest post defending the work and theology of Werner Elert. You can read his post and judge for yourself, but his lack of any scholarly respect for Dr. David Scaer of CTS-Ft. Wayne and Dr. Scott Murray, pastor and synodical vice president is quite transparent. For example, he refers to Murray's book on the law, which was based, I think, on his doctoral work, as a "shallow and mistaken study." Dr. Lawrence Rast provides a more positive review in a 2005 CTQ article. He then cuts them down again at the end of his article by noting two other men as "better scholars." Dr. David Scaer remains one of Missouri's greatest scholars, and I think that Becker could have acknowledged his theological acumen with a bit more graciousness.

His admiration for Missouri's former left and current theologians of the ELCA seems far greater than anything he would offer for those in Missouri, at least those who seem to him to be on the right of the spectrum. I continue to wonder, given his disdain of these scholars and the obvious direction the Synod is taking under President Harrison, why he doesn't feel compelled to move over to a denomination more sympathetic to his convictions. Does he hold out hope that the denomination will one day officially embrace his views on women's ordination and evolution? Given that close communion itself has been memorialized and discussed at conventions for the last 41 years without moving away from the original point, I suspect his hopes for change in these other spheres, if they are there, are not encouraging. So does he remain simply to complain and cut down from the side and remain a kind of 'thorn' in Missouri's side? I don't know. Perhaps future posts might reveal his full vision as a theologian within Missouri.

Postscript: I find it interesting that the theologian Becker chose to 'defend' also wrote a significant piece of scholarship, published by CPH in 1966, which has been used for years as a foundation of the close communion practice in Missouri. The book is Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries. I wonder what Dr. Becker thinks of this work since I would imagine that his fellowship preferences are probably much broader than Missouri's.

Also, I have to compliment Dr. Becker for his recent willingness to assist a vacant parish in Michigan City, Indiana as a supply pastor. The parish lost its young pastor to an unexpected and sudden death. Immanuel Lutheran Church's website with Becker can be found here. Despite my differences with Dr. Becker's theology, I always respect an ordained academic who is willing to serve the church as a pastor as well as a scholar.

Bishop Bo Giertz (1905-1998)

2011-02-09T07:09:00.000-08:00

In my unintended series on significant theologians of the 20th century without earned doctorates, yet another name must be added: Bo Giertz. As far as I can determine, this great theologian of Sweden who became a very prolific and popular writer while also attaining great respect as a scholar, never earned an actual doctoral degree. Yet, as happens so often, he is the subject of dissertations himself and remains an inspiration for generations of theologians and pastors.

Many have provided more than adequate summaries of this great man's life, a feat I will not attempt to reproduce here. A nice biographical sketch can be found at the Lutheran Student Fellowship of Pittsburgh, among other places. Basically, Giertz was a man of the church. His active career can be divided into two parts: his time as a parish pastor in Torpa, Sweden (1938-1949), and his time as a bishop in the Church of Sweden in Gothenburg (1949-1970). His first few years in the ministry (1934-1938) appear to have been spent as an assistant to the bishop with special responsibilities for work with the youth. The first eleven years as a parish pastor produced an incredible output of writing, which included what is most certainly his most famous work, the Hammer of God, a novel written in 1941. This was the first work of Giertz to enter my own library, a book I purchased before becoming a pastor, yet did not finish reading until well into my ministry. The second work to enter my library was a little booklet entitled "Liturgy and Spiritual Awakening," published in 1950. It is actually part of the pastoral letter Giertz wrote upon taking up his position as bishop. My copy came by way of the library of the Rev. W. H. Krieger, former pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church, Traverse City, where I once served as senior pastor years after him. Krieger, also a past president of the Michigan District and vice president of Synod, was one of the early proponents of liturgical renewal in Synod, which he modeled at Trinity and is still evident today.

A short sample from that booklet shows us Giertz's deep appreciation for the ancient liturgical forms, but always as tools useful in the present as well:

Liturgy "speaks wisdom among those who are full grown." It uses all the richness of the Scriptures, all the meaningful symbols and prefigurements of Christ in the Old Testament. It prays the prayers of the Psalter anew, it listens to the prophesies and finds in them the deepest mysteries of the gospel. It loves exactly those hidden things that only slowly unfold themselves and that constantly give the mind something new to ponder. Just because the liturgy constantly turns back to the same holy forms, it dares to make use of the hidden wisdom of the Scriptures. Therefore it also loves that music which beneath an obvious simplicity hides unfathomable depths of humble worship and joyful lodging. It loves to lift its soul to God in the haunting music of the Kyrie or the reverent joy of the Preface. In all this it is very unlike the mood of awakening....

The good bishop understood the strength and invaluable treasure we have in the liturgy, and speaks well to our day when the ancient forms are frequently discarded and dispensed in exchange for what are seen as more effective and useful forms. Note his wise words next to those who have fallen in love with the contemporary fixation with change, yet unintentionally fall into the very formalism they despise:

There can be no normal church life without liturgy. Sacraments need form, the order of worship must have some definite pattern. It is possible to live for a short time on improvisations and on forms that are constantly changing and being made over. One may use only free prayers and yet create a new ritual for every worship situation. But the possibilities are soon exhausted. One will have to repeat, and with that the making of rituals is in full swing. In circles where people seek to live without any forms, new forms are nevertheless constantly taking shape. Favorite songs are used again and again with monotonous regularity, certain prayer expressions are constantly repeated, traditions take form and traditional yearly ceremonies are observed. But it would not be wrong to say that the new forms that grow up in this way are usually less attractive and more profane than the ancient liturgy. They contain less of God's Word, they pray and speak without Scriptural direction, they are not so much concerned about expressing the whole content of Scriptures, but are satisfied with one thing or another that seems to be especially attractive or popular. The new liturgy that grows in this manner is poorer, less Biblical, and less nourishing to the soul than the discarded ancient order.

Bishop Gietz is an old voice needed in our new day more now than ever.

And this is all the more amazing considering that this great champion for the truth came from a position of atheism as his starting point. He would also later become a voice in opposition to the liberalizing trends in his own church body, such as the ordination of women which he opposed. Even in retirement he did not stop working and writing, and remains for all of us an example of a true churchman.

The only other work of Giertz presently in my library is the more recently translated devotional To Live With Christ. It was published by Concordia Publishing House in 2008, and is now also available in Kindle and ePub editions, for those able to utilize it in this way. I have used it and highly recommend it. As more of his work is translated and published I hope to add these to my library in time as well.

May his work continue to inspire and instruct the church today. We need his wisdom.

[For those desiring a more developed bibliography for further reading and study of Giertz, go to this site.]

Anyone Know What Happened to These Professors?

2011-02-08T09:35:00.000-08:00

I was recently looking through one of the academic catalogs from Concordia Theological Seminary-Ft. Wayne and wondered what happened to a couple of professors who left the seminary in the early to mid-2000's. Neither is listed on the clergy roster of Synod, and in doing a Google search it seems that little is available there also. The professors both taught OT exegesis. They are Chad Bird and Douglas McC. L. Judisch. Bird, it appears has done some adjunct work for Clarendon College as recently as last spring, but is not listed among their faculty for this year. He has also been involved in the doctoral program at Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, OH since 2003, according to an online CV. Dr. Judisch, who was my OT prof at Ft. Wayne also shows up on the net, but only in reference to past works he has authored. Both of these men contributed well-received books and writings over the years. Pr. Bird (I think he is still a pastor?) also wrote at least one of the hymns in the Lutheran Service Book. I'm simply curious where they are at now and what they might be doing in the church-at-large. Does anyone know?

Martin Franzmann

2011-02-06T15:02:00.000-08:00

As we sang his now classic hymn in church this morning, "Thy Strong Word," I was reminded of another great theologian of the 20th century; a theologian who also did not appear to have secured an earned doctorate in his lifetime. Martin Franzmann (1907-1976) remains influential even to this day not only through his hymnody, but also through his prolific writing. Recently I had the occasion to use his commentary on Romans for one of my graduate papers, a paperback I bought several years ago at a used book store in Madison (during another graduate class), which is now falling apart from use and age. While in college his book The Word of the Lord Grows was our standard text for the introduction to the New Testament. Then later his influence continued as I used the Concordia Self-Study Bible and the Concordia Self-Study Commentary in my ongoing preparation for Bible studies and sermons, especially in my earlier ministry. His writing encompasses many more works that I confess to having not yet read, all of which I suspect are still accessible and much used by pastors and laypeople alike.

Franzmann was a highly gifted man who served his church not only in teaching and scholarship, but in the administration of the Synod itself, as well representing the church abroad at conferences. He came of age during the Great Depression and established himself as a scholar in the post-war years of the later 40's, eventually becoming a respected professor of New Testament exegesis at Concordia Seminary- St. Louis, as well as the head of the Department of Exegetical Theology. Richard Brinkley, in his biographical work Thy Strong Word (1993), notes that Franzmann had been working on an advanced degree since the 1930's when he was a student at the University of Chicago. He attended this institution again in the 40's and 50's where he worked on his Ph.D, a degree he never completed. In 1956, the same year he became head of the exegetical department, Concordia Theological Seminary-Springfield awarded him the honorary degree of Doctor of Divinity "for his outstanding academic contributions and achievements as well as for his service and dedication to Lutheranism and the work of the Lutheran Church" (24).

As a theologian his greatest contribution may well have been his outspoken resistance to the growing popularity of higher-criticism, although one must never underestimate the impact of his more popular works that influenced countless members of the church. Brinkley notes that as a professor he was highly regarded by his students. "First of all, they were impressed by his knowledge of the Greek New Testament. He knew large portions of it by heart and could recite them from memory without having to consult a Greek New Testament" (29). One wonders how many with earned doctorates from well-respected institutions would still be hard pressed to keep up with this brilliant mind.

I was only about halfway through high school when Dr. Franzmann died. Yet, within about three years of his death I would be sitting at Concordia-St. Paul with his New Testament introduction, learning at his feet even though he was no longer among us. However, I feel a certain connection to him in another way. According to Brinkley, Franzmann was "a lifelong Anglophile," a weakness I also share. His attraction to things English led him eventually to leave the St. Louis seminary in 1969 and move to Cambridge. There he taught at the Westfield House until health concerns caused him to turn over these duties to his son. He did return to St. Louis in the spring of 1975 in an attempt to help heal the divisions which now so troubled the beloved Synod, especially since the walkout in 1974. His efforts, although much appreciated, helped to further break his once vital health, and not long after his return to England he passed away quietly in his sleep.

Franzmann, like Marquart mentioned in the previous post, was a working theologian with a brilliant mind who was too busy, it would seem, to slow down long enough to devote himself to the time necessary for an advanced doctorate. Regarding Marquart I once heard that Dr. Preus had to push him to go back to school and secure some kind of advanced degree. At the time of his appointment, and for some time after, he had only a Bachelor of Divinity. He later secured a master's degree from Canada, I think, in the field of scientific philosophy, which suited his interests in apologetics.

We remain blessed by these men of great talent and devotion to the church.

Theologians Without Doctorates

2011-02-05T12:58:00.000-08:00

Today we assume that serious, academically-minded theologians earn a doctorate. In fact, how can someone ultimately be respected without one? However, many famous teachers of theology in the past never made it that far, and still they commanded great respect among their peers and even secured respected teaching posts in world class universities. Recently I discovered that three great theologians of the 20th century taught and wrote extensively and yet the only doctorate they had came in the form of an honorary one. The three men are: Karl Barth, Reinhold Niebuhr, and C.S.Lewis. Now one may take issue with the last name in the list since he did not make a career in theology, but rather in teaching literature. Nevertheless, it cannot be argued that his writings stand among the great 'classics' of apologetics. (Another name one might also add to the list could include the well-known biblical scholar F.F.Bruce.)

It seems ironic that innumerable doctoral dissertations have been written about these men who never underwent the rigor of this ritual themselves (e.g.: Dr. Steve Mueller of Concordia -Irvine did his dissertation on C.S.Lewis at the University of Durham.) I greatly respect those who pursue doctoral studies and in no way wish to diminish their accomplishments. That said, I also count among the teachers who have most influenced me or with whom I have great respect and admiration, men who never aspired to that level. One of those theologians would be Kurt Marquart, who taught for many years at my alma mater Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne. A few years before his death he was awarded an honorary doctorate; I believe from Concordia-Wisconsin. It was long overdue. Still, his theological brilliance was not enhanced by the honorary degree. He had already proved himself long before.

As I round the corner in completing my Master of Sacred Theology degree (two more classes to go!), I need to remind myself that as Luther taught us, it is oratio, meditatio and tentatio that make a theologian (literally, prayer, meditation, and trials- See the CTQ article by John W. Kleinig for more.) Theology does not flower in the vacuum of a sterile classroom environment, but rather in the midst of the church itself. We may learn theology in a classroom, but that knowledge must serve the church if it is worth our attention and time. I suspect that having spent over two decades in the pastoral ministry theology will always be linked to the church for me, even if I should be given the opportunity to teach it in a more formal, academic environment.

I didn't plan to begin this post with one topic and transition to the other. Oh, well, writing does not always follow a perfectly straight line....