Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Malcolm Muggeridge
The greatest author you may never heard of is the Englishman, Malcolm Muggeridge. He was at times, a Communist, always a skeptic of human endeavor, a humorist and always a writer. He converted late in his life to Catholicism.
His writings cured me of a knee jerk, college age leftism and liberalism. He made me realize "conservatives" could be brilliant. He helped me to see that liberals were often hypocrites pontificating on behalf of the poor while enjoying riches. His story is too involved and long for me to summarize here. He was brought up a atheist, was a communist utopian then a cynic and finally a believer. He went to Stalinist Russia as a believer in the Communist vision and at atime when the Western elite were enthralled with Stalin and saw for himself and then exposed the murderous famine. He could poke a hole in any pious or secular facade.
Here are the books and articles of his I would most recommend:
Jesus Rediscovered(e-text)
A Third Testament(PDF)
The Great Liberal Death Wish (1979)
His greatest works are his two volume auto biography "Chronicles of Wasted Time".
David Mills of Touchstone has an article concerning those books here.
Here is a page with a list of stuff about Muggeridge.
Here are some great one liners (from the Web):
* An orgy looks particularly alluring seen through the mists of righteous indignation.
* Civilization - a heap of rubble scavenged by scrawny English Lit. vultures.
* The trouble with kingdoms of heaven on earth is that they're liable to come to pass, and then their fraudulence is apparent for all to see. We need a kingdom of heaven in Heaven, if only because it can't be realized.
Here are some longer quotes from the Mills piece:
“To accept this world as a destination rather than a staging-post, and the experience of living in it as expressing life’s full significance, would seem to me to reduce life to something too banal and trivial to be taken seriously or held in esteem,” he wrote at the beginning of the first volume. Speaking of all the “prospectuses for an earthly paradise,” communist or capitalist, he wrote that
[t]o attempt to expose and ridicule the fraudulence of such prospectuses is no more life-denying than exposing the fraudulence of one for building a housing estate on the slopes of Etna would be shelter-denying. . . . In other words, the Christian proposition that he that loves his life in this world shall lose it, and he that hates his life in this world shall see it projected and glorified into eternity, is for living, not for dying. . . . It is misers and Don Juans who moan; spendthrifts and saints are always laughing. . . . All I can claim to have learnt from the years I have spent in this world is that the only happiness is love, which is attained by giving, not receiving; and that the world itself only becomes the dear and habitable dwelling place it is when we who inhabit it know we are migrants, due when the time comes to fly away to other more commodious skies.2
The hazards in the way of telling the truth are, indeed, very great. . . . Every man the centre of his own universe; insensibly, we sub-edit as we go along, to produce headlines, cross-heads, a story line most favourable to our egos. How indestructible, alas, is that ego!
Surveying the abysmal chasm between my certainty that everything human beings tried to achieve was inadequate to the point of being farcical, that mortality itself was a kind of gargoyle joke, and my equal certainty that every moment of every day was full of enchantment and infinitely precious; that human love was the image vouchsafed us of God’s love irradiating the whole universe; that, indeed, embedded in each grain of sand was eternity, to be found and explored, as geologists explored the antiquity of fossils through their markings—surveying this chasm, yawning in its vastness to the point of inducing total insanity, tearing us into schizophrenic pieces, I grasped that over it lay, as it were, a cable-bridge, frail, swaying, but passable. And the bridge, this reconciliation between the black despair of lying bound and gagged in the tiny dungeon of the ego, and soaring upwards into the white radiance of God’s universal love—this bridge was the Incarnation, whose truth expresses that of the desperate need it meets. Because of our physical hunger we know there is bread; because of our spiritual hunger we know there is Christ.
His writings cured me of a knee jerk, college age leftism and liberalism. He made me realize "conservatives" could be brilliant. He helped me to see that liberals were often hypocrites pontificating on behalf of the poor while enjoying riches. His story is too involved and long for me to summarize here. He was brought up a atheist, was a communist utopian then a cynic and finally a believer. He went to Stalinist Russia as a believer in the Communist vision and at atime when the Western elite were enthralled with Stalin and saw for himself and then exposed the murderous famine. He could poke a hole in any pious or secular facade.
Here are the books and articles of his I would most recommend:
Jesus Rediscovered(e-text)
A Third Testament(PDF)
The Great Liberal Death Wish (1979)
His greatest works are his two volume auto biography "Chronicles of Wasted Time".
David Mills of Touchstone has an article concerning those books here.
Here is a page with a list of stuff about Muggeridge.
Here are some great one liners (from the Web):
* An orgy looks particularly alluring seen through the mists of righteous indignation.
* Civilization - a heap of rubble scavenged by scrawny English Lit. vultures.
* The trouble with kingdoms of heaven on earth is that they're liable to come to pass, and then their fraudulence is apparent for all to see. We need a kingdom of heaven in Heaven, if only because it can't be realized.
Here are some longer quotes from the Mills piece:
“To accept this world as a destination rather than a staging-post, and the experience of living in it as expressing life’s full significance, would seem to me to reduce life to something too banal and trivial to be taken seriously or held in esteem,” he wrote at the beginning of the first volume. Speaking of all the “prospectuses for an earthly paradise,” communist or capitalist, he wrote that
[t]o attempt to expose and ridicule the fraudulence of such prospectuses is no more life-denying than exposing the fraudulence of one for building a housing estate on the slopes of Etna would be shelter-denying. . . . In other words, the Christian proposition that he that loves his life in this world shall lose it, and he that hates his life in this world shall see it projected and glorified into eternity, is for living, not for dying. . . . It is misers and Don Juans who moan; spendthrifts and saints are always laughing. . . . All I can claim to have learnt from the years I have spent in this world is that the only happiness is love, which is attained by giving, not receiving; and that the world itself only becomes the dear and habitable dwelling place it is when we who inhabit it know we are migrants, due when the time comes to fly away to other more commodious skies.2
The hazards in the way of telling the truth are, indeed, very great. . . . Every man the centre of his own universe; insensibly, we sub-edit as we go along, to produce headlines, cross-heads, a story line most favourable to our egos. How indestructible, alas, is that ego!
Surveying the abysmal chasm between my certainty that everything human beings tried to achieve was inadequate to the point of being farcical, that mortality itself was a kind of gargoyle joke, and my equal certainty that every moment of every day was full of enchantment and infinitely precious; that human love was the image vouchsafed us of God’s love irradiating the whole universe; that, indeed, embedded in each grain of sand was eternity, to be found and explored, as geologists explored the antiquity of fossils through their markings—surveying this chasm, yawning in its vastness to the point of inducing total insanity, tearing us into schizophrenic pieces, I grasped that over it lay, as it were, a cable-bridge, frail, swaying, but passable. And the bridge, this reconciliation between the black despair of lying bound and gagged in the tiny dungeon of the ego, and soaring upwards into the white radiance of God’s universal love—this bridge was the Incarnation, whose truth expresses that of the desperate need it meets. Because of our physical hunger we know there is bread; because of our spiritual hunger we know there is Christ.
Monday, January 30, 2006
All the "-ism's" there is
-ism Central
From Agnosticism (the belief that we can't know whether God exists)
to
Voluntarism (the belief that reality, morality, and the structure of society are determined by a divine will)
HT: Orthodoxy Today
From Agnosticism (the belief that we can't know whether God exists)
to
Voluntarism (the belief that reality, morality, and the structure of society are determined by a divine will)
HT: Orthodoxy Today
Sunday, January 29, 2006
A First commandment classic from Luther
Famous passages are often well known because they are so valuable. That is true for this gem from Luther.
This selection from the Large Catechism on the First Commandment is not only doctrinally correct but goes to the heart of the Christian life. The "successful life" merchants parading as Gospel preachers these days speak nothing of the true human heart which casts about without an anchor and seeks continually for stability in unstable things such as money and possessions.
That is idolatry as Luther points out so well. What a great word word "cling" is to illustrate faith. Our heart clings to God as a dying man to a life raft.
Many a one thinks that he has God and everything in abundance when he has money and, possessions; he trusts in them and boasts of them with such firmness and assurance as to care for no one. Lo, such a man also has a god, Mammon by name, i.e., money and possessions, on which he sets all his heart, and which is also the most common idol on earth. He who has money and possessions feels secure, and is joyful and undismayed as though he were sitting in the midst of Paradise.
On the other hand, he who has none doubts and is despondent, as though he knew of no God. For very few are to be found who are of good cheer, and who neither mourn nor complain if they have not Mammon. This [care and desire for money] sticks and clings to our nature, even to the grave.
Thus you can easily understand what and how much this commandment requires, namely, that man's entire heart and all his confidence be placed in God alone, and in no one else. For to have God, you can easily perceive, is not to lay hold of Him with our hands or to put Him in a bag [as money], or to lock Him in a chest [as silver vessels].
But to apprehend Him means when the heart lays hold of Him and clings to Him. But to cling to Him with the heart is nothing else than to trust in Him entirely. For this reason He wishes to turn us away from everything else that exists outside of Him, and to draw us to Himself, namely, because He is the only eternal good.
This selection from the Large Catechism on the First Commandment is not only doctrinally correct but goes to the heart of the Christian life. The "successful life" merchants parading as Gospel preachers these days speak nothing of the true human heart which casts about without an anchor and seeks continually for stability in unstable things such as money and possessions.
That is idolatry as Luther points out so well. What a great word word "cling" is to illustrate faith. Our heart clings to God as a dying man to a life raft.
Many a one thinks that he has God and everything in abundance when he has money and, possessions; he trusts in them and boasts of them with such firmness and assurance as to care for no one. Lo, such a man also has a god, Mammon by name, i.e., money and possessions, on which he sets all his heart, and which is also the most common idol on earth. He who has money and possessions feels secure, and is joyful and undismayed as though he were sitting in the midst of Paradise.
On the other hand, he who has none doubts and is despondent, as though he knew of no God. For very few are to be found who are of good cheer, and who neither mourn nor complain if they have not Mammon. This [care and desire for money] sticks and clings to our nature, even to the grave.
Thus you can easily understand what and how much this commandment requires, namely, that man's entire heart and all his confidence be placed in God alone, and in no one else. For to have God, you can easily perceive, is not to lay hold of Him with our hands or to put Him in a bag [as money], or to lock Him in a chest [as silver vessels].
But to apprehend Him means when the heart lays hold of Him and clings to Him. But to cling to Him with the heart is nothing else than to trust in Him entirely. For this reason He wishes to turn us away from everything else that exists outside of Him, and to draw us to Himself, namely, because He is the only eternal good.
Saturday, January 28, 2006
A classic from Irenaeus
The Word, our Savior, became what lost man was, thus establishing in himself a communion with man in order to win man's salvation. What was lost possessed flesh and blood, for God had formed man out of the muddy earth, and it was for this man's sake that God determined the entire manner of the Lord's coming.
The Lord, too, therefore, possessed flesh and blood, in order that' he might recapitulate in himself, not some other work, but the one the Father had formed in the beginning, and that he might in this way seek out what was lost" (Adv. Haer. V, 14,2).
The Lord, too, therefore, possessed flesh and blood, in order that' he might recapitulate in himself, not some other work, but the one the Father had formed in the beginning, and that he might in this way seek out what was lost" (Adv. Haer. V, 14,2).
Friday, January 27, 2006
1970's rock radio nostalgia
The topic is not exactly "incarnatus est"-like but here we go. Nostalgia is a disease particularly suited to the middle aged. That's me!
Whatever happened to ...
1. Two-fer Tuesday on FM rock radio? Used to be if it was Tuesday and "Stairway to Heaven" was blasting out of your custom car stereo you could be assured that soon another rocking Zep track would come your way. No longer.
2. Block Parties on FM Rock radio? Used to be on a weekend you could bet some station was a having a "block party" where they would play 5 or 6 of your favorite tracks from your favorite band. That rocked.
3. Nickmames for FM rock radio stations that subtly referred to illegal drug use? My favorite was WMMS in Cleveland ... the Buzzard! The "buzz"-ard, get it? All we have now where I live is the "The Fox" (sometimes known as "The Big Ol' Hairy Fox") and "The Ride". Come on.
4. George Thorogood and the Delaware Destroyers. I am telling you, man, he was bad to the bone.
5. Taking an entire weekend and playing every Beatles song from A to Z? "Across the Universe" to "Your Mother should Know".
Whatever happened to ...
1. Two-fer Tuesday on FM rock radio? Used to be if it was Tuesday and "Stairway to Heaven" was blasting out of your custom car stereo you could be assured that soon another rocking Zep track would come your way. No longer.
2. Block Parties on FM Rock radio? Used to be on a weekend you could bet some station was a having a "block party" where they would play 5 or 6 of your favorite tracks from your favorite band. That rocked.
3. Nickmames for FM rock radio stations that subtly referred to illegal drug use? My favorite was WMMS in Cleveland ... the Buzzard! The "buzz"-ard, get it? All we have now where I live is the "The Fox" (sometimes known as "The Big Ol' Hairy Fox") and "The Ride". Come on.
4. George Thorogood and the Delaware Destroyers. I am telling you, man, he was bad to the bone.
5. Taking an entire weekend and playing every Beatles song from A to Z? "Across the Universe" to "Your Mother should Know".
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Just another news day
This sounds like some sort of pornography: 500 Irish priests having sex.
Nothing is off limits at Pastors Buddy's church. Myself, I like boundaries.
Southern Baptists aiming at each other after taking over denomination.
What do bishops do at Easter: proclaim Jesus risen or take a luxury cruise?
Nothing is off limits at Pastors Buddy's church. Myself, I like boundaries.
Southern Baptists aiming at each other after taking over denomination.
What do bishops do at Easter: proclaim Jesus risen or take a luxury cruise?
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
I see sleep and not death
I know, I know, it comes from an Eastern Orthodox site. But this is a nice meditation on death from a Christian perpective. Notice the advice from Chrysostom to meditate upon those newly dead. Strange but compelling advice.
I am not sure it is so easy to overcome the natural anxiety of death as the author seems to suggest (Lutheran pessimism!) but read for yourself.
"Be Calm, Look and See"
Every Christian, by the grace of the truths revealed to us by Christ, can face death without fear. Moreover, he has the possibility to philosophize soundly and creatively about the mystery of death.
Let us not forget that the hour of our death, that second birth—a birth toward the true and permanent life—is an hour that is unique, profound and mysterious. At this hour, the light of eternity begins to illumine our temporal life, which is waning and which eventually will be extinguished. As our age advances, as the time of our life races forward and the hour of death approaches, when our earthly life ends only to meet endless eternity, the questions about the meaning of life are evoked with greater intensity.
At the time of our first birth, when we come from nonexistence into existence, when we enter the life of earth, we do not have the possibility to ask where we are going, since we come as infants. But, during our second birth into the new life, that is, at the time of our death, whether we want to or not, certain questions arise before us: What ultimately is the meaning of all that labor, agony and misery that pressure us during the entire course of our life? Why do we fear death even though we know that as soon as we are born we move with certainty towards it? Could it be that we did not have sufficient time to understand this truth and, thus, to overcome anxiety over death? Would it not have been of benefit for even one person to have returned from beyond the grave and to tell us what the souls experience there "face to face" with God?
Once again, the Christian appears privileged in these and other similar questions, since faith and hope remove the veil of mystery. Thus, St. Chrysostom says: "Let us gather around those who are on their way to the other life. Sit and do not disturb the dead who are before you( ... ) calm yourselves, look and see the great mystery. . . ." In this silence ask yourselves: "What is this great mystery that concerns me? He who was dear to me yesterday is now before me as a horror; what was yesterday a part of me is now seen as a stranger; the one I embraced a while before, I now do not even care to touch. I weep over him as my own, but avoid the decay as not my own." [1]
In another occasion, the same Father gives this counsel: "When you see someone leaving for the other life, be not disconcerted but come and concentrate within yourself, examine your conscience, consider that not long after this the end awaits you, too." It is in this that we differ from the unbelievers, observes the holy Father. It is that we Christians have "different judgments about things." I see things quite differently from the unbeliever. It is precisely the same in the case of death. The unbeliever looks upon the dead and considers him dead. I look upon the dead and I see sleep and not death. All of us see with the same eyes whatever happens in the present life, but we do not see with the same mind and the same thought. [2]
The emotion that the soul experiences before death is so strong and profound that even those who have heard or studied many informative teachings without benefit, are greatly benefitted when they find themselves before a dead person. "Having enjoyed many teachings but having received no benefit in this manner, they are forced to philosophize all at once over the issues of the present life when they come to themselves and "in the misfortunes of others" foresee "their own changes." [3]
By means of all these, a Christian acquires not only a true and healthy attitude, but also a courageous one. His hopes for the future life are encouraged. In this way he does not consider even death itself to be death. When the Christian faces one who has died, he is not in danger of what happens to many. And this because he can consider "the crowns, the prizes, the secret blessings, which ‘eye has not seen, and ear has not heard’; he can imagine that life in the company of angels." [4]
Consequently, the faithful person faces death in a healthy attitude. He knows very well that "a self-indulgent heart becomes a prison and chain for the soul when it leaves this life; Whereas an assiduous heart is an open door." [5] Moreover, the believer does not stand before the mystery of death in fear and trembling. Because he takes a positive and creative stance before death, he can overcome the natural anxiety which death creates. The Church of Christ helps its members to see the present and the future under the light of the Gospel; the meaning of death in biological life, and the meaning of the new eternal and unwaning life in death. Also, the believer understands more fully and profoundly the hour which is so different from all the other hours of our life. He comprehends better that help at the time of death can only come from God. For He alone, our Creator, knows the depths of the human soul that migrates for eternity, and only God can satisfy and fill the soul with the certain promise of a new life.
1. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On Patience, and On Not Weeping Bitterly Over the Dead PG 60,727.
2. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On the Rich Man and Lazarus, Homily 5,2 PG 48,1020-1021.
3. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On Psalm 110,1 PG 55,280-281.
4. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On Psalm 48,5 PG 55,230.
5. MARK THE ASCETIC, On the Spiritual Law: 200 Texts, 20. The Philokalia..., transl. from the Greek and edited by G.E.H. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, Kallistos Ware (Faber & Faber, London-Boston), Vol. I, p. 111.
I am not sure it is so easy to overcome the natural anxiety of death as the author seems to suggest (Lutheran pessimism!) but read for yourself.
"Be Calm, Look and See"
Every Christian, by the grace of the truths revealed to us by Christ, can face death without fear. Moreover, he has the possibility to philosophize soundly and creatively about the mystery of death.
Let us not forget that the hour of our death, that second birth—a birth toward the true and permanent life—is an hour that is unique, profound and mysterious. At this hour, the light of eternity begins to illumine our temporal life, which is waning and which eventually will be extinguished. As our age advances, as the time of our life races forward and the hour of death approaches, when our earthly life ends only to meet endless eternity, the questions about the meaning of life are evoked with greater intensity.
At the time of our first birth, when we come from nonexistence into existence, when we enter the life of earth, we do not have the possibility to ask where we are going, since we come as infants. But, during our second birth into the new life, that is, at the time of our death, whether we want to or not, certain questions arise before us: What ultimately is the meaning of all that labor, agony and misery that pressure us during the entire course of our life? Why do we fear death even though we know that as soon as we are born we move with certainty towards it? Could it be that we did not have sufficient time to understand this truth and, thus, to overcome anxiety over death? Would it not have been of benefit for even one person to have returned from beyond the grave and to tell us what the souls experience there "face to face" with God?
Once again, the Christian appears privileged in these and other similar questions, since faith and hope remove the veil of mystery. Thus, St. Chrysostom says: "Let us gather around those who are on their way to the other life. Sit and do not disturb the dead who are before you( ... ) calm yourselves, look and see the great mystery. . . ." In this silence ask yourselves: "What is this great mystery that concerns me? He who was dear to me yesterday is now before me as a horror; what was yesterday a part of me is now seen as a stranger; the one I embraced a while before, I now do not even care to touch. I weep over him as my own, but avoid the decay as not my own." [1]
In another occasion, the same Father gives this counsel: "When you see someone leaving for the other life, be not disconcerted but come and concentrate within yourself, examine your conscience, consider that not long after this the end awaits you, too." It is in this that we differ from the unbelievers, observes the holy Father. It is that we Christians have "different judgments about things." I see things quite differently from the unbeliever. It is precisely the same in the case of death. The unbeliever looks upon the dead and considers him dead. I look upon the dead and I see sleep and not death. All of us see with the same eyes whatever happens in the present life, but we do not see with the same mind and the same thought. [2]
The emotion that the soul experiences before death is so strong and profound that even those who have heard or studied many informative teachings without benefit, are greatly benefitted when they find themselves before a dead person. "Having enjoyed many teachings but having received no benefit in this manner, they are forced to philosophize all at once over the issues of the present life when they come to themselves and "in the misfortunes of others" foresee "their own changes." [3]
By means of all these, a Christian acquires not only a true and healthy attitude, but also a courageous one. His hopes for the future life are encouraged. In this way he does not consider even death itself to be death. When the Christian faces one who has died, he is not in danger of what happens to many. And this because he can consider "the crowns, the prizes, the secret blessings, which ‘eye has not seen, and ear has not heard’; he can imagine that life in the company of angels." [4]
Consequently, the faithful person faces death in a healthy attitude. He knows very well that "a self-indulgent heart becomes a prison and chain for the soul when it leaves this life; Whereas an assiduous heart is an open door." [5] Moreover, the believer does not stand before the mystery of death in fear and trembling. Because he takes a positive and creative stance before death, he can overcome the natural anxiety which death creates. The Church of Christ helps its members to see the present and the future under the light of the Gospel; the meaning of death in biological life, and the meaning of the new eternal and unwaning life in death. Also, the believer understands more fully and profoundly the hour which is so different from all the other hours of our life. He comprehends better that help at the time of death can only come from God. For He alone, our Creator, knows the depths of the human soul that migrates for eternity, and only God can satisfy and fill the soul with the certain promise of a new life.
1. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On Patience, and On Not Weeping Bitterly Over the Dead PG 60,727.
2. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On the Rich Man and Lazarus, Homily 5,2 PG 48,1020-1021.
3. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On Psalm 110,1 PG 55,280-281.
4. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, On Psalm 48,5 PG 55,230.
5. MARK THE ASCETIC, On the Spiritual Law: 200 Texts, 20. The Philokalia..., transl. from the Greek and edited by G.E.H. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, Kallistos Ware (Faber & Faber, London-Boston), Vol. I, p. 111.
Monday, January 23, 2006
The Spiritual Dangers of Blogging
is the name of a nice post on the temptations associated with the blogosphere.
From Russell D. Moore on Mere Comments.
Worth reading.
From Russell D. Moore on Mere Comments.
Worth reading.
I do not have a personal relationship with Jesus
I do not have a personal relationship with Jesus. (Gasp, horror!)
I do not know the origin of that phrase. I suspect it came out of pietism or revivalism or some other dreadful renewal movement in the church. It is part of that idea that "anybody" can just go to church but to be a "real" Christian you need a "personal" relationship. Anybody can have head knowledge but what you really need is a heart knowledge of Christ.
In high school in a Lutheran LCMS high school youth group I knelt and said the sinners prayer and accepted Jesus into my heart. At least I thought I was doing that. It must have been somewhat of a surprise for Jesus to hear me invite him into my heart as he had been been there since i was baptized at three weeks old.
I tried hard to have a personal relationship with Jesus in high school. I was a Jesus freak, an introspective, clean cut Jesus freak, an introspective clean cut jesus freak who was going to Lutheran liturgy every Sunday thanks to my parents and one who was getting heavily into rock and roll. But I tried to read the Bible everyday and get some special intense emotional meaning out of every passage I double underlined. Mostly, I just felt flat, like everybody else must have been getting really caught up in Jesus but for me it was like watching black and white TV when I thought everybody else had a color set.
Fast forward through Lutheran college when i drowned any residual pietism in copious amounts of beer and onto seminary and liturgy and learning Greek in college and growing up a bit and it turns out I had always had a relationship with Jesus but a corporate one, a churchly one.
I do not experience Jesus in my heart but in my baptism. I cannot find him in feelings of overwhelming joy or intense emotional attachment (I tried but I do not have those "feelings" for Jesus) but I come in contact with him in the gathering of the church around preaching and the Supper. I do not feel as if Jesus is my close personal friend; he is my Lord whom I know in the external Gospel preached and delivered to me. My relationship with Jesus was cemented through the repitious shared experience of the liturgy (TLH!)I went to growing up and in the knowledge of the faith drummed into my brain through the Small Catechism my father made me memorize at the kitchen table in 8th grade when I wanted be out playing football.
I do not have a personal relationship with Jesus. Thank goodness. I know him in the church through a shared experience of Gospel and sacraments.
I do not know the origin of that phrase. I suspect it came out of pietism or revivalism or some other dreadful renewal movement in the church. It is part of that idea that "anybody" can just go to church but to be a "real" Christian you need a "personal" relationship. Anybody can have head knowledge but what you really need is a heart knowledge of Christ.
In high school in a Lutheran LCMS high school youth group I knelt and said the sinners prayer and accepted Jesus into my heart. At least I thought I was doing that. It must have been somewhat of a surprise for Jesus to hear me invite him into my heart as he had been been there since i was baptized at three weeks old.
I tried hard to have a personal relationship with Jesus in high school. I was a Jesus freak, an introspective, clean cut Jesus freak, an introspective clean cut jesus freak who was going to Lutheran liturgy every Sunday thanks to my parents and one who was getting heavily into rock and roll. But I tried to read the Bible everyday and get some special intense emotional meaning out of every passage I double underlined. Mostly, I just felt flat, like everybody else must have been getting really caught up in Jesus but for me it was like watching black and white TV when I thought everybody else had a color set.
Fast forward through Lutheran college when i drowned any residual pietism in copious amounts of beer and onto seminary and liturgy and learning Greek in college and growing up a bit and it turns out I had always had a relationship with Jesus but a corporate one, a churchly one.
I do not experience Jesus in my heart but in my baptism. I cannot find him in feelings of overwhelming joy or intense emotional attachment (I tried but I do not have those "feelings" for Jesus) but I come in contact with him in the gathering of the church around preaching and the Supper. I do not feel as if Jesus is my close personal friend; he is my Lord whom I know in the external Gospel preached and delivered to me. My relationship with Jesus was cemented through the repitious shared experience of the liturgy (TLH!)I went to growing up and in the knowledge of the faith drummed into my brain through the Small Catechism my father made me memorize at the kitchen table in 8th grade when I wanted be out playing football.
I do not have a personal relationship with Jesus. Thank goodness. I know him in the church through a shared experience of Gospel and sacraments.
Friday, January 20, 2006
The likeness is re-drawn
What follows is a famous passage from Athanasius in his "On the Incarnation of the Word." He has traced the creation of man in the image of the Word and its loss and the falling of man toward the nothingness out of which they were created. Here in a central passage, Athanasius sketches the why of the Incarnation.
What, then, was God to do? What else could He possibly do, being God, but renew His Image in mankind, so that through it men might once more come to know Him? And how could this be done save by the coming of the very Image Himself, our Saviour Jesus Christ? Men could not have done it, for they are only made after the Image; nor could angels have done it, for they are not the images of God. The Word of God came in His own Person, because it was He alone, the Image of the Father, Who could recreate man made after the Image.
In order to effect this re-creation, however, He had first to do away with death and corruption. Therefore He assumed a human body, in order that in it death might once for all be destroyed, and that men might be renewed according to the Image. The Image of the Father only was sufficient for this need. Here is an illustration to prove it.
You know what happens when a portrait that has been painted on a panel becomes obliterated through external stains. The artist does' not throw away the panel, but the subject of the portrait has to come and sit for it again, and then the likeness is re-drawn on the same material.
Even so was it with the All-holy Son of God. He, the Image of the Father, came and dwelt in our midst, in order that He might renew mankind made after Himself, and seek out His lost sheep, even as He says in the Gospel: " I came to seek and to save that which was lost." (Luke 19. 10) This also explains His saying to the Jews : " Except a man be born anew ..." (John 3. 3) He was not referring to a man's natural birth from his mother, as they thought, but to the re-birth and re-creation of the soul in the Image of God.
What, then, was God to do? What else could He possibly do, being God, but renew His Image in mankind, so that through it men might once more come to know Him? And how could this be done save by the coming of the very Image Himself, our Saviour Jesus Christ? Men could not have done it, for they are only made after the Image; nor could angels have done it, for they are not the images of God. The Word of God came in His own Person, because it was He alone, the Image of the Father, Who could recreate man made after the Image.
In order to effect this re-creation, however, He had first to do away with death and corruption. Therefore He assumed a human body, in order that in it death might once for all be destroyed, and that men might be renewed according to the Image. The Image of the Father only was sufficient for this need. Here is an illustration to prove it.
You know what happens when a portrait that has been painted on a panel becomes obliterated through external stains. The artist does' not throw away the panel, but the subject of the portrait has to come and sit for it again, and then the likeness is re-drawn on the same material.
Even so was it with the All-holy Son of God. He, the Image of the Father, came and dwelt in our midst, in order that He might renew mankind made after Himself, and seek out His lost sheep, even as He says in the Gospel: " I came to seek and to save that which was lost." (Luke 19. 10) This also explains His saying to the Jews : " Except a man be born anew ..." (John 3. 3) He was not referring to a man's natural birth from his mother, as they thought, but to the re-birth and re-creation of the soul in the Image of God.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Misusing liturgical freedom
We must beware of misusing our liturgical freedom to produce new liturgies. One should rather use the old forms and learn to understand and have a feeling for them before one feels oneself competent to create something new and better. He who has not tested the old cannot create something new. It is a shame when everybody presumes to form his own opinions about hymns and the liturgy without having thoroughly looked into the matter. Let a man first learn in silence and not act as though it were a matter of course that he understands everything. Once a man has first learned from the old he can profitably use the developments of recent times (in language and methods of speech) for the benefit of the liturgy.
Wilhelm Loehe,quoted by John Pless.
Wilhelm Loehe,quoted by John Pless.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
On preaching sermons
I appreciate Petersen's occasional meditations on the art of preaching. He is thoughtful and consistently on target. Here are several of my small, obvious thoughts on sermons :
They are sacramental. I think of this as a Lutheran approach to sermonizing. I have had people (former Baptists!) tell me they wished my sermons were more like Bible class. But the sanctuary is not a classroom and the puplit has no blackboard. The sermon is an opportunity to give Christ to sinners.
They are contextual. The style and even the content depends upon who is listening. The same text is preached differently at the seminary than at the country church 30 miles from the seminary.
When one is in a parish for awhile one develops a relationship ( hate that word) with the congregation and can preach in a different way than to strangers. Yes, in a certain sense, all Christians are the same: baptized sinners and so all sermons are the "same" in a way. But the sermon is a tool of the pastoral office and is the primary way a pastor is shepherd to his people. The shared funerals, joys, baptisms, confirmations, etc forge a bond that is epxressed in the way one preaches.
Preparation is essential. Not neccessarily the commentaries and all the steps we learned in seminary though they are useful but meaningful mediation on the text and time spent organizing your thoughts. The bad sermons I have heard were simply sloppily done.
There are no hard and fast rules other than number 1. The sermon is gospel. But you cannot apply a cookie cutter with every text and every preacher and every church. As soon as you say no story illustrations you might use one or hear a good sermon that does use one.
Finally, saying the words "law and Gospel" or "word and Sacrament" or pointing to the altar near the end of the sermon and mentioning the Lord's Supper do not make a sermon Lutheran.
They are sacramental. I think of this as a Lutheran approach to sermonizing. I have had people (former Baptists!) tell me they wished my sermons were more like Bible class. But the sanctuary is not a classroom and the puplit has no blackboard. The sermon is an opportunity to give Christ to sinners.
They are contextual. The style and even the content depends upon who is listening. The same text is preached differently at the seminary than at the country church 30 miles from the seminary.
When one is in a parish for awhile one develops a relationship ( hate that word) with the congregation and can preach in a different way than to strangers. Yes, in a certain sense, all Christians are the same: baptized sinners and so all sermons are the "same" in a way. But the sermon is a tool of the pastoral office and is the primary way a pastor is shepherd to his people. The shared funerals, joys, baptisms, confirmations, etc forge a bond that is epxressed in the way one preaches.
Preparation is essential. Not neccessarily the commentaries and all the steps we learned in seminary though they are useful but meaningful mediation on the text and time spent organizing your thoughts. The bad sermons I have heard were simply sloppily done.
There are no hard and fast rules other than number 1. The sermon is gospel. But you cannot apply a cookie cutter with every text and every preacher and every church. As soon as you say no story illustrations you might use one or hear a good sermon that does use one.
Finally, saying the words "law and Gospel" or "word and Sacrament" or pointing to the altar near the end of the sermon and mentioning the Lord's Supper do not make a sermon Lutheran.
Saturday, January 14, 2006
What is the real contemporary service?
The local Charlotte paper ran a short item about some church offering contemporary informal worship. The headline said it was an unorthodox service. Well the paper did not mean to communicate what was the literal meaning of the headline : that the service was heretical and outside the bounds of Christian faith. But hey ....
What the headline meant was that it was unusual and novel. But these days calling a contemporary service novel or unusual is really inaccurate. So many churches offer them and with such mind numbing sameness, we can hardly call them out of the ordinary. In fact, the liturgical, "traditional" services ought to now be called fresh and exciting and novel and different as they are increasingly rare.
So perhaps I will advertise the services at my congregation as contemporary services and maybe the Charlotte Observer will cover the fact that we sing the Kyrie and rise for the processional cross and the pastor wears vestments.
What the headline meant was that it was unusual and novel. But these days calling a contemporary service novel or unusual is really inaccurate. So many churches offer them and with such mind numbing sameness, we can hardly call them out of the ordinary. In fact, the liturgical, "traditional" services ought to now be called fresh and exciting and novel and different as they are increasingly rare.
So perhaps I will advertise the services at my congregation as contemporary services and maybe the Charlotte Observer will cover the fact that we sing the Kyrie and rise for the processional cross and the pastor wears vestments.
More on essential paintings
Hop over herefor more reaction to the list of essential paintings for theologians.
My reaction was yesterday.
My reaction was yesterday.
Friday, January 13, 2006
(NON) Essential Paintings for Theologians
Here is a post worth looking at. It is a list of essential paintings for theologians. (Hat tip to: Cyberbrethren )
It is a list I reject from the beginning. No icons. Only Western art. Western renaissance art. Now I am no art expert. So consider the following the ranting of a severely ignorant person on a subject he knows almost nothing about.
(In college I almost failed my art appreciation class because I skipped too often. I was only in that class because I hated and dropped music appreciation class. I wish I could take those classes now. I was very foolish. OK, enough confessing.)
I hate Western religious art, especially of the Renaissance. It is wonderful, it is beautiful but it is not religious. The portraits and scenes of Christ and Mary and the saints are not really about Christ, the saints or Mary. They are about the human form or beauty or a naturalistic aesthetic that the artist was pursuing. These paintings tell me about color and light and the human form. They do not tell me about God or the human situation before God. They are not, at heart, spiritual (though they depict Biblical scenes); they are humanistic. They want to show life as it is seen with the eyes: what maidens really looked like in 1502 or what late medieval princes wore and what the countryside looked like or the ideal human form.
Contrast icons. I am no lover of Eastern Orthodoxy but icons are a treasure to me. While Renaissance art seeks to sees with the eyes; icons wish to see with the eyes of faith. When looking for a religious image, I do not want to know what 15th century maidens wore or looked like. I do not want to know what it was "really" like when Mary breast fed Jesus. I don’t want to see an anatomically correct Jesus. What I want is what icons give. A view of human nature and creation as infused with the divine. A divine view of the world. I want a perspective that gives eternal truth not biological. I want a theological commentary embedded in the painting itself. All this is in the icon. I cannot find it in Western renaissance art.
It is a list I reject from the beginning. No icons. Only Western art. Western renaissance art. Now I am no art expert. So consider the following the ranting of a severely ignorant person on a subject he knows almost nothing about.
(In college I almost failed my art appreciation class because I skipped too often. I was only in that class because I hated and dropped music appreciation class. I wish I could take those classes now. I was very foolish. OK, enough confessing.)
I hate Western religious art, especially of the Renaissance. It is wonderful, it is beautiful but it is not religious. The portraits and scenes of Christ and Mary and the saints are not really about Christ, the saints or Mary. They are about the human form or beauty or a naturalistic aesthetic that the artist was pursuing. These paintings tell me about color and light and the human form. They do not tell me about God or the human situation before God. They are not, at heart, spiritual (though they depict Biblical scenes); they are humanistic. They want to show life as it is seen with the eyes: what maidens really looked like in 1502 or what late medieval princes wore and what the countryside looked like or the ideal human form.
Contrast icons. I am no lover of Eastern Orthodoxy but icons are a treasure to me. While Renaissance art seeks to sees with the eyes; icons wish to see with the eyes of faith. When looking for a religious image, I do not want to know what 15th century maidens wore or looked like. I do not want to know what it was "really" like when Mary breast fed Jesus. I don’t want to see an anatomically correct Jesus. What I want is what icons give. A view of human nature and creation as infused with the divine. A divine view of the world. I want a perspective that gives eternal truth not biological. I want a theological commentary embedded in the painting itself. All this is in the icon. I cannot find it in Western renaissance art.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
New to the Blogroll
I am bad about updating the blogroll. I have been reading most of these blogs for a while and added them to my roll.
Necessary Roughness
Putting Out the Fire
Watersblogged
Cwirla
Weedon
Calm Reverence
There is one word that describes what is missing in much contemporary worship. Reverence.
Here are some good words on reverence for pastors from the sainted A.C. Piepkorn of the St. Louis seminary. This is from his The Conduct of the Service which I got off the internet ages ago and I cannot remember where.
There is really only one basic rule of good form: "Be courteous!" And similarly there is really only one basic rule of altar decorum: "Be reverent!" Every other rule is simply a practical amplification of this basic charge.
To be reverent we must first of all be humble. We are ministers -- ministers of Christ, serving Christ in the room and in the name of fellow-sinners. We minister not because of any virtue in ourselves. Our sufficiency is of God. We minister as temples of the Holy Ghost, as being bound in sacramental union to the Lord of the Church, as kings and priests living in mystic communion with the Most Holy Trinity, as those whom Christ has chosen that we might be with Him and that He might send us forth to preach (St. Mark 3, 13).
We minister under the aspect of eternity and in the Presence of the Divine Majesty. Wherever we stand, we are on holy ground. In such a ministry there is no room for pride, only for all-pervading humility.
To be reverent we must be prepared. We must know what we are doing, and why we are doing it. The physical preparations, as far as may be, should be taken care of well in advance. There should be no last-minute running to and fro, no hasty final preparation, no distressed paging about. A meditation, brief if need be, but as long as the time permits, ought never to be overlooked; spiritual preparation is more essential to reverence than the proper ordering of the physical adjuncts.
To be reverent we must be calm. The unforeseen, the accidental, the disturbing must not be permitted to distract us. We are God's ambassadors and God's servants. We are speaking for and to God. Our entire lives ought to be, and our public ministry must be en Christo - in Christ! So must the calm peace of the changeless Christ in our souls be reflected in our outward demeanor.
Here are some good words on reverence for pastors from the sainted A.C. Piepkorn of the St. Louis seminary. This is from his The Conduct of the Service which I got off the internet ages ago and I cannot remember where.
There is really only one basic rule of good form: "Be courteous!" And similarly there is really only one basic rule of altar decorum: "Be reverent!" Every other rule is simply a practical amplification of this basic charge.
To be reverent we must first of all be humble. We are ministers -- ministers of Christ, serving Christ in the room and in the name of fellow-sinners. We minister not because of any virtue in ourselves. Our sufficiency is of God. We minister as temples of the Holy Ghost, as being bound in sacramental union to the Lord of the Church, as kings and priests living in mystic communion with the Most Holy Trinity, as those whom Christ has chosen that we might be with Him and that He might send us forth to preach (St. Mark 3, 13).
We minister under the aspect of eternity and in the Presence of the Divine Majesty. Wherever we stand, we are on holy ground. In such a ministry there is no room for pride, only for all-pervading humility.
To be reverent we must be prepared. We must know what we are doing, and why we are doing it. The physical preparations, as far as may be, should be taken care of well in advance. There should be no last-minute running to and fro, no hasty final preparation, no distressed paging about. A meditation, brief if need be, but as long as the time permits, ought never to be overlooked; spiritual preparation is more essential to reverence than the proper ordering of the physical adjuncts.
To be reverent we must be calm. The unforeseen, the accidental, the disturbing must not be permitted to distract us. We are God's ambassadors and God's servants. We are speaking for and to God. Our entire lives ought to be, and our public ministry must be en Christo - in Christ! So must the calm peace of the changeless Christ in our souls be reflected in our outward demeanor.
Those evil, earth destroying ... trees!
I love this.
Turns out that a large producer of greenhouse gases is ... plants and trees. Plants produce a startling amount of methane which is a greenhouse gas and contributes to global warming. Trees are a culprit in global warming.
Of course, we have all been encouraged to plant trees to combat global warming since trees and such absorb CO2.
Half baked incomplete science becomes the basis for an iron clad rigid orthodoxy which then becomes public policy. AND IT TURNS OUT THE SCIENCE IS KOOKY!
So I have an idea ... lets cut down all those trees! They are ruining the environment. New bumpersticker : "Combat global warming, buy a chainsaw!"
Turns out that a large producer of greenhouse gases is ... plants and trees. Plants produce a startling amount of methane which is a greenhouse gas and contributes to global warming. Trees are a culprit in global warming.
Of course, we have all been encouraged to plant trees to combat global warming since trees and such absorb CO2.
Half baked incomplete science becomes the basis for an iron clad rigid orthodoxy which then becomes public policy. AND IT TURNS OUT THE SCIENCE IS KOOKY!
So I have an idea ... lets cut down all those trees! They are ruining the environment. New bumpersticker : "Combat global warming, buy a chainsaw!"
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Christ, Abraham's True Seed
I had posted previously on the unbiblical nature of Pat Robertson's comments on physical Israel and the Jewish state being an enduring object of God's promises.
Today I came across a note on the Theologica blog of World magazine concerning a statement made by some faculty at Knox Seminary on this very topic.
The statement is entitled: An Open Letter to Evangelicals and Other Interested Parties: The People of God, the Land of Israel, and the Impartiality of the Gospel. It is quite good and makes the same point I was making. The statement is not perfect, being a heavily Reformed theological document, but in regards to Israel and prophecy and the Old Testament it is not bad at all.
Here are a couple of excerpts:
All human beings, Jews and Gentiles alike, are sinners,5 and, as such, they are under God's judgment of death. Because God's standard is perfect obedience and all are sinners, it is impossible for anyone to gain temporal peace or eternal life by his own efforts. Moreover, apart from Christ, there is no special divine favor upon any member of any ethnic group; nor, apart from Christ, is there any divine promise of an earthly land or a heavenly inheritance to anyone, whether Jew or Gentile. To teach or imply otherwise is nothing less than to compromise the Gospel itself.
Jesus Christ, who is fully God and fully man, came into the world to save sinners. In his death upon the cross, Jesus was the Lamb of God taking away the sin of the world, of Jew and of Gentile alike. The death of Jesus forever fulfilled and eternally ended the sacrifices of the Jewish temple. All who would worship God, whether Jew or Gentile, must now come to him in spirit and truth through Jesus Christ alone. The worship of God is no longer identified with any specific earthly sanctuary. He receives worship only through Jesus Christ, the eternal and heavenly Temple.
The inheritance promises that God gave to Abraham were made effective through Christ, Abraham's True Seed. These promises were not and cannot be made effective through sinful man's keeping of God's law. ather, the promise of an inheritance is made to those only who have faith in Jesus, the True Heir of Abraham. All spiritual benefits are derived from Jesus, and apart from him there is no participation in the promises.
Today I came across a note on the Theologica blog of World magazine concerning a statement made by some faculty at Knox Seminary on this very topic.
The statement is entitled: An Open Letter to Evangelicals and Other Interested Parties: The People of God, the Land of Israel, and the Impartiality of the Gospel. It is quite good and makes the same point I was making. The statement is not perfect, being a heavily Reformed theological document, but in regards to Israel and prophecy and the Old Testament it is not bad at all.
Here are a couple of excerpts:
All human beings, Jews and Gentiles alike, are sinners,5 and, as such, they are under God's judgment of death. Because God's standard is perfect obedience and all are sinners, it is impossible for anyone to gain temporal peace or eternal life by his own efforts. Moreover, apart from Christ, there is no special divine favor upon any member of any ethnic group; nor, apart from Christ, is there any divine promise of an earthly land or a heavenly inheritance to anyone, whether Jew or Gentile. To teach or imply otherwise is nothing less than to compromise the Gospel itself.
Jesus Christ, who is fully God and fully man, came into the world to save sinners. In his death upon the cross, Jesus was the Lamb of God taking away the sin of the world, of Jew and of Gentile alike. The death of Jesus forever fulfilled and eternally ended the sacrifices of the Jewish temple. All who would worship God, whether Jew or Gentile, must now come to him in spirit and truth through Jesus Christ alone. The worship of God is no longer identified with any specific earthly sanctuary. He receives worship only through Jesus Christ, the eternal and heavenly Temple.
The inheritance promises that God gave to Abraham were made effective through Christ, Abraham's True Seed. These promises were not and cannot be made effective through sinful man's keeping of God's law. ather, the promise of an inheritance is made to those only who have faith in Jesus, the True Heir of Abraham. All spiritual benefits are derived from Jesus, and apart from him there is no participation in the promises.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Blessings of Baptism
Often we overlook the benefits and marvel of Holy Baptism. Many today around us say, at worst, baptism is nothing or even wrong and, at best, some say it doesn't really matter. Nothing could be further from the Biblical truth. Baptism is a divine command that gives salvation and as such is a gift more precious than any other.
Here are some basic passages from Holy Scripture and selections from the Catechisms of Martin Luther concerning this holy, life giving water called baptism.
GOD'S WORD
"Jesus answered , "I tell you no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit." John 3: 5
"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Matthew 28:19
"Don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that just as Christ was raised the dead through the glory of the Father we too might live a new life." Romans 6: 3-4
"Baptism now saves you." 1 Peter 3: 21
THE SMALL CATECHISM
What is Baptism? Baptism is not simple water only, but it is the water comprehended in God’s command and connected with God’s word.
Which is that word of God? Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Matthew: Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
What does Baptism give or profit? It works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are such words and promises of God? Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Mark: He that believeth and baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
How can water do such great things? It is not the water indeed that does them, but the word of God which is in and with the water, and faith, which trusts such word of God in the
water. For without the word of God the water is simple water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a gracious water of life and a washing of regeneration in the Holy Ghost, as St. Paul says, Titus, chapter third: According to His mercy He saved us By the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ, our Savior, that, being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
LARGE CATECHISM
"I can boast that Baptism is no human trifle but instituted by God himself moreover that it is most solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved , lest anyone regard it as a insignificant thing like putting on a red coat. For it is of the utmost importance that we esteem Baptism excellent glorious and exalted, for which we contend and fight chiefly because the world is now so full of sects clamoring that Baptism is an external thing and that external things are of no benefit. But let it be ever so much an external thing here stands God's Word and command which instituted, establish and confirm Baptism. But what God institutes and commands cannot be an empty thing , though in appearance it were of less value than straw."
"You must honor Baptism, and esteem it glorious on account of the Word since he Himself has honored it both by words and deeds ; moreover confirmed it with miracles form heaven. For do you think it was a jest that, when Christ was baptized the heavens were opened and the Holy Ghost descended visibly and everything was divine glory and majesty?"
"Now here we have the words: "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved." To what else do they refer than to baptism , that is, to the water comprehended in Gods' command? Hence it follows that whoever rejects baptism rejects the Word of God, faith, and Christ, who directs us thither and binds us to Baptism."
"For consider if there were somewhere a physician who understood the art of saving men from dying or even though they died of restoring them speedily to health so that thereafter they would live forever. Oh, how the world would pour in money like snow and rain to recieve such a cure. But here in Baptism there is brought free to everyone's door such atresure and medicine that utterly destroys death and preserves all men alive."
"So let everyone esteem his Baptism as a daily dress in which he is to walk constantly that he may ever be found in the faith and its fruits, that he suppress the old man and grow up in the new."
Here are some basic passages from Holy Scripture and selections from the Catechisms of Martin Luther concerning this holy, life giving water called baptism.
GOD'S WORD
"Jesus answered , "I tell you no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit." John 3: 5
"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Matthew 28:19
"Don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that just as Christ was raised the dead through the glory of the Father we too might live a new life." Romans 6: 3-4
"Baptism now saves you." 1 Peter 3: 21
THE SMALL CATECHISM
What is Baptism? Baptism is not simple water only, but it is the water comprehended in God’s command and connected with God’s word.
Which is that word of God? Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Matthew: Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
What does Baptism give or profit? It works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are such words and promises of God? Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Mark: He that believeth and baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
How can water do such great things? It is not the water indeed that does them, but the word of God which is in and with the water, and faith, which trusts such word of God in the
water. For without the word of God the water is simple water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a gracious water of life and a washing of regeneration in the Holy Ghost, as St. Paul says, Titus, chapter third: According to His mercy He saved us By the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ, our Savior, that, being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
LARGE CATECHISM
"I can boast that Baptism is no human trifle but instituted by God himself moreover that it is most solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved , lest anyone regard it as a insignificant thing like putting on a red coat. For it is of the utmost importance that we esteem Baptism excellent glorious and exalted, for which we contend and fight chiefly because the world is now so full of sects clamoring that Baptism is an external thing and that external things are of no benefit. But let it be ever so much an external thing here stands God's Word and command which instituted, establish and confirm Baptism. But what God institutes and commands cannot be an empty thing , though in appearance it were of less value than straw."
"You must honor Baptism, and esteem it glorious on account of the Word since he Himself has honored it both by words and deeds ; moreover confirmed it with miracles form heaven. For do you think it was a jest that, when Christ was baptized the heavens were opened and the Holy Ghost descended visibly and everything was divine glory and majesty?"
"Now here we have the words: "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved." To what else do they refer than to baptism , that is, to the water comprehended in Gods' command? Hence it follows that whoever rejects baptism rejects the Word of God, faith, and Christ, who directs us thither and binds us to Baptism."
"For consider if there were somewhere a physician who understood the art of saving men from dying or even though they died of restoring them speedily to health so that thereafter they would live forever. Oh, how the world would pour in money like snow and rain to recieve such a cure. But here in Baptism there is brought free to everyone's door such atresure and medicine that utterly destroys death and preserves all men alive."
"So let everyone esteem his Baptism as a daily dress in which he is to walk constantly that he may ever be found in the faith and its fruits, that he suppress the old man and grow up in the new."
Monday, January 09, 2006
Issues Etc. Interview
Just got off the phone with Rev. Todd Wilken on Issues Etc. for an interview on Pat Robertson's comments on Sharon and how God punished him for dividing the land. We discussed my previous post on those who feel God still has a plan for physical Israel.
Skate over to Issues Etc. to listen.
Skate over to Issues Etc. to listen.
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Gay Cowboys
The news:
The veteran Today show critic has been taken to task by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation over his negative review of the gay cowboy western, in which he referred to Jake Gyllenhaal's character, Jack, as a "sexual predator" who "tracks Ennis down and coaxes him into sporadic trysts."
While Shalit may not be a Brokeback fan, his colleagues in critique have clamored to commend the cowboy drama.
To date, the film has been named Best Picture by the Los Angeles Film Critics association and the New York Film Critics Circle and deemed one of the year's 10 best films by the American Film Institute and the Broadcast Film Critics Association.
Ok. several things come to mind.
1. Enforced orthodoxy: We all must like this film, we all must like this film, we all must like this film.
2. Critical standard : If it is gay, if it seems to break cultural taboos(are there any left really?), it is good.
3. A cowboy homosexual movie is not just a gay movie. It is an attack on the shared values and iconic images we use as a society to think about ourselves. A "Western" is a defining object for American pop culture. Whether good or bad they are part of our shared background as a people reaching back into our history as settlers and pioneers and those who sought the frontier and moved West from Europe, from New England, etc. When we tell "western" stories we are telling ourselves who we are as a people. To thrust homosexuality into that cultural image is an attempt to distort and wreck the message and meaning associated with the american western cowboy icon.
The veteran Today show critic has been taken to task by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation over his negative review of the gay cowboy western, in which he referred to Jake Gyllenhaal's character, Jack, as a "sexual predator" who "tracks Ennis down and coaxes him into sporadic trysts."
While Shalit may not be a Brokeback fan, his colleagues in critique have clamored to commend the cowboy drama.
To date, the film has been named Best Picture by the Los Angeles Film Critics association and the New York Film Critics Circle and deemed one of the year's 10 best films by the American Film Institute and the Broadcast Film Critics Association.
Ok. several things come to mind.
1. Enforced orthodoxy: We all must like this film, we all must like this film, we all must like this film.
2. Critical standard : If it is gay, if it seems to break cultural taboos(are there any left really?), it is good.
3. A cowboy homosexual movie is not just a gay movie. It is an attack on the shared values and iconic images we use as a society to think about ourselves. A "Western" is a defining object for American pop culture. Whether good or bad they are part of our shared background as a people reaching back into our history as settlers and pioneers and those who sought the frontier and moved West from Europe, from New England, etc. When we tell "western" stories we are telling ourselves who we are as a people. To thrust homosexuality into that cultural image is an attempt to distort and wreck the message and meaning associated with the american western cowboy icon.
Friday, January 06, 2006
Where is the Promised Land?
Ah, Pat Robertson has done it again. Pat says that the wrath of God is responsible for the stroke Mr. Sharon has suffered. What interests me in Robertson's comments is not the idea that God is punishing Sharon with a stroke.
I am more interested that Robertson said it was because Sharon had given away the land that God said was his. According to Robertson and many like him, God still has an enduring interest in, indeed a preoccupation with, the physical soil of the historical land of Old Testament Israel. The land is according to Robertson, still the subject of God's promise.
Mr. Robertson is a fine example of someone who upholds the Bible, inerrancy, a literal, grammatical reading of the text, and manages to get everything wrong! There is really only one little teensy problem with Robertson's view of the land of Israel and the Biblical texts: he leaves out one little matter: Jesus. Robertson and the rapture happy dispensationalists with him read the Scripture in a flat way that makes Jesus and the Gospel just more bits of Scripture data not the key to the entire Bible. So Jesus and the Incarnation have nothing to do with the promises to Israel of the land. They are independent of Jesus and his coming.
The matter is clear to Robertson : God said the land will always be his and so it must be. But what he leaves out is the New Testament fact that all the Old Testament has been poured like a funnel into Christ. Christ is the temple, the prophets, the kings, the Torah, the priest, the sacrifices, the Psalms ... and he is the land. He is Israel itself. Out of Egypt have I called my son … Hosea 11 and Matthew 2. To whom does this text refer? Israel or Jesus? Ha, trick question! Both … because Jesus is Israel.
Jerusalem is now where Christ is. He is the mercy seat enthroned between the cherubim. He is the holy land. The Church as the body of Christ is now that sacred place where, filled with the glory of the Lord and one with Christ at the altar of His body and blood, God is present on earth.
The dirt around Jerusalem and Sinai and the Jordan are holy. They are holy on account of the sacred and holy acts God performed there. We must honor and cherish those places on account of God's mighty acts. But that dirt itself is no more special than the sand in my daughters sandbox. It is just dirt. The flesh of Christ now residing in our flesh is the true holy land, the presence of God on earth.
I am more interested that Robertson said it was because Sharon had given away the land that God said was his. According to Robertson and many like him, God still has an enduring interest in, indeed a preoccupation with, the physical soil of the historical land of Old Testament Israel. The land is according to Robertson, still the subject of God's promise.
Mr. Robertson is a fine example of someone who upholds the Bible, inerrancy, a literal, grammatical reading of the text, and manages to get everything wrong! There is really only one little teensy problem with Robertson's view of the land of Israel and the Biblical texts: he leaves out one little matter: Jesus. Robertson and the rapture happy dispensationalists with him read the Scripture in a flat way that makes Jesus and the Gospel just more bits of Scripture data not the key to the entire Bible. So Jesus and the Incarnation have nothing to do with the promises to Israel of the land. They are independent of Jesus and his coming.
The matter is clear to Robertson : God said the land will always be his and so it must be. But what he leaves out is the New Testament fact that all the Old Testament has been poured like a funnel into Christ. Christ is the temple, the prophets, the kings, the Torah, the priest, the sacrifices, the Psalms ... and he is the land. He is Israel itself. Out of Egypt have I called my son … Hosea 11 and Matthew 2. To whom does this text refer? Israel or Jesus? Ha, trick question! Both … because Jesus is Israel.
Jerusalem is now where Christ is. He is the mercy seat enthroned between the cherubim. He is the holy land. The Church as the body of Christ is now that sacred place where, filled with the glory of the Lord and one with Christ at the altar of His body and blood, God is present on earth.
The dirt around Jerusalem and Sinai and the Jordan are holy. They are holy on account of the sacred and holy acts God performed there. We must honor and cherish those places on account of God's mighty acts. But that dirt itself is no more special than the sand in my daughters sandbox. It is just dirt. The flesh of Christ now residing in our flesh is the true holy land, the presence of God on earth.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
God himself descends at the Jordan
Luther does a masterful job on Christ's baptism here.
He is wonderfully acerbic (wicked louts, the abyss of hell, naughty blind and foolish) but goes on to hit all the Gospel notes in treating the text. Heaven open, Christ not ashamed to decend into the water for sinners, the peaceful dove, the kind voice of the Father.
This is from Volume 5 of Baker's Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, Epiphany Third Sermon, 1534, page 216-218.
That was to be a comforting paradigm for us, that God's Son lets himself be baptized-though he was without sin-and performs what he was not obligated to do. We in contrast never do anything above and beyond what is necessary, for we are such wicked louts who don't even do what is our duty. Christ, God's Son, is holier than baptism itself, and yet he allows himself to be baptized. He institutes and ordains holy baptism, and moreover commands that such baptizing, henceforth, continue within Christendom, so that all who desire to be saved might be baptized.
That is the reason why wicked people come mto the abyss of hell because they despise or disdain baptism. Satan has ravished and blinded them, so that their eyes and ears are closed and they don't see or hear what is happening here. Why aren't you baptized, or your children ? If Christ permitted himself to be baptized, how can you be so naughty, so blind and foolish, as to despise baptism? Even though baptism were worth nothing, ought you not regard it with respect because of what this text is saying, that the Son of God himself was baptized, and that you, too, should be baptized, if for no other reason than to honor him, even though it were of no benefit to you?
To this, however, we must add baptism's promise and benefit. For we see how God in heaven pours out his grace through his Son's baptism. Heaven which before was closed, is opened by Christ's baptism and a window and door now stand open for us to see through. No longer is there a barrier between God and us, since God himself descends at the Jordan. The Father lets his voice be heard, the Son sanctifies baptism with his body, and the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove. Is this not a great manifestation, a truly great sign of how very precious baptism is to God, that he does not abstain from it?
That is why this day is called Epiphany, the Festival of the Manifestation, because the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit manifest themselves. The Holy Spirit appears in the lovely form of an innocent dove. Among all birds, a dove is known for its gentle nature, peaceful and not aggressive. So the Holy Spirit reveals himself in the friendliest of forms to show that he is not wrathful toward us, but wants to help us become holy and rescue us through Christ.
The Son, who does not require it for his person, nonetheless, allows himself to be baptized, revealing himself not only as example, but also for the sake of grace, that we might gladly receive baptism and be sure that by it we have a gracious God when we follow Christ's example and command, allowing ourselves to be baptized.
The Father's voice resounds, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." It is a new voice, the likes of which no one had heard from heaven before. It would not be surprising if heaven and earth had trembled at the sound of God's speaking. I would have fallen on my face if I had heard God's voice. But this voice is different from the voice at Mt. Sinai where God also spoke from heaven. There his voice was so terrible that the earth quaked, the hills trembled, and the people feared for their lives. Here, however; it was all friendliness, grace, and compassion.
He is wonderfully acerbic (wicked louts, the abyss of hell, naughty blind and foolish) but goes on to hit all the Gospel notes in treating the text. Heaven open, Christ not ashamed to decend into the water for sinners, the peaceful dove, the kind voice of the Father.
This is from Volume 5 of Baker's Complete Sermons of Martin Luther, Epiphany Third Sermon, 1534, page 216-218.
That was to be a comforting paradigm for us, that God's Son lets himself be baptized-though he was without sin-and performs what he was not obligated to do. We in contrast never do anything above and beyond what is necessary, for we are such wicked louts who don't even do what is our duty. Christ, God's Son, is holier than baptism itself, and yet he allows himself to be baptized. He institutes and ordains holy baptism, and moreover commands that such baptizing, henceforth, continue within Christendom, so that all who desire to be saved might be baptized.
That is the reason why wicked people come mto the abyss of hell because they despise or disdain baptism. Satan has ravished and blinded them, so that their eyes and ears are closed and they don't see or hear what is happening here. Why aren't you baptized, or your children ? If Christ permitted himself to be baptized, how can you be so naughty, so blind and foolish, as to despise baptism? Even though baptism were worth nothing, ought you not regard it with respect because of what this text is saying, that the Son of God himself was baptized, and that you, too, should be baptized, if for no other reason than to honor him, even though it were of no benefit to you?
To this, however, we must add baptism's promise and benefit. For we see how God in heaven pours out his grace through his Son's baptism. Heaven which before was closed, is opened by Christ's baptism and a window and door now stand open for us to see through. No longer is there a barrier between God and us, since God himself descends at the Jordan. The Father lets his voice be heard, the Son sanctifies baptism with his body, and the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove. Is this not a great manifestation, a truly great sign of how very precious baptism is to God, that he does not abstain from it?
That is why this day is called Epiphany, the Festival of the Manifestation, because the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit manifest themselves. The Holy Spirit appears in the lovely form of an innocent dove. Among all birds, a dove is known for its gentle nature, peaceful and not aggressive. So the Holy Spirit reveals himself in the friendliest of forms to show that he is not wrathful toward us, but wants to help us become holy and rescue us through Christ.
The Son, who does not require it for his person, nonetheless, allows himself to be baptized, revealing himself not only as example, but also for the sake of grace, that we might gladly receive baptism and be sure that by it we have a gracious God when we follow Christ's example and command, allowing ourselves to be baptized.
The Father's voice resounds, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." It is a new voice, the likes of which no one had heard from heaven before. It would not be surprising if heaven and earth had trembled at the sound of God's speaking. I would have fallen on my face if I had heard God's voice. But this voice is different from the voice at Mt. Sinai where God also spoke from heaven. There his voice was so terrible that the earth quaked, the hills trembled, and the people feared for their lives. Here, however; it was all friendliness, grace, and compassion.
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
The innocence of the babe
Epiphany is on January 6th.
In the West, this festival focuses on the worship of the Magi, the Epiphany of the Christ to the Gentiles. Thus many missions hymns are Epiphany hymns and vice versa. (So much for the need for World mission sundays or evangelism sundays. Just follow the church year and you will find everything you need, sooner or later.)
In the East however, Epiphany focuses on the baptism of Christ. The Epiphany is of the Holy Trinity at the Jordan. The Father speaks, the Son receives baptism, and the Spirit descends. In the East, the day has a rich mix of Christological, Trinitarian and sacramental themes apparent in many of the Eastern father's sermons for Epiphany.
Here is a short section of Gregory of Nyssa's sermon "On the Baptism of Christ".
Christ, then, was born as it were a few days ago--He Whose generation was before all things, sensible and intellectual. To-day He is baptized by John that He might cleanse him who was defiled, that He might bring the Spirit from above, and exalt man to heaven, that he who had fallen might be raised up and he who had cast him down might be put to shame.
And marvel not if God showed so great earnestness in our cause: for it was with care on the part of him who did us wrong that the plot was laid against us; it is with forethought on the part of our Maker that we are saved. And he, that evil charmer, framing his new device of sin against our race, drew along his serpent train, a disguise worthy of his own intent, entering in his impurity into what was like himself,--dwelling, earthly and mundane as he was in will, in that creeping thing.
But Christ, the repairer of his evil-doing, assumes manhood in its fulness, and saves man, and becomes the type and figure of us all, to sanctify the first-fruits of every action, and leave to His servants no doubt in their zeal for the tradition.
Baptism, then, is a purification from sins, a remission of trespasses, a cause of renovation and regeneration. By regeneration, understand regeneration conceived in thought, not discerned by bodily sight. For we shall not, according to the Jew Nicodemus and his somewhat dull intelligence, change the old man into a child, nor shall we form anew him who is wrinkled and gray-headed to tenderness and youth, if we bring back the man again into his mother's womb: but we do bring back, by royal grace, him who bears the scars of sin, and has grown old in evil habits, to the innocence of the babe. For as the child new-born is free from accusations and from penalties, so too the child of regeneration has nothing for which to answer, being released by royal bounty from accountability.
And this gift it is not the water that bestows (for in that case it were a thing more exalted than all creation), but the command of God, and the visitation of the Spirit that comes sacramentally to set us free. But water serves to express the cleansing. For since we are wont by washing in water to render our body clean when it is soiled by dirt or mud, we therefore apply it also in the sacramental action, and display the spiritual brightness by that which is subject to our senses.
In the West, this festival focuses on the worship of the Magi, the Epiphany of the Christ to the Gentiles. Thus many missions hymns are Epiphany hymns and vice versa. (So much for the need for World mission sundays or evangelism sundays. Just follow the church year and you will find everything you need, sooner or later.)
In the East however, Epiphany focuses on the baptism of Christ. The Epiphany is of the Holy Trinity at the Jordan. The Father speaks, the Son receives baptism, and the Spirit descends. In the East, the day has a rich mix of Christological, Trinitarian and sacramental themes apparent in many of the Eastern father's sermons for Epiphany.
Here is a short section of Gregory of Nyssa's sermon "On the Baptism of Christ".
Christ, then, was born as it were a few days ago--He Whose generation was before all things, sensible and intellectual. To-day He is baptized by John that He might cleanse him who was defiled, that He might bring the Spirit from above, and exalt man to heaven, that he who had fallen might be raised up and he who had cast him down might be put to shame.
And marvel not if God showed so great earnestness in our cause: for it was with care on the part of him who did us wrong that the plot was laid against us; it is with forethought on the part of our Maker that we are saved. And he, that evil charmer, framing his new device of sin against our race, drew along his serpent train, a disguise worthy of his own intent, entering in his impurity into what was like himself,--dwelling, earthly and mundane as he was in will, in that creeping thing.
But Christ, the repairer of his evil-doing, assumes manhood in its fulness, and saves man, and becomes the type and figure of us all, to sanctify the first-fruits of every action, and leave to His servants no doubt in their zeal for the tradition.
Baptism, then, is a purification from sins, a remission of trespasses, a cause of renovation and regeneration. By regeneration, understand regeneration conceived in thought, not discerned by bodily sight. For we shall not, according to the Jew Nicodemus and his somewhat dull intelligence, change the old man into a child, nor shall we form anew him who is wrinkled and gray-headed to tenderness and youth, if we bring back the man again into his mother's womb: but we do bring back, by royal grace, him who bears the scars of sin, and has grown old in evil habits, to the innocence of the babe. For as the child new-born is free from accusations and from penalties, so too the child of regeneration has nothing for which to answer, being released by royal bounty from accountability.
And this gift it is not the water that bestows (for in that case it were a thing more exalted than all creation), but the command of God, and the visitation of the Spirit that comes sacramentally to set us free. But water serves to express the cleansing. For since we are wont by washing in water to render our body clean when it is soiled by dirt or mud, we therefore apply it also in the sacramental action, and display the spiritual brightness by that which is subject to our senses.
Monday, January 02, 2006
Garments of Skin
Genesis 3:21 Also for Adam and his wife the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.
I have always viewed this passage as a "gospel" passage, even as a picture of the coming sacrifce of Christ.
Adam and Eve tried to cover their shame themselves with leaves and it did not work. They relied on their own efforts to deal with sin. They could not hide from God. God then sacrificed a living animal who gave his life to properly cover Adam and Eve. Thus, Christ gives himself to cover us with His righteousness, our baptismal robe of purity.
I have been reading this excellent book, The Spirit of Early Christian Thought : Seeking the Face of God by Robert Wilken. He includes a section on Gregory Nyssa's interpretation of this passage which is radically different.
He sees them as punishment, as symbolizing the fact that humanity was now subject to deaht and unruly passions. We are clothed in magnificent garments of purity until the fall and now the dead animal skins hang on us heavily and are a picture of the sin and weight which drags us to the grave.
Anyone know what Luther or other Lutheran interpreters have done with this?
I have always viewed this passage as a "gospel" passage, even as a picture of the coming sacrifce of Christ.
Adam and Eve tried to cover their shame themselves with leaves and it did not work. They relied on their own efforts to deal with sin. They could not hide from God. God then sacrificed a living animal who gave his life to properly cover Adam and Eve. Thus, Christ gives himself to cover us with His righteousness, our baptismal robe of purity.
I have been reading this excellent book, The Spirit of Early Christian Thought : Seeking the Face of God by Robert Wilken. He includes a section on Gregory Nyssa's interpretation of this passage which is radically different.
He sees them as punishment, as symbolizing the fact that humanity was now subject to deaht and unruly passions. We are clothed in magnificent garments of purity until the fall and now the dead animal skins hang on us heavily and are a picture of the sin and weight which drags us to the grave.
Anyone know what Luther or other Lutheran interpreters have done with this?
Sunday, January 01, 2006
Circumcision of our Lord
Today is New Years Day. In the church it is the Circumcision of our Lord.
O God, who by the child-bearing of a pure Virgin hast bestowed upon all mankind the rewards of everlasting life : grant, we beseech thee ; that we may know the succour of her intercession, through whom we have been found worthy to receive the Author of life, even Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord : Who liveth and reigneth with thee.
R. Amen.
The photo above and the collect are from Breviary Net a wonderful site that has the Roman Breviary (Daily Prayers) in Latin and English. Even with all the Romanist stuff it is a wealth of prayers, readings from the fathers, hymns, and images.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)