I ran across a couple of posts yesterday that offer an interesting and telling contrast of worldviews regarding what it means to be a woman and have children. Notice the difference in the "iconography," not to mention the comments sections. Notice also that the first author is male. Here are the articles for your consideration. Any conclusions I might draw I think are self-evident.
Say No To . . .
and
The Soft Sexism of Low Expectations
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
God's Own Child
At lunch today, our youngest and last still being home-schooled, 14-year old Mary says out of the blue to my wife and me, "For my funeral--you're probably not going to be there--but I'd like to have that hymn that we sang yesterday at church, 'God's Own Child, I Gladly Say it.'" I certainly hope she's right about my not being there for her funeral. And I'm so thankful that the grace of God covers all the ways I screw up as a parent and still produces such beautiful-to-hear statements of faith. Here are the words of the hymn (LSB, 594):
God's own child, I gladly say it:
I am baptized into Christ!
He, because I could not pay it,
Gave my full redemption price.
Do I need earth's treasures many?
I have one worth more than any
That brought me salvation free
Lasting to eternity!
Sin, disturb my soul no longer:
I am baptized into Christ!
I have comfort even stronger:
Jesus' cleansing sacrifice.
Should a guilty conscience seize me
Since my Baptism did release me
In a dear forgiving flood,
Sprinkling me with Jesus' blood?
Satan, hear this proclamation:
I am baptized into Christ!
Drop your ugly accusation,
I am not so soon enticed.
Now that to the font I've traveled,
All your might has come unraveled,
And, against your tyranny,
God, my Lord, unites with me!
Death, you cannot end my gladness:
I am baptized into Christ!
When I die, I leave all sadness
To inherit paradise!
Though I lie in dust and ashes
Faith's assurance brightly flashes:
Baptism has the strength divine
To make life immortal mine.
There is nothing worth comparing
To this lifelong comfort sure!
Open-eyed my grave is staring:
Even there I'll sleep secure.
Though my flesh awaits its raising,
Still my soul continues praising:
I am baptized into Christ;
I'm a child of paradise!
God's own child, I gladly say it:
I am baptized into Christ!
He, because I could not pay it,
Gave my full redemption price.
Do I need earth's treasures many?
I have one worth more than any
That brought me salvation free
Lasting to eternity!
Sin, disturb my soul no longer:
I am baptized into Christ!
I have comfort even stronger:
Jesus' cleansing sacrifice.
Should a guilty conscience seize me
Since my Baptism did release me
In a dear forgiving flood,
Sprinkling me with Jesus' blood?
Satan, hear this proclamation:
I am baptized into Christ!
Drop your ugly accusation,
I am not so soon enticed.
Now that to the font I've traveled,
All your might has come unraveled,
And, against your tyranny,
God, my Lord, unites with me!
Death, you cannot end my gladness:
I am baptized into Christ!
When I die, I leave all sadness
To inherit paradise!
Though I lie in dust and ashes
Faith's assurance brightly flashes:
Baptism has the strength divine
To make life immortal mine.
There is nothing worth comparing
To this lifelong comfort sure!
Open-eyed my grave is staring:
Even there I'll sleep secure.
Though my flesh awaits its raising,
Still my soul continues praising:
I am baptized into Christ;
I'm a child of paradise!
Sunday, January 11, 2009
The Word is in the Water
We confess that, in Baptism, the key thing is not simply the water, but what has been added to it. Even with ordinary uses of water, it is common for us to think this way. For instance, it's not the water but the flavoring and fizz added to it that make soda what it is, or the barley, hops, and fermenting yeast that make beer what it is. In a much greater way, it is the Name and Word of God connected to the water that make baptism what it is. In fact in the baptism of our Lord, we see that the Word made flesh is in the water Himself. Thus, baptism is the Gospel. It is Jesus. It delivers Him and all His gifts to us in and with the water poured over us. To reject baptism or its saving power is to reject the Word contained in it. Luther comments this way in the Large Catechism:
"From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God's Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God's Word and command are added.
"Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God's Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God's order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God's Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.
"Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it, all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign.
"Therefore we always teach that the Sacraments and all external things which God ordains and institutes should not be regarded according to the coarse, external mask, as we regard the shell of a nut, but as the Word of God is included therein. . .
"Thus, and much more even, 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 from 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?
"Therefore I exhort again that these two, the water and the Word, by no means be separated from one another and parted. For if the Word is separated from it, the water is the same as that with which the servant cooks' and may indeed be called a bath-keeper's baptism. But when it is added, as God has ordained, it is a Sacrament, and is called Christ-baptism."
(Large Catechism, Holy Baptism, 14-19,21-22)
"From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God's Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God's Word and command are added.
"Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God's Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God's order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God's Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.
"Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it, all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign.
"Therefore we always teach that the Sacraments and all external things which God ordains and institutes should not be regarded according to the coarse, external mask, as we regard the shell of a nut, but as the Word of God is included therein. . .
"Thus, and much more even, 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 from 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?
"Therefore I exhort again that these two, the water and the Word, by no means be separated from one another and parted. For if the Word is separated from it, the water is the same as that with which the servant cooks' and may indeed be called a bath-keeper's baptism. But when it is added, as God has ordained, it is a Sacrament, and is called Christ-baptism."
(Large Catechism, Holy Baptism, 14-19,21-22)
Saturday, January 10, 2009
You Can't Take It With You
The wicked may prosper, but never for long. (See Psalm 73)
And here's another take on the whole event.
And here's another take on the whole event.
Gran Torino
(Cautiously taking off my pastor hat for something a little less theological:)
Last evening, all the ladies of the house were gathered in the living room having a Jane Austen fest, watching the long version of Pride and Prejudice (as in 5 hours long). Thus, the self-respecting males in the house had to go out and watch the new Clint Eastwood movie, Gran Torino. We were not disappointed.
While I hesitate to recommend an R-rated movie–and this movie is rather raw at some points and filled with bad language throughout–I found it to be an entertaining and compelling story. The Clint Eastwood character, despite his gruff, seemingly racist exterior, is a very likable character–a "real man" in the old school sense. And his relationship with his family, as contrasted with his neighbors in a changing neighborhood, is developed fairly well. If I was hearing correctly, Clint Eastwood himself even does a little singing during the closing credits.
In terms of the religious aspects of the movie, there is a shaman who is very briefly portrayed in a positive light, and there are a few not unexpected problems in the way the Catholic priest is portrayed (though he, too, is developed as a positive character). But in a deeper way, the climax of the movie in particular is quite Christological–a slightly surprising and satisfying resolution of the story (though the imagery perhaps gets carried a little too far). Lutherans even get a brief reference in connection with Hmong refugees coming to America.
Some of the actors portraying the Hmong characters in this movie were a little stiff and clearly newer to the acting craft. And again, there is a heavy dose of foul language (thought it mostly comes off as realistic rather than gratuitous). But if that coarseness doesn't put you off, I believe you'll thoroughly enjoy this movie.
Here's a review of the movie from the local Milwaukee paper.
Last evening, all the ladies of the house were gathered in the living room having a Jane Austen fest, watching the long version of Pride and Prejudice (as in 5 hours long). Thus, the self-respecting males in the house had to go out and watch the new Clint Eastwood movie, Gran Torino. We were not disappointed.
While I hesitate to recommend an R-rated movie–and this movie is rather raw at some points and filled with bad language throughout–I found it to be an entertaining and compelling story. The Clint Eastwood character, despite his gruff, seemingly racist exterior, is a very likable character–a "real man" in the old school sense. And his relationship with his family, as contrasted with his neighbors in a changing neighborhood, is developed fairly well. If I was hearing correctly, Clint Eastwood himself even does a little singing during the closing credits.
In terms of the religious aspects of the movie, there is a shaman who is very briefly portrayed in a positive light, and there are a few not unexpected problems in the way the Catholic priest is portrayed (though he, too, is developed as a positive character). But in a deeper way, the climax of the movie in particular is quite Christological–a slightly surprising and satisfying resolution of the story (though the imagery perhaps gets carried a little too far). Lutherans even get a brief reference in connection with Hmong refugees coming to America.
Some of the actors portraying the Hmong characters in this movie were a little stiff and clearly newer to the acting craft. And again, there is a heavy dose of foul language (thought it mostly comes off as realistic rather than gratuitous). But if that coarseness doesn't put you off, I believe you'll thoroughly enjoy this movie.
Here's a review of the movie from the local Milwaukee paper.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Milwaukee, the new San Francisco
I didn't realize we were on the liberal (or libertine) cutting edge here in the Milwaukee area, but evidently we are. Here is the web site of our gay-friendly Milwaukee Public School, which reportedly is going to be the first of its kind in the country to extend the grade levels it serves from high school down to middle school. Yes, middle school. The slogan for this school is "Where you can be who you are." But seriously, how many middle schoolers have a firm grip on who they are? They also say in their vision statement that they want to create "a safe environment where students will be treated fairly regardless of sexuality, ability, appearance, or beliefs." I wonder how fairly someone would be treated who expressed their Scriptural belief that homosexuality is sinful? (See Romans 1:24-28 or 1 Corinthians 6:9-11)
This, of course, is just another sign of how far our schools have fallen, from promoting academic knowledge and learning to promoting a social agenda. But even more so, it's a sign of how the church needs to clearly proclaim both repentance and the forgiveness of sins, not only the sinful corruption of our humanity that homosexuality is, but also how Christ is the Lamb of God who bears and carries away the sin of the world. As we observe the Baptism of our Lord in the coming days, we are reminded of how the sinless Jesus became the homosexual and the adulterer Himself in the water of the Jordan, how He absorbed all of our sin into Himself and became Sin for us, so that in Him we would become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). Only as those baptized into Christ do we really find who we are, holy and beloved and forgiven children of God.
The funny thing is, this hasn't really been a news item here in the local Milwaukee media that I've noticed. I don't think anyone wants to be labeled as hateful or bigoted by questioning the motives or the wisdom of this move. However, U.S. News and World Report picked up on the story. Here's a snippet of the article:
This, of course, is just another sign of how far our schools have fallen, from promoting academic knowledge and learning to promoting a social agenda. But even more so, it's a sign of how the church needs to clearly proclaim both repentance and the forgiveness of sins, not only the sinful corruption of our humanity that homosexuality is, but also how Christ is the Lamb of God who bears and carries away the sin of the world. As we observe the Baptism of our Lord in the coming days, we are reminded of how the sinless Jesus became the homosexual and the adulterer Himself in the water of the Jordan, how He absorbed all of our sin into Himself and became Sin for us, so that in Him we would become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). Only as those baptized into Christ do we really find who we are, holy and beloved and forgiven children of God.
The funny thing is, this hasn't really been a news item here in the local Milwaukee media that I've noticed. I don't think anyone wants to be labeled as hateful or bigoted by questioning the motives or the wisdom of this move. However, U.S. News and World Report picked up on the story. Here's a snippet of the article:
The Milwaukee Public School System will expand the services provided by its gay-friendly high school and apparently become the nation's first school system to create a gay-friendly middle school.
At a meeting two weeks ago, a subcommittee of Milwaukee's Board of Education unanimously approved the Alliance School's proposal to serve sixth, seventh, and eighth graders. The proposal gained unanimous approval from the full board by default when the item was not pulled for further discussion or a vote at last night's meeting. Alliance School lead teacher Tina Owen said the public charter school will begin accepting new applicants eligible for middle school in the 2009-2010 school year immediately.
Milwaukee's response to gay-friendly schools has been much different from other cities'. In Chicago, community leaders' concerns about creating a gay-friendly high school stalled plans to bring such a proposal before the city's school board. In New York City, protesters greeted students of the gay-friendly Harvey Milk High School in Manhattan's East Village on its first day of classes five years ago. But in Milwaukee, the Alliance School's birth as a high school and expansion to serve middle school students passed with no real opposition. Calls from social service organizations and parents urging Owen to create the middle school more quickly are the only responses she has received from the community, Owen said.
(Hat tip to Charlie Sykes for this story)LCMS Clergy Numbers
I don't follow LCMS statistics too closely. Perhaps that's why the numbers on p. 8 of the January 2009 Lutheran Witness were just a little bit surprising to me regarding clergy. According to the LCMS Church Information Center, there are 6,167 congregations in the synod with 9,164 clergy, or 1.49 clergymen per congregation. But then comes the next line: Of the 9,164 clergy in the synod, only 5,356 are serving a parish! Adding in chaplains (which I'm assuming are all ordained men) the number still only adds up to 5,837. That means more than 35% of our clergy, 3,327 men, are not serving in a parish or full-time work as a pastor! Now, of course, I recognize that a good chunk of that 35% includes retired pastors who often serve part-time, or ordained ministers teaching at our synodical schools, and the like. But 35%? Do we have that many bureaucrats in our synodical and district offices? What's up with these numbers? The number of missionaries is listed at 811. But in LCMS-speak, the vast majority of those are laity, right? Whatever the case, I don't want to hear any more about our need for "lay ministers." It seems we need more of our ordained men doing the first thing they were given to do in their ordination: serving in a pulpit and at an altar, preaching and teaching the Word of God and administering the sacraments.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
A few more pictures
Here are a few of the professional pictures taken at Bekah and Gabe's wedding back on December 27th. (And yes, the photographer did graciously give us the digital rights to these.)
All my children (including Gabe):
The whole crew with Mom and Dad:
View from the balcony during the marriage rite:
The Rev. Dr. Joel Biermann preaching during Vespers:
The Rev. Dr. Karl Fabrizius playing a mean air guitar at the reception:
You can view many more pictures at my wife's blog.
All my children (including Gabe):
The whole crew with Mom and Dad:
View from the balcony during the marriage rite:
The Rev. Dr. Joel Biermann preaching during Vespers:
The Rev. Dr. Karl Fabrizius playing a mean air guitar at the reception:
You can view many more pictures at my wife's blog.
Monday, January 5, 2009
How should I dress for church?
Here's one from the archives. I wrote it for the church newsletter the year the Packers last won the Super Bowl. (What a distant memory that seems compared to this year!) On the day of the NFC championship, everyone kneeling for communion at one point was wearing Packers garb of some sort, be it a jacket or sweatshirt or T-shirt. Now I was as rabid a fan as any of them, but that picture just didn't look quite right to me. Here's what I came up with to address the larger issue, which I think is still relevant:
I have noticed lately that more and more people are coming to church wearing clothing which has on it the names of sports teams or names of companies or slogans or various pictures and symbols from the secular or entertainment world. Is it appropriate for Christians to dress this way in the Lord's house? And if not, why not?
To begin with, we don't want to make up some sort of arbitrary and legalistic code about what a person can and cannot wear that goes beyond what the Scriptures teach. We do not wish to encourage our sinful human pride by setting up a system whereby people are judged by their clothing or are shown partiality by how they dress. The Scriptures speak of this in James 2: "If there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, ‘You sit here in a good place,' and say to the poor man, ‘You stand there,' or, ‘Sit here at my feet,' have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?"
But this does not mean that we can simply dress however we please, either. For the Scriptures make it abundantly clear that when we gather for the divine service of the Word and the Sacraments, we are coming into the very presence of Christ. "Where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them" (Matthew 18:20). The way we dress should reflect this reality that our Lord Jesus is truly present among us in worship. Just as we wear our best when we go out to a fine restaurant, so we are to wear clothing that is fit for feasting at the banquet table of the Lamb of God, partaking of His Holy Word and His precious body and blood. To do otherwise is to act as if Christ is not really present or that His presence isn't all that important or worth honoring. It would be like wearing sweats and an old T-shirt to your wedding.
This is not to say that we should be showy in our clothing, dressing in such a way as to draw attention to ourselves. Rather, modesty should be the rule. St. Paul speaks this way when he tells women how to dress in I Timothy 2: "I desire that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works."
Our real clothing as Christians is the righteousness and holiness of Christ which He has freely given to us. "As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ" (Galatians 3:27). It is this spiritual clothing that should be reflected in our earthly clothing.
Especially when we gather for the divine service, our dress should exhibit the fact that we are people who have been called out of the world in Christ; we are certainly in the world, but we are not of the world. Worldly clothing with worldly philosophies and agendas, then, should not find its way into the holy house of God. "Come out from among them (the people of the world) and be separate, says the Lord" (II Corinthians 6:17).
Here, then, are some simple guidelines for how to dress for Church:
+ Avoid wearing clothing with any words displayed on it, especially if it's promoting some person or team or company. This isn't the business of the church, and it can be distracting to others.
+ Avoid wearing clothing with any sort of pictures or symbols that represent the things of the secular or entertainment world. Again, the divine service is not the place for these to be featured.
+ Dress in such as way as is fitting in the presence of the King of kings and the Lord of lords.
+ Dress in such a way that you don't draw improper attention to yourself. Modesty is the key word.
+ "Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering. . . But above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfection" (Colossians 3:12-14).
I have noticed lately that more and more people are coming to church wearing clothing which has on it the names of sports teams or names of companies or slogans or various pictures and symbols from the secular or entertainment world. Is it appropriate for Christians to dress this way in the Lord's house? And if not, why not?
To begin with, we don't want to make up some sort of arbitrary and legalistic code about what a person can and cannot wear that goes beyond what the Scriptures teach. We do not wish to encourage our sinful human pride by setting up a system whereby people are judged by their clothing or are shown partiality by how they dress. The Scriptures speak of this in James 2: "If there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, ‘You sit here in a good place,' and say to the poor man, ‘You stand there,' or, ‘Sit here at my feet,' have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?"
But this does not mean that we can simply dress however we please, either. For the Scriptures make it abundantly clear that when we gather for the divine service of the Word and the Sacraments, we are coming into the very presence of Christ. "Where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them" (Matthew 18:20). The way we dress should reflect this reality that our Lord Jesus is truly present among us in worship. Just as we wear our best when we go out to a fine restaurant, so we are to wear clothing that is fit for feasting at the banquet table of the Lamb of God, partaking of His Holy Word and His precious body and blood. To do otherwise is to act as if Christ is not really present or that His presence isn't all that important or worth honoring. It would be like wearing sweats and an old T-shirt to your wedding.
This is not to say that we should be showy in our clothing, dressing in such a way as to draw attention to ourselves. Rather, modesty should be the rule. St. Paul speaks this way when he tells women how to dress in I Timothy 2: "I desire that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works."
Our real clothing as Christians is the righteousness and holiness of Christ which He has freely given to us. "As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ" (Galatians 3:27). It is this spiritual clothing that should be reflected in our earthly clothing.
Especially when we gather for the divine service, our dress should exhibit the fact that we are people who have been called out of the world in Christ; we are certainly in the world, but we are not of the world. Worldly clothing with worldly philosophies and agendas, then, should not find its way into the holy house of God. "Come out from among them (the people of the world) and be separate, says the Lord" (II Corinthians 6:17).
Here, then, are some simple guidelines for how to dress for Church:
+ Avoid wearing clothing with any words displayed on it, especially if it's promoting some person or team or company. This isn't the business of the church, and it can be distracting to others.
+ Avoid wearing clothing with any sort of pictures or symbols that represent the things of the secular or entertainment world. Again, the divine service is not the place for these to be featured.
+ Dress in such as way as is fitting in the presence of the King of kings and the Lord of lords.
+ Dress in such a way that you don't draw improper attention to yourself. Modesty is the key word.
+ "Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering. . . But above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfection" (Colossians 3:12-14).
Thursday, January 1, 2009
No Goods or Services Provided
"No good or services were provided to you by the church in connection with any contribution"
Those are the words stamped on our congregation's financial forms which indicate how much was given in offerings over the past year. Evidently federal or state law requires that we include such a statement because of our non-profit status as a church.
That statement got me to thinking, though. Is it true? Don't you receive goods and services in connection with your offerings? What greater service could you be receiving than divine service? What greater goods are there than the saving Word of God and the body and blood of Christ given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins? Does that statement on your financial form lie?
The answer is, "no." For your offering is not given to pay for such heavenly goods and services. Your offerings are not "dues" that you pay so that you can stay in the church "club" and receive its benefits. For the divine service and the holy goods that God gives to you are entirely free and without any strings attached.
It is written in Romans 6, "The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." What you receive in church is a free gift! The forgiveness, life, and salvation bestowed upon you come with no strings attached. There is nothing for you to do but to receive what God gives you entirely by grace. No requirements are laid upon you.
So what are the offerings for then? Why do we give them? There are at least three answers. First of all, the giving of an offering shows forth your thanks to God for all that He has done for you in Christ and all that He has given you in both body and soul. It is a concrete expression of gratitude for His goodness toward you.
Secondly, an offering is an expression of faith. It shows that you believe that the Lord is indeed the Creator and Owner of all things and He alone is to be praised for the good things that you have. Returning back to Him a portion of what He has first given you honors Him as your Maker and Redeemer and shows a trust that He will continue to care for you in the future.
Thirdly, we give offerings because we desire to support the ministry of the Gospel of Christ. We want to be sure that the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments will continue to go on in our midst, both for our salvation and for the salvation of others. This Gospel is our very life and our greatest treasure, and we want the good news of Jesus to be proclaimed here and in all the world.
Those are the words stamped on our congregation's financial forms which indicate how much was given in offerings over the past year. Evidently federal or state law requires that we include such a statement because of our non-profit status as a church.
That statement got me to thinking, though. Is it true? Don't you receive goods and services in connection with your offerings? What greater service could you be receiving than divine service? What greater goods are there than the saving Word of God and the body and blood of Christ given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins? Does that statement on your financial form lie?
The answer is, "no." For your offering is not given to pay for such heavenly goods and services. Your offerings are not "dues" that you pay so that you can stay in the church "club" and receive its benefits. For the divine service and the holy goods that God gives to you are entirely free and without any strings attached.
It is written in Romans 6, "The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." What you receive in church is a free gift! The forgiveness, life, and salvation bestowed upon you come with no strings attached. There is nothing for you to do but to receive what God gives you entirely by grace. No requirements are laid upon you.
So what are the offerings for then? Why do we give them? There are at least three answers. First of all, the giving of an offering shows forth your thanks to God for all that He has done for you in Christ and all that He has given you in both body and soul. It is a concrete expression of gratitude for His goodness toward you.
Secondly, an offering is an expression of faith. It shows that you believe that the Lord is indeed the Creator and Owner of all things and He alone is to be praised for the good things that you have. Returning back to Him a portion of what He has first given you honors Him as your Maker and Redeemer and shows a trust that He will continue to care for you in the future.
Thirdly, we give offerings because we desire to support the ministry of the Gospel of Christ. We want to be sure that the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments will continue to go on in our midst, both for our salvation and for the salvation of others. This Gospel is our very life and our greatest treasure, and we want the good news of Jesus to be proclaimed here and in all the world.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Just One Picture
Here's one shot from Grandma Novak's camera of the bride and groom. Laura and I are next to Rebekah, and Gabriel's parents, Philip and Cassandra, are next to him. The last time I wore a tux was on my own wedding day! (Of course, I wore my pastoral robes for the ceremony itself.)
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Father of the Bride
Yesterday my daughter Rebekah was married to Gabriel Frusti. It was foggy and rainy outside, but it was beautiful indoors. I had the privilege of both walking my daughter down the aisle and then performing the marriage rite. What a challenging and emotional thing it was! I had tears in my eyes during the procession and a lump in my throat throughout the ceremony, but my voice only broke when pronouncing them to be husband and wife. Thankfully I had the assistance of Gabe's two uncles, the Rev. Dr. Joel Biermann and the Rev. Matthew Richardt, both of whom did a good job in preaching and assisting in Vespers. That certainly helped take a load off of my shoulders so that I could more fully enjoy the occasion of God joining my firstborn to her new husband. It was a great experience to have the congregation singing the hymns and liturgy in strong voice as we prayed for the bride and groom and rejoiced in God's gift of marriage and the forgiveness of Christ.
There's one thing that struck me at the end of the ceremony. It's nothing profound. In fact, it's sort of obvious, but it left me feeling just a little bit like Steve Martin at the end of the movie Father of the Bride. Of all the people in the procession, I was the only one who didn't get to walk out with the one I walked in with. All of the groomsmen were arm in arm with the same bridesmaids they entered with, but after processing in with my daughter I had to walk out with the other pastors. I was surprised at how lonely that felt. You go through all these preparations for weeks and months in advance to make sure everything goes properly, and then it's all over and your daughter is a wife and she's on her way to the beginning of a new life. And you don't quite know what to do next once that's all happened. It was a strange feeling--not really sad, just unexpected.
Of course, the next thing to do yesterday was simply to enjoy the reception and celebrate with friends and family and toast the occasion and slow dance with my wife and be humbled by the fact that God allows us sinners still to enjoy so much good in this fallen world. There were plenty of friends, and pastors in particular, who were more than happy to stick around and help drink all the unfinished bottles of wine! From beginning to end, it was a good day.
Rebekah, I'm so glad you found a good man, and a Lutheran one, in Gabriel. God richly bless your marriage and your household!
There's one thing that struck me at the end of the ceremony. It's nothing profound. In fact, it's sort of obvious, but it left me feeling just a little bit like Steve Martin at the end of the movie Father of the Bride. Of all the people in the procession, I was the only one who didn't get to walk out with the one I walked in with. All of the groomsmen were arm in arm with the same bridesmaids they entered with, but after processing in with my daughter I had to walk out with the other pastors. I was surprised at how lonely that felt. You go through all these preparations for weeks and months in advance to make sure everything goes properly, and then it's all over and your daughter is a wife and she's on her way to the beginning of a new life. And you don't quite know what to do next once that's all happened. It was a strange feeling--not really sad, just unexpected.
Of course, the next thing to do yesterday was simply to enjoy the reception and celebrate with friends and family and toast the occasion and slow dance with my wife and be humbled by the fact that God allows us sinners still to enjoy so much good in this fallen world. There were plenty of friends, and pastors in particular, who were more than happy to stick around and help drink all the unfinished bottles of wine! From beginning to end, it was a good day.
Rebekah, I'm so glad you found a good man, and a Lutheran one, in Gabriel. God richly bless your marriage and your household!
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Living Nativity
At this time of year some Christian churches will have "living nativities" with live animals and actors portraying the setting of Christ's birth; or they will have big musical stage productions telling the Christmas story. And of course, there's nothing necessarily wrong with those things.
But there's one thing I've noticed. The churches that tend to really go all out on such things also tend to de-emphasize or not to believe at all in the literal presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament of the Altar. The pretend portrayal is preferred over the real thing. The vacuum that is created in pushing aside the Scriptural teaching of the Lord's Supper is inevitably filled with our own creations. The works of man always appear to be more impressive than the works of God. I recall even one Lutheran pastor who would kneel before a plastic Jesus as part of a school Christmas program, but who thought it wrong to genuflect at the altar during the consecration!
Let us never forget, then, where the real living nativity is: It's on the altar and in the pastor's hand and in your mouth, the living body and blood of Christ wrapped in the swaddling cloths of bread and wine. To go to Bethlehem is to go to the Sacrament; for Bethlehem means "house of bread." And the Bread of Life, the Word made flesh, is here in God's house for you, as Jesus said, "I am the Living Bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world." Let us not only keep Christ in Christmas, let us also keep the mass, Holy Communion, in Christmass.
But there's one thing I've noticed. The churches that tend to really go all out on such things also tend to de-emphasize or not to believe at all in the literal presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament of the Altar. The pretend portrayal is preferred over the real thing. The vacuum that is created in pushing aside the Scriptural teaching of the Lord's Supper is inevitably filled with our own creations. The works of man always appear to be more impressive than the works of God. I recall even one Lutheran pastor who would kneel before a plastic Jesus as part of a school Christmas program, but who thought it wrong to genuflect at the altar during the consecration!
Let us never forget, then, where the real living nativity is: It's on the altar and in the pastor's hand and in your mouth, the living body and blood of Christ wrapped in the swaddling cloths of bread and wine. To go to Bethlehem is to go to the Sacrament; for Bethlehem means "house of bread." And the Bread of Life, the Word made flesh, is here in God's house for you, as Jesus said, "I am the Living Bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world." Let us not only keep Christ in Christmas, let us also keep the mass, Holy Communion, in Christmass.
Monday, December 22, 2008
I'm Sure This Will Help Study Habits
I wasn't aware that not just college dorms but even dormrooms were going co-ed; guess I haven't been paying close enough attention. One has to wonder at the wisdom of those who think that putting college age males and females in the same sleeping quarters "isn't aimed at romantic couples" or doesn't have the effect of promoting sexual immorality. Even if there are many examples of "platonic" male/female dormrooms, is that really something we want to encourage? Whatever happened to even the most basic standards of decency and ethics in the way men and women relate to one another? Not a good trend, but I guess it's hard to stop now that living together before marriage has become the accepted norm in our culture. Here's the article:
The University of Chicago is joining a nationwide trend of allowing male and female students to live not just on the same dorm floor, but in the same dorm room.
The University of Chicago is joining a nationwide trend of allowing male and female students to live not just on the same dorm floor, but in the same dorm room.
The school sent a letter out to parents last week informing them of the decision. The school says it was a student-led initiative that isn't aimed at romantic couples. However, the school says couples won't be banned from asking to be roommates when the program begins next month.
Nationally more than 30 campuses allow co-ed dorm rooms.
The University of Chicago program is called open housing and it won't include freshmen. Students do not need parental permission to participate. The school says students will not be assigned mixed-gender housing. Instead it's on a request basis.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Why Do We Practice Closed Communion?
(With the Christmas holy-day approaching and with the greater number of visitors we'll be having for divine service, I thought it might be good to post this recent newsletter article:)
The above question is one of the toughest for the average Lutheran to answer. At first glance it seems so contrary to our basic Christian instincts. Doesn’t Jesus welcome all people? Didn’t He die for everyone? Isn’t forgiveness and salvation something that is not dependent on anything in us? Isn’t it all God’s grace, anyway? Why shouldn’t we let people come to the Lord’s Supper who want to do so?
The answer to the above question comes from God’s own Word. First of all, not everyone who receives the Lord’s Supper receives it to their benefit. Some are actually harmed by it because they do not have the right faith. 1 Corinthians 11:29 states, “He who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” Those who do not believe that the true, literal body and blood of Christ are being distributed, who believe that Communion is a just a remembrance ceremony using mere bread and wine, would eat and drink to their own condemnation according to this verse. To eat and drink in an unworthy manner is to eat and drink without penitent faith in the Lord’s real presence or in the promise of forgiveness attached to His real body and blood.
So then, first of all, out of love for our neighbor, we cannot simply let anyone come to the Lord’s table without first being sure they hold to this belief for their own good. Unfortunately, many Christian bodies–such as Methodists, Baptists, and non-denominational groups (to name just a few)–reject Christ’s true body and blood in His Supper. To admit them to the Lord’s table would be to dishonor Christ and fail to love our neighbor.
Second of all, God’s Word clearly teaches that we are not to have fellowship (communion) with false teaching. The Lord’s Supper is the highest and most intimate union that we have with one another as Christians on this earth. To permit a rejection of Christ’s Word into that intimate fellowship would be to love something or someone more than Christ. No one is saying that people from other church bodies aren’t Christian; we are not judging their heart or whether or not they will go to heaven. However, in these other church bodies there is false teaching that threatens saving faith, like a little bit of arsenic mixed in with otherwise good food. To overlook that false belief and say, “You can commune with us anyway,” would be to say that part of Christ’s Word doesn’t matter or that we can do without it. But what part of the Gospel can we safely sacrifice? Should we accept to communion those who reject infant baptism? those who say that good works contribute to our salvation? those who pray to and put their faith in the saints? those who ordain women as pastors? those who say that some parts of the Bible aren’t true and are not God’s Word? those who say that homosexuality is OK? those who water down the faith to be relevant to pop culture? It’s not just some esoteric ivory tower theological point that’s at stake but the very Gospel of Jesus Himself.
Once again, on the surface having open communion seems like the tolerant, inclusive, loving thing to do. But in reality it is the opposite of love for God or our neighbor. If we truly love our neighbor, we will want them to be freed from all false teaching. The temptation for us to compromise is high when it involves a relative or a guest whom we don’t want to offend. But God’s Word must be our highest love; for it brings Christ to us and gives His gifts. Since the Lord’s Supper is the Gospel, we want to administer it in the most faithful and loving way possible.
The practice of the early church backs up this practice. There was false teaching and heresy also in the days of the apostles and their successors, as well. And so when someone wanted to commune at a place other than their home church, they would actually get a letter from their pastor to give to the pastor in the city where they were going, certifying that the bearer of the letter held to the true faith. Apart from that, someone would not be allowed to Communion. (See Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries by Werner Elert.) No one had the prideful notion that they had the “right” to commune wherever they wanted. This was a privilege given by Christ and administered by pastors who were given to be “stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Corinthians 4:1).
And of course the practice of the early church reflected Scriptural admonitions: “Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Corinthians 1:10). Jesus said, “. . . teaching them to observe all things which I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19). “Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them” (Romans 16:17). “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house” [“House” in this context might refer to a house church.] (2 John 10). The last two verses apply especially to not welcoming preachers and others who teach falsely. But the principle remains the same. No false teaching is to be accepted alongside Christ’s truth, for Jesus said, “A little leaven leavens the whole lump” (1 Corinthians 5:6; see also Galatians 5:9). Like yeast, once a little false teaching takes hold, it can spread throughout everything else the church teaches and practices. One only needs to look at the compromise that has occurred in many church bodies (including some areas of our own Missouri Synod) to see evidence of that.
Finally, we shouldn’t forget that closed communion is also practiced within the membership of a congregation, too. Our Lord says in Matthew 5 that we should seek to be reconciled with those who may have something against us, whom we need to confess wrongdoing toward, before we go to the altar. We should not go to Communion if there are grudges that we’re holding on to or vengeance that we’re seeking toward our neighbor. Being reconciled with God in Christ at His table also involves seeking peace with our neighbor, especially if that neighbor will be kneeling with us at the communion rail.
Pastors must sometimes refrain from communing their own members who are behaving impenitently, openly holding on to their sins, refusing to humbly turn to Christ and seek His mercy. Jesus said in John 20, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” Sometimes a person needs to be barred from the Lord’s table to show the severity of their sin, that they might be brought to true repentance and seek the forgiveness the Lord gives with His body and blood.
So to sum up, the practice of closed communion is based on love for God and His Word and love for our neighbor, that they may receive and abide in the truth of Christ and His testament. It’s not a “we’re better than you” sort of thing. Rather, it is a practice which seeks to treat the body and blood of Christ as the holy, divine gifts that they are.
The above question is one of the toughest for the average Lutheran to answer. At first glance it seems so contrary to our basic Christian instincts. Doesn’t Jesus welcome all people? Didn’t He die for everyone? Isn’t forgiveness and salvation something that is not dependent on anything in us? Isn’t it all God’s grace, anyway? Why shouldn’t we let people come to the Lord’s Supper who want to do so?
The answer to the above question comes from God’s own Word. First of all, not everyone who receives the Lord’s Supper receives it to their benefit. Some are actually harmed by it because they do not have the right faith. 1 Corinthians 11:29 states, “He who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” Those who do not believe that the true, literal body and blood of Christ are being distributed, who believe that Communion is a just a remembrance ceremony using mere bread and wine, would eat and drink to their own condemnation according to this verse. To eat and drink in an unworthy manner is to eat and drink without penitent faith in the Lord’s real presence or in the promise of forgiveness attached to His real body and blood.
So then, first of all, out of love for our neighbor, we cannot simply let anyone come to the Lord’s table without first being sure they hold to this belief for their own good. Unfortunately, many Christian bodies–such as Methodists, Baptists, and non-denominational groups (to name just a few)–reject Christ’s true body and blood in His Supper. To admit them to the Lord’s table would be to dishonor Christ and fail to love our neighbor.
Second of all, God’s Word clearly teaches that we are not to have fellowship (communion) with false teaching. The Lord’s Supper is the highest and most intimate union that we have with one another as Christians on this earth. To permit a rejection of Christ’s Word into that intimate fellowship would be to love something or someone more than Christ. No one is saying that people from other church bodies aren’t Christian; we are not judging their heart or whether or not they will go to heaven. However, in these other church bodies there is false teaching that threatens saving faith, like a little bit of arsenic mixed in with otherwise good food. To overlook that false belief and say, “You can commune with us anyway,” would be to say that part of Christ’s Word doesn’t matter or that we can do without it. But what part of the Gospel can we safely sacrifice? Should we accept to communion those who reject infant baptism? those who say that good works contribute to our salvation? those who pray to and put their faith in the saints? those who ordain women as pastors? those who say that some parts of the Bible aren’t true and are not God’s Word? those who say that homosexuality is OK? those who water down the faith to be relevant to pop culture? It’s not just some esoteric ivory tower theological point that’s at stake but the very Gospel of Jesus Himself.
Once again, on the surface having open communion seems like the tolerant, inclusive, loving thing to do. But in reality it is the opposite of love for God or our neighbor. If we truly love our neighbor, we will want them to be freed from all false teaching. The temptation for us to compromise is high when it involves a relative or a guest whom we don’t want to offend. But God’s Word must be our highest love; for it brings Christ to us and gives His gifts. Since the Lord’s Supper is the Gospel, we want to administer it in the most faithful and loving way possible.
The practice of the early church backs up this practice. There was false teaching and heresy also in the days of the apostles and their successors, as well. And so when someone wanted to commune at a place other than their home church, they would actually get a letter from their pastor to give to the pastor in the city where they were going, certifying that the bearer of the letter held to the true faith. Apart from that, someone would not be allowed to Communion. (See Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries by Werner Elert.) No one had the prideful notion that they had the “right” to commune wherever they wanted. This was a privilege given by Christ and administered by pastors who were given to be “stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Corinthians 4:1).
And of course the practice of the early church reflected Scriptural admonitions: “Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Corinthians 1:10). Jesus said, “. . . teaching them to observe all things which I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19). “Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them” (Romans 16:17). “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house” [“House” in this context might refer to a house church.] (2 John 10). The last two verses apply especially to not welcoming preachers and others who teach falsely. But the principle remains the same. No false teaching is to be accepted alongside Christ’s truth, for Jesus said, “A little leaven leavens the whole lump” (1 Corinthians 5:6; see also Galatians 5:9). Like yeast, once a little false teaching takes hold, it can spread throughout everything else the church teaches and practices. One only needs to look at the compromise that has occurred in many church bodies (including some areas of our own Missouri Synod) to see evidence of that.
Finally, we shouldn’t forget that closed communion is also practiced within the membership of a congregation, too. Our Lord says in Matthew 5 that we should seek to be reconciled with those who may have something against us, whom we need to confess wrongdoing toward, before we go to the altar. We should not go to Communion if there are grudges that we’re holding on to or vengeance that we’re seeking toward our neighbor. Being reconciled with God in Christ at His table also involves seeking peace with our neighbor, especially if that neighbor will be kneeling with us at the communion rail.
Pastors must sometimes refrain from communing their own members who are behaving impenitently, openly holding on to their sins, refusing to humbly turn to Christ and seek His mercy. Jesus said in John 20, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” Sometimes a person needs to be barred from the Lord’s table to show the severity of their sin, that they might be brought to true repentance and seek the forgiveness the Lord gives with His body and blood.
So to sum up, the practice of closed communion is based on love for God and His Word and love for our neighbor, that they may receive and abide in the truth of Christ and His testament. It’s not a “we’re better than you” sort of thing. Rather, it is a practice which seeks to treat the body and blood of Christ as the holy, divine gifts that they are.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Mt. Zion Web Site Updated
Thanks to the hard work of our web master, Jon Kohlmeier, the web site of Mt. Zion Lutheran Church in Greenfield, Wisconsin has been updated and made to look much better. You can access the new web site here. There are still a few more things we will be adding and adjusting, but I'm glad we were able to get this live before Christmas. Good work, Jon!
Ethnic Jesus
It used to be bother me a little bit when I would see Nativity scenes from other countries that depicted Jesus as being of the same race as that country–in a Chinese painting Jesus looked oriental, in an African portrayal Jesus was black, or for that matter, in a German or Scandinavian portrait Jesus looked like a blue-eyed European. It bothered me because the Christmas narrative is a true story, real history, and Jesus is a middle-eastern Jew. To depict the Nativity in some other way seemed to me to be making it into a bit of a fairy tale that we can mold and shape and change to fit our desires and needs. But the account of Jesus’ birth is no myth. It doesn’t belong in the same category as flying reindeer and all the fantasy that has become so much a part of our culture’s Christmas holiday. The Christmas narrative is for real. Luke emphasizes that point by even giving you some of the historical details about who the Caesar was and the census and the tax and who the governor of that region was at that time. The Christmas story is an actual, literal account about the real Jesus and His birth.
And yet the more I think about it, the more I believe that those paintings may have it right, at least in this sense: The angel came with the message of good news for all people, “To you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” The Savior Jesus is born to you, for you; He is yours. He’s your kind, humankind. When the Son of God took on our human nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary, He did not just became a man. He became man. He took all of humanity into Himself in His incarnation. For He came to bear the sins of all humanity in His body. That includes every nation and race and people and language. Though Jesus was indeed a Jew, His birth reveals the truth that there is in fact only one human race, the fallen children of Adam. And in this newborn baby in the manger, every sinner is redeemed and restored to God. Jesus is the embodiment of all people from every corner of the globe, and in His body all people are put right with God again.
And so when Jesus is portrayed as African or Oriental or European, theologically speaking that’s true. By becoming man, Christ becomes one with all people to deliver all people. The Savior is born to you, for you. He’s one of you, your very flesh and blood, your true human brother. There’s no one that’s left out of the new life that comes from His holy birth. He’s like you in every way, except without sin, that you might become like Him in every way and share in His divine glory.
(The rest of this 2007 Christmas sermon can be accessed here.)
Thursday, December 18, 2008
The Two Shall Become . . .?
One of the last things to do for the wedding of my daughter on the 27th is to prepare the bulletin. It looks like we're going to produce our own "in house," though we did look at several of the full color ones offered by various publishing houses.
There's one thing that has always struck me as a little strange. All of the full color professional bulletins that I saw cut short a particular marriage verse by rendering it, "The two shall become one." But that's not how the Bible has it. It's not "The two shall become one," but "The two shall become one flesh." Why do they always cut off that last word, flesh, on their bulletin covers?
Perhaps it doesn't seem very spiritual to be talking about flesh in church, but the marital union is not just a generic spiritual union but, as the wedding liturgy points out, a union of "heart, body, and mind." It could be that the bulletin designers are not particularly Lutheran in their theology and so didn't want to emphasize this more, shall we say, "sacramental" aspect of marriage. But the sexual union is part of the gift that God created and that He gives to a husband and wife when He marries them. "The two shall become one flesh" is also fulfilled, quite literally, in the procreation of children, when God grants it, from this union of husband and wife.
And let us not forget that marriage portrays our one-fleshness with Christ. Our union with Him, too, is a concrete, tangible reality. For ultimately, Jesus is the one who (in the language of Genesis 2) left His Father and was joined to His wife by means of His incarnation and the cross. He was put into the deep sleep of death, and out of His side the Church was created to be His Eve by the sacramental blood and water that flowed. Baptized into the risen Jesus, "we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones" (Ephesians 5:30 NKJV).
There's one thing that has always struck me as a little strange. All of the full color professional bulletins that I saw cut short a particular marriage verse by rendering it, "The two shall become one." But that's not how the Bible has it. It's not "The two shall become one," but "The two shall become one flesh." Why do they always cut off that last word, flesh, on their bulletin covers?
Perhaps it doesn't seem very spiritual to be talking about flesh in church, but the marital union is not just a generic spiritual union but, as the wedding liturgy points out, a union of "heart, body, and mind." It could be that the bulletin designers are not particularly Lutheran in their theology and so didn't want to emphasize this more, shall we say, "sacramental" aspect of marriage. But the sexual union is part of the gift that God created and that He gives to a husband and wife when He marries them. "The two shall become one flesh" is also fulfilled, quite literally, in the procreation of children, when God grants it, from this union of husband and wife.
And let us not forget that marriage portrays our one-fleshness with Christ. Our union with Him, too, is a concrete, tangible reality. For ultimately, Jesus is the one who (in the language of Genesis 2) left His Father and was joined to His wife by means of His incarnation and the cross. He was put into the deep sleep of death, and out of His side the Church was created to be His Eve by the sacramental blood and water that flowed. Baptized into the risen Jesus, "we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones" (Ephesians 5:30 NKJV).
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Alien Creation
This headline caught my eye this morning: 5 Projects Ask if Life on Earth Began as Alien Life in Space. Now I'm all for scientific inquiry and the pursuit of truly scientific knowledge, and this isn't the first time I've heard this theory proposed. But consider the lead paragraph from the article:
"For years, scientists have considered the possibility of exogenesis, the idea that life arrived on Earth from another planet, and not just the building blocks of life, but organisms that were ready to rock and roll when they arrived. It’s a Rube Goldberg scenario, however, dependent on several successful steps. First, life has to evolve on an alien planet. Then it must be blasted into space on a rock, probably from a large impact. Assuming it survives a long journey through harsh conditions—and makes its way into our neighborhood—life then has to resist fiery atmospheric entry and a brutal landing before trying to make a new home for itself. Here are several research projects looking at the feasibility of such a fantastic voyage."
Yet they think it's foolish and irrational to believe in Creation! And of course they never explain how the alien life came into being or how dead elements anywhere in the universe can become living organisms on their own. Maybe if we start referring to God as the ultimate Alien and His creating as Massive Exogenesis, then they'd give consideration to the Biblical account. Sheesh.
"For years, scientists have considered the possibility of exogenesis, the idea that life arrived on Earth from another planet, and not just the building blocks of life, but organisms that were ready to rock and roll when they arrived. It’s a Rube Goldberg scenario, however, dependent on several successful steps. First, life has to evolve on an alien planet. Then it must be blasted into space on a rock, probably from a large impact. Assuming it survives a long journey through harsh conditions—and makes its way into our neighborhood—life then has to resist fiery atmospheric entry and a brutal landing before trying to make a new home for itself. Here are several research projects looking at the feasibility of such a fantastic voyage."
Yet they think it's foolish and irrational to believe in Creation! And of course they never explain how the alien life came into being or how dead elements anywhere in the universe can become living organisms on their own. Maybe if we start referring to God as the ultimate Alien and His creating as Massive Exogenesis, then they'd give consideration to the Biblical account. Sheesh.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Issues, Etc.
Here's a nice little video/commercial promoting the Issues, Etc. radio program. If you haven't already checked in to what's going on there, be sure to give it a listen!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)