When a True Statement is made to be False

     There are many examples of this in the world. A statement is made, using portions of the truth to present a falsehood. The devil is the inventor of this tactic. He used this tactic in the garden of Eden to tempt the woman to doubt the truth and to refashion God’s Word according to her own reason. The result was that Mankind was cut off from the Truth, cut off from Life. Death thereby came to mankind in connection with the blindness and corruption of sin. The devil foolishly tried this tactic with Jesus, too. The devil actually quoted Scripture to Jesus in an attempt to move Jesus to accept something false. The devil actually quoted the Scripture verbatim. But he used the Scripture out of context, applying it to try to present a false precept, and therefore the true statement was actually false. Even though the statement was true in the context in which it stands written, used as the devil used it, it was nevertheless false.

     At When Love Encounters Impenitence, Love Does Not Go to War a statement is quoted as a beautiful “bit of grace and truth.” The statement is made at Steadfast Lutherans within the comments concerning the article Interesting Interview of Pastor Morris in the Newtown Bee, by Pr. Rossow. Notably, Pr. McCain in his blog post quoting this statement does not provide a link to where it was made. Thereby he uses the quote without allowing his readers to examine how it was used.

     The quoted statement was actually used to attack other Christians, using the deliberately controverted guise of love. The statement is actually an attack on people who are openly and honestly addressing a serious issue and calling for dishonesty within their church body to be swept away so that the truth may prevail among them.

     Here is the statement, which, divorced from the context in which it was presented, is a truly beautiful “bit of grace and truth.” It sounds wonderful until one reads it in the context in which Pastor Fiene has written and presented it.

When love encounters impenitence, love weeps while shaking the dust off its feet. Love doesn’t go to war. It doesn’t badger. It doesn’t shout. It doesn’t scream for everyone to fix their eyes on the sin that’s already been made as public as it can be.

Love doesn’t continually appoint itself to the task of penning another epistle of rebuke. It doesn’t repeatedly provide online fuel for those who easily explode in anger and cruelty. Love doesn’t seek to stir up more anger over vacations or preferential treatment.

Love is patient. Love recognizes that, were it not for the calling, gathering, enlightening, and sanctifying of the Holy Spirit, not a trace of orthodoxy would beat in any of our hearts. Love remembers that countless saints spent far more time than Pr. Morris has defending their sins before the Lord brought them to repentance. Love waits, hopes and prays that our brother in Christ will one day see his error.

And, in the meantime, if love must shake the dust off its feet, then that’s what love must do. But it does so in tears, not in a manner like this.

     The issue being raised by the original article is the issue of a blatant sin committed within the LC-MS. The pastors and congregations of the LC-MS take an oath not to partake in unionistic worship. In the situation being addressed, a pastor openly, publicly, and proudly violated this oath. When he was called on it, he apologized in a way that actually accused those who sought to bring him to repent. I posted concerning this at An Apology Is Not Repentance. The end result was that the LC-MS president apologized for attempting to do his sworn duty, while the one who should have been called to repent denied that he did any wrong. The way it was finally presented was as a call to the members of the LC-MS to repent of their desire to call sin “sin” and to call sinners to repent of their sins, especially their public sins against the Gospel.

     The falsehood begins with the very first sentence, where Pr. Fiene says: “When love encounters impenitence, love weeps while shaking the dust off its feet.”

     This is a very devilish use of the truth. For this is exactly what the Lord Jesus has commanded the saints to do regarding those who reject the truth that has been presented to them. However, Pr. Fiene is not in agreement with Jesus that Pr. Morris should be confronted openly with the truth and then told that he is not a Christian on account of refusing to acknowledge his sin and repent of it. The people whom Pr. Fiene is countering are actually calling for Pr. Morris, as well as his district president and Pr. Harrison to be called to repent of their public sin in this matter, the sin of calling sin as “righteousness” and righteousness as “sin.” They are calling for repentance of all three lying pastors. But even they are not speaking of shaking the dust off their feet. Even they are not saying that if these lying pastors refuse to hear the truth and be called to repentance that they should be excommunicated for the sake of showing them the seriousness of their impenitence. Pr. Fiene especially is not calling for this. He is trying to condemn those who are at least calling their leaders to be accountable. He is trying to change the focus from the call to the leaders to repent, so that the focus becomes one of calling those who are calling for repentance to repent. But because this devilish maneuver is masked as love, it is a very effective deception.

     If those who practice unionism don’t believe that it is sinful, then they should admit this and end their participation in the LC-MS communion. However, the sad fact is that the LC-MS is not what it claims to be. The LC-MS has openly practiced unionism at many levels for decades, perhaps really even for its entire existence. The LC-MS has only pretended to be against unionism, while allowing it and actually practicing it for years.

     From that perspective Pr. Fiene would be correct, if indeed he were saying that the members of the LC-MS should admit the longstanding impenitence of the LC-MS and with tears shake the dust off their feet and walk away.

     But Pr. Fiene’s dishonest use of the truth goes further still. He says:

     Love doesn’t go to war. It doesn’t badger. It doesn’t shout. It doesn’t scream for everyone to fix their eyes on the sin that’s already been made as public as it can be.
     Love doesn’t continually appoint itself to the task of penning another epistle of rebuke.

     This ignores the very obvious fact that war has already been declared and imposed upon those whom he is condemning. War has already been declared by those who gave an oath not to partake in unionism and then have openly done so and furthermore have publicly sought to make unionism the accepted practice of the church. Those who stand up against this are persecuted until either broken or driven out of the LC-MS. Those who do resist, those who do fight against those making war against them, are doing so not only for their own sake, but for the sake of their loved ones who are being destroyed spiritually in this war imposed by the so-called tolerant ones.

     This is true also for those who have admitted the truth of the impenitence of the LC-MS and have shaken the dust off their feet and walked away in tears. They still look on as they see their family and friends being led further and further away from the narrowness of the truth into the broad path of relativism and tolerance of adulterated doctrine and practice. As they view the changes effected in their family and friends, their love does move them to pen yet another and another epistle. They do experience and even express holy anger as they stand helplessly watching their loved ones spiritually eviscerated.

     And then Pr. Fiene and Pr. McCain cry out that love does not cry out against such things.

     Truly there is a point where one must finally say, “I have nothing more whatsoever to do with thee.” There does come the time where mourning and even praying for such comes to an end, as the Lord told Samuel to stop mourning for Saul and John says not to pray for those who sin unto death (1 John 5:17).

     I must admit that I don’t really know how to make this distinction and so I simply continue as the Lord Jesus teaches in the Our Father and as the General Prayer follows the admonitions of the apostles, praying for everyone generally. As for those who seem to be beyond receiving anything good from me, I do eventually stop praying for them specifically, including them in my general prayers for all and for all of the enemies of the cross. And even though I have shaken the dust off my feet concerning the impenitent churches and those who remain in their clutches, my heart nevertheless longs for their repentance unto the way of true peace and life.

     It seems that a big issue for those still in churches like the LC-MS is that they imagine that they are still fighting to protect their home and loved ones. They seem not to realize that their church body that they call home has been confiscated by the enemy. So they continue fighting for what is no longer theirs. They fight battles that are nothing more than futile rebelling against the established rulers of the household. From this perspective they would do well to hear Pr. Fienes that such is not the way of love. Love rather would admit the impenitence of their false church so that they would shake the dust off their feet and walk away in tears. Then they would be free to embrace the true faith, the true doctrine, and the true worship without continually fighting the enemy whom they falsely call brother. Then they would begin to understand what St. John declares, saying:

     Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you. We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. (1 John 3:13-14)

     In order truly to love the brethren, one must first rightly acknowledge the brethren. Continuing in fellowship with those who are not the brethren is to malign and despise the brethren. Those who love the brethren do not join themselves to the world that hates the brethren. Rather, in love for the brethren, they stand together with the brethren apart from the world. It seems odd that so many have forgotten this so that they continue to cling to worldly corporations that use “Church” in their corporate identities while ignoring and even despising those who stand apart, gathered into the name of Jesus. They somehow seem to have become convinced that love means holding to the church that bears the name and works of their fathers and grandfathers rather than the Church founded upon and preserved through the name and works of Jesus.

+ + +

Weak = Strong

When things seem to be going well and we imagine ourselves to be standing on our own two feet then we are inclined to feel strong.  However, when things seem to be going poorly and we have been knocked down, then we feel weak.



Bodily infirmities can be ignored sometimes.  Other times a person can rise above the limitations or pain, perhaps even putting them out of mind, coping with whatever the person faces.  A person can feel as though anything can be overcome.  A person feels as though one can stand against anything.

This can apply to other areas of life, too.  A person can often overcome serious adversities.  Overcoming life’s difficulties can lead a person to begin to count oneself as strong and able to stand against whatever may come.

But this only lasts for as long as the person’s own strength does not fail.  Eventually one cannot ignore one’s own limitations and frailty.  This is true physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.

St. Paul wrote warning against trusting in one’s own strength, especially in spiritual matters. “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”  (1 Corinthians 10:12)

St. Paul was one who knew.  He had been a Pharisee, named Saul.  He had studied the Scriptures intensely.  He had devoted himself to the most stringent adherence to the Law of God as given through Moses.  He counted himself to be exemplary among the people of God.  He was influential to the point of being intrusted with letters to pursue and take prisoner those who were following in the way, the faith of Jesus.

On the way to carry out this mission, the Lord Jesus stopped Saul in his tracks and confronted him.

And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

  (Acts 9:1-8)


    The rest of this account tells how weak Saul suddenly realized himself to be.  Not only was he now unable to see, but he had just learned that his entire life had been in vain.  All of his efforts were worthless, even worse than worthless.  All of his efforts to serve God were actually damned!  All of his pride was shown to be idolatry.  All of his devotion was shown to be false worship.  He had actually been an enemy of God rather than God’s friend!

    After this Saul (asked for or desired) began to be known as Paul (little or small).  With his conversion and baptism and ordination as the apostle of Jesus to the Gentiles, Paul was now very small in his own eyes and his own efforts and devotion were counted as skubalon (crap).  Thus he writes:

Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.

  (1 Corinthians 10:12-15)

First is the warning against relying upon one’s own reason and strength.  Then is the promise that God is faithful and will limit one’s encounters with temptations to the strength that He Himself gives to the beloved believer.

In the verses that follow, he explains this further, pointing to the means through which this strength is given to the believer.

The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

  (1 Corinthians 10:16-17)

This is the means through which God strengthens His saints for all that they encounter in their daily lives.  This begins with being baptized into the body of Christ.  It extends into the life of worship that flows from this regeneration into God’s kingdom.  As a living member of Christ’s body, this holy supper is the means through which God renews His saints in the faith in which they stand and live.

This is why we dare not compromise it through any form of idolatry.  For this meal is the Communion with God that Christ restored for us and to which we are regenerated and reconciled through Baptism.

This is why it is so sad, even heart breaking, to observe the many ways that those professing to be Christians continue to turn back to ways of seeking to be strong through their own reason and strength.  Even the Holy Supper itself they turn into a work of their own rather than the means through which the merits of Christ are given to us by God.  Worship and devotion and prayer are turned into the idolatry of imagining that these are somehow worthy of merit in themselves.  And so these become means of making oneself better and stronger through one’s own efforts rather than being God’s gifts through which He Himself regenerates us and renews us and strengthens us and keeps us in the one true faith of Jesus.

This faulty and idolatrous mindset is demonstrated in the way that Philippians 4:13 is usually translated.  The KJV is representative of this: “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.”

What St. Paul actually writes directs us to a very different mindset: “For all things I am strong in the one empowering me, Christ.”

The mindset that St. Paul teaches is one of what the Lord works for us rather than what we work for ourselves and for God.  St. Paul teaches us to know God as the one doing the work in us rather than looking to find a way to use God like a helpful tool.  St. Paul very specifically avoids this idea that God gets us started and we must continue to work to complete what God begins by saying that we are strong IN the one empowering us.  He very carefully and deliberately avoided using the word THROUGH.  We are IN Christ through His means of grace, through which He works these blessings for us and in us.  We are made to be IN Christ through Baptism.  We are renewed IN Christ through His body and blood administered to us IN the Holy Communion.

When we understand this and believe it even as the Lord and His apostles declare unto us, then we begin to see that indeed God does provide the strength and the means of escape from all temptations.  Then we begin to see that we truly do not need to be strong on our own and that we do not need to stand by our own strength.  Then we begin to enjoy our life in Christ rather than striving to make it real for ourselves.  Then our times of weakness become times of true strength.

It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities. For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me. And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.

  (2 Corinthians 12:1-10)

The Lord Jesus declares in response to our prayers and all of our efforts: “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.”  How did He triumph over the powers of the devil, sin, and death?  Not through visions or miracles or even prayers answered as He willed for Himself.  He triumphed through the weakness of subjecting Himself to the Father’s will which carried Him to the cross where He suffered an ignominious death after many hours of injustice, torture, and ridicule.

He continues to work His blessings and to display His victory in the same way.  Not through visions or grandiose miracles or answering our prayers as we present them, but through the means of grace He gives us the victory that He won for us.  Thus St. Paul directs us to rejoice in our weakness, for then we do not try to win the battle for ourselves nor even to glorify God through our own efforts.  Then instead we look to Christ and rely upon His grace in all things.  Then we receive the strength that knows no limits, even as Christ lives and reigns to all eternity.

+ + +

Crap! Crap! Crap!

I am really tired of all of the crap!

Yet I find myself neck deep in it every day. Everywhere I turn, more of it. It piles up all around me. It stinks! It makes moving forward in a positive manner seemingly impossible.

Thank God for Sunday and the divine service! Thank God for the Our Father (Lord’s Prayer)! Thank God for the Creed! Thank God for the Catechism! Thank God for the gift of my loving and faithful wife! Thank God for the life that we share in Him!

Suddenly the crap is gone!

+ + +

The Way of Big Government and Big Party & Church Politics

Today I viewed a couple of videos that were very educational and enlightening. For all of my adult life, meaning from 18 years old forward, I have been bewildered concerning the fact that what the groups with whom I have been affiliated always did was the opposite of what they claimed to be. These two videos caused me to think more deeply and to acknowledge things to which I previously seem to have been wearing blinders. It is not that I did not see any of the conflicting information. But I nevertheless seem to have been running like a horse with blinders, or at least blinders with worn spots.

Here are links to the two videos if you’d like to see them.

Republican Party Origins

U.S. Government & CFR Complicity in Foreign Conflicts

Until a few years ago I have been registered as a Republican. My first experience with active participation in the GOP was as a teenager. The Reagan election was my first time voting. But the local GOP meetings disgusted me. I could not believe what frauds these people were. But I thought it was a localized problem and not the actual way of the party. I thought that the officially publicized platform actually meant something. It did to me, but the party only used it as a diversionary tool. It took me many years to realize this. Even then, my sense of loyalty accompanied by inability to find a suitable party to which I could flee, made it a struggle to leave. After all, in order to vote, one must register as something. Moreover, to leave a party that seemed to say the right things in its platform seemed as though I would be denouncing those things and not just the hypocrisy of the party. I did finally leave and registered with another party.

The greater point of this is what I have realized about my more important affiliations in life. Family and church affiliations are the more important ones in a persons’ life. Of these I have been forced to acknowledge that very similar fraud has been a part of these affiliations. One cannot do much about family. Those ties are essentially impossible to sever entirely. They can be stretched to the ends of the earth, but they never seem to break entirely. Besides, the Lord has established this bond and does not want us to sever it entirely. Only from the dysfunction and delusions are we to be severed entirely. Love and honor of parents and family must continue even in the face of total brokenness and dysfunction. Church affiliation is nearly as unbreakable, but not quite. But the pain of such action is nearly unbearable.

This is the issue that I actually wish to address primarily in this post. My own past church affiliation was the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod. For most of my life I struggled regarding the discontinuity between what this synod professed to believe and what was actually embraced and practiced. In my very early years I was not truly aware of this conflict, as it was not evident in what was taught in the parochial school and my primary example of Christian life and faith was from my parents, Luther’s Small Catechism, and the Bible. With Luther’s Small Catechism as a guide, what the Bible truly teaches of Christ and His Church is easily discernable.

During one of my theological interviews at the seminary one of the professors asked me, “Considering where you are from, how did you get to be so conservative?” At first I mentioned my pastors. But even without his quizzical look I immediately realized this was not so. Then I mentioned my grandfather and parents, but realized this was not so either. Then I realized and said, “Because this is what the Scriptures teach.” It was not until years later that I realized how helpful Luther’s Small Catechism had been, but then, it is nothing more than quotes from the Scriptures with further exposing quotes from the Scriptures.

So then, what of the professor’s question? Why did he even ask such a question? He asked it because of the fallacious facade of conservatism presented by the synod and her leaders. He knew that I did not come to be a devoted believer in the true doctrine of the Scriptures through the influences of my affiliation with this church body. It simply was not possible. Making a public profession of belief and practice and requiring a “quia subscription” to this does not in itself actually produce such belief and practice.

This is another topic in itself requiring at least another discussion. However, at this juncture I will point to what it does produce. The following graphic says more than pages of explanation:

I experience considerable angst when I visit blogs and web sites of pastors and congregations and of Confessional Lutherans who proudly display this graphic. I visit these blogs hoping to find that these people have become aware of the real problem in their church body. On some occasions I am amazed at the impressive scholarship and explanation of true doctrine, that leaves me ready to rejoice, only to have the concluding statements undermine all that was previously said, leading right back to the same compromised doctrine and practice. On some of these sites this graphic is displayed.

When I see this I sometimes actually cry out: “Can’t you see what you are saying?”

Consider what is declared in this graphic: “Still Attending Grandpa’s Church.”

Herein is clearly stated the real problem. Does it jump out of the graphic at you? Do you see what the problem is declared to be?

Whose church do you say that you are attending? To whom do you say that you look for the faith and for your life of worship? To whom do you ascribe ownership of the Church?

Did you really say: Grandpa’s Church?

Do I really need to draw attention to this further? Well, just in case. . .

Whose Church do the Scriptures declare the true Church to be?

To this people often respond that one is only arguing about semantics. Yep! Semantics are indeed the issue.

From Dictionary.com’s semantics.

se·man·tics     [si-man-tiks]

noun ( used with a singular verb )

1. Linguistics .
   
   1. the study of meaning.
      
   2. the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.
      
2. Also called significs. the branch of semiotics dealing with the relations between signs and what they denote.
   
3. the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.: Let's not argue about semantics.
   
4. general semantics.
   

The commonly misapplied statement of “Let's not argue about semantics.” is used as an example in this definition of semantics.

How is this misapplied? When people use “Let's not argue about semantics.” as a means of bypassing the necessity of agreement concerning the actual accepted meaning of words, then this is a misapplication of the statement. In fact, this misapplication is actually using the term in the exact opposite way that it is meant to be used. “Let's not argue about semantics.” is supposed to mean that the actual accepted meaning of words should be what is used in the conversation rather than using self-devised meanings that lead to confusion of what is really being discussed.

But when people are preaching tolerance as an alternative to acceptance and unity, they prefer to veil their real meaning.

Back to the profession made in the graphic.

The real problem within the big church bodies is that they are indeed preaching faith in the church body and the traditions of the fathers and the sense of familial loyalty, rather than the uncompromised and unadulterated faith in Christ that is taught in the Scriptures.

As long as this is the way, those who are unwilling to sever the ties will continue to say all of the right things only to denounce them in their concluding remarks. This is why the church bodies, which always demand loyalty to themselves, are never reformed. Never reformed.

The Lutheran “reformers” learned this. Though they began with seeking to reform the Roman Catholic Church, they found that it was impossible to do so from within the church body. Reformation is made by an external force, not an internal one.

By way of example, consider a child forming an object with Playdough. If the object loses its correct form, or as is usually the case, it did not turn out properly at all, how does the object become reformed? By reducing it to its original form and forming it all over again. The object is reduced to a ball of dough again, not by the object, but by the creator.

Is this not the very semantic used in Holy Scripture? Is not the Church declared to be the Lord’s Church and even a loaf of dough from which He removes all of the old leaven and forms it all over again as a pure loaf with nothing but pure ingredients?

Here again is the graphic:

In whose image is this church said to be created? Who is actually proclaimed as the creator of this church?

If people continue to insist upon attending the Church of Grandpa, whose word will ultimately be that which is preached and followed? Whose precepts will be embraced?

If it is Grandpa’s Church, then what position of authority is given to the Word of God, Jesus? Can the Rock of the true confession of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the Living God, truly be the foundation of a Church that is built upon Grandpa and his works and words?

Consider the history of the many church bodies that have made their emphasis following in the way of their grandpas. They always, always, always follow the same pattern of resembling Grandpa more and more and resembling the one true body of Christ less and less.

Pointing out such observations is sadly like pouring water on a slanted pane of glass.

+ + +

Rain, Rain

Today it is raining so that I cannot safely do my work. The forecast for tomorrow is snow!

Farmers of crops, especially here in Kansas where the annual rainfall is precious, are known to say, “We never complain about moisture. We always need moisture.” There are, of course, variations to this saying.

Indeed the rain is cause for giving thanks, yet my sinful shortsightedness is not always thinking thus. Moreover, my flesh thinks back to this past summer when we desperately needed rain and the Lord withheld it. I have found myself praying, “O great, Lord! Why did you not send this when we really needed it?!”

Thankfully, the Lord has trained me for many years through His Scriptures and through the prayer that He gave to us and through the General Prayer of the Church. Through these He has taught me to hear His answer to my complaints. Through these He directs my heart to trust His wisdom and graciousness even when my perception cannot see this.

If I am willing to hear this, there are many things that accompany the rain for which to give thanks as well. My old body receives another day or two of rest from harsh labor. I have time to study and to call the repairman for our refrigerator that quit working. I could actually go on throughout the rest of the day listing all that is good that the Lord is working through today’s weather.

With this view St. Paul says that speaking to one another psalms and hymns and spiritual chants we will find ourselves giving thanks always, over all things, in the name of the Lord of us Jesus Christ to the God and Father. (Ephesians 5:19-20)

I continue to marvel at the Church’s liturgy as it has been handed down to us. How blessed we are to have the psalms and hymns and spiritual chants organized for us to utilize in this way.

So, let it rain. Let it snow. Let the sun bake the earth. We have the divinely ordained refuge of the holy Liturgy of the divine service, through which the Lord serves us what we need most and satisfies our souls and bodies together.

+ + +

CPH & LC–MS versus TLH

For many years I have desired to produce a little booklet that would include the order of service from TLH, The Lutheran Hymnal, with a side by side explanation of the portions of the liturgy for the benefit of people who desire to understand the worship life of the Church. For years CPH, Concordia Publishing House, and the LC–MS, the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, told me that I would need to receive permission from the copyright department of CPH. Throughout my lifetime this information was given to the congregations regarding use of the liturgy and hymns.

Yet some time ago, perhaps a year or so ago, I called the CPH permissions department regarding use of the printed liturgy for this purpose and I was told that this information could not be supplied to me. I was told that I would have to research the various portions of the liturgy for myself to determine whether or not each portion was in the Public Domain.

This sounded very peculiar to me. I wondered why this change in policy had occurred.

I began to examine the hymnal more thoroughly than I had in the past. Lo and behold I found a big piece of the puzzle on the very first page of actual information, that is, on page 2, the Preface page.

I had never really paid attention to what this page says. I had seen it countless times and cursorily read it as well. But on this occasion I actually heard what is contained in this declaration. I was astounded.

Here is a photo of the page:

The startling portion I will quote:

We have freely used whatever we found of value and, by way of acknowledgment, have carefully indicated all sources. In turn, we freely offer for the use of others all original contributions or translations made by the committee as such or by its individual members.

This is truly astounding! For how many years did the LC–MS and CPH tell people the exact opposite?

According to the Preface to the hymnal, every portion of the hymnal has always been free to be used. This is in fact the stated purpose of the hymnal! Permission for free use of the materials is given in the Preface to the hymnal.

Back when I first desired to produce this little booklet regarding the meaning of the worship life of the Church as is so wonderfully expressed in the liturgy, back when I did this sort of work full-time and did not have to earn my living through such work as arborist services, I was misinformed by CPH and the LC–MS. (Is misinformed a strong enough term?) Even now the truth has not been clearly stated by the LC–MS and CPH personnel and leaders.

Now, however, I am happy to realize that I am free to pursue this endeavor. Now I am happily aware that this little booklet can be produced if I so desire and can find the energy over and above my other daily tasks.

In fact, I do so desire.

However, I would like to hear whether or not anyone else shares such desire with me. Are there people who would like to have such an explanation available to them? If such a booklet were made available in PDF format, and perhaps also printed format to be purchased, would anyone actually want to receive it and use it? If I go to the effort of producing portions here on the blog or at the Bride of Christ ELC web site, does anyone desire such explanations? My primary desire is for the Order of the Holy Communion, beginning on pg. 15.

Does anyone share this desire?

Which Jesus Is Your Jesus?

I recently performed an Internet search for my name and learned to my surprise that I am not the only Paul Siems listed in Wichita, Kansas. I found that there is another Paul Siems just a short distance away (at least according to that search). He is not me and I am not he. Yet via an Internet search for Paul Siems you will find us both. We have never actually met one another, by the way. Yet we share the same name, at least this far.

He is Paul E. Siems.

I am Paul A. Siems.

Yet if we both were in a crowd and heard someone call out, “Paul” or “Siems” or “Paul Siems”, we both would likely respond. That is, if we both heard it. However, someone could call out for Paul Siems and receive a response from the wrong one of us. And if the calling person had never met either of us, how would the person know whether the right Paul Siems had been contacted? More information would need to be verified to be certain. However, the person may not bother to verify, not realizing that just calling out “Paul Siems” is insufficient.

Yet how many Christians Pray to “Jesus” in just this way?

How many Christians use the additional information necessary to identify the true Jesus? How many simply use the name of Jesus and expect that their prayers will be heard and received, without verifying that they are using the name rightly and addressing it to the true Jesus?

Which Jesus is your Jesus?

Do you even know? Do you care?

It seems that most Christians are oblivious to the fact that there are many Jesuses and many Christs, even though there is only one true Jesus and Christ. Most Christians express that believing and praying to Jesus is sufficient, without any need to be sure that one knows who Jesus Christ really is.

Well, it certainly matters in the case of Paul Siems in Wichita, Kansas. One Paul Siems is the son of a retired dentist. The other is the son of a deceased millwork draftsman and wood worker (carpenter). One of us is a Lutheran pastor and an arborist. I don’t know more about the son of the dentist, even though the dentist was my dentist until he retired.

Moreover, we do not pronounce Siems the same way. He and his family say Sims rather than Siems (seems).

Now here is something rather frightening.

According to this, which can also be viewed at PeopleFinders, I am back living in Hugoton, KS again rather than Wichita. Hmm. It also says that I have used an alias of Paul M. Siems. Not true! It lists as my relative my wife, only identifying her as a relative, and listing her maiden name, which she has not used for 19 years. Hmm.

Now for the scarey, part. This source of information about me offers to provide information regarding:

* Criminal records
* Misdemeanors
* Felonies
* Lawsuits
* Bankruptcies & Tax Liens
* Sex Offender Check
* Judgements

Yikes! They don’t even know where I am, and they identify me according to an alias that I have never used. What sort of false information will they give regarding felonies and sex offender checks? I wonder whether my wife and I are divorced and don’t know it!

Do you see the point? Using such a source for information will direct a person to a Paul A. Siems who does not exist, even though some of the information given will be correct. Other information will send the person seeking me on a wild goose chase.

Yet with regard to Jesus Christ, most Christians settle for far worse sources of information and base their contact with Him on the faulty and even fraudulent information provided by their false sources.

Do you suppose that this makes a difference?

For example:

How many churches and pastors teach that the Jesus who says: “This is My body, given for you.” and “This is My blood, shed for the remission of sins” does not mean what He says? Does your Jesus really mean these words, or did He just say them to have something to say? Or did He say these words meaning something else entirely than the words that He spoke?

How many say that what Jesus says of regeneration and conversion is not how regeneration and conversion take place? Jesus says that the nations are discipled through baptizing and teaching. His apostle, Peter, says that Baptism saves us (1 Peter 3:21) and gives us the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and that this promise is not only for the adults who hear it but also for their children and even for those who are far off in the future (Acts 2:38-39). St. Paul says that salvation is by grace through faith and that this is a gift of God, not a work that people do for themselves (Ephesians 2:8-10). Yet most Christians say that faith is a decision or commitment that the person must make for oneself and that the children cannot have such faith because they are unable to produce this faith for themselves through human reason. So is your Jesus the one who says that salvation is through faith, which is given in Baptism with the Holy Spirit, purely a gift of God that He works, or is your Jesus the one who says that you must do this for yourself when you reach the age of reason, however you choose to define this?

Is your Jesus the one who says that the words of the apostles are given to them by the Holy Spirit as the very words of Jesus that cannot be rejected without rejecting Jesus, or is your Jesus the one who sent forth a bunch of confused liars who said things about salvation and the means of grace that are really just symbolic gestures?

Is your Jesus the one who commands that His disciples mark and avoid those who cause divisions in His Church regarding doctrine and practice, or is your Jesus the one who says judge not and tolerate all things and all doctrines and all forms of worship as equal? Is your Jesus the one who commands that the pastors bind the impenitent to their sins and excommunicate them, or is your Jesus the one who says that the Lord’s table is a matter for the individual to decide regardless of what the person says and does?

Is your Jesus the Almighty God who created in six days all things, both visible and invisible, or is your Jesus merely one who claims for Himself what actually happened by accident over millions and even billions of years?

Did your Jesus suffer and die for the sins of world, rising bodily from the dead and rising with that body to heaven, or did your Jesus merely live an exemplary life and teach enduring principles of morality?

And when you gather into a congregation, is this the one true gathering of saints into the name of Jesus in accord with all that He entrusted and charged to His apostles? Or do you congregate in a congregation that is in association with many diverse groups who worship according to many styles and confess different things concerning Jesus and His Church?

So, the question is: Which Jesus is your Jesus?

When you pray, to which Jesus do you pray? When you gather with others into the name of Jesus, do you all gather into the same understanding of that name? Do you worship with the same confession of who Jesus is? Do you bind yourselves in communion with those who are truly one in Christ? Do you share the same understanding and belief concerning the work of the Holy Spirit? Do you truly share together in the Holy Communion of Christ?

Are you among those who imagine that these things don’t really matter?

Well, I can tell you that if you attempt to contact me through the means that direct one to Paul E. Siems, I will not hear you or respond to you. If you seek to find me in Hugoton , you will not find me. You can cry out until your throat bleeds and I will not hear you.

So perhaps it would be wise for us all to examine ourselves and our understanding of Jesus and our ways of worship and praying to be certain that the Jesus to whom we pray is the real Jesus according to the name through which all men must be saved (Acts 4:12). Perhaps we would do well to ask whether or not we are congregating with those who are truly of the body of Christ according to His definition.

In these matters, is wishful thinking enough? Is being close really enough? In spiritual matters is ignorance ever bliss? Are you satisfied with what you have assumed regarding these things, or do you stand with the apostle (Philippians 2:12) in counting the necessity of working out your own salvation with fear and trembling to be certain that your hope is not in vain?


† † †

Refrigerator Art-Scribblings

How many refrigerators are covered with the scribbling of little children displayed as precious works of art? Grandparents, uncles and aunts, and parents alike receive the illegible writings and the muddled scribbling of beloved children and post them on every inch of refrigerator case.

Why? Is it because of the quality of the work? Or is it because of the value that love pours over everything done by the beloved?

Yet as much attention as love gives to the scribbling and smudges, the family does not make these mutated attempts at art stand as representative of the family. If the child should demand that these “masterpieces” be made the foundation of the family’s life, the answer would be a very firm, “No.”

It is the same within the family of God. He receives our prayers and our praises and our works and glows with fatherly love, praising our sickly efforts. But He has truly beautiful things planned for the life of the family. He has wondrous prayers that have been carefully crafted, even preserved in Holy Scriptures by the Holy Spirit’s inspiration. Rich and magnificent hymns have been composed and passed on through the generations. The divine liturgy goes back to the temple and even the tabernacle in the wilderness.

Yet how often do impetuous people imagine that their spontaneous responses are equal to or even superior to these majestic works that embrace the ancient sages of the Church who spent lifetimes in the service of the Lord and composed hymns and music that still leave the heart in awe of God’s glory and mercy and grace? They want to get up on a stage and trash the chancel, bringing electric guitars and drums and dancers and bar stools to replace the altar and paraments and even the very paten and chalice.

No. This is not what a faithful father/pastor will permit. Yes, around a campfire at a youth lakeside sing-along some of these things may at times be appropriate. But not as the foundation for the life of the family. Yes, at the basketball or football or soccer game a spontaneous prayer is a wonderful thing, but in the divine service God has called us together for a specific purpose. What flows from the heart at a youth water ski party on the lake is planted in the heart in the divine service where the entire family is gathered for the Holy Supper of unity and life through the body and blood of our God and Savior. The things that carry us through in times of spontaneity are the things of substance that we receive together through the careful preparations of devoted pastors who pull together in the sermon what they have received through intense study of the Scriptures and of the lofty writings of the Church fathers.

Yes, the muddled artwork of children has a place on the refrigerator door, but it is not included as page one of the blue print for the house. Much less are our muddled prayers and praises used for the blueprint of the everlasting house that the Lord establishes for His family.


† † †

Praying with Hearts that Hear

The Collect of the Day for this past Sunday teaches us to pray with amazing boldness what can only be prayed from the most absolute humility.

Stir up our hearts, O Lord, to make ready the way of Thine only-begotten Son, so that by His coming we may be enabled to serve Thee with pure minds; through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, who liveth, and reigneth, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end.

Does anyone really pray this way anymore? How many churches even use this prayer in their worship anymore? Of those that do, do they actually believe that God gives what is besought in this prayer?

Does anyone today really believe that God enables those who are His children and who gather in the name of Jesus to serve or worship Him with pure minds?

Do people even understand anymore what it means that we should worship with pure minds?

More and more what is said or professed by people as their belief is that the perfect Church cannot be found or exist on earth. More and more what people confess rather than the holy catholic Church is that the Church cannot be holy because it is made up of imperfect people, sinners. More and more the belief that the Church is the gathering of those whom God has purified into the name of Jesus through Baptism to believe and confess with the same mind and mouth the one true faith by which He keeps us united with Jesus Christ through the means of grace is set aside and discarded, except perhaps in their so-called “quia” subscription to their official book of doctrine. But do they still believe that God grants that we may be enabled (by Him alone) to serve Him with pure minds?

It is amazing how many do quote the Psalms regarding “singing a new song.”

This would be truly wonderful if these folk had any clue as to what this means. They imagine the “new song” to be one that they produce and sing. But the new song that the Psalms teach is the new song that God has given, the new song of the new man. This song is new to the Old Adam, but is actually the original song given to Adam in Creation. This new song is the renewed song that is written for us in Holy Scriptures. This is why the New Testament admonition is as in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16:

Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

This is the new song that the Old Adam and our sinful flesh resist and reject. According to our own reasoning we imagine that the original song is worn out and weak. We do not realize that the real strength for happiness and true exuberance comes from the original song of Creation that is established forevermore as the New Song of Regeneration. This song is called the new song because it takes lifeless and corrupt fleshly people and makes them new again in Christ.

This can only happen when we are made to serve or worship God in the unity of the pure mind that God renews to each of us in Baptism and preserves in us through His Holy Communion.

It is interesting that in the prayer that the Lord Jesus gives us to pray that there is absolutely nothing new from what has already been fore-written in the Scriptures. Everything that He teaches us to pray is what the Lord God has already declared to be His holy and gracious will for us. He teaches us the meaning of being made to be a new creature again, new as God ordained from the beginning and even from eternity.

God does indeed cause us to serve Him with pure minds, when the minds with which we serve Him are the minds that He renews in us through His pure and unchanged means of grace. When our services are purely the gathering to receive from Him the service that He has ordained, we do receive the pure minds for which we pray, the pure minds that He gives in place of the corrupt minds that we bring to Him. In true humility we pray and even expect to receive what only He can give. What we pray with the humility of expectant faith, He grants with His own mighty AMEN!

Sermons Posted

After almost a year of not posting sermons to the web site, I have begun posting again. Due to financial struggles and the need to adjust the format of the web site to compensate for changes to the various web browsers and their “improvements,” I did not post sermons for a time. I was not even sure, for a time, whether or not I would be able to afford to maintain the web site.

Learning new HTML and CSS and other language needed for web site administration takes time. I am hopeful that I have the site working more in accord with the newer standards. I have not yet corrected the entire site, but the newer pages have been adjusted.

This Sunday’s sermon for the Festival of the Reformation has been uploaded and can be viewed and downloaded here.

I hope to begin uploading past sermons up to the time that I stopped last year and to make changes to the pages previously posted.. But at least the site should be functional again for the newer pages across the various browsers.

How Apropos

Yesterday, as I was still thinking of the musings posted below, walking through the Sam's Club parking lot, I observed this license plate:

Worship Styles

Tomorrow is Sunday, the Lord’s Day, the day for gathering into the name of Jesus to receive from Him the divine service of Word and Sacraments.  As I begin preparations for the divine service each week, I grieve over the many schisms in those professing to be members of Christ’s body.  These schisms are manifested even within the same church bodies, and more, even within the same congregations.

Below are snippets from the “worship schedules” of three LC-MS congregations:

These snippets, as they are displayed on the web page each congregation, demonstrate the schismatic nature of their views of the Church and of the purpose of the Church.

The first demonstrates the definition of Church and Worship that is commonly held among Christians of all of the church bodies.  Tradition is the primary underlying foundation of belief and practice.  The Church and the “faith” of the churches is counted as a “faith tradition.”  Thus some who profess to be Christian are counted as Baptist Christians, others as Catholic Christians, others as Pentecostal Christians, others as OurLabel Christians, and some even as Lutheran Christians.  Then, even within these faith traditions there are further divisions, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, and the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.

Each of these have further divisions.  Yet they all practice as one communion, in theory.  In practice they are no more united than grains of sand on the seashore are united.

The three snippets above are all from congregations within the LC-MS.  They call themselves congregations.  Yet they have multiple services with multiple formats.  The first distinguishes between “Traditional” and “Blended.”  What does this mean?  Particularly, with what is the third service blended?  How has this blending been effected?

The second is from a congregation that began with similar terminology to the first, but now has stepped beyond this to label one of the services as a “Service of Testimony.”  By this they are making it clear what they are blending into their congregation’s doctrine and practice.

The third is from a congregation that has long led the way toward blending with that from outside the doctrine that is counted as their “faith tradition.”  Theirs is the most blatant of the three, openly declaring one of their services to be “Jazz/Praise Worship.”  This congregation used the terms “traditional” and “contemporary” in the past.  Now, however, those have become “Worship” with “Jazz/Praise Worship” highlighted and a new service added as “Healing Service.”

So then, within the LC-MS, what really constitutes Worship?  One can find congregations that hold only to the traditional or historic liturgy and others that blend together whatever suits their fancy.  So, using the LC-MS as an example, what really is worship defined to be?  How does this reflect the Faith?

So-called styles of worship do have meaning.  Each style of worship is the practice of what is embraced as important and defining.  That is why people pick and choose between services.  Within the same church bodies and even within the same congregations styles of worship permit people who embrace different things of importance to share facilities and even a name without actually coming together as one.

However, one must ask whether or not they may in fact really be of the same mind.  When tolerance is the accepted practice rather than unity, is tolerance not the uniting doctrine from which the practice flows?  When tolerance has become the accepted doctrine and practice, what is the reason for the members of a congregation or church body to continue?

When people refer to themselves as X-Christians and Y-Christians and Z-Christians, what are they defining the Christian faith really to be?  Is this reflected in their styles of worship?

Communication ≠ Contest

A lesson that seems to be very hard learned is that communication is not equal to contest.

This fact is especially hard for a person to acknowledge once the person has entered into an argument. An argument is a contest. Those in the argument are contesting one another, seeking to gain a superior position to the other, seeking to make one’s own point to prevail over the other’s.

This is actually the opposite of communication.

Communication is a giving and a receiving.

Argument is contestation. It is one sided from two opposing sides. It results in escalation. Argument continues until one side or the other or both begin to listen, to receive, and not just to attempt to give forcibly. Argument is violent.

Communication is peaceable. It begins with agreement on at least some point. It has agreement as its objective. It always includes listening with actual hearing.

An adage applied to communication is that a person is created with two ears and only one mouth for a reason.

Those who are wise remember this adage when attempting to communicate.

This is especially true in communication with God. We apply the term “worship” to this. Worship includes such things as prayer. Worship is communication where the two to one principle is absolutely necessary as we approach it. If we forget the two to one principle in this communication, it ceases to be true worship.

Jesus said:

But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:23-24)

Spirit and Truth, both are from the Father. Neither are from the worshiper. Worship is not something that is produced by the worshiper. This includes true prayer. True prayer is listening and hearing God.

The liturgy of the divine service is designed with this as its structure. This is why so many today desire to discard the historic liturgy. The liturgy teaches us to hear God. But people are inclined to want to tell God, not to hear God. And so the liturgy does not appeal to most people.

Jesus teaches that true worship is in spirit and in truth. Where are the Spirit and the Truth encountered? In the preaching and in the Sacraments. The Truth is the Word. Jesus is the Truth. He is present and continually speaks to us throughout the divine service where the Word is preached purely and the Sacraments are administered accordingly. The Spirit also is present and at work wherever the Word is present.

So what appearance then does true worship have? God speaks and the worshipers hear what God says. Then the worshipers respond with what they have heard, hearing yet again God’s grace, mercy, and peace proclaimed. Thus the two to one principle is in full effect. The worshipers hear God speak and they hear God again as they speak and sing what God has given to them to speak and sing. This is what the Lord Jesus teaches in the Our Father. This is what the prophets and the apostles admonish.

When this is the pattern that rules the hearts of those who confess faith in Christ, then this becomes the pattern in their daily lives. Their communication reflects this. Thus, when Christians are walking in spirit, they do not argue. When arguments arise, the person walking in spirit realizes that this is not communication and not the way of the peace of God and the person becomes silent until the other person is willing to speak peaceably. If that does not occur, the Christian walks away from the one who rejects his peace, which is really the peace of God.

Arguing is not equal to communication. Arguing actually has the opposite result of true communication. Remembering this when an argument is in the formative stages is invaluable. Those who do remember this are called blessed. (Matthew 5)

Alleluia in Lent

“Not saying Alleluia during Lent is stupid!” This very bold statement is from a post entitled even more audaciously, Not Saying Alleluia During Lent is Stupid (Sure to Cause Apoplexy Among High Church Purists) at Paul T. McCain’s Cyberbrethren.

A response to this is posted at Gaba’s Notebook entitled Stupid Rubrics.

From a certain perspective I have to agree with McCain. It is actually the opposite of his intention, but I nevertheless must say from the proper perspective that “not saying Alleluia during Lent is stupid.” I don’t actually agree with McCain at all, but rather with Saint Paul’s statement concerning the Moron of God, in the 1 Corinthians 1:25 context.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (1 Corinthians 1:18-25)

The Moron of God or the Foolishness of God is wiser than men. Yet to sinful man, to the sinful flesh and the Old Adam, the wisdom of God appears as foolishness, and those who follow the way of God appear as morons.

From this perspective I relate to McCain. As the season of Advent approached, as the season of Trinity drew closer and closer to the close of the cycle of the Church year, I began to dread the advent of Advent. I dreaded Advent’s advent because I knew that soon I would no longer be singing the Gloria in Excelsis. It seemed to me that the season of Advent would be stealing away from me the joyous privilege of singing the song of the heralding angels. The Gloria in Excelsis is the preaching of what the Christ Mass really is. Thus, I dreaded the loss of the privilege of singing it and hearing it.

However, after the season began and the full measure of the awareness of the “why” settled over me again, I began to give thanks for this robbery. This was especially true when the season of Christmas had arrived and the exquisite joy of hearing the Gloria in Excelsis was restored after its absence had been felt in my heart and soul during the four weeks of Advent.

After pondering McCain’s outburst concerning the Alleluia not being sung during Lent, especially in observing the clear and deliberate quote from Luther both divorced from its context as well as in deliberate contradiction of its context, I realized more fully the source of my resistance to this ancient liturgical practice.

The source is the sinful flesh and the Old Adam. According to my sinful flesh, according to my sinful nature that is mine by inheritance from Adam, I do not want to face the truth. The truth is that I am unworthy of speaking or singing Alleluia. Alleluia is not truly the possession of the Church on earth. It is ours here on earth only as those who await the redemption of our body:

For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only —they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. (Romans 8:19-23)

The singing of the Alleluia is the possession of the Church on earth in keeping with the rest of the passage quoted above, where St. Paul further explains:

For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it. Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God. (Romans 8:24-27)

And also,

If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory. (Colossians 3:1-4)

I don’t want to let go of my imagined “right” to sing Alleluia!

I very much prefer the theology of glory, at least according to my fleshly nature. I want to imagine that my singing of Alleluia will loft its way heavenward and fill heaven with joy. I want to imagine that Alleluia is my right as a Christian!

But according to the new man, the one that rises up from the water where the Old Adam is washed away, according to the good conscience of the resurrection afforded me in Baptism (1 Peter 3:21), I thank God for the wisdom of the season of Lent. To the Old Adam, who tries to tread the water of the flood so as to shout his praises heavenward, this wisdom seems moronic. But the new man walks according to spirit and finds that the means of grace are the true means of praise. The new man is happy to be on his knees receiving the glory of God administered in bread and wine for his forgiveness and restoration to the fullness of God’s Holy Communion.

The new man realizes that there is a reason that the Alleluia is not found in the Scriptures of the New Testament until the revelation of the songs of the saints in heaven in Revelation 19. In the Scriptures of the New Testament the Alleluia is only hinted at through admonitions concerning regular use of the Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs and in Old Testament quotations such as Romans 15:11 where St. Paul quotes Psalm 117 but not using Hallel. But the word Alleluia is not actually recorded until it is heard in Revelation 19.

In the accounts of the New Testament a very different language of praise is recorded. Instead of Alleluia we hear “Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!” We also hear, “Kyrie Eleison!” (Hosanna = save now & eleison = have mercy.) Sometimes we only hear the sobs of a woman anointing the feet of her Lord and God with perfume and washing His feet with her tears and drying them with her hair. We hear the pitiful cry of the publican in the temple, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner!” and of the repentant thief on the cross, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.”

This is not the audacious language of the sinful nature. Not at all! This is the humble and contrite language of repentance. This is the language of John the Baptist and of Jesus: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” Interestingly, neither John nor Jesus stood in the temple shouting “Alleluia!” They did not stand in the temple and call the people to join in praising God. Rather, they went out into the wilderness, where the people would have to abandon all of their lofty praises and be humbled by the harshness of the curse in the world to sit on grass and rocks and soil and to be quiet and listen. For this is the nature of true worship: not to speak and sing the praises of God, but to listen and to hear and to receive the Gospel through the means of grace.

Alleluia is not truly ours to sing at all. Rather, it is the response that God works in us through the seemingly common elements of water and bread and wine. Thus the meal of Thanksgiving is held before us as the showing of the Lord’s death till He comes. It is to this awareness that the season of Lent draws us. It is for this reason that we are urged for a season to set aside our audacious presumptions of Alleluias as our right so that we may again learn to acknowledge them as God’s gifts that have been purchased for us at the cost of the suffering and death of Jesus. Then the Old Adam has no claim on us and is no longer able to puff us up with empty and imaginary rights of our own to praise God. Then we humbly bow before our God and Savior to receive the worthiness of His glory, born of the Virgin, to suffer and die our miserable death for us so that by His glorious merits we are declared righteous to come into the holiness of God and receive the praises that fill us until we overflow with them in our lives and in our worship.

Rote Worship Loses Meaning?

This is a response to a wonderful post by Dan at Necessary Roughness,
Rote Worship Loses Meaning? My response is posted here as it seems to me to be too long to include in the comments section on his blog.


+ + + - - - + + + - - - + + +


Dan, you make some wonderful statements regarding the liturgy and your esteem of the liturgy is wonderful to behold.

I have some additional thoughts that I believe are worthy of pondering.

After listing aspects of the historic liturgy you then say: “These are the church’s tools, and we make them ours.”

Are these the Church’s tools? Is not this part of the false perception of those who decree that the liturgy is rote? While rote does not necessarily mean “lifeless,” this is what is implied. Tools are lifeless instruments. Are any of the portions of the liturgy lifeless? Are they not the very Scriptures put into practice? The Scriptures by themselves are without life, and merely point to the one who is the Life. But when the Scriptures are uttered, those utterances are the very Word of God, Jesus, actively present among those who rightly utter them.

These words are not tools. They are the very Life by which we receive life.

This is true even in the form of creeds and prayers that are drawn from and summarize and recite the doctrine revealed to us in the Scriptures. The pure and holy doctrine is not a tool. It is the very voice of God among us.

In your last paragraph you say: “That’s not bad stuff to recite every week. If it loses meaning to me, then the fault is mine, not the liturgy’s.”

No, it is not really a matter of fault. It is really a matter of where life is found. The liturgy is alive. The question is, “Is the worshiper alive?” Also, “Is the worshiper receiving the Life that comes to be present through the liturgy?”

That really is the issue for those who consider the liturgy to be rote or not lively. Those with such a view toward the liturgy have chosen to make worship based upon their own actions, their own thoughts, and their own words. They have turned their hearts away from God’s gracious activities and His gracious words of life and power and His thoughts of condescension toward us poor sinners, and have imagined themselves worthy of offering praise to God so that their hearts are filled with their own glorious acts and thoughts and words that they imagine to be elevated to heaven by their doing them. They reverse the Christ Mass, the gift of God, which is from heaven above come to earth below. They reverse the Epiphany of our Lord to us, to make it the epiphany of the worshipers to God.

They do not feel uplifted by the liturgy because they do not believe that they need to be lifted up. Only one who understands worship as proskuneo (forward toward-dog), prostrate kissing of foot or hand, only one who understands worship from this perspective can truly appreciate the holy absolution as that which lifts up the soul. This is why “This is the feast of victory for our God” was substituted for “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” The revelation of what is for those who are already in heaven was chosen in place of the blessed evangelism of the holy heralds from heaven concerning the great work and love of God come to earth to save those who have no hope in themselves and throughout their earthly lives look longingly to that which is above.

This is why the so-called contemporary worship promoters are not promoting anything that is truly contemporary with earthly worshipers. For true contemporaneity acknowledges the “now/not yet” reality of earthly life and worship. True contemporaneity does not look in the mirror without observing the poor, miserable sinner who has no righteousness of his own, who craves the continual declaration of the heavenly absolution. True contemporaneity declares that worship and praise have value only because these actions are faithful reiterations of the declarations of the one who is worshiped and praised, the author and finisher of the faith.

Were You There

“Were you there when they crucified my Lord?”

Thus go the lyrics of a Negro spiritual that many have come to accept as a song of remembrance of the Lord’s suffering and death. I never understood it. I always thought it was a silly song based upon emotionalism. Even though I do not remember my pastors ever addressing this issue, even though they permitted this song to be sung in the divine service, even as a child I was uncomfortable with what I perceived as the focus of the song.

I’ve tried researching it, and what information I have found seems to confirm that the focus is awry. As a child I always heard a sense of blaming in the song. I always heard a sense of “Oh, how terrible that they would do this to the Lord Jesus!” From what I have been able to determine, this is at least a part of what is meant in this song, but more to the point is the expression of thinking of oneself as persecuted and abused and looking to what was done to Jesus in a “poor me, poor us” kind of relationship. It seems to be in the line of “misery loves company” sort of perspective with a bit of “Oh how I love Jesus” mixed in.

The lyrics of the song as it is included in the LC-MS hymnal, Lutheran Worship, can be viewed here. The tune can be heard and three stanzas viewed here. Some information regarding the origins of the “spirituals” is available here and here. Other sources are available as well.

As I reflected upon this song this season of Lent and in the entrance into the season of Easter, I thought about the answer to the question, “Were you there when they crucified my Lord?” The answer is, “Yes! I was most certainly there.”

I did not nail Jesus to the tree. I did not beat him or spit upon Him. I did not lay Him in the tomb. I did not stand there crying, either. But I was there. For Jesus took my complete identity as Sinner. He took my name of condemnation and disgrace. He took my guilt and shame. He took my punishment. He cried out in my place of feeling as forsaken by God. Oh yes! I was truly there.

I have been crucified with Jesus through Baptism. In the person of Jesus, I was crucified, dead and buried. And again in connection with Baptism I rose again the Third Day unto new life in Christ. I now walk in the newness of that life that is in Him. I partake of His body and blood and am renewed in Him regularly.

What appears to be the basic premise of this song is weak and shallow at best. Nevertheless, with the right understanding, the question is one worthy of answering with the answer that God Himself proclaims in the divine liturgy. The answer is not one of “Oh, how sad that this was done to Jesus and how sad that I must suffer many things in this world.” but of “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.” (Rev 5:12) And again, “Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.” (Rev 5:13)

Amen!

Gospel Star

The headline of this article from today’s Wichita Eagle more or less puts things into perspective.

The on-line version changes the headline.



For those who don’t get it, try reading any of the four Gospel accounts to discover who the star of the Gospel is. To make it easy, three of the four accounts declare the matter in the first sentence:

Matthew 1:1

Mark 1:1

John 1:1

But then, I suppose the contemporaneity of these accounts may escape the awareness of "Gospel Stars" and their fans.

Lenten Disappointment

This year I feel cheated by the season of Lent. Actually, I feel cheated by the circumstances that have led me to cheat myself during the season of Lent.

Circumstances have forced me to have to apply so much energy regarding running my business and earning a living that I have had to set aside the usual midweek Lenten services. Even for Ash Wednesday I was unable to muster the energy to prepare a sermon and to prepare for a service. This is most regrettable to me.

The office of preaching is truly a blessed office, and the season of Lent is, in my estimation, the most wonderful season for preaching. It is the time in the Church Year that most clearly focuses upon the preaching of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. The texts are so richly laden with the preaching of our need for repentance unto faith and with the Lord’s endless calling to us to bring us to repentance unto faith that I truly regret missing these extra opportunities for preaching.

Preparation for preaching is truly a wonderful blessing. Those entrusted with the preaching office are truly blessed. For studying in preparation for proclamation is considerably different than ordinary study of the Scriptures. Sermon preparation forces a very deliberate and unavoidable subjugation to the Scriptures as the record of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It forces a subjugation to the will of God for the world and for the saints. If forces an attitude of humility to turn from one’s own thoughts to listen to the voice of God.

Sermon preparation is a very special time of struggling intensely with God in connection with what He intends to say through the Scriptures to His Church. The preacher is richly blessed through this struggle, and then is doubly blessed to be commanded and commissioned to share this blessing publicly to all who will receive it.

Yes, I feel disappointed that I found it necessary to set aside the usual blessing of midweek Lenten services this year. This is a fast that I hope never to need to observe again. Yes, this year for Lent our fast was to give up the midweek services, and for me especially, the giving up of preparing the service and preaching the midweek proclamation. Truly this has been one of the most difficult fasts that I have observed. Yet it nevertheless has served the purpose of a fast, namely, that it made me hungry for the Word and has directed my heart to my need for the Gospel. Still, when I choose to fast, I would much rather give up desserts or chocolate or meat or whatever else.

Oh Lord Jesus, come soon, and put an end to all fasting and bring us to Your wedding banquet that never ends! Amen!