Liturgy And The Youth

Pastor Matthew Harrison who is now president of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod talking about youth and the liturgy.

HT Paul McCain

Today’s Quote Of The Day From Leo The Great

Today’s quote of the day is from Leo the Great warning the hearers of his sermon on the Feast of the Nativity (Sermon XXIV.6) and us today as well to be on guard against false teachers who wish to introduce new teachings and doctrines under the “a cloak of piety and chastity” and to remain steadfast in the apostolic faith:

You, dearly beloved, whom I address in no less earnest terms than those of the blessed apostle Peter, “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession,” built on the impregnable rock, Christ, and joined to the Lord our Savior by His true assumption of our flesh, remain firm in the faith, which you have professed before many witnesses and in which you were reborn through the water and the Holy Spirit, and received the anointing of salvation and seal of eternal life. But, “if anyone preaches to you anything besides that which you have learned, let him be anathema”; refuse to put wicked fables before the clearest truth, and what you may happen to read or hear contrary to the rule of the catholic and apostolic creed, judge it altogether deadly and diabolical…. Indeed, they put on a cloak of piety and chastity, but under this deceit they conceal the filthiness of their acts, and from the recesses of their ungodly heart hurl shafts to wound the simple…. A mighty bulwark is a sound faith, a true faith, to which nothing has to be added or taken away, because unless it is one, it is no faith, as the apostle says, “on Lord, one faith, one Baptism, on God and Father of all and through all and in us all.” Cling to this unity, dearly beloved, with minds unshaken, and in it “follow after” all “holiness.” In it carry out the Lord’s commands, because “without faith it is impossible to please God,” and without it nothing is holy, nothing pure, nothing alive, “for the just lives by faith” and he who by the devil’s deception loses it is dead though living, because as righteousness is gained by faith, so, too, by a true faith is eternal life gained, as our Lord says. And this is life eternal, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. May He make you to advance and persevere to the end, who lives and reigns with the Father and the Holy Spirit, forever and ever. Amen.

- Leo the Great, On the Feast of the Nativity, IV, Sermon XXIV.6

HT: From the always awesome and edifying Treasury of Daily Prayer, which can be purchased through Concordia Publishing House.

POTF Blog Of The Week: Bringing the Reformation to Protestantism

The POTF blog of the week has to go to Dr. Gene Edward Veith’s post “Bringing the Reformation to Protestantism” over on his Cranach blog. Martin Luther once said the church is always in need of a reformation. In his post, Dr. Veith lays out but a few points to make the case that Dr. Luther’s point is just as applicable and valid today as it was almost five hundred years ago.

From the post:


The original Reformation, whose anniversary we mark on October 31, began in 1517 as an attempt to bring medieval Catholicism back to the Gospel, the Bible, and Vocation. It has occurred to me that today the various Protestant churches need that same Reformation.

THE GOSPEL. Luther nailed his theses on the church door to challenge the practice of selling indulgences. In effect, people were told to give their money to the church, whereupon they would get to go straight to eternal happiness in Heaven. Today, in many Protestant churches, people are being told to give their money to the church, whereupon they are told that they will get health, wealth, and temporal happiness in this world. But the Prosperity Gospel is not the Gospel!

Neither is the Social Gospel of the liberal mainline Protestants, which construe the Kingdom of Heaven as an earthly utopia. Neither is the Social Gospel of many conservative churches, which construe the Kingdom of Heaven as an American civil religion.

In sophisticated theological circles, both of mainline Protestants and among a surprising number of evangelicals, the Gospel has to do with inclusion, of being accepted into the church community. The “New Perspective on Paul” says that the Apostle did not teach justification by grace through faith apart from the Law, as Protestants used to all agree. Rather, by “Law,” he just meant the setting aside of the Judaic ceremonial law. He was concerned with inclusiveness, of allowing Gentiles to become full members of the church alongside of Jews. Not salvation from the guilt and sin that comes from violating the moral law. Similarly, the business of the church today should be including everybody, not proclaiming a supernatural salvation grounded in redemption from sin.

The actual Gospel is the good news that Jesus Christ has, through His life, death, and resurrection, atoned for the sins of the world. The Protestantism that has drifted away from this Gospel is in need of Reformation.

THE BIBLE. Medieval Catholicism did believe in the Bible. They just didn’t use it much. Today’s mainline Protestants don’t believe in it at all. Many conservative Protestants believe in it–acknowledging its authority, inerrancy and all–but they have stopped reading it in their services and their sermons sometimes have not a shred of Scripture in them. Instead, the preaching is about self-help, pop psychology, politics, or generic inspiration. Sometimes the message is “believe in yourself” or even “have faith in yourself.”

The Reformers taught that the Word of God is not only authoritative, but a means of Grace. They preached the Law, to bring their listeners to repentance, and then they proclaimed the Gospel of free forgiveness in Christ. In the words of Walther, they preached faith into their listeners’ hearts.

The Protestantism that has drifted away from the Word of God is in need of Reformation.

You can read the rest here.

A blessed Reformation Day ya’ll!

Reformation Week 2010 On Issues, Etc.

My favorite talk show for the thinking Christian, Issues, Etc., is celebrating reformation week next week with a series of special programming segments and guests. Do yourself a favor and tune in for what looks like a great week of learning and catechesis by some of the most knowledgeable guests available anywhere. If you are not able to tune in live, go to either the on-demand page or iTunes and download the podcasts like I do (believe you me that Todd, Jeff, and Craig love their on-demand listeners and don’t mind at all if you are not able to tune in when they broadcasting live!)

According to the Issues, Etc. support page it looks like the schedule will be as follows:

Monday, October 18
The Doctrine of Justification with Dr. Carl Fickenscher of Concordia Theological Seminary

Tuesday, October 19
The Means of Grace with Pr. Paul McCain of Concordia Publishing House

Wednesday, October 20
The Theology of the Cross with Dr. Scott Murray of Memorial Lutheran-Houston, TX

Thursday, October 21
Vocation & Two Kingdom Theology with Dr. Steven Hein of the Concordia Institute for Christian Studies

Friday, October 22
Worship with Pr. Will Weedon of St. Paul Lutheran Church-Hamel, IL

Like I said, the most knowledgeable guests available anywhere!

Finally, I would encourage everyone to prayerfully consider supporting Issues, Etc. by become a member of the Reformation Club and ask the members of your individual congregations to support Issues, Etc. as part of your mission or outreach budget.

A New Video from Pastor Fisk: Lutheranism for Attractive People

Pr. Jonathan Fisk from over at Worldview Everlasting answers more email and addresses predestination, devotional materials, and how to talk with your friends.

Another Way To Evaluate Hymns

Just so ya’ll don’t think it’s just me… here’s Pastor Tom Chryst’s excellent list on evaluating hymnondy to be sung during the Divine Service:

Words:

1. Is it Christian? If a Jew or Mormon or Buddhist could sing the song without pause, it is likely not a Christian song.

2. Does it mention Jesus (Christ) by name? Titles such as Savior and Lord are not wrong, but songs/hymns are most clear when the proper name is used. It leaves no room for confusion.

3. Does it mention the cross? Or does it speak nebulously about God’s love apart from this central teaching?

4. Does it balance Law and Gospel? (Especially troublesome is if Gospel is absent)

5. Does it suggest salvation has to do with my work, decision, commitment or heart, or does it rather make clear that we receive everything as a gift from God alone?

6. Does it rightly show our good works as a response to God’s good work in Christ, or does it leave the impression God justifies us in response to our action? Could it give such an impression?

7. Does it specifically teach some false doctrine (like the Rapture, for instance)?

8. Does it refer at all to the Means of Grace (Word and Sacraments of Baptism and Communion)? Or does it suggest we receive from God apart from such means?

9. Does it make prayer into a sacrament (which offers grace)? Does it suggest a certain prayer must be prayed to invite Jesus into our hearts? (Decision theology)

10. Is it scriptural? There should be a strong scriptural connection, rather than lofty and abstract concepts tied to no particular text.

11. Does it present a corporate view of the church, or does it overly emphasize the importance of the individual? (Us/We vs. I/Me) “Me-and-Jesus” music should be avoided.

Music:

1. Is the music beautiful?

2. Is the tune appropriate to the text? Does the “mood” fit?

3. Is the music inappropriately difficult for the singers?

4. Does the tune carry “baggage” (i.e., a familiar Christmas tune should not be used in Lent. Likewise certain secular tunes have strong associative ideas we might want to avoid)

5. Does the music “play on the emotions”? This should be avoided.

6. Is the music reverent?

7. Does the music have a timeless quality, or is it too strongly associated with a narrow style?

Pastor Chryst, who is an associate pastor at Grace Lutheran Church, Racine, WI, is an excellent and faithful preacher whose sermons and general musings can be found at Preachrblog. His blog has long been favorite read of mine as are his appearances on Issues, Etc.

The Most Awesomest Video Introducing The Lutheran Confessions… Ever

Pastor Jonathon Fisk, who shepherds St. John Lutheran Church up in Springfield, PA, and whose blog is a favorite of mine over at Worldview Everlasting, has put up his newest video which is a high octane introduction to the Lutheran confessions of the Book of Concord. Watching this video is a bit like drinking history and theology through a fire hose but Pastor Fisk has created a ten-minute e ticket ride that you’d wait hours in line for if you had to. Fortunately, the replay button is a virtual one and you get right back on watch the most awesomest video introducing the Book of Concord… evah!

How Should Hymnody Be Judged? A Simple Guide

I was having a “friendly discussion” with a friend of mine concerning what goes on during worship on a Sunday morning recently on Facebook. After much back and forth about the Divine Service versus praise and worship as a mere preference (it’s not a matter of personal preference for confessional Lutherans but that is a whole other can of worms and another post to be written for a later discussion…) I was asked who, in my ever so humble opinion, should test the hymnody. Should that responsibility fall to the pastor or maybe it should be the music minister. I was also asked how my church handles a situation where “the called staff find a song acceptable and you personally do not, how does your church handle that?”

The first thing that I think would be helpful is to establish a standard so that we remove our personal preferences from the equation. I may like the old Greek and Latin hymnody (I’m referring to the style of hymns and not the Latin or Greek language) but just because I like a certain era’s hymns doesn’t mean that anyone else will. By setting up some guidelines the thorny issue of a hymn’s aesthetic value as a personal preference will be greatly diminished.

A few years ago I posted a simple list which I thought was an excellent guide as to how we can evaluate hymnody so that the matter of personal preference or subjectivity could be pushed to the back burner and a more objective standard could be set forth as a means to judge what we sing on a Sunday morning:

1) Is the Crucified and Risen Christ Jesus the indispensable center of the hymn?
2) Does the hymn clearly proclaim Christ’s vicarious satisfaction as the sinner’s salvation?
3) Is the hymn grounded on a clear, Scriptural text?
4) Does the hymn point us clearly to the Church’s ministry of word and Sacrament as the place where we surely receive Christ’s gifts?
5) Does the hymn make clear that it is entirely Christ’s work alone that saves us without works, responses, or proper feelings of our own?
6) Does the hymn make clear that the faith which alone justifies is not a human work, but a free gift given by God’s choosing of us (not our choosing of Him), in Christ Jesus, through Word and Sacrament?
7) If the hymn speaks of the Christians response to Christ’s gifts, does it make clear that it is what Christ does for us and not what we do for Him that is the center of the Church’s life and mission? Does it make clear that sanctification is as much by faith alone as is justification?
8) Has the hymn been properly tested and tried by the Lutheran Church?
9) Does the hymn inspire in us a hunger and thirst for the things of Christ Jesus and His Kingdom that is coming?
10) Does the hymn drive you clearly, unerringly to the sound doctrine of Christ Jesus rather than merely let you free associate it’s words with sound teaching?
11) Does the tune bear repeated singing? That is, could you sing it twenty times in a row and not feel sick to your stomach?
12) Is it a hymn that the congregation knows or can sing with some choir support?

If we used the criteria listed above to apply a modicum of discernment for what we sing on a Sunday morning, we would have far fewer disagreements on theological matters than currently plague our beloved synod. Why do I say that? It’s simple: because we would singing our one clear confession of faith and with one clear voice and not with as many confessions as there are voices as there are personal preferences.

And, so ya’ll don’t think I’m just picking on the music led by your praise bands and such, this criteria works just fine with choirs leading our sung confession as well! Don’t think that just because a congregation employs a choir that they are immune to singing goofy songs that should never be sung within the walls of a Lutheran sanctuary. The fact of the matter is that there are plenty of consultant provided guides being used in Lutheran circles that recommend that we use pop culture songs to make the unchurched seeker more comfortable in the name of evangelism. I know we paid some consultants a good penny or two for evangelism advice but chances are that if the song was popular on top 40 radio it ain’t gonna pass even one of the criteria listed above and doesn't need to sung from the balcony by our choirs or the pews by the congregations. The same thing goes for last week’s top ten list over at K-Love which takes vapid and adds a dash of the eww that’s kinda creepy factor with songs that seem to favor effeminate or romantic language that is more appropriate with ones spouse than the risen Christ! Nope, nonsense like that fails our simple evaluation big time and is best left off the rotation of regular hymns.

As to the question of who should test the hymns, the pastor with the input of a layperson with some theological training on staff or who has volunteered to run the music program works nicely. It’s important that both the pastor and the congregation work together in picking hymns to be sung within the Divine Service. The laity should rely on the pastor’s theological knowledge to ensure that no errors are present in the hymns and that the hymn is appropriate or a particular Sunday’s pericope as well as hold that pastor to account should he err (and he will err from time to time as he is a poor miserable sinner like the rest of us) and choose hymns that do not meet the a standard we all should hope for. It should never be an either or situation that has the pastor or laity subservient to the other as we are all slaves to Christ.

I hope that answers your questions.

What Are We Teaching Our Youth? Part 3

Pastor Jonathon Fisk from Worldview Everlasting looks at some of the weird goings on at the national youth gathering like liturgical dancing and a prayer walking class that was taught as part of a breakout session in his video titled “I'm Just Very Confused - Part 2: Authorized Take-Over Deum”

Part 1 can be viewed here

What Are We Teaching Our Youth? Part 2

Pastor Jonathon Fisk from Worldview Everlasting continues his look at the national youth gathering in his video titled "I'm Just Very Confused - Part 1: Simulized Adrenali-Fide"

What Are We Teaching Our Youth?

Here’s another great video from Pastor Jonathon Fisk. Pastor Fisk is a favorite blogger of mine no matter what medium he’s using over at Worldview Everlasting.

This video looks at what went on at the last nation youth gathering, an event which congregations from all over the country sent their youth to. So what are these national gatherings teaching? Pastor Fisk gives us a hint in the embedded video.

Lutherans Didn’t Invent Contemporary Worship And Comparing CCM To Psalms

In spite of this month being one of the busiest I’ve experienced in years, I took a friend up on her offer to participate in a discussion where a commenter on her site was trying to make the case that songs of the contemporary Christian music variety’s focus on the “personal relationship” was no different that that of the personal nature of the Palms. Wrote the commenter:

As for the “personal relationship” aspect of new hymns, read the psalms, the hymnbook in our bible, and it is so personal, you can’t escape the first person, personal expression, speaking out to God, crying out to God aspect of it. Three kinds of psalms – mad, glad or sad. All personal.
So many traditional Lutheran hymns are just loaded with secondary discourse – you can sing them and keep your distance and stay far away as you doze off, waiting for them to be done soon.

And later:

As for expediency, I just find it is way easier to reach people in worship using modern contemporary sounding music whether it is amazing grace with guitar, A Mighty Fortress on Guitar, or something being written today.
I’ve heard they have Luther’s original chart of A Mighty Fortress, arranged on… guitar. Lutherans broke the mold with indigenous contemporary worship but, for the most part, have let the evangelicals pave the way, the Lutherans sticking to what was familiar to them. We are not doing what Luther did. We stay comfortable rather than reach new people. We prefer insider language and music. Seems different to me than what Jesus would have done. Didn’t he leave everything to reach those far from God?
If contemporary worship music helps us reach new people, and traditional hymnody honestly just scares many people away, are we sticking with our traditions at the expense of the great commission?

Boy howdy, talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight! Those two hundred and thirty eight words have enough fodder for a month’s worth of posts!

First, the statement "Lutherans broke the mold with indigenous contemporary worship" is simply untrue even if it is repeated entirely too often. It was many, many years before the reformers even moved the Divine Service from Latin to the vernacular German. In the Augsburg Confession (ACXXIV) the Lutheran reformers went so far as to confess that they preserved the order of the mass, save the parts sung in Latin and the hymns which were in German to “to teach the people. For ceremonies are needed to this end alone that the unlearned be taught [what they need to know of Christ].” Again, what was that about teaching being “secondary”? No sir, teaching in traditional Lutheran hymnody was always a primary function of these hymns and not something “secondary” or something to “doze off” to.

The most elementary look at church history would find that singing by the congregations had almost disappeared by the time of the reformation. By the sixteenth century most of the singing was entrusted only to professional choirs or musicians. It was the reformers who brought back sung confessions of the church catholic to the laity in the Greek, Latin, and yes, German hymnody (and by Greek and Latin I mean the style of the hymns and not the languages) so that these hymns would strengthen Christ’s church.

To think that the hymns of saints whom have fallen asleep no longer have anything to offer us today is as theologically uninformed as it is arrogant. Traditional Lutherans sing the hymns they do because of their theological depth and their clear confession of Christ and His work and not because they are trying to use “insider language and music” and keep to themselves. A singing, confessing church is a proclaiming church and in doing so she is in fact carrying out the Great Commission. A singing, confessing church uses her hymnody to make disciples by teaching all that her Lord has given her in song as well as by the Word.

But what of the Psalms? Do they show us that we need to follow the contemporary Christian music’s trend to make the “personal relationship” the material principle of our sung confession and not follow the reformation tradition of hymn as a catechetical device?

I take issue with the Psalms being perceived as personalized in the same way that the majority of modern Christian music accomplishes its personalization. The easiest way to test contemporary Christian music is to simply look at the grammar: scrutinizing who the song about by looking at who is the subject of the verbs. If we, or our feelings, or our works, or our actions are the subject of the song, it is about us and is not about us the work and person of Jesus. Using the Psalms as a baseline is actually a pretty good idea in that our hymnody should at least measure up to the various psalmists in both proclamation as well as theological content. When put side by side with the Psalms, the vast majority of contemporary Christian music simply doesn’t measure up as it’s clichéd and vapid with it’s banality guaranteeing it’s proper place in the pile of forgotten one hit wonders currently playing on K-LOVE.

Yep, I’ll be happy to use the Psalms as a “traditional” benchmark any day of the week!

Pr. Fisk’s Goal Malady gLAWspel Video

No matter how many times as I’ve watched the embedded video from Pastor Jonathon Fisk I always find myself cheering and wanting to hit the replay button to watch it again, and again, and again. Pastor Fisk hits a home run going from explaining our freedom to do good works not because we have to but because we get to and then juxtaposing the account of Mary sitting at the feet of Jesus over Martha’s work in her kitchen as Christian freedom.

What happens when the we get to gets mixed up with the we have to? Pastor Fisk has called this confusing the good news of the Gospel with Law or something that we have to do “GLawspel” and he explains it, there’s no other word for it, brilliantly.

Most of my Lutheran friends have already seen the video but I’m hoping that folks who are outside of Lutheranism might give Pr. Fisk a shot at explaining a very difficult subject that I would argue plauges most of the churches in west and especially in our own country.

I strongly suspect that Pastor Fisk’s videos will become a staple here at POTF as I love his humor and ability to teach in a somewhat unorthodox manner with orthodoxy never compromised.

An Irenaeus Quote And Guarding Against Heretics

The following is today’s reading from the Treasury of Daily Prayer:

We have learned from none others the plan of salvation, than from those whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and the pillar of our faith…

We allege…against those who do not recognize Paul as an apostle: that they should either reject the other words of the Gospel which we have come to know through Luke alone, and not make any use of them; or else, if they do receive all these, they must necessarily admit also that testimony concerning Paul, when he (Luke) tells us that the Lord spoke at first to him from heaven: Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me? I am Jesus Christ, whom you persecute”; and then to Ananias, saying regarding him: “Go your way; for he is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name among the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him, from time to time, how great things he must suffer for My names sake.” Those, therefore, who do not accept him [as a teacher], who was chosen by God for this purpose, that he might boldly bear His name, as being sent to the forementioned nations, despise the election of God and separate themselves from the company of the apostles… But they are altogether deceived who imagine that they may learn from the scriptural text adduced by heretics, that [doctrine] which their words plausibly teach. For error is plausible and bears a resemblance to the truth but requires to be disguised; while the truth is without disguise and, therefore, has been entrusted to children.

-Irenaeus of Lyons

Sadly, there are many folks in the church today, both in leadership positions and otherwise, who should fall under the same critique as those who Irenaeus addressed in the quote above. These persons, while teaching in public forums disparage Saint Paul for being too focused on doctrine or too systematic with the ease at which they openly scorn their ex-wives. While expressing concerns that sound Biblical doctrine is a hindrance to spirituality and kingdom growing, these false teachers are more than happy to introduce the doctrines and practices of mystics who believed that God is a she and “sin is necessary part of life because it brings one to self-knowledge” as well as Roman Catholic monks who actually fought against the Lutheran reformers for a papacy which can praise the devotion of members who state “I will believe that the white that I see is black if the hierarchical Church so defines it!”

Irenaeus correctly ties the Gospel preached by the apostle Paul with the one they learned from Luke who records eye witness testimony to assemble his Gospel text, Paul’s conversion, as well as traveled with him for a bit on his missionary journeys. If they fail to acknowledge Paul’s epistles as being received by God (and if being consistent is an attribute that doesn't offend their post modern sensibilities) then shouldn’t they throw out Luke’s testimony as well? Or maybe a effortless re-imagining of Luke’s account will suit what it is that they wish to introduce into the Church as some seem to have the tendency to do these days with the praise and approval of their ecclesiastical superiors.

I guess that since Saint Peter considered the epistles of Paul to be Scripture (2 Peter 3:16), the setting aside Peter’s epistles as suspect along with the Gospel according to Mark (as Mark’s account is more than likely derived from the testimony of Peter) might also be in order so we don’t fall into an abyss of doctrine where the color white is white and black is black to the vexation of that Roman monk some idolize.

Just as when Irenaeus was defending the Gospel against the Gnostics and those who wished to introduce into the Church new doctrines and practices cloaked in biblical terminology and themes; we must be on guard right now, today, for wolves that hide themselves behind plausible errors that resemble Biblical truths while maintaining that these new or recovered teachings are for the purpose of growing the kingdom, spirituality, or even salvation itself.

As Irenaeus wisely points out, a heretic’s errors are often disguised as plausible teachings and bear a resemblance to the truth. We must always, always be watchful and test what is being taught in the name of God to the very Word of God whether we are pastors, deaconesses, Sunday school teachers, or even slack jawed yokels like myself.

Is False Teaching A Violation Of The Second Commandment?

I’m way behind in listening to my podcasts so today’s soundbite of the day comes from a segment that aired two weeks ago to the day on Issues, Etc. I hope the guys at IE don’t mind that it takes some of us a while to listen to all the shows…

Back on May 27 Pastors Henrickson and Woerth discussed on the Pastors’ Roundtable the fact that Dr. Luther’s viewed teaching falsely in the name of God was the most egregious violation of the Second Commandment. Is false teaching a violation of the second commandment? Absolutely!

The second commandment of course is “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain” which was given, along with the other commandments, by Yahweh to Moses in Exodus 20:7. The Small Catechism explains the second commandment this way:

We should fear and love God that we may not curse, swear, use witchcraft, lie, or deceive by His name, but call upon it in every trouble, pray, praise, and give thanks.

The entire segment where Pastors Henrickson and Woerth discuss the second commandment can be heard here. It’s a great segment and well worth your time.

Issues, Etc. Interview With Dr. Steven Hein On The Suject Of Mysticism

Last week on Issues, Etc. host Todd Wilken conducted three interviews with Dr. Steven Hein of the Concordia Institute for Christian Studies on man’s failed attempts to reach God. The three interviews covered the topics of moralism, rationalism, and finally mysticism. What a great series of interviews with the subject of mysticism being somewhat timely in light of the most recent posts!

What is mysticism you ask? Well, I had to look this one up myself since I have very little formal training in theology in the Lutheran Cyclopedia:

Mysticism (from the Gk. mystikos, “mystical; secret”

A. Term applied to a wide range of phenomena (e.g. demonology,* magic,* dreaminess,* weird experiences, occultism)

The Lutheran Cyclopedia further explains:

The goal of mysticism is the alleged intuitive and emotional contact with the Absolute (“that which is,” “the Good,” “God,” and many other aspects of ultimate spiritual values). In it’s practical aspects, mysticism is the attempt to apperceive, use, and enjoy ultimate values.

The Lutheran Cyclopedia also gives us an insight into Martin Luther and mysticism:

In his early period M. Luther* ed. Deutsche Theologie (see “German Theology”) and commended the work of J. Tauler* (St. L. ed., XXIa, 56). J. Staupitz* was a mystic. But Luther's system centered in the external Word of God and its doctrine of justification. He condemned the mysticism of Sebastian Franck,* A. R. B. v. Karlstadt,* T. Münzer, K. v. Schwenkfeld,* N. Storch (see Zwickau Prophets).

The Lutheran Cyclopedia concludes the entry on mysticism with a list of folks who are mystics to be condemned:

B. Other mystics include Adam* of St. Victor, Angela* de Foligno, J. Böhme,* Bernard* of Clairvaux, Bonaventura,* N. Cabasilas,* Catherine* of Siena, Clement* of Alexandria, R. Crashaw,* Dionysius* the Areopagite, (2), Gertrude the Great (see Gertrude, 1), Gregory* of Nyssa, Guyon,* Hildegard* of Bingen, W. Hilton,* F. v. Hügel,* Hugh* of St. Victor, W. R. Inge,* Jacopone* da Todi, W. James,* John* of the Cross, R. M. Jones,* Julian(a)* of Norwich, W. Law,* Luis* de Granada, Mechthild* of Hackeborn, Mechthild* of Magdeburg, M. de Molinos,* Richard* of St. Victor, R. Rolle* de Hampole, J. v. Ruysbroeck,* H. Suso,* Teresa* of Ávila, E. Underhill.* EL

Do you regular readers of POTF recognize any of names in the list of people to be condemned for their mysticism? Let me remind my critics, because I know I’m gonna catch flack over this, that this list isn’t mine but rather it is on a webpage bought and paid for by the LC-MS as well as published by Concordia Publishing House in their printed version of the Lutheran Cyclopedia. Just so ya know…

The interview with Dr. Steven Hein was good one in that Dr. Hein did an excellent job at explaining how mysticism is just one more of man’s failed attempts to reach God. Dr. Hein also explained the different ways mysticism manifests itself in Christian circles today and why it’s considered a “digression” back to heresies that plagued the early church.

Sadly, I understand that there are people who wish to reintroduce the very kind of mysticism back into the Lutheran church that the reformation confessors condemned in the sixteenth century (when mysticism was at the height of it’s popularity) while claiming that such was normative and always part of the historical church’s practices since the Apostolic age. Listen to the interview linked below for some great insight on this new/old heresy rearing its ugly head in today’s church. Thank you Pr. Wilken and Dr. Hein both for a great interview!


Issues, Etc. Interview With Dr. Steven Hein On Mysticism

Book Of Concord App Is Now Available At iTunes

My new favorite person just might be Brian Yamabe, who blogs over at Vocation in the Valley, for putting together a Book of Concord application for the iPod Touch, iPhone, and Apple’s newest cool toy; the iPad! The “Triglotta – The Book of Concord" app can be found here at iTunes App Store. And best of all; it’s free!

Brian deserves a huge thank you for taking the time to put this great resource together for all of us to use. So head over to Vocation in the Valley, say howdy and tell Brian how appreciative we all are for his invaluable contribution to making the Lutheran Confessions available to this new digital medium.

Good Friday

From the Treasury of Daily Prayer:

But if any honest Christian wants to know why the Lord suffered death on the cross and not in some other way, we answer thus: in no other way was it expedient for us, indeed the Lord offered for our sakes the one death that was supremely good. He had come to bear the curse that lay on us; and how could He “become a curse” otherwise than by accepting the accursed death? And that death is the cross, for it is written “Cursed is everyone that hangs on a tree.” Again, the death of the Lord is the ransom of all, and by it “the middle wall of partition” is broken down and the call of the Gentiles comes about. How could He have called us if He had not been crucified, for it is only on the cross that a man dies with arms outstretched? Here, again, we see the fitness of His death and those of His outstretched arms: it was that He might draw His ancient people with the one and the Gentiles with the other, and join both together in Himself. Even so, He foretold the manner of His redeeming death, “I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto Myself.”

- Athanasius of Alexandria

"What Would You Rather Have; A Religion Or A Relationship?"

I received an email earlier this week that I wanted to address but couldn’t because of my work schedule being ramped up to get ready for a couple of weeks out of town. A friend of mine has written me that she has been visiting a very traditional congregation that uses the historic liturgy and sings the time tested hymnody sung by conservative congregations across denominational lines to supplement her Sunday morning worship at a congregation that has departed from, by all outward appearances, looking like a historic Lutheran church that your grandparents would recognize and be pleased with.

Let’s look at two of the more bizarre practices before I ask my questions:

The pastor has rewrote the ecumenical creeds for the congregation to
confess.

The people get to stand up at a point in the worship service and say
like the good folks at Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Church: “The bible I hold is God's word from cover to cover. It makes me wise for salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. It is useful for teaching, correcting, rebuking,and training me how to live. I need to read listen and learn from God's word every day. This is most certainly true.”

If I had to endure either of these situations this I’d be looking for a way to supplement my Sunday worship just like my friend has choosen to do. I’ve wrote several posts detailing why I can’t return a home church because the pastor not only rewrote the creeds to the point I wasn’t even sure he was talking about a confession of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but he rewrote the Lord’s Prayer in such a way that even the Dali Lama could agreed with the text. Nope, ain’t gonna go back there…

So, since it’s become public knowledge that my friend is supplementing her Sunday morning worship with visits to a more traditional worship setting she has been under a good deal of pressure to stop visiting the more traditional congregation and “looking deeper into liturgy”. She writes:

“Pastor doesn’t' really approve of what we are doing and has already challenged us with questions like "what would you rather have; a religion or a relationship."”

What? Religion or a relationship? Is that what a liturgical, traditional congregation is, just a religion? Really?

Now, I promised some folks that since I’m a bit busy I’d give my readers the opportunity to address the question; “what would you rather have; a religion or a relationship?” I said I’d put this post up a few days ago but I wanted to get my friends permission to include actual quotes from her email.

So… for the discussion please address the dichotomy of religion versus relationships in the context of visiting or being a member of a traditional, liturgical congregation (and is that a false dichotomy?) and what does Scripture say concerning religion versus relationship when speaking of the faithful gathering to worship the crucified and risen Lord.

Discuss. What say you?

The Bible As History, No Modernity Or Post Modern Goofiness In This Class

I started teaching a class this past Sunday on whether the Old Testament can be viewed as an account of a historical nature or if, as many modern and postmodern would have it, we should look at the Biblical narrative and accounts as myths, fables, or morality tales similar to parables in that they are only meant to teach us how to play nice and love one another but have no grounding within genuine history. Guess which side I’m taking?

It’s remarkable how much Jesus talked about events recorded in the Old Testament as if the events really, really occurred. Imagine that… He talks of the flood recorded the Genesis account in Matt. 24:36-39 as if it is a real event. He also speaks of Sodom and Gomorra as if they were real cities destroyed for their wickedness in Matt. 11:23,24 and Jonah as a real person swallowed by a real fish in Matt. 12:39-41.

In the texts we are looking at in our study it is clear that at no time is Jesus using the kind of language He uses when He teaches by parables, such as “the kingdom of heaven is like…” or ”the kingdom of heaven can be compared to…”, when referring to events recorded in the Books of Moses and the prophets! Jesus speaks to his hearers and to us of real events occurring within a recorded history.

Now it could be that I’m just cherry picking verses out of context except that the Gospel writers are very careful to tell us when Jesus is using parables to ‘splain things. In addition, Jesus always explains his parables to the disciples even if not right away (another case for is meaning is at the last supper, meaning, yes, He really did mean that the bread and the wine are His Body and Blood and not some allegorical representation supposed by my evangelical friends!)

What surprised me most about how the class started off (This if the first week of the study. I suspect I’ll spend three or four weeks on going over Jesus’ understanding of Scripture before moving on to a look at the evidence of the historicity of the New Testament.) was how these high school students were able state in an unsolicited manner and with a high degree of certainty that the Bible can and should be looked at as a historical document. I really assumed that their secular education would have beaten any notion of the historicity of Scripture completely out of their systems by now. I see so much influence of modernity and postmodern thinking that sometimes I take for granted that the youth might actually be on the right track and capable of critical thinking.

I was even pleasantly surprised when one of my students even recommended a book to me that his grandfather had given to him: Josh McDowell’s book “Evidence Demands A Verdict” for making a case that Scripture is historical in it's very nature. As the kids say: w00t!

There’s no doubt that it’s gonna be fun five or six weeks for everyone in the class.