Who Says I’m Not Open To Contemporary Worship?

My missus and I will try out a new church tomorrow.

I always like to call ahead (OK, my favorite niece was on Facebook and IM’d the pastor for me, she was more than happy to help her uncle out!) and announce that I’m going to visit someplace new so that the pastor’s job is made easy and he doesn’t have to wonder if the person he is communing shares the same confession of faith that all Lutherans are supposed to. I certainly don’t want him to wonder if I’m some Jack Mormon who just wandered off the street and thinks that the Holy Supper is only a representation of the body and blood of our Lord and to be consumed as part of an ordinance (hey, that’s just like my evangelical and reformed friends... that’s kinda weird ain’t it?) and not the true Body and Blood that offers life, salvation, and the remission of sins by the power of the Word attached to the elements of bread and wine. So, I’m considerate like that and all.

Anyhoo, I was warned by the pastor (once again through social media instant messaging) that tomorrow being the fifth Sunday of the month it is normal for the congregation to experiment with contemporary worship: Divine Service 1! When I asked if the service was going to be conducted in Latin or even Greek I was informed that the language of choice for this particular congregation was but the vernacular!

So, there you have it; tomorrow I will knowingly go to a church that practices contemporary worship, Divine Service 1 out of the Lutheran Service Book, and conducts the entire service in English. Who says I’m not open to contemporary worship?

PowerPoint In Church

Dr. Gene Edward Veith over at his Cranach blog had a post up on Monday titled “PowerPoint corrupts absolutely” in which he highlights a critique of PowerPoint by Edward Tufte in the magazine Wired. From the linked article Tufte writes:

Imagine a widely used and expensive prescription drug that promised to make us beautiful but didn’t. Instead the drug had frequent, serious side effects: It induced stupidity, turned everyone into bores, wasted time, and degraded the quality and credibility of communication. These side effects would rightly lead to a worldwide product recall.

Yet slideware -computer programs for presentations -is everywhere: in corporate America, in government bureaucracies, even in our schools. Several hundred million copies of Microsoft PowerPoint are churning out trillions of slides each year. Slideware may help speakers outline their talks, but convenience for the speaker can be punishing to both content and audience. The standard PowerPoint presentation elevates format over content, betraying an attitude of commercialism that turns everything into a sales pitch.

So, Tufte is making a case that PowerPoint is nothing more than a bullet driven commercial sales pitch. As somebody who has had to sit through what seems endless hours of PowerPoint presentations on the exciting world of metrology and measurement uncertainties in relation to mass standards, I couldn’t agree more with Tufte’s assessment that often such presentations are merely a “pushy style (that) seeks to set up a speaker’s dominance over the audience” and rarely is useful in actually conveying information or teaching.

I was actually somewhat surprised that nobody on Dr. Veith’s blog brought up the copious use of PowerPoint in many of today’s churches. Heck, has anyone been to what passes for mission churches lately? Without projectors scrolling the words of Days of Elijah to croon along with the band and/or giving the seekers something pithy to fill in on their sermon outlines, most of these soul willing congregations would be lost as an SED mystic thumbing through a Pauline epistle (trust me, you don’t get more lost than that!).

But is there an actual problem with PowerPoint being used in churches or missions or is the issue one of aesthetics? I would argue the former and not the latter.

For the last ten years consultants and church growth experts have made repeated claims that the church must look as much like the culture as possible so as to attract the unchurched seekers that, we are told, stay away from church because it is foreign to them. What better way to blend into the culture than adopting the basic sales tool of corporate America?

But as Tufte points out in his piece; PowerPoint has little to do with actual teaching or conveying of useful information but rather “PowerPoint’s pushy style seeks to set up a speaker’s dominance over the audience. The speaker, after all, is making power points with bullets to followers.” Tufte goes so far as to suggest that it would be better for children burdened with teachers who insist on using PowerPoint “if the schools simply closed down on those days and everyone went to the Exploratorium or wrote an illustrated essay explaining something.” Do we think less of churches that should be caring for our immortal souls than we do of schools?

With Scriptural literacy and Biblical understanding at a point in this country that even atheists and agnostics seem to have a better understanding the Christian faith than do Christians, we don’t need to be dumbing anything down but rather we should be ramping up catechetical instruction like nobody’s business. We need to start believing the apostle Paul (I know this will be difficult for the more mystic minded SED employee) when he says in Romans 10:17

So faith comes by hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.


Notice that the apostle didn’t say write spiffy pamphlets or slideshows with easy to read bullet points. Faith for us poor miserable sinners comes through the preached word! Believe it, it’s true! If faith came by reading bullet points wouldn’t the new atheists (who know Scripture better that most Christians but choose to reject it as foolishness or mythology) believe this Good News and be saved? Does anybody seriously think that Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins are going to come to faith through a Sunday morning PowerPoint presentation? If not, then why would we expect a dissimilar result when we subject the unchurched seeker to the same? Do we really expect the faithful believer’s faith to be sustained through a PowerPoint presentation? If the answer to that question is yes, I would love to hear someone honestly try to make his or her case from Scripture or the Lutheran Confessions. Really, I would pay some serious coin to hear that apologetic argument.

So just stop with the PowerPoint nonsense in churches folks! No matter what they told you in your church worker’s outreach extension course at Concordia University in Cowsbreath, the sacrament of PowerPoint saves nobody and entertains even fewer. On top of that, such goofiness during a Sunday service only ends up endangering the rescued kittens of a certain slack jawed yokel blogger (see embedded picture to see what’s at stake) and nobody wants that… do they?

A Study Of The Te Deum With Pastor Wil Weedon On Issues, Etc.

Issues, Etc. had a great segment on Monday with Pastor Wil Weedon of St. Paul Lutheran-Hamel, IL study the Te Deum, one of the Christian church’s most ancient hymns of praise. I hope everyone will take some time out of their day and listen to Pastor Weedon walk through this marvelous hymn that is so strong theologically that Martin Luther thought it should be one of our creeds. Listen here.

The Te Deum is one of my absolute favorite hymns and I enjoy singing it once or twice a month during the Order of Matins on the Sundays. While the Stephan Starke setting of the Te Deum used on the show is not my favorite setting, I couldn’t help but smile and sing along as the verses were being played while on my way home in the car last night.

Here is the text for one the greatest sung confessions on this side of eternity and the other side of eternity as well if Pastor Weedon is correct in his sanctified speculation (and I have no reason to think otherwise!):


Te Deum Laudamus

We praise you O God, we acknowledge you to be the Lord;
all the earth now worships you, the Father everlasting.
To you all angels cry aloud, the heavens and all the powers therein;
to you cherubim and seraphim continually do cry:
Holy, holy, holy Holy Lord, God of Sabaoth,
heaven and earth are full of the majesty of your glory.
The glorious company of the apostles praise you,
the goodly fellowship of the prophets praise you,
the noble army of martyrs praise you,
the holy Church throughout all the world does acknowledge you:
the Father of an infinite majesty, your adorable, true,
and only Son, also the Holy Spirit, the counselor.
You are the King of glory, O Christ.
You are the everlasting Son of the Father.
When you took upon yourself to deliver man,
you humbled yourself to be born of a virgin.
When you had overcome the sharpness of death,
you opened the kingdom of heaven to all believers.
You sit at the right hand of God in the glory of the Father.
We believe that you will come to be our judge.
We therefore pray you help your servants,
whom you have redeemed with your precious blood.
Make them to be numbered with your saints in glory everlasting.

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.

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.

Is There A Wrong Way To Use A Processional Cross? I Think So…

Before this weekend I didn’t think there was a way to inproperly use a processional cross and upon visiting a new church this past weekend I discovered I was very much mistaken.

What is a processional cross? A processional cross is usually a crucifix (but sometimes a plain cross with no corpus for those groups or individuals who deem a crucifix too Roman Catholic or offensive) which is carried at the head of a procession and which is mounted upon a long staff or handle to be easily seen by members of the congregation.

What is a processional cross used for? The Altar Guild Manual (available here at Concordia Publishing House) has this to say about the use of the processional cross:

As the name implies, this cross is used in processions. It may be carried in an entrance procession at the beginning of the service, the Gospel procession (when the minister and attendants carry the lectionary of gospel book into the middle of the nave for reading the Gospel), or, if customary, to the gravesite in the service for the Burial of the Dead. When it is not being carried during the service, the processional cross rests in a stand in the chancel or in a bracket mounted on the chancel wall (p. 44).

As I’ve already stated I visited another congregation this weekend and I was having to pay extra close attention to the liturgy or order of service so I didn’t get even more confused than is my normal state. Everything was the same, but very different.

After the first praise song led by what I would deem a pretty well trained praise band the vicar led a childrens sermon that was based on what the Gospel reading of the day. About mid-way through children’s sermon a nice young lady brought the prosessional cross into the sanctuary (the The Altar Guild Manual is only a guide and there are no synod bylaws stating that a MUST be kept up in front of the church or chapel) and stood behind the raggamuffins as they listened and interacted with the vicar. After the vicar completed his task the young lady turned around, lifted the cross up as is the custom when moving from one location to another, and led the children out of the sanctuary before the adults started the worship service with the confession of sins.

I don’t think that the processional cross in traditional orthodox Christianity was ever used to usher children out of church, into a nursury, or away from the adults as they receive God’s divine gifts through the preached Word and administered Sacraments! I’ve made no secret here at POTF on my thought that children should included in the Divine Service as they need those same gifts of Word and Sacrament as much as you and I do!

A processional cross has always been used to announce or hearld the Gospel coming into midst of the faithful and has been done so for as long as people have gather in such large numbers that it was difficult to see what was going on. All the early christians did is to take a page out the military’s handbook when they used a guidon to direct troops in battle or marching in ceremonies. Granted, the first prosessionals used not crucifixes but banners but it was an easy transition for the first Christians.

The more I think about this past weekend the more it bothers me. There is something wrong with marching kids out of church so the adults can do their thing. There is something especially wrong with marching the ragamuffins out with a processional cross as if it were some ceremony that is good and edifying!

The processional cross can and should be used to announce that the Gospel is in the midst of the faithful and not be used to lead children away from the congregation gathered to receive our Lord’s gifts. But that’s just my thoughts on the matter…

Thoughts On A Thesis Of Worship(?)

The following is what I sent to a friend of mine after he emailed me the Theses on Worship issued by the Council of Presidents and asked for my ever so humble opinion (I actually hadn’t seen them myself until Monday as I’ve been pretty busy with matters outside and off of the interweb):

While I have a love for theology I’m certainly not a trained theologian. I’m also by no means a wordsmith or anything approaching a good communicator. That being said; this document is a convoluted mess that a council of trained theologians should be embarrassed to issue! My thoughts on the thesis are as follows:

· We’ve surrendered the word worship to the evangelical view that worship is something that we do instead a Divine Service where it is God who gives His gifts.
· The liturgy is adiaphoria so we can each do what is right in our own eyes and anyone who says otherwise is only doing so to burden the souls who seek to experience God through their worship. In other words, AC XV 1 should be ignored and we amend AC XV to simply say all liturgy is a human tradition and therefore contrary to the Gospel. AC XXIV should also be amended to reflect the same.
· Our view of the Old testament is now equal to that of the Mormons where the liturgical rites that prefigure temple and synagogue worship were plan A and B and where overturned By Jesus and the apostles and are rightfully ignored and condemned. Our understanding of these rites as essential to understanding the vicarious atonement of Christ at Golgotha is as old fashioned as those dusty sixteenth century confessions and need to condemned.
· Worship is about you and community (read into this the emergent influence and undertones). Your calling is to expand your community so that more folks can understand that worship is about you and community.
· There can be true forms of worship just don’t tell me that there are wrong forms of worship because that will make me sad and I’ll accuse you of burdening my conscience.
· We should talk about the above until everyone agrees with us and can then claim unity.

Well, that’s my thoughts on this nonsensical drivel.

Pastor Klemet Preus also has some things to say about the thesis over at a post on Steadfast Lutherans.

It’s Bar Form Not Bar Tunes

Today’s Issues, Etc. soundbite of the day is from an interview on July 17 with Dr. Paul Grime. Dr. Grime is an Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministry and Missions and Dean of the Chapel at Concordia Theological Seminary up in Fort Wayne, Indiana. In today’s soundbite Dr. Grime debunks the myth that Luther brought in bar tunes into the church.

I’ve heard this urban legend being used on more than one occasion to justify the sneaking in of popular culture’s music through the portals of our sanctuaries. The thinking is this; that if we make church sound more like the culture we’ll attract more people and thereby grow Christ’s Church. I’ve even seen an evangelism “suggestion” saying if we just play a Randy Newman or John Fogerty song as “bumper music” the people will feel more comfortable and not scared away by too much of that scary church music.

The fact of the matter is; is that if we make our sacred places look and sound like the culture they cease to be sacred spaces. Christianity has always been countercultural and has never conformed to what was going on outside the walls of our sanctuaries.

Dr. Grime’s comments tearing down the falsehood that Luther would take songs sung in taverns and make hymns out of them by explaining what a bar form is just, well, it’s just music to my ears and is today’s Issues, Etc. soundbite of the day.

Just in case you missed it, here’s my inaugural pick for soundbite of the day.

What Kind Of Culture Are You Trying To Build?

I’m a little cranky after reading the latest article from the Reporter, official newspaper of the LC-MS, concerning young adult ministry. Hate to be a negative Nancy but ya’ll know how so persnickety I can get. Here’s the article:

Web site features Synod young adult ministry
A new Web site for young adult ministry in the Synod is up and running at http://www.lcmsyoungadultministry.org.

Sponsored by the Synod's seven-member Young Adult Ministry Advisory Committee, the site offers:
• monthly blog articles by young adults about their ministry, culture, and faith.
• information about servant opportunities, including the committee's first "LEAD" servant event, held May 31-June 5 in New Orleans.
• book reviews about young adult ministry and culture.
• twitter feeds on the activities of the advisory committee.
Jessica Bordeleau, a member of the committee, told Reporter that the group's two-pronged goal is "to enable congregations to build a culture where young adults are able to fully participate in the life of the church, and to enable young adults to become an integral part of the church community, living out their faith in a global context."
Bordeleau is coordinator for Lutheran Youth Fellowship and Young Adult Ministry with LCMS District and Congregational Services -- Youth Ministry.

A virtual note paper-clipped to the site's home page describes the advisory committee and its work, as follows:

"We are a movement of LCMS young adults reaching out to our peers with the love and light of Christ. We know that no top-down institutional program is going to impact the heart of a young adult like a community of believers living out the love of Christ in their daily interactions, ... ready, willing, and able to be servant leaders who point our friends, communities, and world to the love of Christ in relatable, relevant, real ways."

Posted July 29, 2009


First things first… reread Ms.Bordeleau’s comments; “to enable congregations to build a culture where young adults are able to fully participate in the life of the church, and to enable young adults to become an integral part of the church community, living out their faith in a global context."

How the heck do these folks suppose that young people are to become active participants in the life are the church? Is this something that even requires “building cultures” within congregations? How do any of us become active participants in a congregation whether young or aged? The Means of Grace!

Through the Means of Grace, through God’s properly preached Word and through His rightly administered Sacraments we become part of the community of believers past, present, and future. It is the community that always gathers around the voice of her Shepherd, Jesus Christ that should be held up as something to be imitated. Sadly as of late people that gather for Word and Sacrament are mocked as museum keepers only performing a maintenance ministry!

Think I’m just an angry blogger who just doesn't like change? Then read the book of Acts and see how the first Christians grew the Christ’s Church. Read how Peter and Paul created a culture of community by preaching the Gospel and the repentance of sins as commanded by Jesus himself. Read how Stephan did the same and was martyred for living out his faith, albeit deadly, context! Can anybody point me to a single passage of Scripture that states we need to build cultures so that youngsters (or oldsters for that matter!) can feel like they are a part of a community apart from the Means of Grace? Is the phrase “build cultures” even in the Bible? I know my knowledge of Greek is extremely limited and my knowledge of Hebrew is nonexistent so maybe I’m just missing some hidden meaning lost on slack jawed yoke like myself but I can’t find a single English translation that speaks of “building cultures” either! Apart from the Voice, an emergent translation that makes the NIV look like a modern day pedagogic masterpiece, there isn’t a single translation I can find that points to works outside the church; i.e. “faith in a global context."” as something to measured from inside the Church. Yes, the outside world will know Christians by their works but the faithful don’t count these works as their own but rather as fruits of faith. Big difference between the two views!

Which brings me to the second point; this has the emergent church’s theological fingerprints all over it. The emergents nearly always focus on acting within a global community to help the world become the paradise our Lord intended it to be. Of course this misses the problem of the fall into sin entirely as the root cause of the real problem plaguing humanity and if you fail to understand the problem, how the heck can anyone understand Christ’s gifts won at the cross. This is why emergents always point to works and community outside the church catholic!

Now, read the article again; what does the monthly blog feature; articles for young adults about their ministry, their culture, and their faith, information about servant opportunities that they can participate in, and book reviews about their ministry and their culture. Not a lot about Jesus in there is there? Sorta begs the question; exactly what kind culture do you suppose they are trying to build?

Te Deum Sung In Grand Rapids Sola Conference

The embedded video is from the Higher Things' Sola conference up in Grand Rapids Michigan. I dare anyone to say that kids only like (or are capable for that matter) to sing along with praise bands that are indistinguisable from rock or pop groups that can be heard on top 40 radio stations while worship team leaders dance around a stage like the latest pop tart du jour after watchin' the video.

While what sacred music is and what it means to sing sacred music can certainly be debated (as I've done here on more than one occasion) there is no debating that these kids are singing hymns that reflect their theology in content as well as stylistically. This is what happens when we dare our youth to be Lutheran!

Concordia Irvine Offers New Worship Drama Degree

In the inbox this morning was a story in the Reporter, the official LCMS newspaper that Concordia University, Irvine, Calif., has approved a minor in worship arts leadership. From the story;

The minor includes courses in music, theology, song selection, how to put a service together, and how to select a worship team. It is designed to provide training in various worship styles, the use of technology and media in worship, service planning, and the use of drama and visual arts.

I thought I remember President Kieschnick saying sometime last year that we were a united bunch. Didn’t I read that somewhere? I’m sure I did, somewhere...

Now at first I thought President Kieschnick was just holding to the Lutheran confessions which I know he holds most dear which state in Article XXIV: Of the Mass.

Falsely are our churches accused of abolishing the Mass; for the Mass is retained among us, and celebrated with the highest reverence. Nearly all the usual ceremonies are also preserved, save that the parts sung in Latin are interspersed here and there with German hymns, which have been added to teach the people. For ceremonies are needed to this end alone that the unlearned be taught [what they need to know of Christ].

But after reading President Kieschnick’s piece I now realize that he meant that we are unified not by our confession of what Scripture teaches, (he later said we do indeed have “disagreements”) or our worship but rather we are unified by the passing of the synod’s marketing campaign in convention and election of synodical bureaurocrats. Sorry, I’m really getting off topic here (although the two issues are joined at the hip), anyhoo...

So, to further buttress our stated unity the Concordia system is now offering courses on how to create new worship services? Really? Do we now need to modify ACXXIV to say we have indeed abolished the Divine Service for some new fangled thing(s) that we trained people to create so as to be relevant? Do we also need to say that we no longer sing the historic hymnody that has been sung and confessed for millennia instead we look for songs to sing and that we no longer consider a pastor as an undershepherd who leads us in worship but rather that we now use teams to lead us? Are we so incompetent at preaching Christ and Him crucified that we need to resort to drama teams to entertain us on a Sunday morning?

Yes sirree buddy, all we need in the LCMS is more drama…

Today’s Quote Of The Day

I actually found today’s quote of the day yesterday over at Father Hollywood’s blog but I didn’t have time to post it because of my traveling back to the Haut South. The quote of the day comes from the Rev. Aaron Koch's blog, "The Staff of Aaron", in his post Living Nativity:

"I recall even one Lutheran pastor who would kneel before a plastic Jesus as part of a school Christmas program, but who thought it wrong to genuflect at the altar during the consecration!"

Oh, heck yeah!

I can not begin to recount how many of my evangelical friends question whether my faith is genuine based on the fact that I cross myself before prayer or bow my head whenever the Gloria Patri is sung during the Divine Service.

For my newer readers, the Gloria Patri is a short doxological hymn of praise to God that is sung during various points of our worship service;

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. Amen.


Thank you Pastor Beane for bringing Pr. Koch's fine quote to our attention, it kept me going all the way home yesterday.