FW: Is Every Christian a Minister?

 

Consider…   Feed: Steadfast Lutherans Posted on: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:15 AM Author: Dr. Matthew Phillips Subject: Is Every Christian a Minister?   The answer to this question may change depending on one's understanding of minister.  If understood broadly, any Christian may serve others.  However, minister usually means someone whom Lutherans commonly call a pastor today.  Therefore, obviously, every Christian is not a minister or pastor.  In 1530 the first Lutherans understood this well when they confessed, "…no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called." [1] It is possible to further explain the Augsburg Confession through an examination of the contemporary writings of Martin Luther related to this subject. Early in the Reformation Luther made the biblical distinction between baptized priests and ministers when he wrote: "For thus it is written I Pet. 2 [:9]: 'You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, and a priestly royalty.' Therefore we are all priests, as many of us are Christians. But the priests, as we call them, are ministers chosen from among us.  All they do is done in our name; the priesthood is nothing but a ministry.  This we learn from I. Cor. 4 [:1]: 'This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.' "[2] While Luther delineated between Christians as baptized priests and ministers, he does this to contrast the biblical office of preaching with the corrupt priesthood established through Roman episcopal ordination.  Therefore, he asserted that papal priests had forsaken preaching the Word for praying the canonical hours and offering masses in propitiation for sins.  In other words, he contrasted the Office of the Holy Ministry (Predigtamt, ministerium) with the papal priesthood.  Additionally, Luther argues against the papal bishops' claim that they alone had the authority to ordain pastors.  Thereby, he rejected the Roman sacrament of ordination and the notion that pastors possessed an "indelible character" as a result of their ordination.[3] Luther's rejection of Roman sacerdotal (priestly) authority did not mean the rejection of the pastoral office.  During the 1520s new groups emerged that rejected the external call of ministers and the sacraments.  Anabaptist preachers began to appear throughout Germany who claimed divine inspiration for their secret preaching.  They also rejected infant baptism and the idea of the Christ's physical presence in the Lord's Supper.  For this reason, in 1530 Lutherans condemned the Anabaptists as they confessed "That we may obtain this faith, the Ministry of Teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted."[4] In the early 1530s Luther examined the nature of this ministry and the call of pastors in various writings.  He specifically rejected wandering, secret preachers and affirmed the pastoral office when he stated, "For to the pastor is committed the pulpit, baptism, the sacrament [of the altar], and he is charged with the care of souls."  He then instructed faithful Christians to report these sneaky, uncalled preachers to their pastors.  If these infiltrators did not have a call to preach, then Luther instructed them to be silent because they did not have a call to the pastoral office.[5] Dr. Luther included a lengthy discussion of the doctrine of the call in his lectures on Galatians in 1531 (published in 1535).  He stated that every minister must be certain that his call is from God.  While Christ called the apostles without means, God continues to call pastors through human means.   In the sixteenth century city officials or princes often called pastors to certain parishes.  (In twentieth-century America, Christian congregations normally call pastors.)  However, this call was no less divine than the apostles' call.  Luther made it clear that even if someone taught true doctrine, if he did not have a proper call, he should be told to stop preaching.  He concluded, "Therefore we who are in the ministry of the Word have this comfort, that we have a heavenly and holy office; being legitimately called to this, we prevail over all the gates of hell."  It was necessary for a minister to boast in his call to glorify God, give him divine confidence in his ministry, and to give assurance to his congregation.  Instead of puffing the pastor up this knowledge should humble him.[6] If all Christians are not ministers, then how should Christians live?  According to Luther, the universal call is baptism and faith in Christ.  Then, Christians, as baptized priests, serve their neighbors in love through various callings.[7]  Luther purposely contrasted the call to ordinary living in faith to monks whose external works only appeared spiritual.  The world considers self-chosen religious activity as a true service to God.  However, Luther responded that a servant's cooking and housework is a service to God that surpasses monastic holiness.  In the same manner that a pastor serves God through fulfillment of the duties of his call, the servant girl may joyfully serve God through completing her daily tasks.[8] Luther spoke similarly in numerous sermons and lectures.  While commenting on Galatians 6:4, he referred to a Christian's work as a divine calling whether he or she was a city leader, a servant, a teacher, or a student.  Each person should fulfill his or her duties and not be concerned with others' vocations.[9]  In a Christmas sermon Luther emphasized the deception of external appearances.  Priests, monks, and friars seem holier than people who marry and work ordinary jobs.  In fact, a baptized woman, who believes in Christ and lives ordinarily with her husband and children, is holier before God than a nun who exhibits great outward piety.  Luther encouraged his hearers to demonstrate the fruits of faith in their daily callings.[10] According to Luther, every Christian is definitely not a minister.  God calls pastors to do certain things because of their office.  All Christians are not called to do those things, namely, preach God's Word publicly or administer the sacraments.  However, every Christian is a baptized priest, who by faith in Christ serves his neighbor in love through his or her divine vocations.  This may be in the form of overt religious activity such as prayer, exhortation, or the comforting Word of the Gospel.  However, taking out the trash also fulfills a vocation when done in faith, and is therefore a divine work too. [1] Augsburg  Confession, art. 14. http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article14 [2]  Martin Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, Luther's Works 36: 112-13. [Emphasis added] [3]  Ibid., 113-116; Norman Nagel, "Luther and the Priesthood of All Believers," CTQ 61 (1997): 284-285, 289. http://ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/nagelnlutherpriesthoodallbelievers.pdf. [4]  Augsburg Confession, art. 5. http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article5 .  The Latin text refers to the ministerium and the German uses the term, Predigtamt which literally means preaching office. Concordia Triglotta, (St Louis 1921), 44.  The English text is a translation of the Latin version. [5] Martin Luther, "Infiltrating and Clandestine Preachers," Luther's Works 40: 384-87.   (Quote on p. 384) [6] Idem, "Lectures on Galatians (1535)," Luther's Works 26: 19-21 (Quote on p. 20). [Emphasis added] [7] Idem, "Lectures on Genesis," Luther's Works 3: 131. [8] Idem, "Sermon for Fifteenth Sunday After Trinity," The House Postils, vol. 3, ed. Eugene Klug (Grand Rapids 1996), 10-11. [9] Idem, "Lectures on Galatians (1535)," Luther's Works 27: 119-120. [10] Idem, "Third Sermon for the Festival of Christ's Nativity," House Postils 3: 232-233. View article...

View article...

FW: What is a Lectionary?

 

On Lectionaries…   Feed: Blog My Soul Posted on: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:50 PM Author: ScotK Subject: What is a Lectionary?   Someone asked, "Why do we use the pericopes that we do; who chooses them?" An interesting question that gave me the opportunity to dig up some old notes and dig into some documents. This doesn't go too deep, but gives a brief overview of how the Church's lectionary developed and the choices that were made that has led to the lectionary being used by the majority of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod today. A lectionary is a set of appointed readings from Holy Scripture used in congregational worship. There are lectionaries appointed for use on Sundays, as well as appointed readings to be read on the major feast and festival days of the Church Year. A lectionary permits the preacher to preach through the counsel of God in an orderly manner, in a way that is both instructive and thematic. The Church Year, with its thematic structure of seasons, is central to the lectionary. Liturgical churches that use a lectionary take it totally for granted, but it comes as quite a revelation for those who know nothing about it and learn of it for the first time. Generally, the lectionaries used today include a reading from the Holy Gospels, a reading from some other book in the New Testament, generally the Epistles, a reading from the Old Testament, and a Psalm. The Gospel reading is considered the main reading and sets the theme for the worship service. In the majority of Lutheran  lectionaries, the other readings (especially the Old Testament) are intended to support the preaching on, and explanation of, the content of the Gospel reading. Origins of the Lectionary St. Jerome It is generally accepted that what we know today as the historic lectionary was first established by Jerome (lived c. A.D. 342–420). Having the name of Jerome attached to the lectionary made it influential on its own, but when it was later included in the Leonine Sacramentary, it became a standard text for the Western Church. At this time, the lectionary only provided assigned readings for Advent, Christmas, Lent, and Easter, with the rest of the year covered by optional Propers or by the choice of the local bishop or pastor. Three hundred years later, when Charlemagne decided to standardize liturgical practices in his do main, his religious advisor, Alcuin (c. 735–804), did a revision of Jerome's work. This standardized worship in the Western Church and put everyone on the same page, at least for the festival part of the year. The next major change to the lectionary would not come until the thirteenth century with the establishment of Holy Trinity as a major festival in the Church. Holy Trinity soon came to dominate the second half of the Church Year, and with that came the establishment of assigned Propers for the entire year. By the end of the thirteenth century, the liturgical practice of the Western Church, year round, was governed by the historic lectionary, though it wouldn't be until the Council of Trent (1545–1563) that the Roman Church actually enforced and stabilized its use. Johannes Bugenhagen During the Reformation the question wasn't, "Should the lectionary be changed?" only whether it should be used at all. While Zwingli and others abolished the use of lectionaries along with the observation of the Church Year, Calvin substituted a lectio continua for the lectionary, since he saw homiletical value in having some sort of assigned reading. The Lutherans judged that the lectionary did not promote false doctrine, and they retained the historic lectionary with only slight revisions—the most notable being the added Propers for Trinity 25 and 26. Additionally, they moved Transfiguration from August 6 to the last Sunday after Epiphany. Luther prescribed the use of the historic lectionary in both the Formula Missae and Deutsche Messe (LW vol. 53 p. 23ff), and all Lutheran altar books continued in their use of it. Even the Augsburg Confession and the Apology testify to its official use in Lutheran congregations (Article XXVI and Apology XXIV.1). For the next four hundred years, Lutheran retained this common historic lectionary, along with Roman Catholics and Anglicans. It served as the basis for preaching and devotional books, hymnody and church music, and even until the mid-twentieth century was the index for every Lutheran hymnal. There certainly is a history of other lectionaries being prepared. Even in Luther's day, it is recorded that among the Lutherans there were different lectionaries beginning to be used. It is important and useful to note that these were not individual undertakings, but that all the churches in a district or area would be using the same "variation." In 1896 the Eisenach Conference churches of the Prussian Union produced a lectionary, popularized in the United States by Lenski and his notes on the series. The Synodical Conference produced a series that was adopted in 1912 and included by the framers of The Lutheran Hymnal (1941) as a "Second Series" available for use on Sundays (TLH p. 159ff). In 1868 the Scandinavian Lutheran Church produced a Three-Year Lectionary for their use. Most often these alternate lectionaries were produced, not to supplant the historic lectionary, but to supplement it, often adding Old Testament Readings or offering alternate texts for preaching. For the most part, the patterns and themes of the historic lectionary were maintained. Already fifteen years after the production of The Lutheran Hymnal, American Lutheran church bodies were seeking a revision. In 1965 the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod resolved to appoint a commission that would work with other Lutheran church bodies to produce a new common hymnal. In February 1966 representatives of the LCMS, the American Lutheran Church, and the Lutheran Church in America met in Chicago and formed what would become the Inter-Lutheran Commission on Worship (ILCW). Later, representatives of the Slovak Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Canada (ELCIC) joined the Commission. Among other issues, the ILCW dealt with the Church Year calendar and proposed a multi-year lectionary, citing a "widespread restiveness with the appointed readings, a great deal of experimentation, and a desire for either reform of the pericopes or a completely new lectionary," resulting from "a variety of influences in current theology, social-ethical involvements, developments in worship practice, and especially the influential biblical theology movement of recent decades" (Contemporary Worship 6: The Church Year Calendar and Lectionary. Prepared by the Inter-Lutheran Commission on Worship. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House; Philadelphia: Board of Publications of the Lutheran Church in America; St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1973. p. 13). Rembrandt's Mother reading a lectionary One of the outcomes of Vatican II was the publication of the Ordo Lectionum Missae in 1969, the new Three-Year Series that supplanted the historic (One-Year) lectionary in the Roman Catholic Church. The next year the Protestant Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church, and United Church of Christ adopted the Ordo as a basis for new lectionaries in their churches. Having already set aside concern for loyalty to the received heritage and reverence for Western tradition, the ILCW simply followed suit when, in 1973, the ILCW published its version of the Three-Year Roman Ordo. The ILCW Three-Year Series established a lectio continua of synoptic Gospel assigned to each year: "Year A" focuses on Matthew, "Year B" on Mark, and "Year C" on Luke. John is featured in all three Series during the Sundays after Easter, and appears extensively along with Mark in Year B, especially in Advent, Christmas, and Lent. The Three-Year Series assigned a First Lesson, usually the Old Testament, to coordinate with the Gospel Reading. A lectio continua Reading of the Epistles was assigned to each year with no special effort to coordinate the Epistle with the Gospel selection. Contemporary Lectionaries, Especially Lutheran With the inclusion of the ILCW Three-Year Series in the LCMS's Lutheran Worship, the ELCA's Lutheran Book of Worship, WELS's Christian Worship, and the ELS's Evangelical Lutheran Hymnary, this Series quickly became popular in Lutheran circles. Even though the ILCW had offered a revision of the historic (One-Year) lectionary to be included with the Three-Year Series, within fifteen years its use had sharply fallen. However common and widely used it was among Lutherans, the ILCW Three-Year Series become one of the most short-lived lectionary series. Two years after the formation of the ILCW, representatives of the ELCA, ELCIC, and LCMS had joined an ecumenical group called the Consultation on Common Texts (CCT). Composed of biblical, linguistic, and liturgical scholars from various Christian denominations, their purpose was to prepare worship texts and materials for use in North America, including lectionaries. In 1978 they sponsored a meeting in Washington DC whose purpose was to form a committee that would reconcile the differences between the various denominational uses of the Three-Year Series. Ultimately the LCMS withdrew from this group. In 1983 the remaining members published the Common Lectionary. The biggest change in the Common Lectionary over its ILCW predecessor was the revision of Old Testament Lessons. The framers of the ILCW lectionaries had selected texts with reference to their New Testament fulfillment (typological approach). The CCT questioned the validity of imposed typology on the Old Testament Scriptures. Instead, the Common Lectionary used a pattern of semi-continuous readings, which were essentially independent from the Gospel. The CCT also included an appointed Psalm in the Sunday Readings. Another notable change was the adoption of the Episcopal Church's practice of replacing the "Sundays after Pentecost" with "Propers" keyed to the civil calendar. The Common Lectionary was first used on a trial basis by a number of Lutheran and Episcopal congregations. The first to officially adopt it for use in their congregations was the Anglican Church of Canada in 1985. Early on, the Common Lectionary received a number of criticisms. These criticisms were directed especially from Lutheran, Episcopal, and Roman Catholic sources. Ultimately, and in response to those criticisms, the CCT published the Revised Common Lectionary (RLC) in 1992. In addition, three versions of the RLC were framed in response to the criticism of the Old Testament selections. There is a Roman Catholic version, which at times used readings from the Apocrypha for the Old Testament Lesson. And then there are two Protestant versions, one in which the typological approach to assigning the Old Testament Lesson matched to the Gospel is used, and the other where the semi-continuous Old Testament Readings of the Common Lectionary are mostly retained. The increasing influence of social issues on the selection of texts is seen in the revisions of the RCL, as more stories of women of faith are added and texts deemed to appear anti-Semitic when taken out of their cultural and religious context of the Ancient Near East are eliminated. The RCL has become the lectionary of the Episcopal Church, the ELCA, and ELCIC. It is the official lectionary of the United Methodist Church, Presbyterians, United Church of Christ, and Disciples of Christ. The Lectionary for Lutheran Service Book The LCMS did not adopt the RCL. Beginning in 1999, seventeen years after the introduction of Lutheran Worship, the LCMS Commission on Worship began work toward a new hymnal. In the 2006 Guide to Introducing Lutheran Service Book (p. 49, 50), the Commission's Lectionary Committee summarizes the approach taken toward the lectionaries to be included in the new hymnal, Lutheran Service Book (LSB): From the beginning of the development of LSB, the Lectionary Committee determined that both the three and one-year lectionaries would be included in LSB. Since the introduction of the three-year lectionary in the Lutheran Church in the early 1970s, the great majority of congregations have made use of it. Though the number of congregations currently using the one-year lectionary is relatively small, the committee believed it essential to retain this historic lectionary, though with some modifications.  Three-Year Lectionary (LSB pp. xiv–xix) The committee's work concerning the three-year lectionary centered on the extent to which it would make use of the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL), which was published in 1992. The committee studied the issue carefully and, at the direction of the Commission on Worship, endeavored to bring considerable commonality with the RCL, especially during the Sundays after Pentecost. During festivals such as Christmas, Holy Week, and Easter, however, the lectionary reflects greater commonality with the one-year lectionary. Among some of the features of the revised three-year lectionary are the following: Some Old Testament readings have been changed so that they are more closely connected to the Gospel for the day. Most of Acts 1–2 is read consecutively every year according to the following schedule: Ascension Day Acts 1:1–11 (First Reading) Easter 7 Acts 1:12–26 (First Reading) Day of Pentecost Acts 2:1–21 (Second Reading) Holy Trinity Acts 2:14a, 22–36 (Second Reading) Following the original intentions of the three-year lectionary, the Psalm of the Day is not understood to be a separate reading but rather a response to the Old Testament/First Reading. With the inclusion of 107 psalms in the Pew Edition, the selections for Psalm of the Day have been completely revised. Every effort has been made to use whole psalms. When a portion of a longer psalm is appointed, the committee endeavored to make the selection of verses as straightforward as possible to avoid causing confusion for the worshiper. As explained above, the Sundays after Pentecost follow the system that is used in the RCL. In this system, specific propers are assigned to a period of seven consecutive days, each being given the designation "Proper" with a number following. Unlike the current system in Lutheran Worship, where Sundays are skipped at the end of the church year, the new calendar places the "skip" at the beginning, right after the Sunday of the Holy Trinity. The designation "__________ Sunday after Pentecost" is retained as a more churchly way of identifying the Sunday, rather than by the "Proper" number. Though a bit different than our current practice, this new calendar is quite easy to use, partly because it is so logically conceived. One-Year Lectionary (LSB pp. xx–xxi) The committee quickly determined that the historic one-year lectionary, together with its calendar, would be retained. Benefits of using this lectionary include an annual repetition of key biblical texts and the ability to consult historic resources, such as Martin Luther's various series of sermons on the Gospels and Epistles. Among the features of the LSB one-year lectionary are the following: The traditional Gospels and Epistles are retained. In a few cases an alternate Gospel is provided. More frequently, an alternate Epistle is also included. The Old Testament readings were completely revised with the goal of providing readings that are closely related to the Holy Gospel for each day. The pre-Lent season, also known as the "gesima" Sundays, is retained. A minor adjustment from the historic calendar occurs in the weeks following Easter. Whereas the earlier calendar referred to these as the Sundays "after" Easter, the revised calendar mirrors the three-year lectionary in designating them as the Sundays "of Easter. The traditional Latin names for the Sundays have been retained, as have the appointed readings. At the time Lutheran Service Book was being planned, the Lectionary Committee acknowledge a small but loyal following for the historic liturgy. In reality there is increasing interest in the older historic (one-year) lectionary. For the first time since The Lutheran Hymnal, there is again support for the historic lectionary, with a separate LSB One-Year Lectionary book being published. Concluding Thoughts Now, I apologize in advance if what follows sounds preachy. You will never find the perfect lectionary, yet even the worst of them is probably better than no lectionary at all. What is hugely obvious is that just as there is no such thing as a theologically neutral translation of the Scriptures, so, too, there is no such thing as a theologically neutral lectionary. The RCL lectionary(s) often display an agenda that at many points finds itself at cross-purposes with confessional Lutheranism. (So stick with the LSB lectionaries—end of plug.) While the question of which lectionary we use (or whether we use a lectionary at all, for that matter) is certainly an adiaphoran, this does not make it an unimportant matter. In choosing a lectionary for use in the Divine Service, we should remember that we are choosing a catechetical tool. A lectionary is to be more than a means to dole out little parcels of Scripture, it gives a framework for the most important task the Church has been given by her Lord: proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ. It sets the hearer on the path toward understanding the purpose and meaning of Holy Scripture, and serves as a guide for both pastor and congregation through the whole counsel of God. Understanding the history behind the lectionaries is important, especially for pastors called to these tasks of preaching and teaching God's people. It should be noted. Much of this article was first put together several years ago when several of us pastors in the circuit were keenly interested in the historic lectionary, and there was not talk yet of a new hymnal (probably 1997—1998). Back then I was involved in several listservs and while I can't say for certain, I am fairly sure that some of this was picked up from posts and/or papers that we would circulate to start or lubricate discussion. Living in the world that I do now, I am more conscious of acknowledging sources and giving credit for seminal thoughts that have been incorporated into subsequent work. Sixteen or so years ago, when this was put together for my own use, my tracking and acknowledgement of sources was virtually none existent. This also leaves facts somewhat unverifiable. Had I meant to publish it, hopefully I would have done better at the time. Now, I have no idea how to reconstruct those sources. Subsequent to the posting of this article I was contacted by the Rev. Alexander Ring. Much of the article is a condensaton and gloss of his paper The Path of Understanding:The Development of Lectionaries and their use in the Lutheran Church, presented to the Evangelical Lutheran Synod General Pastoral Conference, Bloomington, MN, January 6­8, 1998. It was later published in Lutheran Synod Quarterly, Vol 38, #2, 90–124. This version is now posted with Rev. Ring's knowledge and consent. View article...

View article...

FW: Luther was not original...

 

Consider…   Feed: Pastoral Meanderings Posted on: Thursday, June 13, 2013 5:00 AM Author: noreply@blogger.com (Pastor Peters) Subject: Luther was not original...     HT to SimonPotamos and Anglandicus... Per Fidem Solam: Romans 3:24 in the Würzburg Glosses Romans 3 in the Würzburg Codex (f2r) I have already written on the Irish Würzburg glosses here. I'm working through Romans 3 for school at the moment and so I thought I would examine the Würzburg glosses to see how an early Irish theologian interpreted the same text in the 8th century. I've reproduced both the biblical text and the glosses here together. The glosses are italicized and were originally written in Gaelic and Latin. "23For all have sinned and do need the glory of God. 24Being justified freely by his grace [that is, by faith alone, i.e. the faith of belief in Jesus Christ], through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, [that is, it is He that has redeemed and it is He also that is the ransom, i.e. by the blood] 25Whom God had proposed to be a propitiation [that is, it has been set forth in the mysteries of the Godhead, to make atonement for those who believe his liberation would be in the blood], through faith in his blood, [that is, through the faith of every one who believes in his salvation through His blood] to the showing of his justice, for the remission of former sins." The gloss 'Per Fidem Solam' added in tiny a tiny hand over 'per gratiam ipsius' What is interesting is the phrase 'by faith alone'. Our Irish scribe added this gloss in Latin (per fidem solam) over verse 24 'justified freely by his grace' (Iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius) and then expanded it with a Gaelic gloss relating this justification by faith alone to faith in Christ. Luther was famously criticized for adding 'alone' (allein) to his German translation of Romans 3.28, 'man is justified by faith [alone]', although it doesn't appear in the Greek (or Latin text). Of course Luther's 1522 translation wasn't the first vernacular translation to add 'alone' to Romans 3.28. Several earlier Roman Catholic editions did the same thing (e.g. the Nuremberg Bible of 1488, the Geneva Italian version of 1476). In a similar fashion our 8th century Irish theologian interpreted Romans 3.24 as teaching justification per fidem solam. Luther, it seems, wasn't alone. My Comments Luther and the Lutherans hardly ever claim originality.  It is faithfulness that is our claim, rooted in Scripture, attuned to the fathers, manifesting the evangelical and catholic faith... View article...

View article...

FW: Why do you cling so tenaciously to the Mass?

 

Read on…   Feed: Steadfast Lutherans Posted on: Thursday, June 06, 2013 9:16 AM Author: Pastor Donavon Riley Subject: Why do you cling so tenaciously to the Mass?   According to Trent, and not quite according to the Catechismus Romanus the sacrifice of the Mass is not a repetition of the sacrifice on the cross, but its remembrance, its being made present, and its application. Nevertheless, the sacrifice of the Mass is said to be in fact a propitiatory sacrifice. And since in this divine Sacrifice which is performed in the Mass, that same Christ is contained in a bloodless sacrifice who on the altar of the cross once offered himself with the shedding of his blood: the holy Synod teaches that this sacrifice is truly propitiatory. … God, propitiated by the oblation of this sacrifice …This however does not succeed in setting aside what is most repugnant in the notion of the identity of the sacrifice of the Mass with the sacrifice on the cross. That is the assertion that we human beings sacrifice the body and blood of Christ. Hermann Sasse – The Lonely Way: Selected Essays and Letters, Volume 2 (1941-1976)   Luther had asked the question, to get the Papists out in the open on the sacrifice of the Mass, "Why do you cling so tenaciously to the Mass?" Philip Melanchthon is quite clear about this in his Apology, Article 15 [On Human Traditions]. It is because the papal party has substituted a human worship of God that they prefer to the one commanded by God. That is, they do not like the promises given in Christ, and prefer others. Philip was, oddly enough, shocked that his distinction in AC 15 [Concerning Church Rites] between human traditions and God's own institution of true worship in pure preaching and right administration of sacraments would ever be questioned. He writes that, "we never dreamed that they [the papal party] would actually condemn the proposition that we do not merit the forgiveness of sins or grace by observing human traditions" (Kolb-Wengert 223.3). He then goes on to note that the opponents "appoint another mediator" than Christ. (223.5) They add to Christ's last will and testament (223.12). Then they "deprive Christ of his honor," acting as if Christ is absent, not present (225.18). Then what happens? Well, the dreamed-up spiritual life becomes something preferred by the religious, becoming "far preferable to the works that God commands," (227.25), which is the actual vocation (227.25). But back to Luther's question, "Why do you cling…?" Because they have set up an illusion, which they prefer, to the true worship, a righteousness that comes through divine law, not promises. This can be seen in three key Roman Catholic teachings about sacraments: The Sacramental System understood grace and the means of grace under the general category of eternal law. According to this thinking, the sacraments were "new laws," that fulfilled and replaced the old laws. That is, circumcision was replaced and completed by baptism, the Passover superceded by the Lord's Supper, as Thomas Aquinas writes in Summa Gentiles. Priests were understood as "for" priests, offering a sacrifice that completed and replaced that of the Levites. And each sacrament was instituted by God for a stage of development on the way back to God from vice to virtue. Baptism to get rid of original sin, Confirmation for adolescents becoming responsible for actual sins, the Lord's Supper and Penance for continual growth, the Orders or Marriage for entering upon adult life, and Final Unction for the preparation for new life. Yet, perhaps even more importantly, understanding sacraments under the law meant creating an office of the papacy that played a necessary role in salvation. Even if it was not initially demanded by Scripture or the Apostolic Church, the argument goes, the office can become irreversable and necessary as the Spirit works through the tradition of the Church to secure the Gospel message, as Karl Rahner noted. When you begin salvation with law, and end it with law, then one of the main necessities is to have some way of extending and elaborating law over time. The Pharisees did it with an oral tradition, and so it survived among all types of Jews, because they were able to extend law indefinitely. For Rome, the Pope was understood as being the means by which God's law could be extended, enlarged, and applied especially to Christians in a new place and time. The pope's ability to make law that is binding becomes the source of canon law, and the means by which he is understood to do this is by the perceived necessity of having a final and ultimate authority to interpret Scripture when so many interpretations compete for the hearts of people. Scripture is then taken as a book of mysteries, which has applications in it for future ages planted by God, but not yet understood by its authors who lived in its history. In this way the church itself was understood to be a kind of ongoing incarnation of Christ. A means by which God's law is extended indefinitely into the future. A sacrament itself. After all, when Christ is no longer around to tell you what to do each time some new moral conundrum arises, to whom can you turn? Such teaching authority is absolutely crucial for any understanding of salvation that comes through the law. Right at this point the Lutherans unearthed another reason why this mass is clung to so tightly. Christ had come to be understood as in some important way absent, since he is visibly and physically apparently gone. Yet, Het has left us with a new and improved version of the law to fulfill. What are we to do? We all know that we cannot fulfill the law on our own without Christ and grace, but how will we know His will in any time or place as new situations constantly arise? In steady steps the notion of mediation between Christ in heaven and his earthly presence begins to solidify around the office of the Papacy as the Vicar of Christ. The Pope becomes the stand-in for Christ, whose power is extended down to the very parish priest through ordination. The key means of mediation then is to offer up an unbloody sacrifice, as it came to be called, an acceptable request that Christ re-present Himself despite the unholiness of this world, its people and this very Church. A sacrifice of prayer is to be offered that pleases God, and is met by God with approval, and a re-presenting of Christ, who thus comes into the elements or publishes his eternal will into the Church. That is, the head of the Church, Christ, returns to his body, the Church, and in this unity makes the fulfillment of the law as righteousness a reality again. Why cling to the mass as an unbloody sacrifice? In order to get an absent Christ to re-present himself as a means of grace and not only judgment. Notice what happens to the understanding of "Word," in this sense of using the Mass. The "Word" in the Sacrament then was either turned into mere prayer to God, with its implied exhortation to the gathered people (in the line of via moderna, who understood that God's will before all time needed to be agreed with), or it was applied to the bread and wine by means of manufacturing a holy place in this unholy world that could harbor Christ really present again (Thomas Aquinas' direction in both baptism and Lord's Supper). Too often the modern dialogs on the "sacrifice" of the Mass have dissembled into ambiguity, noting that something new is happening for Lutherans, so much so that for some Lutheran and Roman Catholics, they seem to be willing to move away from addressing the harsh edges of "sacrifice" in the modern Mass. Then we can say both Lutherans and Roman Catholics understand there is some type of sacrifice going on: at least a sacrifice of praise. But this doesn't get to the real matter. Roman Catholics cling so tightly to the sacrifice because it is a product of the divine right of the papacy de iure divino (SA III. 4, p.307.1). And that is clung to so tightly because when no distinction of law and Gospel is made, there is no other means by which Christ's human and divine nature can stay together, no other graceful way the infinite divine can somehow affect matters on the finite earth, unless we have a mediator who allows the movement between the two of these. When there is no real new kingdom of Christ into which we are swept by his death and resurrection, then there is only the attempt to improve this world by way of the Church. In other words, at the heart of this thinking about the Mass as a sacrifice there is a fear that Christ is absent, and must be made present, but only can be so by one who stands in an office that is more than human, more than mere human tradition, more than earthly. Without this, like loosing a kite from a broken string, we would loose our head the Christ. This means a significant disruption is woven into the fabric of our understanding of the Church, Pope, and Scripture, to say nothing of the Sacraments, when the Lutherans come into the picture pointing out that Christ himself is the end of the law, and that what lies beyond law is a new kingdom, a new world of Gospel without law. And further yet, Christ is present for us in His very word of promise which puts to death the old sinner and raises the new saint, utterly disturbing the ontological order of having an infinite, almighty God standing over finite an unholy people. If Christ himself is present, and even as a very specific promise for us in the Sacraments, then the law would be over where He has given His promise. In Christ a new time, a new kingdom, a new life is being created, out of nothing. But that would mean we need no vicar of Christ in the sense of a stand-in, who develops new laws to apply to our worship, and our moral life, etc., as far as concerns our salvation. Further yet, we would need no protected, authoritative interpreters of Scripture. All we would need is the external preaching office and the hearing of that preaching, which offers Christ as a promise. But then all the added prayers in the Mass are not divine law, or necessary matters for salvation, they are at most human traditions, and so is the papacy itself. At the best we could say the Mass prayers were "aven," that is, "wasted effort." But as Luther noted, monasteries, and the Mass, and the Papacy are all human inventions that are not commanded, not necessary, not useful, and all the "while causing dangerous and futile efforts besides." (306.2) But who then will make new laws for us regarding salvation? No one. We would then be living beyond the law, in freedom, and there is only that one voice in the conscience that gives it proper location here on earth, "I am pleased with you." That is why Luther notes, "if the Mass fails, the papacy falls." (303.10) "Before they would allow that to happen, they would kill us all, if they could do it." Why? Well, the answer would be self defense. But that is always the last defense of the sinner again the full, all sufficient grace of God in Christ given as a gift for faith alone. View article...

View article...

FW: Great Stuff — Why men have stopped singing in church

 

Read on…   Feed: Steadfast Lutherans Posted on: Sunday, June 02, 2013 9:15 AM Author: Norm Fisher Subject: Great Stuff — Why men have stopped singing in church   A "Great Stuff" post found over on Patheos.com by David Murrow   It happened again yesterday. I was attending one of those hip, contemporary churches — and almost no one sang. Worshippers stood obediently as the band rocked out, the smoke machine belched and lights flashed. Lyrics were projected on the screen, but almost no one sang them. A few women were trying, but I saw only one male (other than the worship leader) making the attempt. A few months ago I blogged, "Have Christians Stopped Singing?" I did some research, and learned that congregational singing has ebbed and flowed over the centuries. It reached a high tide when I was a young man – but that tide may be going out again. And that could be bad news for men. First, a very quick history of congregational singing. Before the Reformation, laypersons were not allowed to sing in church. They were expected to stand mute as sacred music was performed by professionals (priests and cantors), played on complex instruments (pipe organs), and sung in an obscure language (Latin). Reformers gave worship back to the people in the form of congregational singing. They composed simple tunes that were easy to sing, and mated them with theologically rich lyrics. Since most people were illiterate in the 16th century, singing became an effective form of catechism. Congregants learned about God as they sang about God. A technological advance – the printing press – led to an explosion of congregational singing. The first hymnal was printed in 1532, and soon a few dozen hymns became standards across Christendom. Hymnals slowly grew over the next four centuries. By the mid 20th century every Protestant church had a hymnal of about 1000 songs, 250 of which were regularly sung. In the church of my youth, everyone picked up a hymnal and sang every verse of every song. About 20 years ago a new technological advance – the computer controlled projection screen – entered America's sanctuaries. Suddenly churches could project song lyrics for all to see. Hymnals became obsolete. No longer were Christians limited to 1,000 songs handed down by our elders. At first, churches simply projected the songs everyone knew – hymns and a few simple praise songs that had come out of the Jesus Movement. People sang robustly. But that began to change about ten years ago. Worship leaders realized they could project anything on that screen. So they brought in new songs each week. They drew from the radio, the Internet, and Worship conferences. Some began composing their own songs, performing them during worship, and selling them on CD after church. In short order we went from 250 songs everyone knows to 250,000+ songs nobody knows. Years ago, worship leaders used to prepare their flocks when introducing a new song. "We're going to do a new song for you now," they would say. "We'll go through it twice, and then we invite you to join in." That kind of coaching is rare today. Songs get switched out so frequently that it's impossible to learn them. People can't sing songs they've never heard. And with no musical notes to follow, how is a person supposed to pick up the tune? And so the church has returned to the 14th century. Worshippers stand mute as professional-caliber musicians play complex instruments, sung in an obscure language. Martin Luther is turning over in his grave. What does this mean for men? On the positive side, men no longer feel pressure to sing in church. Men who are poor readers or poor singers no longer have to fumble through hymnals, sing archaic lyrics or read a musical staff. But the negatives are huge. Men are doers, and singing was one of the things we used to do together in church. It was a chance to participate. Now, with congregational singing going away, and communion no longer a weekly ordinance, there's only one avenue left for men to participate in the service – the offering. Is this really the message we want to send to men? Sit there, be quiet, and enjoy the show. And don't forget to give us money. There's nothing wrong with professionalism and quality in church music. The problem isn't the rock band, or the lights, or the smoke machine. The key is familiarity. People enjoy singing songs they know. How do I know? When that super-hip band performed a hymn, the crowd responded with gusto. People sang. Even the men. View article...

View article...

Received for Review

 

Simpson, Clare. Illustrated by Kay Harker. Why Do We Have to Be So Quiet in Church? And 12 Other Questions Kids Have About God. Orleans, MA: Paraclete Press, 2013. 32 Pages. Cloth. $14.99. www.paracletepress.com (LHPN) Potente, E. J. and David Zersen. Shaping Worship Space: How Christians Shelter and Adorn their Liturgies: A Congregational Planning Guide. Austin: Concordia University Press, 2008. 100 Pages. Paper. $14.99. https://www.cph.org/p-1253-shaping-worship-space-how-christians-shelter-and-adorn-their-liturgy.aspx (LHP) Preus, Klemet I. What  They Need to Hear: Sharing Christ with Family and Friends. St. Louis: Concordia, 2013. 204 Pages. Paper. $15.99. https://www.cph.org/p-22275-what-they-need-to-hear.aspx (P) Middendorf, Michael P. Romans 1-8 (Concordia Commentary). St. Louis: Concordia, 2013. 802 Pages. Cloth. $49.99. https://www.cph.org/p-7380-romans-1-8-volume-1-concordia-commentary.aspx (P)

View article...

FW: Great Stuff — Mark’s thoughts: Dealing with difficult times in a Psalms way

 

Surburg…   Feed: Steadfast Lutherans Posted on: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:21 PM Author: Norm Fisher Subject: Great Stuff — Mark's thoughts: Dealing with difficult times in a Psalms way   Another great post found over on Pastor Surburg's blog:   As we live in a fallen world, it is inevitable that we will encounter difficult times.  These challenges can take many different forms.  Many of these things are the results of circumstances and situations that are completely outside of our control.  No matter what shape they may take, the fact remains that we often find ourselves facing the challenge of living through difficult circumstances in life. When we face these kinds of situations, how are we to handle them?  What model can we follow or where can we look for guidance?  For nearly three millennia God's people have recognized the Psalms as a primary resource for this.  In the Psalms we encounter inspired prayers.  The Psalms are both prayers addressed to God and they are God's word addressed to us.  When we use the Psalms, the Spirit is teaching us how to think and how to pray. Even within the Psalms themselves we find different ways of dealing with difficult times.  One psalm that I have come to appreciate greatly is Psalm 77.  In the psalm, Asaph begins by saying:              I cry aloud to God,                         aloud to God, and he will hear me.             In the day of my trouble I seek the Lord;                         in the night my hand is stretched out without wearying;                         my soul refuses to be comforted.             When I remember God, I moan;                         when I meditate, my spirit faints. Selah (Psalm 77:1-3 ESV)   Asaph begins with the confident cry of faith.  In the day of his trouble he cries aloud to God. He is confident that God will hear him.  Day and night he turns to God for help. However it begins to become clear that this does not bring immediate relief. On the contrary, his soul refuses to be comforted and in his prayer and meditation he moans and his spirit faints. In the next section Asaph moves deeper into the description and contemplation of his plight. He says:             You hold my eyelids open;                         I am so troubled that I cannot speak.             I consider the days of old,                         the years long ago.             I said, "Let me remember my song in the night;                         let me meditate in my heart."                         Then my spirit made a diligent search:             "Will the Lord spurn forever,                         and never again be favorable?             Has his steadfast love forever ceased?                         Are his promises at an end for all time?             Has God forgotten to be gracious?                         Has he in anger shut up his compassion?" Selah (Psalm 77:4-9 ESV)   Bereft of sleep, Asaph declares that he is so troubled by the situation that he cannot speak.  He turns to the past as he attempts to remember the song that used to accompany his life in better times.  Yet just as the psalm began with a cry of faith focused upon God, so also now in the midst of his troubles Asaph's attention remains centered on what God has revealed about himself.  God is the One who is favorable towards his people.  He is characterized by steadfast love and faithful promises.  He is gracious and compassionate. These things do not seem to be in evidence right now for Asaph.  Yet in the words of the psalm this is considered atypical – it is completely uncharacteristic of God, and so surely it will not continue.  Asaph is in the midst of great troubles and is sorely distressed, but his basic outlook remains one that is grounded in faith toward what God has revealed about himself. At the present, Asaph's experience contradicts what God has revealed about himself. God does not seem to be acting in ways that are commensurate with his revealed character.  And so Asaph makes a key move.  He writes:             Then I said, "I will appeal to this,                         to the years of the right hand of the Most High."             I will remember the deeds of the LORD;                         yes, I will remember your wonders of old.             I will ponder all your work,                         and meditate on your mighty deeds.             Your way, O God, is holy.                         What god is great like our God?             You are the God who works wonders;                         you have made known your might among the peoples.             You with your arm redeemed your people,                         the children of Jacob and Joseph. Selah (Psalm 77:10-15 ESV)   Asaph turns his attention to what God has done in the past – to the wonders and mighty deeds that he has worked.  God is the God who works wonders and in doing so he has made known his might among the peoples.  In one central event God has done this in a way that goes beyond all of the others – in a way that is foundational for all of the others.  He did this in the exodus as he redeemed his people from slavery in Egypt.  This action affirms all of the things that Asaph knows to be true about God.   If Asaph focuses on his own present situation he may wonder whether God is favorable towards his people; whether he is characterized by steadfast love and faithful promises; whether he is gracious and compassionate to the ones he has called. But by remembering and meditating on the mighty deeds of God in the exodus he finds assurance that this indeed is God's character for him. Finally, Asaph speaks about the most dramatic moment of this powerful event.  He writes:             When the waters saw you, O God,                         when the waters saw you, they were afraid;                         indeed, the deep trembled.             The clouds poured out water;                         the skies gave forth thunder;                         your arrows flashed on every side.             The crash of your thunder was in the whirlwind;                         your lightnings lighted up the world;                         the earth trembled and shook.             Your way was through the sea,                         your path through the great waters;                         yet your footprints were unseen.             You led your people like a flock                         by the hand of Moses and Aaron. (Psalm 77:16-20 ESV)   Asaph describes in a dramatic fashion how God brought Israel through the Red Sea.  God led his people like a flock.  He cared for them as he rescued them from slavery. The God who has done this can be counted upon to care for his flock in the present – no matter what things may look like right now. Psalm 77 provides the pattern for us to follow when we are in the midst of difficult times.  Our first move is the cry of faith to God.  Like Asaph, we know that God has revealed himself to be the One who is favorable towards his people.  We know that he is characterized by steadfast love and faithful promises; that he is gracious and compassionate.  When we experience difficult times and this does not seem to be evident, in faith we are also to regard it as completely uncharacteristic of God, And so in the face of contradictory evidence we remember the deeds of the Lord, the wonders that he has done. When Asaph did this, he turned to the great Gospel event of the Old Testament – the exodus.  Now in the era of the New Testament we turn to the Gospel event– the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Through his action God has redeemed us.  He has purchased and won us from sin, death and the devil with his holy precious blood, and his innocent suffering and death.  By his resurrection he has guaranteed that his life will triumph over death for us. Through this action God has affirmed for all eternity that he is steadfast in his love and faithful to his promises.  He has demonstrated that he is gracious and compassionate towards us.  We return in faith to this and to the way we have received a share in it. Asaph returned to the mighty wonders that God had worked with water.  We do too, for in the water of Holy Baptism we have died with Christ and have been buried with him.  Because of this we know that we will also share in his resurrection on the Last Day (Romans 6:3-5). No matter what the circumstances of the moment seem to be saying, we are able to affirm, "I have been baptized into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ."  In this fact we have the assurance of God's love and care which the Spirit uses to carry us through the difficult times of life. View article...

View article...