Sometimes all of the stuff one reads and listens to and watches adds up to a weird stew in your head.
Last night I watched the movie "Trip to Bountiful" for the first time in many years. It is a Horton Foote play adapted for the screen and is quite good. An old woman desires to go back to her hometown in Bountiful, Texas after being cooped up in her son's apartment with him and his nagging wife for 20 years. All she wants to do is sink her hands in the dirt of her father's house and feel the soil that sustained them. It is good on all levels but one can see something of a Christian angle in the journey theme. We have an incessant desire to seek God and be where we belong but the incessant strife of our sinful flesh and world hinders and blocks us from ever arriving fully in this life.
The text in the three year lectionary series for this coming Sunday is the bread of life passage from John 6:51-59. Eating the flesh of Jesus and drinking his blood brings eternal life. One is struck by the normal-ness and the strangness of these words. Eating, drinking are everyday activities. Isn't it amazing how physical and tactile the sacrament really is and what the Bible really says. That we eat the very flesh and blood born of Mary. Yet in this eating we apprehend the very Son of God himself, who has made this flesh his own and offered it on the cross and gives it in the Supper. The Son of God, God from God, light from light, hid behind the veil of the Cherubim, is given to us under bread and wine.
Then I am reading some short stories by Philip K. Dick (PKD) and one has a scene where an extra terrestrial religion (Sci-Fi) involves not the worshippers eating their "god" , as PKD puts it, but salvation consists of their god eating the worshippers! The moment of union with the god is in being consumed so that one becomes a part of the god. One is brought into communion with the divine by being eaten by him. It is a gnostic image and one that smells of death. The earth eats us when we die, whether our ashes are scattered or our bodies buried, the earth consumes our bodies. It is not a far jump to the idea of the universe as "God" and we are in death merging into that "god", being eaten.
I am also reading a short story collection by Flannery O Connor who I have heard much about but have never read before. She is wonderful. One story has a small boy, neglected by his alcoholic parents, brought to a faith healer at a river bank in the rural south and the boy had never heard of Jesus before but the preacher spoke of baptism and the water and the water bringing the blood of Jesus and the kingdom and salvation and a new life just down in the river, just in the water. He is baptized but feels nothing. His alcoholic parents are passed out the next day so he wanders back to the river again looking for those wonderful things the preacher said were in the river. He tries to go down in the water but the river spits him back until finally he goes under, the current grabs him and … he drowns.
Hank Williams comes to mind, "I am going down in the river three times but, Lord, I'm only coming up twice."
So how does all of this connect? It probably doesn't save in this: the physicality of all of it. The role that material things play in each case: the dirt of Bountiful, flesh of Christ, the bread and wine, our own flesh and the rushing water. That boy went looking for salvation in the water, the old lady for the dirt of her home, Jesus became a real flesh and blood person, we really eat bread, the flesh of Jesus.
That when we talk of God, if we are serious that this God is indeed the one who created all things, we cannot help but talk of real things, creation, water, bodies, bread, dirt. That such things are spiritual, that they matter in our relationship to God.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Lutheran Worship and Emotions
In regard to my previous post about emotions , Dr. Ronald Feuerhan addresses much of the same territoy in an excellent fashion here.
Here are a couple of bits:
Emotions, obviously, are a part of us. The emotional self, along with the physical, intellectual and social, makeup what we are. The Scriptures speak of us as body and soul or body and spirit. All these are parts of what makes us the persons we are; all are therefore gifts of God's creation. But all are also under the curse of sin. They are all therefore flawed. When we use our minds, this can serve as a blessing; but sometimes that same intellect can be a will unto itself.
One occasion, early in his ministry, Dr. Billy Graham was accused of exciting the emotions in his crusades. "The emotions are certainly involved," he replied, "for I speak to people about God's love, and love is an emotional thing!" So when we hear the word of God's gospel in the divine service, we too respond with the emotion of love for him who so loved us. We are grateful for opportunities to use our intellect, our bodies, our whole being in his service. When we come to God's worship, we are there in our whole being. We respond to God's message intellectually and emotionally.
But the one thing certain here, the one thing she can always find, no matter how she feels or thinks, is that God is here with his gifts. That's God's promise, a promise given substance in the flesh and blood of Christ here for her. Her Lord is there for her not because of her mood, her understanding, not even her faith; Christ is there because of his will and word. She can come to the Supper feeling happy or sad, bright or blue, but that doesn't matter. God and his gift will be the same. She is assured that she is forgiven, no matter how she feels.
So it's not a question of whether or not our emotions are involved; it's not a matter of whether we "use" our emotions or not. Basically we don't approach God's service thinking about our emotions or our intellect or our bodies. We approach God's service, hearing his invitation and all his words, and receiving his gifts. The emotions and the intellect are involved, but in a way that we don't think about them; we come to the divine service confident and thankful that God is thinking about our feelings and about every thing else pertaining to the well-being of our lives. Then, when we are thankful for God's gracious concern and promised gifts, then the emotions are likely to be very much present in our worship, in our joyful response.
Here are a couple of bits:
Emotions, obviously, are a part of us. The emotional self, along with the physical, intellectual and social, makeup what we are. The Scriptures speak of us as body and soul or body and spirit. All these are parts of what makes us the persons we are; all are therefore gifts of God's creation. But all are also under the curse of sin. They are all therefore flawed. When we use our minds, this can serve as a blessing; but sometimes that same intellect can be a will unto itself.
One occasion, early in his ministry, Dr. Billy Graham was accused of exciting the emotions in his crusades. "The emotions are certainly involved," he replied, "for I speak to people about God's love, and love is an emotional thing!" So when we hear the word of God's gospel in the divine service, we too respond with the emotion of love for him who so loved us. We are grateful for opportunities to use our intellect, our bodies, our whole being in his service. When we come to God's worship, we are there in our whole being. We respond to God's message intellectually and emotionally.
But the one thing certain here, the one thing she can always find, no matter how she feels or thinks, is that God is here with his gifts. That's God's promise, a promise given substance in the flesh and blood of Christ here for her. Her Lord is there for her not because of her mood, her understanding, not even her faith; Christ is there because of his will and word. She can come to the Supper feeling happy or sad, bright or blue, but that doesn't matter. God and his gift will be the same. She is assured that she is forgiven, no matter how she feels.
So it's not a question of whether or not our emotions are involved; it's not a matter of whether we "use" our emotions or not. Basically we don't approach God's service thinking about our emotions or our intellect or our bodies. We approach God's service, hearing his invitation and all his words, and receiving his gifts. The emotions and the intellect are involved, but in a way that we don't think about them; we come to the divine service confident and thankful that God is thinking about our feelings and about every thing else pertaining to the well-being of our lives. Then, when we are thankful for God's gracious concern and promised gifts, then the emotions are likely to be very much present in our worship, in our joyful response.
Emotional Questions
Discussing emotions and Christianity is a tricky thing.
Many Christians criticize emotion in religion, especially excessive emotions and the appeal to emotions. The search for a specific feeling whether it be an ecstatic experience or the beatific visage displayed by the praise worshippers, waving their hands or just the quiet smile that is evidence that one is feeling the Spirit can be a substitute sacrament. Emotions can become the guarantee, the proof that God is at work.
Certainty is a powerful motivator and the need for it can push people to find God in the subjective feelings generated by music or manipulation or preaching or circumstance. Such emotions are eschewed (rightly) by liturgical, sacramental, "Scriptural" worship.
And yet ...
Do not emotions play a part in our experience of God? Are emotions themselves bad in the experience of a Christian relation to God?
I get a chill down my spine almost every time I sing "For all the Saints"? What am I to make of the chill? Do we almost involuntarily associate such feelings with the presence of God, with the work of His Spirit? Is the chill a God given reaction to the happy promise of eternal life and reunion with the saints who have gone before? Is it a gift from God given to inspire in me a healthy desire to continue fighting the battle of faith and to walk through this wilderness toward the goal of heaven?
Or is it just an involuntary reaction to manipulative music? A purely human response to the expectation of death, the naturalness of grief? Fatigue, hunger, a viral infection? What difference between that chill and the grin of the fool at the psychic's table who has just heard the voice of his father from beyond reasurring him that he is ok?
And what of all the other times when there is no emotion, the vast majority of instances when I feel nothing at the Lord's Supper, when it is everyday and routine?What of the deadness and the irritation, when the faces of the parishioners annoy me, when I am daydreamy and feel absent? Does this indicate a lack of God's work? What if I am not really, really "sorry" for my sins, save in a vague intellectual way? Is that real? Must I cry tears to show that I am indeed in a state of true repentance?
The Lutheran insistence on the objective character of the Gospel and faith's crazy solitary insistence on the promises of Christ in the face of all else is helpful in the midst of these questions, at least I find it to be so. Christ's promises in the Supper are real no matter what emotions. His forgiveness is blood bought and real and conveyed to me by his divine promise of absolution, no matter what my unfeeling reception of them. My tears do not establish the certainty of my status as a baptized child of God, only Christ's humble staus as sinner on my behalf and his presence in the water do that.
Many Christians criticize emotion in religion, especially excessive emotions and the appeal to emotions. The search for a specific feeling whether it be an ecstatic experience or the beatific visage displayed by the praise worshippers, waving their hands or just the quiet smile that is evidence that one is feeling the Spirit can be a substitute sacrament. Emotions can become the guarantee, the proof that God is at work.
Certainty is a powerful motivator and the need for it can push people to find God in the subjective feelings generated by music or manipulation or preaching or circumstance. Such emotions are eschewed (rightly) by liturgical, sacramental, "Scriptural" worship.
And yet ...
Do not emotions play a part in our experience of God? Are emotions themselves bad in the experience of a Christian relation to God?
I get a chill down my spine almost every time I sing "For all the Saints"? What am I to make of the chill? Do we almost involuntarily associate such feelings with the presence of God, with the work of His Spirit? Is the chill a God given reaction to the happy promise of eternal life and reunion with the saints who have gone before? Is it a gift from God given to inspire in me a healthy desire to continue fighting the battle of faith and to walk through this wilderness toward the goal of heaven?
Or is it just an involuntary reaction to manipulative music? A purely human response to the expectation of death, the naturalness of grief? Fatigue, hunger, a viral infection? What difference between that chill and the grin of the fool at the psychic's table who has just heard the voice of his father from beyond reasurring him that he is ok?
And what of all the other times when there is no emotion, the vast majority of instances when I feel nothing at the Lord's Supper, when it is everyday and routine?What of the deadness and the irritation, when the faces of the parishioners annoy me, when I am daydreamy and feel absent? Does this indicate a lack of God's work? What if I am not really, really "sorry" for my sins, save in a vague intellectual way? Is that real? Must I cry tears to show that I am indeed in a state of true repentance?
The Lutheran insistence on the objective character of the Gospel and faith's crazy solitary insistence on the promises of Christ in the face of all else is helpful in the midst of these questions, at least I find it to be so. Christ's promises in the Supper are real no matter what emotions. His forgiveness is blood bought and real and conveyed to me by his divine promise of absolution, no matter what my unfeeling reception of them. My tears do not establish the certainty of my status as a baptized child of God, only Christ's humble staus as sinner on my behalf and his presence in the water do that.
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
High Speed Internet
Getting high speed internet today. Woo hoo! Found out it is cheaper to bundle a bunch of stuff together than what we were paying for phone and dial up.
Crossing another technological boundary. My daughters and I have been counting the days.
Now if the durn cable companies would just let me buy my channels ala carte I might get more than the 13 channels I now get from them. Dont watch enough to spend 49 or 59 dollars or even 39. Another day.
Crossing another technological boundary. My daughters and I have been counting the days.
Now if the durn cable companies would just let me buy my channels ala carte I might get more than the 13 channels I now get from them. Dont watch enough to spend 49 or 59 dollars or even 39. Another day.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Running away from the pastoral office
I just stumbled across an article by Addison Hart in an old isssue of Touchstone magazine. The article deals with the Second Oration of Gregory Nazianzus, in which Gregory explicates his reasons for fleeing the office, after his ordination as priest by his father.
It is a well done article, setting forth reasons why it is perhaps a better response to flee from the holy ministry than to rush towards it, how Gregory showed forth a healthy understanding of the great responsilities, the awesome nature of the spiritual realities involved and the personal virtues needed.
Subscribe to the magazine here.It is well worth it.
Here are some short excerpts :
The author :
Let me say here that I tend to think, though I’m doubtful of convincing everyone who reads this, that in running away from the priesthood as he did, Gregory Nazianzen showed considerable good sense.
Gregory :
without being better than ordinary people (nay, it is a great thing if they be not worse), with unwashed hands, as the saying goes, and uninitiated souls, intrude into the most sacred offices; and, before becoming worthy to approach the temples, they lay claim to the sanctuary, and they push and thrust around the holy table, as if they thought this order [i.e., the pastoral office] to be a means to livelihood, instead of a pattern of virtue, or an absolute authority, instead of a ministry of which we must give account.
The author:
We live in an age when too many are ordained who apparently fear neither presumption before God nor disobedience to God. This is an indictment. The historical, cultural, social, and religious causes of this fact I leave to others to analyze, but I note the fact itself. We find many who have confused their pastoral office with vocations to be therapists, social activists, entertainers, CEOs, masters-of-ceremony, dispensers of warm fuzzies, “professional clergymen,” etc. Rarely do we find the priest or pastor who has had what should be the basic, formative, existential experience of finding himself apprehensively before the living God and questioning his will, standing between the two terrible abysses of presumption and disobedience. Indeed, some have fallen headlong into one or the other abyss, and seem not to realize it. The conclusion that must be drawn is that something vital to understanding the character of the pastoral office—not to say the character of God—has largely been lost.
It is a well done article, setting forth reasons why it is perhaps a better response to flee from the holy ministry than to rush towards it, how Gregory showed forth a healthy understanding of the great responsilities, the awesome nature of the spiritual realities involved and the personal virtues needed.
Subscribe to the magazine here.It is well worth it.
Here are some short excerpts :
The author :
Let me say here that I tend to think, though I’m doubtful of convincing everyone who reads this, that in running away from the priesthood as he did, Gregory Nazianzen showed considerable good sense.
Gregory :
without being better than ordinary people (nay, it is a great thing if they be not worse), with unwashed hands, as the saying goes, and uninitiated souls, intrude into the most sacred offices; and, before becoming worthy to approach the temples, they lay claim to the sanctuary, and they push and thrust around the holy table, as if they thought this order [i.e., the pastoral office] to be a means to livelihood, instead of a pattern of virtue, or an absolute authority, instead of a ministry of which we must give account.
The author:
We live in an age when too many are ordained who apparently fear neither presumption before God nor disobedience to God. This is an indictment. The historical, cultural, social, and religious causes of this fact I leave to others to analyze, but I note the fact itself. We find many who have confused their pastoral office with vocations to be therapists, social activists, entertainers, CEOs, masters-of-ceremony, dispensers of warm fuzzies, “professional clergymen,” etc. Rarely do we find the priest or pastor who has had what should be the basic, formative, existential experience of finding himself apprehensively before the living God and questioning his will, standing between the two terrible abysses of presumption and disobedience. Indeed, some have fallen headlong into one or the other abyss, and seem not to realize it. The conclusion that must be drawn is that something vital to understanding the character of the pastoral office—not to say the character of God—has largely been lost.
A Call to an Ancient Evangelical Future
This is an interesting document from the evangelical community. Certainly, one finds alot in it to commend : the call to take seriously the Scripture narrative as formative of the life of the church, to turn away from overly contemporary pastoral approaches and from individualism, to turn to more ancient credal and liturgical ways of thinking and living.
Yet one wonders how exactly the writers envisage this kind of transformation occuring. Apart from a community that can regulate its "borders" of belief, that can call its members to a sharply defined set of beliefs and practices that can attract and call forth allegiance in the face of overwhelming cultural inpulses, this kind of call will remain a ripple in the face of forces too large for it.
One must applaud the impulse away from shallow Amrican religosity but as Lutherans one wonders, "Where have you been for so long?" The Confessions and liturgies of the Lutheran Church offer just such a rootedness in the church Catholic along with a fidelity to the Scripture narrative of a people completely helpless save the gracious God who is present among them in preaching and sacrament.
Of course, we Lutherans live in a very glass house these days. The same cultural forces distorting other communions are ravaging our own. Yet the Scriptural, confessional, liturgical and creedal roots from which this battered once grand Lutheran tree sprang are still vital, still life giving. And so still we hope.
Yet one wonders how exactly the writers envisage this kind of transformation occuring. Apart from a community that can regulate its "borders" of belief, that can call its members to a sharply defined set of beliefs and practices that can attract and call forth allegiance in the face of overwhelming cultural inpulses, this kind of call will remain a ripple in the face of forces too large for it.
One must applaud the impulse away from shallow Amrican religosity but as Lutherans one wonders, "Where have you been for so long?" The Confessions and liturgies of the Lutheran Church offer just such a rootedness in the church Catholic along with a fidelity to the Scripture narrative of a people completely helpless save the gracious God who is present among them in preaching and sacrament.
Of course, we Lutherans live in a very glass house these days. The same cultural forces distorting other communions are ravaging our own. Yet the Scriptural, confessional, liturgical and creedal roots from which this battered once grand Lutheran tree sprang are still vital, still life giving. And so still we hope.
Sunday, August 27, 2006
Philip. K. Dick
Any fans of the science fiction writer Philip K. Dick out there? I have just started reading a book of his short stories and find him very interesting.
I am interested in any opinions, positive or negative.
I am interested in any opinions, positive or negative.
Friday, August 25, 2006
The Seventh Ecumencial Council
The Patristic Anglican has a nice post on the importance of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. He makes a point I was trying to make some months back that, to put it very simply, the Renaissance was bad for sacred art.
Here is a bit:
The second point of the Council was, unfortunately, forgotten in the West after the Schism and advent of the Renaissance. That point is that a true, sacred image of Christ must show not only his flesh (a reasonably realistic representation his humanity) but also his divinity.
The first of these rules (the materialistic, realistic rule) was easy enough to follow, but the Church had to develop a special stylized, sacred artistic vocabulary to express the second, spiritual and immaterial rule that required representation of the divinity of Christ. One of the aspects of the Church's solution to this second rule is immediately recognizable in authentic sacred art: the image is two-dimensional and without scientific perspective of fully realistic art.
Of course, the rules governing iconography are much more complicated than that--but these two major canons prevent to creation of inauthentic images or idols. Indeed, once religious art gains the hyper-realism, with scientific perspective and other "advanced" technique of realism that were ascendant in the Renaissance, Christ is portrayed as merely a man; and often a tortured, suffering, agonized man (hardly the Son of God at all!)--such art is religious in subject but it is not authentic sacred inconography under the Seventh Council.
Hence, to smash a kitschy, saccharine statute of a Nordic Mary wearing a veil is not iconoclasm--its good taste.
Here is a bit:
The second point of the Council was, unfortunately, forgotten in the West after the Schism and advent of the Renaissance. That point is that a true, sacred image of Christ must show not only his flesh (a reasonably realistic representation his humanity) but also his divinity.
The first of these rules (the materialistic, realistic rule) was easy enough to follow, but the Church had to develop a special stylized, sacred artistic vocabulary to express the second, spiritual and immaterial rule that required representation of the divinity of Christ. One of the aspects of the Church's solution to this second rule is immediately recognizable in authentic sacred art: the image is two-dimensional and without scientific perspective of fully realistic art.
Of course, the rules governing iconography are much more complicated than that--but these two major canons prevent to creation of inauthentic images or idols. Indeed, once religious art gains the hyper-realism, with scientific perspective and other "advanced" technique of realism that were ascendant in the Renaissance, Christ is portrayed as merely a man; and often a tortured, suffering, agonized man (hardly the Son of God at all!)--such art is religious in subject but it is not authentic sacred inconography under the Seventh Council.
Hence, to smash a kitschy, saccharine statute of a Nordic Mary wearing a veil is not iconoclasm--its good taste.
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Become as nothing
All that human ingenuity can devise, be it as holy and as luminous as it may, must tumble to the ground if man be saved in God’s way-in a way different from that which man himself plans. Man may forever do as he will, he can never enter heaven unless God takes the first step with his Word, which offers him divine grace and enlightens his heart so as to get upon the right way.
This right way, however, is the Lord Jesus Christ. Whoever desires to seek another way, as the great multitudes venture to do by means of their own works, has already missed the right way; for Paul says to the Galatians: "If righteousness is through the Law," that is, through the works of the Law, "then Christ died for naught." Gal 2, 21.
Therefore I say man must fall upon this Gospel and be broken to pieces and in deep consciousness lie prostrate, like a man that is powerless, unable to move hand or foot. He must only lie motionless and cry: Almighty God, merciful Father, now help meI cannot help myself. Christ my Lord, do help now for with only my own effort all is lost!
Thus, in the light of this cornerstone, which is Christ, everyone becomes as nothing; as Christ says of himself in Luke 20, 17-18, when he asks the Pharisees and scribes: "What then is this that is written. The stone which the builders rejected, the same was made the head of the corner? Every one that falleth on that stone shall be broken to pieces; but on whomsoever it shall fall it will scatter him as dust." Ps 18, 22.
Therefore, we must either fall upon this stone, Christ, in all our inability and helplessness, rejecting our own merits, and be broken to pieces, or he will forever crush us by his severe sentence and judgment. It is better that we fall upon him than that he should fall upon us.
Luther, Church Postil, Pentecost Wednesday, Complete Sermons of M. Luther, Lenker, vol. 2, p. 396.
This right way, however, is the Lord Jesus Christ. Whoever desires to seek another way, as the great multitudes venture to do by means of their own works, has already missed the right way; for Paul says to the Galatians: "If righteousness is through the Law," that is, through the works of the Law, "then Christ died for naught." Gal 2, 21.
Therefore I say man must fall upon this Gospel and be broken to pieces and in deep consciousness lie prostrate, like a man that is powerless, unable to move hand or foot. He must only lie motionless and cry: Almighty God, merciful Father, now help meI cannot help myself. Christ my Lord, do help now for with only my own effort all is lost!
Thus, in the light of this cornerstone, which is Christ, everyone becomes as nothing; as Christ says of himself in Luke 20, 17-18, when he asks the Pharisees and scribes: "What then is this that is written. The stone which the builders rejected, the same was made the head of the corner? Every one that falleth on that stone shall be broken to pieces; but on whomsoever it shall fall it will scatter him as dust." Ps 18, 22.
Therefore, we must either fall upon this stone, Christ, in all our inability and helplessness, rejecting our own merits, and be broken to pieces, or he will forever crush us by his severe sentence and judgment. It is better that we fall upon him than that he should fall upon us.
Luther, Church Postil, Pentecost Wednesday, Complete Sermons of M. Luther, Lenker, vol. 2, p. 396.
Religon's decline?
Get Religion has a good piece on mistaken assumptions about the inevitable decline of religion. Martin Marty is quoted:
Truth is, most Western leaders have long believed that religion would inevitably fade, he said. Thus, the West has been dominated by two big ideas.
“One idea was that every time you looked out your window, there was going to be less religion around than there was before,” said Marty. . . . “The other idea was that whatever leftover religion you find, it was going to be tolerant, concessive, mushy and so on. Instead, there has been an increase in religion and the prospering religions are all extremely intense. The versions of Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism that are prospering tend to be among people who care very much about what their faith is about.”
Countless despots have learned that faith cannot be killed with force. This is especially true outside what Marty called the “spiritual ice belt” that extends across Western Europe and North America. . . .
In the mid-1990s, Marty directed a massive project to study the “militant religious fundamentalisms” on the rise worldwide. It concluded that the leaders of many such groups would resort to military action, when they failed to achieve victory through constitutional means. And if military might was not enough, Marty noted that the study warned that “they may very well take no prisoners, allow no compromises, have no borders and they might resort to terrorism.”
Go, read the whole thing.
Truth is, most Western leaders have long believed that religion would inevitably fade, he said. Thus, the West has been dominated by two big ideas.
“One idea was that every time you looked out your window, there was going to be less religion around than there was before,” said Marty. . . . “The other idea was that whatever leftover religion you find, it was going to be tolerant, concessive, mushy and so on. Instead, there has been an increase in religion and the prospering religions are all extremely intense. The versions of Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism that are prospering tend to be among people who care very much about what their faith is about.”
Countless despots have learned that faith cannot be killed with force. This is especially true outside what Marty called the “spiritual ice belt” that extends across Western Europe and North America. . . .
In the mid-1990s, Marty directed a massive project to study the “militant religious fundamentalisms” on the rise worldwide. It concluded that the leaders of many such groups would resort to military action, when they failed to achieve victory through constitutional means. And if military might was not enough, Marty noted that the study warned that “they may very well take no prisoners, allow no compromises, have no borders and they might resort to terrorism.”
Go, read the whole thing.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
The perfect pastor
Every now and again there are spoofs like this one that makes the rounds about a church searching for the perfect pastor.
He preaches exactly ten minutes and then sits down. He condemns sin, but never steps on anybody's toes. He works from 8 in the morning to 10 at night, doing everything from preaching sermons to sweeping. He makes $60 per week, gives $30 a week to the church, drives a late model car, buys lots of books, wears fine clothes, and has a nice family. He always stands ready to contribute to every other good cause, too, and to help panhandlers who drop by the church on their way to somewhere. He is 36 years old, and has been preaching 40 years. He is tall on the short side, heavyset in a thin sort of way, and handsome. He has eyes of blue or brown (to fit the occasion), and wears his hair parted in the middle, left side dark and straight, right side brown and wavy. He has a burning desire to work with the youth, and spends all his time with the senior citizens. He smiles all the time while keeping a straight face, because he has a keen sense of humor that finds him seriously dedicated. He makes fifteen calls a day on church members, spends all his time evangelizing non-members, and is always found in his study if he is needed.
Isn't there a grain of a good thing in congregational expectations like these?
I mean, a congregation really is looking for the perfect pastor every time it calls. The congregation is looking for Jesus. The congregation knows instinctively, subconsciously, if you will, that the real pastor is Jesus. The exorbitant demands on time, the wild expectations, the unfair drain on resources … all of it shows that a congregation is in search of that One, that pastor who will give every ounce of himself, who will bleed, suffer all for his people. Christian folk want the ultimate shepherd.
So we pastors live in this tension from the first, by definition … of being a continual disappointment Even at our best we are not Jesus. So the church has always insisted it is not the person but the office, that Christ works through imperfect men on account of his promise in the office of the Ministry, in the Word and sacraments.
Congregations really do get the perfect pastor when the pastor preaches the gospel, forgives, gives the sacrament. They get Jesus. One job of the pastor is to not by his life or conduct or teaching wreck that and shatter the image of Jesus in the office by his own sins.
He preaches exactly ten minutes and then sits down. He condemns sin, but never steps on anybody's toes. He works from 8 in the morning to 10 at night, doing everything from preaching sermons to sweeping. He makes $60 per week, gives $30 a week to the church, drives a late model car, buys lots of books, wears fine clothes, and has a nice family. He always stands ready to contribute to every other good cause, too, and to help panhandlers who drop by the church on their way to somewhere. He is 36 years old, and has been preaching 40 years. He is tall on the short side, heavyset in a thin sort of way, and handsome. He has eyes of blue or brown (to fit the occasion), and wears his hair parted in the middle, left side dark and straight, right side brown and wavy. He has a burning desire to work with the youth, and spends all his time with the senior citizens. He smiles all the time while keeping a straight face, because he has a keen sense of humor that finds him seriously dedicated. He makes fifteen calls a day on church members, spends all his time evangelizing non-members, and is always found in his study if he is needed.
Isn't there a grain of a good thing in congregational expectations like these?
I mean, a congregation really is looking for the perfect pastor every time it calls. The congregation is looking for Jesus. The congregation knows instinctively, subconsciously, if you will, that the real pastor is Jesus. The exorbitant demands on time, the wild expectations, the unfair drain on resources … all of it shows that a congregation is in search of that One, that pastor who will give every ounce of himself, who will bleed, suffer all for his people. Christian folk want the ultimate shepherd.
So we pastors live in this tension from the first, by definition … of being a continual disappointment Even at our best we are not Jesus. So the church has always insisted it is not the person but the office, that Christ works through imperfect men on account of his promise in the office of the Ministry, in the Word and sacraments.
Congregations really do get the perfect pastor when the pastor preaches the gospel, forgives, gives the sacrament. They get Jesus. One job of the pastor is to not by his life or conduct or teaching wreck that and shatter the image of Jesus in the office by his own sins.
Wilt thou deem Him little on this account?
In this passage, Gregory of Nazianzus maintains that the passages about Christ which refer to his weakness, changeableness, etc are referred to his humanity and salvific work, to the Incarnation not to the Trinity. This is an anti Arian passage where one can see the great soteriological turn the Arian debates hinged on. What the Arians took for proof that the Son was a creature, the Nicenes took as proof of his mercy and redemption of humanity.
To this what have those cavillers (Arians) to say, those bitter reasoners about Godhead, those detractors of all that is praiseworthy, those darkeners of light, uncultured in respect of wisdom, for whom Christ died in vain, those unthankful creatures, the work of the Evil One?
Do you turn this benefit into a reproach to God? Wilt thou deem Him little on this account, that He humbled Himself for thee; because the Good Shepherd, He who lays down His life for His sheep, came to seek for that which had strayed upon the mountains and the hills, on which thou wast then sacrificing, and found the wanderer; and having found it,took it upon His shoulders--on which He also took the Wood of the Cross; and having taken it, brought it back to the higher life; and having carried it back, numbered it amongst those who had never strayed.
Because He lighted a candle--His own Flesh--and swept the house, cleansing the world from sin; and sought the piece of money, the Royal Image that was covered up by passions. And He calls together His Angel friends on the finding of the coin, and makes them sharers in His joy, whom He had made to share also the secret of the Incarnation? Because on the candle of the Forerunner there follows the light that exceeds in brightness; and to the Voice the Word succeeds; and to the Bridegroom's friend the Bridegroom; to him that prepared for the Lord a peculiar people, cleansing them by water in preparation for the Spirit?
Dost thou reproach God with all this? Dost thou on this account deem Him lessened, because He girds Himself with a towel and washes His disciples' feet, and shows that humiliation is the best road to exaltation? Because for the soul that was bent to the ground He humbles Himself, that He may raise up with Himself the soul that was tottering to a fall under a weight of sin? Why dost thou not also charge upon Him as a crime the fact that He eats with Publicans and at Publicans' tables, and that He makes disciples of Publicans, that He too may gain somewhat ... and what? ... the salvation of sinners. If so, we must blame the physician for stooping over sufferings, and enduring evil odours that he may give health to the sick; or one who as the Law commands bent down into a ditch to save a beast that had fallen into it.
On the Theophany, Chapter 13.
To this what have those cavillers (Arians) to say, those bitter reasoners about Godhead, those detractors of all that is praiseworthy, those darkeners of light, uncultured in respect of wisdom, for whom Christ died in vain, those unthankful creatures, the work of the Evil One?
Do you turn this benefit into a reproach to God? Wilt thou deem Him little on this account, that He humbled Himself for thee; because the Good Shepherd, He who lays down His life for His sheep, came to seek for that which had strayed upon the mountains and the hills, on which thou wast then sacrificing, and found the wanderer; and having found it,took it upon His shoulders--on which He also took the Wood of the Cross; and having taken it, brought it back to the higher life; and having carried it back, numbered it amongst those who had never strayed.
Because He lighted a candle--His own Flesh--and swept the house, cleansing the world from sin; and sought the piece of money, the Royal Image that was covered up by passions. And He calls together His Angel friends on the finding of the coin, and makes them sharers in His joy, whom He had made to share also the secret of the Incarnation? Because on the candle of the Forerunner there follows the light that exceeds in brightness; and to the Voice the Word succeeds; and to the Bridegroom's friend the Bridegroom; to him that prepared for the Lord a peculiar people, cleansing them by water in preparation for the Spirit?
Dost thou reproach God with all this? Dost thou on this account deem Him lessened, because He girds Himself with a towel and washes His disciples' feet, and shows that humiliation is the best road to exaltation? Because for the soul that was bent to the ground He humbles Himself, that He may raise up with Himself the soul that was tottering to a fall under a weight of sin? Why dost thou not also charge upon Him as a crime the fact that He eats with Publicans and at Publicans' tables, and that He makes disciples of Publicans, that He too may gain somewhat ... and what? ... the salvation of sinners. If so, we must blame the physician for stooping over sufferings, and enduring evil odours that he may give health to the sick; or one who as the Law commands bent down into a ditch to save a beast that had fallen into it.
On the Theophany, Chapter 13.
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
World Mapper
World mapper is a cool site full of maps that distort according to statistical categories such as welath income tourist income, and all sorts of things as well as historical variables.
HT: Confessing Evangelical
HT: Confessing Evangelical
Monday, August 21, 2006
Devotion and Dissent: The Practice of Christianity in Roman Africa
This is a cool site on the early churhc in Africa. Scholarly papers in the areas of
Burial Practices and Care for the Dead
Baptism and Initiation Rituals
Cult of the Saints
Eucharist and other Ritual Meals
Penance
Church Leadership: Roles and Requirements
Books and Reading
Marriage and Family (AAR 2000)
Pious Practices
Prayer
Good stuff, too.
Burial Practices and Care for the Dead
Baptism and Initiation Rituals
Cult of the Saints
Eucharist and other Ritual Meals
Penance
Church Leadership: Roles and Requirements
Books and Reading
Marriage and Family (AAR 2000)
Pious Practices
Prayer
Good stuff, too.
Sunday, August 20, 2006
The Pilgrim’s Progress of Bob Dylan
The NY Times on Dylan's new album and his relationship to God.
Saw him in Winston Salem last Friday night actually. His voice is completely gone. But his band was great and the arrangements of his songs were very good and interesting. All three opening acts were good. (Alana James and the Continental Two, Junior Brown and Jimmie Vaughn). All from Texas as well.
Now the crowd we were mixed up in was another story ... can you say over 60 year old dope smoking morons?
Interesting mix of ages in the crowd. The younger kids were well behaved interested in the music. The gray hairs? Sheesh.
Saw him in Winston Salem last Friday night actually. His voice is completely gone. But his band was great and the arrangements of his songs were very good and interesting. All three opening acts were good. (Alana James and the Continental Two, Junior Brown and Jimmie Vaughn). All from Texas as well.
Now the crowd we were mixed up in was another story ... can you say over 60 year old dope smoking morons?
Interesting mix of ages in the crowd. The younger kids were well behaved interested in the music. The gray hairs? Sheesh.
500 free religion journals online
With a hat tip to alastair adversraia, here are 500 free religion journals online.
Interesting stuff ... everything from Asian folklore studies to the Wesleyan Theological Journal.
You can now waste _all_ your time. You will never have to do anymore meaningful work!
Interesting stuff ... everything from Asian folklore studies to the Wesleyan Theological Journal.
You can now waste _all_ your time. You will never have to do anymore meaningful work!
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Illustrious combatants in the conflict of God
I have written this before but there is something strangely compelling about the stories of the martyrs.
The concept of combat as passive endurance of suffering, of overcoming your enemies by holding to the truth and not by fighting back with physical blows but by faith, of confessing, and the way in which the early church celebrated and revered the gory deaths of the martyrs, the upside down cross centeredness of it all ... I cannot really articulate it now but read this and perhaps you will know what I mean.
HISTORY OF THE MARTYRS IN PALESTINE, BY EUSEBIUS, BISHOP OF CAESAREA
Alphaeus, also, a most amiable man, endured afflictions and sufferings similar to these. His family was of the most illustrious of the city Eleutheropolis, and in the church of Caesarea he had been honoured with the dignity of Reader and Exorcist. But before he became a confessor he had been a preacher and teacher of the word of God; and had great confidence towards all men, and this of itself was a good reason for his being brought to his confession of the truth.
And because he saw that there was fallen upon all men at that time laxity and great fear, and many were swept along as it were before the force of many waters, and carried away to the foul worship of idols, he deliberated how he might withstand the violence of the evil by his own valour, and by his own courageous words repress the terrible storm. Of his own accord, therefore, he threw himself into the midst of the crowd of the oppressors, and with words of denunciation reproached those, who through their timidity had been dragged into error; and held them back from the worship of idols, by reminding them of the words which had been spoken by our Saviour, respecting confession.
And when Alphaeus, full of courage and bravery, had done these things openly with boldness, the officers seized him, and took him at once before the judge. But this is not the time for us to relate what words he uttered with all freedom of speech, nor what answers he gave in words of godly religion, like a man filled with the Spirit of God. In consequence of these things he was sent to prison. And after some days he was brought again before the judge, and his body was torn all over by severe scourgings without mercy, but the fortitude of his mind still continued erect before the judge, and by his words he withstood all error. Then he was tortured on his sides with the cruel combs, and, at last, having wearied out the judge himself, and those who were ministering to the judge's will, he was again committed to prison, together with another fellow-combatant, and stretched out a whole day and night upon the wooden rack.
After three days they were both of them brought together before the judge, and he commanded them to offer sacrifice to the emperors: but they confessed, and said, We acknowledge one God only, the supreme sovereign of all; and when they had uttered these words in the presence of all the people they were numbered among the company of Holy Martyrs, and were crowned as glorious and illustrious combatants in the conflict of God, for whose sake also their heads were cut off. And better than all the course of their lives did they love their departure, to be with Him in whom they made their confession. But the day that they suffered martyrdom was the seventh of Teshri the latter, on which day the confession of those of whom we have been speaking was consummated.
The concept of combat as passive endurance of suffering, of overcoming your enemies by holding to the truth and not by fighting back with physical blows but by faith, of confessing, and the way in which the early church celebrated and revered the gory deaths of the martyrs, the upside down cross centeredness of it all ... I cannot really articulate it now but read this and perhaps you will know what I mean.
HISTORY OF THE MARTYRS IN PALESTINE, BY EUSEBIUS, BISHOP OF CAESAREA
Alphaeus, also, a most amiable man, endured afflictions and sufferings similar to these. His family was of the most illustrious of the city Eleutheropolis, and in the church of Caesarea he had been honoured with the dignity of Reader and Exorcist. But before he became a confessor he had been a preacher and teacher of the word of God; and had great confidence towards all men, and this of itself was a good reason for his being brought to his confession of the truth.
And because he saw that there was fallen upon all men at that time laxity and great fear, and many were swept along as it were before the force of many waters, and carried away to the foul worship of idols, he deliberated how he might withstand the violence of the evil by his own valour, and by his own courageous words repress the terrible storm. Of his own accord, therefore, he threw himself into the midst of the crowd of the oppressors, and with words of denunciation reproached those, who through their timidity had been dragged into error; and held them back from the worship of idols, by reminding them of the words which had been spoken by our Saviour, respecting confession.
And when Alphaeus, full of courage and bravery, had done these things openly with boldness, the officers seized him, and took him at once before the judge. But this is not the time for us to relate what words he uttered with all freedom of speech, nor what answers he gave in words of godly religion, like a man filled with the Spirit of God. In consequence of these things he was sent to prison. And after some days he was brought again before the judge, and his body was torn all over by severe scourgings without mercy, but the fortitude of his mind still continued erect before the judge, and by his words he withstood all error. Then he was tortured on his sides with the cruel combs, and, at last, having wearied out the judge himself, and those who were ministering to the judge's will, he was again committed to prison, together with another fellow-combatant, and stretched out a whole day and night upon the wooden rack.
After three days they were both of them brought together before the judge, and he commanded them to offer sacrifice to the emperors: but they confessed, and said, We acknowledge one God only, the supreme sovereign of all; and when they had uttered these words in the presence of all the people they were numbered among the company of Holy Martyrs, and were crowned as glorious and illustrious combatants in the conflict of God, for whose sake also their heads were cut off. And better than all the course of their lives did they love their departure, to be with Him in whom they made their confession. But the day that they suffered martyrdom was the seventh of Teshri the latter, on which day the confession of those of whom we have been speaking was consummated.
Friday, August 18, 2006
Sanctification and Christ
From Dr. David P. Scaer on sanctification :
Traditional Roman Catholicism shares with Lutheranism a monergistic view of the general plan of salvation. God alone sent His Son into the flesh (incarnation) and sacrificed Him for the world's sin (atonement); however, the certainty of individual salvation is made dependent on the level of believers' personal holiness.
Sanctification requires cooperating with divine grace in doing good works. At the center of this system is a doctrine of sanctification which holds that man cooperates with God for the certainty of salvation. There is no place for the total justification of sinful humanity as God's completed activity in Christ. Man cooperates with God in becoming holy and so sanctification is defined in ethical terms, which can be measured.
A majority of other Protestant denominations agree with Luther's monergistic doctrine of justification, but like Roman Catholics they see sanctification, the working of the Holy Spirit in Christian lives, in synergistic terms ... Believers are required to play a part in developing their personal holiness by living lives disciplined by the Law and by special ethical regulations set down by the church. Christians can and must cooperate with God's grace to increase the level of personal sanctification ... As a rule most Protestants agree with Luther that God alone justifies sinners and initiates the work of sanctification, but many differ in holding that believers are responsible for completing it. They oppose the Roman Catholic view that pilgrimages, novenas, penance and masses as good works; however, they agree with Catholicism that man cooperates with God in his sanctification to attain personal holiness.
Scaer then explains his view of sanctification :
Sanctification means that the Spirit permeates everything the Christian thinks, says and does. The Christian's personal holiness is as much a monergistic activity of the Holy Spirit as is his justification and conversion. The Spirit who alone creates faith is no less active after conversion than He was before.
... The works of sanctification are, strictly speaking, only those which Christians can do. They find their source, content and form in Christ's offering of Himself for others and are given to Christians by the Spirit who proceeds from the Father and the Son and who is sent into the world by the Son. Sanctification is a Trinitarian act.
... Jesus, in requiring that we love God with our whole being and our neighbors more than ourselves, was not giving us an impossible goal to awaken in us a morbid sense of sinfulness. Nor was He speaking in exaggerated terms to make a point, but He was describing His own life and the life of His Christians who live their lives and die in Him. Like Christ, Christians trust only in God and sacrifice themselves for others. Sanctification not only defines the Christian life, but in the first and real sense it defines Christ's life.
Jesus Himself loved God with everything which He was and had and made us His neighbors by loving us more than He loved His own life. Sanctification is first christological, that is, it is Christ's own life in God and then our life in Him. His life did not follow a system of codes, a pattern of regulations or list of moral demands and constraints and restraints.
Just as Christ's life had to do with self-giving, our sanctification has to do with presenting our bodies as living sacrifices. Our sanctification finds its closest point of contact in the earthly life of Jesus who gave Himself for us. Christ's giving of Himself is in turn an extension of Father's giving of His Son, "God so loved the world that He gave His only Son." The sending of the Son as a sacrifice reflects the Father's eternal giving of Himself in begetting the Son, "begotten of His Father before all worlds." So the Christian doctrine of sanctification draws its substance from atonement, incarnation and even the mystery of the Holy Trinity itself. This self-giving of God and of Christ take form in the lives of believers and saints, especially those who are persecuted for the sake of the Gospel and martyred.
Taken from the Issues Etc. archives
Traditional Roman Catholicism shares with Lutheranism a monergistic view of the general plan of salvation. God alone sent His Son into the flesh (incarnation) and sacrificed Him for the world's sin (atonement); however, the certainty of individual salvation is made dependent on the level of believers' personal holiness.
Sanctification requires cooperating with divine grace in doing good works. At the center of this system is a doctrine of sanctification which holds that man cooperates with God for the certainty of salvation. There is no place for the total justification of sinful humanity as God's completed activity in Christ. Man cooperates with God in becoming holy and so sanctification is defined in ethical terms, which can be measured.
A majority of other Protestant denominations agree with Luther's monergistic doctrine of justification, but like Roman Catholics they see sanctification, the working of the Holy Spirit in Christian lives, in synergistic terms ... Believers are required to play a part in developing their personal holiness by living lives disciplined by the Law and by special ethical regulations set down by the church. Christians can and must cooperate with God's grace to increase the level of personal sanctification ... As a rule most Protestants agree with Luther that God alone justifies sinners and initiates the work of sanctification, but many differ in holding that believers are responsible for completing it. They oppose the Roman Catholic view that pilgrimages, novenas, penance and masses as good works; however, they agree with Catholicism that man cooperates with God in his sanctification to attain personal holiness.
Scaer then explains his view of sanctification :
Sanctification means that the Spirit permeates everything the Christian thinks, says and does. The Christian's personal holiness is as much a monergistic activity of the Holy Spirit as is his justification and conversion. The Spirit who alone creates faith is no less active after conversion than He was before.
... The works of sanctification are, strictly speaking, only those which Christians can do. They find their source, content and form in Christ's offering of Himself for others and are given to Christians by the Spirit who proceeds from the Father and the Son and who is sent into the world by the Son. Sanctification is a Trinitarian act.
... Jesus, in requiring that we love God with our whole being and our neighbors more than ourselves, was not giving us an impossible goal to awaken in us a morbid sense of sinfulness. Nor was He speaking in exaggerated terms to make a point, but He was describing His own life and the life of His Christians who live their lives and die in Him. Like Christ, Christians trust only in God and sacrifice themselves for others. Sanctification not only defines the Christian life, but in the first and real sense it defines Christ's life.
Jesus Himself loved God with everything which He was and had and made us His neighbors by loving us more than He loved His own life. Sanctification is first christological, that is, it is Christ's own life in God and then our life in Him. His life did not follow a system of codes, a pattern of regulations or list of moral demands and constraints and restraints.
Just as Christ's life had to do with self-giving, our sanctification has to do with presenting our bodies as living sacrifices. Our sanctification finds its closest point of contact in the earthly life of Jesus who gave Himself for us. Christ's giving of Himself is in turn an extension of Father's giving of His Son, "God so loved the world that He gave His only Son." The sending of the Son as a sacrifice reflects the Father's eternal giving of Himself in begetting the Son, "begotten of His Father before all worlds." So the Christian doctrine of sanctification draws its substance from atonement, incarnation and even the mystery of the Holy Trinity itself. This self-giving of God and of Christ take form in the lives of believers and saints, especially those who are persecuted for the sake of the Gospel and martyred.
Taken from the Issues Etc. archives
Early Christian Resources
I again stumbled across this useful page of online resources on Early Christianity maintained by the North American Patristics Society.
Well done.
Well done.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Butter, lard, bacon, tar, grease
Sometimes reading Luther just makes me laugh. Quite apart from whatever point he is making. Like this great paragraph:
Moreover we poor heretics have committed a great new sin against the infernal
unchristian Church of the most infernal father the pope. In the chapter of Naumburg we have ordained and consecrated a bishop without chrism, as well as without butter, lard, bacon, tar, grease, incense, coals, and whatever makes it even holier, [we have done it] against their wishes, but not without their knowledge.
Quoted in Ralph Smith, Luther, Ministry, and Ordination, p. 158.
Ah, Martin, ever the gentle ecumenist!
Moreover we poor heretics have committed a great new sin against the infernal
unchristian Church of the most infernal father the pope. In the chapter of Naumburg we have ordained and consecrated a bishop without chrism, as well as without butter, lard, bacon, tar, grease, incense, coals, and whatever makes it even holier, [we have done it] against their wishes, but not without their knowledge.
Quoted in Ralph Smith, Luther, Ministry, and Ordination, p. 158.
Ah, Martin, ever the gentle ecumenist!
Springsteen again
I have been gone for a couple of days and while I was away there was a spate of comments about my Bruce Springsteen post.
The discussion illustrates a couple of things.
1. Lutherans listen to rock and roll. Hmmmm.
2. The dangers of over analyzing rock and roll. It doesn't stand up to it. Its not supposed to. I think it was Frank Zappa who said that writing about rock and roll is like dancing about archeticture (sp?). But I write about it occasionally. Thing is, I do not have a great singing voice, can't play an instrument and have the stage presence of a dead fish so besides singing along badly in the car, writing is all I can do.
Anyway Rosalita is simply a four minute balst of energy nothing more. An exhilarating ride down mainstreet going way too fast.
The only real way to analyze rock and roll and do it any justice is though a sort of via negativa. That is, rock and roll is worthless garbage, commercial crap destined to be forgotten, completely and totally a waste of time. All of that is true AND that is the glory of rock and roll. Its not supposed to be important. Try to make it say something and you lose it. Its three chords and a cloud of dust. That's all.
3. Also Petersen's remark about seeing abortion in the song is new to me. I think he is completely wrong but hey we're all post modernists here. The meaning resides in the hearing not the singing. We all make our meaning for ourselves.
So rock is dead. Long live rock.
The discussion illustrates a couple of things.
1. Lutherans listen to rock and roll. Hmmmm.
2. The dangers of over analyzing rock and roll. It doesn't stand up to it. Its not supposed to. I think it was Frank Zappa who said that writing about rock and roll is like dancing about archeticture (sp?). But I write about it occasionally. Thing is, I do not have a great singing voice, can't play an instrument and have the stage presence of a dead fish so besides singing along badly in the car, writing is all I can do.
Anyway Rosalita is simply a four minute balst of energy nothing more. An exhilarating ride down mainstreet going way too fast.
The only real way to analyze rock and roll and do it any justice is though a sort of via negativa. That is, rock and roll is worthless garbage, commercial crap destined to be forgotten, completely and totally a waste of time. All of that is true AND that is the glory of rock and roll. Its not supposed to be important. Try to make it say something and you lose it. Its three chords and a cloud of dust. That's all.
3. Also Petersen's remark about seeing abortion in the song is new to me. I think he is completely wrong but hey we're all post modernists here. The meaning resides in the hearing not the singing. We all make our meaning for ourselves.
So rock is dead. Long live rock.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Rosie, come out tonight
Often, I feel my advancing age. My wife says I overdo it, that I am not that old (42)and she is probably right but yet ...
Things happen.
Like hearing the song "Rosalita" by Bruce Springsteen. One of my favorite songs, a great energetic thing that Bruce and the band played to perfection in the live shows. The bootlegs are often better than the album version.
When one listens to a song there is usually a process of identification. One identifies with something or someone in the song. One imagines oneself as the singer or the one being sung to or a character in the song. Especially in Springsteen where the narrators are usually very vivid and the characters distinct.
So here are some of the lyrics to "Rosalita":
Spread out now Rosie, doctor come cut loose her mama's reins
You know playin' blindman's bluff is a little baby's game
You pick up Little Dynamite, I'm gonna pick up Little Gun
And together we're gonna go out tonight and make that highway run
Papa's on the corner waitin' for the bus
Mama she's home in the window waitin' up for us
She'll be there in that chair when they rustle her upstairs
'Cause you know we ain't gonna come
I ain't here for business
I'm only here for fun
And Rosie you're the one
So, it is a song of liberation and freedom. A song that invites Rosie to follow the singer away from Mom and Dad out to make the highway run. A song of joyous youthful independence and fun.
But when I hear this song now, ah cruel fate, I no longer identify with the singer. I identify with the Dad! Can rock and roll be so cruel?
I have two high school age daughters, one of whom quite likes Bruce, and we are riding in the car listening to this song and I think,"What's this punk doing trying to come and take my daughter away from me?" You see, all is lost.
Here's more :
We're gonna play some pool, skip some school, act real cool
Stay out all night, it's gonna feel all right
So Rosie come out tonight, baby come out tonight
Windows are for cheaters, chimneys for the poor
Closets are for hangers, winners use the door
So use it Rosie, that's what it's there for
Now I know your mama she don't like me 'cause I play in a rock and roll band
And I know your daddy he don't dig me but he never did understand
Papa lowered the boom, he locked you in your room
I'm comin' to lend a hand
I'm comin' to liberate you, confiscate you, I want to be your man
Someday we'll look back on this and it will all seem funny
... So hold tight baby 'cause don't you know daddy's comin'
Skip school, stay out all night.. oh, no, I dont think so. Liberate you, confiscate you? Daddy's comin? I think Mr. Singer here is confused as to just exactly who the "dad" is, dont you think? I am Dad, not some scruffy 18 year old.
So, my fate is sealed. Rock and roll has turned on me. Bruce is my enemy, not my muse. Anybody got any Lawrence Welk records? I guess I'll just put on Bruce's latest(mostly lame ) record of folk songs and watch PBS and wonder when my girls are going call to say they are coming home.
Sigh.
Things happen.
Like hearing the song "Rosalita" by Bruce Springsteen. One of my favorite songs, a great energetic thing that Bruce and the band played to perfection in the live shows. The bootlegs are often better than the album version.
When one listens to a song there is usually a process of identification. One identifies with something or someone in the song. One imagines oneself as the singer or the one being sung to or a character in the song. Especially in Springsteen where the narrators are usually very vivid and the characters distinct.
So here are some of the lyrics to "Rosalita":
Spread out now Rosie, doctor come cut loose her mama's reins
You know playin' blindman's bluff is a little baby's game
You pick up Little Dynamite, I'm gonna pick up Little Gun
And together we're gonna go out tonight and make that highway run
Papa's on the corner waitin' for the bus
Mama she's home in the window waitin' up for us
She'll be there in that chair when they rustle her upstairs
'Cause you know we ain't gonna come
I ain't here for business
I'm only here for fun
And Rosie you're the one
So, it is a song of liberation and freedom. A song that invites Rosie to follow the singer away from Mom and Dad out to make the highway run. A song of joyous youthful independence and fun.
But when I hear this song now, ah cruel fate, I no longer identify with the singer. I identify with the Dad! Can rock and roll be so cruel?
I have two high school age daughters, one of whom quite likes Bruce, and we are riding in the car listening to this song and I think,"What's this punk doing trying to come and take my daughter away from me?" You see, all is lost.
Here's more :
We're gonna play some pool, skip some school, act real cool
Stay out all night, it's gonna feel all right
So Rosie come out tonight, baby come out tonight
Windows are for cheaters, chimneys for the poor
Closets are for hangers, winners use the door
So use it Rosie, that's what it's there for
Now I know your mama she don't like me 'cause I play in a rock and roll band
And I know your daddy he don't dig me but he never did understand
Papa lowered the boom, he locked you in your room
I'm comin' to lend a hand
I'm comin' to liberate you, confiscate you, I want to be your man
Someday we'll look back on this and it will all seem funny
... So hold tight baby 'cause don't you know daddy's comin'
Skip school, stay out all night.. oh, no, I dont think so. Liberate you, confiscate you? Daddy's comin? I think Mr. Singer here is confused as to just exactly who the "dad" is, dont you think? I am Dad, not some scruffy 18 year old.
So, my fate is sealed. Rock and roll has turned on me. Bruce is my enemy, not my muse. Anybody got any Lawrence Welk records? I guess I'll just put on Bruce's latest(mostly lame ) record of folk songs and watch PBS and wonder when my girls are going call to say they are coming home.
Sigh.
Friday, August 11, 2006
Loehe's Mission appeal
A bit of Wilhelm Loehe's mission appeal for North America. Loehe does not fall into the all too common trap of making missions solely a matter of reaching the lost. It is not a waste of time nor is it maintenance ministry to reach out to Christians who are struggling. The mission field is in every congregation, every individual, on church rolls or not.
Notice also his appeal is for pastors not for generic "outreach". Interesting.
Our brothers are suffering in the vastness of North America. We are standing by idly, unwilling to help. Meanwhile, the Pope's servants and the proponents of sects are all the more busy. Their love too seems holy, eagerly accepted by the ones in need. They return their love, with their children they join the Roman church, the sects. For those who thirst muddy, unclean and unhealthy waters are preferable to death by thirst.
Should we not help? Should we idly watch how our brothers-in-faith are being misled because of the lack of shepherds? Should we watch as the evangelical church in North America disappears? Woe to us if we do not help here as much as possible. We let thousands perish while we exert ourselves to win individuals? We pray the Lord to save the heathens and add them to His church, while we abandon congregations of our church? We forget those who are near and dear to us while we reach for those who are still serving idols. We should do the one and leave the other! Come on, brothers, let us help as much as we can.
Brothers, hear the summons, expressed by someone else, and heed it: "Thousands of families, your brothers-in-faith, maybe even your physical brothers and sisters, are hungering for the healthy sustenance of the Gospel. They beseech you with their pleading: Help us! Send us preachers who will strengthen us with the bread of life, who will edify us with God's word and teach our children the saving doctrine of Jesus. Please help us, else we are lost! Why are you not helping? Is this how you express the love of Christ? Is this how you keep His commandment? Remember the words: Whatever thou doest to the least of my brothers, thou doest unto me.'
It is certainly true that many of our German brothers in the western states of North America are calling for help. In many localities they are facing additional danger, for in no other country are there so many religious sects as in North America. Some of them have already directed their attention and efforts towards the settlements of our German brothers. Alien workers want to bring in the harvest, while the Lord is calling for His own. Should our brothers not worship in the spiritual inheritance of their fathers, instead of lingering in the institutions of the sects? I am begging you, for Christ's sake, lend a helping hand, quickly pull together. Don't parley too much! Quickly, quickly! Immortal souls and their rescue are at stake here.
Found it here.
Notice also his appeal is for pastors not for generic "outreach". Interesting.
Our brothers are suffering in the vastness of North America. We are standing by idly, unwilling to help. Meanwhile, the Pope's servants and the proponents of sects are all the more busy. Their love too seems holy, eagerly accepted by the ones in need. They return their love, with their children they join the Roman church, the sects. For those who thirst muddy, unclean and unhealthy waters are preferable to death by thirst.
Should we not help? Should we idly watch how our brothers-in-faith are being misled because of the lack of shepherds? Should we watch as the evangelical church in North America disappears? Woe to us if we do not help here as much as possible. We let thousands perish while we exert ourselves to win individuals? We pray the Lord to save the heathens and add them to His church, while we abandon congregations of our church? We forget those who are near and dear to us while we reach for those who are still serving idols. We should do the one and leave the other! Come on, brothers, let us help as much as we can.
Brothers, hear the summons, expressed by someone else, and heed it: "Thousands of families, your brothers-in-faith, maybe even your physical brothers and sisters, are hungering for the healthy sustenance of the Gospel. They beseech you with their pleading: Help us! Send us preachers who will strengthen us with the bread of life, who will edify us with God's word and teach our children the saving doctrine of Jesus. Please help us, else we are lost! Why are you not helping? Is this how you express the love of Christ? Is this how you keep His commandment? Remember the words: Whatever thou doest to the least of my brothers, thou doest unto me.'
It is certainly true that many of our German brothers in the western states of North America are calling for help. In many localities they are facing additional danger, for in no other country are there so many religious sects as in North America. Some of them have already directed their attention and efforts towards the settlements of our German brothers. Alien workers want to bring in the harvest, while the Lord is calling for His own. Should our brothers not worship in the spiritual inheritance of their fathers, instead of lingering in the institutions of the sects? I am begging you, for Christ's sake, lend a helping hand, quickly pull together. Don't parley too much! Quickly, quickly! Immortal souls and their rescue are at stake here.
Found it here.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
The Bible and end times
It has always struck me how premillenial dispensationalism
(which is, btw, a cool phrase, anyway, it makes you sound so learned … such big words you have ! )
arose out of the fertile ground of sola scriptura, inerrant biblical literalism.
Is it not ironic and instructive that such a great heresy, one so antithetical to the Biblical teaching itself can have sprung from those who insist they teach nothing but the Bible? From whose who espouse the strictest most Biblicistic inerrancy possible?
In fact the very strictness with which the fathers of dispensationalism held to biblical innerrancy and literalism led to their views on the end times. A non-Christological literalist view of OT prophecy joined with a literal reading of the Apocalypse of St. John merged into the stew now known as pre-millenial dispensationalism. The Old Testament says "Israel" so it must mean Isreal, the nations state now and always. If John sees a beast, a beast it is . The crude rigor to which Biblical exegesis was reduced led to almost a mathematical precision and to the sorts of one for one identification of Iran or Iraq or the USSR with various figures in the Bible or with various events arranged in a chronology tied to a iron clad sequence of Armageddon.
For Lutherans the key to Biblical interpretation is never inerrancy itself. Inerrancy and the truthfulness of the text is a characteristic of the text not the interpretive key. The key is Christ! We do not read the Bible in a flat scientific way. The forebears of much of dispensationalism were affected by the enlightenment and the rationalism they were battling against. They shared many ways of thinking with their enemies. They were modernists, one might say.
Lutherans at their best are not modernists. We read the Bible saying, "This is the Word of the Lord" and singing "Praise to you, O Christ!" That is, we read it in a liturgical and sacramental setting which is nothing other than to say we read it in a Christocentric way. We read it to see and hear and receive Christ not information.
So we read "Israel" and think "church". We hear "Christ is coming" and we think of the sacrament where he comes to us often. We hear Zion and we think "presence of God with us." We hear of the end times and we know we are living them not because of the Middle East but because by his cross our Lord has overcome the world.
(which is, btw, a cool phrase, anyway, it makes you sound so learned … such big words you have ! )
arose out of the fertile ground of sola scriptura, inerrant biblical literalism.
Is it not ironic and instructive that such a great heresy, one so antithetical to the Biblical teaching itself can have sprung from those who insist they teach nothing but the Bible? From whose who espouse the strictest most Biblicistic inerrancy possible?
In fact the very strictness with which the fathers of dispensationalism held to biblical innerrancy and literalism led to their views on the end times. A non-Christological literalist view of OT prophecy joined with a literal reading of the Apocalypse of St. John merged into the stew now known as pre-millenial dispensationalism. The Old Testament says "Israel" so it must mean Isreal, the nations state now and always. If John sees a beast, a beast it is . The crude rigor to which Biblical exegesis was reduced led to almost a mathematical precision and to the sorts of one for one identification of Iran or Iraq or the USSR with various figures in the Bible or with various events arranged in a chronology tied to a iron clad sequence of Armageddon.
For Lutherans the key to Biblical interpretation is never inerrancy itself. Inerrancy and the truthfulness of the text is a characteristic of the text not the interpretive key. The key is Christ! We do not read the Bible in a flat scientific way. The forebears of much of dispensationalism were affected by the enlightenment and the rationalism they were battling against. They shared many ways of thinking with their enemies. They were modernists, one might say.
Lutherans at their best are not modernists. We read the Bible saying, "This is the Word of the Lord" and singing "Praise to you, O Christ!" That is, we read it in a liturgical and sacramental setting which is nothing other than to say we read it in a Christocentric way. We read it to see and hear and receive Christ not information.
So we read "Israel" and think "church". We hear "Christ is coming" and we think of the sacrament where he comes to us often. We hear Zion and we think "presence of God with us." We hear of the end times and we know we are living them not because of the Middle East but because by his cross our Lord has overcome the world.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
We are Israel
It is the children born through God's promise that are reckoned as the children of Israel.
Romans 9:6
We are Israel. The baptized church is Israel.
I do not know how many times I have said this in Bible class. With the conflict in the Middle East, the continuing popularity of end time books and televison programs, there is continuing fascination with Israel, "prophecy" and the Bible.
But the words of St. Paul cut through like a knife on this subject.
It is not fashionable certainly in academic theological circles or in the mainstream liberal denominations nor anymore in the evangelical set but the Bible truth is that the church is now Israel. It replaces OT Israel.
This is the key to so much.
First it puffs away all the pseudo-religious hokery surrounding so many pronouncements and right wing evangelical politics on the Middle East. Theologically the present state of Israel is just another nation. It maybe in our (america's) best interest to defend or not defend Israel but that is a policy question not a theological one.
Second when we remember that we are Israel, the bapitzed, it clears the air of all the psuedo end time fog. God does not have a plan B to come back to Israel as if the church and Jesus and the Spirit were all a big detour because the Jews rejected Jesus and there are prophecies out there from the OT still hanging around that need to be fulfilled.
No, all roads lead to and from the cross of Jesus. We are Israel. Jesus has summed up all the OT in himself and his church.
Finally and most importantly the truth that we are God's Israel deeply affects how we pray. The church prays the Psalms and the OT. What sense do the Psalms make if Zion, Israel, Judah, Jerusalem, David, kingdom etc etc etc do not have reference to us and our hope?
The Old Testament is our story, the story we are living now. We are Israel. We are in the wilderness, we are walking the dry ground of our baptismal Red Sea, we are crossing the Jordan, the pillar of fire is with us and on and on on.
We are Israel.
Romans 9:6
We are Israel. The baptized church is Israel.
I do not know how many times I have said this in Bible class. With the conflict in the Middle East, the continuing popularity of end time books and televison programs, there is continuing fascination with Israel, "prophecy" and the Bible.
But the words of St. Paul cut through like a knife on this subject.
It is not fashionable certainly in academic theological circles or in the mainstream liberal denominations nor anymore in the evangelical set but the Bible truth is that the church is now Israel. It replaces OT Israel.
This is the key to so much.
First it puffs away all the pseudo-religious hokery surrounding so many pronouncements and right wing evangelical politics on the Middle East. Theologically the present state of Israel is just another nation. It maybe in our (america's) best interest to defend or not defend Israel but that is a policy question not a theological one.
Second when we remember that we are Israel, the bapitzed, it clears the air of all the psuedo end time fog. God does not have a plan B to come back to Israel as if the church and Jesus and the Spirit were all a big detour because the Jews rejected Jesus and there are prophecies out there from the OT still hanging around that need to be fulfilled.
No, all roads lead to and from the cross of Jesus. We are Israel. Jesus has summed up all the OT in himself and his church.
Finally and most importantly the truth that we are God's Israel deeply affects how we pray. The church prays the Psalms and the OT. What sense do the Psalms make if Zion, Israel, Judah, Jerusalem, David, kingdom etc etc etc do not have reference to us and our hope?
The Old Testament is our story, the story we are living now. We are Israel. We are in the wilderness, we are walking the dry ground of our baptismal Red Sea, we are crossing the Jordan, the pillar of fire is with us and on and on on.
We are Israel.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
We must never ask how many confessors there are
Truth is not always surrounded by an equal number of confessors. The
number is an adiaphoron, an accident which has nothing to do with the
substance. We must never ask how many confessors there are but what they
confess. Word, confession, doctrine--that is all; everything else changes.
If only the church is apostolic, it will then be large enough, no matter
what its fixed membership. The word 'catholic' cannot be defined in terms
of any fixed number but is properly explained by the doctrine of the
universal grace of God which wants to see true doctrine and the true church
spread as widely as possible, and they would be widely spread if it were not
for the opposition from men's wickedness. It is the Lord's unalterable
decree that nothing can prevail against his grace except for the wicked
heart of man."
Wilhelm Loehe, Three Books About the Church, pp.123,124
number is an adiaphoron, an accident which has nothing to do with the
substance. We must never ask how many confessors there are but what they
confess. Word, confession, doctrine--that is all; everything else changes.
If only the church is apostolic, it will then be large enough, no matter
what its fixed membership. The word 'catholic' cannot be defined in terms
of any fixed number but is properly explained by the doctrine of the
universal grace of God which wants to see true doctrine and the true church
spread as widely as possible, and they would be widely spread if it were not
for the opposition from men's wickedness. It is the Lord's unalterable
decree that nothing can prevail against his grace except for the wicked
heart of man."
Wilhelm Loehe, Three Books About the Church, pp.123,124
Monday, August 07, 2006
Exultet
Here is an interesting post from an ELCA seminarian in Columbia SC. Thoughts to ponder. Dont know him but maybe we can make him a Missourian (smile).
The blog is called Exultet.
A bit from the post:
I remember the many worship services that I attended in my youth, waiting for the familiarity of the liturgy or for some sign of sacramental reverence. Yet most of these services consisted of a few praise choruses and a lengthy sermon, which left me sorely disappointed. I am still a bit confused by worship among Evangelical protestant churches; it often seems to me that they have jettisoned much that is good from our 2000 year old tradition. When we can't stand in continuity with the majority of our forbears, don't we cease to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.
The blog is called Exultet.
A bit from the post:
I remember the many worship services that I attended in my youth, waiting for the familiarity of the liturgy or for some sign of sacramental reverence. Yet most of these services consisted of a few praise choruses and a lengthy sermon, which left me sorely disappointed. I am still a bit confused by worship among Evangelical protestant churches; it often seems to me that they have jettisoned much that is good from our 2000 year old tradition. When we can't stand in continuity with the majority of our forbears, don't we cease to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.
My Life Among the Deathworks
I have seen a couple of reviews of this book by Philip Reiff My Life among the Deathworks including this one at New Pantagruel.
It strikes me as an important book. A difficult read but I'd like to to pick it up.
Here is a paragraph from the review in NP.
The essential starting point is the useful model of comparative cultural analysis that Rieff lays out in the first chapter and uses throughout the rest of the book. First world culture, which is “pagan and in the majority everywhere,” has as its defining characteristic a “primacy of possibility,” or pop—a broadly inclusive concept that covers everything from the Aboriginal dreamtime to Plato’s Forms. These governing primacies of possibility, being metadivine in their primacy, also contain the hidden limits of possibility: the Greek gods and goddesses, Rieff points out, were themselves subject to fate, which is the defining motif of the first world culture.
Second world culture is grounded in “the traditions out of Jerusalem” in which the principle of the world’s creation is not a mythic, metadivine reality, but a divine revelation that commands obedience and places clear and absolute limits on possibility. Second world culture’s defining motif is faith.
The third world culture of late modernity and postmodernity recognizes no governing divine or metadivine presence, and is characterized by recyclings of the mythic motifs of first world culture in sinister, fictive primordialities like race, class, and sexuality (though these primordialities are ontologically unmoored, unlike the pops of pagan culture), and by its relentless assaults on the divine revelations at the heart of second world culture. The motif of this third world culture is fiction
It strikes me as an important book. A difficult read but I'd like to to pick it up.
Here is a paragraph from the review in NP.
The essential starting point is the useful model of comparative cultural analysis that Rieff lays out in the first chapter and uses throughout the rest of the book. First world culture, which is “pagan and in the majority everywhere,” has as its defining characteristic a “primacy of possibility,” or pop—a broadly inclusive concept that covers everything from the Aboriginal dreamtime to Plato’s Forms. These governing primacies of possibility, being metadivine in their primacy, also contain the hidden limits of possibility: the Greek gods and goddesses, Rieff points out, were themselves subject to fate, which is the defining motif of the first world culture.
Second world culture is grounded in “the traditions out of Jerusalem” in which the principle of the world’s creation is not a mythic, metadivine reality, but a divine revelation that commands obedience and places clear and absolute limits on possibility. Second world culture’s defining motif is faith.
The third world culture of late modernity and postmodernity recognizes no governing divine or metadivine presence, and is characterized by recyclings of the mythic motifs of first world culture in sinister, fictive primordialities like race, class, and sexuality (though these primordialities are ontologically unmoored, unlike the pops of pagan culture), and by its relentless assaults on the divine revelations at the heart of second world culture. The motif of this third world culture is fiction
Tagged
I think I have been tagged a couple of times, most recently by The Lutheran Logomaniac so, without much thought, here goes ...
1. One Book that changed your life:
Chronicles of Wasted Time by Malcolm Muggeridge
2. One book you've read more than once:
LOTR ( cliche, right?)
3. One book you'd want on a desert island:
Hmmm, Augustine's City of God
4. One book that made you laugh:
A Walk in the Woods Bill Bryson
5. One book that made you cry:
Geez cant think of one ... guess I am not in touch with my feelings
6. One book that you wish had been written:
A killer exhaustive well written humorous informative 4 volume history of rock and roll.
7. One book that you wish had never been written:
DaVinci Code
8. One book you're currently reading:
Gregory of Nazianzus: An Intellectual Biography by John McGuckin
Cant think of others to tag ... most have already done it.
1. One Book that changed your life:
Chronicles of Wasted Time by Malcolm Muggeridge
2. One book you've read more than once:
LOTR ( cliche, right?)
3. One book you'd want on a desert island:
Hmmm, Augustine's City of God
4. One book that made you laugh:
A Walk in the Woods Bill Bryson
5. One book that made you cry:
Geez cant think of one ... guess I am not in touch with my feelings
6. One book that you wish had been written:
A killer exhaustive well written humorous informative 4 volume history of rock and roll.
7. One book that you wish had never been written:
DaVinci Code
8. One book you're currently reading:
Gregory of Nazianzus: An Intellectual Biography by John McGuckin
Cant think of others to tag ... most have already done it.
Saturday, August 05, 2006
Mortals following mortals to the grave
Here is the conclusion of the funeral oration Gregory Nazianzus preached at his father's death, in the presence of his mother and his friend Basil the great.
There is something moving abut these words as he addresses his mother at the loss his father and her husband. The words address how a Christian ought to view death and are, dare I say, practical.
The translation is a bit dated but read it slowly and with care (if i may advise you, dear reader!)
Life and death, as they are called, apparently so different, are in a sense resolved into, and successive to, each other.
For the one (life) takes its rise from the corruption which is our mother, runs its course through the corruption which is the displacement of all that is present, and comes to an end in the corruption which is the dissolution of this life; while the other (death), which is able to set us free from the ills of this life, and oftentimes translates us to the life above, is not in my opinion accurately called death, and is more dreadful in name than in reality; so that we are in danger of irrationally being afraid of what is not fearful, and courting as preferable what we really ought to fear.
There is one life, to look to life. There is one death, sin, for it is the destruction of the soul. But all else, of which some are proud, is a dream-vision, making sport of realities, and a series of phantasms which lead the soul astray. If this be our condition, mother, we shall neither be proud of life, nor greatly hurt, by death.
What grievance can we find in being transferred hence to the true life? In being freed from the vicissitudes, the agitation, the disgust, and all the vile tribute we must pay to this life, to find ourselves, amid stable things, which know no flux, while as lesser lights, we circle round the great light?
Does the sense of separation cause you pain? Let hope cheer you. Is widowhood grievous to you? Yet it is not so to him. And what is the good of love, if it gives itself easy things, and assigns the more difficult to its neighbour? And why should it be grievous at all, to one who is soon to pass away? The appointed day is at hand, the pain will not last long. Let us not, by ignoble reasonings, make a burden of things which are really light.
We have endured a great loss — because the privilege we enjoyed was great. Loss is common to all, such a privilege to few. Let us rise superior to the one thought by the consolation of the other. For it is more reasonable, that that which is better should win the day. You have borne, in a most brave, Christian spirit, the loss of children, who were still in their prime and qualified for life; bear also the laying aside of his aged body by one who was weary of life, although his vigor of mind preserved for him his senses unimpaired.
Do you want some one to care for you? Where is your Isaac, whom he left behind for you, to take his place in all respects? Ask of him small things, the support of his hand and service, and requite him with greater things, a mother's blessing and prayers, and the consequent freedom. Are you vexed at being admonished? I praise you for it. For you have admonished many whom your long life has brought under your notice.
What I have said can have no application to you, who are so truly wise; but let it be a general medicine of consolation for mourners, so that they may know that they are mortals following mortals to the grave.
GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, ORATION XVIII, 42-43
There is something moving abut these words as he addresses his mother at the loss his father and her husband. The words address how a Christian ought to view death and are, dare I say, practical.
The translation is a bit dated but read it slowly and with care (if i may advise you, dear reader!)
Life and death, as they are called, apparently so different, are in a sense resolved into, and successive to, each other.
For the one (life) takes its rise from the corruption which is our mother, runs its course through the corruption which is the displacement of all that is present, and comes to an end in the corruption which is the dissolution of this life; while the other (death), which is able to set us free from the ills of this life, and oftentimes translates us to the life above, is not in my opinion accurately called death, and is more dreadful in name than in reality; so that we are in danger of irrationally being afraid of what is not fearful, and courting as preferable what we really ought to fear.
There is one life, to look to life. There is one death, sin, for it is the destruction of the soul. But all else, of which some are proud, is a dream-vision, making sport of realities, and a series of phantasms which lead the soul astray. If this be our condition, mother, we shall neither be proud of life, nor greatly hurt, by death.
What grievance can we find in being transferred hence to the true life? In being freed from the vicissitudes, the agitation, the disgust, and all the vile tribute we must pay to this life, to find ourselves, amid stable things, which know no flux, while as lesser lights, we circle round the great light?
Does the sense of separation cause you pain? Let hope cheer you. Is widowhood grievous to you? Yet it is not so to him. And what is the good of love, if it gives itself easy things, and assigns the more difficult to its neighbour? And why should it be grievous at all, to one who is soon to pass away? The appointed day is at hand, the pain will not last long. Let us not, by ignoble reasonings, make a burden of things which are really light.
We have endured a great loss — because the privilege we enjoyed was great. Loss is common to all, such a privilege to few. Let us rise superior to the one thought by the consolation of the other. For it is more reasonable, that that which is better should win the day. You have borne, in a most brave, Christian spirit, the loss of children, who were still in their prime and qualified for life; bear also the laying aside of his aged body by one who was weary of life, although his vigor of mind preserved for him his senses unimpaired.
Do you want some one to care for you? Where is your Isaac, whom he left behind for you, to take his place in all respects? Ask of him small things, the support of his hand and service, and requite him with greater things, a mother's blessing and prayers, and the consequent freedom. Are you vexed at being admonished? I praise you for it. For you have admonished many whom your long life has brought under your notice.
What I have said can have no application to you, who are so truly wise; but let it be a general medicine of consolation for mourners, so that they may know that they are mortals following mortals to the grave.
GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, ORATION XVIII, 42-43
Friday, August 04, 2006
Prayer websites
This is a very interesting site of Orthodox worship. It is Orthodox, mind you, full of Orthodox worship not Lutheran but fascinating and edifying. Some wonderful prayers. If you are curious about Orthodox worship and texts this seems to be the place to go. Just as daily prayer in the Roman tradition is here.
The Lutheran Liturgical Prayer Brotherhood has a nice prayer book availbale. I don't know if there is anything Lutheran online that compares to the comprehensiveness of these Roman and EO sites.
Thanks to anonymous who posted the Orthodox link in a comment. Plenty to disagree with from a Lutheran perspective but plenty to appreciate.
Here is a pre-Communion prayer:
First Prayer of St. Basil the Great
O Sovereign Lord Jesus Christ our God, source of life and immortality, Who art the Author of all creation, visible and invisible, the equally everlasting and co-eternal Son of the eternal Father, Who through the excess of Thy goodness didst in the last days assume our flesh and wast crucified for us, ungrateful and ignorant as we were, and didst cause through Thy own Blood the restoration of our nature which had been marred by sin: O immortal King, accept the repentance even of me a sinner, and incline Thine ear to me and hear my words. For I have sinned, O Lord, I have sinned against heaven and before Thee, and I am not worthy to gaze on the height of Thy glory; for I have provoked Thy goodness by transgressing Thy commandments and not obeying Thy orders. But Thou, O Lord, in Thy forbearance, patience, and great mercy, hast not given me up to be destroyed with my sins, but Thou awaitest my complete conversion. For Thou, O Lover of men, hast said through Thy Prophet that Thou desirest not the death of the sinner, but that he should return to Thee and live. For Thou dost not will, O Lord, that the work of Thy hands should be destroyed, neither dost Thou delight in the destruction of men, but Thou desirest that all should be saved and come to a knowledge of the Truth. Therefore, though I am unworthy both of heaven and earth, and even of this transient life, since I have completely succumbed to sin and am a slave to pleasure and have defaced Thy image, yet being Thy work and creation, wretch that I am, even I do not despair of my salvation and dare to draw near to Thy boundless compassion. So receive even me, O Christ Lover of men, as the harlot, as the thief, as the publican, and as the prodigal; and take from me the heavy burden of my sins, Thou Who takest away the sin of the world, Who healest men's sicknesses, Who callest the weary and heavy laden to Thyself and givest them rest; for Thou camest not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. And purify me from all defilement of flesh and spirit. Teach me to achieve perfect holiness in the fear of Thee, that with the clear witness of my conscience I may receive the portion of Thy holy Things and be united with Thy holy Body and Blood, and have Thee dwelling and remaining in me with the Father and Thy Holy Spirit. And, O Lord Jesus Christ, my God, let not the communion of Thy immaculate and life-giving Mysteries be to me for condemnation nor let it make me sick in body or soul through my partaking of them unworthily; but grant me till my last breath to receive without condemnation the portion of Thy holy Things, for communion with the Holy Spirit, as a provision for eternal life, and as an acceptable defense at Thy dread tribunal, so that I too with all Thy elect may become a partaker of Thy pure joys which Thou hast prepared for those who love Thee, O Lord, in whom Thou art glorified throughout the ages. Amen.
The Lutheran Liturgical Prayer Brotherhood has a nice prayer book availbale. I don't know if there is anything Lutheran online that compares to the comprehensiveness of these Roman and EO sites.
Thanks to anonymous who posted the Orthodox link in a comment. Plenty to disagree with from a Lutheran perspective but plenty to appreciate.
Here is a pre-Communion prayer:
First Prayer of St. Basil the Great
O Sovereign Lord Jesus Christ our God, source of life and immortality, Who art the Author of all creation, visible and invisible, the equally everlasting and co-eternal Son of the eternal Father, Who through the excess of Thy goodness didst in the last days assume our flesh and wast crucified for us, ungrateful and ignorant as we were, and didst cause through Thy own Blood the restoration of our nature which had been marred by sin: O immortal King, accept the repentance even of me a sinner, and incline Thine ear to me and hear my words. For I have sinned, O Lord, I have sinned against heaven and before Thee, and I am not worthy to gaze on the height of Thy glory; for I have provoked Thy goodness by transgressing Thy commandments and not obeying Thy orders. But Thou, O Lord, in Thy forbearance, patience, and great mercy, hast not given me up to be destroyed with my sins, but Thou awaitest my complete conversion. For Thou, O Lover of men, hast said through Thy Prophet that Thou desirest not the death of the sinner, but that he should return to Thee and live. For Thou dost not will, O Lord, that the work of Thy hands should be destroyed, neither dost Thou delight in the destruction of men, but Thou desirest that all should be saved and come to a knowledge of the Truth. Therefore, though I am unworthy both of heaven and earth, and even of this transient life, since I have completely succumbed to sin and am a slave to pleasure and have defaced Thy image, yet being Thy work and creation, wretch that I am, even I do not despair of my salvation and dare to draw near to Thy boundless compassion. So receive even me, O Christ Lover of men, as the harlot, as the thief, as the publican, and as the prodigal; and take from me the heavy burden of my sins, Thou Who takest away the sin of the world, Who healest men's sicknesses, Who callest the weary and heavy laden to Thyself and givest them rest; for Thou camest not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. And purify me from all defilement of flesh and spirit. Teach me to achieve perfect holiness in the fear of Thee, that with the clear witness of my conscience I may receive the portion of Thy holy Things and be united with Thy holy Body and Blood, and have Thee dwelling and remaining in me with the Father and Thy Holy Spirit. And, O Lord Jesus Christ, my God, let not the communion of Thy immaculate and life-giving Mysteries be to me for condemnation nor let it make me sick in body or soul through my partaking of them unworthily; but grant me till my last breath to receive without condemnation the portion of Thy holy Things, for communion with the Holy Spirit, as a provision for eternal life, and as an acceptable defense at Thy dread tribunal, so that I too with all Thy elect may become a partaker of Thy pure joys which Thou hast prepared for those who love Thee, O Lord, in whom Thou art glorified throughout the ages. Amen.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
He received a woodland and rustic church
This is from Gregory Nazianzus' funeral oration for his father, a bishop. His father was a convert to Christianity and at his conversion was quickly elevated to the bishop's chair. He was, in our terms, a second career man sent to a small remote congregation.
It is nice to note the description of the elder Nazianzus' parish in Cappadocia and it's meager numerical strength and rustic setting.
When pastors or lay people are discouraged at their own church circumstances, it is sometimes nice to read a little history and let those who have gone before us comfort us if only in the realization, "hey they went through this too.,"
He received a woodland and rustic church, the pastoral care and oversight of which had not been bestowed from a distance, but it had been cared for by one of his predecessors of admirable and angelic disposition, and a more simple man than our present rulers of the people; but, after he had been speedily taken to God, it had, in consequence of the loss of its leader, for the most part grown careless and run wild;
accordingly, he at first strove without harshness to soften the habits of the people, both by words of pastoral knowledge, and by setting himself before them as an example, like a spiritual statue, polished into the beauty of all excellent conduct.
He next, by constant meditation on the divine words, though a late student of such matters, gathered together so much wisdom within a short time that he was in no wise excelled by those who had spent the greatest toil upon them, and received this special grace from God, that he became the father and teacher of orthodoxy--not, like our modern wise men, yielding to the spirit of the age, nor defending our faith by indefinite and sophistical language, as if they had no fixity of faith, or were adulterating the truth; but, he was more pious than those who possessed rhetorical power, more skilled in rhetoric than those who were upright in mind; or rather, while he took the second place as an orator, he surpassed all in piety.
... He, like the great Noah, the father of this second world, made this church to be called the new Jerusalem, and a second ark borne up upon the waters; since it both surmounted the deluge of souls, and the insults of the heretics, and excelled all others in reputation no less than it fell behind them in numbers; and has had the same fortune as the sacred Bethlehem, which can without contradiction be at once said to be a little city and the metropolis of the world, since it is the nurse and mother of Christ, Who both made and overcame the world.
Oration 18, 16-17.
It is nice to note the description of the elder Nazianzus' parish in Cappadocia and it's meager numerical strength and rustic setting.
When pastors or lay people are discouraged at their own church circumstances, it is sometimes nice to read a little history and let those who have gone before us comfort us if only in the realization, "hey they went through this too.,"
He received a woodland and rustic church, the pastoral care and oversight of which had not been bestowed from a distance, but it had been cared for by one of his predecessors of admirable and angelic disposition, and a more simple man than our present rulers of the people; but, after he had been speedily taken to God, it had, in consequence of the loss of its leader, for the most part grown careless and run wild;
accordingly, he at first strove without harshness to soften the habits of the people, both by words of pastoral knowledge, and by setting himself before them as an example, like a spiritual statue, polished into the beauty of all excellent conduct.
He next, by constant meditation on the divine words, though a late student of such matters, gathered together so much wisdom within a short time that he was in no wise excelled by those who had spent the greatest toil upon them, and received this special grace from God, that he became the father and teacher of orthodoxy--not, like our modern wise men, yielding to the spirit of the age, nor defending our faith by indefinite and sophistical language, as if they had no fixity of faith, or were adulterating the truth; but, he was more pious than those who possessed rhetorical power, more skilled in rhetoric than those who were upright in mind; or rather, while he took the second place as an orator, he surpassed all in piety.
... He, like the great Noah, the father of this second world, made this church to be called the new Jerusalem, and a second ark borne up upon the waters; since it both surmounted the deluge of souls, and the insults of the heretics, and excelled all others in reputation no less than it fell behind them in numbers; and has had the same fortune as the sacred Bethlehem, which can without contradiction be at once said to be a little city and the metropolis of the world, since it is the nurse and mother of Christ, Who both made and overcame the world.
Oration 18, 16-17.
He didn't say nothing
USA Today opinion piece chronicles the late Reggie White's turn against the kind of pop Christianity he had been peddling. Very interesting.
"When I look back on my life, there are a lot of things I said God said. I realize he didn't say nothing. It was what Reggie wanted to do. I do feel the Father ... gave me some signals ... but you won't hear me anymore saying God spoke to me about something — unless I read something in Scripture and I know."
"I came to the realization I'd become more of a motivational speaker than a teacher of the word."
"When I look back on my life, there are a lot of things I said God said. I realize he didn't say nothing. It was what Reggie wanted to do. I do feel the Father ... gave me some signals ... but you won't hear me anymore saying God spoke to me about something — unless I read something in Scripture and I know."
"I came to the realization I'd become more of a motivational speaker than a teacher of the word."
O Good Samaritan, come to my aid
Evidently this is a famous prayer of St. Jerome's. Nice.
O Lord, show your mercy to me and gladden my heart. I am like the man on the way to Jericho who was overtaken by robbers, wounded and left for dead. O Good Samaritan, come to my aid, I am like the sheep that went astray. O Good Shepherd, seek me out and bring me home in accord with your will. Let me dwell in your house all the days of my life and praise you for ever and ever with those who are there.
O Lord, show your mercy to me and gladden my heart. I am like the man on the way to Jericho who was overtaken by robbers, wounded and left for dead. O Good Samaritan, come to my aid, I am like the sheep that went astray. O Good Shepherd, seek me out and bring me home in accord with your will. Let me dwell in your house all the days of my life and praise you for ever and ever with those who are there.
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Turning the Cheek
Also from First Things is this clear headed explanation of turning the other cheek and why it does not apply to warfare or responding to aggressors.
A sentence or two:
For example, we are commanded to turn the other cheek as to injuries to ourselves, but not to turn the cheeks of the weak and vulnerable when we have a moral duty to defend them. It’s no part of Christian charity, for example, for a mother to stand by and let her child be raped when she could use force to stop the rapist, including by killing him if necessary. When a sovereign state uses military force to stop unjust aggressors from killing its citizens, we have the same moral principle writ large.
A sentence or two:
For example, we are commanded to turn the other cheek as to injuries to ourselves, but not to turn the cheeks of the weak and vulnerable when we have a moral duty to defend them. It’s no part of Christian charity, for example, for a mother to stand by and let her child be raped when she could use force to stop the rapist, including by killing him if necessary. When a sovereign state uses military force to stop unjust aggressors from killing its citizens, we have the same moral principle writ large.
Beer Blessing
From First Things
Beer Blessing
From the Rituale Romanum (no 58)
Bene+dic, Domine, creaturam istam cerevisae, quam ex adipe frumenti producere dignatus es: ut sit remedium salutare humano generi: et praesta per invocationem nominis tui sancti, ut, quicumque ex ea biberint, sanitatem corporis, et animae tutelam percipiant. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen
Bless, O Lord, this creature beer, that Thou hast been pleased to bring forth from the sweetness of the grain: that it might be a salutary remedy for the human race: and grant by the invocation of Thy holy name, that, whosoever drinks of it may obtain health of body and a sure safeguard for the soul. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Beer Blessing
From the Rituale Romanum (no 58)
Bene+dic, Domine, creaturam istam cerevisae, quam ex adipe frumenti producere dignatus es: ut sit remedium salutare humano generi: et praesta per invocationem nominis tui sancti, ut, quicumque ex ea biberint, sanitatem corporis, et animae tutelam percipiant. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen
Bless, O Lord, this creature beer, that Thou hast been pleased to bring forth from the sweetness of the grain: that it might be a salutary remedy for the human race: and grant by the invocation of Thy holy name, that, whosoever drinks of it may obtain health of body and a sure safeguard for the soul. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
O strange conjunction!
One of the joys of reading the fathers is the wonderful paradoxes they extol. None is greater than the Incarnation. The Fathers always hold the Incarnation close to soteriology. Here is a bit from Gregory Nazianzus:
He came forth then as God with that which he had assumed, one person in two natures, flesh and spirit, of which the latter deified the former.
O new commingling; O strange conjunction! The Self-existent comes into being, the Uncreate is created, that which cannot be contained is contained, by the intervention of an intellectual soul, mediating between the Deity and the corporeality of the flesh. And he who gives riches becomes poor, for he assumes the poverty of my flesh, that I may assume the richness of the Godhead. He that is full empties himself, for he empties himself of his glory for a short while, that I may have a share in his fulness.
What is this mystery that pertains to me? I had a share in the image; I did not keep it. He partakes of my flesh that he may both save the image and make the flesh immortal.
Or. 38.13
He came forth then as God with that which he had assumed, one person in two natures, flesh and spirit, of which the latter deified the former.
O new commingling; O strange conjunction! The Self-existent comes into being, the Uncreate is created, that which cannot be contained is contained, by the intervention of an intellectual soul, mediating between the Deity and the corporeality of the flesh. And he who gives riches becomes poor, for he assumes the poverty of my flesh, that I may assume the richness of the Godhead. He that is full empties himself, for he empties himself of his glory for a short while, that I may have a share in his fulness.
What is this mystery that pertains to me? I had a share in the image; I did not keep it. He partakes of my flesh that he may both save the image and make the flesh immortal.
Or. 38.13
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)