A Dog's Life

I was walking my dog the other day when it struck me how a dog could serve as an illustration of human behavior in sin.

My dog is always straining at the leash, and when he is permitted to run free in the yard, he is always testing the limits.  It doesn't seem to matter how large or small the yard is, the only thing the dog is interested in is the edge of the yard - and he is constantly trying to escape to the 'outside'.

My dog is generally responsive to voice commands, so I can walk him around the yard - or sometimes the neighborhood - without a leash, but now and then, he acts as though he is deaf.  I know that he is not deaf; he can hear me open a bag of dog treats (or the container of animal crackers - his favorite!) from three rooms away.  Nevertheless, he acts deaf when he thinks I cannot see him, or I am too far away to grab him.  He is particularly hard of hearing when he is facing something he does not want to do - like take a bath or get a haircut.

Human behavior when facing the will of God is similar.  We tend to always want to go where we ought not to go and to do the forbidden thing.  When our circumstances permit little freedom, we seem driven to disobey in some small way, and take a perverse sort of comfort in doing so.  Where we have no limits -or so it seems- on our conduct, we tend to try to find the limits by doing more and more absurd, foolish, or dangerous things.  We tend not to hear the Word of God unless we are in trouble, or we want something from Him very urgently.

One day, I asked him why he was so contrary (as though he is capable of understanding everything I say) - and it struck me that his conduct was just like sinful man's conduct before God.  That did not make his misbehavior much easier to deal with, but it did make me laugh -- and thank God that He is so much more patient and forgiving that I am often minded to be.

It also put me in mind of the poem by Robert Burns, the Scottish poet, called, "To a Louse", referring to the insect, not to a particular sort of human miscreant.  Anyhow, the first two lines of the last verse are as follows:

O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us.

A First Look

The following is my first look at the "Today's Business" #1 for the July LCMS Convention. Take it for what it is worth. It may help you as you begin to unravel this thing. Note: now and again there is a little sarcasm in the responses. It is difficult to avoid when you spend hours reading self-serving bureaucratic jargon.

1-01

To Celebrate failing to meet the goal. Weird. Compare whereas #1 with #6.

1-02

Ablaze is not Lutheran to begin with. Let's put it away. It will pass no matter what. (That is called a "Gimmee")

1-03

A pointless Gimmee.

1-04

We could use better materials. Let's stop congratulating ourselves and develop some better stuff.

1-05

A nice thought. a reasonable idea. Hardly seems like it should require a convention resolution.

1-06

Reasonable.

1-07

This hardly needs a resolution. It just requires common sense.

1-08

A waste of time, and a gimmee.

1-09

Ov 1-11 needs to be removed from this and considered on its own merits.

2-01

Bad idea. Just reinforces the bureaucracy. Comes from them too.

2-02

That is what we need, Synod guidance on how to fire people. Sadly, another gimmee.

2-03 -- A bunch of gobbledy gook and techno speak. Ridiculous.

“as they cluster in Christian communities sometimes also known as congregations;” (??)

“Such concern is reflective of the mind of Christ and is integral to His mission mandate to reach out to all” *this is not a true statement*

2-04 -- a waste of time and energy, simply an advertisement for CPH

2-05 -- the first resolved asserts something that is not demonstrably true and should be edited or deleted.

2-06 -- good idea

2-07 -- a nice idea, but really.

3-01 -- need to determine what the heck is meant by statements like:

“Loving, compassionate recognition of the deep pain and personal struggles that same-sex inclinations produce in many individuals, families, and congregations may not be neglected in the name of moral purity” (“Theological Implications,” 2010 CW, p. 15);

and ask what the import of phrases like this are: “[T]he LCMS believes and teaches that same-gender genital sexual activity–in every situation– violates the will of our Creator and must be recognized as sin” - where does this striking precision come from - "same-gender genital sexual activity"?

Since all of the resolution becomes the official position of the Synod, should it not be plain and clear?

3-02
This resolved does not appear to be true: Resolved, That the LCMS commend groups such as Word Alone, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC), Lutheran CORE, and others for their courage and faithfulness in maintaining their confessional identity by opposing the ELCA’s recent decision;

WHAT "confessional identity" are they addressing?

3-03

The resolution applauds the statement of the task force, fails to address the issue of the appropriateness of the 'cooperation in externals' and punts any thinking about the issue another three years down the road.

3-04

How can we discuss this issue when pastors are ejected from the Synod because their congregations have taken a confessional stand against the Synod, or failed to join the Synod - the case of a new congregation - in a timely fashion? If these men are not fit for fellowship as members of the Synod, how could we make that sort of determination about some fledgling church body?

3-05

We need a thorough response, and the issues raised by the ELCA document are for deeper and more significant than those mention in the resolution

3-06

As long as we commend it for study but do not commend it uncritically or commend the CTCR for the study, this is okay.

3-07

A sound idea.

3-08

A Gimmee

3-09

Needs to be substituted by the original memorial 3-16.

The LWF has declared itself a fellowship and all belonging are in Altar and Pulpit Fellowship - which means that we are in fellowship with everyone in the LWF if anyone we are in fellowship with is in the LWF.

4-01 Stewardship

a generic resolution: a gimmee.

4-02

These things are the duties of the Board of Directors, and should require no resolution. typical CYA waste of time.

4-03

Reflects the problem of the Synod, that the Synod sees itself as the central and top priority, and looks to manage the Synod full of churches and people for its advantage. Nonetheless, the idea is sound. Keep the people informed.

4-04

Stupid. Make stewardship and financial management a required course for all church workers? Resolution fails to understand that the problem is not going to be solved by programs and courses. It is about faith and the Word of God.

4-05

Resolution to permit two individuals from the same district to be elected to the Board of Directors for the simple expedience of the convention process. Not necessarily a wise idea.

4-06

Changes the priority of the purposes of Synod - making formation of new congregations and preaching stations primary and the support and maintenance of training and educating pastors and teachers moves down to about fourth place.

Removes the voting privileges from the pastors.

diminishes the identification of the Board of Directors.

Grants the authority to re-write the constitution of the Synod to the corporation. without any necessary turning to the Synod in convention.

Constitution and by-laws may be changed at any convention, special or regular, by a simple majority of the delegates, or by two-thirds majority of the delegates present for the vote. Whichever is less.

Not salutary changes.

4-07

Changes made to move the nominations and memorializing of the Synod farther away from the convention time. [sarcasm alert] I suppose with all our modern conveniences and tools, it is too much to expect that we could do the same work as those in previous generations without our modern conveniences.

The resolution also shifts a significant portion of the costs associated with the convention to the congregations and people, and changes the responsibility for delivery from Synod to user in most situations. Pay more, get less. Their solution to the problems of the changes in the post office is to put it up on a web site and make others find it and print it out at their cost.

4-08

Expands the presidents authority in planning conventions slightly and removes all time expectations from the procedure.

4-09

Streamlining the present system, but not altering the parts that have given offense - such as the president's power of appointment.

4-10

A reasonable change.

4-11

Codifying a CCM ruling. Even if it is defeated, the effect is null because the opinion will not have been vacated by the convention.

4-12

Housekeeping

4-13

Housekeeping

4-14

Poorly worded attempt to permit meetings to be done using technology rather than requiring travel and hotels.

4-15

Cost cutting. May not be wise - would rather implement go-to-meeting type technology and keep a variety of voices in the loop. Resolution is filled with bureaucratic-speak jargon.

4-16

Ov. 4-23 should be removed from the resolution by amendment. This issue is one that should be decided by the convention, not by the greedy overlords.

5-01

a gimmee.

5-02

Pointless, and a gimmee.

5-03

[Sarcasm alert] Why not simply ordain everyone at their baptism and stop this charade? - vote no. AC XIV

5-04

Waste of paper.

5-05

Another attempt to require continued education and hold the pastors hostage to the whims of the DP's - which they already are, pretty much - vote NO

5-06

Reverses things: the old way had the board of regents select the candidates and the electors elect them. This resolution has the electors -now called the "prior approval panel" determines who can be on the slate and the Board of Regents does the electing.

5-07

Generalizes the duties of the President and reduces his direct authority. The old by-laws gave the President the power to delegate his duties and responsibilities to others. I think that system was better.

5-08

A total change, eliminating by-laws about application, certification and placement. 5 pages of by-laws reduced to 14 lines.

5-09

The rationale explains that most people would not be qualified to be on the board of Regents. Gotta have advanced degrees and directly applicable experience and stuff.

5-10

Removes notification of intent to grant tenure from the process. Cuts out the ignorant layman and bellicose pastor.

5-11

. . . is the same resolution as 5-10

5-12

Eliminates the expectation that faculty will be rostered members of Synod, because "in many disciplines of study the most qualified faculty members are not rostered members of the Synod". Simply regularizing a practice that is contrary to the present constitution and by-laws.

5-13

Recommends rejecting specific memorials because the Board behind the committee doesn't like them.

6-01

Thank God that Human Care does what it is supposed to.
a Gimmee.

6-02

Another pro-life resolution. Good, but unnecessary.

6-03

Extending the definition of a call officially to those who serve as institutional chaplains and instructors.

6-04

To join the Lutheran Malaria Initiative - along with the ELCA, LWR and accept support from the UN. Good passion. Bad associations. Say NO.

6-05

To more formally support Prison Ministry - kind of a gimmee.

6-06

To continue working in the area of Domestic Abuse. a gimmee

6-07

To work to end human trafficking and slavery. another kind of gimmee.

After all, isn't the church really all about social ministry - helping the underdog. That is the real meaning of religion, right? Then we become ELCA Light.

7-01

To encourage the hokum called the Task force on Synodical Harmony. A Hokum Gimmee

7-02

Refusal to admit when the CCM makes a mistake - continuing to hold out the rationale for reversing the judgment against the unionism of David Benke. Once again, a rationalizing and justification.

7-03

To finally formalize a method of getting rid of troublesome members of Boards and Commission. Political expedience, and about time! Vote NO

7-04

Tweaking a bad system of reconciliation. Add a Layman.

7-05

Making sure that SMP's can receive calls, as long as they are approved by the DP.

7-06

Making it explicitly clear that we can call pastors from church bodies with which we are in fellowship.

7-07

Cannot pass this because the rationale, which is part of the resolution, is faulty and dishonest, and the resolution makes financial support of the Synod and completing statistical reports for the Synod part of the obligations of and condition of continuing membership in the Synod

7-08

Study the idea of establishing a statute of limitations in the Dispute Resolution Process

7-09

Decline overtures, specifically avoiding the desire to require CCM opinions to expire if not approved specifically in convention.

Committee 8 - Structure and Governance: "Run, Forest, Run!!"

8-01

Eliminate any distinction between rostered members of the Synod, now called "Individual Members" - and they all are eligible to be the non-lay delegate from the congregation.

8-02

Now moving to a quadrennium.

Congregations can no longer send in memorials to Synod - must send them to the circuit to process, and they must send them to District to process and send on to the Synod.

Enforcing the vocabulary of Minister of religion- Commissioned / ordained.

Eliminating Visitation Circuits and forming "Circuit Networks"

Circuit Forum will select the Circuit Counselor.

The District President shall nominate the candidates for Circuit Counselor.

The quadrennium will be Circuit Convocations, year 1, District Convocation, year 2, District Conventions Year 3, and Synodical conventions year 4.

8-03

Electing Circuit Counselors. Nominations begin with the congregations, but the District President has to have the right to nominate candidates. (Huh?)

8-04

Change in voting delegates to district conventions:
each congregation gets at least a layman, even in multiple congregation parishes.
In the event of a vacancy, each congregation can elect an "Individual member" to replace the pastor.
Churches with schools can send teachers instead of laymen.
Large parishes get twice as many delegates.

8-05

Synodical convention delegates are elected by the district
no longer pastoral delegates, but "individual member delegates"
The number of delegates per district will be computed based on A) 10% of the number of congregations in the Synod and B) the proportion of confirmed members in the district as a proportion of the Synodical whole.

8-06

Overtures may be submitted by congregations directly, but priority will be given to those which come through Circuit Forums and Districts.

8-07

To study how to deal with districts.

8-08

Leave CCM and CTCR alone - and Doctrinal review - and shuffle everything else into a two Board structure.

Treasurer will be CFO and appointed, not elected
Office of National Mission (ONM) and Office of International Mission (OIM) be established
Chief Mission officer oversee the ONM (above) working with CFO and CAO - Chief Administrative Officer
CMO also oversee the OIM (above)

8-09

makes explicit that congregations are sub-units of Synod, and responsible to carry out Synod programs - used to be Synod was the servant of the congregation

8-10

Adjusting things for the CFO no longer being an officer of Synod.

8-11

Formalize a procedure that will result in a new name for the Synod

8-12

To allow the BOD to adjust the handbook to reflect the new changes consistently

8-13

To give the President more power in the choosing of the First Vice-President.

8-14

To divide the Synod into five geographical regions and have one of each of the VP's elected from each region. Guaranteed to eliminate the possibility of electing conservative VP's

8-15

To allow the COP and the BOD to restructure the nominations to match the adopted new structure for this convention.

8-16

To require the new BOD be representative of the 5 regions.

8-17

To elect the president before the convention with all congregations having two votes two weeks before the convention.

8-18

To establish a 4 year cycle in place of the three year cycle.

8-19 & 8-20

Housekeeping to accommodate the change to a four year cycle.

8-21

changes to accommodate a four year cycle in term of office.

8-22

How to adopt doctrinal resolutions.

8-23 to 8-29
Housekeeping to update stuff

8_30

To change the requirements of membership in the Synod

8-32

to change the relationship of Synod to its members:
“B. Relation of the Members to the Synod

In their relation to the Synod, all members of the Synod, by voluntarily subscribing to the Confession (Article II) and the Constitution of the Synod, make a confession of faith, a joint commitment to God’s mission, and a mutual covenant of love. In so doing, they

1.Bind themselves to the confessional basis of the Synod (Article II);
2.Agree to abide by, honor, and uphold the collective will of the Synod as expressed in its Constitution, Bylaws, and convention resolutions;
3.Pledge their active involvement and support of the Synod’s efforts to carry out its mission and purpose; and
4.Promise that, if they find themselves to be in disagreement with the Synod’s actions or positions, they will so advise the Synod in a loving and evangelical manner, and if necessary follow the Synod’s authorized procedures for expressing dissent.


8-32

to reject all efforts to show this train down.


Hope that is a help as you sort through the book. Go ahead and comment your questions and I will try to respond.

A brief response to Enroute . . . to Increased Harmony

One can hardly look at the report in the Reporter concerning the “Task Force on Synodical Harmony” without recognizing that it first and foremost illustrates the progress of error as outlined by the sainted Dr. Charles Porterfield Krauth, and that our Synod is well on it way between step two and step three. As a member of Synod, and therefore having a stake in the condition of our Synod, I find it difficult to trust the neutrality of the Task Force based solely on its origin. The contents of the abbreviated report in the Reporter appears to justify that lack of trust.

The first error of the report is the tacit assumption that the disharmony in the Synod is wrong, that is, that it is not as it should be in the light of the Synod as it exists today. One might effectively argue that the conditions in which the Synod finds itself is unfortunate, and in need of remedy, but that the consequent disunity and discord is viewed as a problem to be addressed independent of the causes of that disharmony is simply as symptom of the precarious condition of the Synod. The assumption that the Synod as it exists should not have sharp divisions and consequent discord is a demonstration of both the futility of the mission of the task force and that the task force itself is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Discord in the Synod is not destructive of our unity in Christ or our concord in doctrine and practice, as asserted in the report. It is, in fact, that lack of unity in doctrine and practice that is creating the discord and disharmony. Far from being the cause, it is the symptom. Since the report views the situation from precisely the wrong perspective, it cannot help repair the problem, but will only serve to deepen the divide. Lip service to the potential blessings arising from conflict cannot disguise the faulty foundation upon which the effort proceeds. Discord is the symptom of the underlying disunity, not the cause of it.

The report is correct in noting that the problem is not merely that we are divided, but that many times those involved in the disputes of our church body conduct themselves in ways that are unbecoming the children of God and unhelpful to achieving the results that one must assume they hope to achieve, if one puts the best construction of everything as Luther so wisely counsels Christians to do. Polemical language is often strident, and emotions run deeply, but it is the part of Christians to eschew judging the heart of the other and addressing the problems clearly, taking no offense at the casual weaknesses of others as they struggle with issues that divide us and are of such significance in the faith of the disputants. Forgiveness and charity are proper starting points even in a debate. The battle will not be won, after all, by human chicanery, but by the Word of God, and not always immediately, but in God’s good time and order.

I will briefly address the seven ‘aspects’ of disharmony as reported in the “Board Briefs” contained in the Reporter mailed to members throughout the Synod. Regardless of the intention of the individual members of the task force, the report both lays bare the nature of the problem and explains, unintentionally I believe, why the effort to find unity and concord in the Synod by this methodology is doomed to failure. First on the list is “Inability to Deal with Diversity”. It notes that “most (not all) presenters agreed that our church is blessed with amazing concord in matters of doctrine”. The standard applied, however, must be measuring our agreement in doctrine against the diversity of doctrine throughout the spectrum of what calls itself “Christianity”. By that standard, any agreement is significant. The historic position of our church body is not to seek a minimal amount of agreement, but total agreement in doctrine. Against the more rigorous standard of our forefathers, we do not possess “amazing concord” in doctrine, but striking disunity on all but the most fundamental of doctrines, and some uncertainty even there within our Synodical ranks.

Our concord is further tarnished by the relegation of such things as admission to the Holy Communion, worship substance and style, the Office of the Public Ministry, the role of laity, and the “service” of women in the church to the realm of “practice” as opposed to doctrine. The report appears to gloss over the significant disunity in our midst over the understanding of the relationship and connection between doctrine and practice. Every controversy in our Synod appears to be categorized as an issue over practice, and assumed to be “non-doctrinal” (however that may be variously understood). The issue is acknowledged in the report, but appears clearly to be viewed by the Task Force from the perspective on those who do not stand with the historic doctrines and practices of our Synod in these controversies.

Second is “A Lack of Civility”. It is unfortunate that the analysis is couched in the terms of the unhelpful characterizations of only one element in the controversies of our Synod. There is no doubt that commandments have been breached by members on all sides of the questions in our Synod, but the official response from elements of the leadership of the synodical organization has often been to mis-characterize sincere and honest efforts at addressing the issues amongst us as violations of this or that commandment with no possibility of debate or discussion concerning those judgments, let alone the issues in question. To hear the charge repeated without a frank acknowledgment that it applies to all parties in the disunity of our Synod is disheartening and counter-productive.

The third point is spot on. The Synod is becoming politicized because the problems in our Synod are increasingly addressed from a political rather than theological foundation. Power trumps, and it does not appear that which “side” is in ascendancy changes that element of the equation – to the frustration of many who are not fighting for a team, but for the Synod’s well-being and for the Word of God to hold sway.

Aspect number four suggests that this is primarily a clergy problem. Two truths stand out that argue against the assertion being made here. First, pastors are supposed to be shepherds who protect their flock against the wolves. When error is openly tolerated and practiced, pastors are supposed to speak up. Viewing this as a “problem” is false and unhelpful. This is a clergy problem much like sound Biblical doctrine is inconvenient. It is only a problem if the clergy are leading away from the Word of God and sound practice, unless the one making this judgment is inconvenienced by the truth and unwilling to conform to the “sound words”, as in 1 Timothy 6:3.

The second truth which argues against this “aspect” is that when a congregation changes in new and unsettling ways, the laity who find the changes robbing them of the comforts of the Word and the familiar commonplaces of the liturgy (for example), often find that there is no alternative available for them. They have no congregation to flee to, no safe-haven of Word and Sacrament when the congregation at which they have been worshiping takes it upon itself to divest itself of the familiar and strike boldly out in a new and diverse direction. When the preaching is corrupted, when the hymns are taken away and replaced with less substantial songs, when creeds are discarded as too confining or “not visitor friendly”, the problem is not a clergy problem, it is a laity problem - they have, in many cases, no adequate alternative, and no champion to speak for them or fight for them.

Pastoral formation is supposed to prepare men to stand on the battlements and endure all odds for the sake of the truth and to protect and defend the sheep of the flock. To question pastoral formation because there are occasionally men who will actually take up the task to which their vows of ordination commit them - rather than because there are so many who will not and claim the right to be called ‘pastor’ while they fail to shepherd the flock in the pastures of the Word - is misguided and appears unhelpfully partisan.

Poor Communication across “party lines” (#5) results as often as not from commitment to different positions. Children often assume that communication is the same as capitulation. You haven’t ‘heard’ them unless and until you agree with them. The same mind-set afflicts many in the controversies of the church. Until we can understand that someone may disagree with us who truly understands us, we will continue to talk past one another. The task force needs to understand that what is lacking is the humility to be corrected, not the ability to listen.

When a veteran of the controversies of the Synod hears someone talking about holding pastors accountable for causing disharmony, the nearly-automatic reaction is suspicion (#7) that someone wants to solve the controversy by eliminating the other side. What the Synod suffers from is not the lack of an enforceable code of conduct, but the lack of commitment to true concord and doctrinal unity. We have become unwilling to wrestle the big issues down, and as an organization, we have relinquished the authority to require our members to participate in resolving the divisions. In blunt terms, the Synod has surrendered doctrinal discipline, and error is treated as the equal of the truth in our Synod. In many places, error has the upper hand, and tolerates the truth no more. But our Synod is formally unwilling and unable to face that fact honestly. It is our inconvenient truth. It has been so since the Behnken solution to the shattering controversy of the Chicago Statement - the Statement of the 44 in 1945.

The result is distrust. (#7) The problem is not the loss of “the system” which served our Synod for so long, and finally betrayed our Synod in the twentieth century. Pastoral formation through high school and college and Seminary with those holding strikingly different theologies learning to treat each other as good buddies created the mess we have. Somehow, they learned not to fix the problem by addressing the theology but to be kind to one another as each “team” tried to out maneuver the other in controlling the Synodical apparatus. Truth became something like a game, and the truth lost when holding hands with one another became more important than standing for what is true.

The Task Force wants to understand how to go back to the days when “churchmanship” (#6) was more important than confession. If there was a real hunger for concord and unity, it would be sought in the Word of God, and addressing the questions before us frankly on the basis of the Word. Reading the history of the Synod shows us that there was a time when standing together on the truth was more important than standing together as buddies. Back then, when someone wanted to hold fast to something no one else agreed with, he left the Synod - willingly or not. If we want “Synodical Harmony”, we need to find our way back to that sort of commitment to truth and sound doctrine - and church practice that reflects both sound doctrine and our unity in it. This is called the church militant for a reason! As long as our commitment is to diversity in practice, which is also diversity in doctrine, we cannot and will not find concord and harmony. The most we can look forward to is the day when error is ascendant, as Krauth describes it, and drives out all who stand on the truth so that there is no one causing controversy left.

If that is the goal of the Task Force - a church without controversy - Charles Porterfield Krauth set forth the recipe back in 1871 in his book, The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology. All they need to do is open their copies and follow the directions.

Land of the Fee and Home of the Slave

The nation I grew up in died a little last night. One political party chose to use the power of majority (while they still held it) to pass legislation that the vast majority of Americans did not want them to pass, and fundamentally alter the nature of our country. The Democratic Party, which once stood for the people is now the Communist party, and stands astride the people as a master and a dominator.

The President lied boldly about what his health care program would do as he labored to promote it. Congress continued to pretend that they were doing something good for the people, something that the people really wanted, despite the fact that they clearly did not want the stuff they were being force-fed last night. Benjamin Franklin, when asked what sort of government the founding fathers had created, said that we had a republic, if we could hang on to it. We lost our grip a bit last night.

This has been coming in the form of deceitful and anti-American education for a century, and in the form of at least a double-standard for the laws of the nation. The common man is held to account for following the law. "Leaders" are free to ignore them. For example, when President Clinton committed a felony in perjuring himself before a Federal judge, it revealed that awful double standard. He got away with a slap on the wrist. If I had done precisely the same thing, I would do hard time. Now we have a tax-cheat running the IRS, and an apologist for American enemies serving as Attorney General. Crime isn't crime if you are seated high enough in the right party -- see the corruption of the DFL politicians for illustration, or Barney Frank for example. and now America isn't America any longer.

Welcome to Amerika. Although he lied copiously on the way to this health care mess, President Obama actually told us what he intended to do when he was running for the presidency. Very few paid attention , and most of those who heard him could not believe he was actually capable of being what he said he was going to be and doing what he said he was going to do.

Now reality sets in. The only question is whether the defenders of freedom and capitalism and America that remain in our political system will have the courage to do what is necessary to turn this thing around. I hope so, but I sincerely doubt that we have conservative politicians with that kind of steel in their spine. Today we face a new reality - and it is going to get much worse before it gets better.

Internet Christianity

I am a member of a number of email "chat" groups. They are all related to the faith. As I participate, and observe the nature of the discourse, I have begun to formulate an assessment.

Internet Christianity is not confessional, nor does it advance confessional thinking, generally. What it advances is personal kind of faith, a highly idiosyncratic theology. People start by asking questions, which is good, but soon the discourse turns to a discussion which floats heavily in the direction of "I think so-and-so," of "I feel thus and so about this or that."

Confessional theology is grounded in truth, an objective, outside-of-me truth. The Lutheran Confessions provide just such a framework on the topics that they address. Internet Christianity becomes very individual and not shaped so much by an external truth but by an internal monologue.

Faith has always been personal and internal, but it needs to be grounded in reality which is not open to personal modification. Scriptures provide that, to some extent, although most people are comfortable doing what they refer to as "interpretation". By that they generally mean that they dismiss what they are uncomfortable with and redefine terms in parts so that what it means to them is often contrary to the literal sense of the text.

Theology which is highly personal and, as I defined it above, idiosyncratic, is not a strength for the church. It may start innocently enough, but it can lead quite easily to the sort of denial and redefinition that one might observe in the Emerging Church Movement.

Aside from the "I believe what I like" sort of excess encouraged in Internet Christianity, we find it possesses an atomizing effect. The Church is a unity, a common confession of truth, and a body of shared experience. The individual sitting alone behind their computer screen determining for themselves what seems right and feels right and does not offend their sense of religion provides only half of the experience of the church. Everyone has always made those sorts of assessments in the privacy of their own thoughts, but historically in the church, people were forced to do this in the context of the constant presence of the body of the believers around them for worship, for the teaching ministry of the church, and for the fellowship of the saints. They were simultaneously being homogenized with the confession of the church around them and wandering freely in their own judgments. Either half of this process without the other is unhealthy.

There is no un-ringing of this bell. The contents of this 'pandora's box' cannot be forced back into the container. Internet Christianity is here to stay. This is just a caution for those who engage in it. Do not allow this process to become a fractionalizing experience in the church. It will not serve the Church, her mission, or you personally, well.

You Don't Own Me

The one perspective I have yet to hear on the news is that the nanny-state health care being proposed for our nation overlooks one thing, the citizen is not a possession of the state. The government in America is supposed to be of the people, for the people, and by the people. The government has absolutely no business trying to decide who should or must have health insurance.

It is none of their business! I am not a ward of or the property of the state. It is supposed to be my servant as a citizen.

The state has no business telling me what I can eat, or what activities I can or cannot indulge in. It may limit activities by law that infringe on others, but what I do that does not involve others is none of their business.

This new none-dare-call-it-socialism is simply the unlawful removal of the basic rights and freedoms of American citizens. Get out of my business, and do your own job, government! Protect our nation's sovereignty, defend our freedoms, help the states co-operate in things that they must co-operate in for peace and prosperity, enforce our laws, but get out of my pocket, and out of my life where I am not threatening any one else's rights or freedom.

The state simply has no business telling me that I must be healthy, or do things the way someone else likes them done - at least not in my private life.

This used to be America, but, as the the security guard in the video that went viral on the web said, "it ain't no more!"

Definitions

Theology is the art of making distinctions, at least in one sense. I like defining things, so that they makes sense, at least to me.

A Politician:

A person who will say anything, true or not, in order to be permitted to do (or get away with having done) whatever they desire.

For illustrations, look to Congress, or any state governing body (or elected government figure), i.e. Nancy Pelosi, Charles Rangel, Harry Reid, President Obama, etc..

This Is Why

People wonder why the leaders of this nation do not appear to be overly concerned with the troubles that the citizens seem to be enduring. The answer is very simple, they are Humanists.

These people are humanists of the stripe of those who produced the Humanist Manifestoes in the last century. They stand in stark contrast to Christians and other theistic religions which generally have a code of ethics and compassion. It is sadly true that not every religionist has always lived up to their religous confessions. There is a simple reason for that. It is called, "SIN". Humanity, as a species, is sinful by nature, and tends to fail when it comes to keeping moral commitments. Some failures are small, and some are quite large. Some don't matter to anyone except the one who fails, and some matter a great deal to many people. But fail or not, these people who practice religion based on the Bible have a code of compassion toward others, and tend to be concerned about how the other guy is doing.

Humanists do not. They will use the distress of others to motivate people to support them, or to empower their agenda for change, but they do not care about people, precisely because they are humanists. Read the Humanaist Manifesto II. It boldly asserts that there is no deity out there, caring about us, motivating our caring about one another, saving anyone. When they list the great destructive pressures of human society, "vulgarization, commercialization, bureaucratization, and dehumanization", they offer no solution. They simply tell us to pursue life's enrichment "despite [these] debasing forces". The traumas and terrors of human life are merely the evolutionary pressures which are to be endured and overcome by those fit enough to survive.

If you wonder why they campaign on the troubles oflife, as though they were going to resolve them, if elected, but never seem to actually fix the problems, it is because they never intended to fix them. The troubles are easy handles to motivation for getting people to vote for them. Solving the problems would make the elected officials less important and less necessary. Besides, they expect you to either survive or not, pretty much on your own. These problems are viewed as the evolutionary forces necessary to cull the herd of the unfit. It helps to remember, when dealing with committed evolutionists, that evolution does not care about the individual. Evolution is scarcely conscious of the individual. It focuses on populations, and is really about the species as a group, without a concern for any specific member of the group -excluding themselves, of course.

A New World

President Obama proudly proclaims that the United States is not a Christian nation. Sadly, this is only too true.

But now he tells the Muslim world that we are a Muslim nation - Now it is getting spooky!

Nonsense

I read daily about the dust-up in the Republican party between the "moderates" and the "conservatives". Clearly this is a debate by people so deeply entrenched in the world of Washington politics that they have lost all sight of reality.

First, who is Colon Powell to be lecturing on what is or is not a Republican? He went public in support of the Democrat candidate long before the vote, and he has given no evidence that his opinion has been altered by the mismanagement of the government by Obama since. If he is still a Republican, then so is Obama.

Second, political parties are supposed to offer alternative ideas, not simply different groups of men and women to enact the same ideas. If the "big tent" is so big that social progressives fit in and should have a significant voice in guiding the party, where do those who disagree go to find representation? How do we challenge the status quo and the mindless assault on our prosperity and liberties? The Republican party is not just "our team". It is supposed to be the champion of a set of principles and ideas distinct from the Democrats. It is supposed to offer real choice, not just more of the same in a different color wrapper.

Because the two national parties have abandoned the business of offering real choices, the political landscape is becoming fragmented to a significant degree. I imagine that we will see the sort of multiple-party electioneering that we see in Europe in the none-too-distant future, right here is America.

Pity.

Something Old, Something New . . .

I saw it in the newsletter of a congregation I was once a member of.  It is called "Natural Church Development".  I was curious.  The few comments about the program indicated that they had gotten the materials from somewhere official.  The program information suggested it was similar to a host of "church growth" programs.  I wondered where it had come from and who was behind it.  That sort of information often speaks volumes about things - church programs in particular.

So, I "googled" it.  I discovered that it was a program of the Seventh-Day Adventists.  As I read the materials available on-line, I found that it was pretty much a rehashing of the same-old church growth stuff.  It claimed that it was not, and that it was all about allowing the Word of God and the Power of God to cause the church to grow all by itself.  The only problem was that it identified concern over things such as sound doctrine as "legalism" which was detrimental to the growth of the church and of the eight characteristics of a "healthy" church.

The materials quoted by the pastor of the congregation focus on depending on the Word to work all by itself (which is a special phrase in NCD, they call it the "all by itself" principle).  The other materials talk about being "scientific" about things.  The Holy Spirit is the only one who can make the church grow, but if we get out of the way of the Holy Spirit (by doing things as they ought to be done properly) the church will grow.

The materials tell us that the purpose of the NCD program is not numerical growth or increased money in the coffers.  But then the materials go on to say that those churches that have used three or more surveys by the group - and their 'coaches', of course - have a track record of 51% growth in those areas.

I don't want to repeat the eight points of the program.  You can search that out for yourself.  But a "healthy" church, they report, does not care about "right doctrine".  Spiritual worship is "fun" and filled with laughter.  And small groups are very important (not "cells", mind you), but their focus is not supposed to be about teaching what the Word of God says.  No, "holistic groups . . . go beyond just discussing Bible passages to applying its message to daily life" - whatever that may mean.  And the "holistic" group is really focused on reaching out to those who do not belong to the church.  "The meaning of the term "discipleship" becomes practical in the context of holistic small groups: the transfer of life, not rote learning of abstract concepts."

Oh, yes, and Evangelism is about meeting needs.  "Need-oriented evangelism intentionally cultivates relationships with pre-Christian people".  It is to be need-centered, not message centered.  "Using appropriate ministries and authentic relationships, believers can guide others into the family of God."

The congregation in whose newsletter I noticed this program is always facing a financial challenge.  They operate a day school, K thru 8 -- and it is a good school!  I also noticed that the starter kit for this program is $175.  Never let an opportunity to make some money slip by!

The program is church growth warmed over and dressed in scientific respectability.  It is about butts in the pew and cash in the coffers, not about church or salvation at all.  It is like yogurt, you can flavor it any way you want so that it can seem Lutheran, for example, but it is fundamentally guided by those surveys and how your church is or is not meeting the goals and fitting the paradigm of a "healthy" congregation.

The ELCA is all over this program.  And now, it seems that the Missouri Synod is awakening to it, too.  Pastors beware!

An Old Question Answered

They asked the question, "How could all those reasonable people have permitted Hitler and the Nazi's to do the atrocious things they did?"  Of course, that question has been asked of all of those societies that permitted monstrous evil to walk the streets unchallenged.

Our society is answering that question with a living demonstration.  The news media, once responsible, is now demonizing everything they disagree with in the most extreme and irrational ways.  Conservative Christianity is caricatured as the cause for the loss of faith.  Conservative thought is seriously described as a form of insanity.  Conservative religion is styled as "extreme" and "fundamentalistic".  Advocates for liberal agendas openly assault institutions that they see as standing in their way - illustrated for us by gay activists interrupting worship services to throw literature and condoms around, and shout epithets at the worshipers.

Because 53 percent of the voters selected a candidate who was openly associated with the cause of  the social progressives, those who identify with that cause feel empowered and emboldened to spew their opinions publicly, and the media is reporting it all as though it were important news.

When the extremists have control of the political, and the media give voice only to them and their ilk, you end up with a society doing monstrous things, and pretending it is all so very reasonable.  Big Brother has finally arrived, he just got here twenty-five years behind schedule.

God help us, the inmates have taken over the asylum.

I Don't Get It

My puny portfolio has taken a beating.  The value of my home has dropped by approximately 20% -- according to the reports on the financial sites.  Jobs are vanishing with a swiftness not seen for seventy-plus years.  Things don't look good, and the news media is saying positively that things are bad.

Then I go to the gas station, and although I watch on the internet as crude oil drops day-by-day, my local gas station prices just went up a nickle per.  I go to the stores and prices are up for everything.  Walmart's prices are up.  Even the Subway in Walmart is now charging $1.60 for the bag of popcorn that was just recently one dollar even.

My taxes are bound to go up, seeing as how the new president is doubling down on Mr. Bush's unwise and ineffective approach to the economic woes.  Local government is cutting back on services and putting the hourly help on shorter hours (but paying the commissioners and the salaried people - the supervisors - the same money!).

If we are in a recession, shouldn't something other than my income and my investments recede? 

Hey business guys!  If you want more business from a shrinking money pool, raising your prices is the wrong approach.  Try charging less.

Sounding Eerily Familiar

Drudge Report has a headline story about Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi holding forth on how birth control will help the economy.

It has been clear that the pro-choice lobby is anti-human, and anti-life, but now one of the leading democrats has taken the position that people are a problem, and has come one step closer to government mandated birth control. It is a small step from pointing out how extra children are disadvantageous to the economy and regulating the number of permissible children in a family - as China has done, for example.

Spooky!

Here We Go!

We have the first signs. The President refuses to answer reporters' questions. His surrogates decline to answer certain questions. The "drive-by" media scarcely takes notice.

Now we have 'The Media' uncritically accepting false claims because they target the right. Right Here. We have a difficult time ahead when the watchdogs are not only asleep, but are helping those they are supposed to be watching.

Welcome to the New World

I avoided the coverage of the inauguration.  I wasn't able to totally avoid it, but most of it passed me by silently.  Since then, the little news I have permitted into my world has confirmed my suspicions that what was once called "The News Media" is now simply a propaganda apparatus frantically trying to hide the truth and disguise reality.

I have read several comments about how the election of Obama was the fulfillment of the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr., that a man would be judged by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin.  Senator Clair McCaskill of Missouri - a member of the Obama campaign team - even stated that it was denigrating the president to focus on his color or ethnicity.  He was elected because of who he is and because of his ideas.  Well, at least that was her take on it.

And it was egregiously dishonest.  Obama was not elected on the basis of the content of his character.  The media did all that it could to hide what little about Obama and his character leaked out.  Far from denigrating the president, Obama's identity and chief campaign issue was his race.  No one else talked about it, but he was campaigning constantly on the claim that everyone else would talk about it, point to it and try to make the public uneasy.  Any debate surrounding the few words that slipped out of Obama's mouth during the campaign was attacked as "racist" by his shills in the party and in the main-stream media.

Everybody says, "give him a chance".  Honestly, we don't have any choice there.  He is the president.  He has at least four years.  The first two will be with the most partisan and least rational Democrat majorities in both houses of congress.  We will see what he will be.  Everyone hopes that he is good for the country - for the economy, for our national security, for our future.  I share that hope.

But the man has promised to do things I believe will not work well for our economy, or for our national security, or for our future.  My fondest hope is that when Obama has finished his work, the United States is still a free nation, and not a newly minted third-world country with a struggling economy and gravely distressed national security.

Here's to our 44th president, Barack Hussein Obama.  God help us, and give him wisdom.

Comforable Illusions

I watch the news, and I am impressed by the number of notions that we seem to share as a society that are not true.

That this nation is a free country:  We have a history of freedom, but our liberties are being taken from us daily by laws regulating behavior which is rightly of no concern to others, and by taxes that seek to impose the values of another on the populace, and by a news media which fails in its duty so abysmally and deliberately.

That 'We, the people' exercise significant political power.  That power exists, but it it is muted by politicians who disregard the will of their constituents once they are elected (with the willing complicity of the Media), by politically owned machines that disable the election process - as in Minnesota this year, or Washington state a few years back, and by a double standard of justice which makes what is a scandal for a Republican into a political virtue for a democrat, and always expects morality and decency from one party and excuses the bald lack of it from the other.

That you can depend of the news Media for anything resembling truth or honesty.

That "good people" tend to think alike.  The fact is that when most Americans are confronted by the truth, they choose to believe something else - and don't want to know, for fear that it will upset them.

It makes life a challenge.  We need to deal with reality as it is, not with myths which put us to sleep.

Amusing

It is amusing, in a sad and somewhat frightening sort of way, to watch the media fawn over Obama. The Philadelphia Enquirer had posted on-line (but has since corrected) a poll asking which president Obama reminds people of. The choices were JFK, FDR, Lincoln, or Bobby Kennedy! Set aside the fact that Obama isn't President yet, Bobby Kennedy never got there!

Personally, I would have voted for Herbert Hoover.

A Man Without a Country

Rarely does anything as expected as the Obama election cause so much distress in me as this event has. I am profoundly dispirited by the meaning of the election, as I understand it.

The reality is, as yet, to be revealed. Obama promised a lot of things in his long campaign. His personal history promises many things as well. Nothing he has said clears up the mystery of what he will do, nor reduces the potential misfortune his election presages. The reality awaits. I suspect that it may take a generation of two to fully develop and for the consequences of this election to be fully appreciated - although appreciated is hardly the right connotation to apply.

First, let it be clear that the one factor everyone pretends was a non-factor, and yet is his chief claim to fame (at this point in time) – race – has no part in my reaction to the election. I quit counting race as significant in evaluating a person long ago. In fact, it seems to me that we have fallen far short of Martin Luther King’s dream of the day when we judged a person by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. The most celebrated fact in the news coverage of this election result is that we have elected a black man to the highest office of the land - FINALLY.

The content of his character, however, has been deliberately hidden, covered, and ignored. His personal history, sparse as he has allowed the record to be, is troubling. His philosophical mentor is Saul Alinsky, a communist agitator. His personal hero is Frank Marshal Davis, a communist. His one mistake in the campaign, echoing the Marxist credo with the now famous “redistribution” comments to Joe the Plumber. Programs mentioned during the primary campaign - which largely disappeared from his conversation during the major campaign were frightening: withdrawing our troops immediately from the conflict in Iraq and subsequently in Afghanistan, funding a poverty program for the other nations of the world through the UN, unilaterally disarming our nation, negotiating with those around the world who would like to destroy us simply because we are not Moslem without preconditions, and to the aim of making them more content with us, bankrupting the coal industry, ending the use of oil in this nation within a decade, and declining to increase our use of nuclear fuel - effectively reducing our economy to third-world status.

It comes to mind that Hugo Chavez was elected by popular vote in Venezuela. Adoph Hitler was elected by popular vote in times of severe economic distress in the 1930's in Germany. Given the agenda - murky though it is - which has emanated from the One who has been waiting for himself, the possibilities are troubling. Obama has already thrown newspapers off his campaign plane for failing to endorse him. He does not treasure free speech for those who do not kowtow to his ideas. He has signaled his agreement with eliminating the free expression on the radio by returning to the policies of the “fairness doctrine”. He has given too little information to give any thinking person confidence in what he would not do, and too much for comfort when one ponders what he might attempt.

The President-elect announced in his victory proclamation that now we would begin to change this nation. That agenda tells me that the nation I grew up in, served in the military as my duty, during the Vietnam thing, and have always loved, is soon to be no longer. Something else is to take its place - a changed nation. No longer my America - now just something called the United States, but not the United States of the past.

At the same time, I must admit that my church body has changed too. Once famous for its rock-solid commitment to sound doctrine, our President is now famous for telling us that this is not our grandfather’s church, and he has instituted a program which leads the church body away from its historical practices and commitments. I feel that my church body is no longer the Lutheran Church I grew up in and in which I spoke my vows of ordination.

My country is committed to becoming something else, and my church is committed to becoming something other than it has historically been. I feel like a man without a county!

But I do take comfort in this, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yes and forever.”

The Tension Is Almost Unbearable!

Tomorrow we vote!

Are the polls rights?

What will this nation look like in a year, or three?

Tonight is a time for prayer.

Among the things we can give thanks for is that this endless election cycle is coming to an end . . . just in time for the 2012 presidential election campaign to start!

May God have mercy on us!

Now This Is Funny!

Scientists in Europe constructed this 17 mile long supercollider to re-enact the Big Bang.  It took more than two decades to build and cost over ten BILLION dollars.  They started it up last week, and it ran for about 36 hours before it broke down.  It will now require a couple of months to repair.

What a remarkable use of resources!  How well built and cleverly designed!  It is reminiscent of the Hubble Telescope which was put into orbit with faulty mirrors and opticals and needed to be repaired in outer space before it was useful.  Don't you just love the care and precision of modern science!  This is just hilarious!

Fascinating!

What would you do if you had the ability to shape the perspective on the world of huge numbers of your fellow citizens?

That is the question the denizens of the so-called "Main Stream Media" have been busy trying to answer. The MSM, as it is widely known, holds the marvelous ability to shape how people see the world by both what it reports (and chooses not to report) and how it deigns to color that report. In some cases, details, like party affiliation, are highlighted, and in others, they are completely ignored. Recountings of history can include events, and assign them a significance they did not originally possess, or significant events can be ignored entirely! The power of the MSM is eeriely like that of Big Brother in the Orwell book, 1984.

So what is the MSM doing with that frightening power? They are using it to reveal, not disguise, their prejudices and errant presuppositions. Rather than quietly and craftily guide and shape public opinion, as they had for so many years, the MSM seems to have adopted the program of wildy flailing about in obvious and ridiculous ways to call attention to the complete lack of objectivity they possess, and to emphasize their utter lack of interest in anything but their own desire to deceive.

This makes for great theater! If you agree with the perspective on society and politics clearly embraced by the MSM, it is pleasing - or it should be - to see one's own prejudices so energetically endorsed. For those who hopes and dreams (or, merely their intellect) lead them to view society from a different political and social paradigm, the display undresses the naked biases and goals of the media that they once sought to hide beneath the disguise of objectivity and the stated desire to merely report (not shape) the news of the day. Those who agree can find joy in such overt endorsement, and those who disagree may find cheer in the transparency of the activism of the reportage.

Oddly, the clarity of their advocacy of a specific partisan agenda seems to have been working against the effectiveness of their effort. Even partisans on the MSM's side of the issues find themselves blushing for shame at the naked ambition and the complete disregard for fact coming from the media claiming the mantle of "truth-speakers".

Take the case of Governor Sarah Palin. She is a demonstrably respectable woman. She is bright, and her value system shines forth from her personal acts and decisions. She takes on political corruption for the benefit of the populace. Her home-grown naivete is reflected in the quaint notion that government should serve the people, and not the other way around. She carries a Downs Syndrome child full term, living out her stated convictions about the sanctity of life, and her opposition to abortion. Like the elephant in the tale by Dr. Seuss, which so many of us grew up hearing, she means what she says, and she says what she means -- or so it would appear. A decent human being, one of apparent conviction and action, Mrs. Palin has natural appeal. She seems like someone it would be nice to know personally.

But the MSM responds to her viscerally and violently. If they don't like her stand on the issues, and it seems clear that they don't, they could debate her, or simply dismiss her stance as they have so many others for so many years. But they attack her ad hominem, that is, against her person and not her opinions or her issues. The depravity of the attack is breath-taking!

What is fascinating is how this time it appears to be flashing back upon the MSM. It puts one in mind of the child's response to school-yard verbal bullying, "I'm rubber, you're glue. Everything bounces off of me and sticks on you." How very appropriate! It is about time.

The Meaning of Words

Rush Limbaugh is always saying "words mean things". During the non-stop coverage of Hurricane Gustav, we became quite familiar with the phrase "Breaking News!" Judging by its continual use to introduce non-news, it appear that the phrase has been forcibly modified to mean, "Here is something we haven't mentioned in the last quarter hour or so." And, by the way, the reporters don't have to look and sound so disappointed that we did not have another disaster with Gustav the way we did with Katrina. It was an almost out-of-body sort of experience to hear the so-called "news" media repeating lies and distortions about Katrina which have since been proven to be false. Oh, for the good old days of hype and excess, eh, Shep?

I must be getting old

I just read the Lutheran Witness for August 2008. I remember a time when it was a theological magazine. Today it is something else. Actually, it has been for sometime now.

In the present issue is an article of personal recollection with no apparent point, except to vent the author's memories. Of course, there was also the cutesy use of the nickname, "Shabby".

The article on marriage was nice, but it almost seemed like a set-up for the reprinting of a widely reported statement by President Kieschnick on the issue of same-sex marriage. The statement is fine, except for the unfortunate use of the term "Judeo-Christian", and the omission of the stance of the Missouri Synod that homosexual inclinations are also not according to the will of God.

The next article dealt with Mormon plural marriage. It makes no point, except to inform in a general sort of way.

Then there is an article by the CEO of the Lutheran Social Service of the South. Judging by the accompanying picture (and the first paragraph) , it takes off from the point of plural marriage to make a heart-felt appeal for dealing in a socially responsible (and culturally mandated) way with abuse of children. It is really about following society's values and doing what our laws instruct us to do.

The high point seemed as though it would be the article on Music. It highlighted a note that organists were becoming harder to find, especially in smaller parishes, but then offered no hope and no ideas workable in my situation, or other situations I am familiar with. Seemed to me that it would have been the right place to talk about the need for standard MIDI music for the parish, but no such luck.

Next was a fine advertisement for the LCMS Foundation, disguised as an article. Give more money was the message. It was followed by a full-page ad entitled, "Have You Discovered the Joy of Giving?", for the Foundation.

Then we have a heartwarming article about people who raise miniature donkeys, and apparently use the coloration of the fur on the animal's shoulders as an evangelism tool.

Then we have a discussion of suicide from the statistical and psychological points of view. No theology here, either.

I confess there was a Bible Study. I tried to read through it, but it was . . ., well, dull. But that is my problem.

And the magazine wraps up with a paean to "Fan into Flame", the fund-raising portion of the "Ablaze " program. More money. Another appeal to give.

Reading the "Official publication of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod" is depressing. There was nothing uplifting in it. Like I said, I must be getting old. I expected more.

Memories

I received word the other day that one of the congregations I served in my first parish is closing its doors after a final service on August 17th. Zion Lutheran Church of Hoskins, Nebraska. The locals call it "Zion East".

I have mixed feelings about it. I loved that church and most every single member. Clem and Lorena Weich, who were the perennial youth group leaders, Herman Koepke (and his bride, Dorothy, and their children), The Andersons, and, well, too many people to name, and too long ago to be sure that I would not misspell their names or forget someone who is, in memory, precious to me. I have personal stories about most of them, and they delight me when I think about them.

I only served as pastor there for two years. These were the people who had the first shot at teaching me how to be a pastor, and they did it with great patience and love.

I don't feel badly that the congregation must close. Every congregation has a life - it is born, it lives for a time, and it "dies". When I was there almost thirty years ago, I told them that if they could not support their congregation, they should close. At that time, they stepped it up a notch, and the congregation continued. As a small farm congregation, many of whose members drove past several other Lutheran congregations to get to "their" church, slow death by attrition was almost inevitable.

I just wanted to say, "Thank God for Zion East". It sheltered the saints of God for generations, and trained more than one pastor in how to be a pastor. I buried a number of the saints in their cemetery, and baptized a few children. It was my joy and honor to serve them, and serve the Lord among them. May God bless and keep the members who still live among us, and gather us in heaven, when the time is right, to sing that song of glory before the throne!

Hypocrisy

I observed many years ago that I went to the seminary to train for a job that didn't really exist in a church body that wasn't really there. I meant -- as I explained to anyone who asked -- that what I thought the parish ministry was, it wasn't. My mental picture of what a pastor was did not really resemble the reality. People did not deal with their pastors the way I did, and thought that everyone would. There was less respect. They tended to treat their pastors as oddities.

And the church I had grown up in had seemed so united and Christian, and about God and worship. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that it was not so. The church body (the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod) was all about money. Go figure. They talked about being united, but they had been divided since before my birth on theological grounds. Half of the church body did not believe the Bible was the Word of God. Some did not believe much of what the Bible teaches about Jesus. And that was almost thirty years ago.

A decade (or more) ago, I had a friend describe to me the arrogant dismissal of doctrine by a member of the Synodical missions staff. He called concern about truth and sound doctrine a "seminary mindset", and one which my friend was cautioned to dispose of as quickly as possible.

Apparently the church, which our beloved Synod's president intoned "is not your grandfather's" wasn't really my grandfather's church even back a while ago.

So, we live in a church that says that it stands to promote sound doctrine, but actually opposes it. It says that it exists to protect congregations from renegade pastors, but refuses to do so. It says that it stand to protect pastors against rogue congregations, but rather chooses to assist rogue congregations in abusing faithful pastors.

We call this the church militant. We are at war. Sadly, it seems like we are at war with one another rather than with the enemy, you know, the old evil foe. This is the place where you are trained to stand up for the truth -- and if you stand up for it, it simply makes you a target.

I do not regret for a minute that I became a pastor. I have known so many wonderful people -- and roughly as many monsters who wear their sheep disguise badly. I am what God called me to be. I gladly stand and take the arrows. I love to share the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ. I am simply not willing to pretend that the world - or the church - is anything other than what it is. And I wish that we could stop all the pretending and hypocrisy around us, at least in the church.

To that end, one must admire the fresh new openness of the Kieschnick Klan in St. Louis. They force faithful men out of their positions, fire confessional radio people, and can missionaries for the effrontery of actually doing mission work. Don't these people (the fired and abused) know that this all a con, and the synod is about money, not the Word of God? This not just not my grandfather's, it isn't really church, either. But dressed up in the disguise of religion, and the sense of "rightness" that accompanies so many in religion, they are confident that they are doing "God's work".

And He shall hold them accountable. May God have mercy on their souls.

An End to Freedom

We in America are facing the end of our liberties. We still retain the right to move around freely, if we can afford the fuel. We have a limited say in who our leaders are. But it is fast slipping away.

Choosing our leaders has become something decidedly other than the American people choosing them. It is true, of course, that we almost never have had the mythical power to choose who would be president. That was done for us in smoke-filled rooms. Today our candidates are chosen by primaries.

Republican candidates are chosen in Republican primaries where independents and Democrats cross over and vote for the least offensive candidate running, and slowly squeeze conservatives out of the race. It is amusing to hear the Democrats wringing their hands over Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos" in which he encourages Republicans to do the same sort of thing to prolong the Democrats' pain in the primary process. This deeply flawed and deceptive process is aided and abetted by the Mainstream Media deliberately smearing some candidates - even with deliberate untruths - and hiding and refusing to report the failings and foibles of the preferred candidates. This year the result is that there are no Republicans on the ballot, just two potential Democrats for the DFL ticket and a Democrat doppelgänger (and wannabee) as the "presumptive" Republican Candidate.

The severely flawed system has produced remarkable results in the past, such as JFK being elected by fraudulent votes in Kansas and Illinois. This year we have candidates staking out positions on issues before the primaries, and as soon as their candidacy is secured, they boldly deny their positions.

Freedom is gone when we cannot actually elect someone to do something that they say they will do and enforce their doing of it.

Most Americans, in any opinion poll, want our Immigration laws enforced. Our elected politicians stubbornly refuse to do it.

Our national security is daily eroded by elected leaders who will do and say anything, regardless of the long-term consequences. We desperately need a means of controlling their conduct -- but there is none available to us. They are not held to standards - not truth, not decency, not even the standard of the Law. Average Americans who did the things our politicians routinely get away with would be serving serious prison time.

It is facing the ugly realities that are arising in our modern society, and the sad truth of our impotence to make repairs to our system that make me so delighted I have faith in God who will make all things work out just right. Frankly, I can't imagine how to do it, even if I had the power to do so.

"Even so, Come Lord Jesus!"

Serendipity

The new Lutheran Witness arrived the other day. I assume it is for the month of May. The President's page, which is now prominently featured in the front of the magazine, was all about the shortage of pastors in the Missouri Synod - how we will need more pastors each year in the next ten years than we have been producing in any year for the last 35. The arguments were true. The statistics were doubtless accurate. The appeal to action was as it has been for decades.

This week we also received notice that a number of men will graduate from the seminary and not be placed immediately because there are too few calls for graduates. I didn't write down the numbers, but it was something like 18 St. Louis Graduates and 13 from Fort Wayne that will wait for someone to need one of those hundreds of pastors that we will need each year (something like 280) badly enough to call them. Meanwhile, the roster of congregations designated as "vacant but being served" (and therefore NOT calling a pastor) continues to grow in almost every district.

Of course, we must also add to the list the four hundred (plus!) pastors still on the roster who have been removed from their calls by various mechanisms due to the unchristian actions of their congregations. Men are fired, their compensation reduced or eliminated in order to force them out without technically 'firing' them , they are harassed daily and endlessly until
they collapse physically, or emotionally, and finally resign for the sake of a) their health, b) their families, c) the well-being of the few Christians in their congregations, or d) simply to escape the pressure-cooker their office has become. All of this, of course, with the approval, and often the participation of their District Office. In one case in Missouri, a pastor was forced to resign with
a small severance package, or be terminated immediately with no severance package, and the district president announced to the Circuit Pastor's Conference that he had "never seen that sort of situation handled in such a Christian manner before". That begs the question, of course, "How can something so ungodly be done in a 'Christian manner'?".

This all follows the time tested principle that if you just keep saying the same old things, and act as though nothing is happening, nothing is changed, most people will never notice. Stories are told of Jews during World War Two who were moved from their homes to concentration camps, and did not actually understand what was happening to them until they were being herded
into the gas chambers themselves. They were told that things were fine, they were being resettled in a new place, that things were a little rough for a short while, but nothing was amiss. They didn't pay attention to much -- not that it would have helped them a great deal -- because they were constantly being reassured that things were just fine.

During the time of the Synod's greatest upheaval, the official line from the Synod was that we are united in confession and moving forward. Until the Seminex debacle in the 1970's, most everybody seemed to believe that line. Even conservatives deeply involved in the controversies considered their adversaries to be friends who had just gotten a little mis-guided. "Oh, yeah, Ott. He's always been a little like that!" And any attempt to hold one to their words or their actions that went against the official line of the Synod was labeled a violation of the Eighth Commandment, true or not! (Actually, that is still happening!)

So, this past week we heard about the sorry situation of men who trained for at least four years, sometimes eight, and found no call at the end of their training, and at the same time, and impassioned plea to encourage young men to consider training for the parish ministry because we are going to be so short-handed in the very near future. Talk about the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing!

Lord, have mercy upon us!

Another Start

I am always intending to blog, but I never seem to stop to do it. I am trying something new - ScribeFire - an add-on to my Mozilla Firefox. Perhaps I can find time while I await the other things on my browser. Dial-up (which is all that is available at this address) is a pain in the sitting parts!

So, here we go with another start.

The Wonder of It All

Luke 2:1-14

Now it came about in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth. This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all were proceeding to register for the census, everyone to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register, along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child. And it came about that while they were there, the days were completed for her to give birth. And she gave birth to her first-born son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

And in the same region there were some shepherds staying out in the fields, and keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened. And the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which shall be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in cloths, and lying in a manger." And suddenly there appeared with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased."

I have heard the Christmas story every year for the fifty-seven years of my life. As a child, I memorized parts of it each year for my place in the annual Christmas program of the Sunday School. I memorized different parts each year until I had committed to memory the entire passage, from Luke 2, verse one, to verse twenty. I have sung it, and shouted it, and cried my way through it. I have preached it for over twenty years, and written several Christmas programs for Sunday Schools of parishes I have been called to pastor. Through it all, I have never gotten tired of it, nor ever lost the sense of the Wonder of it all.

It almost seems like a faerie tale. It has so many legends built up around it that many people today think that it is a legend itself. The Archbishop of the world-wide Anglican fellowship declared the Christmas narrative to be legend and fiction just this past week. It has the best qualities of a legend it is oft repeated, generally known although not generally well known, and has characters larger than life and it is filled with elements almost too fantastic to believe. It is often called "The Christmas Story." I try to avoid that phrase because it permits people to go on thinking that it is fiction. I try to be careful to call it the Christmas Narrative or the Christmas account. This re-telling of the events of that night so long ago, events of such cosmic significance, are the focus of our attention this day. Our theme is, "The Wonder of It All".

One of the things that doesn't seem to naturally occur to people as they consider the Biblical account of the birth of Jesus is how this simple narrative separates the Christian faith from so many religions, and this account from all of those myths and legends. Have you ever noticed how myths and legends begin? "Once upon a time . . .". They have no historical particularity. You cannot place them in real time and you cannot place them among real people. You cannot ever say that they really happened, nor can you often assert that nothing like it ever did happen.

But Christianity is different. The Christmas account is filled with time and place and people data that gives our faith a firm rooting in real time and history. Christmas is the first, and a very vital step, in bringing God and our salvation down to earth and reality.

God became one of us. You are dust and to dust you shall return, so said God through the Scriptures. He took on that dust for us. He stepped down from the glory of heaven and from what it is to be God and took on our humanity. He did that in Bethlehem. He humbled Himself to the form of an infant. The Wonder of it all!

Think about it! Almighty God endured becoming a helpless infant. Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows! He bore every grief, not just the grief of death. On Christmas day, over two thousand years ago, God stepped out of His glory and into our humility. And there was nothing half-way about it. He did not simply become one of us, but He became a poor and helpless child, of poor and insignificant people. He was not born in a hospital, or a birthing room, or superintended by even a lowly midwife. He was born of a young girl in a stable. It puts me in mind of when I was a child and left a door open in my haste. My mother would ask, What? Were you born in a barn? Jesus would have had to answer, "Yes." Here he is, God in the flesh, born in a stable, cradled in a manger. Imagine the wonder of it all.

He had no glory that man could see. He was laid in a feed trough a hay-rack. The manger was no delightful nativity piece. It was a rough-hewn thing slapped together to hold hay or feed for the animals. The shepherds came because God could not contain Himself. Heaven burst with the joy and the glory of the plan of our salvation and the marvel of the Incarnation. "Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which shall be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. "And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in cloths, and lying in a manger." God announced it to mere shepherds, because He just had to tell someone. And suddenly there appeared with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased." ! The wonder of it all! Not only did God come, as promised, to save His people from their sins, but He came so simple, and so humble, and so accessible. And you can bet that there were still shepherds alive who could hear someone read the words of Luke and say, "Yes, I was there!"

He not only humbled Himself to the point of flesh and poverty and ultimately suffering and dying for us, He left us the details. This is not a "Once Upon a Time" sort of yarn. This is an historical account filled with place and time and people identifiers. In those days there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus. We know of him! We know when he ruled, and how. We can place this man in history. We even know what his name was before he adopted the title Ceasar and called himself "Augustus". His name had been Gaius Octavius Thurinus, until Julius Caesar adopted him and he had been born in 63 B.C..

And this census was first taken when Quirinius was governing in Syria. Only a few people know today that Quirinius governed twice in Syria; once as a military governor and once as the official civil governor. One of those governings began in 8 A.D., so that would be too late for Jesus' birth. The other term was supposedly quite a while before Jesus could have been born. Some people thinks that means that the Bible is in error. Not so! The census (which the King James Version calls a tax because the census was for the purpose of assessing taxes from each region) was ordered originally while Quirinius served in his first term, which lasted until 5 B.C.. Things being what they were, it took a while for the order to be proclaimed and the actual census to happen, just in time for Jesus' birth in about 4 B.C. But many who first read or heard Luke's account would say, "Oh, the census ordered during the governorship of Quirinius in Syria. Yeah, I remember that!"

God has provided us with detail in time and place and people so that we can identify who and where and how in history. All of this was so that we might know for sure from this vantage in history, nearly two thousand years later, that it really happened. Jesus was born at an identifiable time in history, lived among people and through events we know about outside of our religion, walked in places you can visit today, if you wish. The details tell us that it is no myth, no legend, no work of fiction, but history that God came down to rescue us.

God got down to accomplishing that rescue three decades later. He took on our sins with all their shame and guilt, and suffered crucifixion. He was whipped and beaten, spit upon, cursed and mocked. He was nailed rudely to the cross and hung between heaven and earth betrayed and murdered by man, forsaken and punished by God. He endured it all for us and for our sins, to redeem us from sin and death, so that He might forgive us our sins and give us eternal life with Him. He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.

"Peace" is the word the angels sang to the Shepherds on that Christmas night so long ago. The sang of peace with God and peace from our sins and the condemnation due to us because of them - given to us in Christ. That is why the angels sang of it. And the judgment of well-pleasing is the judgment that is ours in Christ. He was Well-pleasing to His Father at His Baptism, as He began His public ministry. And He was well-pleasing to His Father on the Mount of Transfiguration as He began the descent into Jerusalem and to the cross. When our sins are forgiven, that is when God declares us well-pleasing to Him in Christ, and we are at peace with Him and at peace with one another in Christ. The blessing sung by the angels was nothing other than the Gospel, only in words that those who do not know the Gospel could not decipher. That is why the world loved the "Peace on earth, goodwill toward men", but despise the Prince of Peace, and reject the gift of Peace which He brings.

But even with all the details provided and the wonderful message of the promises of the Gospel, it is hard to believe, and many do not. Even from within the church, many call this miracle of grace a myth, a legend, or, worse yet, a symbol, and they deny the saving reality of God come into the flesh and the reality of the need to be saved. Outside the church they often don't even pay Christ any attention. Christmas is, to them, a nuisance, or a holiday of human good will and good works, a holiday for children's stories about Santa and Rudolph, and a traditional occasion of gift-giving. Unbelievers either in the church or outside of it are in grave danger for only those who know the truth and place their trust in Jesus Christ have eternal life. Jesus has purchased that salvation for everyone, paying with His own life and His own sufferings and His own blood. Those who would be saved need only take God at His Word, and trust Him, but those who reject Jesus, or His historical reality, or their own need for salvation, are lost.

But we have heard the song of the angels, announcing the glory of God, that He has sent His Son to be born among us Immanuel, God with us. We have heard it through the ears of the shepherds, and have seen it all through the eyes of the Apostles to the bitter end. And tonight we rejoice in it. This is the good news of a great joy, our Savior has been born. Our sins have been lifted off from our shoulders. We have the assurance of God's love and abiding concern. Let us rejoice tonight and sing with the angels of the glory of God which is His indescribable love for us and His remarkable and glorious grace which worked our salvation! Oh, the wonder of it all!

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Amen