Intrepid Lutherans

Ascension Day

noreply@blogger.com (Pastor Spencer) — Thu, 09 May 2013 12:48:00 +0000

Ascension of Our Lord
The elevation of Christ into heaven from the Mount of Olives in the presence of His followers took place on the fortieth day after His Resurrection. It is recorded in Mark 16:19, Luke 24:51, and in Acts 1:4-12. The occasion celebrates the completion of Christ's earthly ministry, the pledge and guarantee of our eventual glorification with Christ in eternity, and His existence in heaven with a real and continual, yet completely glorified, human nature.

In the Fourth Century, St. Helena, the mother of Emperor Constantine, built the first church at the summit of Mt. Olivet to commemorate the Ascension of Christ.

This church was destroyed by the Persians in A.D. 614, rebuilt in the Eighth Century, destroyed again by the Saracens, then rebuilt a second time by the crusaders after they occupied Jerusalem at the end of the First Crusade. The Muslim army under Saladin destroyed this church in A.D. 1189, leaving only an octagonal structure, still standing today, which encloses a stone said to bear the imprint of the feet of Christ as He left the ground.

The descriptions of the Gospel writers as they describe the Ascension are a true account of what transpired. At the same time, they should not be interpreted to teach that heaven is to be located directly above the earth; no more than the words "sits on the right hand of God" mean that this is Christ's physical location at all times. As Jesus disappeared from the sight of His followers, He simply rose off the ground and was soon hidden by a cloud. Angles then told those who had been watching Him that He would return in a similar manner - that is, in the sky and from out of clouds.

The observance of this Feast Day in the Christian Church can be traced back to the days of the Apostles themselves. St. Augustine writes that it was begun by the Apostles, and he speaks of it in a way that shows it was the universal observance of the Church long before his time, in both the Eastern and Western Church.

Frequent mention of this celebration is also found in the writings of St. John Chrysostom, St. Gregory of Nyssa, and in the Constitution of the Apostles. It is one of the Feasts ranking as equal with the Feasts of the Passion, the Resurrection, and of Pentecost among Roman, Eastern Orthodox, and liturgical Protestant churches.

A very ancient tradition in all these churches is the extinction of the paschal candle and its removal from the Chancel area after the reading of the Gospel.

A Little Something for the National Day of Prayer - May 2nd

noreply@blogger.com (Pastor Spencer) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:00:00 +0000

The day after tomorrow is the National Day of Prayer in the U.S. This is different than the World Day of Prayer, held on the first Friday in March, which is supposed to be a Christian observance. Wikipedia describes this occasion on the first Thursday in May this way -

"The National Day or Prayer is celebrated by Americans of many religions, including Christians of many denominations, such as Baptists and Catholics, as well as Sikhs, Muslims, Hindus, and Jews. On the National Day of Prayer, many Americans assemble in prayer in front of courthouses, as well as in houses of worship, such as churches, mosques, synagogues, and temples.Luncheons, picnics, and music performances revolving around praying for the nation are also popular observances. Traditionally, the President of the United States issues an official National Day of Prayer proclamation each year as well."

As a service to orthodox, confessional Lutheran Pastors and congregations, below is an explanation you may use when asked by folks in your communities to participate in the National Day of Prayer.

You're welcome!

Pastor Spencer

Prayer Is Worship, and That's a Fact!

Once and for all people need to understand that prayer is a form of worship. There really shouldn't be any argument about this fact. The very first words in Webster’s dictionary to define "worship" are “a prayer . . . showing reverence or devotion for a deity.”

Now, Jesus Himself said that those who worship Him must do so in truth. (John 4:24). And God teaches us very clearly that truth and false teaching are not to be joined together in His church (Romans 16:17, First John 4). Thus, it is obviously not pleasing to God for people who accept the full truth of His Word to join in worship and prayer with those who hold to any false teachings. For what indeed does truth have to do with falsehood? They are opposites!

How much clearer could anything possibly be!? But it seems most people reject this very obvious Bible teaching. Why; because they don't like it. It doesn't fit with their warm, soft, gooey-sweet concept of Christianity. But it is still God's own truth, whether anyone likes it or not.

Therefore, this Pastor and this congregation will never take part in any non-denominational, inter-denominational, multi-religion prayer-fest. We will say very clearly and firmly, “No!” We must refuse to offend and insult our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ by our participation in any such mixture of truth with falsehood!

Yes, the Rumours are True... Intrepid Lutherans is going South.

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 03:05:00 +0000

South to Texas, for a conference, that is. The week of April 29^th, is the time scheduled for the 2013 Colloquium and Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America (ELDoNA). The first three days comprise the Colloquium part of the week's agenda, and is open to visitors. I will be in attendance.

Intrepid Lutherans has tried to have a presence at least at some of the confessional Lutheran conferences around the nation: like the Lutheranism & the Classics Conference in October 2010, at Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, IN; the Emmaus Conference in May 2011 in the Pacific Northwest; the Lutheran Free Conference in November 2011, at Martin Luther College in New Ulm, MN; the Symposium on the Lutheran Confessions in January 2012, again at Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, IN; and, of course, our own Conference of Intrepid Lutherans in May of 2012.

Since ELDoNA has always, and especially recently, been an object of our curiosity, we thought that this year's Colloquium would be of interest. It is known that several WELS laymen will be in attendance, and, perhaps, maybe even some WELS clergy. As I understand it, there will be seven papers delivered on Tuesday and Wednesday that week, following which I plan to post some sort of description of, or reaction to, my experience.

Stay Tuned!

UPDATE: A Deceptive Pamphlet from Bethany Lutheran College (ELS)

noreply@blogger.com (Rev. Paul A. Rydecki) — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:02:00 +0000

UPDATE: Please note Rev. Moldstad's apology in the Comments below the post.

HT: Ecclesia Augustana

Maybe these things shouldn't surprise me anymore, but they still do. The graphic below was posted last evening by Ecclesia Augustana. It is a copy of a pamphlet being handed out at Bethany Lutheran College by their chaplain, Rev. Don Moldstad, for a presentation he was making on the papacy.

It's bad enough that this pamphlet misrepresents the Scriptural and Lutheran doctrine of justification.

But equally disturbing is the deceptive manner in which these statements have been presented. They are listed under the column entitled "The Lutheran Confessions." They are directly listed, in quotation marks, under "Luther's Small Catechism." But they are not found in Luther's Small Catechism. Anywhere. They come, instead, from the ELS's explanations of Luther's Catechism. A pastor who cannot distinguish between the Lutheran Confessions and the writings of his own synod is inept. A pastor who knows the difference and still presents his synod's writings, in quotation marks, under "The Lutheran Confessions," is being deceptive.

If Rev. Moldstad is led to recognize his error, at very least his error of misrepresenting the words of Luther's Small Catechism, we will welcome his public apology and gladly publish it here on Intrepid Lutherans.

Under the column entitled "The Lutheran Confessions":

From Luther’s Small Catechism:

“I believe in the forgiveness of sins because the Bible assures me that God the Father has by grace forgiven all sinners and declared them righteous.”

“God can declare sinners righteous because, (sic) on the redemptive work of Christ, He has aquitted (sic) all men of the guilt and punishment of their sins, and has imputed to them the righteousness of Christ. He therefore regards them in Christ as though they had never sinned.”

“I receive this justification when the Holy Ghost through the means of grace, leads me, the sinner, to believe that God has forgiven all my sins for Christ’s sake.”

The Average Layman is Defenseless!

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:30:00 +0000

Today, we reprise a lecture we featured twice in 2011 under the title, 'non rockaboatus' is an organizational disease: Lectures by Dr. Walter Martin, but with a different emphasis. After the facts exposed in last week's post, Do any Lutherans want to be Dresden Lutherans? Meanwhile, the Groeschelites continue their agenda..., it is abundantly clear that our Synod is wracked with division and, as a consequence, is in steep decline right along with the rest of the visible Church. And with the Church, so goes Western Civilization itself, whose political, legal and educational structures were built upon the framework of Christian teaching.

Stating as much in our conclusion to that post (the section entitled The Collective Descent of American Lutheranism), we submitted that the time of inaction, the time of armchair lamentation over the state of our Synod and of American Lutheranism, the time of complacent Synod watching as if it were a mere spectator sport, has come to a close. Yesterday was the time to act. Today is the time to do so feverishly. Tomorrow will be too late. After tomorrow, it will be time to separate and start over. The following will suggest one of the more potent actions laymen can take, but the reader will have to read to the end to discover what it is, and why it is among the most potent forms of action.

Dr. Walter R. Martin (d. 1989) was an expert on the occult, and from the 1960’s onward, disseminated countercultic and apologetic information through his organization, Christian Research Institute (CRI). At least one of Dr. Martin’s works, The Kingdom of the Cults, remains a very valuable resource, one which I consult with semi-regularity as need arises. An associate of Dr. Rod Rosenblatt and Dr. John Warwick Montgomery, Dr. Martin was, like they, an influential Christian intellectual, a man with the courage and ability to engage in public debate with his opponents, and, as a fierce defender of Christian orthodoxy in the face of truly diabolical liberal Christianity, more than equipped to defeat them.

Over the past three years, several of Dr. Martin’s lectures have been featured by Chris Rosebrough on his internet radio show, Fighting for the Faith – a daily program in the lineup of Pirate Christian Radio (PCR). I remember these PCR features, since I am of about the same age as Mr. Rosebrough, and remember Dr. Martin’s voice and manner of teaching from my youth, in a way similar to Rosebrough’s reminiscences. We confessional Lutherans would be mistaken if we should think that our struggles are unique to us. Others have already gone through the struggle that is now hard upon us. We would be fools not to learn from their experience and take their advice.

Dr. Walter Martin on the Cult of Liberalism

(lecture begins @~58min, 30sec)
A Cue to Theological Change: A Change in the Terms used by the Church
“Any person who does not know that today in the United States, and in denominational structures worldwide, we are in an accelerating apostasy, does not know, I repeat, does not know what is going on...” (1hr 12min)

“They were using all of our terminology... What you have to understand is very hard... the major denominational structures on the United States today have pumped all of the meaning out of Christian terminology, and have nothing but a hollow shell. And people are attracted by the shell...” (1hr 28min 50sec and following)

Questions:

What happens over the course of a generation or two when the church begins to use old familiar terms with subtly, though increasingly, different emphasis?
Or, what happens when entirely new words, words previously unfamiliar in Church usage, words with less precise meaning, words with less established theological meaning, replace the old, precise, established and familiar terms? Is the deprecating declaration, “these terms are synonymous,” a sufficient explanation?
What happens when well established ecclesiastical terms, having widely understood meaning, are simply dropped from use?
What ecclesiastical terms can you identify which meet the above three conditions?
If we are to heed Dr. Walter Martin's warnings, ought laymen to be suspicious whenever pastors or theologians use the authority of the church to push their language games as authoritatively binding on the laity?

The Average Layman is Defenseless!
“You can see these people in the cults and the occult if you have any degree of discernment at all, because they are outside the church. But how do you see the Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Lutheran, Episcopalian professor of theology? How do you get him in a place where you can find out what his theology really is? The moment you question him, he reverts to orthodox terminology, and then if you press him for the definitions of his terminology, he claims that you're being suspicious, bigoted and unloving. The average layman is defenseless! He's got to take what comes from behind the pulpit and recommended by his church authority because the moment he opens his mouth, he's accused of being divisive in the church, unloving, and disturbing the fellowship of the faith! When it is the devil behind the pulpit, not the victim in the pew, that's responsible for it!...” (1hr 36min 12sec)

“That is why I am concerned about the cult of liberalism as never before. We can identify the other cults, but how do you identify somebody that looks like you, acts like you, sounds like you...? Do you want the answer? ...1 Thessalonians 5:14ff ...put everything to the test, cling tenaciously to what is good...” (1hr 38min 30sec)

Questions:

Is it proper for the layman to assume that ALL pastors who may serve him, or that ALL theologians who may serve his church body, are orthodox on every point of Scripture teaching?
When St. Paul commended the Bereans for verifying his teaching by searching the Scriptures, what was he commending if it was not a cautious reception of his words? Was he commending an open and uncritical reception of his teaching?
How can a layman identify potential theological corruption in his pastor or his church's theologians? Unfamiliar terminology, or unfamiliar use of familiar terminology, perhaps?
How then does the layman examine a pastor or theologian who, by definition, by virtue of the Office he holds, is not allowed to wrong, about anything, ever?
How does a layman examine a Minister of the Word, whose operating assumption is that he is always orthodox and that laymen always need guidance and correction? Will a personal conversation bring about correction in the Minister's theology? Will writing a letter suffice?

Theological Language Games and the Destruction of Orthodoxy
“British theology was corrupted by German theology – Friedrich Schleiermacher, Albrecht Ritschl, David Strauss – and finally [it came] to America... Where do you think we got the God is Dead Theology from? From historic Christianity?... We did not! We got it from a good solid Baptist theological seminary, known as Colgate Rochester in New York, which was absolutely orthodox, but which sold out to liberalism! And when it did, they embraced the theology of Paul Tillich, and ended up with God is Dead. It was called at the time, The Gospel of Christian Atheism – did you ever hear such linguistic nonsense in your life!?” (1hr 40min 30sec)

Questions:

This is at least the third point in Dr. Walter Martin's lecture where he emphasizes the language games of theologians as evidence of changing theology.

How can changes in the use of language possibly result in changes to one's theology, if one's use of language doesn't change the way he thinks about theology?
What is the potential threat to the Christian when his pastors and theologians defend dramatic changes in the language he ought to use when contemplating and expressing his Christian convictions?
From what primary source might Christians be most vulnerable to subtle, or even overt, changes in language use and the threat of its impact on their theology?
Why is it safest to stay with historical and well-established terminology of the church?
If the concern is that our "contemporary generation" doesn't use historic ecclesiastical terminology in everyday conversation and therefore doesn't understand it,
1. Was there ever a time when ecclesiastical terminology was in such wide use in everyday conversation that it was understood on the basis of its everyday usage?
2. How might catechesis have helped people understand the church's use of language in the past?
3. How might catechesis help in the same way, today?

Dr. Walter Martin also makes the strong suggestion here that not only can "orthodox" seminaries go liberal, but gives evidence that they have done so.

Is it possible for an orthodox Lutheran seminary to go liberal?
How can a Lutheran layman know, or even suspect, that his seminary is going liberal?
What can the Lutheran layman do to correct problems in his Synod's seminary, if he suspects, or if it is confirmed that such problems exist? Will a personal conversation bring about the desired correction? Will writing a letter suffice?

Finally, Dr. Walter Martin singled out three Germans – European liberal theologians from the era of 19^th Century European Evangelicalism – as having ruined British and American theology. Surely, these German theologians had no impact on 19^th Century American Confessional Lutheranism... did they?

A Declining Regard for the Scriptures: Spiritual Death and Social Destruction
“[Liberalism] is a cult because it follows every outlining structure of cultism. It has its own revelation, its own gurus, and its denial, systematically, of all sound systematic Christian theology. It is a cult, because it passes its leadership on to the next group, that takes over either modifying, expanding or contracting the same heresies, dressing them up in different language, and passing them on. It is theologically corrupt, because it is bibliologically corrupt; it denies the authority of Scripture and ruins its own theology. And, it ends in immorality. Because the only way you could have gotten to this 'homosexual,' morally relativistic garbage, which is today in our denominational structures, is if the leadership of those denominations divide the authority of the Scriptures, and Jesus Christ as Lord. That is the only way we've gotten there.” (2hr 28min 50sec)

Questions:

How does the Christian's view of the inspiration, inerrancy and perspicuity of the Scriptures impact his theology?
How does the teaching of the church impact society in general – that is, apart from its immediate impact on the people who sit in the pews and hear it directly?
How might false doctrine, therefore, in addition to destroying faith, also become a social evil?
Given that most liberal churches have abandoned orthodoxy, and have embraced the "social gospel" in place of the "Gospel of Jesus Christ," can their fixation on issues of "social justice" be classified as precisely the opposite? Not as the "good" they would have it to be, but as an unmitigated evil perpetrated by liberal churches, which result, rather, in gross injustice?

Immunizing Christians against Theological Poison
“Every major theological seminary that has turned from orthodox Christianity began with disbelief of biblical doctrine... Corrupt Bibliology led them to the next step. Theology began to be touched by it... And finally they had emptied the Gospel of all its content, and simply were using the outward shell so that they could go on collecting money from the people and the churches, because they knew that if the people in the pews knew that they were apostate they'd throw them out. So the strategy was: hang on to the trust funds, hang on to the money that we've got, hang on to the properties we control, we will gradually educate the laymen into this new approach to theology. And then, finally, we will take control of everything. This is the gradual process of feeding you theological poison, until you become immunized enough so that you don't know what is happening to you. And when you wake up to what is happening to you, it's too late. They've got everything...” (1hr 26min 10sec)

“Look what happened... Look at the votes. We were very subtly, systematically, squeezed out. All of the positions of leadership were given to people who denied the foundations of the faith...” (1hr 30min 35sec)

Questions:

The fixation of liberals is what:
1. Preserving sound teaching? ...or
2. Preserving the organization as an institution?
The process of changing theology while maintaining the organization requires that liberals retain the laity while retraining them "gradually" – through a use of familiar terms with subtly, though increasingly, different emphasis, by introducing foreign terms and dropping common ecclesiastical terms.
1. Why do they need to retain the laity? What does the laity offer them?
2. Why is the change gradual?
3. Why is changing the organization's language the best way to change the thinking of those in the organization?
Is it possible for an orthodox Lutheran Synod to go liberal?
How can a Lutheran layman know, or even suspect, that his Synod is going liberal?
If sound teaching is not valued by a liberal Synod as highly as the organization itself, what does the Lutheran layman have that would be so sufficiently valuable that a corrupt organization would pay heed to the orthodox advice of a layman?
1. Merely his orthodox advice? ...or
2. His money?
Can organizational change which laymen must purchase with their money be relied upon as genuine?

Do any Lutherans want to be Dresden Lutherans? Meanwhile, the Groeschelites continue their agenda...

noreply@blogger.com (Intrepid Lutherans) — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:55:00 +0000

Those of you who have been following us on Facebook and Twitter probably could have seen this coming, as you've recently been fed a steady diet of links to some of our older posts reprising topics like Pietism, Sectarian Worship, Lay Ministry, along with a few links featuring the advice of orthodox Lutherans from previous eras regarding genuine Lutheran practice that also does the job of confessing our separation from sectarians.

But they are just a bunch of old dead dudes, and who really cares about ancient history anyway. Yeah, they said stuff. So what. We say stuff, too, and what we say is what matters today.

Meanwhile, an email rather circuitously made its way to our inbox yesterday. It was initially sent to the pastors of an entire circuit in the WELS SEW District, and included a passel of attachments for their review ahead of their meeting of this Friday. They will be discussing the opening of an INTERDISTRICT MULTI-SITE CONGREGATION. The congregation, Hope Lutheran in Oconomowoc, WI (Western Wisconsin District), had been planning a multi-site effort since 2010, and, with the encouragement of their District President, had been communicating their plans with WW DMB throughout this time. In July of 2012, a conversation with Wisconsin Lutheran College (WLC) President Dan Johnson resulted in his offer to use the facilities of WLC as a "cradle to launch the second location of Hope" – in the Southeastern Wisconsin District (SEW).

Click here for the documentation.

Multi-site Congregations? Whence comest thou?
In a previous exposé on the teaching of Craig Groeschel, entitled Pietism and Ministry in the WELS: A brief review of Craig Groeschel, we critiqued the thirteen points of his Vision and Values document. Point one, along with our response to it, reads

Since Christ is for us and with us, we are a fearless, risk taking, exponential thinking church. We refuse to insult God with timid thinking or selfish living.

Compare this, the FIRST POINT of Groeschel's Vision and Values statement, with THE FIRST POINT listed in the Mission Vision Values statement of Hope Lutheran, from the documentation packet linked above:

"Since Christ is for us and with us, we are a fearless, risk taking, exponential thinking church. We refuse to insult God with timid thinking or selfish living."

Already we see, Craig Groeschel is their guide – they have adopted his Vision for Ministry and made it their own, quoting from it verbatim. But it doesn't end there. Here are points four and seven from Craig Groeschel's Vision and Values document:

"4. We give up things we love for things we love even more. It's an honor to sacrifice for Christ and His church.

"7. We will lead the way with irrational generosity. We truly believe it is more blessed to give than to receive."

You can read our 2010 exposé on Craig Groeschel to see our responses to these points. But compare these points to POINT SIX listed in Hope Lutheran's Mission Vision Values statement, again from the packet linked above:

"We love to give up things we love for the things that God loves."

We did a post or two on plagiarism, did we not? Yes, I think we did. Here is the series we posted in 2010 on the sin of plagiarism. Craig Groeschel makes an appearance in this series, as well – commenting on those who do not give credit to their sources:

A Superfluity of Naughtiness: Plagiarism and Pastoral Fraud – Part I

A Superfluity of Naughtiness: Plagiarism and Pastoral Fraud – Part II

A Superfluity of Naughtiness: Plagiarism of Sectarian Sources in the WELS – A Case in Point

A Superfluity of Naughtiness: Plagiarism of Sectarian Sources in the WELS – A Case in Point (cont'd)

Re-read these old posts, and read the rest of our 2010 exposé on Craig Groeschel and his connection to the WELS. What we said then still applies today, and that application is most assuredly expanding.

Recently, Craig Groeschel wrote an editorial for FoxNews.com, which was titled, Christians, here's why we're losing our religion. Aptly titled, his objective is, in fact, to lose religion. He writes:

"You see, religion alone can only take a person so far. Religion can make us nice, but only Christ can make us new. Religion focuses on outward behavior. Relationship is an inward transformation. Religion focuses on what I do, while relationship centers on what Jesus did. Religion is about me. Relationship is about Jesus... religion is about rules, but being a Christian is about relationship."

Compare Groeschel's statement, above, to POINT SEVEN in the document Mission Vision Values, again, in the packet linked above. It reads:

"We will not let our behavior or church culture create a barrier between Jesus and a person he died for."

The relationship between statements like this and Evangelical leadership emanating from the likes of Craig Groeshel is obvious. Yet, such leadership is Scripturally incompetent – a clear example of allowing an enemy of the Christian AND the Church (i.e., the World) to dictate our terms. In reality, those who separate religion from Christianity, as Groeschel suggests, have no idea what either religion or Christianity is. Sure, Christianity is a relationship between the individual and Jesus, but Scripture's testimony on the matter is clear and abundant: for as much as it is a relationship between the individual and Jesus, it is also a relationship of confessional unity between fellow Christians AND a relationship between the congregation and Christ. Christianity is NOT strictly a matter between the individual and God, in its visible manifestation, it is principally corporate in nature! One cannot separate the idea of "religion" from Christianity! To even suggest it is nonsense.

Craig Groeschel continues in his editorial:

"But in order to reach the current generation and generations to come, we must change the way we do things. That's why we like to say, 'To reach people no one is reaching, we have to do things no one is doing.'"

He is repeating, here, the sixth point of his Vision and Values statement – which we commented on in our previous exposé. Hope Lutheran echoes this thought in POINT FIVE of their Mission Vision Values statement, contained in the documentation packet linked above:

"We are committed to reaching people that churches are not reaching."

But is Hope Lutheran, or anyone else who copies Craig Groeschel, really living out this vision statement? Hardly. Following the model of those 'who are doing what no one else is doing', those so doing such only succeed in doing what everyone else is doing. It's called a bandwagon. The fact is, it is on the basis of his multi-site church model that Craig Groeschel's LifeChurch.tv was recently named the most innovative church. Those who copy him aren't at all "doing what no one else is doing to reach those no one else is reaching," but are simply doing what everyone else is doing, as they climb on board the bandwagon to do what has apparently been "successful" for Craig Groeschel. Everyone without a shred of creativity of their own, that is. Professor John Schaller has better advice for Lutherans. Read what Schaller writes, to see what he says about doing what everyone else is doing, instead of what Lutherans, alone, can uniquely do.

Craig Groeschel continues further:

s churches, we don't have the liberty to change the message, but we must change the way the message is presented. We have to discover our 'altar ego' — and become who God says we are instead of who others say we are.

Note that by "we", Groeschel is not referring to the Church anymore. By this point in his editorial, he has already separated corporate religion from the individual. The "we" he is referring to is individual Christians, and nothing more. Thus, the change he is calling for is not change in the Church, but change in the individual Christian, beginning with the separation of the individual Christian from the Church, and continuing with a change in his focus, calling the Christian to dwell on his own behaviour. Not only is this rank Sanctification oriented Pietism (which we detailed in our post, Lay Ministry: A Continuing Legacy of Pietism, and highlighted as a problem with Craig Groeschel in our 2010 exposé), it is a "change in the message." It is a manifestly duplicitous perspective on Christianity. All he is saying here is, "We must change the message to eliminate "religion" from Christianity (yes, change), we must change the message to eliminate "labels" from our identity (i.e., to eliminate a Christian's public confession from his Christianity), we must change the message to focus on what Christians do for God or what Christians do for man in the name of God instead of what the Holy Spirit does for man through His appointed Means, and we must change the message in these ways to accommodate the demands of the unregenerate who won't listen to us otherwise (who, the Scriptures tell us, are at war against God and don't want to listen to Him anyway). Moreover, we must change the message the way others say we must change the message, we must change the way they say we must change, and become who they say we must be." Who are these "others" but Craig Groeschel and similar Evangelical leaders! Separating the Christian from his religion and from his confession, they insert themselves to take over for the visible Church.

The Collective Descent of American Lutheranism
In our post, C.P. Krauth explains how orthodox Lutheran Synods descend into heterodoxy, we quoted Charles Porterfield Krauth as he identified the Course of Error in the Church, well-known since the time of St. Augustine and operating as well as it ever had in his own time:

It begins by asking toleration

Indulged in for this time, error goes on to assert equal rights

ipso facto

From this point error soon goes on to its natural end, which is to assert supremacy

The Conservative Reformation and its Theology

For almost three years now Intrepid Lutherans have been warning of this danger, educating our readers on the differences between heterodox sectarianism and orthodox Lutheranism, and demonstrating those differences along with giving evidence of its incursion into our Synod. Some have joined us by lending us their names; though some have been threatened for this, many remain. But these few do not account for the nearly 1500 daily page reads we see on average. Many folks read our essays and informational posts, and are confronted with the stark reality: our Synod is deteriorating right along with the visible Church everywhere, which almost unanimously now invites the World and worldly influences to abide with her in determining doctrine and practice. If they would aspire to be Dresden Lutherans of any sort, it is high-time for our readers to do more than just read. It is time for them to assert their Confession, to begin acting on their convictions in a way that will bring an end to this sort of thing.

A Brief Explanation of Lutheran Hymnody: For the Lutheran who asks regarding the Beautiful Hymns of His church

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Fri, 05 Apr 2013 03:00:00 +0000

Three weeks ago, we published a lengthy post entitled, An Explanation of Lutheran Worship: For the Lutheran who asks the Meaning of the Beautiful Liturgy of His church. The body of that post contained a full Explanation of the Common Service — the order of Divine Service beginning on “page 15” of The Lutheran Hymnal which was published by the Synodical Conference in 1941. An English-language harmony of sixteenth century Lutheran liturgies published in 1888 by the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, it still serves as a benchmark of liturgical excellence. Indeed, in our recent post, Lutheranism and the Fine Arts: Dr. P.E. Kretzmann and the Necessity of Continuing Catechesis, we quote Dr. Kretzmann referring to the Common Service as “unsurpassed in the entire history of the Christian Church.”

The Explanation we published two weeks ago was taken directly from catechetical materials developed by the General Council for the distinct purpose of educating Lutherans regarding the doctrinal integrity and catholicity of genuine Lutheran worship. Indeed, this Explanation of the Common Service, published in 1908, was dedicated to the “Young Lutheran who asks the meaning of the beautiful liturgy of the Lutheran Church.” In our introductory remarks preceding the explanation, we marveled at this. Lutherans these days don't educate their youth about Lutheran worship, and if they do, they don't do so in a way that extolls it's beauty as a work of Fine Art, nor do they do so in a way that reinforces its doctrinal integrity, nor do they do so in a way that embraces its catholicity. One of the bright shining exceptions to the lamentable reality that contemporary Lutherans no longer value their heritage of worship enough to bother passing it down to their youth, is the LCMS-affiliated organization, Higher Things. Outside of this organization, the best one can hope for is a one- or two-lesson explanation of Lutheran worship which neither extolls its beauty nor places value on its doctrinal integrity and catholicity, but uses the opportunity to deride our heritage by vaunting its status as “an adiophoron” and setting it on equal footing with just about any form of Sectarian Worship imaginable – as long as one wears the appropriate set of blinders as he goes about imagining. Yeah, sure, you can do it, but why would you want to? In answer to this one needs but a “reason,” and in the world of adiaphora that merely means “opinion.” Thus one “reason” is as good as another, and anything one can “justify” has open license attending it.

But we further asked the reader to notice the use of language this Explanation employed. It was not written for functionally illiterate Lutherans who find reading and understanding anything written above the sixth-grade reading level to be a hopeless struggle. On the contrary, being dedicated to the “Young Lutherans,” it was written to Lutheran Youth, and plainly assumed that they had command of their own language. If it was written above their level, then it served the noble purpose of lifting them out of their immature literacy and colorless task-oriented-use of language, through the rich vocabulary and precise grammar employed in the distinctive and enculturating language of the Church. Contemporary Lutherans, it seems, no longer value the uplifting qualities of higher literacy, either.

Regardless of what the so-called wise-men of contemporary times insist upon, I am not ready to succumb to such disrespect for others that my operative assumption is that they are all functionally illiterate. I don't think all, or most, or even a significant minority of educated Lutherans are just a bunch of dumb-dumbs who can't read. Some very-well may refuse to read anything more complex than a comic book, but that is a separate matter – a matter of sinful obstinacy, and perhaps even rebellion. It is not a matter of literacy. So today, we are going to continue our use of materials having high-literary quality to provide a brief explanation of Lutheran hymnody.

What is a Hymn? A Canticle? A Carol? An Anthem?
We begin with the source pictured at the top left: The Handbook to the Lutheran Hymnal, by W. G. Polack – who was the chairman of The Lutheran Hymnal committee. This work first appeared in 1942, essentially accompanying the publication of The Lutheran Hymnal, and went through several revisions thereafter. It is a book which catalogs all of the hymns used in The Lutheran Hymnal, identifying their authors and sources, providing a history of the circumstances under which the hymn was written (if notable), reproducing the hymn in its original language alongside the English version which appeared in the hymnal and identifying (sometimes justifying) alternate readings from the original composition. It is considered a classic in the field of hymnology.
Read more »

“Who do You Say that I AM?” What do the Scriptures Say?

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 23:30:00 +0000

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth — those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.

“If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true... I do not receive testimony from man, but I say these things that you may be saved... I have a greater witness... for the works which the Father has given Me to finish — the very works that I do — bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me. And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

“I do not receive honor from men. But I know you, that you do not have the love of God in you. I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me... How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that comes from the only God?” (John 5:24-44, NKJV)

The bile which dribbles from the lips of His enemies is no different now than it was when Jesus walked the earth. Though man’s search for Meaning and Truth, and his desire for Eternal Life continues unabated, the Life and Message of the Man Who is also God – Jesus Christ, the Messiah and the World’s one and only Saviour from Sin – is reviled, and those who follow Him, despised. The World along with man’s own Fleshly Nature remain as much the Christian’s enemy as the Devil himself, to tear us away from the Only Way to the Father: Jesus (Jn. 14:6, Ac. 4:12). The words above are those of Jesus in response to His enemies.

But, who is Jesus? How do we know about Him? How do we know He is Who He said He is? In the text above, Jesus Himself names for us the two coordinating witnesses which answer these questions:

“I do not receive testimony from man... I have a greater witness... for the works which the Father has given Me to finish — the very works that I do — bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me”

That is, the historical facts of Jesus life, death and resurrection are ample testimonies of Jesus' claims.
“And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.”

That is, the Scriptures themselves – and in this case, Jesus was referring specifically to the prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the Messiah, numbering on the order of 300, which in Him alone are exactly fulfilled – written by God through the pens of His appointed prophets (2 Pe. 1:20-21,Is. 59:21; 2 Ti. 3:15-17; 1 Co. 14:37,2 Co. 13:10,1 Pe. 1:25; 2 Pe. 3:2,2 Pe. 3:15-17; Mk 16:15-18,He. 2:3-4), also give ample testimony concerning Jesus.

These are the two witnesses who testify of Jesus: the events of Jesus’ life and the words of Scripture. And it is only upon two or three witnesses that testimony concerning a man is to be received (De. 19:15, Matt. 18:16, He. 10:28). And these are the witnesses against whom the Beast has waged war, and which the World around us has long left for dead, whose carcasses they “rejoice over and make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth” (Rev. 11:1-14).

According to the very words of Jesus, God’s Message to all of mankind about the work of Jesus, the Message against which all of mankind is naturally opposed, cannot be divorced from the actual historical facts of Christ’s life. Indeed, such facts are as important to us today as they were to the disciples who witnessed the events of His life firsthand, who on the basis of what they had seen and heard “could not help but speak of it” (Ac. 4:12-21), even in the face of persecution by the Jewish, and later, Roman authorities. Already before the close of the Apostolic Age, on the basis of their witness to these events and the Message of Jesus Christ which attended them, the Good News had become known as that which was “turning the world upside down” (Acts 17:1-7). No, the Message of Good News cannot be divorced from the historical events of Jesus’ life as Scripture records them, from His birth to His death by crucifixion, and especially His bodily Resurrection. For “if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching in vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ... If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (1 Co. 15:11-23). The facts of history concerning Jesus, as they are recorded in the Scriptures, establish the Christian religion; and this is why, as facts, they are important: for if the Messiah had not actually come as God in the Flesh, if He had not died on the Tree as propitiation for the sins of the World, if He had not risen bodily from the grave, all in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, then the Christian religion is a myth – the same as every other religion on the planet which rests on false or unverifiable historical claims, or on no claims whatsoever.

So it behooves every Christian to make these facts his own, as facts and not only as articles of faith (which by definition any worldly religion can claim regardless of the facts), and be prepared, as St. Peter and St. Paul adjure us, to assert them as such as part of our defense of Christianity: “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” and “Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching” (1 Pe. 3:15 & 2 Ti. 4:2, NKJV). With this in mind, the following brief explanation for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, according to the facts recorded in Scripture, is produced.

The First Part

person of Christ

The Second Part

crucifixion

The Third Part

bodily resurrection

These facts are vitally important for the Christian to understand, as they are fulfilled in the historical person of Jesus, and served as a primary basis on which the Message of the Early Evangelists was proliferated throughout, and beyond, the Mediterranean. They must continue to serve as such, lest our own irrational prejudice against historical fact increasingly rob the Good News of the Person Who gave it. They impress upon us, and all who would hear us, that the events of Christ’s life as recorded in the Scriptures, as important as they are to the Christian religion, aren’t just religious truths, aren’t the product of an desperately profound hopefulness willing to jettison reality: they are also, and just as importantly, legitimate history – the same sort of legitimate history by which we learn of Pope Gregory VII, Martin Luther, George Washington, Napolean Bonaparte, Queen Victoria, or Winston Churchill – a history which has not lost integrity as historians and archeologists have studied the historical claims of the Bible, but a history whose credibility remains established as those claims have become verified as fact.
Read more »

A Second Sermon for Easter – 'The Festival of Christ's Resurrection': “Where there is faith, God no longer sees sin” – by Dr. Martin Luther

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 01:00:00 +0000

A Second Sermon for The Festival of Christ's Resurrection

Where there is Faith, God No Longer Sees Sin
by Dr. Martin Luther¹

And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them. And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Luke 24:36-47

The incidents of our text also occurred on Easter, when the two disciples had returned from Emmaus to Jerusalem, and had narrated to the others what had happened to them and told them that they had seen the Lord. They are in fact the same which John relates, and which form the text for next Sunday, making no mention, however, of Thomas and his experience, which occurred eight days later and is presented to our consideration by the lesson of the following Sunday. Our text, which contains much important matter, might be considered under various heads, but inasmuch as we have already dwelt upon the resurrection itself, we will now confine our discourse to two main points presented by our lesson. Read more »

A Sermon for Easter – 'The Festival of Christ's Resurrection': “The Power and the Benefit of the Resurrection of Christ” – by Dr. Martin Luther

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:00:00 +0000

A Sermon for The Festival of Christ's Resurrection

The Power and the Benefit of the Resurrection of Christ
by Dr. Martin Luther¹

In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: and for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you. And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word. And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him. Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me. Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.

Matt. 28:1-10

The present festival directs our attention to that consolatory and joyful article of our Creed, in which we confess that Christ on the third day arose again from the dead. This requires us, first of all, to know and consider the Easter narrative, then also to learn why this has happened and how to enjoy its benefits. The Easter events were these. On the evening of Thursday before Easter, when Christ had arisen from the Supper and had gone into the garden, He was betrayed by Judas and taken prisoner by the Jews. These dragged Him from one high priest to the other, until they finally concluded to give him over into the hands of Pilate, who as governor had the power to pronounce judgment. About the third hour of the day sentence was passed upon Him, when He was led forth to execution and was crucified. At the sixth hour, about noon, or an hour later, an earthquake occurred and the sun was darkened. Towards the ninth hour, which would be nearly three hours before sunset, Christ died upon the cross. This is according to the statement of Mark; the other Evangelists do not state so definitely the hours in which these events took place.

In our Creed we confess that Christ arose again on the third day, which is far different from saying that He arose after three days. The Lord was not dead three entire nights and days. On Friday evening, about three hours before dark, He died. These three hours are called the first day. During the whole night and day of the Sabbath He remained in the grave, and also the following night until the next morning. This night counts also a day; for the Jews begin their day with the night, and count night and day as one whole day. We reverse this method of counting and call the day find the night one day. In the Church, however, the old Jewish method of reckoning the festivals was retained, so that these always begin with the evening of the previous day.

Very early on Sunday morning, which was the third day after the Friday on which Christ was crucified, at the first dawn of day, when the soldiers were lying around the tomb, Christ, who had died, awoke to a new, eternal life, and arose from the dead in such a manner that the guards around the grave were unaware of His resurrection. From the account which Matthew gives of this event we must infer that Christ did not arise during the earthquake, which evidently began when the angel descended from heaven and rolled away the rock from the entrance of the tomb. Christ, however, passed out from the closed grave without disturbing the seals put upon it, just as on the evening of the same day He also came to His disciples through the doors which were shut.

When the earth began to quake and the angel appeared, the soldiers were so terrified that they lost all consciousness. As soon as they recovered they all ran from the grave, some in this, others in that direction; for the coming of the angel was to them no occasion of rejoicing, but one of terror and distress. There were others, however, who should be comforted by the cheerful tidings of the angel. Read more »

A Second Sermon for Friday of Holy Week, or 'Good Friday': “The Legacy of the Dying Redeemer” — by Dr. Adolph Hoenecke

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 19:30:00 +0000

legate

fr.

legatus

vt.

fr.

legatus

legare

legacy

And this formal definition is precisely the meaning Dr. Hoenecke intends with the use of this term: “a gift by will esp. of money or other personal property; a bequest.” It is unmistakeable. Throughout his sermon, he identifies what Jesus earned through His innocent life and suffering as His Bequest to wretched sinners, he identifies Christ as the Testator, and he identifies the New Testament in His Blood as His Last Will and Testament.

On Maundy Thursday, in the night in which He was betrayed, Jesus, our Saviour, took bread, and when He had given thanks, broke it saying, “Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of Me” (Lk. 22:19; Mt. 26:27; Mk. 14:22; 1 Co. 11:24). In the same manner also He took the cup when He had supped, and when He had given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink ye all of it; this cup is the New Testament in My Blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins. This do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me” (Lk. 22:20; Mt. 26:28; Mk. 14:23-24; 1 Co. 11:25). This “New Testament” offered by Christ in His Blood, was a specific kind legal arrangement that is common in probate law even to this day. Christ, in using this phraseology, was offering his “Last Will and Testament.” People draft a “last will and testament” in preparation for their death, in order that their estate be disposed according to their desires following their death; so it is very fitting that Jesus issued such a Will the day prior to His death. In a “last will and testament,” the benefit of the Testator’s life work is left to the bequeathed. By definition, they have utterly no participation in what the Testator accomplished, nor do they have any ownership in His bequest; by definition, He is the sole owner and He alone has the Authority to dispose of His property in the terms specified in His “Last Will and Testament.” It represents the blessing of the Testator upon the bequeathed, a blessing which belongs to the bequeathed only once it has been received by them in the manner specified by the Testator, in the manner administrated by His executors.

And just what was the Bequest that Jesus willed to His heirs? Just what did His life's work amount to, that wretched sinners would gladly receive it as their inheritance, and remember Him with Joy and Gratitude? He left them what they in no way could acquire on their own, what they could never claim any participation in:

THE REMISSION OF SINS AND RIGHTEOUS STANDING BEFORE GOD!
And all the benefits attending thereto!
And this Benefit is distributed by His Ministers, “administered by His executors,” through the Means of Grace, Word and Sacrament. Using the seven last words of Christ on the Cross, Dr. Hoenecke identifies in the following sermon seven provisions of the Divine Testament, earned by Christ, bequeathed to sinners, and received by them through faith – which the Holy Spirit works exclusively through the Means of Grace.

(NOTE: This sermon was previously published on Intrepid Lutherans, under the title, Holy Week Sermons – Good Friday (by Dr. Adolf Hoenecke))

Holy Week: A Sermon for Good Friday

The Legacy of the Dying Redeemer
by Dr. Adolph Hoenecke¹

Text: The Passion story containing the Seven Last Words of Christ on the Cross

Today we commemorate the death of Jesus Christ. On this day occurred the death of which God speaks through Paul: “The covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ” (Ga. 3:17). And: “For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth” (He. 9:17). So it was on this great day that the divine testament which was made and confirmed in Christ came into force for us. But what did our blessed Lord, the Lamb of God, bequeathe to us at His death? Of earthly goods there was almost nothing. We hear this about his material legacy: “(They) parted his garments, casting lots” (Mt. 27:35) Moreover, we know that the Son of Man, Jesus Christ, had no where to lay His head, to say nothing of gold and silver.Read more »

A Sermon for Friday of Holy Week, or 'Good Friday': “The Redemptive Work of Christ, Made Our Own through Faith” — by Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:00:00 +0000

Vanity of vanities! All is vanity... The eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor is the ear filled with hearing. That which has been is that which will be, and that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun

Eccl. 1:2-9 (NASB 1977)

What has been, is, and will be. So the Scriptures say. The past is hardly irrelevant: it is the reality of what is, and what will be; and this is the lesson of Solomon's lament in the verses directly following (vv. 10-11). It is also Solomon's lesson concerning God's Work and Judgment:

There is nothing better for a man than to eat and drink and tell himself that his labor is good. This also I have seen, that it is from the hand of God. For who can eat and who can have enjoyment without Him? For to a person who is good in His sight, He has given wisdom and knowledge and joy, while to the sinner He has given the task of gathering and collecting so the he may give to one who is good in God's sight... I know that there is nothing better for them than to rejoice and to do good in one's lifetime; moreover, that every man who eats and drinks sees good in all his labor — it is a gift of God. I know that everything God does will remain forever; there is nothing to add to it and there is nothing to take from it, for God has so worked that men should fear Him. That which is has been already, and that which will be has already been, for God seeks what has passed by... The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. Because God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil

Eccl. 2:24-26, 3:12-15, 12:13-14 (NASB 1977)

Thus, that which is “relevant” is only that which God does, that which remains forever, to which there is nothing to add and from which nothing can be taken. And that which is relevant to man, is that which God has accomplished for him. What man accomplishes, whether in the name of God or anyone else, is only vanity.

So what did God accomplish for mankind?

Jesus Christ the righteous... is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world

1 Jn 2:2

Ro. 3:24-25

2 Co. 5:15

Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Christ has redeemed me, a lost and condemned sinner, purchased and won me from all sins, from death and from the power of the devil. This is most certainly true

SC:II:II

So concludes Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann. In the following sermon, he explains further.

(NOTE: This sermon was previously published on Intrepid Lutherans, under the title, Holy Week Sermons – Good Friday (by Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann))

Holy Week: A Sermon for Good Friday

The Redemptive Work of Christ, Made Our Own through Faith
by Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann¹

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, ‘Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the Sin of the world’?

John 1:29

It is a solemn occasion which finds us assembled here at this time, for the Christian world is today commemorating the darkest day in the history of the world, the day on which the Son of God, the Lord of Glory, the Prince of Life, suffered the most shameful death of the cross; it is the day on which He laid down His life as a ransom for the sins of the world. No wonder that the Christian Church has from olden times celebrated the day with every evidence of deepest grief and mourning.Read more »

A Second Sermon for Thursday of Holy Week, or 'Maundy Thursday' — by Dr. Martin Luther

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:00:00 +0000

On Wednesdays through the Lenten Season this year (2013), we published sermons from Dr. Adolph Hoenecke (1835-1908), who is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), and from Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (1883-1965), a prolific author, educator, historian and theologian of the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod (LCMS) and among the more significant figures of 20^th Century American Lutheranism. We will do the same through Holy Week. Except for today, Maundy Thursday. Instead of Dr. Hoenecke and Dr. Kretzmann, we will hear from Dr. Martin Luther himself, from his Hauspostille.

Normally, we read sermons from Dr. Luther's Hauspostille as they come to us in the collection recently edited by Eugene F.A. Klug, and translated by him and others. This is the same Hauspostille included in the seven-volume Complete Sermons of Martin Luther published by Baker Book House. There were two collections of Luther's Hauspostille: one from the stenographic notes of Veit Dietrich and one from those of Georg Roerer, both of whom copied the words of Luther as he preached to his students in his home. Roerer's notes were published in 1539 without Luther's approval, while those of Veit Dietrich were published later, in 1545, and carried with them Luther's endorsement. The newly translated Hauspostille contained in the Baker publication comes from the Roerer collection of Luther's Hauspostille, under the rationale that “the consensus of scholars has more and more moved in the direction of Roerer's transcription of Luther's house postils as the source most complete, exact, and trustworthy.”¹

We will not be reading a sermon from Roerer's collection, however. Missing from that collection, and contained only in Veit Dietrich's collection, are two Maundy Thursday sermons from the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Veit Dietrich's collection of Dr. Luther's Hauspostille was translated from German into English in 1871. In this post, we publish Luther's Second Sermon for the Day of the Lord's Supper, from the second English edition of that translation effort, published in 1884.²

A Sermon for Maundy Thursday

Second Sermon for the Day of the Lord's Supper
by Dr. Martin Luther²

Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.

1 Corinthians 11:27-34

This text is of great importance and deserves to be attentively considered by Christians. We have already learned, from the previous sermon, how the people misunderstood these words, so as to deprive themselves of the comfort contained in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, yea, even shunned it as something dangerous. It is true, Judas did not receive this Sacrament to his consolation or amendment. There were also many among the Corinthians, as St. Paul tells us, who received it unworthily, and thus brought upon themselves bodily and spiritual punishment. There is indeed a difference in the reception of this Sacrament; some partake of it worthily and unto eternal life, but others unworthily unto condemnation, inasmuch as they do not repent and have true faith. Hence it is of the first importance that we learn to know what is meant by the expression “eating and drinking worthily or unworthily.”Read more »

A Sermon for Thursday of Holy Week, or 'Maundy Thursday': “The Holy Sacrament” — by Dr. Martin Luther

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 06:30:00 +0000

On Wednesdays through the Lenten Season this year (2013), we published sermons from Dr. Adolph Hoenecke (1835-1908), who is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), and from Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (1883-1965), a prolific author, educator, historian and theologian of the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod (LCMS) and among the more significant figures of 20^th Century American Lutheranism. We will do the same through Holy Week. Except for today, Maundy Thursday. Instead of Dr. Hoenecke and Dr. Kretzmann, we will hear from Dr. Martin Luther himself, from his Hauspostille.

Normally, we read sermons from Dr. Luther's Hauspostille as they come to us in the collection recently edited by Eugene F. A. Klug, and translated by him and others. This is the same Hauspostille included in the seven-volume Complete Sermons of Martin Luther published by Baker Book House. There were two original collections of Luther's Hauspostille: one from the stenographic notes of Veit Dietrich and one from those of Georg Roerer, both of whom copied the words of Luther as he preached to his students in his home. Roerer's notes were published in 1539 without Luther's approval, while those of Veit Dietrich were published later, in 1545, and carried with them Luther's endorsement. The newly translated Hauspostille contained in the Baker publication comes from the Roerer collection of Luther's Hauspostille, under the rationale that “the consensus of scholars has more and more moved in the direction of Roerer's transcription of Luther's house postils as the source most complete, exact, and trustworthy.”¹

We will not be reading a sermon from Roerer's collection, however. Missing from that collection, and contained only in Veit Dietrich's collection, are two Maundy Thursday sermons from the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Veit Dietrich's collection of Dr. Luther's Hauspostille was translated from German into English in 1871. In this post, we publish Luther's First Sermon for the Day of the Lord's Supper, from the second English edition of that translation effort, published in 1884.²

(NOTE: Due to the length of this sermon, I have taken the liberty of adding subheadings,
to break up the content for those with short attention span.)

A Sermon for Maundy Thursday

First Sermon for the Day of the Lord's Supper
by Dr. Martin Luther²

The Holy Supper

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

1 Corinthians 11:22-26

According to a time-honored usage, more people come to the Lord's Table at this season than at any other time during the year. This fact, together with the urgent necessity that on a stated day the doctrine of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper be plainly taught the people from the pulpit, prompts us to consider now the words of St. Paul, which you have heard read in our text. From these words we learn that this Sacrament was in no wise instituted or introduced by men, but by Christ Himself. In the night in which He was betrayed He instituted it for His disciples, yea for all Christians, that it might be unto them His Testament, His parting gift, full of great comfort and blessing.Read more »

A Sermon for Sunday of Holy Week, or 'Palm Sunday': “Stand Ye in the Ways, and Find Rest for Your Souls” — Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 22:00:00 +0000

We expect that the primary way in which most WELS people experience most of the Bible, most of the time, is by hearing it read in the context of the public worship service

The speech patterns of post-Modernism are unmistakeable in references such as this. The message of the Bible is to be primarily experienced not contemplated; it is more important that the masses have a feeling for what the Bible says, and have a positive experience in relation to that feeling, rather than understand the Scriptures as precisely as possible, especially if the process of understanding is a negative experience of mental struggle.

In the words of Christians who've preceded us, we also find the comfort of discovering that they faced the same issues we face today. Christians have always been concerned about the health of the Church, and, certainly, this is not necessarily a bad thing; but in connection with this concern, they have also been known to take great pride in counting their numbers as a show of growth, as a show of power and influence over others, and as a show of what they've accomplished for Christ. Dr. Kretzmann warns against this in specific terms, as he also warns of bewailing the apparent failure of Christianity, of the fall of Christs' Church at the hands of Her enemies, and of zealously urging human effort to “save the Church from certain demise.” Writing in 1956 as a contemporary of Donald McGavran, “the father of the church growth movement” (of whom and about which we wrote in our recent post, The Church Growth Movement: A brief synopsis of its history and influences in American Christianity), it's almost as if Kretzmann were responding to McGavran directly in the following sermon, and prophetically warning the Christian zealots of our own day who, “listening to the seductive voices of men who profess to be leaders to everlasting life,” would “glibly prate of scholarship and of the latest results of science” and “presume to put up their pitiful manmade theories over against the eternal verities of God’s Word.”

Almost. The fact is, the World is one of the three great enemies of the Christian, and it has always waged war against the Church, always pitted man's reason against the Word of God. We see Dr. Kretzmann's sermon applying to us in our day, even though he uses examples from his own day, because the warnings he issues, the Truth he claims, and the remedy he offers have always applied to Christians. ‘Stand ye in the ways... ask for the old paths... walk in the good ways... and ye shall find rest for your souls...’ — this Dr. Kretzmann explains in the following sermon.

(NOTE: This sermon was previously published on Intrepid Lutherans, under the title, Holy Week Sermons – Palm Sunday (by Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann))

Holy Week: A Sermon for Palm Sunday

Stand Ye in the Ways, and Find Rest for Your Souls
by Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann²

(Introit, Ps. 22:19)

Thus saith the Lord, ‘Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.’ But they said, ‘We will not walk therein’.

Jeremiah 6:16

For most Lutheran Christians, Palm Sunday occupies a unique position among the Sundays of the church year. This is true not only because the day ushers in the solemn contemplations of Holy Week, with the reading of the Lenten story, not only because the Gospel lesson of the day tells us of that unique incident in the life of our Savior, His entry into Jerusalem, but also because in most congregations the day has been set apart for the solemn act of confirmation.

“And they brought [it] to Jesus: and they cast their garments upon the colt, and they set Jesus thereon. And as he went, they spread their clothes in the way. And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen; saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest... And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.”
(Luke 19:35-44)

Palm Sunday has for many centuries been the day on which new members were received into the Christian congregation, when they made a public profession of their faith and were declared ready to receive the last instruction in Christian doctrine before being admitted to the Lord's Supper. For that reason Palm Sunday is a day of solemn memories for many hundreds of thousands of church members, a day on which they quietly and definitely renew the baptismal vow as they repeated it on the day of their confirmation. And even if a Christian was not received into adult membership into the Christian Church on Palm Sunday, he will readily join the other church members in remembering the solemn occasion when he made his vow to be faithful to the Triune God and His Word, and specifically to his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Such a solemn renewal of the vow by which a person declares his allegiance to the Savior is particularly necessary in our day, when so many difficulties have arisen to endanger the simple faith of Christians. It is true that the Christian Church, in its outward appearance, has apparently made much headway in recent years. The number of church members, according to available statistics, has increased by many per cent over the gains recorded a few years ago. Over 60% of the people of America now profess adherence to some church³. It is most unfortunate, however, that in many instances, this outward membership is not the expression of a full and complete adherence to the full truth of the Word of God. There is a good deal of formal Christianity, including a fairly regular attendance at the chief service on Sunday morning, chiefly because this is considered rather fashionable. But when one inquires about the attendance at other church services, at Bible hours, and at meetings in which further progress in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ is the goal, there are bound to be great disappointments. And if we should go one step farther and inquire about regular worship in the home, and about daily Bible reading by the individual, the disappointment would be increased in considerable measure. It is truly a sad phenomenon, but one which cannot be denied, that many congregations, especially in the large cities, have, for the majority of the membership, degenerated into social clubs with a religious veneer, and that the call of the Lord: “My son, give me thine heart” (Pr. 23:26), is falling upon deaf ears.

And there is another point which must be added here, namely that of the attitude taken by a great many people who disdain to be reckoned with churchgoers, many of whom even are out-and-out enemies of the Bible and its soul-giving truths. Somehow people have gotten the notion that Christianity, the Christian religion, the Christian faith, are on trial, that the truth of the Bible has been cited before the tribunal of men and has been found wanting.

Is this true? Is the Christian religion failing? Has it been arraigned before the tribunal of men’s justice and found wanting? — Nothing can be farther from the truth. To all who entertain such notions the Bible calls out: “Nay, but, O man, who art thou that thou repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, ‘Why hast thou made me thus?’” (Ro. 9:20). Or: “The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God” (1 Co. 1:18). Hence it is not the truth of God that is standing at the bar of justice, but the foolishness of man. It is the people of this country and of every city in it who are standing at the crossroads; it is they who should be found in great searchings of heart. For those who reject or ignore His Word and who foolishly criticize the eternal verities of Holy Writ the words are written: “Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, ‘Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.’ He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure” (Ps. 2:1-5). It is the almighty and all-wise God who calls out to men, in His holy Word: “This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left” (Is. 30:21). It is also He who speaks to us, in the words of our text:

“STAND YE IN THE WAYS, AND SEE, AND ASK FOR THE OLD PATHS,
WHERE IS THE GOOD WAY, AND WALK THEREIN,
AND YE SHALL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS.”

Let us, under the gracious guidance of the Holy Spirit, meditate on these words for a few minutes.

I.
It is a solemn warning that lies in these words, just as solemn as that which we find in Christ’s own words: “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat” (Mt. 7:13). Truly, many are they that go in thereat. Many are they who are listening to the seductive voices of men who profess to be leaders to everlasting life, but whose way leads far from the path of heaven to a dreadful uncertainty which leads to everlasting destruction. Who are they who presume to put up their pitiful manmade theories over against the eternal verities of God’s Word? Ah, they glibly prate of scholarship and of the latest results of science. They presume to pick the Bible to pieces and to substitute for its divine truth the flimsy threads of human arguments. They fill the hearts of our growing boys and girls, of our young men and young women, with doubts concerning the wisdom before which the greatest achievements of man’s mind pale into insignificance. They speak of mistakes in the Bible, though nine out of ten have never even read the Bible. Yea, they lead men and women, or try to lead them, into new and strange paths, into paths where the truth of the creation story is ridiculed, where the inerrancy of the inspired Record is set aside, where the deity of Christ is declared to be non-essential, where nothing is left of the Bible but a shell and a hollow mockery.

But what saith the Lord? Let us repeat the words of Ps. 2:4: “He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.” And the Prophet proclaims: “The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord; and what wisdom is in them?” (Je. 8:9). And again we read: “Thus saith the Lord, ‘Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: but let him glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the Lord’” (Je. 9:23-24).

But there is another matter which ought to concern us most seriously at this time, one which is not connected, except indirectly with the attacks that have recently been launched against the Bible. It is a situation which confronts every one of us in a manner that ought to challenge our attention. It is the universal abandonment to selfishness which characterizes our times, the hectic seeking after the gratification of various appetites, the eagerness for sensual and sensuous delights. It was not in this manner that the kingdom of David and the Church of the Lord was built up through the preaching of the Lord’s prophets. It was not thus that George Washington became the “father of his country”; it was not thus that Abraham Lincoln, under God, was fitted to become its savior. It was not thus that the individual state in our great commonwealth was established, each so remarkable in extent and powerful in riches. And, above all, it is not thus that the Lord would have us live our short span of life, as it is allotted to us in this vale of tears. Shall we spend the money which comes to us as a gift from the hands of a kind Father for the pursuit and gratification of momentary and fleeting delights? Shall we waste our God-given strength in the vain pursuit of pleasures which sap our God-given energy and weaken the stamina of our nation? Shall we prostitute the liberty which is ours as the children of God into a license which endangers our soul’s salvation? — Ah, if there were fewer white lights burning to show the way to questionable and dangerous amusements and more white lights of consecration glowing within the hearts and souls of men in the interest of that which is good and elevating or, as the Apostle puts it, of “whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report” (Ph. 4:8); if there were less strength dissipated in yielding to the vices of our day and more strength used in building up the homes and the nation and the churches; if there were less money spent in useless and dangerous luxuries and more for the sound establishment of things which are enduring for the welfare of home and Church: how much more would the pleasure of the Lord rest upon those who call themselves Christians! Does not the Lord say, in the Book of His eternal Truth: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world”? Yea, and He continues: “If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever” (1 Jn. 2:15-17). And another Apostle writes: “Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (Ja. 4:4).

Are we then, my friends, following the allurements of the world's wisdom and of the world's temptations? Have we listened to the voice of the tempter and placed our souls in jeopardy? Oh, let us hear the warning cry of our God: “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein.” Mark what the Lord says through His inspired Prophet: “Behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid. Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they say, ‘Who seeth us?’ and ‘Who knoweth us?’ Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay” (Is. 29:14-16). The world passeth away, and the lust thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever.

II.
And this last promise is of such great importance in our present meditation. For we find that, in addition to the warning contained in our text, we have also a most loving appeal, a fatherly call to all men, for while the Lord admonishes us: “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein,” He adds the beautiful statement: “And ye shall find rest for your souls.” So we see that even the first part of the sentence contains an implied promise, for it says, in effect: If you will keep on standing in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way. The Lord thereby indicates that He presupposes such conduct on the part of all those who are truly His children. This being the case, we can appreciate the promise all the better: Ye shall find rest for your souls; namely, by following the right way and walking therein.

We know where the true path may be found; we know which is the right way to heaven. The Savior of mankind has said: “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me” (Jn. 14:6). Christ is the Way, because He has prepared the way into the presence of our heavenly Father through the blood of His cross. Does the false wisdom of this world throw up its hands in horror over the doctrine of the redemption, an idea which our oversensitive generation can no longer accept? We ignore all objections to the eternal truth, for we know that we have redemption through the blood of the Lamb, the forgiveness of sins.

Let us, therefore, give the closest attention to the words of our text, to the glorious promise included in the words of the Lord: And ye shall find rest unto your souls. The inspired writer of the Letter to the Hebrews states it as a simple fact: “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God” (He. 4:9). And in the same letter we find the encouraging question: “How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (He. 9:14). That is the truth of God: The blood of Christ has purged our consciences from dead works to serve the living God, to walk in His ways. How then can any one, knowing Christ and the atonement through His blood as the only way, neglect to keep on seeking the one and only Way to heaven? Now, Jesus is found in the Word of grace, and in the Word alone. It is He who says, in the Book of eternal Truth: “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (Jn. 5:39). It is He who inspired His holy writer to call out: “Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.” And again: “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path” (Ps. 119:9,105). And let no one think that these passages refer merely to a sanctified life, for there can be no true sanctification without a knowledge and acceptance of the way of justification based on the redemption wrought by the Savior.

Have we been heeding His call: “...thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul” (De. 4:29). It is God Himself who draws men to the Savior, namely by creating willing hearts, such as are willing to be led and guided by Him, eager to learn more and more about the way to heaven through the acceptance of His promise: “Ye shall End rest for your souls.”

Have you been searching for Him in His Word? How often have you read the Bible, the Book which has rightly been called “God’s love-letter to all mankind”? There are less than 1200 chapters in the Bible and, by spending fewer than ten minutes a day on the average, or far less than one per cent of your time, you can easily read the Bible through once every year. Have you been observing a family worship hour, in which you and your loved ones spend some time daily with your Redeemer, in order to learn ever more about the way of salvation through Christ and His blood? There are 168 hours in the week: do you suppose that you could spare two of these hours in becoming acquainted with the eternal verities which are essential for your eternal happiness? O friends, as we value the great and the lasting things of this life, as we look forward to the life beyond the grave, as we desire to spend eternity in the company of our one and only Savior, let us heed the call of the Lord in our text: “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.”

AMEN.

Endnotes:

Kretzmann, P. (1956). Jesus Only: A series of Lenten and post-Easter Sermons. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House. pp. 46-54.

For more information about Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann, see the Intrepid Lutheran post, Dr. P. E. Kretzmann: Standing on God’s Word when the World opposes us
Wendland, P. (2011, December). Evaluating Translations. Forward in Christ 98(12). pg. 29

NOTE: President Wendland is here naming and defending criteria for the choice of a new translation for Synod. This particular criterion plainly trumps the claim that Synod's choice of standard translation is only meant to be the translation used by NPH in its publications, that it does not represent the Synod's recommendation or requirement for use in the local congregation. On the contrary, by establishing this as a relevant and primary criterion, President Wendland directly states “it is expected” that Synod's choice of standard translation will also be the standard translation used in every congregation, will be the translation generally read in public during the Divine Service. It is “expected,” and is therefore a primary criterion in the selection of a standard translation.

Some may be tempted to dismiss President Wendland's emphasis of the term “expectation” in connection with the translation used in WELS parishes, yet, even this month, this point was again emphasized Rev. John Braun, who writes:
Hence, it is known, indeed, it is “expected,” that the version of the Bible used in catechism materials and other publications distributed by NPH will be the version from which WELS children, and members of all WELS congregations, will be indoctrinated; it will be the version they memorize, contemplate and repeat to one another for the rest of their lives. If Synod in Convention chooses the NIV 2011 this Summer as the “translation used in WELS publications,” then “IT WILL BE EXPECTED” that (a) an egalitarian version of the Bible, that is (b) rendered at the sixth-grade reading level, will be that which our children will (c) “memorize, contemplate and repeat to one another” for the rest of their lives. For the rest of their lives, they will be “memorizing, contemplating and repeating to one another” a translation of the Bible rendered in terms that are (a) twisted to comply with the cultural standards of militant feminism that has been in a state of open war against the Church and Christian teaching from the start, in (b) terms no more sophisticated than a sixth grader.

This is the form of indoctrination that awaits our children, should the NIV 2011 be chosen this Summer by Synod in Convention, and it will impact them long into adulthood. Their thinking in matters of religion, as they will have been taught from childhood, will not equip them for their lives as adults, it will only equip them with the thinking capacity of twelve-year-old child. At the same time, they will receive instruction in the ideas of the world from their schools, colleges and workplaces, and from the acquaintances and friends they meet through their lives, in terms suitable for adults. Moreover, the word patterns they repeat to one another from childhood will prepare them to receive with gladness the false teaching of the feminists. The juvenile thinking patterns taught them by their NIV Bibles will render them impotent against not only worldliness, but from direct attacks of the World. We see it now, among those adults who've been taught to think about their faith in the simplistic terms of the NIV 1984. Indeed, I am convinced that blame for the appalling state of American Christianity today can be attributed, at least in part, to the popularity of the NIV 1984 over the past generation. It's users are notoriously unprepared for anything but an “experiential” religious life, and decry anything that is not a “positive experience” as false, or of the devil. They are helpless, and mostly worthless as defenders of the Truth. What else is to be expected? Clumsily wielding a dull Sword, they're not dependable partners in battle. I've witnessed the shamefulness of their easily-avoided defeat many times. They look like fools, and make all other Christians look like fools right along with them, for the sole reason that they transparently think and reason like fools, they articulate their thoughts with the shallow predictability of children. To prepare children for adulthood, they must be prepared with thoughts and words that will actually serve them in adulthood, as adults. They must be prepared for adulthood by equipping them with words and thought patterns with respect to their religion that are suitable for adults. This is accomplished by having them “memorize, contemplate and repeat to one another” the Scriptures according to the standards of adult literacy -- adult speech and thought patterns, not those of a sixth grader. The difference between childishness and adulthood that is suggested by St. Paul in this regard is stark:
Likewise, the Proverbs tell us:
The Bible says in these verses, and in others, that childish ways and thinking are habits and behaviours which the adult IS EXPECTED to put behind him, not retain throughout his life, and which he must be trained to put behind him from childhood. Training Christians to think and speak like twelve-year-olds for the rest of their lives is no way to prepare them for the rigours of Christian adulthood. The NIV, whether the 1984 or the 2011 edition, DOES NOT ADEQUATELY PREPARE CHILDREN FOR CHRISTIAN ADULTHOOD.

So let's have no more talk of dismissing the importance of Synod's choice “translation used in WELS publications,” as if it weren't intended to have, indeed, if it weren't “THE EXPECTATION” that it have, wider and deeper impact than merely the “translation used in WELS publications.” It is clearly “expected” to be far more than just this. And it undoubtedly will be.
This is an interesting statistic cited by Dr. Kretzmann. His sermon was written in 1956, and according to then "available statistics," roughly 60% of America's population "confessed adherence to some church." One may assume that at that time the term "church" was limited to a church of some Christian confession. Of further interest with regard to this statistic is that it had recently "increased by many percent," perhaps giving some reason for Christian boasting. Dr. Kretzmann's further warnings and lamentations in this paragraph, however, make it clear that such increases, in and of themselves, were no cause for confidence as, “in many cases, outward membership [was] not the expression of a full and complete adherence to the full truth of the Word of God.” Moreover, church attendance and membership was generally known to follow from human weakness, as people tended to use church as a way to indulge their need to be “fashionable.”

In contrast, according to the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), the percentage of Americans identifying themselves as Christian was 76% – a statistic which represented nearly a 15% numeric increase since 1990, but, due to population growth over the same period, also represented almost an 11% decline as a percentage of American adults. Granted, as stated, this is a slightly different statistic than the one cited by Dr. Kretzmann, who cited “confessed adherence to some [Christian] church,” yet, I would presume to say that identifying oneself as “Christian” in 1956 would have been tantamount to confessing “adherence to some church,” whereas today, given the growth of the Emergent Church over the past 15 years and the growing rejection of organized religion, “confessed adherence to some church” can no longer be said to be equivalent to self-identifying as a “Christian.”

If one accepts that these statistics are roughly equivalent in nature, then even with a relatively much higher percentage of professing Christians in America today, and with raw numbers of Christians in America measurably increasing, it is curious to notice that today’s attitude toward Church attendance, even among those professing to be “confessional Lutherans,” has shifted that much further away from that of Dr. Kretzmann, who indicated that such increases were not necessarily cause for rejoicing, given that “full and complete adherence to the full truth of the Word of God” was not the confession of the adherents. Today, among advocates of the ubiquitous Church Growth Movement (CGM), the primary matter of concern is the health of the organization (whether it be the Congregation or the Church Body to which it belongs), where the health of the organization is measured in dollars. Since such organizations are non-profit and rely primarily on donations, this means essentially one thing: “butts in seats.” More numbers means more donations, and more donations mean a healthy church (or “church body” as the case may be), while fewer numbers thus means an unhealthy or “dying” or “ineffective” congregation or church body. Today, more than ever, to get "butts in seats," churches of the Church Growth Movement exploit the same apparently long-known human weaknesses – the human need to pursue what is judged "fashionable" in the eyes of the World – as we observe them having thus “degenerated into social clubs with [little more than] a religious veneer,” as made plainly evident in our recent post, Real? Relational?? Relevant??? O THE HORROR OF IT ALL!!!

“What was missing in my life was Absolution”: One Christian's Journey from Evangelicalism to Confessional Lutheranism

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 04:59:00 +0000

On Tuesday, we published a short blog post highlighting the research of Rev. Matthew Richard (CLBA), who is working on a doctoral degree at Concordia Seminary - St. Louis, entitled, 'Crucible Moments' and 'Becoming Lutheran'. Afterward, while perusing his blog, PM Notes: Evangelizing Moral Therapeutic Deists; Comforting Post-Evangelicals; Strengthening Monergists, I stumbled across one of his posts from last December: Confessions Of A Former Evangelical (Encore). It is a brief post, featuring only a broadcast from Chris Rosebrough's Fighting for the Faith, regarding which he comments:

"Perhaps the Best Defense of the Gospel You'll Ever Hear (From a Lutheran)"

I recall this episode from Fighting for the Faith, and agree: It is well worth your time. I've included it in this post, below. Give it a listen.

Incidentally, that post, linked to from Rev. Richard's blog to his Baptist friend's blog, is no longer there. Perhaps his Baptist friend was just cleaning up old posts, but nothing before January 2013 is available. However, maybe this following fact is pertinent. On February 28, 2013, his Baptist friend, a Baptist minister, announced that he has left the Southern Baptist Convention. He has many very interesting, and familiar, reasons for doing so. Please read his post: Why I’ve Left the Convention.

A Journey From Legalistic Pietistic Evangelicalism to the Cross
delivered at the First National BJS Conference, February 2009
by Chris Rosebrough

Quotes from Chris Rosebrough's “Plenary Speech”
compiled for those of who won't listen to the podcast,
who haven't been through the transition of “Evangelical” to “confessional Lutheran,”
who don't know what a genuine Worldview Crisis really is
(See our recent post, 'Crucible Moments' and 'Becoming Lutheran' for more information on “transition” and “Worldview Crisis”.)

They've completely transformed the church service. It's no longer a pastor who is an undershepherd of the Good shepherd, feeding God's sheep with God's Word, making disciples, giving them Word and Sacrament, proclaiming and announcing the forgiveness of sins won by Jesus Christ on the Cross. Instead, it has been turned into a psychological freakshow.

How about this from Saddleback Church: “When you're running on empty, learn the ancient secrets from God's Word for a less stressful, more relaxing, lighter and free-er lifestyle.”

Now here is the fun part about it. All of these churches... when these guys launch -- four, five or six hundred people. They are marketing experts, they are running circles around us. And the people coming to their churches, are they hearing the Gospel? Not at all... All of these guys "claim" that they are doing these things to reach the lost for Jesus Christ, and to give them the Gospel, and that they are not compromising. HOGWASH!

What are the results of all this? ...After 20 years, 40% of their people don't believe in salvation by Grace... 57% don't believe in the Authority of the Bible... 56% don't believe Jesus is the Only Way to Eternal Life.

Former Evangelicals, they're like ex-smokers...

So you can say that, at that time, I was "On fire for the Lord!" -- and you bet I was, because I was told if I wasn't, I was going to burn in Hell. There was no Grace. There was no forgiveness. Only an endless rat-wheel of good works with no assurance that I was even meeting the lowest standard necessary for me to be saved. That's the thing about the Law: How do you know when you've done it enough to please God?

I did everything I could to stand out as a Christian among Christians, and at the time if you were to ask me if I was going to heaven when I died, my answer would have been. “I hope so... I hope so.” Beneath the Christian facade was a young man who was struggling with his sin, and who knew he wasn't winning that battle. And I knew that I was not good enough to be saved.

“We believe that 'Entire Sanctification' is that act of God, subsequent to regeneration, by which believers are made 'free from original sin, or depravity,' and brought into a 'state of entire devotion to God', and 'the holy obedience of love made perfect'. It is wrought by the baptism with the Holy Spirit, and comprehends in one experience the cleansing of the heart from sin and the abiding indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, empowering the believer for a life of service. 'Entire Sanctification' is provided by the Blood of Jesus, is wrought instantaneously by faith, preceded by entire consecration into this work and state of Grace, the Holy Spirit bears witness. This experience is also know by various terms representing its various phases, such as 'Christian perfection', 'perfect love', 'heart purity', the 'Baptism of the Holy Spirit', the 'Fullness of the Blessing', 'Christian Holiness', and 'Second Blessing of Holiness.'”

Perfection... and that's really the Material Principle of Pietism... Modern day Evangelicals, the center of their preaching is 'the changed life', and, their Formal Principle is 'The Bible as Guidebook for Living.' That's what they preach for. Life change.

I was literally fed a steady stream of tactics and practical methods for 'living a God-pleasing life'... But there was no peace for me, no assurance, no hope, my sin problem wouldn't go away, and I knew that I would face shame and rejection if I had to stand before Jesus and give an accounting of my life. Because that's all they were preaching: an Accounting.

“Be ye perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect.”

“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” Yeah, but I wasn't... I obviously didn't love God... I came to [my pastor] for Grace, and he gave me more Law. Looking back on it I now realize, the teaching and preaching of my church literally cut me off from all hope of salvation. I diligently searched God's Law for little shreds of hope and tiny crumbs of sunlight that could tell me that I would be okay. But there is no comfort in God's Law. There is no forgiveness offered in God's Law.

A person can only live under despair for so long. And that is what this kind of teaching produced in me: utter despair. I was literally withering under the heat of God's Law. But what I didn't know, is that that is exactly what God's Law is supposed to do to us. What was missing in my life was Absolution.

There's no way he can make it into heaven, he's not even trying!

He comforted me with Christ's shed blood on the Cross, he told me over and over again that Jesus' Blood was shed for me, for my sins, all of them, FREE, even the one's I've committed today. I'd never heard a Christian talk this way before. And I'm telling you, there are millions of Evangelicals who've never heard a Christian talk this way before. They don't know the Gospel!

He openly confessed his overwhelming need for a Saviour and his utter dependence on Christ's shed Blood on the Cross for his sins.

“But now the righteousness of God has been made manifest apart from the Law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe, for their is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and are Justified freely by His Grace as a gift through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”

I had stopped my incessant worrying about whether I was good enough, holy enough, or perfect enough to be saved. Instead, I was asking a far more important set of questions:
“Was Jesus Christ good enough?”
“Was Jesus Christ holy enough?”
“Was He perfect enough to save me?”
“Did Jesus' Blood, which He shed on the Cross, cover all of my sins? Or just some of them?”

These texts show that it is all about Jesus Christ [not ME]. His obedience, His ministry, His perfection, His righteousness, His taking my sin and suffering my punishment for me, on the Cross!

Celebrating the Birth of the Greatest Composer in the History of the West: the Lutheran, Johann Sebastian Bach

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 21:30:00 +0000

Today is the Vernal Equinox, the first day of Spring, and in 1685, the same can be said of musical excellence, both in the Church and in the West, as within them the full vibrance of musical life was born, as well – with the birth of Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750), the man known as the Greatest Composer in the History of Western Civilization. We have written much on Intrepid Lutherans about this creative Master, a fiercely orthodox Lutheran who infused his faith into his compositions through the language of counterpoint, in it battling not only Pietism but, as we detailed in our post, Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 3: Johann Sebastian Bach, the apostasy of the Enlightenment. The first post in which we first featured J.S. Bach, Music for Holy Week, Part 1 – excerpts from Matthäus Passion, we summarized Bach's life and accomplishments, as follows:

“

Bach perhaps needs little introduction: he was and remains the master of counterpoint and represents the pinnacle of Baroque musical achievement. In addition to his many secular works, as Cantor of St. Thomas Church in Leipzig he composed a full series of Cantatas to accompany the Lutheran liturgy for each week of the Church Calendar, along with many other Sacred works as he was commissioned... It is worth noting, however, than in addition to his status as a composer, Johann Sebastian Bach was also fiercely orthodox in his Lutheranism. Being active as a composer during the rise of German Pietism and attempting to ward it off through the Sacred works he was often commissioned to compose, his professional library was proliferate with personally annotated works of Lutheran theology – he had the library of a theologian, and he used it as reference material in the composition of his works.

”

Bach's genius as a composer was not entirely his own. He is known to have studied the Masters of the previous generation and incorporated their genius into his own art: men like Michael Praetorius, Samuel Scheidt, Johann Schein, and especially Heinrich Schütz (1585-1672) – the greatest German composer, second to Bach, who, having composed exclusively for the Lutheran Church throughout his career, has been the subject of numerous posts on Intrepid Lutherans, as well.

Schütz studied under the Renaissance Master of antiphonal and polychoral composition, Giovanni Gabrieli, at St. Mark’s Basilica in Venice. So remarkable was his performance as a student, that Master Gabrieli was compelled to recommend him with the words, “In Schütz you will have a musician such as one will not find in many other places”. Indeed, upon his death in 1612, Gabrieli willed his signet ring to Schütz. Heinrich Schütz was appointed Kapellmeister at the Royal Court in Dresden in 1615, and from there through the remainder of his career, he masterfully wedded the highest musical art of the Renaissance with the German language, the purest manifestation of which, for him, was Martin Luther's translation of the the Bible.

Bach's relationship to Schütz is almost serendipitous. Recall from our post, Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 2: Heinrich Schütz ... and other thoughts to ponder over the New Year Holiday... the concern Schütz had in the second third of his life over the decline in compositional integrity he had witnessed, for

“

the advent of the chordal style dispensing with linear but rich polyphonic textures made it possible for technically less accomplished composers to shine with concertante figured-bass music. According to Schütz, there were hardly any younger composers in Germany willing to deal with the more profound aspects of composition. So their tonal idiom was bound to become increasingly shallow and banal.

”

As a result, he published his Geistliche Chormusik (Sacred Choral Music) in 1648, dedicating it to the choir of St. Thomas Church in Leipzig, to “encourage budding German composers, before they would try their hand at the concertante style ...to first demonstrate their skill in this area.” O that today's Lutheran composers would follow this advice, and avoid their own “shallow and banal tonal idiom!”

It seems to be unknown whether Bach took the recommendation of Schütz to heart, or whether those responsible for calling Bach to be Cantor at St. Thomas in Leipzig were seeking to diligently live up to the encouragement Schütz obviously meant for them, or whether his Geistliche Chormusik had any such impact by that time at all. But it is, at least, an interesting coincidence. Other interesting coincidences include Bach's place in time: Heinrich Schütz died as Pia Desideria (published 1675) was percolating in the mind of Philipp Jakob Spener (1635-1705); Bach was born as plans for the Pietist learning center, University of Halle were being drawn; while Bach served in Leipzig, the last of the Lutheran theologians from the Lutheran Age of Orthodoxy, and vigorous opponent of Pietism, Valentin Ernst Löscher (1673-1749), served as Superintendent and as pastor at the Kreuzkirche in Dresden (practically a stone's-throw from the Royal Court, and a place known to benefit from regular collaboration with Schütz); and both Bach and Löscher, being in such proximity, battled with fierce dedication against Pietism in their respective vocations. Löscher and Bach died at the opening of the Enlightenment, in 1749 and 1750, respectively – with no one, really, to take their place.

With the death of Bach, accompanied by the demise of the Lutheran Age of Orthodoxy, the Spring of musical expression also came to an end, and along with it was left behind the Source of New-Life, the True teaching of God's Word upon which this Spring emerged. God's Truth gave way to Man's pride, the searing heat of Enlightenment notions, such as the “perfectibility of man,” invading both the Fine Arts and Christian Theology, first vaunting the objectivity of man's intellect, then vaunting the subjectivity of man's social and emotional existence, each iteratively warring against the other. Today, we live in the Autumn of both the Arts and the visible Church, the clouds of post-Modernism increasingly obscuring the light of Truth, upon which true art and true theology depend. We await with dread the dark Winter that is fast upon us, ready to endure it for the sake of Christ and the benefit of our neighbor, yet wondering what misery it will bring. But we remember the Spring. And we long for its return.

Johann Sebastian Bach is recognized as the Greatest Composer in the history of Western Civilization; and the work recognized as the Greatest Work of the Greatest Composer is nothing other than a Lutheran Mass – Bach's Lutheran Mass in B-Minor. We offer for our readers today, in celebration of the birth of the Greatest Composer to have ever lived, and in fond remembrance of the Spring that once was, this, a full performance of Bach's Greatest Work.

Lutheran Mass in B-Minor – by Johann Sebastian Bach

A Sermon for Judica: “The Power of the Cross” — Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 14:30:00 +0000

On Wednesdays through the Lenten Season this year (2013), we will be publishing sermons from Dr. Adolph Hoenecke (1835-1908), who is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), and from Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (1883-1965), a prolific author, educator, historian and theologian of the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod (LCMS) and among the more significant figures of 20^th Century American Lutheranism.

Last Sunday, also known as Passion Sunday, marked the beginning of the Fifth Week in Lent, or Judica — sometimes also called “Passion Week” or “Passiontide.” Today, unlike we have for the past five Wednesdays, we hear from Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (LCMS), as he tells us about The Power of the Cross

As the late-Renaissance/early-Baroque era painting at left depicts, the Cross of Christ, though once a symbol of ignominy, has, by Christ’s Victory on the Cross become the symbol of Salvation throughout the World, for on the Cross, the entire work of man’s Redemption was accomplished by Jesus. Thus have men through millenia since been drawn to the Cross of Christ, confidently trusting in the completed work of Christ for their eternal Salvation. That is The Power of the Cross, that through it the work of man’s Salvation was completed in Christ, and that by it God continues to draw men to Himself. In the following sermon, Dr. Kretzmann explains.

A Sermon for Judica

The Power of the Cross
by Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann¹

(Introit, Ps. 43:1)

And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die.

John 12:32-33

We call ourselves soldiers of the cross. And it is a most remarkable fact that the cross, once the symbol of deepest shame and disgrace, has, during the last nineteen hundred years, become the sign of victory, the sign by which millions of Christians all over the world profess their allegiance to a man who once died on a cross, thereby sealing His life’s work with His life’s blood. Yes, Jesus of Nazareth, a man who had come to His own, first of all to the people of His own race and blood, but then also in behalf of the untold millions of mankind throughout the world, was nailed to a cross just outside the northern gates of the city of Jerusalem, according to the cruel custom of the Romans in punishing certain base criminals. It seemed a moment of the deepest shame and humiliation when the cross, erected on Calvary as the center one of three, was lifted up to the skies. And it might have seemed to many witnesses a mere incident in the life of a demagogue, whose false claims, as they thought, were definitely brought to naught by His death.

Yet, as said before, the cross of Jesus has become the emblem of faith to millions of people. It was carried as the symbol of salvation from Jerusalem through Samaria and Galilee, through Asia Minor and Europe, through the Americas and Australia, through Africa and Asia, and through the islands of the great seas of the world. It is displayed on innumerable churches, as well as on the church appointments, such as altars, lecterns, and baptismal fonts. It is used as a pendant on ornaments and on lapel pins; it is printed on millions of books and magazines. In short, wherever Christians are found, there the cross is the most prominent symbol of their faith in the crucified Savior. The cross has successfully withstood the onslaught of the Mohammedan half-moon, the star and the crescent, and it is proudly displayed in opposition to the star of David. To this day and hour the cross is proving the symbol of victory even against the hosts of paganism in every continent of the globe.

In this connection we cannot but take note of the fact that the cross, as the emblem of the redemption wrought by Jesus Christ, is mentioned time and again in the Scriptures of the New Testament. If we look at the Epistles of St. Paul, for example, we find him cautioning himself, as it were, against preaching with “wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Cor. 1:17-18). At the same time he openly states that “the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” The same Apostle refers to the “offense of the cross”, for well he knew that the natural man stumbles at this sign of disgrace and shame (Gal. 5:11). He refers to the fact that there is such a thing as a “persecution for the cross of Christ” (Gal. 6:12). Yet in the same connection he boldly writes: “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world” (Gal. 6:14). So also the Letter to the Hebrews admonishes all men to look “unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Heb. 12:2).

All this is in keeping with prophecy which Jesus uttered in our text, a prophecy which sets before us, in golden letters

THE POWER OF THE CROSS

Let us, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, examine this somewhat more closely.

I.
Wherein does the power of the cross consist? What has made it the symbol of a world-conquering faith? Jesus says in our text: “If I be lifted up from the earth.” This is stated, not as a suggested possibility, as though it were an event which might, and then again might not take place. No, it is the statement of an event definitely expected, one that was certain to be fulfilled in the immediate future. Jesus was looking forward to it, He saw in spirit the cross being lifted up in view of the city which had rejected its Saviour. He had, just a few days before, wept bitter tears over the city, because its inhabitants had refused to acknowledge what pertained to their peace (Luke 19:29-44; cf. Luke 13:34-35, Matt. 23:37-39). And His tears had not been the evidence of a shallow sentimentality, of a pity which even a heathen might feel over the trouble that might befall a friend. No, the tears of Jesus, shed as He looked upon the city which would so soon reject Him, were an evidence of His eternal love for all mankind, a love whose unexampled fervor would drive Him even to the cruel cross.

Thus the power of the cross rests upon God’s eternal counsel of love. He had foreseen the fall of men and the terrible power which sin would exert over mankind, the rule of Satan as the prince of this world. But, from eternity also, His love had found a way to break the power of sin and of the devil by sending a Saviour who, as true man, could be under the Law and suffer death, while, at the same time, as true God, He could conquer sin and death.

The fact that God’s eternal counsel of love found its fulfillment in His death on the cross is brought out even in the many passages of the Old Testament which, directly or indirectly, speak of the Messiah’s work. The very first promise which God gave to men after the Fall brought the Gospel news that the Seed of the Woman would crush the head of the serpent at the very time that the serpent would crush the heel of the Victor (Gen. 3:15). In the 22nd Psalm the Messiah, speaking through the mouth and pen of David, cries out: “My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death” (vs. 15). And in Isaiah 55 the sufferings which led to the climax of the crucifixion are pictured: “He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities... He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth” (vv. 3-7).

This fact of the eternal counsel of love giving power to the cross of Christ is brought out also in the various prophecies which Christ Himself uttered in the course of His ministry, when He spoke of His sufferings and death (i.e., John 3:14; Mark 8:31,9:12; Luke 9:22; etc.). It was indicated even in the conversation of Christ with Nicodemus in that beautiful saying: “God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son” (John 3:16). And who will not immediately be reminded of the various passages in which Jesus tells His disciples that the divine obligation was resting upon Him to go up to Jerusalem, to be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles, to suffer unspeakable agony and shame, and finally to be crucified? (i.e., Mark 10:33; Matt. 20:17-19; etc.) – All these facts are the background of this present meditation: they are necessary for the proper understanding of the power of the cross.

II.
But, we find, in the second place, that the power of the cross is so amazingly great and wonderful because His being lifted up from the earth signifying what death He should die, includes the entire work of redemption. Over the cross we might write the words which Jesus Himself spoke on the afternoon of the resurrection day: “Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (Luke 24:26). It is by the way of the cross that the way to heaven is open to us through His blood.

Is it forgiveness of sins that we need? The Bible tells us: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace” (Eph. 1:7).

Is it justification before the righteous God that we are looking for? The Bible tells us: “Being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him” (Rom. 5:9).

Do we need the peace of a good conscience? The Bible tells us: “Having made peace through the blood of his cross” (Col. 1:20).

Do we want to be sure that we are purchased from the power of sin and Satan? The Bible tells us: “The church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28).

Do we want to be certain of our redemption? The Bible tells us: “Ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:18-19).

Do we want to be sure that we are really clean from the filth of sin? The Bible tells us: “The blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7).

Do we need white raiment to stand in the presence of the holy God? The Bible tells us: “They... have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Rev. 7:14).

Do we want to be sure of access to the throne? The Bible tells us: “Having... boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus” (Heb. 10:19).

Thus was the power of the cross exerted; thus was the blood of the cross the agency through which redemption was gained for all mankind. The cross of Christ signifies and includes the entire work of redemption. So the cross is the symbol of the Christian faith, of Christianity itself; thus it was that St. Paul could declare: “I determined not to know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). And even more emphatically he writes, in a later letter; “I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death” (Phil. 3:8-10).

III.
But now we ask: What has the power of the cross to do with you and me in the present meditation? We know that it is not a mere head knowledge, a mere comprehension of historical acts which will avail us, in view of the greatest tragedy and the most astounding miracle which the world has ever seen. Thousands and millions have known the story of the cross of Christ, but this cross was to them an object of scorn and derision, and therefore a delusion and a snare. To them the wonderful message of the Gospel has become as the Apostle Paul so sorrowfully puts it, “a savour of death unto death” (2 Cor. 2:14-16).

Nor is it sufficient to have the cross, the entire suffering of Christ, a mere matter of contemplation, of something to be interested in as an account of the possibilities which reside in the human mind, that a man will readily become a martyr of the cause in which he believes. Thousands and millions of people have regarded with amazement the miracle of Calvary, and as many thousands and millions have shed tears of sympathy over the fate of One whose love should have convinced even the most hardhearted enemy of the truth of His cause. No mere contemplation of Christ’s sufferings will bring the power of the cross into the hearts of men.

For that reason there is only one fact which gives us sublime confidence whenever we study the story of the cross, and that is the fact of Christ’s statement in our text: “I will draw all men unto me.” This is in the most wonderful agreement with His oft-repeated declaration that He came into the world to seek and to save that which was lost, that He came down from heaven, not to do His own will, but the will of the Father who sent Him. “And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me” the Saviour cries out, “that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day” (John 6:39). And we should note, in particular, that this majestic statement is followed by the promise: “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:40). This declaration shows how close is the relation of the cross, the work of redemption, to the lives of all men.

Let us keep this in mind, for the power of the cross applied in the lives of men is due to the fact that Christ’s redemption was gained for all men. It was the world which God loved, for which He gave His only-begotten Son. “God... will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4). Christ stretched out His hands even to the rebellious inhabitants of Jerusalem. He is today calling to all men: “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth” (Is. 45:22).

Thus the power of the cross draws men to Christ, for whosoever believeth on Him shall not perish. As men, in studying the miracle of the cross, realize their own sinfulness, their guilt in the eyes of the holy God, which will bring them down into everlasting damnation unless they turn to Him, then, by the grace of God, they lift up their arms to Him in an appeal for mercy, then the power of the cross draws them to Christ as their one and only Saviour, who loved them and gave Himself for them. Thus is established the fellowship of heart and mind with Christ and God, thus the power of the cross is exerted in time for eternity. For this reason the song of every believer can be that of Psalm 103: “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases; who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies” (vv. 1-4). Truly, we can sing, with hearts uplifted to Him:

AMEN.

Endnotes:

Kretzmann, P. (1956). Jesus Only: A series of Lenten and post-Easter Sermons. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House. pp. 46-54.

For more information about Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann, see the Intrepid Lutheran post, Dr. P. E. Kretzmann: Standing on God’s Word when the World opposes us

A. Hunnius on the truly confessional Lutheran teaching of Romans 5:18

noreply@blogger.com (Rev. Paul A. Rydecki) — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:15:00 +0000

(Here is an excerpt from a post on www.faithalonejustifies.com)

Aegidius Hunnius has a brilliant section in A Clear Explanation of the Controversy among the Wittenberg Theologians concerning Samuel Huber’s misuse of Romans 5 to prove that all those who have been condemned through Adam’s sin have also been justified by Christ’s obedience (whether they believe in Him or not).

Hunnius takes apart Huber’s (and the official WELS) doctrine piece by piece, concluding with this observation about Huber’s supposed “confessional subscription” to the Lutheran Book of Concord:

And what will Dr. Huber reply to the Book of Concord, which, in citing these very words from Romans, explicitly confirms that those things mean nothing other than that we are justified by faith? This is what the Book of Concord says in the Latin edition, page 666: “Therefore, these statements are equivalent and clearly mean the same thing, when Paul says that we are justified by faith; or that faith is imputed to us for righteousness; and when he teaches that we are justified by the obedience of one Mediator, who is Christ; or that through the righteousness of one man, justification of life comes upon all men. For faith does not justify on account of this, that it is such a good work, or that it is such a splendid virtue, but because it apprehends and embraces the merit of Christ in the promise of the Gospel.” Thus far the Book of Concord. If the Pauline phrase (that “through the righteousness of one Man, justification of life comes upon all men”) clearly means the same thing as that other statement, “We are justified by faith” (as the Book of Concord clearly and emphatically asserts), then the interpretation is rejected by the sentence of the Book of Concord that imagines from these words of Paul a justification apart from faith—one that extends also to those who have never had faith and never will. Dr. Luther says it even better in [his lectures on] the second chapter to the Galatians: “Where Christ and faith are not present, there is no remission of sins, no refuge, nothing but pure imputation of sins and condemnation.”

'Crucible Moments' and 'Becoming Lutheran'

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:30:00 +0000

Becoming Lutheran
It is very likely that most readers of Intrepid Lutherans have not been following this research, if they even knew about it, but Rev. Matthew Richard (CLBA), who is working on a doctoral degree from Concordia Seminary - St. Louis, has finished the research stage of his dissertation. The title of his dissertation is Becoming Lutheran: Exploring the Journey of American Evangelicals Into Confessional Lutheran Thought, and the research consisted of three surveys whose participants were once active Evangelicals that have made the transition to confessional Lutheranism, or those who are in the process of making that transition. I was one of the survey participants (along with hundreds of others).

The first two surveys (quantitative and qualitative surveys, respectively) have been published:

Results of Survey #1

Results of Survey #2

It is unknown to me if he will be publishing the results of the third survey, which concerned advice for Lutheran pastors with respect to prospects or parishioners who are going through the transition.

Rev. Richard has been compiling the results of his research on his Research Journal blog. In addition, he was the subject of a very interesting interview on Worldview Everlasting TV after the results of the first survey were released last February.

Having personally been through the lengthy transition from “Evangelical” to “confessional Lutheran,” and having done so reflectively (that is, I wasn't just jumping from one Evangelical church to another, like so many Evangelicals tend to uncritically do), I find that his results describe very well the process that we endure, and that they also help explain why many of us who've made the transition as adults (again, reflectively and deliberately) cling so tenaciously to sound and genuine Lutheranism and warn so vigorously against anything that smacks of contemporary Evangelicalism. Indeed, both Rev. Richard and Rev. Fisk discuss this very thing in the interview, above. Unlike those Lutherans who have become enamoured with sectarianism and adjure their brothers to “just give it a chance,” we've already “given it a chance,” already know very well the ruin to which it leads, and, rejecting it, urge others not to even dabble in it. Just as there are no non-smokers like former smokers, there are no non-Evangelicals like former Evangelicals. I'm one of them. I highly recommend looking at his research.

Crucible Moments
In the first survey issued by Rev. Richard, “Fear” and “Anger” emerged as two themes repeatedly observed. These two emotions were explored in the second survey – certainly for the sake of gaining a deeper and more objective understanding of these two factors, but, it seems reasonable to think, perhaps also seeking a way of “easing the process.” With the results of the second survey now published, however, I think it is pretty clear that these “emotions” are necessary aspects of the process, and that if a person does not endure them then it seems difficult to say whether a genuine transition to confessional Lutheranism has been made (assuming they actually believed the Evangelical teaching they had previously imbibed over the years).

Worldview Change is
Repentance from Falsehood

This result (which may be surprising to some) reminds me of a statistic reported by Josh McDowell in his book, Right from Wrong: 90% of one's values are developed by age 13, while the rest develop mostly between the ages of 13 and 18, and remain essentially fixed through the rest of his life – barring what McDowell called “crucible moments” during adulthood, or moments of ideological or worldview crisis. These “crucible moments” force a person into deep reflection, like no other kind of life experience can, and often result in either a change to, or a significant reinforcement of one's worldview. For any such change to occur in adults, whose values are essentially fixed, worldview crisis is necessary for the change to occur.

As the rest of Rev. Richard's research seems to show, the journey from contemporary pop-church Evangelicalism to genuine confessional Lutheranism is a very definite worldview change. I can personally attest to this fact. If “alleviating” or “easing the process” means hiding distinctive Lutheran teaching and practice in order to avoid “offending” prospects, or to soft-pedal the Second use of the Law in order to avoid “offending” the unregenerate, or to hide the Sacrament for fear of “offending” visitors, then the only effect “easing the process” might have is to attenuate the genuine change itself. That would be unfortunate. Perhaps it is best to simply be aware that individuals making a journey from “Evangelicalism” to “confessional Lutheranism” are struggling through internal conflict, and merely receive it as an explanation for what a given pastor observes as he brings disaffected Evangelicals through adult catechism? Perhaps it is best for a pastor to simply offer direct Scriptural support for every doctrinal claim he makes during the process, instead of trying to practice some form of “armchair psychology,” and leave the prospects to wrestle with the clear statements of Scripture on their own and arrive at their convictions through the Holy Spirit's working? I ask these questions rhetorically, of course, while agreeing with Rev. Richard in the interview, above, that, at the very least, confessional Lutheran pastors ought to patiently stick with disaffected Evangelicals who are in the midst of a worldview crisis.

Anyway, I think that the final product of Rev. Richard's research (which won't be published for several months it appears) will make for interesting reading – as will the many journal articles it will no-doubt produce. For now, I hope our readers will use the links above to give his raw research a look, and I hope that they find something interesting or beneficial in it.

An Explanation of Lutheran Worship: For the Lutheran who asks the Meaning of the Beautiful Liturgy of His church

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Sun, 17 Mar 2013 04:45:00 +0000

Last week, we published an article entitled, Lutheranism and the Fine Arts: Dr. P.E. Kretzmann and the Necessity of Continuing Catechesis. It stood in stark contrast against the depraved junk being pushed by the Church Growth Movement (CGM), which, though vaulting the latest in “scientific methodology”, nurtures anti-intellectualism as much as it promotes mediocrity, turning its back on the preaching and teaching of sound doctrine and repudiating the hard work of rigorous catechesis in order to make Christianity more outwardly attractive to the unregenerate who despise Christ and the teaching of His Word. Another term for this among CGM advocates is, “Evangelism.”

But most importantly, that post emphasized the need not only for rigorous catechesis, but of a broad catechesis that includes more than just Bible study. In that post, Dr. Kretzmann and the Walther League strongly encouraged complementary catechesis in areas of Church History, of Christian Missions, of Distinctive Lutheran Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church, of Church Art, of Science, and of Literature. And within the category of Church Art was included the very important topic of Liturgics.

In fact, the catechesis of the Lutheran Worshiper was the topic of another recent post on Intrepid Lutherans, The Catechesis of the Lutheran Worshiper: An antidote to the “itching ears” and “happy feat” of CGM enthusiasts?. In that post we drew the distinction between those who favor so-called “contemporary worship,” as those who Congregate before Entertainers, with those who retain a wholesome catholicty and still embrace the distinctive practices of historic Lutheran liturgy, as those who Congregate before the Means of Grace.

But what is such “wholesome catholicty”? What is the “distinctive practice of historic Lutheran liturgy”? Do American Lutherans of the 21^st Century even have such a thing? If so, is it at all in general use? Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but one thing is for sure: they certainly had such in the 19^th and 20^th Centuries, AND they had catechetical materials to go along with it for the purpose of teaching successive generations about Lutheran worship.

Lutherans of these bygone times highly valued the wholesome catholicty of their historic Lutheran worship practices, that served to starkly contrast them with the American sects which surrounded them — which had in many cases been given over to the evangelical revivalism of Charles Finney, and to practices emanating from the Holiness movements within American Methodism (as discussed in our recent post, The Church Growth Movement: A brief synopsis of its history and influences in American Christianity. Even in confessional Lutheran churches in America, the allure of the Anxious Bench became increasingly difficult to resist, and Methodist hymnals were, distressingly, in growing demand (as Dr. C.F.W. Walther laments, in our post, C.F.W. Walther: Filching from sectarian worship resources equals “soul murder”. It was within this environment that the confessional and liturgical movements of the 19^th Century grew, and worked toward the establishment of confessional unity among Lutherans in America, and to distinguish and insulate American Lutheranism from the poison of sectarian influences.

In 1908, the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America published an Explanation of the Common Service – a harmony of sixteenth century Lutheran liturgies published in 1888, in the English language. This is the same Common Service found in The Lutheran Hymnal, which was published by the Synodical Conference in 1941, and which is still used in many Lutheran congregations even today. It is my understanding that, in many circles, this liturgy of the Divine Service is still referred to as a benchmark of liturgical excellence. Indeed, in our recent post, Lutheranism and the Fine Arts..., Dr. Kretzmann refers to the Common Service as “unsurpassed in the entire history of the Christian Church.” Sadly, however, though many Lutherans still use it, most Lutherans, and nearly all young Lutherans, are completely ignorant of this fine and beautiful liturgy, having never had the privilege of being consistently guided through worship under the rubrics of this Common Service.

Interestingly, the Explanation published in 1908 by the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, was dedicated to this very group of people, to the “Young Lutherans who ask the meaning of the beautiful liturgy of the Lutheran Church.” As you read this Explanation, notice its use of language. Consider the fine education and catechesis “Young Lutherans” must have enjoyed a century ago, which was deliberately reinforced by the church in books such as this. Do Lutheran publishing houses have such respect and concern for the youth of today? Certainly, they target young people with a great deal of material, so concern unquestionably exists — but does the quality of these materials generally rise to this level? Does it specifically advocate and reinforce Confessional practice? Does it refer to the liturgy as something “beautiful” and as something to be valued? I don't believe I've seen this sort of thing coming from the main Lutheran publishers.

Therefore, in the interest of those who would otherwise never have the opportunity to know, the following Explanation of the Common Service is offered. It explains Lutheran worship according to what has been considered the definitive Lutheran liturgy yet produced – a liturgy which is nevertheless disappearing under the short-sighted tyranny of “contemporary relevance,” and an explanation whose need has long been disregarded as counterproductive to progress and to the future of Evangelical church practice.

Note: the reader may recognize this Explanation as having appeared on Intrepid Lutherans in the past. In fact, it was published as a series in the Summer of 2010, as follows:

Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 1

Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 2

Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 3

Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 4

It is offered, below, in a single unbroken post.

Note also that this explanation, though long out of print, is now available in book form from Emmanuel Press, one of the fine confessional Lutheran publishers listed in the right-hand column of this blog.

A Sermon for Laetare: “The Fruit of Christ’s Passion” — Dr. Adolph Hoenecke

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:30:00 +0000

On Wednesdays through the Lenten Season this year (2013), we will be publishing sermons from Dr. Adolph Hoenecke (1835-1908), who is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), and from Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (1883-1965), a prolific author, educator, historian and theologian of the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod (LCMS) and among the more significant figures of 20^th Century American Lutheranism.

Last Sunday marked the beginning of the Fourth Week in Lent, also known as Laetare, and today, as we have the last four Wednesdays, we will yet again be hearing from Dr. Adolph Hoeecke.

To what end did Jesus submit Himself to the suffering of the Cross? To atone for the sins of mankind, that all men might have forgiveness. It was precisely this forgiveness for which Christ pleaded while on the Cross – not just for those seeking forgiveness, but even for those without a single care for their standing before God, for those who mocked Him, for those who betrayed Him, for those who delivered Him to be crucified, in short, for all of humanity – that all men might have forgiveness of sins. Indeed, it is to this end for which Christ, in His Office of High Priest, yet intercedes for us. If it is for all men that Christ intercedes, then it is also for each individual sinner, who, apart from God’s forgiveness stands before Him in the guilt of his sins, but upon whom, through faith, is pronounced by God, “Blessed are you whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.” This is The Fruit of Christ’s Passion. There is no one for whom Christ did not bear the guilt of sin and suffer its penalty, and there is no one to whom forgiveness is not offered in the Gospel. In the following sermon, Dr. Hoenecke explains.

A Sermon for Laetare

The Fruit of Christ’s Passion
by Dr. Adolf Hoenecke¹

And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required... And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus. And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him. But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry? And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death. And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left. Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.

Luke 23:24-34

“For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?” These were the words our Lord addressed to the daughters of Jerusalem, who lamented Him as He was being led out to Golgotha mid mockery and scorn. The Lord designates Himself as the green tree. He had received that same designation centuries before in prophecy: “I am like a green fir tree. From me is thy fruit found” (Hos. 14:8). The Lord prophesied thus through the mouth of the Prophet Hosea. The same Prophet adds: “Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? Prudent, and he shall know them?” (v. 9). By nature no man is. But all praise be to God! He has bestowed this wisdom and prudence upon us, so that we recognize the fruit which Jesus brought forth when those things were done to Him, the green wood, the holy and righteous One, which should have been done to us, the unholy, unrighteous, godless ones, the dry wood. He suffered in our stead. Then the words came true: “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots (shall bring forth fruit from his roots)” (Isa. 11:1). In this present Passion devotion, therefore, we shall refresh our souls with:

THE FRUIT OF JESUS’ PASSION

It is a precious fruit.
It is a fruit we all are to enjoy.

I.
The fruit of Jesus’ Passion is precious. – “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful... For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous; but the way of the ungodly shall perish” (Ps. 1). – You are well acquainted with these words. They are from the First Psalm. It is a powerful Psalm. It divides all mankind into two groups, the righteous and the ungodly. A beautiful picture of the righteous emerges from the Psalm. They do not walk in evil ways. This does not come from inborn wisdom, nor is it mere outward show – no! it comes from within. This is because they have hearts that fear and love God. They delight in the Law of the Lord. This also explains why they bring forth good fruits. The righteous, moreover, please God; in grace He looks down upon them. And they are trees whose leaf does not wither. They possess the life that does not die in death, but endures for eternity. But the godless are evil with all their hearts. Following the bent of their hearts, they walk the paths of sin, bold and unconcerned, and they ridicule and mock the divine truth and threat. They are barren trees, accursed trees,which are finally rejected in the judgment and find a terrible end. For theirs is eternal damnation.

Pleasant and blessed indeed is the generation of the righteous! But the generation of the godless is utterly repulsive and terrifying! Now give good ear to the voice of divine wisdom: We all would belong to this repulsive generation of godless men, even at this time, just as we belong to it by nature and by birth. We would still have a heart as completely godless as it was at birth. Evil would be the purpose in our hearts. We would mock God and brazenly, nonchalantly despise His truth. We would go on through life living only to sin and the world, and thereby heap up the wrath of God for the day of judgment. We would be damned in the judgment and would be forced to accept hell as our lot. No righteousness before God and not a trace of piety would be found in us. In fact, in the whole wide world there would not be a single God-fearing and righteous man – if, friends in Christ, if there were not available that fruit of Jesus’ Passion which Jesus Himself, while hanging on the cross, called the forgiveness of sins.

If we have forgiveness of sins, then God no longer imputes our sin to us as making us guilty and subject to punishment; then we are men who no longer have any guilt in God’s eyes – in short, righteous men. Mark, then we are righteous not only in the sense of the world; not righteous as men count righteousness, or in the way in which men, let their fellows pass as righteous. Rather, we are righteous in the sense that God Himself regards us so, and acknowledges us as righteous in His eyes, having a righteousness that is valid before Him, a righteousness with which He finds no fault at all. If we have forgiveness, then we are righteous men who please God; men from whom He no longer can withdraw Himself, nor would, if he could; men whom He does not wish to see separated from Himself. They are men who have peace with God. In blessed communion they live with Him as dear children of the heavenly Father.

They, in turn, can also heartily love Him; they are able to find delight in Him and His commandments. For, since they have forgiveness, they have also received a new spirit, the spirit of sonship, the Holy Spirit who teaches them to cry: Abba, dear Father! Happy, indeed, are these righteous men! Their way is known to God. He Himself has gone before to show them the beautiful way that leads through tribulation into His eternal kingdom, through the cross into Paradise and its joys.

Then precious beyond all reckoning is the fruit of Jesus’ Passion, the forgiveness of sins! Whenever the Scriptures call a man blessed and speak of a state of blessedness, felicitate him on some glorious change that has taken place in him, it is always the forgiveness of sins which is the basis for such a beatitude, such a felicitation. Thus the Prophet Isaiah exults in praise of the exceedingly glorious condition of the Holy City, God’s Zion. He says that it is a secure abode, so that not one of its inhabitants would say in spite of all troubles, burdens, and tribulations: “I am sick.” Then He states the reason for this wonderful condition of the City: “The people that dwell therein shall be forgiven their iniquity” (Isa. 33:24).

Similarly, Zacharias addressed a wonderful song of praise to God at the birth of his son John. He praised the child because he was to go before the face of the Lord with whom redemption was to come. From his lips broke forth the glad cry: “And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins” (Luke 1:76-77). Thus this believer bestowed the highest and most precious praise upon the forgiveness of sins, as he blessed his young child because it was to bring the people to the knowledge of salvation and forgiveness (Luke 1:77).

Paul, too, offered God the highest praises because of His gifts of grace, and he called the Ephesians happy men, because they were blessed with those gifts. Now the core and center of everything that he said is in these words: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins” (Eph. 1:7). And to the Colossians he said: “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses” (Col. 2:13). God has forgiven you your sins.

The Scriptures know of only one class of people to whom you can say in the full sense of the word: Blessed are you! You happy man! They are the ones whose sins have been forgiven. David says, “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered” (Ps. 32:1). David, indeed, knows of many treasures which God gives, of an abundance of God’s benefits, but when he wants to bestow the highest praises on the good that God does, he says: “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits; who forgiveth all thine iniquities” (Ps. 103:2-3).

Therefore Paul also says that David had the same thought as he: only that man is truly happy and worthy to be called blessed whom God forgives his sins, to whom God no longer imputes his sin unto damnation. He says: “Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works. Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin” (Rom. 4:6-8). To sum up: Throughout the Scriptures the “Blessed are they!” is applied only to those who have forgiveness of sins. Where there is forgiveness of sins, there is life and salvation.

But upon all who do not have forgiveness there is pronounced the “Woe unto you!” Their sins with their guilt continue to rest upon them. Sin remains upon them and continually draws God’s wrath down upon them. Sin remains upon them, with its punishment and damnation imputed to them. In fact, all sinners should and must speak thus: How can we live if we have no forgiveness? Our sin and iniquity lie upon us. Where there is no forgiveness of sins, there is death and damnation. Woe unto you! – in the full sense of those words – is, then, the verdict that descends on all who have no forgiveness of sins.

In the Scriptures these words: Blessed are you! are applied to men in various connections. “Blessed is that man that maketh the Lord his trust” (Ps. 40:4). “Blessed is he that considereth the poor” (Ps. 41:1). “Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O Lord” (Ps. 94:12). But in every case such men are meant to whom these words apply above all: “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven!” (Rom. 4:7) Of the man who has forgiveness, the “Blessed are you!” is spoken in its highest and most comprehensive sense.

The “Woe is you!” is likewise pronounced in various connections. “Woe unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousuess” (Jer. 22:13). “Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his!” (Increaseth his goods with another’s Hab. 2:6). “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil” (Isa. 5:20). And there are various other Woes. But every “Woe unto you!” can turn at once into a “Blessed are you!” as soon as the God-less man finds forgiveness. For Jesus has borne the curse, the “Woe is you!” pronounced on the sins of all men, and thereby He brought it about that there is forgiveness of sins. Now the sinner can have forgiveness. Now all curses can be converted into benedictions of divine love, and every “Woe unto you!” into a “Blessed are you!”

Mark, that comes about in this way and this way only. If we did not have this glorious fruit of Jesus’ Passion, the forgiveness of sins, then no man could hear these words coming from the lips of God: “Blessed are you!” or “My blessing be upon you!” would comfort him in all his sufferings. No, “Blessed are you!” or “Be of good cheer!” would sustain him in death. Only a “Woe, woe unto you!” and nothing but “Woe!” would come to his ears. Therefore we say: What a precious Passionfruit the forgiveness of sins is!

Why have I said so much in praise of it? Dear friends, you know the reason: We do not account it nearly as precious as we ought. Or do we seek with great diligence this precious fruit, gained for us in the battle of many bitter sufferings? Do we not seek many other things much more eagerly? This lukewarmness and this appallingly low estimate of Jesus’ sufferings would be excusable if you were told, as is done from some pulpits: This sweet, precious fruit, this true fruit of life, is not for you all; for some it did not mature on the tree of the cross. But as true as it is that this fruit is indescribably precious, it is just as true that

II.
We all are surely to enjoy it. This was the boon that Jesus as our High Priest won for us in His prayer on the cross, and that He still gains for us in prayer. “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Thus the Lord prayed on the cross in the midst of His sufferings. Great, indeed, were those sufferings. We cannot even measure them. For He was suffering the full penalty for the world’s sin. He was drinking the cup of damnation, the cup of the death which is the wages of sin. He tasted to the fullest extent what it means to bear the curse of sin.

He did not want to see us bear it. Therefore He suffered. Therefore, even in the midst of His sufferings, when He was already tasting them in their infinite bitterness, even then He cried out: “Father, forgive them.” What a love for sinners dwells in Christ! We have eloquent testimony to that in this petition for forgiveness, spoken from the depths of His sufferings. How ardent must be Jesus’ desire that sinners, even the worst of them, find forgiveness, since He is concerned about them in the midst of His own terrible sufferings and seeks to move the heart of His Father to be gracious toward the sinners!

For whom, then, did the Lord plead so fervently, so movingly, that this great, glorious treasure, this sweet, precious fruit of His Passion, might be given them to enjoy? Was it for Peter, who was deeply grieved? Was it perhaps for the weeping women? Was it, by chance, for the faithful who stood under the cross? Was it for John, the favorite disciple? No, dear friends in Christ! He pleaded for an entirely different group of people. Who would imagine it? What man could conceive it, if the blessed Word of Truth, the Gospel, did not go bond for the fact?

It was for the soldiers who had crucified Him, and pierced His hands and feet, and had then raised Him up. Had they perhaps done it with a feeling of pity? No, with unfeeling cruelty, with mockery and scorn. “And the soldiers also mocked him.” (Luke 23:36). These were the men for whom He pleaded most fervently. It was for the redemption and salvation of these men that He felt such concern, men who did not even care about redemption and life, but mocked Him. But not they alone are meant. There was Pilate, too, who had delivered the Lord to the soldiers; there were the Jews, the mob who had shouted: “Crucify, crucify him!” (Luke 23:21). And there were also the elders and scribes, who had goaded and prodded until Jesus was hanging on the cross.

The proof for that is found in Peter’s address: “(Ye) killed the Prince of Life. Now brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers” (Acts 3:15-17). Truly, this goes far beyond man’s capacity to think and feel. Happy are we, dear friends, that we sinners were not entrusted to the hands of men, but into the hands of the sympathetic High Priest. He prayed for all, for the evildoers, for His bitter enemies, for the base blasphemers and mockers of His sufferings. Surely, friends in Christ, that gives us courage. Can anyone still think that he is not to receive the sweet, precious fruit of forgiveness as his secure possession? Who would give up hope of gaining it because he is an unusually bad sinner? Oh, fix your eyes on those for whom Jesus prayed – the very worst evildoers!

But, we ask, did Jesus hang on the cross only for these soldiers, for these Jews? He hung there also as your High Priest. You will not doubt that. Then His petition must also embrace you. He prayed on the cross for the evildoers, including you and me and all men. He prayed in true, heartfelt love. And He still prays. Now He prays, sitting at the right hand of the Father. “And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1 John 2:1). We have an intercessor who pleads earnestly, urgently, fervently for us with the Father. It is Jesus who is righteous, yea, who has paid the debt for us, has borne all sin for us. Therefore He now asks this of God as His holy right: Forgive, for to this end have I borne all suffering.

Is His prayer heard? How can there be any doubt of that! But we have plain evidence of it, to give us great comfort. Once more recall Peter’s sermon: “Repent ye therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out” (Acts 3:19). Behold, this is an answer to the highpriestly prayer on the cross: Forgive, for they know not what they do. Surely, that also implies: Father, help them out of their ignorance so that they learn to know Me. Grant that there be time for Me to have My Gospel preached to them, so that they come to faith and find forgiveness, so that My blood and sufferings may, by all means, avail for them. And this preaching of the Gospel was the sure testimony that His prayer was heard, the sure testimony that these people were actually to find forgiveness. Therefore Peter also says: “Repent ye and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” That is God’s will of grace.

Now, you also have this Gospel. Don’t you see that forgiveness is surely meant for you? Why do you hesitate? Simply receive it by faith. Therefore be diligent in hearing the Word of forgiveness. Let this actually come true in you:

May God help us all in that holy resolve.
AMEN.

Endnotes:

Hoenecke, A. (1957). Glorified in His Passion (W. Franzmann, Trans.) Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House. (Original work published in German, 1910.). pp. 57-68.

Note: Dr. Adolf Hoenecke (1835-1908) is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS). He, along with Johannes Bading (d. 1913), led the WELS out of pietistic indifferentism and unionism into strong confessional Lutheranism, was one of the founders of the the old Synodical Conference, and is credited with being the first German Lutheran to author a complete Lutheran Dogmatics in America – Evangelical Lutheran Dogmatics – recently translated into English and available from Northwestern Publishing House. For more information about Dr. Hoenecke, a fairly detailed biography written by Professor August Pieper in 1935, can be found at the following link: The Significance of Dr. Adolf Hoenecke for the Wisconsin Synod and American Lutheranism

Lutheranism and the Fine Arts: Dr. P.E. Kretzmann and the Necessity of Continuing Catechesis

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 06:35:00 +0000

“Competent art is hard to come by these days. True, there are many who have been trained in the techniques of their particular art form, or who have practiced on their own, and have developed an impressive skill. But the execution of technical skill alone is not art. The most that such accomplishes is to showcase the skill of a work's creator, while reducing the measure of art’s usefulness to the act of gratifying consumers. True art has little to do with either the artist or his immediate consumers, but centers on a subject which is external to both. More than just centering on a subject matter, compelling art succeeds at drawing the viewer, reader or hearer of it into a conversation regarding the subject. And this is no small task for the artist! In a single work, he must initiate a conversation and say everything he intends in a way that holds his end of the conversation throughout the inquiries and developing thoughts of those who may engage in it. If the artist is to avoid babbling, this requires that he have such a thorough familiarity with his subject that he can anticipate questions or objections associated with his expression of it, and respond to them while also reinforcing areas of agreement. Sometimes, the subject is simple and the conversation is short. Other times the conversation is longer. Sometimes, the artist points toward or draws conclusions. Other times, he only questions. Sometimes he is speaking for himself. Other times, he represents the voice of others. Regardless of the type of conversation, enduring art is that to which its viewers, readers or hearers return again and again, to admire how the conversation is carried out by the artist, or even to renew it again for themselves. Thus, in addition to technical skill, true, compelling and enduring art requires an abundance of creativity.”

With these words, I opened the blog post, Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 2: Heinrich Schütz ... and other thoughts to ponder over the New Year Holiday..., which used the story of the Lutheran composer Heinrich Schütz as a pretense for discussing the nature of Fine Art and its sources. The attentive reader of that post can't help but notice the stark contrast that is drawn between what the Church has always prized as genuine and uplifting artistic expression, and what passes for such these days: the highest, yet least appreciated forms of art finding a place in today's contemporary pop-Church rise only to some expression of folk art, while those most highly sought after are among the lowest forms of expression, the mere spectacle of entertainment art which serves only to “gratify consumers” without requiring much thought from them. We saw clear examples of this in our recent post, Real? Relational?? Relevant??? O THE HORROR OF IT ALL!!!.

The notion that artistic expression ought to center about the observer of it – his feelings, his emotions – or worse, ought to draw observers into the “experience of the art” itself by exploiting human passions, is a distinctly post-Baroque idea that is absent from our most cherished Lutheran music which comes to us largely from the “Age of Lutheran Orthodoxy” (coinciding with the Baroque Era) and centers on the objective message of the Gospel. On the contrary, such notions find their root in the Enlightenment myth of “human perfectibility,” a myth which serves to drive people away from recognizing their fundamental need for Divine Grace. Indeed, such notions were, notably, repeated by enemies of the Church as a means of deriding both the Church and Christian contributions to the Fine Arts. This fact was touched upon in a following blog post, Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 3: Johann Sebastian Bach. Such ideas ought to have no place in considerations leading to artwork that is created in the name and in the service of the Church.

Genuine artistic expression is a potent means of substantive conversation, of engaging the mind of one's fellow conversant through the language of art; and as such, it represents the highest stage of human learning: the Rhetoric Stage. Thus, genuine artistic expression requires genuine education. Moreover, for those who would meaningfully engage such works of art, an understanding of art's idiom is also necessary if it is to be properly appreciated. And, such understanding is also a product of Education, requiring the effort of catechists in the Church toward this end.

Recognizing the Need for Continued Catechesis of Lutheran Young People
The Walther League recruits Dr. Kretzmann
Enter Dr. Paul. E. Kretzmann – Educator (Ed. D.), Theologian (D.D), Historian (Ph. D.). We posted a blog entry about this very important figure of 20^th Century American Lutheranism in our post, Dr. P. E. Kretzmann: Standing on God's Word when the World opposes us. In 1894, a grassroots Lutheran youth organization, called the Walther League, was formed, focusing on youth who had completed their catechism and had been admitted to communicant membership of their local congregations. Their purpose was as follows:

The purpose of this association shall be to help young people grow as Christians through

”

From Rev. Cwirla's Blogosphere: Walther League and Higher Things

This sounds like a good thing, does it not? Whatever happened to this organization? The Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS) blog, Witness, Mercy, Life Together, writes concerning the Walther League: “The league eventually disbanded in 1977 as a result of painful but formative doctrinal discussions.”

Sometime during the 1930's, long before its eventual demise and probably during the period of its peak involvement, and before his departure from the LCMS, Dr. Kretzmann was asked to write a little book for Walther League Chapter leaders, that they could follow as a guide to the continuing catechesis of Lutheran young people. Printed by Northwestern Publishing House, the name of this little book was Knowing and Doing, and the need for it was expressed in its Foreword by Rev. Paul Prokopy. He justifies the need for continuing catechesis, and for this little book, as follows:

“

It goes without saying that our Lutheran young people should know very definitely what the Lutheran church stands for and just why they are Lutherans, and that in all cases they should be ready and able to present the doctrine of their church and to defend it intelligently and ably against attacks. Yet we find that our young people are ofttimes at a loss to testify clearly and sometimes they are even ashamed to confess boldly that they are Lutherans, the reason being that they are not sufficiently informed and that they have not an intelligent understanding of the very important issues involved...

“

Knowledge certainly is power, and if this applies anywhere, it applies to church activity... Placing first things first, Bible Study stands at the head, followed by study of Church History and Missions, the Study of the Distinctive Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church, and [the study of] Practical Questions and of Church Art...

“

But it is not enough that our young people know, they must also do – Knowing and Doing, as the title [of this little book] indicates, must go together... We must have a well-informed, intelligent and efficient [laity].

”

It is interesting to know that only a generation ago the idea of “a well-informed, intelligent and efficient laity” was founded on the basis of broad KNOWLEDGE – not just of the Scriptures, although this was most important and stood at the head of all areas of study, but included other important areas of study, as well: Church History, Missions, Distinctive Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church, Church Art... The full listing of the Table of Contents includes these, and other important areas of study and of practice:

PART I: KNOWING
Chapter 1: Bible Study
Chapter 2: The Study of Church History and Missions
Chapter 3: The Study of Distinctive Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church
Chapter 4: Practical Questions
Chapter 5: Church Art
Chapter 6: Science and Inventions in the Light of Scriptures
Chapter 7: Literature in the Light of the Bible

PART II: DOING
Chapter 1: The Work of Young People within the Home Congregation
Chapter 2: The Work of Young People in the City and District
Chapter 3: The Work of Young People in the Church at Large

Dr. Kretzmann's thoughts in Chapter 5, on teaching Lutheran Young People how and why to appreciate the rich treasure we Christians have in the gift of Church Art, is most helpful as we contemplate the important role of the Fine Arts in Lutheran church-life. It is reproduced here, in its entirety.

Appreciating Fine Art in Service to the Church
An Important Aspect of the Young Lutheran's Catechesis
Few members of the Lutheran Church realize what a splendid heritage is ours in the field of the arts. The work of Luther and his collaborers was not one of senseless destruction, as that of many self-styled reformers in his days and since, but it was a true reformation of the Church, both toward the inside and toward the outside. It is true, of course, that he eliminated all false doctrine from the teaching of the Church. It is true, also, that he removed, or attempted to remove, all that savored of false doctrine, even in the external usages of the Church. But he never became a mere iconoclast, just as he never degenerated into a mere demagogue. He never tore down merely for the sake of seeing things fly. And if he found the superstructure rotten, he carefully examined the foundation, lest he spoil something that was fundamentally good and had only been contaminated and sullied by false doctrine. Carlstadt and the Zwickau prophets, followed by practically the entire Reformed branch of the Church, attacked and destroyed many things which were in themselves not dangerous or which contained a germ of splendid value. Luther and his coworkers preferred to keep the kernel, even if the shell had to be discarded.

Lutheranism and the Fine Arts“But especially in sacred song has the Lutheran Church a grand distinctive element of her worship. 'The Lutheran Church,' says Schaff, 'draws the fine arts into the service of religion, and has produced a body of hymns and chorals, which, in richness, power, and unction, surpasses the hymnology of all other churches in the world.' 'In divine worship,' says Goebel, 'we reach glorious features of pre-eminence. The hymns of the Church are the people's confession, and have wrought more than the preaching. In the Lutheran Church alone, German hymnology attained a bloom truly amazing. The words of holy song were heard everywhere, and sometimes, as with a single stroke, won whole cities for the Gospel'” (Krauth, C. (1871). Conservative Reformation and its Theology. Philadelphia: Lippincott. pp. 152-154)

As quoted by Intrepid Lutherans: Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 1: Michael Praetorius

In pursuing this course, the Lutheran reformers set a good example to all who bear the name of the true Reformer himself, and we should be proud to follow in their footsteps. Luther himself stated that he was in no sense an enemy of the arts, but that he desired to see them all in the service of the Gospel. His interest in the field of art, therefore, was profound. That he was a powerful poet and writer we all know. He was also a musician of no mean ability, he was well versed in liturgics, and he took an intelligent interest in other branches of art as it concerned the work of the Church.

What the fathers of the sixteenth century began the Lutherans of the next century continued; what Luther and Melanchthon and Bugenhagen and others advocated, the latter preserved. It is true that the riches of the Church in the field of Christian art have been largely lost during the age of Pietism, followed by that of Rationalism, but it is fortunately also true that the Lutheran Church of America is awakening to an appreciation of the heritage of the reformers and that proper steps have been taken and are being taken to reintroduce the precious monuments of art which the Church possessed in the sixteenth century.

All this is not being done in the desire for innovations, nor is an enthusiastic minority trying to foist something unwelcome upon a suspicious majority. The Word of God tells us: “let all things be done decently and in order,” (1 Cor. 14:40). A very clear word is that written by St. Paul: “Let every one of us please his neighbor for his good to edification” (Rom. 15:2). And again, the same apostle writes: “Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by Him,” (Col. 3:17). Moreover, we have evidence that it is by no means displeasing to the Lord if we, in a proper way, and without omitting the more important matters pertaining to the spread of His Kingdom here on earth, take an intelligent interest in Christian art and adorn our houses of worship in a manner befitting the majesty and beauty of Him who is fairer than the sons of men. When Mary of Bethany had poured out over Him her pound of ointment of spikenard and Judas, with a great show of interest in the poor, protested against the waste which was practiced by the deed, Jesus calmly took Mary's part, bidding the assembled company let her alone (John 12:7).

Among the foremost subjects to which the attention of the younger members of our church might well be directed is that of church architecture and ecclesiastical art in general. This interest is aroused and sustained by the very complete accounts of the building of the Tabernacle and the Temple of Solomon, together with the minute descriptions of the various appointments and pieces of furniture which were prepared at God's command in the wilderness and afterward copied by Solomon. If we add to the account of the Bible what has been found in the course of the last century concerning Oriental architecture, the subject becomes fairly fascinating. With our interest in the subject aroused in this manner, it is only natural that we desire to know more about the second Temple and then about that of Herod. Our admiration is aroused by the splendor and magnificence of the buildings crowning Mount Zion and many references to the Temple, not only in the Old Testament, but in the gospels as well, become clear to us.

However, our interest does not cease here. We are anxious to know in what kind of buildings the early Christians worshiped, when and how the first Christian churches were built. We study art of the early Christians as displayed in the catacombs and learn how closely their art was connected with, and expressive of, their belief. We view with surprise and misgivings the erection of the Byzantine cathedrals under Constantine and Justinian; we see the development of the Romanesque style until the limit of its possibilities was reached, only to find that the Gothic style practically removed all limits, making the erection of cathedrals possible which are marvels of human ingenuity and the very apotheosis of ecclesiastical art.

At the same time, we see that the pictorial and plastic arts are placed in the service of the Church, that the arts are, in fact, for centuries dominated by religion, that the greatest works of the greatest masters are performed largely in the interest of Christianity. Add to this the appeal of the minor arts, the work in tapestry and embroidery, in iron and brass and wood, the use of bells and the development of organs in the service of Christian worship, and we have subjects of such intense and absorbing interest as to challenge study, even with absorbing application... Possibly eight [one hour] illustrated lectures would be sufficient to give at least a proper idea of the subject.

Lutheran Worship and Artistic Expression: The Divine Service is NOT a Concert Performance“It may be conceded, of course, that the matter of organ music of every kind is an adiaphoron. There is no commandment of God which gives to the organ either a primary or a secondary position, or makes music either essential or subsidiary for divine worship. And yet, it is not a matter of indifference... A Lutheran congregation will strive to bring out its doctrinal position also in its cultus, and will avoid everything that may be misconstrued as though the Lutherans had abated one whit from their position toward the means of grace. The Word and the Sacraments must always occupy the most prominent place before the congregation, and everything that will detract the attention of the audience from these most important parts of the service must be avoided with the greatest care...” (pg. 406)

“[A]ttempts at artistic playing were frowned upon. All efforts which savored of concert playing were not looked upon with favor. Motets or other strange pieces in the service proper were not permitted, the organ being strictly in the service of the congregation and its singing. The organist might give evidence of his art in the postlude... Above all, secular music was strictly taboo, secular songs and fantasies, as well as popular melodies being under the ban...” (pg. 407)

“The organist will therefore prepare himself very carefully for each service. His music must be selected with the purpose of bringing out the lesson or the character of the day... The hymns must be studied both as to text and music to emphasize the spirit in them. All the shadings of joy up to the veriest exultation, all the blendings of sorrow, longing, repentance, and whatever other disposition is brought out in the text, must be correctly interpreted in the music... Above all, extemporaneous playing and improvising is inexcusable at the organ during regular church-services. An artist of the first rank may attempt it at a church concert, but for anyone else to test the patience of the congregation in such a manner is little short of an insult. The sacredness of public worship and the exclusive emphasis which we must place upon the means of grace forbid such performances...” (pg. 407)

“A Lutheran organist will remember, above all, that the classical choral melodies of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries should always occupy first place in his repertoire.” (pg. 408)

“The organ deserves special attention in its relation to the singing of church-hymns and the liturgy... [but] to educate the congregation in the ability to sing, the organ is neither needed nor is it adapted for that purpose; but it is good and appropriate for accompanying good church-singing, which is learned by singing and in no other way. And since the organ occupies this accompanying position only, it must be retained in this position... Long preludes, postludes, and interludes must be discontinued, but, above all, the insertion of self-composed fugues and other devices, by which the congregation assembled for services is changed into a concert audience.” (pg. 408)

(Kretzmann, P. (1926). Christian Art in the Form and in the Place of Lutheran Worship. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House.)

We have a very similar case where we broach the subject of liturgics and hymnology. Luther very properly retained all that was in itself unobjectionable in the orders of service of his day, not only in the communion service, but also in the minor services and occasional sacred acts. In the many church orders, also, which fixed the order or worship in the various German countries in the sixteenth century, not to speak of the Scandinavian countries and England, the most beautiful sections of the ancient liturgy were retained. The Lutheran Church in America has very wisely selected the very best that was to be found in the sixteenth century liturgies, the result being a Communion Service which is unsurpassed in the entire history of the Christian Church [i.e., the Common Service developed by the General Council, and published in the old The Lutheran Hymnal of 1946]. But it ought to be studied and appreciated. – By the same token, the treasure of hymns which the Lutheran Church possesses is a special blessing of God's grace. Not only in the sixteenth century did the fountain of religious poetry flow in rich measure, but it has come down to us in a practically uninterrupted stream. There are hundreds of hymn-writers of the first and second rank, not only in Germany, but also in Denmark, in Norway, in Sweden, in England, in America, and elsewhere, and the products of their pens are numbered by the thousands and tens of thousands. To know the men and women whom God has gifted in such a remarkable manner, to study the hymns and songs which have imparted strength and consolation to untold numbers of Christians throughout the world, that is in itself a privilege which we have not sufficiently appreciated in the past. [As in the case of pictorial, plastic and architectural art that has been created in service to the Church], eight lessons should be devoted to the study of fundamental points of liturgics and hymnology, [as well].

Moreover, when the foundation has been laid and there is some understanding of the pricelessness of the heritage which we possess, the significance and the symbolism of the Lutheran form of worship may well be made a special topic of study. Every real piece of art is worthy of the most careful, detailed, and painstaking study, and we shall appreciate all the more what we have if we examine it in an intelligent manner. Eight lessons will barely suffice for this purpose. However, the interest of our people having once been properly aroused, most of them will surely want to know more about church music as such and about sacred music in general, including the history of the great Passions of Bach, the oratorios of a number of great masters, and the cantatas, motets, and choruses of scores of other musicians. Here again, eight hours or lessons are hardly sufficient, but they may serve to awaken the right kind of interest, which will direct reading and study into the proper channels.

(Kretzmann, P. (~1935). Knowing and Doing: A book of practical suggestions for young people and young people's societies, with special reference to Walther League Work. Chicago: Walther League of the Ev. Lutheran Synodical Conference [printed by Northwestern Publishing House, Milwaukee, WI]. pp. 36-41)

“In the case of Christian art, the creation of a compelling and enduring work is truly an amazing accomplishment. The subject matter of Christian art itself is generally despised by the World; and ambiguity, which is inherent to art and very often its most appreciated aspect, is at the same time a great enemy of Christian subject matter – fidelity to which requires clarity and closure. Thus, Christian art that remains beloved and acclaimed by all, over centuries and across cultures, which succeeds at engaging its viewers, hearers or readers in unambiguous conversation regarding the reality of Christ and the impact of His Gospel, represents skill and creativity towering over that which produces ambiguous works of profane subject matter for which people already have natural affinity. Why? Because it is an easy task to produce works of art having the World’s approval by appealing to fleshly desires and worldly sensibilities, relative to the task of producing generally acclaimed works which militate against what naturally appeals to man and which serves to lift up the offense of the Cross instead.”

From Intrepid Lutherans: Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 2: Heinrich Schütz ... and other thoughts to ponder over the New Year Holiday...

A Sermon for Oculi: “A Highpriestly Heart in the Passion of Christ” — Dr. Adolph Hoenecke

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 14:30:00 +0000

On Wednesdays through the Lenten Season this year (2013), we will be publishing sermons from Dr. Adolph Hoenecke (1835-1908), who is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), and from Dr. Paul E. Kretzmann (1883-1965), a prolific author, educator, historian and theologian of the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod (LCMS) and among the more significant figures of 20^th Century American Lutheranism.

Last Sunday marked the beginning of the Third Week in Lent, also known as Oculi, and today, as we have the last three Wednesdays, we will again be hearing from Dr. Adolph Hoenecke (WELS). His topic this week is The Highpriestly Heart of Jesus in His Passion.

Peter was very close to Jesus. Of the twelve disciples, he was among the three commonly referred to as "the inner circle": Peter, James and John. He was not only bold, but displayed great courage in his boasting, of his willingness and intention to suffer alongside Jesus in His Way of Sorrow (Luke 22:33). And how could he not? He knew that Jesus alone had the Words of Eternal Life, and confessed as much to Him and before his fellow disciples (John 6:68). Who, knowing Jesus alone had the Words of Eternal Life, wouldn't follow Him to the End? But this Peter did not do. Rather than walk with Him, Peter publicly betrayed Him. Denied knowing Him or being associated with Him. Peter's was a great sin, and when the rooster signaled to him what Jesus said he would surely do, he wept bitterly over his sin. He had denied the One in Whom alone there is Life. There was only Death left for him as a result. What was he to do? Could Peter still have confidence in Jesus after this? – Confidence that he still had the love of Jesus, that he would have Life through Him, even though he had earned only Death? Can we have confidence in Jesus? Dr. Hoenecke answers these questions in the following sermon.

A Sermon for Oculi

A Highpriestly Heart in the Passion of Christ
by Dr. Adolf Hoenecke¹

Then took they him, and led him, and brought him into the high priest's house. And Peter followed afar off. And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, and were set down together, Peter sat down among them. But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with him. And he denied him, saying, Woman, I know him not. And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not. And about the space of one hour after another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was with him: for he is a Galilaean. And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew. And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And Peter went out, and wept bitterly.

Luke 22:54-62

“Such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who needeth not daily as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s” (Heb. 7:26-27a). Thus the Apostle describes the characteristics of the true High Priest, such an One as could help us. We do have such a High Priest in Jesus Christ, who is the Redemption that was born of Mary by the Holy Ghost, who could put the question: “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” (John 8:46) and to whom the Father bore witness that He knew no sin, and that He is the innocent and undefiled Passover Lamb.

But Jesus is the true High Priest. He is such an One as we need, not only because He is holy, but also because He has a heart such as must be found in a High Priest to whom poor, burdened, and afflicted sinners will gladly entrust themselves. He had such a heart particularly in the performance of His highpriestly work, in His Passion. God’s Word, in the form of today’s Passion text, makes us sure of that. Therefore the theme of our Passion devotion shall be:

THE HEART OF JESUS THROUGHOUT HIS PASSION WAS THAT OF A TRUE HIGH PRIEST

The certainty of this fact as given by our Passion text.
The fruit such certainty should bear in us.

I.
It is made a certainty for us. “Then took they him, and led him, and brought him into the high priest's house.” They led Jesus into the house of Caiaphas, the high priest. There He stood bound before His judge. In the eyes of the ignorant world, going by outward appearances, Caiaphas was the judge, the high priest. According to God's plan, and the fulfillment of His plan, however, Jesus, the bound and captive Jesus, was the High Priest. The types of the Old Testament were abolished in that moment; fact and reality were taking their place.

Here that became fact, reality which God had said to Moses in regard to the high priest over Israel: “They shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office... And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work... And thou shalt take two onyx stones, and grave on them the names of the children of Israel: Six of their names on one stone, and the other six names of the rest on the other stone, according to their birth.... And thou shalt put the two stones upon the shoulders of the ephod for stones of memorial unto the children of Israel: and Aaron shall bear their names before the Lord upon his two shoulders for a memorial.” (Ex. 28:4-12).

The fact and reality represented by this type is Jesus, the High Priest, for He is not only Moses’ brother and not only the brother of the men in Israel, but the brother of us all according to the flesh. But He is also God, blessed forever. Therefore His shoulders are strong indeed. They must be so. Not only the names of the Twelve Tribes with all their souls, no, the names of all mankind, recorded as debtors before God, and the burden, the guilty burden, which is recorded opposite all our names, opposite yours and mine – all this He bore. “The load Thou takest on Thee, That pressed so sorely on me, It crushed me to the ground” – thus we therefore sing of Him.

And how did He bear it? For every Israelite there must have been a very pleasant ring in the further directions for the high priest. A breastplate was to be made of gold. On it were to be inscribed the names of the Twelve Tribes of Israel and, by direct implication, all the souls in Israel. This little shield was to be fastened securely to the ephod, “that it may be above the curious girdle of the ephod, and that the breastplate be not loosed from the ephod. And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate of judgment upon his heart, when he goeth unto the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually” (Ex. 28:28b-29).

Surely, that was pleasant to hear. It meant that in all faithfulness the high priest was to bring the names of his brethren, with all their guilt, before God, when he went into the Holy of Holies with the sacrificial blood of atonement. Now, did our High Priest, Jesus, go through all His sufferings and into death, bearing all of us upon a brother’s heart? Did He have a true high priest’s heart while He bore the unbearable burden of our sins? Was His mind in His suffering for us that of a sympathetic, compassionate, and faithful brother? Was it a brother’s heart through and through?

Surely, on this all depends. Just consider the possibility that you could not presuppose such a heart in Him. Suppose that you were about to seek Him in your soul’s distress, and suddenly such a word as this came to mind: “Thou hast made me to serve with thy sins” (Is. 43:21-27). Would you have any real confidence in Jesus, if you had to doubt whether He took upon Himself the hard service and labor you caused Him with your sins and iniquities and bore them for you with a thoroughly brotherly, sympathetic heart? In that case you would very likely lose your confidence.

Therefore let us go into the shocking story of our text, and let us see whether it will not make us certain that Jesus in all His sufferings really had the heart of a true high priest, that is, a heart that held for us and all sinners a true brotherliness; that His heart was filled solely with a genuine, warm sympathy for us; that His heart in the faithfulness of love was concerned only with our plight.

The story of our text is, indeed, a shocking one. It is the story of a deep fall. If we note the heinous nature of the sin in question, the circumstances under which it was committed, and the person who made himself guilty of this sin, then we must say that the story presented by our text is a shocking one.

As we have heard, Jesus had been led into the palace of the high priest. There Jesus stood before His bitterest enemies, surrounded by a mob of rude soldiers. The priests vented their hatred against Him in venomous derision; the servants, currying the favor of their masters, practiced their vulgar mockery. The sufferings had already begun. Already the Lord had to suffer, besides the base mockery expressed in words, the most terrible calumnies and insults expressed in deeds. Already He had to endure being pummeled by fists, being struck in the face, and even being spit upon. Thus the Lord suffered even here; thus the Lord humbled Himself even then. He did it, bearing the guilt of the world, the guilt of all men, and always in the spirit of a true high priest.

While the Lord had thus already begun, as the High Priest, performing His sacrificial act in the palace of the high priest, outside in the court one of His disciples had joined the servants to see how this affair would end. It was Peter, the same Peter who had professed a low regard for his own life, stating that he would be ready, if need be, to die with his Lord. The Lord had not encouraged him to prove it in this night. Rather, he had warned him against it. He had foretold that, instead of dying or suffering steadfastly with Him, he would suffer the most shameful defeat, the most ignoble fall. It was not in accord with the Lord’s will that he sat at the enemy’s fire. But to Peter the Lord’s word; “Thou wilt deny me” (Lk. 22:34), appeared not nearly so weighty as his own declaration and vow: “I will suffer all with thee” (Lk. 22:33). Alas, what arrogance! For who could know us and the state of our hearts better than the Lord does? What arrogance! The Lord accuses us of weakness, and then to boast of our strength! Such pride always has fall and ruin in its wake.

What a fall was there! As Peter was sitting in the crowd of soldiers, he was recognized. They accused him point-blank of being one of the disciples. The accusation became more and more pointed: “Of a truth this fellow also was with him” ( v. 59). Now what do we see? Peter not only denied it, but with curses and oaths he asserted that he did not know this man Jesus! That is simply appalling. Once Peter had said: “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life” (John 6:68). At that time he believed and recognized that Christ was the Son of the living God. Now he uttered the miserable lie: I do not even know Him. Then he had vowed: We will not forsake Thee. Now he uttered the disgraceful lie: I had nothing to do with Him. Then he had confessed: Thou art the Christ and the Son of God; now he contemptuously denied Him by referring to Him as “this man.” How can you even think me capable of having associated with this man and of regarding Him with some respect?

Slander is always a terrible thing, but it is doubly appalling in this case and under these circumstances! There was the Lord before the priests, the target of mockery and scorn, even then engaged in the holy work of appearing before God in the name of all men, also in the name of Peter, remembering him before God for the purpose of his reconciliation – and outside stood the disciple, declaring time after time that he did not know this man Jesus, even calling a curse on his own soul to affirm it. Within stood Jesus before the priests, taking an oath on it, for the consolation of the whole world, that He was the Christ; He was vowing to all sinners with an oath that He was their Reconciler and Redeemer – and outside stood the disciple, denying with an oath this same, this only Redeemer.

The Lord did not behold this sad scene out in the courtyard with bodily eyes. The appalling lies, oaths, and curses very likely did not reach His bodily ear. But of this we can be certain: it did not remain hidden from the Lord. When the cock crowed, the Lord turned. Just as if He had been sitting right next to the deeply-fallen disciple, the Lord had lived through the whole deplorable story of this shocking denial. Yes, He had to experience all this even while He was beginning to drink the cup which the Father had given Him, the cup He was to drink also for the same Peter who had just renounced Him mid oaths and curses.

Now, how did the Lord feel in His heart toward His disciple, for whom also He was suffering? The answer to this is of supreme importance for all of us sinners! For Peter’s case is plainly our own case. Here we have a touchstone to the heart of Jesus. In Peter’s denial the greatest of all offenses was committed against the Lord, and this came at the very time when He was already in the midst of the Passion. Already His suffering was great. On top of this, He received the basest insult. Surely, at this point we desire to have the Lord give us a glimpse into His heart, and let us know how His heart during His Passion was disposed toward the disciple who had just offended, in the most saddening way, against the Lord and against His Father and against the Spirit. With the answer to that question we would at once have the answer to the larger question: With what attitude in His heart did Jesus suffer for all of us sinners?

The Lord does open His heart to us; He does let us see how He felt toward Peter. “And the Lord turned and looked upon Peter.” But how? What kind of look was that? In the well-known hymn we sing:

But where is this written? Here! “And Peter went out and wept bitterly” (v. 62). This was contrition of the right kind, a divine sorrow unto life. And this sorrow unto life informs us concerning that look of Jesus: it was a look full of a great, warm sympathy, a look of sincere compassion, a look full of heartfelt comfort. And Peter tells us about it in these his words: “The Shepherd and Bishop of your souls” (1 Pet. 2:25). There he extols the Lord who had rescued Him with His gracious glance of love and had led him to a saving repentance through it. – The eyes of the Lord do not deceive. The attitude of His heart toward Peter was exactly what His eyes told Peter. In the midst of His Passion it was full of a fervent, compassionate sympathy toward the disciple who had just offended most grievously.

Then blessed are we! What the Lord was to Peter He is to all. To all He is the same Shepherd and Bishop, as Peter says in praise of Him. He is the one High Priest for us all. He has taken the whole burden of our sins upon His shoulders; He has borne all our names upon His heart. The sinful woes of every man, yours and mine, He has borne on His heart in largehearted, merciful sympathy with our misery, and with the heartfelt desire to prove Himself our Brother in bringing aid to us, for time and for eternity. It was with such a true high priest’s heart that Jesus suffered for us. That is certain, and our Passion text has established its certainty.

II.
What fruit is this certainty to bear in us? Dear fellow Christians, what fruit ought the beloved Gospel in general bear in us? Faith, the firm, unshakeable faith toward our dear Lord and Saviour. This is also to be the fruit when God’s Word and Jesus Himself, all through the Gospel, testify with such certainty that the Lord in all His sufferings was indeed filled with wrath and hatred against our enemies: sin, death, and the devil, but never, never against even one of us poor sinners. No, as He came to us and was not ashamed to call us poor sinners His brethren, so He suffered for us in true brotherly compassion. He became our Brother and took upon Himself our flesh and blood, so that He might become a faithful High Priest and might suffer for us, bearing our misery on his heart in pure compassion.

That applies to everyone without exception. No one is excluded. Our beloved God and Lord Himself makes this truth so certain in His Gospel, so incontestably certain, in order that it might become a certainty for you and for me and for all. He wants the fact of the great, fervent, brotherly, and compassionate sympathy that stirred the heart of Jesus in all His sufferings for us – He wants that to abide securely in our hearts as an impregnable certainty and confidence.

Therefore, fellow redeemed, allow yourself to be made certain. Search in God’s precious Word and look for those wonderful passages, such as this Passion text, which clearly show you the heart of Jesus, your Brother, your Mediator, your High Priest. The Roman Catholics have an order or brotherhood which calls itself the Brotherhood of Devotion to the Heart of Jesus. It is a brotherhood with a system of self-chosen works, just like all brotherhoods which the Antichrist founds. There is no devotion there, least of all to the heart of Jesus. The true brotherhood of devotion to the heart of Jesus is the one that the Lord, our Brother, founded — the brotherhood of those who hear and keep His Word, who allow themselves to be taught and to be made certain by Him. To them He reveals Himself. Among them He sets hearts afire, hearts that burn with a blessed joy when they behold, in its unspeakable fulness, the fervent, compassionate love filling His highpriestly heart.

In such confidence entrust yourself fully to Him. Yield yourself, surrender yourself into His hands. That is a second fruit. Do that, when you stand, stand as one leading the life of a true Christian. Then yield yourself in implicit trust to Jesus, your Shepherd, your Lord, the Bishop of your soul. You can trust His heart; you know that. Then also trust His guidance; follow where He leads. Be governed by His suggestions, His directions. They are to be found in the Scriptures. To you, too, Jesus says: “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matt. 26:41). To you, too, and to me, to us all the Lord says: There is no depending on yourselves. Therefore let us humbly say: Lord, it is true. Thou knowest us through and through. Thou dost tell us that we are kept by Thee.

Let us not take it ill that the Lord humbles us. We, of course, always have a different idea about ourselves. We have this opinion of ourselves: Though all should forsake Jesus, still I never would do it. And when men say of us: “So-and-so is a Christian; you can rely on him,” how we love this flattering unction! We very likely also say of ourselves: I can depend on myself. Now Jesus says: That’s not true, My dear child, My dear son, My dear daughter. There is no depending on you. Utter weakness is your name. Give up these thoughts, these proud thoughts. Otherwise you can easily meet your downfall. Think of Peter!

My words come to you as those of a true shepherd. Therefore obey and say: The dear Lord is certainly right! Yes, follow! And if He leads you among enemies, then go! He will support you. And if you have no calling in a certain place, then stay away! Do not sit down with the scoffers, and do not draw close to their fires. Do not do it out of an idle curiosity to see how the thing will end, to find out what is going on there. Christ does not bid you go. It is very dangerous for you. This of Peter! Least of all are you to go among enemies and into the gatherings of wordly-minded people and to sit at their fires, because you like to join in their doings. Jesus forbids that to you. And who is He? The Bishop of your soul, the Shepherd who seeks only your good. If you go in spite of that, then evidently your genuine trust of faith in Jesus is already strongly on the wane. Those who have that trust are not stubborn people who accept no guidance, but willing children who gladly submit to such guidance.

And yet – ? Yet quite a few of them fall. If it should happen to you, then be like Peter. As one who has fallen, and fallen deeply at that, put yourself in Jesus’ hands. Do as Peter did; he went out and wept bitterly. He wept in deep sorrow over his sin, but not in despair. Rather, using Jesus’ grace as his pillar of support, he raised himself up. Had not Jesus looked on him with compassion and sympathy?

That is true, true for you. You know how his heart is disposed toward you. You know that he suffered for you in heartfelt sympathy for you. Why do you hesitate? Why will you feel backward about surrendering yourself into Jesus’ hands, even though your fall be very deep, even though your offense may be ever so abominable? There is nothing, nothing in Him that could repel you. Here there is no wrath, nor bitterness, nor resentment; here there is only sympathy, tender sympathy, a look of sympathy and the word of sympathy: Come, let Me help you, that I may take your sins from you and give you peace.

Then we have found help; otherwise not. Then, may the Lord Himself grant that this confidence abide in us at all times: He suffered for us with a truly compassionate, highpriestly heart, and, therefore, is always the High Priest who can feel with us in our weakness, and who surely also prays for us that our faith fail not. May He, then, grant us this further boon that we always be such who truly love His Word, for:
Only His Word makes us certain.

AMEN.

Endnotes:

Hoenecke, A. (1957). Glorified in His Passion (W. Franzmann, Trans.) Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House. (Original work published in German, 1910.). pp. 44-56.

Note: Dr. Adolf Hoenecke (1835-1908) is among the most important theologians of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS). He, along with Johannes Bading (d. 1913), led the WELS out of pietistic indifferentism and unionism into strong confessional Lutheranism, was one of the founders of the the old Synodical Conference, and is credited with being the first German Lutheran to author a complete Lutheran Dogmatics in America – Evangelical Lutheran Dogmatics – recently translated into English and available from Northwestern Publishing House. For more information about Dr. Hoenecke, a fairly detailed biography written by Professor August Pieper in 1935, can be found at the following link: The Significance of Dr. Adolf Hoenecke for the Wisconsin Synod and American Lutheranism
On Peter, fallen deep in sin,
He looked in love and deep compassion.
Such was His way the strayed to win
Not only while in servant’s fashion.
Oh no! His heart is e’er the same;
Good, True, and Faithful is His name!
As He was then, through sorrow wending,
So now, enthroned mid joys unending,
His love but strives that sinners live.
My Saviour sinners doth receive.
(Wis. Ges. 356:6)

Real? Relational?? Relevant??? O THE HORROR OF IT ALL!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Mr. Douglas Lindee) — Thu, 28 Feb 2013 11:30:00 +0000

This is when it all started to happen. Relevance... back in the 1970's... sure ain't what it used to be. My, how the flower it doth fade... The fact is, THIS is what swiftly happens to man's version of "relevance." Thirty years from now, today's "relevant" and "relational" worship leaders are going to look just as "groovy."

"Jesus is a friend of mine (Jesus is my friend);
"Jesus is a friend of mine (I have a friend in Jesus);
"Jesus is a friend of mine (Jesus is my friend);
"Jesus is a friend of mine;
"He taught me how to pray, and how to save my soul;
"He taught me how to praise my God, and still play Rock 'n Roll;
"The music may sound different, but the message is the same;
"It's just an instrument to praise His name!"

That was "groovy," wasn't it? ...ZAP!

The sad thing is, I'm old enough to remember that stuff. I remember being tortured with it as a kid. Here's another one. This puppet-character was so "relational," I think Hollywood later made a slasher movie out of it.

This is the way it looks when you try to be "real," "relational," and "relevant." It looks like you're trying, and bless the man's soul, he is trying. Pretty obvious, too. But instead of trying to be something we're not, can we please be what we are as Lutheran Christians and do what we've always excelled at? Can we please just work at equipping the Church with competent Christian poets, composers and musicians who are trained in the Fine Arts?

And this is what happens when you try to be "relevant," but almost totally miss the mark. Sure, rap is in. It even tries to get in my house from the street on occasion. But I don't think these folks are doing it right...
(NOTE: There is evidence that this video, recently uploaded to YouTube and recently gone viral, is NOT the genuine product of a church, but is a parody written and produced by an individual to make fun of "relevant" and "relational" Christianity. If that is the case, then I personally consider this video to be a stroke of satirical genius. Yes, it's offensive, but that's the point. It is a brutal, poignant and multi-faceted commentary against a movement in American Christianity that is making Christians look like fools, and is trivializing the message they're commissioned by God to represent. Like a nerd tries to be cool, the Church Growth Movement (CGM) wants the Church to try to look like and sound like the world. But the Church can't be what it isn't. It can't be the world as well as the world can be the world -- and the world sees it just as clearly and immediately as the cool kids recognize when a nerd tries to walk their walk and talk their talk. THEY DON'T DO IT RIGHT! Sometimes it's just goofy, other times it's downright offensive.)

Yes, this guy's a pastor. A famous one, too. He also figured out the "relevance" of rap. I don't think he's doing it right, either. He's just making a fool out of himself, and out of everyone who bears the name of Christ in public.
St. Paul advises Titus: "For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain... For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith, not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth. To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed. But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine... in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us." (Titus 1:10-2:8 NASB)

Yeah, I know. "God-talk" is such a bummer. Especially when God Himself is talking. Sorry, dudes.

Being truly "relevant" and "relational" means opening the doors of the church to let the world in. To look the way the world looks as you speak the words the world speaks. This is truly the image of Christians congregating about entertainers to witness entertainers engage in entertainment -- verbatim from the entertainers of the world.

Speaking of "letting the world in," do you need to have one of those "dirty sex-talk Sundays?" You know, Divine Service where children are denied entrance to the Nave and are sent to the Sunday School room to watch Veggie Tales for an hour instead? Easily offended adults are warned not to attend? Under 17 not permitted without a parent? It would be quite a spectacle to witness wholesome Christians making a public show of lascivious thoughts and behaviour. Yeah, that'd be pretty kinky, wouldn't it. You could sell tickets. All of the sinners in the community would flock to see that! Only, you're probably not doing it right. Among other factors, the bar of "smutty relational relevance" has been raised by other forward-thinking Christians who excel at pushing the envelope, who are consistently first-on-the-scene "to do what no one else is doing, to reach those no one else is reaching." To follow their lead, you'll need professional help. This is the "real", "relational" and "relevant" way to do it, now.

I'd written a couple posts on Sunday attire, but that is apparently an entirely irrelevant concern. Attire doesn't really matter. It's best not to concern oneself with it these days.

"Reaching people no one else is reaching..."
Video Series Proposal: Being really 'Real', and 'Relational' to the Core: An Epitome

Need to talk about Stewardship? You've probably been doing that wrong, too. THIS is the way to address difficult subjects in a "relational" way: turn it into comedy. Only entertainment is "relational" anymore, and everyone loves a comedian.

But if the comedy routine doesn't work, threaten to kill them. Then threaten them with Hell. Then promise them that tithing will keep them in Heaven. And then get caught spending the money on yourself. That's amusing, too.

Contemporary Worshipers, congregating before entertainers. This is the way it looks these days. Sort of. Actually, maybe ten years ago, as they were copying out-of-style music from the late 1980's. Wait... No... This is from a church service in 2010, not 2003, twenty-two years after that wretched song was recorded (I remember it. It was cool for a couple weeks, then we all got tired of it. The radio stations didn't get the message, unfortunately, and kept playing it over and over. I wonder why?). Notice: As in the Miley Cyrus song, above, there was no need to change the words of this song, either. It's not important anymore what the text of a song actually says, what's important is whether (a) the listener can "properly understand" what the entertainer means by performing it, and/or (b) the listener subjectively feels spiritually uplifted by it. If the listener either can't "properly understand" what he sees and hears, or doesn't "feel uplifted" by it, then he is the problem, not the music or the entertainer -- whose "entertainment art" is categorically above criticism.

Yes. Some poor wretch possibly went to church that morning expecting, oh, who knows -- Law & Gospel, maybe? -- but got a bearded lady instead. Possibly... though nearly everyone in the audience surely knew that they got up that morning to congregate before entertainers...

More Circus Church. For real. This is a Church service. This is Supreme Anthropocentrism. I, I, I, me, me, me, you, you, you, blah, blah, blah. And this is, literally, how far seeker-sensitive Evangelicalism has allowed itself to sink. Why do we Lutherans insist on drinking from the same poisoned well?

Where have we seen this before? Hmmm?

Has liturgical dance EVER been "relevant" or "relational?" Other than that one time King David did it and embarrassed his wife?

Confirmed. Liturgical dance has NEVER been "relevant" or "relational." And that's NOT a good reason to do it anyway!

Yup! Me too! I think I'm gonna...

And this surely must be the Captain Underpants of contemporary praise and worship.

This isn't to say that ALL Evangelicals have sunk this low, or even want to. But in the past twenty years, I don't think I've heard of a single Evangelical congregation that doesn't "congregate before entertainers" on Sunday morning, that doesn't want to congregate before them, and that doesn't adamantly refuse to give up this model for fear that people will stop coming to church, for fear that they will be unable to attract the unchurched if they can't entertain them on Sunday morning.

This isn't to say that NO Evangelicals have seen the problem with this. I've spoken with many Evangelicals, and read of even more, who've found both practical as well as doctrinal problems with these anthropocentric practices.

From a purely practical standpoint, unless the "Preaching Pastor" is also the "Minister of Worship," there are two divergent sources of significant influence in the congregation which appear before the congregation each week. Often, these two influences, perhaps initially competing together for the approval of the assembly, find themselves competing against each other to increase or maintain their influence. And this is especially the case if these two prominent influences find themselves in disagreement, or see that disagreement is on the horizon. This is a particular problem in mid-sized Evangelical congregations, as disagreements between the "Preaching Pastor" and the "Minister of Worship" often lead to strife among leadership, abrupt dismissals of personnel, and even congregational splits. I've heard the story a hundred times, and it is always the same. Either personality incompatibility, insecurity, jealousy, and even genuine policy or doctrinal disagreements between the "entertaining minister" and the "talking minister" are at the root (even if they start out as good friends), and more often than not, it's the "boring" and "untalented" "talking pastor" whose is seen as the bad guy, even though he usually wins.

More importantly, from a doctrinal standpoint, some Evangelicals actually do see that this entire model of Church practice distracts attention from the centrality of the Word. It makes people the object, as well as the catalyst, of Christian worship, rather than Christ and their relationship with Him. To the observer, the "entertaining minister" is the apparent object and catalyst; but in truth, he's only the secondary object. Hidden under the surface, the primary and real object of the contemporary worshiper's striving is himself, is in his self-centered pursuit of a particular emotional state that he cannot reach on his own: he needs the worship team to get him there. The "entertaining minister" is certainly the catalyst, and to the extent that he generally succeeds at delivering worshipers to their desired emotional/spiritual state, he becomes an object of their adoration, as well. To the extent that he can't, worshipers complain, "They're not doing it right!" I've personally spoken with such Evangelicals who see this most clearly, some are laymen, others are pastors. When they raise their concerns, they are always defeated by the chorus of voices who've been brainwashed by CGM seeker-sensitive principles, who are literally hooked on the entertainment, and like dependent junkies are frantic to retain the source of their weekly "spiritual fix." Some even see an element of manipulation in this model of Church practice, and this is especially the case among mega-churches, whose practices are models of aspiration for smaller, growth-at-all-costs-oriented congregations.

I, personally, haven't witnessed the inner workings of mega-church practices. But over the years I've heard from a handful musicians who have. The leadership structure in these organizations is very similar to what one would find among C-level executives in any corporation. They all have contracts under which they have negotiated compensation packages and associated leadership responsibilities, performance expectations, etc., and frequently, the "Worship CEO" functions as a manager as much as anything else, managing several teams related to the execution of the entertainment each week. I've yet to hear of a situation where there is only one team of musicians. Generally, there are multiple bands. Each band is comprised of professional, or at least highly accomplished musicians, each of whom are almost always Christians. Each band doesn't play every Sunday, it seems, but instead, only every other Sunday or even just once a month. They rehearse between gigs. And this is where it gets interesting. Sometimes, it seems, the set they rehearse for a given Sunday has been planned out for them, other times, band members contribute in some way to the selections; however, it is almost always the case that they are working from either a sermon outline or an entire sermon text that has been provided for them ahead of time by the office of the "Preaching CEO." The "talking minister" appointed for the service they are rehearsing for already knows what he is going to say, or at least what he is going to talk about, and the point of the band's rehearsal is to select and practice a sequence of pieces which will adequately prepare the audience for the message he will deliver.

And here I digress for a moment to share from my own experience as a worship team musician, in much smaller venues. It is amazing to me how Christian religious people, addicted to weekly "spiritual/emotional highs," are so eager to completely give themselves over to the music. Like racehorses leaning on the gate, they chomp at the bit in eagerness for the signal to start, for the piano or the guitar to strike the first chord. It's almost like a gun going off. Even positively mediocre musicians like myself -- people who could never even succeed entertaining drunks at the local bars -- are swiftly given almost complete control of the emotional/spiritual state of worshipers before them. As the music grows louder and tempo quicker, the people jump, gyrate and stomp their feet right along with it, while smiles cover their faces and their singing turns to laughing and shouting. As the tempo and volume subside, the people follow right along -- their eyes close as they sway and swoon with their arms in the air. For cerebrally oriented folks such as myself, it is positively frightening. For reflective Christian musicians with a conscience, it is bothersome. Most musicians, it seems, simply get off on it. They have the power of music, and they like to use it.

To "adequately prepare the audience for the message of the 'talking minister'," the audience must be brought to a fitting emotional state through the preceding entertainment. That is what the band rehearses for, and the "sequence" of music they practice generally leads their religious audience -- people who are eager to give themselves over to the music -- through a cycle of ups and downs: up, up , up to euphoric highs, and down, down, down to melancholy lows; uuuuup and doooowwwn, uuuuuup and dooooowwwn, uuuuuuup and dooooowwwn it cycles until the audience has been "sufficiently prepared." And somewhere between the high and the low, either on the upswing or the downswing, is the preferred emotional state for the audience to receive the message of the "talking minister."

The musicians who have spoken to me about this over the past twenty years, all either professional musicians or very accomplished non-professionals, had, by the time they started talking about it with others, already grown bothered by this practice. It felt to them like they were taking advantage of the emotional vulnerability of their audience. It felt like mass manipulation. In nearly every case, these musicians had shared with me their concerns, in a personal way, because they'd already shared their concerns with their church leadership, and those concerns had been ignored. Rejected, in fact: "You have a negative spirit, God is not able to work through you until you repent;" or "We have no impact on the audience, we are merely instruments through which the Holy Spirit works, and what we see happening before us on Sunday morning is purely His work, not ours;" or "You're fired." In a few cases, I know that these conscience-stricken musicians eventually quit the mega-church scene (if only temporarily in at least one case). In another case, I recall hearing later that the musician even quit being a Christian over it. I no longer move in these circles, and have long lost contact with these guys. I can remember some of their faces, but don't even remember most of their names. I have no idea what they might say today. Granted, these accounts are anecdotal and, as far as the specific circumstances involved (which are irrelevant), amount only to hearsay. But I know what these musicians were concerned about back in the 1990's and early last decade, concerns which resonated with my own, and we can plainly see from the above that the worst in Evangelical practice continues to defy what even our worst imagination of poor Christian judgment can conceive, as "entertainment ministers" continue to "push the envelope". It continues to get worse.

What do you suppose might be around the corner?

And now for the heavy stuff...

"Relevance" among Emergents: Transcending our primal narrative, to live harmoniously with man in the present -- the only true reality there is -- that we may collaborate in the essential human task of creating the New Earth. Ah, Rationalism in the post-Modern age, a.k.a. "making it up as you go along." And the Bible says any of this... where? It doesn't really matter anymore. Emergents, who are largely former Evangelicals, are open about rejecting what the Scriptures plainly say in their most fundamental teachings. And they're pretty safe in doing so. Enough of Evangelical Christianity has been conditioned by nearly a generation of false practice to accept whatever the "talking minister" says -- as long as they find themselves to be sufficiently entertained by the process.

More of the same sort of "relevance" from the same kind of sources: Me... Today... and the pursuit of Ionian/Pythagorean Harmony and Wholeness. Know any Lutherans dabbling with Emergent Church theology? This is what they are being exposed to, and this is what you will be exposed to through them.

All of these videos, and MANY more, have been compiled by Chris Rosebrough in a collection he calls, The Museum of Idolatry -- "the world's largest collection of artifacts of apostasy." 1500 exhibits, and growing. They're all of the sort shown above. Whenever I need a reminder of what I left behind, and why I left it behind, I go to the Museum. I saw this coming, I knew that this is what Evangelicalism would turn into. Very little of this represents genuine Christianity. This is the direction CGM leads.