Scriptural roles of men and women

R.C. Sproul, Jr. has written against women bloggers in, What are you talking about?

But I explain this confusion not for my own sake, not to avoid embarrassment, but to make a point I believe many in the blog world need to learn. People as backward and ancient as I tend to turn to Titus 2 with some regularity. There we see that older women are called to teach younger women. Many of my internet friends recognize this, and so direct their blogs at other women. Trouble is, Titus 2 not only tells us who is the faculty (older women) and who are the students (younger women) but it tells us the curriculum. Older women are told not just that they should be teaching younger women, but that they should be teaching them to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the Word of God may not be reviled.

There are, I’m delighted to report, any number of blogs which teach just these things. (Bearing in mind of course the other weaknesses that come with the internet. Serving your sisters in cyberspace isn’t probably what Paul had in mind, especially if you aren’t ministering to those who are, in real life, your neighbors.) But I have seen others, written by women, that set out, or so it seems, to set the world straight about Auburn Avenue theology, the history of the New Testament church, that seek to change this government policy or that, that direct you to this teacher or some other. Now bear in mind that many of these ladies are pushing the very same things I would push. The trouble I’m getting at isn’t that they are pushing against what I think to be biblical wisdom, but that they are pushing at all.

I have grumbled in the past that the internet, for all its strengths, for all its power in diffusing centralized communication, comes with this exact kind of danger. People are teaching who shouldn’t be teaching. And people are learning where they ought not to be learning. A husband who loses his wife to a hook-up with some internet Lothario is probably better off than one who returns from work to find his wife safely at home, but having been seduced into Rome by some charming blogger.

I have to say that reading Mr. Sproul's article brings back memories of being a part of a church that expects only pious behavior out of women who always wear long skirts, long hair and scarves or hats covering their heads. What does scripture teach about women? The ELS tells me this:

The Roles of Men and Women in Church

On the basis of such Scripture passages as Genesis 1-3; I Corinthians 11:3-16; I Corinthians 14:33b-36; Ephesians 5:22-26; Galatians 3:28; I Timothy 2:11-15; I Peter 3:1-7; Romans 16 and Philippians 4:3, we teach:

1. God created man and woman in his own image, that is, he created them with a true knowledge of Him and with perfect righteousness and holiness. Even though our first parents lost this image in the fall into sin, yet God in his grace promised the Savior and in Him restored this image.
2. This spiritual equality of man and woman is a blessed reality, as St. Paul writes in Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
3. Through faith in Christ all Christians are members of the universal priesthood of believers and as such are in full possession of all its rights and privileges and are exhorted to exercise them.
4. At the creation of man and woman God established an order, or structure, by assigning individual identities and roles to each sex. According to Genesis 2, Eve was created to be a helper to Adam and as such was to be under his headship.
5. The headship principle is clearly taught in the Old Testament. In Genesis 3:26 the Lord says to the woman: "Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." The original structure at creation remained in effect after the fall into sin.
6. The headship principle is clearly set forth also in the New Testament. In I Corinthians 11:3 Paul says, "the head of the woman is man," and in Ephesians 5 the apostle tells wives to submit to their husbands "for the husband is the head of the wife." (Eph. 5:22- 23) The apostle Peter refers to this headship principle when he singles out Sarah as an example in obeying Abraham and calling him Lord. (cf. I Peter 3:1-7)
7. The headship of man in his role of leadership to which the woman is subordinate is therefore God's arrangement for good order. (Genesis 1:31)
8. The prime example of the goodness and necessity of the headship principle is found in the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. (cf. I Corinthians 11:3) Biblical Christianity has always taught that the Father and the Son are equally God; there is no difference in their degree of divinity. And yet in I Corinthians 15:28 the Son himself is said to be subject to the Father. It is interesting to note that here the same verb is used for the Son's subjection to the Father as is used for the woman's subjection to the man in Ephesians 5 and I Timothy 2. In I Corinthians 15:28 the purpose of the Son's submitting to the Father is not to put the Son in an inferior position, but to bring about a beautiful plan. The purpose of the wife's submitting to her husband and of the woman's being submissive within the Christian congregation is also to carry out a beautiful plan, viz., the establishment of a marriage that not only lasts but is also a wonderful harmony, and the establishment of an orderly and harmonious fellowship within the congregation.
9. Our Lord has revealed that He wants the headship principle to be upheld in the church. It is for this reason that the Lord has restricted the pastoral office to men. (cf. I Timothy 2:11-14 and I Corinthians 24:34ff)
10. The same principle applies to woman suffrage in the church. Scripture forbids the women "to have authority over a man,"( I Timothy 2:12)
11. However, this principle does not forbid consultation between men and women in the church. Informal meetings or forums may be held, therefore, at which women may have opportunity to seek information and express their views. But the final decisions are to be made by the men. The Lord himself has placed this responsibility upon the men and they are to carry this out in a manner that is sensitive to the feelings and wishes also of the women.
12. Scripture encourages women to use their talents in areas of church work which do not conflict with the headship principle or the public administration of the means of grace. As members of the priesthood of believers there is much for women to do in church. In Romans, chapter 16, the apostle Paul commends Phoebe to the Christians at Rome as a servant (diakonos) of the church at Cenchreae and sends greetings to women who had been of assistance to him. He mentions Priscilla and her husband Aquilla as "fellow workers in Christ Jesus" (v.3) and a certain Mary "who labored much for us." (v.6) And in his letter to the Phillippians he urges the congregation to "help those women who labored with me in the gospel," (4:2) Nor should we forget the many women who ministered to our Lord during his earthly ministry whose names are recorded in the Gospels. Women may, for example, lend their counsel in open congregational forums; teach parochial school, Sunday school, vacation Bible school; direct choirs; serve on committees in advisory capacities; assist the pastor and elders in calling on the sick, shut-ins and singles; and also assist in works of charity in the congregation and community.
13. From the above passages it is evident that women used their talents in the Lord's service and they were commended for it. The church today can learn from the early church to do the same, but always within the parameters which God himself has established. In the past there has been perhaps too much emphasis on what women are not to do rather than on what they are to do, thus giving some the impression women's talents are neither needed nor appreciated
14. While we must continue to uphold the scriptural principles so far as ordination of women and their exercising authority over the man is concerned, it is clear from the passages under study that women's participation in the work of the Gospel is a blessing to the church. God has given the ministry of the Gospel to all believers; it is the office of the pastoral ministry that he has restricted to qualified men.
15. Finally, Christian men ought to take their leadership responsibilities seriously, and Christian women also have the responsibility of encouraging men to fulfill their obligations and duties of leadership.
16. When men and women labor together in the Gospel, taking heed to the Word and working within the scriptural limits, then truly God is glorified and the church is edified.

John H. of Confessing Evangelical posted on this article. I appreciate his words of encouragement to women bloggers. I had this comment to his post: "Why should I be surprised that scripture forbidding women spiritual authority over men should be misconstrued by Sproul to mean that women shouldn't proclaim the gospel as a part of their daily lives? I am in the ELS synod, which is often misunderstood as being "against" many things including women. Yet nothing could be further from the truth; my pastors educate and encourage all members to be ready to give account for the hope that is in my heart. There is no scripture prohibiting women from bearing witness to the gospel. I did ask my pastors for guidance before starting Be Strong in the Grace. Each one of them has complimented me, encouraged me and helped me with my blog. Even our churches elders have complimented and encouraged me. As confessional Lutheran pastors, I would take their advice over Mr. Sproul's any and every day of my life. John, I know you didn't post this to depress or discourage women, but it is depressing to think that he wrote this. Sproul's article is a good example of the power of words, even on a blog. " I am glad that I read Sproul's piece; I need to know how to respond to such accusations. It is a part of being strong in the grace that is Christ Jesus to know what scripture says and doesn't say.

Be strong in this grace: Sacrament of Holy Baptism

Catechism- Sacrament of Holy Baptism

The institution of baptism

What is baptism? Baptism is not just plain water, but it is water used by God's command and connected with God's Word.

Which is that word of God? Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Matthew, "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

The blessing of baptism

What does baptism do for us? Baptism works forgiveness of sin, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

What are these words and promises? Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

The power of baptism

How can water do such great things? It is certainly not the water that does such things, but God’s word which is in and with the water and faith which trusts this Word used with the water. For without God’s word the water is just plain water and not Baptism. But with this Word it is Baptism, that is, a gracious water of life and a washing of rebirth by the Holy Spirit.

Where is this written? Saint Paul says in Titus, chapter 3, “God saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.”

The meaning of baptism for our daily life

What does baptizing with water mean? Baptism means that the old Adam in us should be drowned by daily contrition and repentance, and that all its evil deeds and desires be put to death. It also means that a new person should daily arise to live before God in righteousness and purity forever.

Where is this written? St. Paul says in Romans, chapter 6, We were…buried with (Christ) through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may life a new life.”

How can we reach the world for Christ if we can't come together as Christians?

I was driving the other day and happened to stop the radio dial on a program featuring a radio preacher. He was talking about denominational issues, so I decided to listen to what he had to say. He made a very interesting statement: How can we reach the world for Christ if we can't come together as Christians?

The radio preacher said that we should be tolerant of each other's doctrines, hymns, worship styles, etc. He said that he had been judgmental toward other denominations and said that God was convicting him of that lately. He urged his listeners to visit other denominations once a month. I wondered what would happen if he visited my church. If this local pastor had visited my church the very next day, he would have experienced the following:

• corporate confession of sins;
• pastor using the office of the keys to pronounce our sins forgiven;
• an infant baptism, our pastor's first grandchild, with tears of joy streaming down the young parents' faces in gratitude to a loving God who can create a seed of faith in their newborn child and our pastor choking back his own tears of gratitude as he poured the saving water on the child;
• proclamation by our pastor with a huge smile on his face, "We have approached the throne of grace, now our God approaches us in His Word;
• sermon reminding us of our own sinful state and the loving God who gave us Jesus Christ as a substitutionary sacrifice so that we may enter heaven.
• gentle and loving admonition to congregants of the biblical teaching on partaking in holy communion without full agreement that Jesus' body and blood are truly present.

What would that radio pastor think of my church? Would he walk away critical of us for not allowing his to take communion or baptizing a newborn baby into faith? I looked up his church and radio ministry on the internet when I got home. I know of his denomination, was a member for a few years and know that they reject that God creates faith in infants at baptism and reject Christ's real presence at communion. Certainly, we share much in common, namely that faith in Jesus as the savior is the only way to eternal life in heaven with God. I do agree that disagreement over what scriptures teach does hinder reaching the world with the gospel message; I also believe that agreeing to disagree is harmful...to me, to all Christians and to the non-believer. Christians must consider the scriptures together and agree on what they teach. That is true unity.

If only...

If only I were going to this workshop tomorrow!!!

House of Love: The similarities between a pastor and a parent

This is exactly the kind of post for my yet to be created blog, House of Love. So, it will go on this blog for now.

Today I read The Burr in the Burgh: What Is a Pastor? This morning my heart is very heavy with worries for my children. This post really ministers to my sad heart and reminded me of where my hope lies.

Pastor Stiegemeyer writes:

...sometimes pastors lead out in front of the flock. And other times, they get behind and push the sheep like a cowboy. Just because the word "pastor" literally means shepherd doesn't mean that some of us aren't really cowboys at heart.

The shepherd leads in such a way that the sheep hear his voice and want to follow. Why? Because they know he will take them to quiet waters and green grass. The cowboy, on the other hand, has to shout and shove and lash the herd to make it go where he wants it to. I see this really as a distinction between Law and Gospel.

The faithful pastor uses both Law and Gospel. But we motivate Christians to follow Christ not primarily with a whip, not with threats and curses. The sheep might go where they are directed as a result of bullying, but they will hate you for it. The better way - Christ's way - is to lead by offering us His blessing. It's like this. Do you follow Christ because you fear His wrath if you do otherwise? Or do you follow Him out of love, because He calls you gently and offers you good things?

This post got me to thinking about the similarities between pastoring and parenting. I am probably guilty of being a cowboy more than a shepherd and I think the primary reason is fear. I fear that I'm not doing well enough, because if I was then my parenting subjects would be very close to perfect. I imagine that some pastors must struggle with that falsehood, too. If I was a good pastor, then my congregation would be (fill in the blank). Is this the secret to parenting: "The shepherd leads in such a way that the sheep hear his voice and want to follow. Why? Because they know he will take them to quiet waters and green grass. The cowboy, on the other hand, has to shout and shove and lash the herd to make it go where he wants it to."

About a year ago, I wrote an email regarding parenting to one of our pastors and he replied:

Blessings in Him who was the perfect child and through whom we have access to the perfect parent - our heavenly Father - Jesus!

What does the Bible say about parenting? Your first and primary responsibility is wrapped up with the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20. Before we give our children anything else, it's bringing them to the Means of Grace, the Gospel in Word and Sacrament, and the working of the Holy Spirit.

The very best thing I ever did for my children was bring them to the waters of Baptism. Honestly, I could give them the best of the whole world, but everything, everything pales in comparison to bringing them to Jesus and Jesus to them. "What does a man
gain if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul..." Jesus says (Mt 16:26).

The sole of parenting is really attached to the soul. I believe that governs everything. How will this effect the eternal soul? is a good question always to ask. That governs setting definite expectations and consequences, communication - use of Law and Gospel, marital example, Christian example, etc., etc.

In Rev. 14:13 it mentions that we will rest from our labors and our "works" will follow us when we go to heaven. What can we take with us from this earth - PEOPLE, especially the ones the Lord's entrusted to us in our homes.


I printed up his email and actually carry it my purse to read it moments of frustration. Now, I'll print up Pastor Steigemeyer's advice, too. I love how our pastors, Pastor Steigemeyer and Martin Luther, just keep turning us back to scripture. What does scripture say? What does scripture say? That is the one thing I hear the most and is the most comforting advice in the world.

Brian Braatz on Faith without works

Brian Braatz posts a nice piece on faith without works.

"The Law demands perfection. Absolute obedience in every way from the moment of conception until the time your soul leaves your body. Unmitigated perfection. This is of course impossible due to our inherent sinful nature. It was lost to you before your parents even met, and you had nothing to say about it. You lost before you even started. So they Law's expectation is unachievable, and everyone knows what that means... death." Read on...

Preachrblog: Hymn - Road to Emmaus

Preachrblog posts on a hymn I'm not familiar with, but it fits nicely in with my post from a couple days ago.

Not Liberal, but Generic...

It has been discussed here and elsewhere that generic American Evangelicalism is having a negative, destructive affect on many denominations, turning many churches into generic, cross-less, positive-thinking social clubs. Bunnie Diehl blog writes about the effect that American Evangelicalism is having on denominations that used to keep more to themselves, see Not Liberal, but Generic.

I just started reading D.G. Hart's Deconstructing Evangelicalism. I found it ironically interesting that Hart proposes that:

"Evangelicalism needs to be relinquished as a religious identify because it does not exist. In fact, it is the wax nose of American Protestantism...it is a face void of any discernible features. The nonexistence of an evangelical identity may prove to be, to borrow a phrase from (Mark) Noll, the real scandal of modern evangelicalism."

So then, if D.G. Hart, who is a Presbyterian (I believe) sees the dangers of the American Evangelical movement, then we, as Lutherans, need also to be ready to defend gospel when fellow Lutherans suggest creating "seeker-friendly" worship, less "offensive" communion practices, etc.

I've only read one chapter of this book and can't wait to keep reading.!

On the road to Emmaus...

I'm on the road to Emmaus, I suppose...

Back on November 23, 2004, I wrote about what I had learned about God's Word during my change to confessional Lutheran practices. I referenced two good posts on the topic:

More Than Words by Rob of Love and Blunder

The Proclaimed and Present Word by John of Confessing Evangelical

At the time I wrote:

The confessional Lutheran church taught me this: When the Word is invoked, Christ is truly present. We have more than a symbol of Christ, we have Him in truth. Until very recently in my faith life, I never fully understood the power of God. His power has literally silenced me. I am finally safe resting in His arms. I no longer try to help or manipulate God by my actions. The day I stopped "trying" to be a good Christian, He started to work through me. I have seen seven family members come to Christ in less than two years, after twenty years of my pathetic attempts to "be a good witness" to them.Truly excellent posts, Rob and John. Thanks for teaching me. I am very thankful.

Well, I certainly don't take my own words to heart. Lately, I've been playing God as I struggle with issues I cannot control in the lives of other people. I have desparately trying to concoct ways to "fix" the situations which cause me fear and heartache. And so the Lord found me yesterday in church. God's Word really convicted me of doubting His ability to grow and sustain faith in people whom He has already placed the seeds and faith and in whom those seeds have already been well-watered.

Luke 24: 13-33: On the Road to Emmaus

Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; but they were kept from recognizing him. He asked them, “What are you discussing together as you walk along?” They stood still, their faces downcast. One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?” “What things?” he asked. “About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see.” He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther. But they urged him strongly, “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over.” So he went in to stay with them. When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?” They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together.

Our pastor used this account from the road to Emmaus for our sermon yesterday. He drew out of this scripture that even the disciples didn't recognize their Lord as He walked along that road with them, although they realized it later on...in hindsight. It's that way with us, too. Pastor also reminded us of the hymn, Abide With Me. Jesus promised he would abide with us; he did with the apostles on the road to Emmaus and He will abide with us. We need to take our sadness and fears to Him and remember that He promised to abide with us. I need to take my sadness and fears to HIm and remember that He promised to abide with me.

Introducing Preach. Teach. Confess

Thanks to Intolerant Elle for leading me to a new confessional Lutheran blog. It is called Preach. Teach. Confess. Here's their self-description:

Preach. Teach. Confess.
As young Lutheran pastors for the old Lutheran truths, we pray that this site provides a beneficial forum for the discussion of Lutheran doctrine and practice, contact between fellow Wisconsin Synod Lutherans and those interested in confessional Lutheranism throughout the country, and some good clean fun. This is not an "official" site for any group. What is said here only represents the teachings of the Lutheran Church in so far as it accurately presents Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.

Looks like they also have well-rounded lives and comment on the important issues of the day, like baseball and politics! I think I'll enjoy reading this blog. Welcome, men!

Quiz: What denomination are you?

I took this quiz about a year or two ago. I tried to find my scores from that test, but maybe I just took the test but didn't blog about it. The questions are fairly Lutheran-savvy, but not totally. Interesting and short quiz found here. You'd think I'd be 0% Anabaptist...oh well.

1: Lutheran (100%)
2: Presbyterian/Reformed (70%)
3: Roman Catholic (70%)
4: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England (69%)
5: Eastern Orthodox (69%)
6: Church of Christ/Campbellite (53%)
7: Congregational/United Church of Christ (53%)
8: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic) (50%)
9: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist (44%)
10: Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God (39%)
11: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene (30%)
12: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.) (21%)
13: Seventh-Day Adventist (21%)

Hat tip to Charles Lehmann

The ELS and BLTS websites are really rockin' now!

I'm probably slow with this news, but I've just discovered the recently updated and improved websites of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod and Bethany Lutheran Theological Seminary and they are really looking great! Lots of resources: statements of doctrine, downloads, Lutheran Synod Quarterly archives, the ELS Handbook, the ELH Hymnal, ELH Hymnal midi files, links...there's too much to list here. You must check it out yourself!

Mattworks: He definitely grew up in a house of love!

Mattworks tackles weighty issues, extremely well for the ripe old age of 22, in The Misunderstood Christian:

Christians are sure annoying, aren't they? Always going around trying to impress they're beliefs on you and "Bible thumpin'" you over the head. Christians are such hypocrites too, OMG. I can't believe they judge people all the time and they're not any better themselves! What makes them so much better than everyone else anyways? Don't they know that the Bible says that God loves everyone? Jeeze, Christians are so brainwashed, they can't even think for themselves. They need a book to tell them how to live! And what's with all the denominations anyways, they can't even figure it out. Those people just made up the Christian religion to feel better about themselves. The world is crap anyways, everyone knows that. All the church wants is my money. Christians are so close-minded.

House of Love, confessional Lutheran style

Keeping a house of love. How is this accomplished? Are you a confessional Lutheran... married or single, old or young, male or female...who is interested in a joint blog? The blog posts will be written from a confessional Lutheran point of view and will center on family experiences, but will welcome the input of all Christians. I am open to ideas, since this wouldn't be fun if it only met my needs.

I know that my Redeemer lives!

Job 19: 25 - 27

I know that my Redeemer lives,
and that in the end he will stand upon the earth.
And after my skin has been destroyed,
yet in my flesh I will see God;
I myself will see him
with my own eyes-I, and not another.
How my heart yearns within me!

Our Easter Sunday sermon was on this passage from the book of Job. We had already sung the triumphant hymn, I Know That My Redeemer Lives. Our pastor aptly commented how we don't say"Good luck on judgement day!" to each other, but "I know my Redeemer lives." Here is a summary of his excellent message to us.

All of us need a redeemer. Our sin nature reminds us of it every day. Jesus is who He says He is. He has redeemed us. Believe it! The joy of Easter is not a rememberance of a historical event, an Easter egg hunt or getting new Easter outfits; the joy of Easter is found in my own salvation. Sure, we all have doubts at times, especially in times of trouble. Job was going through trouble that most of us will never experience and yet he was able to say, "I know that my redeemer lives...and I myself will see him with my own eyes." I will trust in God to sustain my faith to always be ready to say what Job said in the face of torment.

Repent of your sins, rejoice that you have a redeemer and join with Job in saying:

"I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; I myself will see him with my own eyes-I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!"

I know that my Redeemer lives!

I know that my Redeemer lives!

What comfort this sweet sentence gives!

He lives, he lives, who once was dead;

He lives, my ever living head!

He lives triumphant from the grave;

He lives eternally to save;

He lives exalted, throned above;

He lives to rule his Church in love.

He lives to grant me rich supply;

He lives to guide me with his eye;

He lives to comfort me when faint;

He lives to hear my soul’s complaint.

He lives to silence all my fears;

He lives to wipe away my tears;

He lives to calm my troubled heart;

He lives all blessings to impart.

He lives to bless me with his love;

He lives to plead for me above;

He lives my hungry soul to feed;

He lives to help in time of need.

He lives, my kind, wise, heavenly friend;

He lives and loves me to the end;

He lives, and while he lives, I’ll sing;

He lives, my Prophet, Priest, and King!

He lives and grants me daily breath;

He lives, and I shall conquer death;

He lives my mansion to prepare;

He lives to bring me safely there.

He lives, all glory to his name!

He lives, my savior, still the same;

What joy this blest assurance gives:I

know that my Redeemer lives!

Hymn # 351 from Evangelical Lutheran Hymnary

Author: attr. John Hatton

Tune: Duke Street

1st Published in: 1775

Mary Magdalene Sees the Risen Lord
But Mary stood outside by the tomb weeping, and as she wept she stooped down and looked into the tomb. And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. Then they said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?"
She said to them, "Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him."
Now when she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?"
She, supposing Him to be the gardener, said to Him, "Sir, if You have carried Him away, tell me where You have laid Him, and I will take Him away." said to her, "Mary!"
She turned and said to Him, "Rabboni!" (which is to say, Teacher).
Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, "I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God."'
Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that He had spoken these things to her.
 

A new commandment I give you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you love one another. --John 13:34 NKJV

Today is Maundy Thursday, the beginning of the liturgical commemoration of our Lord's Passion.

Most of us who have grown up in the Lutheran tradition associate this day most of all with the institution of the Lord's Supper, and Christ's gift of His very body and blood in, with, and under simple bread and wine as His personal assurance to each of us, individually, that our sins are forgiven; as a way to live in us, so that we might live in Him. Lovers do not encounter each other so intimately as our Lord encounters the least sanctified of those who belong to Him in this Sacrament. He actually becomes part of us, and incorporates us anew into Himself. Through His sacramental body and blood, Christ nourishes and sustains His body, the Church.

But this day actually takes its name from the passage above, John 13:34. "Maundy" comes from the Latin word mandamus, meaning "commandment." In the next few days, Christians will assemble to hear once again the story of the greatest love of all: Christ's love for the human race, that led Him to the cross that whoever believes in Him should live forever (John 3:16).

 

Be strong in this grace: God reaches out to us! Part 3

Sorry to take so long to finish this series! My daughter has been sick with one thing after another since February 22nd, but is finally on the mend.

Part I: Popular explanations concerning our natural human condition and what does the Bible say about our natural human condition?

Part II: Three Answers to our natural human condition

Part III: Some thoughts from Walther and Senkbeil

Walther

"Having this doctrine, what exceedingly happy and blessed people (we) are! This teaching takes us to Christ by a straight route. It opens heavens to us when we feel hell in our hearts. It enables us to obtain grace at any moment without losing time by following a wrong way, striving for grace by our own effort, as we sometimes do with a good intention. We can approach Christ directly and say, "Lord Jesus, I am a poor sinner; I know it; that has been my experience. But Thou has called me by Thy Gospel. I come to Thee just as I am; for I could not come any other way. That is the saving doctrine which (we) have learned from Christ and the apostles."

~C.F.W. Walther, The Proper Distinction of Law and Gospel, p. 137

Senkbeil

"In our relativistic age, the validity of any concept is not in its truth by some objective standard, but its meaning for the individual. A wide variety of goods ranging from hamburgers to automobiles, are advertised with an appeal to personal self-interest. The consumer is reminded that what is best for him is best. Our society appears to be more concerned with subjective meaning than objective truth, even when it comes to moral values. Instead of searching for objective standards upon which to base action in achieving a consensus of opinion. "I feel" has been substituted for "I think". The obvious subjective thrust of Evangelical theology is tremendously attractive to such a world view. The individual who has "invited Jesus to come into his heart" has no need to substantiate the truth of his convictions. He "feels" like a Christian, and for him that is the most important part of believing. The ultimate absurdity of this approach to the Christian faith is best expressed in the words of the old Gospel hymn: You ask me how I know he lives? He lives within my heart. Whether the focus is on speaking in tongues or conquering a pet sin, Evangelical Christianity regards these human actions as a demonstration of God's reality in the human experience. In our subjective age, the attraction of this brand of demonstratable Christianity can hardly be underestimated.

Senkbeil, Sanctification: Christ in Action, pages 9 and 10

" In our pragmatic age, people are much more prone to ask "Does it work?" than "Is it true?" The assumption is made that if it works, then it must be true. More fascinated with results than theory, contemporary Americans are understandably impressed with Evangelicalism. Here is a theory which seems to work; here is a theology which appears to bring results. God is at work in the world; the believer only has to look to his own life to see the reality in his commitment to Christ working its way out in the lives of his people. This is no "paper god"; this is the living Lord of heaven and earth! In the lives of his people, it is held, God demonstrates his power in living reality.

Senkbeil, Sanctification: Christ in Action, page 15

Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him. And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left. And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." And they cast lots to divide his garments. And the people stood by, watching, but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, "He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!" The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine and saying, "If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!" There was also an inscription over him, "This is the King of the Jews."

One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, "Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!" But the other rebuked him, saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."--Luke, chapter 22
 

Michael Spencer: How Religious Parents Royally Screw Up Their Children

I just discovered a wonderful article written by Michael Spencer called How Religious Parents Royally Screw Up Their Children.

At the outset, I want to make it very clear that I couldn't disagree more with those who believe that a strong devotion to religion automatically curses your children for the rest of your life. In spite of thousands of angry Catholic novelists, hundreds of weeping Oprah guests and a few dozen "Fundamentalist Anonymous" groups, there are millions of us who came through a rigorous religious up-bringing with normal sex lives, no desire to be serial transsexuals and only a moderately high guilt level. I have watched secularists go about the parenting process, and I cannot see any real difference. Having a rigid code of right and wrong did not eliminate wisdom, moderation and mercy. Those who attempt to raise non-violent, politically correct, vegetarian children seem to have the same problems as the rest of us. So quit your whining.

I do believe there are hazards that many religious parents do not navigate well. Some of them are simply matters of realism, while others are particular bizarrities endemic to particular religious groups. Evangelical Christianity has bred a plague of experts, many of whom are grinning idiots, bearing the mantle of religious authority. Don't think me ignorant of their game. Desperate people buy books. Observe the traffic near any diet or self-help or parenting shelf in your local Barnes and Noble. But I would urge everyone to realize that we preachers are stupid like everyone else, we just know how to sound like we know what we are talking about. The guys preaching the twenty part series on "Foolproof Biblical Parenting" have a household like Malcolm in the Middle, too.

Great introduction. Early in my parenting, I bought all the "Christian" parenting books our meager budget could afford or I stood in the Christian bookstore and read as much as I could without buying the book. Thankfully, by the teen years, the Holy Spirit has shown me that all parenting advice begins with facing that fact that you and your children are sinners, born into sin and remaining sinners while living on this earth. Christians have the advantage of faith in the gospel, summed up in John 3:16. So knowing we are sinners who live in the promise of our salvation helps to put the daily challenges of parenting into perspective. Michael Spencer writes:

.. How do religious parents royally screw up their children?
1. By trying to raise sinless children. There are several particular beauties to Christianity. One of the most attractive is the Christian worldview's commitment to tell us that we are created in God's image, capable of wonderful things, but now we are fallen and rebellious towards God, and capable of the most heinous kinds of evil and wickedness. And despite some theological quibbling, the majority of Christians agree that we are born with this situation, and will always be sinners, until such time as Christ glorifies these bodies and transforms us for eternity. So our children are sinners, and this should be no surprise. We know why Johnny lies. He is, in his heart, a liar before he knows a word to speak. We know why Johnny is violent, disobedient and lazy, or at least how the whole ball gets rolling.

Now I am not trying to stop anyone from restraining their children from evil, but I am going to say it is darned foolish to operate on the assumption that junior's sin nature can be eradicated through Christian books, Christian videos, Christian school, Christian friends, Christian toys, scripture memory and obsessive Christian parenting. Junior is a sinner. Tell him so, so he can understand himself, and better understand why you are more interested in his conversion to Christ than in his obedience to you. Then show him the Gospel please, a message that does not apply to perfect children. Just ask that rich, young ruler in Mark 10.

He goes on to give a list of eight mistakes Christian parents make. Personally, I think that strong confessional Lutherans won't have trouble with #1, but they might fall prey to #8:

8. By ignoring culture, and isolating your children from it. I am not suggesting you get the Playboy channel for Junior's room or introduce him to the joys of marijuana yourself. I am saying parents who attempt to build a bunker and hide their children from culture make two mistakes: First, you probably make secular culture more appealing than it really is, and second, you lose a lot of good influence. I am certain that I have accomplished more by discussing the inanities of MTV with my kids than by forbidding it. It is now a regular laughing stock in our parent-child interactions. My kids have learned to think "Christianly" with my help. I think they will be the better for it. We see movies together and talk about them. My daughter introduced all of us to CSI, and it brings up lots of discussions. And we ridicule TBN together.

We also take in Shakespeare as a family, listen to one another's music, kick around the last sermon we heard and discuss politics. Should we be doing longer devotions instead? Should Shakespeare and MTV give way to the 700 Club and CCM? Should we give up those TV shows for reading the latest scintillating Christian fiction? Not as far as I am concerned. Life outside the bunker is more interesting and more beneficial.

Hat tip to Hapax Legomena who appears to have lived firsthand through Michael Spencer's list, or at least most of it, ironically with very loving, giving, caring, and well-meaning, Christian parents. He has recently been sharing his life, so far, on his blog. His experiences should be read by all parents.

An ode to Butch...

A man I never knew died last week. His wife taught my children. His children and my children are all classmates. But, for some reason, I never met him in the two years since we joined their church. I learned a little more about Butch today.

Today, my son's hockey team played against his daughter's hockey team in her club's spring hockey tournament. It was the championship match. Why did she play? She was the only goalie left for the team and she's a fierce competitor. It probably never occurred to her not to play. The family left the rink after the game to shower Sophie up and go to the reviewal. He has been the hockey association president since 2002. That told me a lot about him. My guess is that he didn't even have to tell his daughter that it was OK to help her team out on the day before his funeral.

I also found his picture in a very recent (2-17-05) issue of Let's Play Hockey. In today's city newspaper, I learned even more:

Butch, age 53, passed away March 16, 2005. Butch was born in 1951 in Melrose, MN to Agnes and Cyril. He was raised in Freeport, MN or as he liked to refer to it "Lake Wobegon". He attended St. Cloud State and the University of Minnesota to receive his Masters in Electrical Engineering. In 1986, he married Jean, in Pinecreek, MN. He was a long time employee of Medtronic, Inc where he was a Technical Fellow and Distinguished Engineer. He was president of the hockey asociation from 2002 to present. Butch is survived by his wife, Jean; and daughters, Tess and Sophie.

Butch was gifted with tremendous energy and drive and couldn't resist a project whether at work, for a friend or one of his own. He tackled them with great gusto and followed them to completion. As far as we know the only project left unfinished was his retirement home, but we know that God had a better retirement plan for Butch than any we could have come up with.

Butch was diagnosed with untreatable cancer very few weeks ago. Since that time, the 7th grade class has been practicing a song to sing for Butch's funeral. I'm having a hard time imagining how I will keep my composure tomorrow when I hear the sweet sounds of 13 year old voices singing to the family of their sweet Sophie and to the glory of God.

Hymn: Abide With Me

Abide with me.

Journalistic Jargon: A Hymn for Holy Week Meditation

Erica has done a good job in posting on my new favorite hymn, Abide With Me. We have been singing it at each Lenten service. The slow, melodic hymn causes me to reflect on my life and my faith. It seems as though many people know the various parts: bass, alto, etc. Each time I sing it, I tell myself that I want to able to sing or at least hum it to myself...or have my children sing it in my ear. There...I made myself cry writing that just now. The beauty of raising my kids in such a wonderful church that teaches us such great hymns is so that we can all turn to hymns at various points in life.

Abide With Me

Abide with me, fast falls the eventide.
The darkness deepens; Lord, with me abide.
When other helpers fail and comforts flee,
Help of the helpless, oh, abide with me. I

need thy presence ev'ry passing hour;
What but thy grace can foil the tempter's pow'r?
Who like thyself my guide and stay can be?
Through cloud and sunshine, oh, abide with me.

Swift to its close ebbs out life's little day;
Earth's joys grow dim, its glories pass away;
Change and decay in all around I see;
O thou who changest not, abide with me.

I fear no foe with thee at hand to bless;
Ills have no weight, and tears no bitterness.
Where is death's sting? Where, grave, thy victory?
I triumph still if thou abide with me!

This is the verse I want to know as I go to Jesus:

Hold thou thy cross before my closing eyes,
Shine through the gloom, and point me to the skies;
Heav'n's morning breaks, and earth's vain shadows flee;
In life, in death, O Lord, abide with me.

ELS Hymnal #561
LW #490

Is it in your hymnal?

How beautiful is the body of Christ. 

How beautiful is the body of Christ. 

How to become a Christian

I recently read the following question and answer on the WELS Q&A site. I thought the responder did an excellent job of explaining how one comes to faith in Christ Jesus. The person writing in with a question does not explain how she was "raised WELS", but was not a believer. As a newcomer to confessional Lutheranism, I can't imagine how someone could receive faith at baptism, hear God's Word presented in church and at home, study for three years in a rigorous catechism program and proclaim to the congregation on your confirmation day your faith in Christ Jesus. That is what it would mean to me to be "raised WELS". Her question illustrates Chris Jones' post on the importance of catechising the parents along with baptizing the baby.

Question:
I have been studying the biblical reasons to baptize/not baptize infants. Being raised in the WELS, I was not a believer. Later in life after many trials, God touched my heart, and I gave my life to Jesus. I was babtized as an infant, but when I truly came to know Jesus as my savior, I wanted to be obedient and publicly repent and confess Christ, and I was baptized. As an infant I didn't get to do that.
In many verses, the word "repent" comes before "baptize". The two always seem to go together. In fact it seems that if one has not repented one should not be baptized. I am now married to a man who loves the Lord too, and we are studying to know what the Word says. Yes, it says to baptize all nations, and yes we are sinful from conception, but how can an infant be repentant until it is more mature and understands? Is a baptism really valid without being repentant? And wouldn't repentance indicate that the Holy Spirit has already done a work in the person's heart. Can a baby really be saved by a work of the parents, though the Word is clear that we are not saved by works? Has God in Scripture given babies any other provision?

Answer:
The emphasis is not on what parents or others are doing in Baptism. The emphasis is on what God is doing, on what he has promised, and on what we receive by his grace in Baptism. People are not saved by my work when I tell them that Jesus died to save them from their sins. Rather the Holy Spirit uses that message to work faith in their hearts. In the same way babies are not saved by some law work of their parents when their parents have them baptized. Rather the parents are simply using the means of grace given to them, trusting that the Holy Spirit will work through baptism as Scripture promises.

You are making a couple of assumptions that are not warranted. First of all, “repent” and “baptize” do not always appear together. In fact, in the Great Commission the command to baptize even comes before the command to teach. Jesus says, “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” (Matthew 18:19-20).

Secondly, repentance is not a decision we make on our own. Repentance is something that God works in our hearts through his law and gospel. Both adults and infants are by nature spiritually dead in their transgressions and sins (Ephesians 2:1-5) and have no ability to please God in any way (Romans 8:7-8). The Holy Spirit must work repentance in the heart of both adults and babies. Since coming to faith is not a decision on our part but something that the Holy Spirit works in us, it is no greater miracle for him to bring a baby to faith than to bring an adult to faith.

You are looking at baptism as a legal requirement by which you show your love and obedience to God. In baptism, however, we do not do something for God, rather he does something for us and in us. He works to either create or to strengthen faith. It is true that neither baptism nor the proclamation of the gospel will benefit anyone apart from faith. However, through the proclamation of the gospel and through baptism the Holy Spirit works faith. The means of grace have the power to create the faith they require.

Do you doubt that babies can believe? St. Paul writes to Timothy, “from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 3:15).

Luke records, “People were also bring babies to Jesus to have him touch them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. But Jesus called the children to him and said, ‘Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of heaven like a little child will never enter it’” (Luke 18:15-17).

The only way anyone can enter the kingdom of heaven is through faith. Jesus not only is indicating that little children can believe, he is telling us that adults need to become like children, approaching him in child-like faith. Both Paul and Luke use a Greek word that means infant, a baby that must be carried. They are not speaking about children who have reached some sort of age of accountability (a concept that has no scriptural warrant). I might not understand exactly how babies can believe but that does not mean that they cannot believe, particularly when Scripture teaches that they can. If people fail to bring children to baptism and the means of grace, they are in fact hindering the children from coming to Jesus.

Let me summarize:The forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation are received by faith alone (John 3:16-18, Ephesians 2:8-9). The Holy Spirit creates and strengthens faith through the means of grace, the gospel in Word and Sacrament (Romans 10:11-17, Titus 3:4-7, Acts 2:38-39). The forgiveness of sins is therefore always received by faith and faith is created and strengthened only by the Holy Spirit working through Word and Sacrament. The gospel promise of forgiveness offered and proclaimed in Word and Sacrament has the Holy Spirit's power to create or strengthen the very faith that receives the forgiveness that is promised (Romans 1:16-17).

Through baptism the Holy Spirit works to create faith or to strengthen faith. As Paul writes to Titus, “But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that having been justified by his grace we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:4-7). St. Peter explains baptism in this way, “In it (Noah's ark) only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:20-21).
Baptism saves because through baptism the Holy Spirit works faith and brings forgiveness of sins, life and salvation. As Peter told the crowd on Pentecost, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children” (Acts 2:38-39). Please note that children are included in the command and promise Peter speaks about.

The Great Commission is a general command-– “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19; see also Mark 16:15-16). General commands must be taking generally unless Scripture limits the command in some way. Babies are also included in this general command. If someone would say that infants are not specifically mentioned in the Great Commission, I would answer that no particular group is mentioned whether women or teenagers or old men or young ladies or Americans, Germans, Chinese, Africans, or the British. The Great Commission includes all of these groups.

Scripture, however, not only does not exclude infants from baptism but also indicates that they need to be baptized because they are conceived and born in sin. They need to be born again to enter the kingdom of God (Psalm 51:5, John 3:5-6). Through baptism the Holy Spirit works to create or strengthen faith and brings the gifts of forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation (Titus, 3:4-7, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 2:38-39).

For more information on infant baptism you might want to read Baptized into God's Family: The Doctrine of Infant Baptism for Today by A. Andrew Das and Baptism: My Adoption into God's Family by Prof. Gaylin R. Schmeling. You might also want to look at Conversion: Not by My Own Choosing by Prof. John M. Brenner. The latter two books are part of the People's Bible Teachings Series. All three books are available from Northwestern Publishing House - www.nph.net

Pax Domini — An Introduction to the Lutheran Faith

I was directed to Pax Domini by ____________. In the post, Why Lutheran?, Tom Johnson writes:

Baptized and confirmed in a conservative Presbyterian church, I was taught that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. It is why I didn't go to a liberal Presbyterian seminary. Dallas Theological Seminary had the best reputation among those I knew and respected. And, to this day, I am very thankful for my education there and the rigorous commitment to Bible knowledge and the biblical languages. But it was during my time there that I began to ask a question I never thought I would ask: What is the Gospel? One professor taught that the Gospel cannot be summed up by a "formula" or a creed. The Gospel is one's understanding that leads to salvation. Whatever moves the human will is Gospel—and what moves some may not move others. This teaching disturbed me and forced me to search deeper into the Bible...

He goes on to write about the difficulties a starting a church within the PCA. Church planters gave him advise that had nothing to do with preaching the gospel:

Several of them recommended that I stop using a bulletin and "liturgy." They told me I should stop using the piano in worship and start using a guitar. They advised that I wear a golf-shirt instead of a suit and tie. They recommended "praise songs" instead of traditional hymns. They were telling me that I needed to give the people in El Paso "a worship experience" that would lead to successful numerical growth. I was shocked. I felt as if I was hearing the same teaching I had heard years earlier: a person's understanding or experience is more important than the objective truth of the Gospel.

Thankfully, those in El Paso supported my conviction that if God wanted a church, He would build it by His Word and Sacraments. And two years later, our church did become a self-governing church and financially sound. Throughout this time, I enjoyed the support and counsel of a friend in Austin, Texas. He was the chief musician at a Presbyterian church there and had helped me with music and liturgy. I was floored when he told me he was going to seminary to become a Lutheran pastor. He recommended that I read Spirituality of the Cross and helped introduce me to Lutheranism.

Be sure to read the whole article, espeically the ending paragaph that begins:

"Why did I become Lutheran? By the grace of God. In Lutheranism, my mind is now free to marvel at God's truth... My faith has been set free to believe that God is doing extraordinary things through otherwise ordinary things—the spoken word, water, bread and wine."

I could have written that! What a great testimony Tom Johnson gives us.

Be strong in this grace: God reaches out to us! Part 2

Part I: Popular explanations concerning our natural human condition and what does the Bible say about our natural human condition?


Part II: Three Answers to our natural human condition

Calvinism

The five points of Calvinism are: 1. Total Depravity; 2. Unconditional Election; 3. Limited Atonement; 4. Irresistible Grace; 5. Perseverance of the Saints. Calvinism restricts saving grace to the elect. The sins of the elect are forgiven when God brings them to faith. The implications of Calvinism leave one wondering: "Can I find evidence of faith to be sure I am one of God's elect?" To answer that, a person has to look within his own heart.

Arminianism

The five points of Arminianism are: 1. Predestination in view of faith (conditional election); 2. Atonement for all people; 3. Free will enables a person to cooperate in his conversion; 4. Grace can be resisted; 5. A believer may fall from grace. Arminianism extends saving grace to all on condition of faith. The sins of a believer are forgiven when he decides to receive Jesus into his heart. The implications of Arminianism cause one to ask, "Am I obedient to the gospel (as evidence of having made my decision for Christ)?" To answer that, a person has to look within his own heart.

Lutheranism

God's grace extends to all, unconditionally. The sins of all people were forgiven when Jesus died on the cross. The implications of Lutheranism cause a person to ask, "Has God done all that needs to be done to restore me to right standing with him?" To answer that, the person looks to God's Word to read "God so loved the world" and " God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ". God directs us to look, not into our hearts, but into His Word for certainty.

Each of these three systems has important implications with regard to how a person understands the gospel. Both Calvinism and Arminianism direct a person to look in to his or her own heart for the answer to the question about where one stands with God. The Lutheran understanding of the gospel, on the other hand, teaches us to look away from our hearts and to focus only on the promises that God has made to us in Christ. The focus of our faith is never subjective (inward). It is always objective (outward). This difference has far-reaching consequences on our outlook, our motivation for faithfully serving the Lord, and on the way we worship God in our liturgy and our hymns.

Next...Part III: Some thoughts from Walther and Senkbeil

Worthy Woman: on the BTK Killer

Worthy Woman writes her observations on the BTK Killer.

" It won't be long until I start getting these two questions:
1. This guy is Lutheran, aren't you Lutheran too?
2. What kind of person is a murderer like that, and what kind of religion permits that kind of thing.It would be real easy to distance myself from the BTK killer.

Technically, he DOES belong to a different branch of Lutheran teaching. That doesn't get to the heart of the matter, but does go back to a conversation I had with "Texas Easy Rider" at my church several years ago..." Read on

Blogotional: How Do We Evangelize The Hostile?

I thought this was a good post:Blogotional: How Do We Evangelize The Hostile?

Chris Jones: Do We Have A "Right" To Baptism?

Here is Chris Jones' excellent post from 9-19-02, which he mentioned earlier on my post about the strange court case of baptism. Chris brings out the heart of the discussion: help and encourage the parents to create a Christian household for the baptized baby to come home to! I've put the whole post here, because it is such a great post. Be sure to read his simple theological and pastoral principles near the end of the post.

Do We Have A "Right" To Baptism?

There's an interesting dustup going on at the Catholic Heart, Mind, and Strength weblog about under what circumstances (if any) a priest should refuse a parent's request to baptize a baby. HMS contributor Greg Popcak started it (not knowing the powderkeg he was touching off) by suggesting that the Church should have higher expectations of her members. Greg started with the general idea (he called it the Mercedes principle) that if something costs you a lot, you'll value it more and take better care of it. Applying that to Christianity, Greg says

... if we wish to evangelize in an effective way, we cannot water things down. In fact, we have to raise the bar. ... The evangelistic message needs to be, "Yes, come as you are, but be prepared to give everything you are in service of the gospel" This is the Mercedes Principle and it results in strong growth with strong committment.

Welborn (of In Between Naps fame) countered that the pastoral strictness that Greg was recommending often has the effect of driving marginal Catholics away from the Church:

you know, believe it or not, many of the people come to church seeking answers and meaning are coming out of very messy, complicated personal situations. Sometimes the Mercedes principle can be used to discourage these people, rather than bring them out of their messes. We can risk giving the impression that God is only for the perfect, and until you have reached that exalted state - don't bother.

and she brought up the specific situation about baptism:

I say this as a former parish minister who worked all day and night with people who were creeping back into church, sometimes after years or decades out, only to have their heads and souls reeled around for them by a priest, other parish minister or legalistic volunteer who ... wouldn't let a couple get their baby baptized until their marriage was validated in the Church. Never mind that the woman was married to a non-Catholic man unwilling and uncomprehending as to why his first marriage in the Methodist church needed annulling by the Catholic Church, and that getting this couple to the point where both could see the importance of that might take a while...And so the baby went unbaptized.

Well, after that it was off to the races. I recommend you go over to HMS and read the whole thing. The two camps seem to be (1) if they want to be in the Church, make sure they're in it for the long haul - no cheap grace; and (2) get them in the door by any fair means, and trust that baptismal grace will do its work in the long run.
I have some sympathy for both sides in this debate. Theologically I think Popcak has the better position; but though he acknowledges the need for pastoral sensitivities, he doesn't give us an idea of how that would work in practice, which leaves us thinking that he just thinks the priests should be more hardass.

What I saw as missing from the debate are some simple theological and pastoral principles:

• Despite the fact that, numerically, most baptisms are infant baptisms, theologically and liturgically the norm is adult baptism. The baptismal liturgy makes it clear that baptism is predicated on the new Christian's free and conscious confession of faith in Jesus Christ. The normative pattern for becoming a Christian is (1) hearing the proclamation of the Gospel; (2) believing in the Gospel; (3) catechesis; (4) entering the Church through Holy Baptism; and (5) participating in the full sacramental life of the Church.
• 
  Infant baptism, at first glance, seems to stand this pattern on its head. Baptism comes first, not fourth; evangelization and catechesis are all mixed up together; participation in the sacraments (confession and communion) comes in middle childhood; and the personal confession of faith in Jesus Christ comes whenever it comes (if ever). One can see where the Baptists are coming from. But the key that makes infant baptism make sense is that the child is born into a household where the Christian faith is being lived in a serious, consistent way. The theory is that in a genuinely Christian household, evangelization and catechesis will like the air the child breathes. If the child will not, in fact, be raised in such a household, baptizing the child is certainly valid, but pastorally questionable.

I agree with Greg that baptism in that situation is being treated as a "get out of hell free" card, when it should represent a "take up your Cross and follow Me" card.The problem with infant baptism without the Christian household is that the child will end up living in this fallen world without proper evangelization, catechesis, and consistent use of the means of grace. What are his chances of successfully following the way of salvation?

So what is a pastor to do? It seems to me that, given that infant baptism is theologically predicated on the existence of a genuinely Christian household, the pastor's first goal is not to baptize the child, but to create that household. In other words, to evangelize and catechize the parents. The parents, after all, are the primary evangelists to the child; and they cannot pass on what they have not got.

Be strong in this grace: God reaches out to us! Part 1

One of our pastors did a fine job of teaching on the topic of sanctificaton yesterday in Sunday morning Bible Study. He resourced the book, Sanctification: Christ in Action, NPH: Milwaukee, 1989) by Harold L. Senkbeil. According to the NPH site, this book "offers a critical, yet sympathetic analysis of the Evangelical movement's impact on Lutheranism. Examines the historical roots of Evangelicalism; analyzes one of America's most popular Evangelical authors, Charles Swindol; and proposes a new Lutheran initiative in the face of the Evangelical challenge. I'm ordering it today!

Part I:

Popular explanations concerning our natural human condition

"Mankind has the potential for good."

"Mankind is innocent/good by nature."

"Mankind by nature is sinful and spiritually is dead, unable to do anything positive before God, for self or others, not for life nor salvation."

As you read each of the above popular explanations, ask yourself these questions:

1. Who embraces this explanation?
2 What does baptism do in this system?

What does the Bible say about our natural human condition?

When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. He created then male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them "man". When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likenss, in his own image; and he named him Seth." Genesis 5:1-3

" The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time, " Genesis 6:5

"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me, " Psalm 51:5

"For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean', " Mark 7:21-22

"Flesh gives birth to flesh." John 3:6

"Jesus replied, 'I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin," John 8:34

"I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out." Romans 7:18

"...the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so." Romans 8:7

"There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23

"The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Corinthians 2:14

"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins...we were by nature objects of wrath." Ephesians 2:1,3

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." 1 John 1:8

"He who does what is sinful is of the devil." 1 John 3:8

Update on "Is Christianity Broken?"

I've been watching Cerulean Sanctum for comments to Dan's post, "Is Christianity Broken?". Dan did add his comments to my response post, clarifying his point. Tonight I was surprised to read a voice from my past in the comments section of his blog tonight. It is an anonymous comment, but I know that voice way too well. The comments are not reflective of Dan's excellent and helpful blog. I don't speak of the anonymous person, but of the evil influencing him/her. It is the voice of Satan telling saved Christians they still aren't good enough for heaven, that they haven't done enough yet to please God. The voice that denies scripture by saying that the Holy Spirit is something that you must be filled with AFTER "accepting" Jesus into your heart. That voice that confuses Christians into believing that they can acheive some god-like state here on earth. I am so thankful to have walked away from that perversion of Christianity!

"Christianity in the modern western world isn't broken, it has failed and continues to fail. God has not failed us, WE have failed God. Most people have no interest in overcoming sin. They do not want to know what dying to self means. In short, they do not want to be filled with the Holy Spirit. This cuts across ALL groups and denominations. These are diseases called self and flesh and pride. They have infected every Christian group, whether charismatic, evangelical, fundmentalist or any other. Some of the groups that claim to be Full Gospel are the worst. I beleive only a small group of people in the United States (Maybe one percent of the whole population, at best) have any interest in obeying Jesus. They are not a part of any single group or denomination. They are the only reason God has not already destroyed this country. Everyone else just makes excuses. Jesus will reward those who OVERCOME SIN."

I hope that no one decides to accuse me of denying that there is any victory over sin through Jesus. There certainly is! That's not what the anonymous comments are speaking about. Do you think I'm overreacting? It is interesting that our Bible Study this morning was on sanctification. I will be posting on that topic this week. Our pastor gave an excellent lesson on that important topic. How do we know we are saved and going to heaven? The Bible tells us so!

Cerulean Sanctum asks: "Is Christianity broken?"

Dan of Cerulean Sanctum, after a morning's reading of various Christian blogs asks a great question, "Is Christianity broken?"

I've been using Bloglines to read the feeds from about fifty Christian blogs. The service works well and allows a person a quick way of scanning updated feeds. I can read through those fifty blogs as they post in less than fifteen minutes. It's almost like reading through a copy of Christianity Today, except with a far looser editorial standard. And that's a problem.

Since 2001, I've had a blog up. Cerulean Sanctum came about in late 2003 because I saw a need that was going unfilled, a blog that called people back to the heart of the first century Church. I've considered this blog to be a ministry for me; I've received many letters over the last eighteen months from people who have been blessed by this blog.

But now as I read all over the blogosphere, I wonder if we Christian bloggers are actually doing a disservice to people, especially to those who are struggling in the faith or are considering the claims of Christ for the first time.

My reasoning? Well, as I go through my list of fifty blogs, I often leave them feeling confused, angry, depressed, and just about every feeling but the one the Lord wants to cultivate most in us, joyful. This is not to say that there are no Christian blogs that are edifying. But as I read the blogs, see the dissension, note the snarky comments left, and take in some of the more extreme ideas out there, I am left with only one question, Is Christianity broken?

It's hard to escape that impression after a few visits to popular Christian blogs: See list here.

After a while you can't avoid the question. The blogs beg for it. The conclusion seems inescapable. Even writing about this seems to only add fuel to "Is Christianity broken?" If a cross-sectional reading of popular Christian blogs is any indication, the answer must be "Yes."

So on this Friday morning I'm wondering if those of us who blog are only making the Christian walk harder for people rather than easier. This weekend I plan on taking some time to ponder this question. I don't know what this means for this blog, but I'd like to hear what others think about how we Christian bloggers are portraying Christianity to the world. Truthfully, we have an enormous burden in an age when ideas are so readily presentable to the entire planet via the Internet. Maybe we just need to tone down our rhetoric and be a little less dogmatic in some of our thinking. Or maybe all we need is to simply shut up and listen for a change.

Dan asked for comments and I had lots to say. So much, in fact, that I decided to post my comments (and more) here. It's a good post and good questions, Dan. You've given me much to think about here. First of all I would like to offer that Christianity isn't broken at all. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. People are broken. We are all sinners who fall short of the glory of God. Christians remain sinners to their last day on earth, and often succomb to temptation...especially when they imagine that they've been a Christian for so long that they might just be immune to sin (Bill Bright's famous comments come to mind). Blogs are online journals, not poorly edited versions of Christianity today as you aptly noted. It is easy to think of blogs as "gospel", but they are not.

This new technology has enabled individuals to each publish their own household magazine. Very unedited, too. Do any of you have teens whose friends have Xanga journals? A few of them are good, most are really bad. I have to sit with my teen and point out that she can choose not to look at certain ones. Another example... in your town, are all stores good and helpful ones? No. There are churches, grocery stores, clothing stores, pharmacies and porn shops all in the same town. You and your family go the helpful stores and avoid the bad ones. Blogs are the same way; there are good ones and not so good ones. Not every blog that calls itself Christian will be a helpful blog to other Christians. Sometimes I stumble onto a Christian blog that is obviously a very personal view into someone's distorted life and I move on. Same with books and magazines...and that's been true for years. We have to discern whether someone is trying to be uplifting to others or not. And yes, we should all be aware that non-believers might be reading our blogs. Non-believers might be watching us at the hockey rink or at school or at the grocery store (perhaps a more sobering thought than merely reading our anonymous blogs).

Rather than be saddened by the inevitable sin nature of my fellow Christians, bloggers and otherwise, I think we should instead try to encourage and comment on good and helpful posts and contemplate this admonition by Craig Parton:

"Luther said the Christian life is one of continual repentance, and that every Christian is no more than one day old. Adam still rears his head, the flesh is still at war. One day we will enter into a final rest with our Lord Christ in whom is true RedemptiIon and Sanctification, the forgiveness of our daily trespasses."

It is in this contemplation of our own sin nature and through our only hope through Jesus Christ that we can fix our broken blogs and be joyful. Only when we are strong in the grace that is Christ Jesus can we truly be joyful.

Ecumenism on trial!

Ted Olsen of Christianity's Today's weblog posts on a very strange case involving divorced parents fighting over the baptism of their child. Poor kid. Her divorced Christian parents can't even agree that they worship the same God and that God isn't hindered by their fighting over her baptism. One would wonder, though, if their fighting has drowned out the proclamation of the gospel to her.

Custody battles are almost invariably messy, so be patient with this story. Jana Hicks grew up Catholic, but married David Hicks in a Presbyterian church. Eventually, the two started attending an evangelical church, then an Assemblies of God congregation. In 1998, David and Jana split, but by then they had a daughter (identified only by the initial "M" in court documents). Custody was shared, with David Hicks getting the girl three out of four weekends. Most weekends, M went to First Assembly of God in Hermitage, Pennsylvania. That fourth weekend, it was off to a Roman Catholic parish with her mom, Jana.
In 2001, Jana and M started attending St. Sergious Russian Orthodox Church in Parma, Ohio. Last year, Jana decided to remarry, this time to a Russian Orthodox man. And she wanted M to be baptized in that church. But David opposed the baptism.
"This will be now the third religion introduced into [M's] life, and her being baptized in the Orthodox Church, ummm, I oppose that," David explained. "I don't think that that should happen at this time. I think she should grow up, and at her age, when she's old enough, she can make her own decision."

Ted Olsen comments:

"The Assemblies of God and the Russian Orthodox Church stand together, however, against the Superior Court's apparent belief that baptism is just one more aspect of religious exposure. In fact, the churches would see this as the turning point in M's spiritual development up to this point. For the Russian Orthodox, this is the point at which M becomes a real Christian, the point at which she is received into the Church.

For the Assembly of God, M's baptism into a church that rejects the doctrine of justification by faith alone and new birth through the Word of God alone is serious business ...Of course, the Assemblies of God isn't too reluctant to rebaptize, so David's church may just teach her that the Orthodox ceremony isn't the final word."

Does anyone want to bet that little M takes her lesson to a next step and leaves the church at age 18, figuring no one has the answer. Her parents sure haven't provided her with spiritual training.

Ted Olsen telling plays his cards in his final remarks on the case. He's an evangelical and he believes that all should just agree to disagree. He is for ecumenicalism, even to the point of abandoning long-held doctrine of each church.

On one hand, Weblog doesn't want state courts making judgments where religious doctrine comes into play. Some here at CT think the courts should have nothing whatsoever to do with matters of religious doctrine, but Weblog isn't entirely convinced. The baptism may significantly change David Hicks's relationship with his daughter, and courts do have some leeway to exercise the wisdom of Solomon on such matters (not to suggest baptizing only half of M). Jurisdiction aside, is Jana's brinksmanship on this point even necessary? After all, it's not a sin to put off baptism in the Russian Orthodox Church until age 13 (Orthodox saints Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus both put off baptism until their 20s despite having Christian parents; Tertullian even criticized infant baptism). (Sure it is, Mr. Olsen. It is a sin to withhold the saving waters of grace from children. God creates a seed of faith at baptism. He said he does. It is a sin.) As Weblog said earlier, it's messy. But if this is precipitated more by Jana Hicks wanting to please the new man in her life than it is about the nature of baptism and conversion, Weblog expects that even the Russians would be saddened.

What an interesting court case!!! Ecumenism on trial!

By grace alone, by faith alone, by Word alone - that's what I like about our church! - Part III of my faith journey

Below is a post I originally wrote one week and one day after beginning my blog. New readers have recently discovered it and have added comments, so I am updating it and posting it again.

Original post on Kiihnworld on June 8, 2004

One reason I began this weblog was to begin to put into words my thoughts and experiences in the Christian faith. In particular, I'm trying to write my story of going from being raised a mainstream lutheran to becoming an evangelical who eventually returned to her ELCA church (along with many other evangelicals who were given free reign to change the church) and then finally found a home in the Evangelical Lutheran Synod as a confessional lutheran. I've already written about being raised mainstream lutheran and becoming an evangelical. Today, with the help of a friend, I was able to put together the third part of my journey: going from the ELCA to the ELS. The middle part of my story covers twenty years, so I'll need some more time to work on that post.

It has been very difficult to verbalize my feelings towards the changing ELCA. It complicates my task to learn that the changes in the ELCA go beyond me and my life time:back many, many generations over more than a century and a half. The current situation in the ELCA is depressing. In fact, it is beyond depressing to live firsthand in the expansive moral morass. For me, words cannot describe the absolute state of confusion which is glorified there. I personally experienced incorporation of the false teachings of Robert Schuller , switching from saved by grace through baptism to decision theology (ie. use of the Alpha program for confirmation in place of Luther's small catechism and using similiar curricula for Sunday School lessons), abandoning formal confirmation classes because kids and their families complained it was too boring, loss of the liturgy for hand-clapping, emotional performances and meaningless songs, the impending vote next year to ordain and bless practicing homosexuals, etc. I had known for five years that I had to leave, but I kept thinking that I owed it to my home church to stay and try to be a positive influence.

Although it was hard to leave after 30 years of membership at my home church, I did it to protect my own salvation and for the benefit of my children. I now experience much joy at the biblical truths preached and practiced at confessional lutheran congregations, such as King of Grace. I know, after 20 years of searching through churches, that there is no perfect church and never will be on this earth. I was attracted to King of Grace and confessional lutheranism because the Word is faithfully preached and taught. It's strength is turning people to God's Word. I have confidence that Scripture will be the final word on changes made in the ELS. It's grace alone, faith alone, scripture alone and Christ alone - that's what I like about our church. I feel such freedom in the Evangelical Lutheran Synod and at King of Grace: freedom that comes from the peace of mind knowing that the Word is being clearly taught to me and my family, not on somebody's whim or interpretation. I know that my husband and I will grow old in this church and see our grandchildren baptized and confirmed at this church.

Since I am an avid fan of the Q&A section of the WELS website (see link below), I am aware of the many divisions in the more conservative Lutheran synods. I don't pretend to understand them and, in fact, I think that the arguers should realize that there are many newcomers to confessional lutheranism who have very little idea what all the fighting is about between WELS/ELS and LC/MS, etc. Not to belittle the arguments, since they surely stem from legitimate complaints, but God has obviously brought many new people into the church since then. I hope to see more evangelicals turn to confessional lutheranism. I also pray that long-standing members are always so patient with those of us relearning scriptural truths. So far, so good!

***In true lutheran fashion, there are even arguments about whether there are three, four or five solas! I know that there are five original solas, but only three are considered supremely important: Grace, faith and scripture. Gee, that leaves out Christ and God. That doesn't make sense. I'll leave that explanation to a more knowledgeable person than me to comment on that.

Three solas: Sola Gratia (grace alone), Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Scriptura (scripture alone)

Five solas: Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (grace alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) and Soli Deo Gloria (to God alone be glory).

Original comments fromKiihnworld post on 6/8/04

they call him Tim said...
Thanks again for a helpful insight into your faith journey. I sometimes get confused over the disagreements between church bodies too. In a “jestful” sense, the Southern Baptists say that they use arguments and fights to “grow the Kingdom” through new church plants. It’s a sad commentary on people, but maybe God does use our failings in understanding Him properly to reach out beyond ourselves. Just a thought. It’s amazing to see the proliferation of Baptist churches in the South, one on every block.

they call him Tim said...
Aren't there five solas?


TKls2myhrt said...
In true lutheran fashion, there are even arguments about whether there are three, four or five solas! I know that there are five original solas, but only three are considered supremely important: Grace, faith and scripture. Gee, that leaves out Christ and God. That doesn't make sense. I'll leave that explanation to a more knowledgeable person than me to comment on that.Three solas: Sola Gratia (grace alone), Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Scriptura (scripture alone)Five solas: Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (grace alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) and Soli Deo Gloria (to God alone be glory).


Swansmith said...
To me, who grew up Methodist/Independent/sort of Baptist and finally Evangelical Covenant, sola means one. ;) At least, that is what my studies of Spanish throughout high school and college taught me.But I am interested in learning more about Lutherans and doctrinal issues. And I can sing you a Spanish song--solamente in Cristo, solamente in el... (only in Christ, only in Him)

Be strong in this grace: Faith is not a conscious decision of the will

Faith is not a conscious decision of the will. A recent WELS Q & A post on faith features a truly beautiful response. God is so much more powerful and able to create faith in a person than your ability to make a “decision” to follow Christ. God can create that faith through the proclamation of His Word and through baptism. This post also touches on a difficult subject of the faith of an unborn baby. Through this discussion, some beautiful scriptural truths are covered.

Q: “Can a fetus have faith in the womb. I heard that without Baptism a baby/fetus wouldn't be able to have faith because it is too young to understand about Jesus.”

A: Your question deals with a number of issues. The first would be the matter of faith. What is it? Faith is not a conscious decision of the will. Saving faith is something that takes what God offers, in this case, the forgiveness of sins through Jesus Christ. Strictly speaking, it is not something inside of us but something that reaches out and takes what is outside of us--the gospel. We know that infants can have faith because the Bible tells us they can. In Matthew 18:6 Jesus speaks about "these little ones who believe in me." This term would not only include young children and toddlers but also infants as Luke 18:15,16 would reveal.

You also ask, "Can a fetus have faith." We know that this is possible from the example of John the Baptist (Luke 1:44). However, John was an exceptional situation. He was set apart as the one who would announce the Savior's birth. To say that God always works faith in the unborn in this manner would be drawing more than we can from this account. The difficult situation about the unborn is that God has not given us a clear means of grace for them. Baptism is for those who are born. The Lord's Supper is for those who can examine themselves. And the Word of God is preached to those who can comprehend a language. We want to be careful that we don't turn God's Word into a magical means that can work faith in those who do not comprehend a language. The spiritual life of the unborn and the eternal fate of those who die before birth is not addressed in Scripture. Since God remains silent on the issue, we need to do the same.