You're the Inspiration, or, The Wind beneath my Wings

I have seen this posting at various blogs: here, here, here, and here; and I began asking myself whom would I list (provided I was cool enough to be tagged—not gonna happen)? What five people, past or present, inspire your spiritual life? Part of the initial instructions for this meme indicates that Jesus is assumed, so you don’t need to list Him. Ditto for Luther, if you’re a Lutheran.
First, I had to look up meme. Did you know it’s not in Webster’s Dictionary? I looked it up on Oxford Online. It deals with that which is imitated. Okay, moving on.
Whom would I list? I first thought of the pastor who confirmed me. As much as I liked him and his family and the fact that I did all my confirmation homework and all—based on the number of dancing Snoopies (Snoopys? How do you spell the plural of Snoopy?) drawn in my catechism, I would have to say that rules him out.
I suppose I could mention Pastor Todd Wilken and Dr. Gene Edward Veith, who have lately helped me hone my weltanschaaung (world outlook) through their work in radio and print media.
I guess it comes down to these people; I am not sure if I can come up with five.
1. My husband: He will discuss theology with me when I ask. He humors me when I ask him to bring home his Leviticus commentary so that I can study up for Wednesday morning Bible class at work. I know he knows way more than I ever will, but he’s still willing to explain it to me and correct me if I am wrong.
2. Pastor Norm Hanan and his wife Mary: These two wonderful people helped us transition from seminary to parish and put up with our horror stories. They listened, advised, prayed for us, let us (me!) cry on their shoulders when we needed to, and reminded us that the congregation members are sheep. I can’t say enough about them.
3. Pastor Henry Gerike: Some people may find this an interesting choice, but I say he has influenced me much. There are many things that he has taught anyone who has been in his choir about singing, hymnody, liturgy, people who write hymns, and scripture. In addition to these things, he has taught me more about being an organist. It’s a double bonus.
Hmmm. . . I can’t think of anyone else exclusively. Even the people listed above have inspired more than just my spiritual life; therefore, some may say they don’t count.
Maybe it’s just that many people have inspired me and influenced my life, and these are ones who stick out. Maybe I should say a few more thanks to the people who have shaped me thus far: Mrs. Mills for teaching me in high school how to be a college student; Mr. Wait for teaching me that choir is more than singing and for giving me a chance; Mr. Golden for everything, even picking on me; Pastor Chase for introducing me to a scary document—the Humanist Manifesto—it is influenced my perception on the clash between faith and postmodernism; the Higher Things folks (why didn't somebody think of it when I was in high school?) whose conferences have taught me much; and for Dr. Ronald Feuerhahn for having influenced many of the people who have impacted my life.
If you didn’t make an honorable mention, don’t feel left out, for I see the academy people off stage telling me that my three minutes are up and they will cut off the microphone shor. . .

Preaching Tips

While reading Pastor Peperkorn's blog, I came across this comment and piece of advice by Pastor Wilken about being bored with preaching.

“Bring your own struggles with the text into the pulpit with you and lay them out for the hearers. Be honest. And, get to the Cross. If necessary, drag yourself and your hearers there kicking and screaming. Remember, the sermon isn’t over until Jesus is dead for three days. Get him out of the grave, and onto the altar, and then stop talking.
“Finally, stop trying to be interesting. Focus on Jesus, he’s interesting enough.”

Then there is Pastor Wilken’s sermon analysis diagnostic:

How often is Jesus mentioned? Is he the subject of the verbs? What are those verbs?

Then Pastor Wilken gave this piece of advice on Issues, Etc. today:

Don't give Jesus the week off, and don't let your pastor either.

To [mis]quote Dolly Levi, “Advice on preaching from Pastor Wilken? The world should hear it and grow rich.” At least, I wish my pastor had heard and heeded it before yesterday’s sermon.

I am not a homilist. I do not purport to know how to write a sermon or any such thing, so I rely on pastors to tell me how to recognize good preaching. So here’s my analysis of the sermon I heard yesterday:
#1—I counted that Jesus was mentioned twice. For a Lutheran sermon, that does not seem like enough.
#2—He was the subject of the verbs, but they were wimpy verbs; they were not verbs such as “save,” “forgive,” “die,” or “rise”.
#3—He alluded briefly to the cross. He did not drag us kicking and screaming there. It was more talked around than talked about.
#4—Since Jesus never made it to the cross, then He never made it to the grave in the sermon; therefore, He could not have been gotten out and onto the altar.
#5—I think I missed the point. It was something about exercising our faith so that it doesn’t get flabby, fat and lazy. Even though pastor said we don’t save ourselves, we have to exercise faith ourselves. I think I missed something there.
All in all, if pastor didn't quite give Jesus the week off, he at least relegated Jesus to a lesser seat off to the side. To echo the words of the Greeks to Philip, “Sir, we would see Jesus.”

Public Notice

This blog is temporarily down while the author comes up with something profound to say--or until the author stops feeling ornery, whichever comes first.

Self-Taught may be Hazardous

To be misinformed is more dangerous than to be uninformed. Too many people in the church are misinformed, as well as uninformed. It goes back to the wrong application of all God’s people being ministers. The doctrine of vocation has nothing to do with being self-taught in matters of theology.
Why bother with a pastor? It’s like the commercial where the man is on the phone and the doctor on the other end is telling him how to perform surgery on himself. The man skeptically looks at the knife and says, “Shouldn’t you be doing this?” How can we learn without a teacher? In most skills, when one self-teaches, one runs the risk of mis-learning. I would never expect one of my students to read multiple books on how to use a comma and assume they will pass a test without having guided them through the material; however, in the church we think that learning without a pastor to guide us is what congregations should be doing.
We allow ourselves to read and interpret scripture based on our own reasoning. We read a part of scripture and decide for ourselves what it means, even if it is contrary to what scripture really teaches. We allow ourselves to listen to all sorts of teachers through books, radio, television, others, even culture and develop our own personal theology based on the varying messages our varied teachers tell us. Then our pastor has to undo the incorrect teaching and we say, “No, I disagree with you.”
One caveat here is that there are untrustworthy pastors our there who are doing more harm than good; but a pastor who is trustworthy will not lead his people away from the truth, but rather always pointing them to Christ.We always need to be on guard as to the false teachings out there. You know what the FBI says—the best way to spot a counterfeit bill is to study the real ones. The best way to spot bad theology is to study the real deal. This means we can’t make up our own theology to fit our mood. We need to be solid in what we believe so we can say “no” to bad theology, not to our pastors who are trying to lead us farther into what we believe, teach, and confess.

Having it Both Ways

On Fridays on Issues, Etc., they read and respond to e-mail in the first half hour of the program. Today they read an e-mail from a man who was conflicted. He wishes to attend a church where the Word of God is taught in its truth and purity, but he also wishes to attend a church where there is activity. He struggles to find a church with both. He mentioned congregations that were active versus ones that are dying. I understand what he means. There is a real disparity in our church body, the LC-MS, regarding congregations.
I live in a metropolitan area where there are many LC-MS congregations; about 105 within 20 miles of my zipcode, according to the LC-MS website. There are small mission congregations, rural, inner-city, megachurches; you name it; included in that 105. There are more in the area; I just didn’t go far enough out from my zipcode.
Of the aforementioned 105 congregations, I know of many that are confessional. Many of those are smaller rural parishes who are struggling with smaller rural parish issues. The young people are moving away, the older members are transferring to the church triumphant, and they can’t convert the cows to add to their books. The confessional urban parishes are struggling because they don’t have the base of members like they used to, and so they have limited activities—choirs are shrinking, ladies’ groups are disintegrating, and youth groups, well, who has time for that?
There are many of those 105 congregations that are young, vibrant, and growing; they’re not always confessional. Many of them have sacrificed theology for numbers. There is at least one, of them who have removed the “Lutheran” part of their name so as not to offend newcomers. (One is considering a similar move.)
Then there are the middle-of-the-road congregations which are neither hot nor cold. One of which is the church I attend. They want activities, they want numbers; on the flip side, they are fighting the youth flight and the elderly passing problems.
What’s a person to do? Where are the congregations which have schools, choirs, men’s and women’s groups, youth groups (Higher Things, of course), and solid preaching with many people of many ages?
Okay, let me back-pedal for a minute. I’m not saying a church can’t be small. I’m not saying that confessional equals a perfect congregation. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with being old. I know the struggle of trying to be active in a church when all the other participants are old enough to be my parents. I understand the vexation of sitting in the pew weekly waiting for the pastor to show us Jesus.
I leave this question hanging out there: Why are there so few congregations that have both solid teaching and activities?
I guess it goes back to why are there so few Lutherans when Lutheran doctrine is the clearest exhibition of Scripture. (I hope you know what I mean by that last statement—I don’t know how to word it.)

The Bridge is Back

When I think of the I-35 bridge collapse in Minnesota, I next think of Issues, Etc. I know; it sounds like an odd connection. The bridge collapsed one week to the day I drove under it coming back from a live broadcast of Issues, Etc. at University Lutheran Chapel near the campus of the University of Minnesota. Now, while still odd, it makes a little more sense.

Not to trivialize the tragedy of the bridge by any means, nor to disrespect the families who lost their loved ones; I do see some similarities.

A corroded infrastructure led to a collapse. There was a public outcry, and rebuilding began again. The bridge collapsed, they investigated, rebuilt, and are now moving on. Issues, Etc. went off the air, they protested, started over, and are now moving on.

When the bottom falls out, what can one do?

There is never a returning to normal. There is learning from what has happened. There is moving forward with a new sense of not taking anything for granted. There is a fresh reminder that God is in control, even if things are out of control.

Balance

There is a line in The Karate Kid where Mr. Miyagi tells Daniel, "Better learn balance. Balance is key. Balance good, karate good. Everything good. Balance bad, better pack up, go home. Understand?"
I'm sure every generation stands at a crossroads of the past and the future, and we are no exception. We stand at a crossroads of faith and culture. Postmodernism has challenged Christianity to the point where the new atheists are asserting that training a child in faith is a form of abuse. People need the Gospel as they always have; yet are ever as rebellious. The Midwest is in a state of denial about globalization, as someone told me recently.
Balance. How do we balance in the church? In our own lives we have to balance vocation with being workaholics for Jesus (as the same someone told me recently). In the church we have to balance midwesternism with globalism. We have to balance faith and culture. We have to find the balance between past and future. To be backward under the name of conservativism is not balance. To throw out liturgy in the name of relevance is not balance. Even "blending" worship styles is not balance.
I don't have the answers, obviously, or I wouldn't be sending this out to the cybersphere. We need to find the balance where we stand firm and where we move forward. Contradiction? Paradox? Perhaps, but not beyond the realm of Christians who are sinners and saints.
Maybe we find balance only through our paradoxes.

A Question on Baptism

As I stated in my previous post, I played for another church today. I sat in on Bible Class, as I played for both services and had to go somewhere in between. The class is studying parables and they wrapped up the parable of the Sower and moved on to the parable of the tares and wheat.
I found a couple of odd points in the discussion. The pastor asserted that the tares are the hypocrites, and the field is the church. I guess I always thought that the field is the world and the tares are unbelievers. Okay, I can live with this idea.
My question comes from the subsequent discussion. They were discussing hypocrites and the sacraments and the passage about eating and drinking to one's condemnation. Then the question turned to baptism. Someone asked if a hypocrite is baptized, is it a valid baptism? The point was made that this would have to be an adult convert in this hypothetical scenario. Both the pastor and the pastor emeritus said that they thought is would not be a valid baptism, and might possibly go so far to say that the person would need to be re-baptized when they turned from their hypocrisy to true faith.
Here is where I'd like to hear from you and/or your pastor. What do you think?
Are these two pastors correct? Is a hypocrite's baptism valid?

Old School

The church at which I am playing tomorrow still uses The Lutheran Hymnal (TLH). My home church, by which I mean the congregation of my childhood and youth, also uses TLH. I have a feeling neither of them will switch anytime soon or even not-so-soon. That does not matter, however.
There’s been much talk of one’s grandfather’s church. I admit that the Missouri Synod of today does not look like the Missouri Synod of my grandfather’s day; then again, neither does the world of today look like the world of my grandfather’s day. What then? Should we make the church of today look like the world of today? Well, did the church of my grandfather’s day look like the world of my grandfather’s day? I can’t say positively, as I was not alive then; nor is my grandfather alive now to ask, but I’m guessing the answer is no.
My grandfather fits into “The Greatest Generation”, while I am a Gen Xer. The Gospel is still the Gospel for me as it was for him as it was for the disciples. Do times change? Sure. Does worship change? Sure. Do we have to throw everything from the past out? Sure—uh—wait—no, we don’t.
The disciples did not throw out the practices of their fathers, Luther did not throw out the practices of his father, nor should we toss out the liturgy. Here’s the rub: too many people (especially the Baby Boomers, sorry guys) are too eager to either hang on to tightly or toss. I think it’s a throw-back from the sixties (again, I was not alive then, so I can’t positively say). In the sixties it seemed to be either “question authority” or its antithesis. Carry that forward to the church.
History without understanding is as ignorant as no history at all. Worship practices without understanding is similar. When I was a youth and there was no Higher Things to set me straight, I thought that the church WAS my grandfather’s church and not for me; therefore, it should be scrapped. Bring on the drums, the guitars, the praise choruses, get some verve and vigor in the door. I didn’t understand the liturgy, even if I had had it memorized since I was five or six.
Today I hope I know better. I have more understanding about liturgy and worship. I can recognize the difference between Christocentric and egocentric texts. I vaguely comprehend the lack when it comes to the theology of glory. I’m not saying I’m a know-it-all (although others might assert that, but that’s another story). I guess all I’m saying is that to be pointlessly stuck in the past is little better than being pointlessly stuck in a place that’s “relevant”.
God’s Word is always relevant. Worship is always relevant. It is the reason we practice what we practice that is the issue. If we don’t know why we do what we do, we run the risk of being stuck somewhere we don’t want to or should not be. This is why some congregations are opening themselves up to any whim of worship to coerce people in the door. This is also why there are some congregations who “have always done it that way” and always will. Even Shirley Jackson warned us against this in her story “The Lottery.” We need to move beyond the rock throwing.
Consider Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof. He knew when to hold to tradition and when to budge. It was adiaphora to allow his daughter to circumvent the matchmaker. It was not when his middle daughter married outside the faith. I know I sound as though I sit solidly on the fence. Let me assure you: I know on which side I am. Christ crucified is what I confess; the doctrine of the church is to what I subscribe; the liturgy as it has been handed down to us from our forebears is what I practice. I am trying to say in a prolonged, sort of way (which will probably get misinterpreted because I’m not as pithy or witty as some) that there are some churches who want nothing more than to claim to be on the conservative/confessional bandwagon, when really they merely like their old hymnals just fine, thank you. It’s not the same. Even McDonalds adjusts to the time without compromising their heritage. Just teach your people the truth.

Advent Comes Quickly

I just wanted to give you advance warning so that you can plan now. If you want to make Advent banners for your church, don't decide to spend six hours on them every Saturday during Advent so that they are ready for the next day.

Hypothetical

It is common for doctors to notify pregnant women when it is determined that the enwombed one has Down Syndrome. The doctor then informs the woman that she can abort if she wishes. What if. . .
Fast forward to a time when the aborting of a Down Syndrome child becomes the norm. Every woman would be subjected to the testing and instructed to abort if the test comes back positive. Then what? What if then a test is developed which determines Autism. If the abortion of one is mandated or normed, then it would follow that positive results for Autism would lead to an abortion. What next? Then a test for IQ? Then a test for. . . What next--or should I say who next?
If we recommend killing enwombed babies because they have three copies of chromosome 21 instead of two, why not a one that has a defect in a gene (like Fragile X)? Why not anyone who has the potential to not reach an IQ higher than 90? Why 90? Maybe 100? Or 110? Or. . .
I think you see where I'm going with this. If it starts, where does it stop? How can we even dare to say that a child who will not be "normal" does not have the right to live? How can we even dare to define "normal"? We cannot dare either, for we know that if we define "normal" and assert that a child who does not fit that definition shall not be granted life; there will come a day when either we will have our life revoked for not being "normal", or we will ultimately exclude all children from being born.
We must speak up.

Signs of the Times

While driving down a local street, I noticed these three church signs. The three churches aren't too far apart--I'd say they are within a one-mile stretch of the same road.

I thought this first sign was unique, but a little too overbearing.

The second was, ahem, punny, but just wrong from an amillenial standpoint.
Ah! At least one got it right! Funny how it was the one located between the other two. . .

From Whom Comes the Armor?

I have a few favorite hymns (some which rarely get sung, but that's another story); one of which was mentioned in the devotion I was reading today. The hymn quoted is "Christ is the World's Redeemer," LSB 539, and the image which caught my attention is "The armor of His soldiers."

The hymn texts makes many statements in the first stanza stating Who Christ is--Redeemer, Lord, our trust, and so on. The word "armor" got me thinking.

The first obvious thought is armor, The Armor of God mentioned in Ephesians 6. In this passage Paul talks about how to "dress" ourselves to be able to stand against the Devil's wiles; only one piece of armor listed is used on the offense--that is the sword of the Word. The next thought is that Christ is the Word. This is how Christ is the armor of His soldiers. He is the One Who fights for us. He stands strong against the devil. The protection we wear--truth, righteousness, readiness/preparation of the gospel of peace, faith, and salvation--all of these come from Christ Himself. None of this armor do we receive from ourselves; they are all gifts Christ gives. He clothes us in the armor, and then He arms us with His Word, Himself, to stand against the wiles of the devil.

How positively sacramental! Christ clothes us with His righteousness in baptism, and arms us with Himself in his Holy Supper. All so that we can withstand every attack the devil launches at us. Christ is truly the world's Redeemer.

The Waiting Game

Listening to Issues, Etc., this question came up as a “teaser” for an open-line discussion. I pondered emailing my comment to the show, but it has grown beyond a comment into a blog.
It is true that the “marriage age” has been pushed back farther and farther. Consider Laura Ingalls Wilder who got married at 18, and that was about 125 years ago; in Shakespeare’s day it was even younger. In his play Romeo and Juliet, Juliet was only 13 when she married Romeo, although her father argues this point with Paris.
Capulet: But saying o’er what I have said before:
My child is yet a stranger in the world,
She hath not seen the change of fourteen years;
Let two more summers wither in their pride
Ere we may think her ripe to be a bride.
Paris: Younger than she are happy mothers made.
Capulet: And too soon marr’d are those so early made.
So let’s cut to the chase: Above all, Christian parents should encourage their children to marry responsibly and for life.
Why after college, like my mother encouraged me? Maybe the parents believe that their children can be better providers for their family with a college degree. The bachelor’s degree of today is nearly equivalent to the high school diploma of 50 or 60 years ago in terms of employment.
On the other hand, it could be that in our society today people view the job as the most important thing in a person’s life, not the family, and so a college degree is the status symbol, not a marriage. Consider again Laura Ingalls Wilder who had a job—she was a teacher, but hated teaching and hoped to marry so that she would not have to teach any more.
It does put teens and twenty-somethings in a situation of temptation. Waiting longer for marriage is harder when they are bombarded by sexual temptations every day. Is that the fault of the length of the educational system? No, it is the fault of the content of the educational system. The same system which encourages education at the highest level possible (get your bachelors’, master’s, doctorate) also encourages sex—see the posting at Opus—and discourages the nuclear family. Have sex, do what you want, but remember: pregnancy bad, abortion good; marriage bad if it holds you back, marriage good if you’re ready for that step (you can always divorce if he/she holds you back later). No wonder it’s a plethora of confusion.How does waiting to marry after college carry any more temptation for the person who has a significant other than a person who does not? You wait for marriage regardless of when that marriage happens, pure and simple. Christian parents will always encourage their children of that, reminding them that a spouse is a gift, not a right, whenever they are gifted.