Is the modern form of youth ministry a failure?

An article in the Christian Post has raised questions about the usual presuppositions that are behind much of youth ministry today.  You can read it all for yourself here...  Let me quote a few points to get the topic started.

A group of pastors and former youth ministry leaders suggest that today’s youth ministries should be disbanded, calling the common practice of separating congregations by age for worship and Bible study "unbiblical."  The church leaders state their case in the documentary film, “Divided: Is Age-Segregated Ministry Multiplying or Dividing the Church?”

“We have to go back to what does the Bible say? There’s something fundamentally wrong with the church’s drive to say we can do a better job of raising your children than you can,” Dellinger highlights. “God has appointed fathers to lead their children; not for someone else to do it just because they have a college degree or some seminary training. That does not qualify someone to all of a sudden become the spiritual leader of your family.”

I have felt uneasy for the way we do "youth ministry" for a long time.  I am troubled by the idea that kids need to be separate from their parents and segregated into their peer groups in order to learn.  I am troubled by the way the Church has divided families instead of helping families pull together when apart or stay together when they are.  I am troubled by the suggestion that the only way kids relate to the Church is through fun activities designed more to babysit and entertain them than to engage them in the faith.  I am troubled by the presumption that kids cannot relate to people who are much different from themselves (thus the need for an ever changing parade of youth ministers whose primary qualification is their own youth).  I am troubled by the idea that a full service church has segmented and targeted programs for specific age groups.  I am troubled by the suggestion that youth ministry is better for kids than the home or that the Church has a better idea what to do with youth than their parents.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am not ready to throw the baby out with the bath water.  I am not saying that everything we do is a failure but it seems we have bought into the idea that when families enter the church building, they separate and each go their own way, to their own classes, to the service that appeals to their personal taste, and to fellowship with their peers.  I am not sure that pouring a ton of money and a ton of energy into separate programs has borne any real or lasting fruit for the youth's continued place within the Church.  In fact, I know a lot of youth who never make it pass youth ministry into the regular church and the blame is nearly always placed upon the "church" that did not connect.  Maybe it was the fault of the youth ministry that split the youth off from the "church" and did such a good job that they never came back???

I am not suggesting that everything be intergenerational or heavy duty Bible study but I am suggesting that we not segregate our kids by age and then entertain them in the name of Christ.  I would not mind if we re-evaluated both the way we have been doing things, the training programs for those who do "youth ministry" and the effectiveness of what we have been doing the past 50 years or so....

If you must judge Christianity, do not judge it by...

"Judge the Church not by those who barely live by its spirit, but by the example of those who live closest to it..." a quote from Archbishop Fulton Sheen...

Very appropriate to those who banter about statistics that attempt to justify HHS intrusions into religious liberty... or to those who attempt to foster a Lutheran identity foreign to its Confessions... or to those who attempt to transform the freedom of the Gospel into the raison d'etre for radical feminism or the GLBT agenda or any other social justice cause that demandis rights but refuses responsibility... or to those who believe in a simple Gospel, a simple Jesus, and a simple morality devoid of any word of sin, death, and the cross -- a happy contentment and ease of self and life that wants little more than the continuation of the present...

No, if you are going to judge the Church, do not judge it from the perspective of those who delight in breaking with its living legacy yesterday, today, and forever the same... whose faith bears little resemblance to the faith the apostles and prophets and saints of old...  Let not the judges of the Church be drawn from those who disdain the voice of Scripture, who reject the traditions of their spiritual fathers, who cannot speak the faith of the creeds without wincing, who refuse the ancient hymns of praise, and who have found that faith is too far beyond their intellectual grasp and the reach of the Spirit to be believed...  They do not speak for the Church or the faith... They are the judges and critics and not the honest voices of faith and faithfulness.  Give them neither pulpit nor place in which to multiply their doubts, fears, and bitterness...

Do not judge the Church by those who find its spirit and life foreign and alien but judge her by those who, as pants the hart for cooling stream, so they hunger and thirst for the refreshing grace of God... those who come as the wounded to be made whole, the sorrowing seeking joy, the sinner looking for righteousness, and the dying in pursuit of life... those who have tried but know that there is no where else to go but to Him who has the words of eternal life... those who cannot look up in self-assurance and pride but who lay low their heads as the repentant whispering in hushed and humble tone "Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner..."

Let the voices who speak for the faith be those who cling to that faith, who sing the songs of faith, who pray the prayers of faith, who seek to do the works of faith, and who seek to bear faith's cross in the world...  Let them speak for the Church who love her even with all her flaws and failings, as Christ loves them, but who strive ever within the bounds of human frailty to be the people Christ has declared and made us to be in baptism... Let them speak for the Church who kneel declaring themselves unworthy of the grace that makes worthy those who trust in this body broken and given for you and in this blood shed for you for the forgiveness of sins...  Let them speak who sigh that too soon the vessels disappear. the feast though not the love is gone... sweet foretaste of the festal joy, the Lamb's great marriage feast of bliss and love... the anticipated not yet of hope not fully revealed or yet complete...

Dang it, Paul McCain beat me to the punch!

If you have read my blog before, you probably know of my hesitation for the mission trips (loosely spiritual vacations on the mission field)... and here is a video that gives the same concern.... so watch it and think about what he is saying...

I know, who cares... But I found it interesting...

The practice of veiling the crucifix (and other images) is an ancient one.  I have seen it some in Lutheran churches and I have followed the ancient practice for some time but I am sure most folks think it fool's gold.  Nevertheless, I repeat the appropriate sections of an authoritative work that give history and symbolism of the ancient practice...   BTW, yes, the source is Roman Catholic (Fr Joseph Braun's Die Liturgischen Paramente, 2nd ed., 1924, p. 233 ff.):

To be distinguished from the Passion veils is the large Lenten veil, which has stayed in use here and there in Sicily and Spain, at some places in Westphalia, as well as in the cathedral of Freiburg im Breisgau. It is a cloth which is hung up during Lent at the entrance to the choir. It is most often white or violet and remains until the Litany is sung on Holy Saturday. The Congregation of Rites has declared the use of this Lenten veil to be admissible on 11 May 1878 (decr. auth. n. 3448).

History

Whereas according to current Roman use Crosses and images are only veiled during Passiontide, in the Middle Ages the common thing was to cover them right at the start of Lent, be it from the Terce of the Monday after the first Sunday of Lent, be it – although less frequently – already from Ash Wednesday. Here and there the veiling was even done on Septuagesima. Moreover, not only Crosses and images were withdrawn from the view of the faihtful by means of veils, but also reliquaries and chandeliers, and even evangeliaries whose covers were ornamented with pictorial representations were sometimes veiled. […]

The custom of veiling Crosses and images during Lent is apparently not of Roman, but of Gallican origin. It was already known in Gaul in the 7th century, as we can see from St. Audoenus's († 683) biography of St. Eligius (II, 41). “Mos erat, ut diebus quadragesimae propter fulgorem auri vel nitorem gemmarum operiretur tumba (s. Eligii) velamine linteo urbane ornato holoserico”, [NLM: “It was custom that on the days of Lent the tomb (of St. Eligius) was covered with a linen veil finely ornamented in pure silk, because of the refulgence of the gold and the splendour of the gems.”] we read in the same. For Italy the custom is not attested until around the year 1000 […]. In the later Middle Ages the veiling of Crosses and images during Lent or at least Passiontide was universally common.

As material for the veils which covered Crosses, images, reliquaries etc. chiefly white linen was used in the Middle Ages. […] Coloured or painted veils for Crosses and images are encountered less commonly in the inventories. […]

The custom to hang up a veil in front of the altar during Lent is already attested in the “consuetudines” of Farfa, then soon after by Aelfric of Winchester and Lanfranc of Canterbury, and at the beginning of the 12th century by Honorius and Rupert of Deutz. Initially, it was probably only observed in cathedral, monastery and collegiate churches. In the later Middle Ages, however, we also find it in parish churches. It was perhaps least extended in Italy. In modern times, the Lenten veil fell more and more into disuse, and today it is, as said before, only rarely used. Furthermore, it mostly does not serve, as originally, to veil the altar and the priest; for this purpose it is normally not large enough any longer. Rather, it is now almost only an indication that Lent has begun.

The veil was ordinarily hung up after compline of the First Sunday of Lent and remained until after compline of the Wednesday of Holy Week. In parish churches it hung between nave and choir, and in collegiate and monastic churches between choir (presbytery) and altar. It was drawn back on Sundays, feasts of twelve or nine lessons, at funerals corpore praesente and on certain solemn occasions like e.g. holy orders, the vesting of novices and similar occasions. Only the veil of the high altar was drawn back then, however, not those of the side altars. For not infrequently, a Lenten veil was hung up in front of these, too. On ordinary days the veil was either not drawn back at all during Mass, or just for the Elevation, and here and there also between Gospel and Orate fratres. Practice in this respect was rather varied according to local custom.

As for the material, the Lenten veils, in Germany also called hunger veils, were mostly made of linen […], but there were also those made of silk. […] In the later Middle Ages, it was popular to embroider, paint or imprint the Lenten veils with scenes from sacred history, especially those of the Passion. […] The enormous Freiburg Lenten veil from the year 1612 already mentioned shows a large Crucifixion as its main image. Magnificent Lenten veils with a wealth of biblical scenes are also at Zittau and in Gurk cathedral. […]

Symbolism

The veiling of Crosses, images etc. during Lent and Passiontide was done because these times had the character of penance and grief, and therefore decoration in the church was deemed inappropriate. The veiling of the Crosses, moreover, may have its reason in the fact that until the 12th century the representations of the Crucifixus showed not so much the Passion of the Godman, but his Triumph on the Cross. Likewise, the great Lenten veil was doubtlessly introduced with regard to the character of grief and penance proper to Lent. The veiling of the Holy of Holies – i.e. the altar – meant in a way a partial exclusion from the cult, which was to remind clerics and laymen alike, in the time of penance, more manifestly of their sinfulness and to impel them to cultivate a truly penitent disposition.

Of course, over time other meanings were additionally attributed to some of these customs, which is easily understandable given the medieval predilection for mystical speculation. In the veiling of Crosses, images and other decoration of the church was thus symbolised the contumely, weakness and humiliation, which in the Passion of the Lord veiled, as it were, His Godhead and divine Power. The veil however, which was hung before the altar, was associated to a multiple symbolism. It was called a memory of the veil of the Old Testament, which dived the Holy of Holies from the Holy and was rent asunder at the death of the Lord. It was seen as an image of the starry heavens which separate material and spiritual world and veil from us the sight of the heavenly fatherland and the glorified Saviour. It was interpreted as the veil with which Moses covered his face, whose resplendence the people could not bear, or as the spiritual shell of the old service of the Law, which still enfolds the hearts of the Jews and prevents them from grasping the clear meaning of the Law. The taking away of the veil at Easter, then, was to signify that Christ now again stands before us in the unveiled splendour of His eternal glory, that He has opened up the heavens for us and taken away the blindness of the heart from us, which had made it impossible for us to understand the mystery of His Passion.

How we read the Bible and miss the message...

I have reported before on the on-going, seemingly Lutheran, conversion of Tullian Tchividjian, grandson of Billy Graham and now Pastor of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, successor to D. James Kennedy.  It continues to amaze me how some outside Lutheranism get it while we Lutherans ignore it.  To those Lutherans who have moved their congregations and their preaching away from sin and forgiveness, death and resurrection, and on to helps for a better life today, I would encourage you to read one still outside the boundaries of Lutheranism (though, maybe not by much):

We often read the Bible as if it were fundamentally about us: our improvement, our life, our triumph, our victory. And as a result we treat it like a book of timeless principles that will give us our best life now if we simply apply those principles. We treat it, in other words, like it’s a heaven-sent self-help manual. But by looking at the Bible as if it were fundamentally about us, we totally miss Jesus–like the two on the road to Emmaus. In fact, unless we go to the Bible to see Jesus and his work for us, even our devout Bible reading can become fuel for our own narcissistic self-improvement plans.

So, if we read the Bible asking first, “What would Jesus do?” instead of asking “What has Jesus done” we’ll miss the good news that alone can set us free.

As I’ve said before, the overwhelming focus of the Bible is not the work of the redeemed but the work of the Redeemer. The Bible is not first a recipe book for Christian living, but a revelation book of Christ who is the answer to our unchristian living. Scripture, in other words, is the portrait of Jesus. It’s a picture of who he is and what he’s done. The Bible tells one story and points to one figure: it tells the story of how God rescues a broken world and points to Christ who accomplishes this. The OT predicts God’s rescuer; the NT presents God’s rescuer. In all of its pages and throughout all of its stories, the Word of the Lord reveals the Lord of the Word. The plot line of the Bible, in other words, is Jesus-centered.

Why is it bad to use old ceremonies but okay to invent new ones?

A source has forwarded a little district newsletter blurb about some things an LCMS congregation is doing to make Sunday morning "special."

Family Worship Service Increases Attendance 

Trinity Lutheran Church in . . . is a congregation committed to actively involving all ages in worship. At their 10:30 worship service children play a more active role in the service through singing and serving along with helping the adults be more than just passive receivers. 

The structure of the divine service has not significantly changed, but certain elements have been added to engage children directly. The service begins with a child coming forward to light the “Family Candle” which is the Baptismal Candle normally lit only when a baptism occurs. “It gives a chance to remind people that our life in Christ and our worship began in baptism.” says the Rev. . . , pastor of Trinity. 

When the candle is lit the congregation joins in confessing, “Jesus is the light that shines in the darkness. Jesus is the light that shines in our lives.” At the end of the service another child is welcomed forward to extinguish the candle while the congregation responds “This candlelight now departs, but Christ’s light remains in our hearts.”

After the invocation children are invited forward to sing a children’s song. When the song is finished Pastor B and the children sit down and open the “Gospel Surprise” box. A child takes the box home each week and brings it back the following week with an item of his or her choice. When the box is opened an impromptu children sermon is taught using that particular item. “There is a palpable sense of anticipation when the box is opened, not unlike our own spirit longs to hear the Gospel.” adds the Pastor.

The closing has become a much awaited culmination of the service. The “Family Blessing” is an adaptation of the Aaronic blessing of Numbers 6. Pastor B invites worshipers to place their hands on their children, spouse, sibling or even a fellow worshiper (if they agree!) and in unison say, “The Lord bless you and keep you. The Lord keep you in his care and when your days on earth are through may you rest in the arms of Jesus.”

 

There was concern that the flow of the worship would be affected and the changes might detract from the reverence of the service. Pastor B answers,“Fortunately the additions have been embraced by our retired members. The concern that the mood would become less reverent has easily been out shined by the enthusiasm of the children.” 

Since the service was altered in late September the average attendance has increased from 87 to just over 100. A notable difference has been the presence of non-member families. The people of Trinity believe that as Jesus interacted with children we should also welcome them to be involved in the Divine Service.

My point is this.  This same parish does not follow all the rubrics or use the full measure of ceremonial or church usages possible in Lutheran Service Book.  In fact, if some of the things mentioned in the rubrics were included, it might create a backlash against the "Catholic" look of the liturgy.  No matter that all of these things are thoroughly "Lutheran" in doctrine and usage -- over many centuries.  But, that same aversion to the ancient ceremonies and church usages implicit in the Lutheran Confessions will easily give way to new ceremonies and rituals invented to make things nice, special, or inclusive.

I can well imagine that this same district newsletter would not report on kneeling or chanting restored to usage in this parish nor would they report the restoration of Eucharistic vestments or the use of the chalice in place of individual cups or a hundred other things that are consistent with Lutheran history and identity.  But they are happy to report on invented ceremonies designed to make the liturgy more homey (even though it means distorting ancient meanings and replacing them with novelties neither historical nor universal.

It is this split personality toward church usages, ceremonies, ritual, and such that gives our church head aches and not a few heart aches.  Why are we more open to the folksy little ditties than the ceremonies that mark our catholic and evangelical confession and identity?  It is the question that begs to be answered....

Y'all Come Now

The Wind Ensemble of Concordia, Ann Arbor

at

Grace Lutheran Church

2041 Madison Street

Clarksville, TN

931-647-6750

on

Saturday, March 24, 2012

at

7:00 pm

Ritual... to be or not to be... that is the question...

From John W. Kleinig, Lutheran Theological Journal 22/1 1988:

Every pastor is either a witting or unwitting ritualist.  He is, after all, responsible for the performance of that ritual which is necessary for the communication of the Gospel to the members of his congregation.  That is not always an easy business, nor is its importance always appreciated; for while the Lutheran Church has traditionally been a liturgical church, it exists in a culture where liturgical worship, with its emphasis on corporate and supernatural activity has become alien, incomprehensible, and even nonsensical to many people.  So, unless the pastor understands the role of ritual in worship and creates some appreciate for it by his leadership, both he and his congregation will suffer confusion.  They will be caught between the devil of trendy, liturgical innovation, and the deep blue sea of obstinate, liturgical traditionalism.


As a church we, therefore, need to perform our rituals wittingly, without becoming either reactionary ritualists, insensitive to the needs of people, or individualistic anti-ritualists who damage our congregations.  We may even come to a rather unexpected appreciation for the liberating power and enriching beauty of ritual...


It seems that too often we act as if there was a just right amount of ritual -- just enough to be authentically Lutheran but not so much that we draw attention to our Lutheran-ness or, more particularly, our catholic identity.  Over and over again the debate raises the question of Lutheran moderation in all things -- including ceremonies.  Over and over again, we treat these things as if they were mere matters of personal taste.  We are either witting or unwitting ritualists.  We cannot escape it.  So what shall we be?  The witting ritualists who understand that actions and ritual are visible confession or the unwitting ritualists who act as if these were not really essential and we don't really care for them but we have to have some of them to show we are really Lutheran?

I have never made the demand and I have no expectation that other Lutheran Pastors mirror me as the presider or celebrant or the ceremonial at Grace Lutheran Church as being the best or optimum for the whole church.  I do, however, insist that we should be free from constraint of fear to explore more fully the catholic identity inherent in those rituals, ceremonies, and church usages by which we make visible the Reformation insistence that we are not innovators nor do we value novelty but we are by virtue of our Confessions and our liturgical practice the faithful continuation of the evangelical and catholic faith.  Words are not alone in teaching to us the faith.  What we do also teaches even as it confesses before the world what it is that we believe.

There is a minimum of ceremonial, ritual, and church usage that accompanies our Confessions.  It is often as illusive to define in words as the famous SCOTUS reference to recognizing pornography when you see it.  I mean no comparison here except to the difficulty we have in formulating a minimum and saying at least this.  It would seem to me that rubrics begin that definition.  The red letters of the book are meant to define the things we do both to proscribe and describe.  The overall sensitivity to reverence underlies all of this.  We are on holy ground in God's House and we enter the domain of His Word and Sacraments only at His bidding and not from our arrogance or demand.  Concern for the church catholic and the vast history that goes before must also be included in our feeble attempt at a minimum.  We do not act sectarianly -- either as Lutherans in general or as Lutherans among Lutherans.  We may not require uniformity but we do respect the familial character of our life together as people of a common confession and a common liturgical heritage and identity.  Finally, knowing that ceremonies teach and confess, we acknowledge that some things that in one place and time might have been considered adiaphora may become normative for the sake of confession -- when those ceremonies give public expression to truth in dispute.

I have no desire to police or to see ritual policed.  I have no demand that Pastors or parishes act like me or mimic my own parish.  I do expect that we will act like the Lutherans we say we are, using agendas, forms, and hymnals that are doctrinally pure.  I do expect that we will not condemn those who use the form but with less ceremonial nor will we condemn those who use the form yet with a fuller ceremonial.  For the sake of confession and our life together, I would expect, even perhaps, demand, that those with minimal ceremonial conform to the practice of the Church but I think it both unwise and unsound to demand that those who express a fuller ceremonial to give up their practice.  The greater offense lies not with those whose Divine Service expresses the fuller ceremonial life but those who reject, eschew, and abandon even the minimal ceremonial that reflects and confesses what we believe and teach.  Let it be said, however, that for the sake of the Church we are not speak of extraordinary circumstance (chaplain on the battlefield) but regular Sunday worship.

In my own parish, we have a week day celebration that follows this minimum (with but two hymns, no chanting, no assistants, and the barest order of the Divine Service but with vestments, candles, etc.).  On Sundays we follow the fuller ceremonial of a full, sung liturgy with assisting ministers (lay), acolytes (2-3), chanting, the complete ordo adapted seasonally as rubrics suggest, and 5-6 hymns.  As different as they might be, they are the same.  It is easy to recognize that neither disdains ceremonial or ritual nor does either practice the ceremonies of the Church in a manner which idolizes the ritual.  They reflect the same reverential atmosphere and the same attitude of devotion and the same perspective of faith.  If we can do this in one parish, can we not expect to have such commonality of form and unity of ceremonial and ritual without making the demand for unanimity and absolute identical practice in the larger sphere of the Synod?

To be or not to be... wrong question.  We are ritualists.  The only relevant question is of what kind?

I believe....

Here is a beautiful YouTube video of the reading of the Nicene Creed which dates back over a 1,000 years in the the Christian church. This recitation was done at Trinity Lutheran Church, Klein, TX during the March 4, 2012 church services by three members of Trinity as part of Lutheran Schools week. These three members, and students (former and present) are: Mr. Erich Klenk, 97 years old, confirmed in 1928, past Chairman of the congregation, charter member of the Men’s Club in 1946,  and Trinity’s oldest member. Lyle Lovett, great grandson of Trinity founding father Adam Klein, confirmed in 1971, singer/songwriter, and winner of four Grammys. Erin Pali, class of 2016 and current 4th grade student of Miss Marilyn Peterson/ Erin’s Dad Brett also had Miss Petersen in 4th grade during his years at Trinity. This video was posted to YouTube by Pat Blake.

HT to Paul McCain

 

A big circle...

This is good news....

“Issues, Etc.”, a radio talk show produced by Lutheran Public Radio and hosted by Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod Pastor Todd Wilken, began broadcasting live Monday, March 12 from 3-5 p.m. CST weekdays on KFUO, 850 AM in St. Louis. “Issues, Etc.” has been broadcasting on KSIV, Bott Radio Network in St. Louis since June 30, 2008. KFUO is owned and operated by the LCMS. The popular radio show aired for more than 15 years on KFUO. However, the LCMS cancelled the program on March 18, 2008.

“By purchasing airtime on KFUO instead of KSIV, we will be able to offer ten hours of live programming each week to St. Louis area listeners instead of five hours of programming. KFUO also provides a stronger signal for our listeners in southern Illinois,” said Jeff Schwarz, general manager of LPR.

“We will not become employees of KFUO or the LCMS,” said Pastor Todd Wilken, host of Issues, Etc. “LPR and KFUO are totally separate entities. When listeners donate to KFUO, they won’t be supporting LPR and vice versa. It is vitally important for us to have complete editorial control and financial independence from the LCMS.”

“We are extremely thankful to the Bott family and to the Bott Radio Network for providing us the opportunity to broadcast Issues, Etc. on KSIV,” Schwarz said. “Almost immediately after the cancellation, we were contacted by Rich Bott and presented with the opportunity to continue broadcasting on a terrestrial radio station in St. Louis.”

LPR will continue to produce “Issues, Etc.” from its studios in Collinsville, IL.

Now, four years later, the circle is complete... except that Issues, Etc. is strong and KFUO is seeking some of its strength in programming and in audience.  Issues, Etc. returns by paying for the airtime and strengthening its reach through radio.  All things do work together for good... and we can be thankful that the climate in Missouri has changed so that Issues, Etc. can return.  We can also be thankful that Issues, Etc. is both strong financially and a strong voice for the Gospel so that it is beholden to none but the Lord and those whose support makes LPR possible.  Who would have thought we might meet here for such a day as this?  Only the Lord.... Only by grace...

When bad becomes worse...

Without comment...

"This is the last Sunday we will be worshiping in this building," Pastor Sheila Schuller Coleman told congregants during an emotional 11 a.m. service in the famous Crystal Cathedral.  Her father, founder of the Hour of Power, Robert Schuller, also resigned from the board and has left.  The future of the group is uncertain but it is not waiting until the deadline imposed by the sale of the campus to the Orange County Diocese of the Roman Catholic Church.  Instead, the tearful goodbyes were said this Sunday past...

Read it all here...  or here....  

"Hour of Power” is currently showing re-runs while the production is on hold.

After the pastor's surprise announcement, the Rev. Bill Bennett assured congregants that Crystal Cathedral Ministries would hold services next Sunday.  "The congregation can basically stay where they wish to stay," Bennett said later.

He said the church would revert to what he called a more "traditional" style of service, with hymns and music. It is unknown who will take over as senior pastor. The church was sold to the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange in February for $57.5 million, and the ministry has three years to find a new home.


Pastor Sheila discusses the future of our ministry now that escrow has closed from Crystal Cathedral Ministries on Vimeo.

There are a whole lot of things we need to resurrect... this is a good start...

I grew up with a large statue of Jesus on the altar (the Thorvaldsen Christ).  It was not alone.  A crucifix was also on the altar.  I grew up hearing the sound of the great bell tolling during the Words of Institution and the Our Father.  I thought I grew up in a low church congregation.  There was not even a surplice and stoles until I went away to college and brought back stories of what I had seen.  We went from black gown to surplice to alb and along the way added the stole.  We did not have hymnals in the church -- you had one at home and brought it with you to church -- but we got hymnals and racks in the 1970s and LSB sits in the pews now.

There were many things that were original to Lutheran churches but were lost over time.  Sometimes in the name of remodeling and other times because of growing sensitivity to how others saw us and the fear of things deemed too Katholische. Some brave congregations (or maybe just cheap) did not remodel or toss out the old things but many did.  Buildings built from the 1950s on seldom included crucifixes or statues or much of anything that we ornate or elegant.  We preferred simple buildings for a simple Jesus.  Thankfully we have outgrown that fad as well.  Sadly, while some are resurrecting what was once there, others are taking their cues from evangelicalism and ridding even plain Lutheran chancels of any vestiges of their past.  So it is good to hear when one congregation resurrects their past and reclaims their heritage...

Read it all here.... with a HT to Pr. Anthony R. Voltattorni the good folks he serves in Standish, MI...

Zeal for Thy house will consume thee...

Sermon for Lent 3B, preached on Sunday, March 11, 2012.

    We often enjoy watching as spectators things we don’t want to happen to us. We might enjoy watching the spectacle of Jesus disrupting the business of the Temple and seeing the smug and self-righteous Temple authorities getting their due.  But we don't really understand it.  In fact, it makes us uncomfortable.  We are zealous people.  We are casual folks – more live and let live people.  As long as it does not directly affect us, well, we are fairly okay with most anything.
    Zeal or extremism is frightening to us.  Extremism is not a virtue today but a vice.  We like religion but we get a little nervous around people who seem a little too religious.  We like reasonable, flexible religion.  Zealots are dangerous people to the modern mind.  So while we might want to watch Jesus stick it to them, we don't want it to happen here.  It would scare us.  We want a reasonable and flexible Jesus and a reasonable and flexible church  – one too zealous about what you believe or how you practice it.
    If Jesus is anything, He is zealous.  Zeal is not intolerance or arrogance.  Zeal is born of faith.  What makes Jesus zealous is that He trusts the will of the Father implicitly and completely.  What makes Christians zealous is also born of faith.  Zeal is absolute trust in the Lord, in the good news of our redemption, in Jesus Christ and Him crucified.  Jesus is zealous because He trusts the Father absolutely.  Jesus calls us to such zealotry – trusting the Lord with all our heart, mind, body and soul.
    Zeal begins with faith.  For the zealot, faith is the highest thing.  In other words, trust in the Lord is the highest and holiest of callings.  It is for this we live and it is in this we die. Faith is not just something we juggle among our many other priorities.  Faith is our highest priority and the most important calling – that which defines us as people, the people of God.
    Zeal trusts in the Lord.  Faith is not merely the highest thing, it is the only thing.  Trust in the Lord is our everything.  You can have everything else but without faith you have nothing at all.  Remember last week when Jesus asked what profit there was in gaining the whole world and losing our souls?  He was speaking of zeal, zeal for the Lord, for the things of the Lord, for the House of the Lord.
    Jesus is nothing if not zealous.  But we are not so zealous.  We are casual.  We are most comfortable with a faith of minimums, we dress down, we sing in muffled tones, we pray the "amen" only loud enough so that we can hear it, and we try real hard to fit in the world.  In doing so, we only distance ourselves from Jesus and the grace that imparts to us forgiveness, life, and salvation.  By living a faith of minimums, grace becomes merely one thing among many instead of the only thing.  Can we ever be too zealous for the grace of God?
    Jesus is zealous for His Father's house.  He is offended when He sees how comfortable people became with the holiness of God.  The less they felt God's holiness, the easier it was to turn religion into a business and life with God into a hobby.  Jesus is zealous when religion treated sin perfunctorily and when worship became centered in people instead of the Lord.  Jesus would not find our Christian world so different than He found the Temple so long ago.  We need a zealous Lord to call us back to faith and to make us zealous for His Word and Sacraments.
    Jesus is zealous about the Word because it is through this Word that God works.  Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of the Lord, says Paul.  If we take God's Word casually, then we are distanced from its grace, its gifts, and its power.  In order for grace to find us, to justify us through the cross, to wash us in baptism, to absolve us from the daily sin of thought, word, and deed, and to feed us the Eucharistic food for our journey in life, we must take the means of grace seriously.
    Jesus is zealous about the water of baptism because there we are united with Christ and His cross, there we die with Christ and rise with Him to new and eternal life.  We could be casual about baptism if it was our work but because baptism is God's work we cannot be casual about it. Neither can we be casual about being the baptized children of God.  This is not one of our many identities but the identity that defines us as people.  We are God's own not by virtue of our commitment or promise but God's claim on us in baptism.
    Jesus is zealous about sin.  As soon as we become casual about sin, we become casual about the cross.  What Jesus did for us there becomes trivial and peripheral to who we are and how we live.  Confession and absolution are the means of God's restoring work in us, keeping us on the path of life and salvation.  We cannot take mercy seriously until we take sin seriously.
    Jesus is zealous about His Table.  The Eucharist has nothing to do with what we think or feel and is all about the promise of Jesus in the bread and wine, "This is My body... this is My blood."  He sets His table in the midst of our enemies and feeds us the only food that bestows life abundant and eternal.  Jesus is not only zealous for the grace given there but that those who commune are able to receive the grace of His body and blood.  Those who commune are those who believe His Word, who confess the historic faith expressed in the creeds, who repent of our sins and cling in faith to God's forgiveness, and who beg the aid of the Spirit to amend our screwed up lives.  Jesus is zealous about His Table because it is the source and the summit of our spiritual lives.
    Despite our protests we are pretty casual about God, about His Word, about His Sacraments, and about His House.  We are too casual about these things.  Church becomes a place we go – if we go – and not the defining identity of our lives.  We are the Church by God’s actions in Christ.  A casual Church, like a lukewarm Christian, is about as useful to God as a broken coffee pot in the fellowship hall.  It offers nothing at all.  Today we encounter a zealous Jesus who takes us and our need seriously, who takes the Word and House of the Lord seriously, and who teaches us by the Spirit to take them seriously – for in them is life and salvation, and apart from them we are but the walking dead doomed to have only the moment.... when God has provided us eternity.  O zealous Lord, make us zealous for You.  Amen!

Thankful at least for his honesty...

The head of the BBC, Mark Thompson, has admitted that the broadcaster would never mock Mohammed like it mocks Jesus.



He justified the astonishing admission of religious bias by suggesting that mocking Mohammed might have the “emotional force” of “grotesque child pornography”.

But Jesus is fair game because, he said, Christianity has broad shoulders and fewer ties to ethnicity.

Read it all here....

We knew it all along.... we just wanted someone to admit it publicly.  This is the media bias that lies hidden under the surface of the illusion of objectivity...  The biggest problem is not the bias -- we can expect that and Jesus told us the world that was not friendly to Him would not be friendly to His followers -- the biggest problem was the lie of fairness....  Now that one has made the bold admission, I can only hope that others from the media will follow.  Honesty cleanses the discussion so that we can speak to the truth and not argue about lies.

Dignified Informality...

Not having received former Pres. Kieschnick's recent missive, I can only refer to what others have said about it.  One commentator put it this way:  From today's "Thursday missive" by former LCMS Pres. Kieschnick:  "To the greatest extent possible, pastors and other worship leaders do well to design and conduct services that . . . are conducted in what might be called a spirit of dignified informality."  (Pr. Thomas Messer)


Now I really don't have a clue what Kieschnick meant by that.  Clearly Pr. Messer thinks this is not an apt description of the "style" of good liturgy and I have no reason to dispute him.  Yet, I understand by this something slightly different.

People have often complained about liturgy which is done almost without any recognition of the congregation present.  They do not like this rigid formality which is somewhat like doing the liturgy with blinders on.  I have been in worship services that have fallen victim to this kind of rigid formality in which no one really feels at home or welcome.  It is as is we were all there in our own little private spaces but occupying larger space where the Mass was being offered.  Indeed, some of the complaints I have about the highly liturgical RC Masses (EF or Novus Ordo) is that it seems as if everything was going on without acknowledging an assembled congregation.  Interestingly, I have also heard the same complaint of distinctly non-liturgical "praise" worship in which each person present was in their own little world, soft of a me'n'Jesus all by ourselves atmosphere.


Although I would not use the terms dignified informality, I do understand that the formal worship of the liturgy does not ignore the fact that there are people present -- real people and not plastic folks or robotic people in the pews.  I have often described the services here as liturgical but not formal.  In other words, we have lots of kids and lots of little kids and babies.  We have some folks with back problems who cannot sit for long.  Sometimes it is a bit more ordered chaos than I feel comfortable with but most times there is a balance between the formal, liturgical worship of the Divine Service with its ceremonies, usages, and rituals and a congregation of folks of all ages who walk around in the back, who take a child to the rest room, whose little hands occasionally drop a hymnal, whose feet sometimes kick down a kneeler in the wrong spot, etc.  Once I had a child wander into the chancel during the distribution when a young mom with a baby in her arms was communing and the small child let go of her arm to come up and give me a hug.  It happens.  Sort of like the unplanned things of a dinner table at home.  We are not manor born folk or landed gentry.  We are ordinary people.


I am certain that Pr. Messer was sensitive to the fact that it was no secret the Kieschnick administration favored and fostered blended worship or contemporary worship as the essential tool of outreach and growth.  I am in no way inclined to that point of view.  But I am also certain that Pr. Messer did not mean that the folks in the pews were like the perfect children of old -- seen and not heard.  It seems what we struggle with is a middle ground.  On the one hand, the form of worship for Lutherans is the liturgy (no matter which page number in the book or whether it is printed out in the Sunday bulletin).

We are people of the liturgy or Divine Service.  But we do not perform the liturgy as some sort of ritualistic play designed to prove our piety to God.  The liturgy is the DIVINE Service -- God's service to us through the means of grace.  We expect children to be present and there is something wrong when they are not.  We are not actors playing a role to please God but Pastors whose voices and hands God uses to deliver to us His Word and Sacraments and a people who receive, through faith, the gifts He offers there (forgiveness, life, and salvation).


I would not have called it dignified informality anymore than I want orderly chaos.  What we want is a liturgical setting which is not casual but neither is it rigidly formal.  The key to this, in part, lies with the attitude of the Pastor presiding.  Some see the liturgy as monologue time and crack enough jokes and engage in slapstick humor which demeans what God is doing among us.  Others believe the faces of folks at the Mass should be devoid of every emotion.

The dignity of the liturgy is a given because of the God who bids us come and then bestows upon us His gifts and grace.  Formality is a given because we are not spontaneous but follow a form -- the liturgy. Say the black, do the red.  That is good advice.  Strong, loving, and wise presiding helps.  Pastors who are comfortable in their own skin while at the altar and pulpit, to be sure. And it does not hurt that the people are at home in the liturgy enough to be instinctive about what is going on and where things are headed.

A Motherless Child....

Sometimes I feel like a motherless child
    Sometimes I feel like a motherless child
       Sometimes I feel like a motherless child 
A long ways from home
    A long ways from home
       True believer
A long ways from home
    Along ways from home..

We already live in a time when fatherless children are the norm in many places.  We have often lamented that children have become the unwitting victims in so many of the ills of our society.   An article addresses some of this:

When surrogacy and egg donation first gained national attention in the 1980s the children in question usually had a social mother, a woman, herself infertile, married to a man and seeking to achieve pregnancy with the use of another woman's body. Today we are witnessing an equal opportunity run on deliberately conceiving motherless children. Men, alone or in pairs, can buy eggs and rent wombs, too. A child can be denied knowledge of and a relationship with his or her generally fit mother simply because other adults -- the child's prospective legal parents -- wish it to be so, and are willing to pay to make it so. These transactions occur with the aid of doctors, lawyers, and clinics licensed by the state, and thus with tacit approval from the state.

You can read it all in the Atlantic here....

We now find ourselves with children whose father's names and mother's names are "donor" and these circumstances are not supposed to matter to them as they grow up in the gay, lesbian, or single parent homes.... but, guess what -- it does matter...

For decades we have debated whether fathers matter. Must we now debate whether mothers matter, too?

The whole idea that we have to debate this is just plain sad...  Again, the children are the unwitting victims of our own failures and selfishness.

Worth your time...

In this silly season of political argument that is more personal attack than debate on the merits of proposals and for those inclined to the blogosphere and internet forums with their own version of smear vs discussion, a video passed on by Pr. Paul McCain seems more than appropriate...  You judge for yourself...

Changed futures. . .

At the time I write this, we face a modern day American crisis when it seems impossible to count on enshrined religious liberty to guarantee that we can practice what we believe.  We look out on to a Middle East in which dictators have been replaced by varying degrees of Muslim rulers and all the blood and money spent there has left one population decimated and gone -- the Christians!  We hear of once mighty religious groups closing cathedrals and shedding congregations and adherents in great numbers (ECUSA and ELCA).  We hear of Christians persecuted and martyred in shocking numbers and the news has become so routine the media seems hardly to notice anymore.

It is said that Cardinal George of Chicago said: "I expect to die in my bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr..."  If it is true, it may be prescient of the future that awaits serious Christians all over the world -- if not in this generation, perhaps in the ones to come.


Yet this is not entirely a bad thing.  The greatest vibrancy of faith and life has often come not in times of relative prosperity when it was possible to confess the faith with impunity but during times of persecution, struggle, and even violent oppression.  The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church... and it may take some of this to awaken us from the sleep of complacency and a comfortable Christianity that bears little resemblance to Jesus or the early Church.


Only weeks ago we commemorated the Martyrdom of Polycarp.  It is not significant that a first hand account of a tortured death became one of the single most important writings of the early church?  We no longer gather at the graves of the martyrs to rejoice in their faithfulness, to seek to be like them with such singleness of will and boldness of spirit, or to recall with joyful thanksgiving the all they gave in the hour of trial.  Perhaps this is exactly what will spur us on from the deception of a cultural Christianity which takes it worship cues and moral values from the surrounding landscape of society instead of a movement built upon the scandal of the cross.  Surely God is not responsible for the mess of things we have made but if, in this mess, He prods His Church to rise up from the ashes, then the suffering will not have been in vain.

"I expect to die in my bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr..."  Rather a different idea that the one my parents had, hopefully passing on to me a better life, a better church, and a better future than they knew.  I do not fault them for their desire and am thankful for their many sacrifices but it just may be that my own children will find their future tied up with sacrifice more than blessing (at least in the earthly sense of that term blessing).

Yet God is here still, through the means of grace, imparting forgiveness for failure, hope for His future, and enough comfort and peace to bind up our broken hearts and bruised spirits...