A book about my family. . .

While out and about at flea markets, book stores, and antique shops, I happened upon a volume whose title could very well be a book about my family history.  It is probably for another to judge but the abnormal part seems rather true -- at least in comparison to things as they are today.

I grew up in a home with a dad and a mom who were married to each other for nearly 65 years.  They were rather simple folk by the standards today.  They went to church every Sunday, taught their two sons to pray along with a host of other things (from cooking to plumbing), and were productive members of the small town in which they had grown up and lived their whole lives.  Yup, pretty abnormal.  They were not fancy people and their accomplishments were largely limited to the arenas of church, home, and community.  Though they loom large in my own memory, I would be forced to admit that they are largely forgotten now.  The store that belonged to my father from 1958 through 2015 is now closed.  The building is occupied by a glorified junk dealer and I cannot even recall how much of the inventory was left from the remains of dad's store.  Mom's work with the girl scouts, women's club, and a host of other worthy endeavors is as forgotten as those groups.  The town and its people have moved on.  It hurts me more than I imagined it every would hurt them.  They did not live their lives for legacy but as people of faith living out in the present moment a life they strove to make worthy of their calling in Christ.  My brother and I are probably their only estate of value to them.  Yes, they had things but the things were not as important to them as me and my brother.  They loved their daughter-in-law and were happy at the home she made for me and for our family.  They loved their grandchildren and the mountains of photos from my family was evidence of how they cherished these babies who grew up into adults.  It used to be a pretty normal life but I wonder how normal it is today.

I write this not out of nostalgia nor because I want to condemn the way things have become.  It is more out of sadness that I admit what was the norm for me and my wife and the homes in which we grew up is now not so normal anymore.  The world today has lost something precious and in its place has come something less than what was lost.  I am sad because I grew up without a real care in the world.  We played and worked and walked and rode bikes as if there was nothing to fear anywhere.  It was a life without a rigorous schedule, without drop offs and pick ups from day care, and without adult worries to interfere with childhood.  Sure, we had drills about hiding under our desks in case of nuclear attack but we did not worry about it -- much less think about the absurdity of a school desk keep us safe from the mushroom cloud and all of its destruction.  We just did it.  We did not worry about our parents divorcing -- I literally cannot recall that ever happening in my small town while I grew up there.  We did not worry about figuring out our gender or what fueled our sexual desire.  We were kids and most of us went through high school as carefree virgins who expected to find a wife or husband and have a family but did not brood on it.  How unlike today with kids who carry around adult sized burdens on their shoulders and who have had the new normal steal away their childhood and its attempt at innocence!

I knew my great-grandpa, grand-parents on both sides, aunts and uncles, cousins and an extended family that numbered in the hundreds.  We went to reunions and ate meals at each other's homes.  We hauled out the giant tins of Schwanns ice cream for dessert and ate pickled herring along with chips and dip before sitting down to roasted meat, mashed potatoes, gravy, and vegetables.  Though we were not rich, we did not worry if the food would be on the table.  We did sometimes worry that it might be some food we did not especially like but we ate what was there.  Everybody did.  We wore hand me down clothes along with the outfits and shoes purchase once a year -- big enough to grow into as long as we did not wear them out.  We had a TV that had a couple of channels on it and we watched it with glee but parents always controlled what we watched and when.  That big screen was a nice addition to our lives but it did not replace playing with other kids or doing chores or all the other things.  I guess growing up without a screen dominated life was better than anyone today could imagine.  Like most folks, we could not wait to grow up but when we grew up we realized how special such a childhood was in a small town, with a loving family, and enough if not more all around.  Sadly, as normal as it seemed then, it is not now and I am not sure anyone misses those easy, slow, carefree days.  They should.  We all should miss them enough to work to make our modern day lives a bit more like the old ones.

We have settled into a new normal in which families break up and homes are divided and children are optional and marriage is not necessary.  We have accepted the new normal of a world in which you never really feel safe or secure (not even in your own home) and in which you balance dangers with desires when you plan things.  We have become accustomed to a world in which the screens are our best friends and personal contact is secondary to the digital realities of our daily lives.  We expect people not to go to church and we expect to fill our time with other pursuits.  We are over scheduled and even lonelier than ever.  I could be angry about how things have turned out but instead I am sad.  I am sad for my grandchildren and for the kids I see at church.  I am sad at how easily and quickly the new normal has made my childhood abnormal.  In this we have forgotten some of the things that matter most and kept hold on things that do not matter much at all.  I know I cannot change the world but I pray for it and for the future ahead of most of us.  Anger may not bring things back but if we ever get to the point where we want to try something different, the abnormal past might not look so bad to us.  The day may come when antique stores or old book shops or flea markets may hold more than a memory but a sense of hope, restoring what was lost for the sake of joy.

 

By their fruits you shall know them. . .

In one of the more curious details about the early days of Leo's papacy, one can note that while he looks the part, he has consistently used the power of appointment to continue the legacy of Frank the First and the progressive agenda.  While I have no doubt that Leo will not become the atheological voice of his predecessor, he has surely become an extension of the same man's penchant for naming people left of center to all kinds of important posts.  For example, in addition to the bishops, Pope Leo XIV appointed 19 new consultants to the Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue -- nominations consistent with those made under Pope Francis.  Two examples are Emilce Cuda, who is also secretary of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, who seems hesitant to speak against abortion and the other Mónica Santamarina, a leading figure in the World Union of Catholic Women’s Organizations (WUCWO) who enjoys complaining about clericalism and too few women in seminaries and church leadership.

What makes this even more incredible is that before becoming Pope, Leo was head of the dicastery which nominated and investigated candidates for the episcopacy across the Roman world.  He, as much as anyone, should have known what kind of men he was appointing as bishops.  The fact that so many of those whom he has appointed seem to tilt left can only be indicative of his own desire to lean in that direction.  If that is the case, then Rome has some big problems down the road -- far bigger than the question of restoring the ability to say the Latin Mass freely.  I know that he has not had much time in the saddle, so to speak, but he has had enough time for us to judge the direction in which he is heading and that does not look good for Rome or for orthodox and traditional Christianity down the road.

It has often been said that a President of US serves at most 8 years but those whom he appoints to the judiciary extend well beyond that limit.  That is certainly the case for bishops also.  Yes, Leo is a great deal younger than Frank was but Frank's imprint upon Rome has been multiplied by the many he appointed as cardinals (especially cardinal electors) and bishops.  The fact that Leo has had multiple opportunities to slow down or reverse course on the direction Frank the First began only signals that he himself is moving in that direction.  While I wish that were not so, I know many Roman Catholics who believe it is exactly the case.

While I have no dog in this hunt, it does mean that those who would have enjoyed some support from Rome will now have to admit that Rome is not going to be a reliable partner for orthodox Christian teaching on marriage, sexual desire, gender identity, and a host of other issues perhaps more important but less attention getting.  It means that groups like the LCMS are increasingly more and more isolated.  The Christian left is a machine and it works very well to scoop up whole denominations, seminaries, universities, and churchly institutions to agree with the progressive agenda.  Plus, that leftward leaning group has learned to be patient and to consolidate gains when the pace of change slows.  Perhaps that is what Leo is doing in Rome.  In any case, if we know the true man by his fruits, they do not look good so far into this papacy.  Not quite a year is not a long time but unless Leo changes course on some things it is enough to say that Leo is more Frank's guy than Benedict's. 

The Kingdom of God has come near. . .

Eve after nearly 50 years in the pulpit, I admit that I am no expert on preaching but I do have some experience doing it and listening to it.  On the whole, most preachers make a good effort.  On the average, preaching is not all that compelling to listen to or to read.  It is to my great sadness that I say this.  To those who would charge me with arrogance in this judgment, I do not mean to suggest that my own preaching is absent of the same problems as others.  But it does seem as if we have on the whole forgotten what it means to preach.

I would echo S. M. Hutchens in the current Touchstone:  "I must add now, near the end of my life, after listening for decades to bad preaching from numerous pulpits, that Evangelicals have no corner on this market. Each denomination seems infected by its native strain of bad preaching —the Anglicans by preciousness, the Lutherans by formula, the Catholics by laziness and biblical illiteracy, the Baptists by great volume to no great end."  While not mean to categorize all, it does represent the tendencies among the denominations which contribute to the decline of the craft and the failure of its outcome.

If the folks in the pew dismiss what they hear or change preachers like they change channels or peruse the reels and memes of the internet, it could be that preachers no longer seem to be authoritative in their preaching, carrying this weight and fulfilling its duty as they should.  Nobody goes to church to hear some opinion from the guy in the pulpit.  They go as I do now to hear the kingdom of God proclaimed.  What seems common especially among us today is the proclamation that the kingdom of God has come near.  Instead, it is as if that kingdom were something we obtained by achievement, merit, or following a map.  The preachers today often seem to begin with what they do not know instead of what they do, what is the core of their conviction and what bears the authority of the One who is the Word made flesh.

We Lutherans love to debate Law and Gospel in preaching as if our job were merely to rightly distinguish them and then make sure that we spend more words on the Gospel than the Law.  Somewhere in this the text goes missing from the sermon.  Somewhere in this we presume that the Word of God is a tool to be used well but not, as it were, the efficacious voice of the Good Shepherd speaking to His flock so they might hear His voice, recognize it, and follow.  Following is often the thing missing in sermons.  Indeed, where are we to go and whom are we to follow?  There often seems to be great faithfulness in speaking at least one well-worn version of the atonement but not so much any application or compelling direction for us to take home and apply Monday through Saturday.

Of other denominations I cannot speak.  I have only marginal association with what passes for preaching in nearly every denomination but of the online sermons of the notable folk I have a bit more acquaintance.  That said, it saddens me that Charles Stanley still preaches on after death for this seems to admit that good preachers are not common today.  It positively sickens me to call what Joel Osteen says a sermon and that also includes many who, like him, seem at home in anything but Scripture.  So I can only assume that some of what I find disappointing in my own tradition also applies there.  But you discern it and understand that mileage may vary.

I only wish that sermons proclaimed the nearness of the kingdom of God, the presence of the Savior who died and rose again, and the power of Him who chooses mercy over all things.  Nearly every text of the Gospel reading for any given Sunday is abundant in opportunities to proclaim this present God whose kingdom is near to us in Word and Sacrament, and whose call for us to follow is compelling.  If there is another complaint, maybe it is that there seems to be less joy for now and less hope for tomorrow in what is proclaimed.  That is disappointing because joy ought to accompany faith and hope is the mark of faith living in us.  I cannot guarantee that folks who hear me preach will go home feeling better but I have striven to make sure that they encounter the God of joy and hope -- a joy and hope so profound it compels us to live new, upright, and godly lives even though they cannot and will not purchase salvation.  At least that is my desire.  

If you cannot say it with many points, then you ought to at least say it with one or two strong points that will bear home the text appointment within that context of God's abiding presence, the triumph of His mercy, the character of joy, and the mark of hope.  If I can say one thing more, let it be that the preacher's delivery actually display his own confidence in his conviction.  It is a sad thing to hear a good sermon spoken in a voice that appears to be indifferent to what is proclaimed.  Lastly, I will say this.  Before you begin writing a sermon, any sermon, you had better be well acquainted with good preachers and read their sermons.  Speaking sermons helps to make you better but it is secondary to reading and hearing good sermons from the voices and pens of others.  

There are many sins in the pulpit but I should not end this little rant without saying that the sin of being dull is a particularly vexing one.  It might be that most sermons do not excite the hearer enough for them to contemplate any action against the preacher but to admit that this is the case is also sad.  When one can read a passage from literature or a story from the news with more urgency than the Word of God and its preached application, we are all in trouble.  I realize I have rambled but that is how my meandering thoughts worked today.

Happy Valentine's Day anyone?

Myth and legend have never kept us from having fun or making money and are often the occasion for doing both.  So the question of who is this Valentine we call saint may be of significance for a blogwriter somewhere but probably not for those who rushed to the florist, candy shop, and card store to say something eloquently sentimental to our significant other.  Wow, did you notice how that term significant other seemed to steal all the heart out of Valentine's Day?  Oh, well, I have been know to rain on every parade at one time or another. 

The saint we celebrate on Valentine’s Day, the Saint Valentine of Rome, is but one of a dozen or more individuals named Valentine in the annals of Christendom.  The name derives from “Valentinus”—from the Latin word for worthy, strong or powerful.  It was a popular name through the eighth century and several martyrs from the 2nd - 8th centuries bore that name. The official Roman Catholic roster of saints lists a dozen or so Valetines including St. Valentine Berrio-Ochoa, a Spaniard of the Dominican order who was a bishop in Vietnam until his beheading in 1861. He was canonized by Pope John Paul II in 1988 (so obviously the day is not named after him). History records a Pope Valentine who served a mere 40 days around 827 AD (so most likely it was not him either).  A flower-adorned skull of St. Valentine is on display in the Basilica of Santa Maria in Cosmedin, Rome. It came from an excavation of a catacomb near Rome in the 1800s.  This led to bits and pieces of those remains being distributed throughout Europe and the UK.

The day was not observed until the fourteenth century.  Medieval English poet Geoffrey Chaucer seems to invented the day in his work “Parliament of Foules.”  The poem references to February 14 as the day birds (and humans) come together to find a mate. Chaucer wrote, “For this was sent on Seynt Valentyne’s day / Whan every foul cometh ther to choose his mate.” This is probably the start of the day, though not of the saint.  St. Valentine is thought to have been a real person who died around 270 AD but that is not without some controversy.  In 496 by Pope Gelasius I described the martyr and his acts as “being known only to God.” Later accounts (from the 1400s) identify him as a temple priest beheaded near Rome by the emperor Claudius II, allegedly for assisting Christian couples to marry.  Or he could have been Bishop of Terni, also martyred by Claudius II on the outskirts of Rome.  You can see why they are thought to have been the same person.  The confusion, however, led Rome to banish him from the calendar in 1969 even though he remains on the list of officially recognized saints.

Anyway, it took the shift from agape to eros to put this day on our calendars and turn it into a booming commercial success, at least for the florists, chocolatiers, and jewelers.  Alas, no one seems to care about the faith of the saint anymore.  The only thing that is on the minds of most folks is love -- the kind that arouses rather than inspires.  So perhaps it is better no Valentine lays claim to the day or what it turned into and we cannot accurately assess its origin either.  And you may have thought that Christmas was stolen from the Church!  The images of chubby little cherubs and arrows shot through the heart have little value as symbols of the faith but they have done remarkably well to turn an obscure day into one that is forgotten at your own peril.  Happy St. Valentine's Day.

 

Not for women and children any longer. . .

There is great surprise to the fact that religion, specifically orthodox Christianity, is undergoing a revival among those who had, at one point, decided that religion had to be jettisoned in order to achieve a more educated and enlightened estate.  Religion was associated with those who were backwards, uneducated, superstitious, rural, and weak.  It was natural, at that time, to suggest that women, children, and the aged were the most likely to need any sort of religion.  That is now changing.

An argument could be made that even among those who saw themselves as too smart or too well-educated to need religion did not abandon religion but simply switched from the God of traditional religions to the gods of technology, education, pleasure, science, and progress.  Of course, they would demur.  That does not make this suggestion wrong but it simply affirms the fact that those who worked hard to rid themselves of religion were not going to quickly admit that they had merely switched allegiance and were still dependent upon some form of deity.

Across Europe as well as in the US, there is a resurgence of religion and, particularly, orthodox Christianity, among the young, males, and even the educated.  It could be said that even among the most secular of Western nations and societies, there is the surprising renewal of faith among a people who had long thought to have been post-Christian.  There is hope, at least, that the light has not completely been extinguished.  Young people and especially young men are showing up more and more in congregations of conservative, orthodox, Christian congregations.  This is not an anecdotal reality but something which has been documented in poll and survey.

What does this mean?  That is, after all, the Lutheran question.  While I would like to admit that it is due to the vibrant and profound Christian witness proceeding from the Church and the effect of the witness of the Christian life among the people of God, there is another cause.  All the hope and euphoria once associated with science, technology, and progress have been dashed of late as well.  The struggles of life in Covid and afterwards cannot be minimized.  The loneliness that our digital connections has fed more than satisfied is another factor.  The uncertainty of the cost versus benefit of AI (artificial intelligence) must not be written off.  The demise of the global world and of a world marketplace to satisfy and improve the lot of all people is no longer universally held.  Education has become a niche market with degrees that do not translate into jobs or richer lives and this has contributed to the desire for something more than what universities offer of the human dream.  

We may not have contributed to the demise of the things that were once a solid wall keeping religion out of the public square but we can surely capitalize on the desire for something more than what progress failed to fulfill.  If that is the case, we will need to be better catechized and offer the world a compelling reality and not simply an idea.  Christian communities along with the Christian witness are needed.  Nobody is making headway into once secular haunts of the world by presenting a watered down version of Christianity or the God who lives only in an idea.  The world is looking not simply for the transcendent but also for the means to connect with the transcendent.  It is looking for Biblical preaching, music that serves the Word, and sacramental worship in which the mystery of God is heralded more than explained away.  The world is looking for not simply a private faith but a worldview that defines and determines how a person fits into the world.  It is not looking for an echo chamber for the latest idea or trend but for the faith of the ages, the truth that endures forever, and the worship service that transcends time and reality with the Divine.  The world will not be convinced by Sunday Christians who leave their faith at the door when they make their way back home anymore than it will be challenged by a digital reality that lives only on the screens.  It will not be transformed by threat or compelled by fear but will be given pause by the power of love that speaks the truth and attempts to live by it in thought, word, and deed.  I wish I could say that we Christians have given the world such a profound witness that we are being given a second look but I am fairly certain that it is the breakdown of the world and its vaunted institutions that has caused them to give Christianity a second look.  Let us not disappoint them.