The Strength and Weakness of our Church

The strength and weakness of our church (meaning here the Missouri Synod, but perhaps applicable across the spectrum) is the congregation.  When the congregation is strong, imbued with the Confessional identity of her Concordia, organized to maintain and extend this Confession, with a practice that extends from this Confession, and with an unequivocal commitment to Scripture as God's infallible Word that does what it promises, then the church body is strong -- no matter the lacking in her national leaders or the problems identified there.  When the congregation is weak, distant from her Confession, concerned more about self-care than witness, with a practice that is unrelated to her Confessions, and with a viewpoint of Scripture that either undermines its truthfulness or treats it largely as a book of facts, propositions, and truths, then it does not matter how strong the leadership of the church body, the whole thing is weak.

A national leadership cannot save a congregational church body from the weaknesses of her congregations but a national leader who holds up this truth, who speaks it boldly, and who enthusiastically encourages her congregations to a Confessional renewal, can and will make it possible for those congregations to reexamine their life, belief, and practice in the light of those Confessions.

Though sometimes we Pastors are loathe to hear it, whether you are in a church body like the Roman Catholic Church with a highly centralized structure and authority or a very congregational church body like the Missouri Synod, the strength of the Church is always around one altar, one pulpit, one font, one people, and one Pastor. 

So for those who think that a change in national leadership will save a church body, I am sad to tell you, "No, he will not."  For those who believe that we can continue with so many of our congregations doing their own thing, understanding their faith their own way, and Pastors leading them without a connection to the faith confession in the Book of Concord, we cannot continue on this path or it will surely lead us to destruction and the disintegration of the very church body we claim to love and in which we serve.

The goal on the local level is clearly a renewed identity, flowing from our Confessions, shaped by these Confessions in both appearance and practice, led by national leaders whose vision and witness lead us to have confidence in these Confessions and encourage us to live out this identity with boldness in mission and faithfulness as a community.

Every Sunday morning I think about this.  The whole of the Missouri Synod (or any other church body) is only as strong as what will happen here at 8:15 and 10:45 am, when the baptized people of God will gather in His name to hear His Word, receive His gifts, and respond with prayers, praise, service, and sacrifice.  It is my hope and prayer that in every congregation throughout our church body, Pastors are rising today with the same sense of urgency, importance, and calling.  For it is here that the battle for our life and identity as a church body is waged first and foremost and only by extension in the structures of a larger regional or national level.

Can we not agree?

On another forum, where discussion revolves around what is Lutheran, a question of what is NOT Lutheran came up.  You know the old story of pornography and the court -- the judge who said "I cannot describe it but I know it when I see it."  It might be difficult for someone positively to identify what is Lutheran, but surely it would be easier to say what is NOT Lutheran (I know it when I see it).  But, alas, it seems it is just as difficult for some to describe what Lutheranism is not as it is to describe what Lutheran is.

We Lutherans should be in a better position to answer these questions -- better than a Presbyterian or Methodist or Anglican -- since we are a confessional Church.  We have a book of Confessions that speak over time and in every age the same tenets of what is believed and what is condemned.  Because of this book of Confessions, we are less subject to the opinions or feelings or trends of the age or moment but more anchored and grounded in words that speak clearly.  At least you might think so.

What has happened is that the clear words of those Confessions have become merely a starting point for discussion and not a ending point of our statement of what we believe, teach, and confess.  Much as what has been done with Scripture over time, has been done by Lutherans to their own Confessions.  For example, just as easily as it is for a church body to say about what Scripture clearly says But that is not what it means so it is easy for Lutherans to read their Confessions and then insist But that is not what it means,

As an example, the Confessions speak of Scripture not as a book, or rules, or knowledge, or principles, but the living voice of God who speaks and things happen (as He did in creation).  Yet Lutherans have tried to adopt the Fundamentalist  understanding of a word that is primarily a set of propositions that must be accepted and believed.  Or Lutherans have learned the language of the Evangelicals in order to speak of Scripture as a guide book toward better marriages, better children, better families, better jobs, better life today.  Scripture has  become a motivational book, a psychology text, and inspirational story which you can apply to your life to achieve your hopes and dreams.  Or Lutherans have learned the language of the Protestant mainline folks who use Scripture as a principle of love, acceptance, tolerance, and freedom to justify things that stand in radical opposition to the clear word of the text of the Bible.  So, therefore, the Gospel principle is used to reshape morality, identity, and Christian purpose in this world with justice, liberation, and advocacy replacing the proclamation of forgiveness, life, and salvation in Christ.

We might also speak of worship in the same way.  Where the Confessions speak conservatively of the form of the Western Mass (the Ordo) as being that which is not abolished but observed with greater devotion than their opponents and of the keeping of ceremonies and ritual and church usages (the Church Year for example) that do not distract from or deny the Gospel, Lutherans have heard generic principles to justify just about everything.  The Great Commission and the need to fill the pews has led some Lutherans to do whatever works on Sunday morning.  Others have made personal preference for content and style as the major criteria for what happens on Sunday morning so that the music sounds like what folks hear on the radio and do what they do in the movie theater or in front of the TV -- watch.  Others have made the drama of the liturgy its most important point and do a fine job with aesthetics yet without confidence that the liturgy is the means of grace (where the Word and Sacrament do what they can and have been established to do and impart to us Jesus Christ and all His gifts).

Or we might speak of the way Lutherans talk of ministry as if it had nothing to do with the Office appointed by Christ to impart the means of grace, the Word and the Sacraments, and more to do with what people like to do, feel they can do well, and therefore must be given a place to do (generally within the Sunday morning setting).

Or we might speak of music as the servant of the Word now become at least as important as the Word or even more important than the Word so that how something sounds to the folks in the pews becomes determinative of its use more than what it says.

So if we know it when we see it, we should also know it when we do not see it.  At least you'd think so.  And this is the crisis of our Lutheran Church today -- that our understanding of what is Lutheran and what is not has shifted away from the Confessions and dwells more in the realm of personal identity, choice, and preference.  What we like is Lutheran and what we don't like is not.

For about 50-60 years, Lutherans have been in a period of confessional and liturgical renewal that has born much fruit.  We have rediscovered our evangelical and catholic identity by seeing who we are and how that is manifest on Sunday morning through the lens of the Confessions.  With all of this rediscovery and its renewal of our faith and life, we have Lutherans shopping in surrounding churches for what looks or feels good to them (or what they think will improve the numbers).  I am sad that we are willing to jettison what we have spend decades rediscovering.  I am sad that we have elevated earthly success over faithfulness in doctrine and practice.  I am sad that what we are left with is such a confusing mess, that Lutherans are doing what seems good in their own eyes and the rest of us cannot even agree on what should NOT be done in the name of Lutheran, much less what SHOULD be done...

Congregational Governance

Missouri has probably more congregations still using the voters system of congregational governance that other Lutherans -- by this I mean voters without a council or board of directors.  My home congregation still uses a voters systems with trustees and elders as the only committees and nearly all decisions major or minor are made by the assembled all male voters.  I am sure they are in a minority but that is the system they still keep.

On the other hand I know of congregations using modified board of directors structures with but one congregational wide meeting annually.  The business is mostly electing and adopting a budget or spending plan.  The rest of the business of the congregation is handled either by church staff or these board of directors (generally acting in terms of larger principles, goals, or policies and not in specific business items).
 
Somewhere in the middle are the myriad of forms of governance with voters who meet for certain questions or functions and a church council that is made up of directors or chairpeople (what a weird word) who represent specific areas of responsibility (evangelism, education, stewardship, property, music, youth, etc.).

There are even some congregations (some tending to the charismatic end of things and some involved with things like TCN) where the congregations attempt an apostolic style group of twelve elders appointed as a spiritual counsel with Pastors who function like the head elder and the CEO of the business of the congregation.  Some will probably comment on this but I am sure the numbers of congregations using this are small.

For all the cyber ink spilled in this area, most people in the pew are not all that interested in governance.  This is attested to by the nearly universal problem in finding people to accept nomination to office and the complaints by many of how few folks actually show up at the voters meetings. I was once asked if I would attend voters meetings if I were not the Pastor and I had to beg off speculative answers (translate that, NO).

That said, a few observations might be in order.  Voters meetings, like constitutions, become important only when there is conflict or a big issue facing folks.  Building, buying, calling, or a hymnal issue is surely able to bring out a decent crowd.  And this is how it should be -- when facing big issues we all chip in and work through to the answer (with the hope that all of us share the goal of the best of the Church and its ministry and not some other agenda).

Speaking of agenda, the problem with voters meetings is the agenda.  Some meetings drone on repeating things that were previously published in the newsletter, announced in the bulletin, and read out loud in oral reports.  Why do we drone on endlessly repeating what has already been said?  It is no wonder people judge these meetings as unimportant or redundant.  The other problem is the lack of an agenda.  When there is no agenda, the agenda is either complaint or display or oratorical rhetoric or, my favorite, in the church I grew up in or used to belong to or across town they. . . .   In a time when people see their lives are busy and their time as one of their most precious commodities, let us at least do them the favor of an agenda and moving the meeting along to its announced purpose and then adjourn.

The last point is also about the agenda -- the agenda of some who come to meetings for but one purpose:  to demonstrate their, ah, well, as Pastor Weedon put it so well, their gift of negativity.  I have sat through meetings that were simply forums for these nattering nabobs of negativity (cool line penned by William Safire for VP Spiro T. Agnew).  These folks have a complaint and have voiced it and had it answered over and over again but they did not like the answer and so they raise the ante by making it public.  Or these are folks who have complaints flowing from different areas of their lives but since there is no voters meeting at work or at school or in the neighborhood or in the community, they hijack the church's forum to voice their discontent on just about everything.  At these meetings we generally hope for few folks in attendance so that the negativity does not become the seed of a weed that takes over God's pasture in this place.  Just the opposite is the case.  It is at these meetings we need people who will vocalize their confidence in their Pastor and parish leaders, who will evangelically defend and support them, and who will counter the stream of negativity with the dam of kindness, hopefulness, and goodness.  When people with the, ah, gift of negativity, encounter such an outpouring of kindness and support, it provides a more profound and effective way of isolating this negativity instead of engaging it on its own terms and with the same style.

All in all it might we may lament the lower attendance at meetings than in the past, but, as one member who does NOT attend put it... I do not attend because I believe that the people elected are capable and faithful, I have plenty of information provided to me on what was decided and why, I believe that you are a good Pastor, and I trust in the wisdom and decisions of you all for my church.  He was trying to turn his non-attendance into a vote of confidence in the way things are going... and, though some might not see it this way, he was correct in his thinking.  He did have confidence in his Pastor and elected leaders and this was the reason he did not attend.

So I am not as excited by low attendance at voters meetings as I am those within the congregation who are regularly absent from the Lord's Table, distant from the Bible study and teaching opportunities provided by the parish, and not involved in the work of the kingdom that goes forth in this place and from this place.  This is the area where I think we need to focus our attention in my parish and in most parishes across the Synod...

Three or One -- a Tale of Two Lectionaries

While nearly all the world has joined the bandwagon for a version of the three year lectionary originally prepared by the Roman Catholics flowing from the changes to the liturgy in Vatican II, Missouri still has a deep and bitter divide over the historic one year lectionary and the three year ecumenical lectionary.

The LSB includes one liturgical year with its three year pattern of observances of festivals and seasons which began life as a revision of the 1969 Ordo Lectionum Missae, flowing from the reforms of the Second Vatican Council which had been itself revised by the ILCW and LBW.  Then it was revised again by LW and then the final revision in its form in LSB.

The LSB also includes another liturgical year with a one year pattern of observances of festivals and seasons.  Revisions to the one-year lectionary used in TLH and LW were very minor. The historic Gospels remain intact. Likewise, all of the historic Epistles are included. In a few cases, however, an alternate Epistle is provided. Since the historic lectionary did not have assigned Old Testament readings, the Old Testament readings that relate closely to the Holy Gospel were added. In addition, they attempted to provide a balanced selection of the various genres of Old Testament readings (e.g., prophetic writings, historical narrative).  Full propers have been prepared for the one-year lectionary, including a psalm and verse of the day, expanded introits, and hymn suggestions for each Sunday and festival.

Some are adamant about one or the other.  I will admit to being torn between then.  While I like the idea of a consistent set of texts repeated and therefore more familiar and (hopefully) known by the people, I have used the three year lectionary for 30 years and have become accustomed to its strengths and quirks.  While I enjoy the generally friendly debate over one or the other, what I do not like is that some have made this a sign or test of orthodoxy.  I actually have had Pastors tell me that they were disappointed in me and felt that I had failed my liturgical identity and confession by using the three year lectionary.  As I say, I have mixed feelings about both but certainly would not condemn a choice for one or the other even if it were different from the choice I have made.

It seems that the majority of parishes and Pastors of the LCMS use the three year lectionary.  It is the one CPH supports with most of its resources and I can only imagine that they looked at this from a marketing perspective and found that supporting the one year lectionary in this way was not cost effective.  Still, those who use the one year series have put together everything from a Facebook group to a set of bulletin covers that reflect the themes of the "historic" lectionary.

Whether we like it or not, both are churchly choices and in keeping with our identity and faith as evangelical, catholics of the Augsburg Confession.  I would hope that this might be remembered when we make our judgments of those who may differ with us over the choice of lectionary to use.  I may well go back to the one year series at some point in time... I do not know... but I certainly delight in the myriad of themes, lessons, and passages that a Christian will hear over a three year cycle.  I guess the cost of this is the loss of the wonderful though largely misunderstood names for the Sundays (especially the gesimas)...  One loss I lament most of all is the fact that my volume of Healy Willan propers has become a relic of sorts since this has little connection to the three year series.

Struggling with the Catechism

Luther's explanation to the second article includes:  That I may be His own and live under Him in His kingdom, and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness...  The first part of that is easy enough since we all want to belong to the Lord, to have a place of refuge to run to like running home to mom and dad, and so that He can fight all my battles for us... but that is not where it stops.  In fact, the problem with this is that the that I may be His own  is defined by the "and" -- namely -- live under Him in His kingdom, and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness...

This is the problem... I may want a place to run to for solace when the things of my life become too big for me to face or bear or handle on my own but to live under Him in His Kingdom and serve Him in righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, this is a problem.  I may want a place to run to when I need to but normally I want God to come at my beck and call, to do my bidding, to provide for me what I want, and to fix my slip ups.  It is not God's kingdom that I want to live in but God to come into my kingdom and make it mine -- so that I may be the lord I want to be, ruler of all that is mine and definer of my own destiny.  This is the rub.  I want God to live under me -- a reliable and faithful genie to grant me my wishes and fulfill my commands.

And then there are those words so foreign to our vocabulary.... righteousness, innocence, and blessedness.  I do not want to be righteous -- except for a few moments out of the week in Church or perhaps when I am caught in my own guilt and shame... but really, if I wanted righteousness I would be a Pharisee.  I know Pharisees, and, let me tell you, Larry is no Pharisee.  I am a publican and a sinner who frets about admitting it -- either to God or to those around me.  My heart has not sought after righteousness and when I am righteous it is because I am forced to be.  My heart is stained with the sinful desires that will not go away and will not be silenced.  I want the Lord to be my righteousness precisely so that I do not have to be righteous myself.  Yet what Luther is telling me is that if the Lord is my righteousness, I am to live under Him IN righteousness...

Innocence?  I may be naive about some things and stupid about others and downright ignorant of other things... but I am not innocent.  I deal with a devious nature that seeks to set up things and set up people so that I look good.  I think about how I look as much as how I should look to others.  I may not be smooth and savvy at evil like some are but even if I am not slick it does not mean I am innocent.  Luther's explanation of the eighth commandment is a daily haunt -- to put the best construction on everything?!  That is what my heart does not want to do.  I delight in the spicy details of the foibles of those I do not like and even do not know.  No, innocence may be my calling but guilt, duplicity, and guile are things I know too very well.

Blessedness...gadfry what does that word mean anyway?  Blessed are the.... what does that mean -- happy are the, say, poor in spirit?  Happy?  Content?  At peace?  My heart can be a raging river of discontent.  Sometimes I am an enemy of every one and everything because I am also my own enemy.  Peace is my prayer but how can you have peace when you look in the mirror every morning and see exactly who you are and who you are not?  Peace, peace, there is no peace.... that is the Bible passage for my day.  You know the old expression s_ _ _  happens -- well I know its truth only too well.  I count on it.  I am surprised when the day goes well.  Blessedness is not an apt description of me and my heart.

If you want to know how I read the Catechism, this is how I read it.  Its words both convict and encourage me.  They speak to my heart exposing the hidden evil within to the light of God's Son and provide me the agenda for my work with the Spirit to repent, change, transform, and become the new and different person that my Lord has declared me to be in my baptism.

Where is the Gospel in this?  Where it always is.  The Gospel is Jesus Christ... the Jesus who is for me in His incarnation, suffering, death and resurrection and in me applying His gifts and grace and supplying me with the power of His grace to do what I cannot by my own reason or strength... from the faith that first believes and hopes to the change that is His work and the fruit of His Spirit present within me just as He has promised. 

Which Jesus Christ?  The Jesus Christ that is true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the virgin Mary, is my Lord, who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned person, purchased and won me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil; not with gold or silver, but with his holy, precious blood and with his innocent suffering and death...Every day when I realize who I am apart from Christ I am driven into the arms of Him who claims me as His own and into the power of the Spirit who can do what I cannot... Everyday is a struggle to say with confidence and trust... that in addition to the picture of me that I know is so real and true, there is another vision of me to see through the eyes of the Father and the blood of His Son and for me to believe that this image of me is as true of me as is the image I see in the mirror of my sin.  And then to trust what God has declared to be true even more than what my conscience knows to be true of me...  "This is most certainly true..."

A Changing Question

Where once the greatest question before a young man or young woman was "Who would be the best life partner?" the question today might well be "Who would be the best sex partner?"  We have seen things that were once not discussed in polite conversation become the whole premise of movies and TV shows.  We have seen the strange and the weird paraded as just another normal on the likes of Jerry Springer and others.  We have seen the internet turned into a pornography machine only now eclipsed by the social networking sites (which have a component of public display, video, and erotic connection as well).  We have seen the cell phone turned into a sexual toy (with both sexting and photo/video components).  We have seen the age of first sexual experience decline among youth with, what some polls say, is a sixth month difference between practicing Christians and non-Christians. We have seen STDs become commonplace and even the dread of aids has done little to discourage frequent and rampant promiscuity.  We have watched the talk shows that say sex is the most important indicator or factor in the happiness of a couple (but may not have much effect upon fidelity or longevity of a marriage).  We have seen it all and still more is unfolding that will shock us at first and then, at some point, become mainstream enough so that it is accepted.

But it seems the aging sex goddess Raquel Welch has raised the red flag to say all that we have seen is not good and in fact it is preventing what we desire most underneath and what is in the best interest of society as a whole -- a stable, loving, caring marriage in which children are conceived and nurtured in this love.  She blames at least some of it on the promise (a false one) of safe sex divorced from responsibility, commitment, and love.  She complains that "nobody can keep it in their pants," and why not?  With sexual pleasure the highest of goals, with more and more folks of all ages hooking up and cohabiting, with fewer and fewer children born, with the news filled with the sexual escapades of societies political and sports heroes, with cheap and reliable means of preventing pregnancy and disease... and with fewer and fewer people offering any compelling reason why not to give in to desire... we are left with dealing with the effects of our self-indulgence.

In the face of this, there are churches that haul out the chancel furniture (so to speak) in order to put a bed on display and then have a series of sermons on "how to" make sex better (I wonder what texts in Scripture are butchered in pursuit of proofs for these theses).  In the face of this, there are churches fearing that if they get too far behind the learning curve of society they will be irrelevant and so they work to incorporate the changing views of culture into the fabric of the faith as quickly as possible (witness the haste in adapting to gay and lesbian marriage and homosexual clergy with their accompanying rites and blessings).

Nevertheless, I am encouraged when people who were poster children for the early days of the sexual revolution sit up and take notice of where this road has led us.  Giving into desire was the first path of sin and still is the path to our destruction.  Not every desire is good, not all that is possible is beneficial, and the path of Christian life is one of self-control and not self-realization or freedom.  We have used what technology has provided us and turned this into the toxic drug the dark alley that feeds our insatiable desire yet never delivers to us what we want and need most -- love, acceptance, companionship, caring, friendship, honesty, fidelity, and family.  For these, the Creator's wisdom is still the right answer.  And the Church dare not abandon this truth for the sake of the changing whims of self-indulgence that parade as freedom when they are but license to self-destruction...

Tribulation from the World, Peace from Christ

Sermon preached for Easter 6, Sunday, May 9, 2010.

     I must admit that I get a billion and a half of those tear jerking emails that show you some sentimental picture and tell how a smile changed somebody’s day.  Although I suppose it is true to some degree, most of the people whom I speak to as Pastor are not smiling and a smile will not change the mountain of hurt or pain that has touched their lives.  No matter how much I want to smile it away, I cannot – not for my family whom I love or for members of this church family.  Tribulation is part and parcel of life in this world.  And a smile cannot erase that tribulation.  Now don’t get me wrong I have nothing against smiling, I am all for it; it is just that we need much more.
    We often assume that peace on the inside comes from peace on the outside of our lives.  In other words, if our lives are good, if the job is good, if the money is good, if health is good, if things are going well, then we will be good.  But I am here to tell you that the river of peace flows in the opposite direction – not from things outside in but from the inside, from Christ who lives within us by baptism and faith, flowing outside to the tribulations and trials of our lives.
    Peace does not flow from the outside in but from the inside out.  From the Christ placed into the heart by the Spirit working in baptism; from the heart to the rest of our lives.  Amazingly those who have the most to complain about on the exterior of their lives are often those who possess the greatest peace on the inside.  And the other way around; those with things going their way on the outside are empty of peace on the inside.  I say to you that you cannot wait for life to be good to be happy, to have peace, to be content.  Peace comes from Christ and his peace is still while turmoil, trials, and tribulation rage on around us.  Where Christ is, there is our peace.
    In the Gospel for today, we heard Jesus preparing His disciples for His death, resurrection and ascension.  The day will come when you will not seem Me. The disciples had grown used to Jesus presence with them.  The things that they had seen and heard were upsetting to them but having Jesus there in front of their eyes was comforting.  His presence was the source of their peace.  But Jesus prepares them for the day when this will change.  Though Jesus will no longer be visibly present, His gift of peace will still be theirs.  They will see Him not with their eyes but with the eyes of faith.
    The day will come when you will be scattered and dispersed, says Jesus. In other words, the day will come when you will feel alone and not be able to find comfort in the presence of brothers or sisters in Christ.  But you will not be alone.  Jesus is telling them that they may not see this fellowship with their eyes but they have been bound together in the blood of Christ and nothing can steal this unity of faith from them.   Not even death!
    The day will come when you will face tribulation, says Jesus.  But even when it seems you  are under the gun and life has taken you down, you are not alone, not without the power and peace of God to sustain you in this trial.  Turmoil and trials will not depart from this life, but Jesus is still here with us and in us by baptism and faith.  He speaks peace in the face of tribulation.
    Despite appearances to the contrary, if we are in Christ, we are never alone, never without Christ’s presence and peace, never without the fellowship of believers to support and encourage us.  Where Christ is there is His peace. Where Christ lives in us by baptism and faith, we have His peace – no matter how difficult or upsetting our lives may be on the outside. Though the world be in turmoil, we have the peace of a cross where our sins are forgiven and an empty grave where the hope of everlasting life is born.
    We who live in Christ by baptism and faith have received the blessings and benefits of that cross and empty tomb.  We live in that perfect peace won for us by His saving death and life giving resurrection.  We are not the defeated who limp along in fear but the victorious in Christ who stand firmly rooted and grounded in Christ.  The victory is ours not because we see it or accomplish it but because He gives it to us by His death and resurrection.  The victory is ours not because life is smooth or easy but because we live in Christ and He lives in us.
    Don’t wait for your live to be good in order for you to be happy.  Don’t wait for your lives to be fair before you enjoy contentment.  Don’t wait for life to be comfortable or easy in order for you to know peace.  These things are yours not because your life is good on the outside, but because Christ lives in You and with Him the fullness of what His suffering, death, and resurrection has born.  It is a dangerous things to believe that when life is good, you will be okay.  Every one is okay when life is good.  You do not need God when life is good.  We need to know that we are good when the bottom drops out of our lives.
    Peace flows to you not because everything in your life is good.  Peace flows to you from Christ, from Christ into your heart by baptism and faith, and from there into the rest of your lives – whether or not the rest of your life ever becomes easy.
    Today we remember those who showed a mother’s love to us.  Their love freely given is a great gift.  Mom loves us, bears our struggles, is wounded with us in all our pains, and would do anything to make it better. It is a free gift from her but a painful for her.  Because she is willing to suffer the pain of loving us, we know her nurture, care, and peace.  So when you remember Mom today, give thanks for the love that loves you even when it hurts her.
    Where does such love come from?  Only from the God who loves us and is willing to bear the painful cost of that love.  The God who is wounded by our pain, bears our struggles as His own, carries all the weight of our sin, endures our death for us, and desires only what is good and beneficial for us... Peace is ours only because of such love come to us in Christ.  It is not the fruit of a good life but the gift of this unimaginable love shown to us in Christ... the pefect peace that passes all understanding is ours because He has overcome the world.  The peace that passes all understanding is ours because He has made us His, we belong to Him by baptism and faith, and He surrounds us with His love and care every day.  The peace that passes understanding is ours because still He lifts us up when we fall by the grace of forgiveness and feeds at the honored place of His table when we deserve nothing of this kindness.
    This day and this life will never be easy, but we live in Christ and peace is ours no matter what this life is like.  It flows from Christ to us by the gift of baptism and faith.  It is fed and nourished on the body and blood of Jesus.  It is our gift no matter where we go, what happens to us, or what tribulation befall us.  Peace is not the fruit of a life made perfect or successful in human terms but the fruit of His death and resurrection, gladly given to us in grace.  If Christ is ours, peace is ours.  Amen

And I thought I might get a little crazy and sing a little Zinzendorf.... boy am I out of it all...

This is definitely NOT your father's Zinzendorf....

And He set me on fire, and I am burning alive.
With His breath in my lungs I am coming undone.
And he set me on fire and I am burning alive.
With his breath in my lungs I am coming undone.
And I cannot hold it in
Remain composed.
Love's taken over me
So I propose the letting myself go.
I am letting myself go.

You are my joy.
You are my joy.
You are my joy.
You are my joy.

And He set me on fire, and I am burning alive.
With His breath in my lungs I am coming undone.
And He set me on fire, and I am burning alive.
With His breath in my lungs I am coming undone.
And I cannot hold it in and remain composed.
Love's taken over me and so I propose the letting myself go.
I am letting myself go.

You are my joy.
You are my joy.
You are my joy.
You are my joy.

I need to catch my breath, I need to.
I need to catch my breath, give me a moment now.

You are my joy.
You are my joy.
You are my joy.
You are my joy.

I'm laughing so hard
And I'm laughing so hard
And I'm laughing so hard

A Remarkble Dissonance

It occurs to me after reading Bro. Weedon's blogpost from the sainted O. P. Kretzmann that there is such a difference between the viewpoints of some on what constitutes parish success and failure (not always clear cut between clergy and lay).  This divergence is more than that -- a dissonance that seems to scream at us like the convergence of notes not intended to be played together, at the same time.

I speak here of success being defined as the faithfulness of the Lord in coming to us as He has promised in Word and Sacrament and the faithfulness of those who assembled at His bidding to receive these promised gifts.  Attendance is not everything but it is surely the minimal starting place for the people of God and for the Pastor who tends the flock.  Yet for too many of us attendance is secondary to other issues either equal to or perhaps great than attendance in importance. 

I was once told by a Lutheran Pastor that one should never presume that those who came to worship on Sunday were Christian and that a Pastor should preach to them as if they were the unconverted.  He discounted attendance every bit as much as the folks who deliberately and regularly absent themselves from the House of the Lord and His gifts imparted there.  It would seem to me that we must take those who attend at their word (or example) and preach to them exactly as if they are the people of God by baptism and faith, assembled in His name to receive the gifts of His promise in His Word and Table. 

I have been told over and over again by people believed that they worshiped better or easier or more meaningfully alone with the TV, with their Bible, with their quiet thoughts, with nature's beauty, with golf club or shot gun or soccer ball...etc.  Attendance is not everything, they say, nor should they be judged by their absences.  But surely attendance is the base level of our commitment to the Lord.  It may not be everything but it is at least the minimum.

I am told by those who chart these things and those who are experts in church growth that the welcome given to people and the friendliness of the congregation is one of -- if not the most important -- factors in the success of a congregation (translate that growth).  Now I know something of cold congregations and I am not unsympathetic to this unwelcoming atmosphere but surely what is believed, proclaimed, and taught out to count for something, something at least as important as if not, dare I say, more important than friendliness?! 

I was told by a longtime Lutheran family that joined the Mormons that their decision was based not on what was believed or taught but on the perception that the Mormons lived what they believed more so than the Lutherans they had known from childhood to early middle age.  They recounted to me the many youth, family, and social activities the Mormons had going.  They spoke to me of how they had something for everyone, for every situation in life, and for every interest.  They adored the way the Mormons demonstrated their friendliness in ways that the cold and distant Lutherans had never done.  "What about the Nicene Creed? Baptism? The Lord's Supper?" but before I even got going on my questions, "If I had to choose between friendliness and acceptance and the right doctrine, I chose someplace that makes me feel at home..."  Okay.

I could go on... but somewhere along the way the standards of judgment for what constitutes a faithful Pastor and a faithful congregation changed... I am not advocating cold Pastors or cold congregations.  I am not saying that as long as people are in Church on Sunday morning everything else is okay.  But gee whiz... doesn't attendance count for something... and doesn't doctrine and truth rank higher than a warm welcome?

There are always reasons, extraneous circumstances, and justifications.... but it seems we have reshaped the Church of Acts 2:42-46 and I am afraid this Church is not the same one to which Pentecost gave birth... Or maybe I am just wrong...

A Distasteful Subject

I just got a packet in the mail from the District Office... it is about the subject we either hate to talk about (most all of us Pastors) or we love to talk about (the strange few who put out this stuff)... it was a STEWARDSHIP packet.... Ggggggggaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh!

There are aspects of the parish ministry I do under duress and aspects I would do without pay and aspects that make me want to bury my head in the sand... Stewardship falls into the later category.  I have always believed that well fed parishioners will make good stewards... eventually.  It is a slow but deliberate process and yet I know that it will not do to avoid the subject... at some point we have to talk money (and not some smokescreen about gifts but about cash, cold hard cash).

I hate to talk about it because people hate to hear me talk about it.  Stewardship is the urgent subject that we avoid like a colonoscopy -- (my fav joke about it "Hey! Now I know how a Muppet feels!").  Alas, I have few jokes about stewardship because it is easier to laugh about what happens in a colonoscopy than it is to find humor in stewardship (the only one I know I can tell is "The good news is that we have all the money we need for the Church.  The bad news is that it is all in your pockets.").

The Bible studies cover the same ground over and over again.... stuff belongs to God not to you... it is yours to manage not to possess... we are given it to use for His glory and purpose and not to indulge ourselves... God blesses us when we return to Him what He as given us... giving is a privilege and not a duty... God wants a cheerful giver... establishing the right priorities about our stuff is a key to contentment and peace... etc...

Some of the programs are new -- we have the District Consecrated Stewards program which is like a capital campaign but without the big cause and with pledging toward the budget/general fund instead of a building project or something similar... but it runs the same predictable path of Bible studies, calls, dinner, pledge, and reap the rewards... and this did not work so well our last capital campaign...

Our Financial Secretary noted once that when I preach on money (even when it comes up naturally in the lectionary) the offering goes down... hint... the rule on money is preach less, receive more...

So the big test of the morning is whether or not I will get up enough courage to open the envelope from District clearly marked STEWARDSHIP... or maybe I will postpone this to tomorrow...

Yep, that is what I will do... I will see how I feel tomorrow...

Mothers Day...

With all due respect to the moms out there... the day on the Church Calendar that fits Mother's Day best in the Church is August. 15...

Look it up...

Quiet Time

I am guilty of enjoying music... I listen online, I listen to my cds, I listen to Sirius XM, I listen to radio... But there are wonderful moments of silence... when all the media is turned off...  Sunday morning from about 5-6:30 am is one of those times... time for silence without interruption...

I expect we do not value silence much.  At most restaurants you can hardly talk for the loudness of the music and atmosphere around you.  The retail establishments play music or some sort of sound tracks continually.  It is hard to find a place to enjoy silence without the cell phone going off, the land line going off, the TV on in the background, the sound of motorcycle tearing up the highway, or a deep bass pumping out rhythm at the stoplight.

I grew up listening to the sounds of silence extolled in music that was not so silent.  Today kids are apt to equate silence with boredom and being bored is the greatest of all modern day sins.

We offer few silent moments in worship -- largely because people do not know what to do with them and assume somebody forgot their part...  but silence can be a very fruitful time... Growing up we would often sit in the Sanctuary before the service and it would be silent.  I sort of liked that.  Though now I think many would find it eerie.  We often manufacture sound to fill in the quiet gaps that we cannot accept.

I love the early hours of the morning simply because of the quiet... the street out side my office is still rather quiet, no one is calling, the building only occasionally creaks, and I have turned off all the sound devices in my office... It does not seem lonely but rich, not empty but full...

I like silence in particular for thinking, for reading, and for praying... before the Divine Service (twice this Sunday) and a Bible class and a thousand questions and comments and organ and voice... just a little silence to think and pray... surely we would do well to recapture a love of and time for silence in our lives...   

The Hijacking of the Church Year

Once again our parish council dealt with but another request for an "Emphasis Sunday" by a parachurch organization (RSO to use the Missouri lingo).  We have a District Sunday coming up and a Synod Sunday, and we could have an emphasis Sunday from some aspect of Synod's structure or a worthy cause literally every week.  It is without end.  We are inundated with full color bulletin inserts and dvds of PowerPoint presentations and video and posters.  It is a never ending stream of worthy causes with all their PR to back up their claims of need and importance and urgency.  I am not suggesting that any of these are anything less than they say.  My question has to do with the Church Year.

Tomorrow is Mother's Day is most of our churches (good fall on the calendar since most Pastors are not so sure the 6th Sunday of Easter is all that important anyway).  And a week from now the Sunday after the Ascension will become Armed Forces Sunday and later this month the Holy Trinity will compete with Memorial Day. I could continue the list but I won't.  The sanctoral calendar is one step below the Sundays of the Season and the Sundays of the Season have to compete with the secular calendar and the "Emphasis Sundays" that come to us from myriad of sources within the Church.

The point is that it is no wonder that the Church Year is so foreign to the life of God's people.  It did, after all, come to us from the calendar of feasts and festivals for Israel, transformed by the events in the life of the Lord and the ordinary time devoted to the teaching of Jesus.  But it is so very distant from us and from our lives in part because of the many things that displace, complete with, or detract from the Church Year and the sanctoral calendar.

We try to minimize them in this parish and we do have a monthly mission emphasis for our Sunday school offerings (of adults and children) that does include some of these causes.  But we have deliberately chosen NOT to have them on Sunday morning.  We follow the Church Year and the calendar of our congregation is the Church's calendar.  Now mind you, we have taken some hits from this.  Even within our own District there have been a few folks who thought us petty because we do not have District Sunday or Synod Sunday.  We include a very significant sum from our general offerings for this (about 10% of our income) and we believe that this is the better way than having appeals and spokespersons for these causes every week.

We do have people who find it cold or callous that we do not hand out roses on Mother's Day and sing "Faith of our Mothers Living Still" (no joke, some churches do change the words for this day) and some complain that we are not patriotic because we do not have a color guard bring in the flag on Memorial Day or when the Fourth of July falls on a Sunday (this year).  So it is not without some heat within our own pews that we keep the Church calendar as this church's calendar.

I am curious as to how others handle these requests, the secular calendar, and the myriad of emphasis Sundays... let me know

Doom and Gloom and Not

If you read some of the blogs and follow up on things -- even here, perhaps -- it is easy to get the impression that things are very bad in the Church of Jesus Christ and that it is time for another Great Reformation or else the whole thing will go to hell in a handbag... as they say...

Let me say that for all the things I address that are not as they should be, I am not a doom and gloom person.  I do not spend my time wringing my hands and shaking my head in dismay.  Sure, some things confound, confuse, and conflict me.  Sure, I get frustrated and even weary -- but that is not most of the time nor is it even much of the time.  For all the things that we might lament here on this blog or in other forums and for all those who might believe it is time to leave a singing ship or head out in the sea of faith in a lifeboat, I am not one of them.

I know that the vast majority of parishes in my Synod and in the Church as a whole are people gathered around the Word and Sacrament of the Lord.  There may be liturgical problems, theological issues, ministry troubles, and fellowship cracks that all pull against the fabric of the Church but that fabric was woven not by the words or actions of man -- that fabric was woven by the Lord through His Word that accomplishes His purpose and His Sacraments that bestow and nurture our life in His Kingdom.  This fabric is resilient and pulls back into its Divinely intended shape against the hands of man trying to distort or reshape what God has made.

The Church of Jesus Christ does not depend upon any of the structures of present day church bodies continuing as they are now or changing to be something different -- the Church is constituted by the Word of God calling, gathering, enlightening, and sanctifying the sinner to be His own child by baptism.  The Church is sustained and grows by that same Word that goes forth in the voices and actions of the people who have been marked in baptism's waters and set apart for their vocation as His priestly people who serve the world in His name.  The Church is nurtured by the Word of absolution that calls the fallen to come back and restores them by grace bigger than any sin and by the Table where every week the unworthy are called to the higher seat by the God whose love deigns to serve us when it should be the other way around.

I am buoyed and encouraged every week by standing in vestments as Christ to my people, knowing that Christ is working through me not as a holy man leading the unholy to become like him but as the God whose voice speaks through His unholy and unworthy servants and who has designed His Church to use sinful men as Pastors and agents of His amazing grace.  Every week I speak to those at the rail :"The Body of Christ for you n_____________" and they are fed both physically and spiritually on the incarnate grace of Jesus Himself.

I am not a doom and gloom personality.  I am not naive or foolish and do not minimize the problems and challenges before us but my confidence rests in the fact that the Church does not belong to Larry Peters or to any man (elected or appointed or not).  The Church belongs to Jesus Christ and He is the guarantor of her life, her holiness, her fruitfulness, and her faithfulness.  God is faithful.  He will do it.  His methods try my understanding but God has not called me to understand Him.  His ways test the limits of my reason but God never promised to be reasonable.  God is faithful, doing what He has promised through His Son, by the power of the Holy Spirit.  This is where my faith is deposited -- in God's faithfulness -- and this is the call to my faith -- to be faithful in trust to Him whose faithfulness bids me.

So you will hear some complaints from me and frustrations and some rants and raves and vents as well... but you will not hear doom and gloom.  If you do, send me an email linked to this post.  Because it is the Lord's Church we cannot ever give in to this doom and gloom... for it represents not merely a maximizing of the problems but a rejection of Christ's Lordship...

The Child Who Rises Up to Challenge the Parents

The numbers game is always a precarious one.  According to Wikilist of the ten largest Lutheran bodies, we have some impressive numbers.  That is, until you unpack them a bit...  I put under the churches and their size (listed in millions) some of the banter I hear about numbers -- not my own take but what others have said about those numbers... mostly to disparage them...


   1. Church of Sweden (6.75)
             Church attendance in Sweden is down about 5-10% on average...

   2. Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania (5.3)

   3. Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus (5.3)
             Some might legitimately ask about the accuracy of these African numbers...

   4. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (4.6)
             Where only half that number has communed in the past two years...
   5. Church of Denmark (4.5)
   6. Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland (4.5)
             The Danes and Finns have not much better attendance that Sweden...
   7. Protestant Christian Batak Church, Indonesia (4.2)
             We like to herald numbers like these to trumpet mission work but discount them too...
   8. Church of Norway (4.0)
              Slightly higher than Sweden's attendance
   9. Malagasy Lutheran Church (3.0)
              Again, a former mission, and our dilemma in unpacking these numbers...
  10. Evangelical Lutheran Church of Hanover, Germany (3.0)
              Well Germany is awash in full churches on Sunday morning, isn't it...

My point is that these numbers do not reflect the full story... those in Europe and America have some soft numbers, it is true, but the softest of those soft numbers is generally in Europe.  Former missions have now become strong partner churches but sometimes the very same people who trumpet the mission success of these churches downplay their size or vitality (or point to their financial dependence upon money from the US and Europe) in order to minimize the strength of their witness when they disagree with European and American Lutherans.

The big revelation is this -- on Sunday morning there are more Lutherans in Church in Africa than there probably are in Europe and America combined.  We have been talking about the vitality of our former Lutheran missions now partners for a long time but when it hits home like this, it gives us pause.  So when former missions rise up to complain about the recognition of same sex marriage or approval of gay and lesbian clergy (in PALMS), they represent not the viewpoint of one portion of Lutheranism but a very large portion of those active on Sunday mornings and the most vital areas of Lutheran life and identity.

Anglicans have long wrestled with this issue of former missions who now have the strength and stature to disagree with the mother churches in England and America.  Now we Lutherans are finding the same reality.  And this is the rub.  The very same people who wish to trumpet the success of these former missions are the ones who do not want to listen to what they have to say when they disagree with the direction of European and American Lutherans (ELCA in particular).

Lest those in Missouri smile smugly, we are not far behind.  The more that we embrace the Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Bill Hybels style of evangelical identity, the more we risk being theologically distant from those very church bodies we once nurtured as missions and now accept as partners.

Perhaps this is God's correction hand at work to remind us... we are not always who we think we are and those who were once our obedient children have risen up to challenge their muddled parents... and this is how it should be...

Service or Service

Paul McCain over at Cyberbrethren has posted a new story about a church in St. Louis that canceled services on Sunday morning in order to do service in the community.  There is nothing earth shattering in the video except one more completely mistaken idea about what we do on Sunday morning.

In comments you hear one woman suggest that putting a few cookies in a baggie and giving it to someone is more concrete and real than just "praying for them."  In another snippet you hear something to the effect that making a difference is what we are here for and not simply going to church.

So what have we learned?  Cookies are more powerful than prayer and that Sunday morning makes no difference.  Alas, we might take comfort that this congregation was not a Lutheran one -- except that there are Lutheran ones who feel like this might be a good idea and there are Lutherans who might voice their faith in exactly the same way we hear prayer and cookies compared.

I am going to skip over the prayer and cookies thing for now and comment only on the idea that what we do on Sunday morning makes no real difference in this world or for this life -- at least not in comparison to other forms of worship or the good works that we do in the world.  It is a sad reality when what we do on Sunday morning as the Church is seen as something which makes no difference.  It betrays a false understanding of why we gather, of what the Lord does among us, and of the import of what He does for this mortal life.

I have often heard people complain that nothing changed after worship -- that they were expecting a lightning bolt moment of revelation or understanding or spiritual clarity and all they got was sins forgiven and the pledge of eternal life.  I feel so bad for them -- not because they came away empty handed but because what was in their hands was of such little value to them.  It is for this reason that folks fall away from the faith and from their lives within the congregation.  It is for this reason that people shop churches looking for an experience new and different because they have grown tired and bored with the liturgy and the means of grace.  It is for this reason that congregation ditch the liturgy in favor of something inspiring, entertaining, and relevant (at least as the average non-church person might define them).

The problem is not with what the liturgy and the means of grace offer but how we value them.  We live in a world less of sin and its death than disorders of which we are not at fault and limits upon our happiness and quality and quantity of life which can be enlarged through spirituality, science, and technology.  We live in a world where forgiveness is less important than self-realization, where our identity flows more from getting what we want than changing the values resident in our hearts.  We live in a world where a few moments of do gooding fulfills our desire for meaningfulness, relevance, and spirituality -- more than the Word of God proclaimed and taught and the Sacrament of the Altar eaten and drunk in faith. We live in a world where people would quickly exchange the Divine Service of the God who comes to His people to bestow upon them His gifts for the feeling that I made a difference today.

This is a wake up call.  Our people are not so sure why they come or should come to Church on Sunday morning.  They have been taught by the values of the world around them that cookies are better than prayer and a lunch for a homeless shelter is the rough equivalent of feasting upon the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.  They have been taught that good works are the easy things you can do once in a blue moon, without really inconveniencing yourself or your life, and then you can get back to your me-centered life without guilt -- you make a difference and you did enough good to bypass the guilt path for a while.

I am not advocating a choice between Service and service -- they can and must go together and it is in the Service of God's House that we are equipped for the service to the world which God bids us do in His name.  I am not suggesting that Sunday morning without this service to neighbor is enough for us to barely get by the minimal expectations or requirements of God.  I am not saying that we should not be making lunch at the homeless shelter.  I am not saying we need to yell at people for being so shallow as to believe cookies and prayer are roughly equal or that there is something wrong with them because they have coming to worship for so long and they still do not know why they are there.

I am saying we who call ourselves Pastors have much to account for to God and much to do in preaching and teaching so that our people do not fall victim to such fallacies and false ideas.  I am saying that we need to speak about and model to our people the value of the Sunday gathering around the Word and Table of the Lord, what we receive there and what that grace is given for.  I am saying that we need to equip our people to know what it is they receive in the means of grace on Sunday morning, so that they might accurately value this grace given in Word and Sacrament, and that it might bear the fruit of good works in their lives because it has called them, gathered them in, enlightened them, and sanctified them  to be members of Christ's body by baptism and faith.

Another Slant on One of My Former Rants

Friend Pastor Wil Weedon has written a piece on church attendance that says some of what I should have said on my earlier post.  You can read about it HERE..... Good stuff!  HT to Fr. Weedon.

I have gifts and I want to use them...

Somewhere along the way something changed.  Serving the Lord because a right demanded and gifts became an obligation for the Church to find a place for such service.  I am not trying to pick on anyone but to raise a question about the shift in the way we approach things as a Church.

In a conversation at the Model Conference on Theology that dealt with matters of worship, a Pastor told me that he had people in his congregation who were gifted musicians and that they developed contemporary worship because they had people gifted in this area and they did not have anyone gifted as an organist.  He was quite adamant that these gifts drove the direction of his worship leadership.  They had gifted people and it was his belief that the congregation owed them a place to use their gifts in leading worship.

In a conversation about parish leaders, the same point was made.  We have women gifted in the area of leadership and deeply spiritual and therefore it is our duty to utilize those gifts.  His point was made with reference to women serving as Eucharistic ministers (during the distribution of Holy Communion), congregational Presidents, lectors, and elders.

When did the gifts drive the discussion?  If a person is a good reader, does that mean the Church is obligated to find a place for that person to read (usually in worship)?  If a person is a good tenor saxophonist, does that mean does that mean the Church is obligated to find a place for that person to play (usually in worship)?  Has the Church become one huge spiritual gifts director whose job it is to give people a chance to use their gifts front and center (usually in worship)?  Have gifts become the spiritual dollars burning a hole in our pockets so that we must find a way to spend them (usually in worship)?

I am not trying to be sarcastic here but am asking an honest question of the Church and those who lead her?  Is ministry or leadership a gift that must be utilized or a privilege within the Church?  Is the fact that  someone CAN do something a requirement that they MUST do it within the Church?  Is ministry or leadership a function or ability that we must recognize and utilize or is it a privilege bestowed?

There are many who have gifts but who do not have calls or places to exercise those gifts.  Is this a failure of the Church to find a place for these gifts to be utilized?  There are some who do not possess these gifts but who have been called, ordained, and installed.  Is this a failure of the Church in choosing whom the Church will give the authority to act in Christ's name?

I am not trying to paint anyone into a corner but to ask when this shift was made and whether it was a faithful and good shift.  If we keep to this course, we might well develop and office of gifts director to function in this way in the congregation or change the role and function of the seminaries and bishops from equipping and setting apart to the role of discerning, identifying, and making a place for those so gifted to utilize their gifts.

Though this does not seem to have been changed from the vantage point of doctrine, it is true that the way we talk about this -- both in the larger church and in the congregation -- have definitely changed.  I just though it might be worth talking about...

The Water We Do Not Want

It is often strange to hear the upside of the flood in Scripture -- such as First Peter and its description of the saving action that took place in the flood, when Noah and his family were rescued and preserved.  Today throughout the upper portion of Middle Tennessee, the flood has no upside.  The Cumberland and Red Rivers have done a great deal of damage as well as ponding water in low lying areas.  We have at least one member whose home was a complete loss and several others significantly affected by the flood damage.  In addition, the flooding has created a mess of a traffic pattern in Clarksville that forced us to close the Church Office yesterday afternoon.  I would ask for your prayers for the victims and their families, including the 18 who lost their lives in this disaster.  It all began with rain and the rain did not end.  While I was teaching a class to new members on Saturday, the water was preparing for its onslaught.  In the end some 13-14 inches of rain over two days showed us the might of man in the face of water droplets.  Please pray for the many families affected directly by the flooding, by those whose jobs are affected  by the damage and flooding, and the many other myriad of ways this disaster has wrecked havoc upon us in Clarksville, north into Kentucky, and south through Nashville and points beyond.  Don't forget to pray for the relief workers... and please support the good work of the Red Cross and others who jumped in to make sure there were places for folks to go...  God bless you...

A Slap of Reality...

On another forum discussing first calls, I posted my own story of disappointment and even disillusionment when I left the Seminary to meet the congregation where I was to vicar for a year and then the parish where I would first serve as Pastor.  Let me make this perfectly clear -- I am not complaining about the Pastors who went before me or the people who I met when I arrived.  What I am complaining about is that the definition of Lutheran that our Lutheran congregations have grown accustomed to and our Lutheran Pastors have accepted is a different Lutheranism than the one identified in the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.  And this slap of reality has often made it hard on a young Vicar or Pastor facing a congregation very different than the congregation of his dreams or even of the expectation of the Seminary.

Those Vicars and Pastors who come from Seminary are not simply hard nosed and uncompromising types who are rigid and unbending, arrogant and condescending, difficult and uncompromising.  They are also the true believers whose heads have been filled with the Confessions, who have been formed as Pastors within the rich liturgical environs of the Seminary chapel and its musical depth, who are idealistic and energetic as people are in youth or new to a vocation or idea.  They have the highest of high expectations of people whose hearts are formed and shaped by baptismal grace and nurtured at the devotional center of the Altar and enlarged through the faithful reading and study of God's Word.  They have the unrealistic but noble expectation that the guiding principle of the Church is not what works or what feels good or what have we always done but what is good and right and true.  They have been taught that the folks in the pew want to be Lutheran, know what it means to be Lutheran, and will follow a Lutheran Pastor like a dog follows his master -- out of love and not forced obedience.

To some this is an "I am more of a Lutheran than you" that is believed to be an indicator of a problem personality.  There may be some truth to this.  But the truth is this is exactly how I was as a new Vicar on Long Island shocked to find that a parish with 1500 communicants had but one of 5 services Holy Communion and that the Sunday schedule was so tight it was a cattle call service, shortened to make up for the pitifully small rail.  Here I sat on an elevated dais teaching the catechism to 100 kids at tables, assisted by parent sargents of arms to keep order among kids who did not listen or even want to be there. Here I found a congregation where their new Pastor was unprepared for the dynamics of a congregation 7 times the size of his previous parish and a conflict between this Pastor and this congregation that grew like a weed and threatened to pull in a new, young Vicar simply trying to get through it all

This is exactly how I was as a new Pastor in upstate NY upon finding that the people were aliturgical, did not think that the name Lutheran was all that positive, that the voice of the Spirit speaking to the heart was just as reliable as Scripture, that I may be Pastor but they were elders in the Spirit and in the Lord and were going to teach me something about spiritual life and maturity, that the music was the pits, that the church building was falling down (descriptive of how well things had been cared for in other areas), and that the Church was not at the center of folk's lives but somewhere on the fringe...  I was depressed and disappointed and wondered whether it was the odd duck or the norm for congregations that called themselves Lutheran.  Above all I found myself completely alone and isolated in this circumstance (with only my wife to talk to or console me).

I will admit that I am not nearly as idealistic, energetic, and optimistic as I was then... and I will also admit that I have learned to be less Lutheran in order to make it in these parishes... to put up with things that are in conflict with who we are Confessionally -- at least over the short term -- and to hope and pray that enough teaching will change these folks...  I will admit that I am not shocked as I once was by what is said by or goes on in parishes and by Pastors of this church body and that I am less inclined to say something to folks when these shocking things are said and done in the name of God... I will admit that I am bolder on this forum than I am in District gatherings where some of what I complain about goes on or I meet the people who perpetrate these less then Lutheran liturgical identities and practices...  I will admit to this and you might say I have matured but if this is the price of maturity I am not so sure about it...


I did spend time there, getting to know these folks, teaching them, holding up Lutheran confessional identity and practice, and slowly moving them along (so that they would not identify Lutheran confessional identity with a person but with Lutheranism itself).  After 13 years there, this Parish does identify with Lutheran confession and does retain the weekly Eucharist and the liturgy as part of that identity.  But it was a hard time for me trying to live down the high expectations and facing with the slap of reality and the penultimate Lutheran question "what does this mean?"

Not all may know that there is a terrible truth that a new Pastor awakens to when he makes it into his first call... a period of depression because the rich and deep liturgical life he knew is gone and what is left in its place is Sunday morning with all its warts.... a period of sober awareness when you find out people may not necessarily want to be the Lutherans the Confessions speak of and are quite comfortable being the Lutheranism they defined (with some of it rooted less in Dr. Martin and more in Wesley, Calvin, Osteen, and Warren)...  It is not that we blame anyone for this as much as we lament that we cannot count on a Lutheran confessional and liturgical identity and these must be taught a new (as if they had never been).

I am NOT defending arrogance or pride or justifying unloving practice of those Pastors who place principle before people in all cases... but what I am admitting, and I believe that you would as well, is that real life in the parish is very distant from the life in the parish which is presumed from the liturgical life and theological setting of a seminary... so just maybe some of the guys (and some from Ft Wayne) that people complain about on this forum are going through what I went through (more than 32 years ago)... That said, I am glad I am not starting over and I pray even more fervently for those who come out of Seminary with or after me... the standards are high, the goals serious, and the effort needed great.  Look beyond the reality to gather a sense of what God can and will do... Look beyond the disappointment to the opportunity... but talk to your fellow Pastors about this... it is a a common experience...and keep the high ideals even as you work to implant them in the lives of your people... working in love and with love for the flock over which the Lord has made you a Bishop....