Northwoods Lutherans

Video from BEING LUTHERAN — NOTHING TO BE ASHAMED OF

pomeranus — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:26:17 +0000

These are low-production videos of three of the four evening of the Lutheran identity/renewal week. The fourth evening’s video should be up by Friday, June 12.

The first, third and fourth evenings were held in the fellowship space of St. John’s Riverside Lutheran Church outside of Gillett, Wisconsin. The second evening was filmed in the sanctuary on the evening of June 2, 2009–Tuesday after Pentecost.

Again, many thanks to Pastor Cota for serving as chaplain during the event.

Your comments are encouraged so that we can refine this for use throughout the circuit. Ideally each evening would have a different presenter.

May God use our feeble efforts to strengthen the faith of the faithful.

Treasures in the Attic, part 1:

Treasures in the Attic, part 2:

God’s Pottery Wheel, part 1:

God’s Pottery Wheel, part 2:

On the third evening, the record button was pressed — but the camcorder had not been turned on. Sorry!!

Honorable Beggars, part 1:

Honorable Beggars, part 2:

Renewed and Refreshed

pomeranus — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:20:14 +0000

It was a joy for all who participated. Special thanks goes to Pastor Shane Cota who led the opening prayer service each night which included a meditation. They were so good, people asked for copies. There was a general consensus that it was worthwhile for those who were able to attend. Participants included members of St. John’s Riverside, members of sister LCMS congregations, other Lutherans, and non-Lutherans. It is now hoped that this can be refined and expanded to include more pastors and to be held in each parish in the Gillett circuit. God willing, that will happen.

One of the joys of the evenings was closing with Compline. Compline will certainly become a staple in St. John’s Riverside prayer life.

If you would like to gain a sense of what each evening was like, you can link to the handouts which provide the information for the prayer services and a summary of what was covered. Note that these are tri-fold brochures. The content is on the second page of each pdf. We hope to upload video of the evenings also. The third evening did not get recorded because of human frailty. The record button was pressed — but the recorder had not been turned on!

May God guide and bless the continuation of this endeavor to renew and deepen our faith and understanding.

1 – Treasures in the Attic — Our Faith is Not Clutter

2 – God’s Pottery Wheel — The Shape of Worship; Worship that Shapes

3 – Everyday Life — Where Faith Bears Fruit

4 – Sharing the Gospel — Being Honorable Beggars

Being Lutheran — Nothing to Be Ashamed Of!

pomeranus — Wed, 20 May 2009 01:56:55 +0000

St. John’s Riverside Lutheran Church
LC–MS
5686 Highway 32 South
Gillett, Wisconsin

June 1 – 4, 2009

Four Evenings to Renew and Deepen Our Faith and Understanding

Monday June 1	Treasures in the Attic Our Faith Is Not Clutter
Tuesday June 2	God’s Pottery Wheel The Shape of Worship; Worship that Shapes
Wednesday June 3	Everyday Life Where Faith Bears Fruit
Thursday June 4	Sharing the Gospel Being Honorable Beggars

7:00 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.

Everyone is encouraged to attend all four evenings. Each evening will be valuable on its own. If you can’t join us on a certain evening, come on an evening or evenings that work out for you.Each evening will include the participation of a presenter and a pastor who will lead opening and closing worship and provide opportunities for conversation and advice.

Schedule for Each Evening
7:00   Responsive Prayer and Hymn
7:10   Presentation
7:55   Questions and Discussion
8:15   Compline Service

On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, we will meet in our fellowship space in the basement. Tuesday evening, we will meet in the sanctuary.
A handout will be distributed each evening so that what is learned can be reviewed and shared with others.
Chaplain: Pastor Shane Cota
Presenter: Michael Zamzow

Over the years Lutherans in America have lost the confidence many of their ancestors brought to this country. The Lutheran proclamation of the Gospel was so central to their lives, that some of them left Europe so they would not be coerced or punished for being Lutheran. While not all our ancestors braved crossing the Atlantic for religious reasons, they cherished the faith enough to form Lutheran congregations and synods rather than merely melting into the religious mainstream of their new surroundings. They knew that the Lutheran Church proclaimed the Gospel with a clarity and focus that was not to be found elsewhere.
Lutherans are sometimes not mindful of just what a blessing the Lutheran Church has been in proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ with such vigor and clarity. Christians throughout the world sing Lutheran hymns, listen to the great music written by Lutherans like J.S. Bach, are aided by institutions founded by Lutherans and profit from the studies and writings of Lutheran scholars. In the past decade increasing numbers of Christians are attracted to the Lutheran Church for the very reasons our congregations and synods were founded and grew. They long for the clarity and focus which inspires the proclamation of the Gospel and the music and worship of our Church.
While others have come to treasure and cherish our heritage, we have let it gather dust and let it fall into disuse or irrelevance. The four evenings we have planned are intended to remind and re-acquaint us with the Lutheran heritage so that the Gospel can be proclaimed and heard clearly and with focus and conviction in our midst. With that renewed clarity and focus we will be better able to bear witness to Christ in our lives and through the ministry of our congregation and synod.
Each of the evenings will unwrap the insights and beliefs which bring the clarity and focus of the Gospel which is the very reason why there is a Lutheran Church and why we are not ashamed of it. This unwrapping will be done engagingly and with an opportunity for questions and discussion.
The first evening will let the basic insights of the Lutheran Reformation proclaim anew the Good News of Jesus Christ. Lutheran doctrines are not just musty old phrases spouted by musty old guys. They are teachings which protect the Gospel from destructive distortions and inspire the teaching, preaching, and worship in our churches.
The second evening will be devoted to deepening our appreciation and understanding of how and where Lutherans worship. The goal is to let the liturgy. hymns, and worship space become a part of the clear and focused proclamation of the Gospel.
The third evening will concentrate on the Lutheran understanding of vocation and how it shapes daily living and our self-understanding not only in our workplaces, but in our families, our communities, and the public square.
The fourth evening will offer a take on how Lutherans share the Gospel. Evangelism is too often stereotyped in such a way that Lutherans are justly skeptical of methods and attitudes commonly employed.
Members of St. John’s Riverside are encouraged to bring along people they know who would be interested in what we are offering. People interested in what Lutherans are all about might find these evenings informative. Lutherans from other congregations or synods might find them inspirational. Our time together will be worthwhile if just one of us is a bit less ashamed of who we are and what we believe.

April 20th — Johannes Bugenhagen

pomeranus — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 04:11:01 +0000

A Short Synopsis of Bugenhagen’s Life

On April 20, 1558 Johannes Bugenhagen was born to eternal life. His earthly life began on June 24, 1485 in the Hanseatic city of Wollin in Pomerania. Bugenhagen’s father was a member of the town council and made sure that Johannes was given an especially good education. In 1502 he began his studies at the university in Greifswald where he came in contact with the growing Humanist movement, but did not pursue theological studies. In 1504 Bugenhagen was called to serve as a teacher and rector of the municipal Latin school in Treptow on the Rega. In the following year he was called serve simultaneously as lector (lecturer) for the canons of the Premonstratensian Abbey of Belbuk outside of the city. The abbot not only headed the abbey, but was the patron of the congregation and the school in Treptow. He was to give the canons an introductory course in Holy Scripture with an emphasis on Paul’s Pastoral Epistles and the Psalms. His reputation as a scholar grew and spread. In 1509 Bugenhagen was ordained a priest and began preaching (it is worth noting that his sermons in Wittenberg sometimes lasted three hours).

In 1517 Bugenhagen traveled throughout Pomerania gathering documents in order to write the first history of the Duchy of Pomerania. This enterprise was commissioned by Duke Bogislav X. Bugenhagen was thus connected with the past and then the future of his Pomeranian homeland.

In 1520 Bugenhagen comes to agree with Luther (after initial rejection of the reformer’s writings), being impressed especially by the Babylonian Captivity of the Church.

In 1521 Bugenhagen traveled to Wittenberg to study theology. While Luther was at the Diet at Worms, Melanchthon suggested that Bugenhagen fill in for the absent Reformer by lecturing on the Psalms. So began the career of Johannes Bugenhagen as a leader of the Lutheran Reformation.

In 1522, Bugenhagen married his wife, Walpurga

With the help of Luther, Bugenhagen was called as Pastor of the city church (St. Mary’s) in Wittenberg in 1523. He thus became Luther’s confessor. About the same time he became involved in publishing Luther’s New Testament in Low German. His scholarship led to a paid appointment as a lecturer in exegesis at the Wittenberg University. Bugenhagen began his work on his later very influential Passion History at this time.

Bugenhagen is the first Lutheran theologian to take issue with Zwingli’s teachings on the Sacrament of the Altar with his Sendbrief wider den neuen Irrtum in 1525. In the meantime Bugenhagen had received calls from various Hanseatic cities to be their pastor. Bugenhagen also begins what became one of his great accomplishments, the organization of the Lutheran churches in Northern Germany and Scandinavia. He writes theological arguments for the introduction of the Reformation and then works out church orders which will shape church structure and practice for centuries.

Bugenhagen always remained the pastor at heart. When the plague hit Wittenberg in 1527, the university and scholars fled the city. Luther and Bugenhagen remained to minister to the flock. After years of lecturing, Bugenhagen was given a doctorate in theology in 1533. The following year he works on publishing the entire Bible in Low German. In the meantime, a grassroots Reformation had been developing in Bugenhagen’s homeland, Pomerania. Just as he was made a professor at the university in Wittenberg in 1535, the request came from Pomerania for a church order for the duchy and a visitation or inspection tour. Although he was offered the office of bishop of Pomerania, he remained pastor and professor in Wittenberg.

From 1537 to 1539, Bugenhagen undertook the task of reforming the church in the realm of Christian III of Denmark which included Schleswig-Holstein and Norway at the time.

During the Smalcald war, Bugenhagen remained in Wittenberg while others fled. He even continued to preach during the occupation of the city by imperial troops in 1547.

In 1558 Bugenhagen died and was buried in the City Church in Wittenberg.

Bugenhagen’s Signifcance

There are several areas in which Bugenhagen still shapes the life of the Lutheran Church. Bugenhagen chose a harp as his seal because of his love of music. Our Lutheran liturgies still contain some of the music he wrote for the divine service.

The Lutheran understanding of the Lord’s Supper and the accompanying piety are due in a great part to the efforts and influence of Dr. Pomeranus. He recognized the danger in Zwingli’s teaching and sounded the warning trumpet. It has been shown that it was pastors who were taught and trained by Bugenhagen who took up the struggle against the Crypto-Calvinists. While it is disputed that Bugenhagen was himself a Premonstratensian (Norbertine, for us Northeast Wisconsin types) canon. His close association with the order is, however, evident. This background would account for his liturgical interests. His preservation of traditional vestments and practices at Wittenberg scandalized Martin Bucer during the discussions which led to the Wittenberg Concord which was incorporated into the FC. His alertness to the dangers of Sacramentarianism might also be traced back to Premonstratensian sensibilities since Norbert of Xanten took on Tanchelm in Antwerp.

The organization and spread of the Reformation among the North German cities and principalities as well as in Scandinavia was aided by several gifts which Bugenhagen brought to the task. Being the son of a Hanseatic merchant gave him insight into the independent-mindedness of the Low German culture which prevailed around the Baltic Sea. It is that same culture which gave rise to what we know as Anglo-Saxon law. It took a skilled theologian to convince learned bourgeois leaders of the veracity of the Lutheran teaching on justification. It also took someone who spoke the lingua franca of the Baltic: Mittelniederdeutsch (Middle Low German). Mittelniederdeutsch was the language of contracts not only in Northern Germany, but throughout Scandinavia and even into Russia and within some quarters of London. The common Gothic syntax and grammar made it the koine of the region.

The work on the Passion History became a part of Lutheran piety and Lenten liturgical practice.

It was the heart of a pastor who heard the confessions of Luther, of nobles, of peasants, and servant girls. It was the heart of a pastor which would not falter before pestilence or war. While we might not want to emulate three-hour sermons, Bugenhagen’s attention to Holy Writ, the liturgy, music, and especially to the Sacrament of the Altar should serve to inspire 21st century Lutheran pastors to faithfulness in preaching and careful administration of the Sacraments.

The Meaning of Words, a Man’s Word, the Word of God — Part III

pomeranus — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 20:49:55 +0000

After a prolonged hiatus, the discussion of words and God’s Word continues. Apologies are due for the long delay in this discussion.
By its very length and place within a blog, this discussion cannot be exhaustive. To gain a more extensive understanding of Holy Writ as the Word of God, I suggest one dig out Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana. Paperback editions of accessible translations are available. I also highly recommend Kenneth Hagen’s Luther’s approach to scripture as seen in his “commentaries” on Galatians, 1519-1538, published by Mohr Siebeck, 1993. A preview of this gem can be accessed at Google Books. Sacra Scriptura by Hermann Sasse (edited by Friedrich Wilhelm Hopf, published by “Lutherische Blätter” in Hermannsburg) is also a joy to digest. What follows is not a scholarly exposition, but an encouragement to reflect and discuss a crucial issue in the life of the Church today (as it has always been).

Whether Holy Writ is the Word of God should not be up for grabs among those called to be servants of the Word. Unfortunately, subtle forms of gnosticism and rationalism nibble away at the authority of Holy Writ. Authority is moved from Holy Scripture to a principle which is crafted to make the reader or expositor the arbiter of to what degree Holy Scripture is true, is God’s Word, is authoritative. Often familiar Scriptural insights are transformed into means of undermining the authority of the written Word. When the witness of Holy Writ to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Word of God is gnosticized, what is left of it resembles more the Bible of Marcion or the tattered remains of the Bible after Thomas Jefferson got done with it. The tautological trap of this approach is not always evident to the unwary. If, for example, the Holy Trinity is deemed a construct of the Church rather than as a faithful expression of the witness of Holy Writ, all Trinitarian references and allusions are excised or dismissed as later additions. This approach to Scripture has been mainstreamed since Adolf von Harnack (who, incidentally, was a fan of Marcion). Consequently, we no longer listen to Scripture, but to the “experts” who provide the key to understanding Scripture. Expert opinions are eerily analogous to the passwords given the initiated in the gnostic mythological systems. The special knowledge of the experts allows them to change, reject, ignore, warp, or deny the witness of Holy Writ. The new gnostics are very slippery. If they do not take the plunge into open apostacy with Spong and Crossan, they are likely to protest that they are faithful to the biblical witness and even claim that they are more biblical or literal than the orthodox Lutherans who call the apostatic (not apostolic!) revisions into question. In the end, it comes down (as it often does) to prepositions. It is a question of where the servant of the Word stands. Apo, hyper, or hypo the Word of God.

About a year ago, an acquaintance of mine, Georg Gremels (who is presently a professor at the mission seminary in Hermannsburg), spoke to an assembly of SELK pastors in southern Germany. He noted that in order to understand God’s Word, one has to stand under the Word of God. That is a very short, simple statement. It seems obvious. Yet it runs counter not only to the stance of revisionist, but also to the stance of fundamentalists. The revisionist has the neo-gnostic passwords with which to unlock Scripture. The fundamentalist sets about through to make sense of Scripture, in effect lording it over Scripture while appealing to its authority. This becomes evident in questions regarding the Lord’s Supper, where an inherent rationalism functions much like the gnostic experts in reshaping what Scripture clearly says). Scripture serves as a quarry for gnostics and rationalists who pick and choose and shape and chip at the rocks out of which they build their edifices. They in effect become masters of the Word (or so they think). The Lutheran servant of the Word understands that only under the Word of God does he remain a servant. It is not always pleasant to stand under the Word which comes down like a hammer on one’s pet ideas, fancies, or delusions. It is, however, only under the Word, that God imprints His image, the image of the Crucified, on His servant. It is the servant who has thus been stamped, hammered, chiseled and shaped who then proclaims Christ crucified rather than talking about him. The hammered servant does not offer what people’s ears itch for, but becomes himself a hammer who brings God’s Word to bear on people’s lives so that they too will have the Crucified imprinted, impressed, engraved on their hearts, minds, and lives. The servant of the Word does not snip and cut and paste and shred the Word, but submits to the Word which is sharper than any two-edged sword.

When we look at our proclamation, we perhaps do well to do some rethinking and readjusting of how we prepare to preach. I confess that all to often I have by force of bad habit approached a text from Scripture with the wrong attitude or stance. When we begin our preparations by asking, “What am I going to say about this text?” we have neglected the more foundational question, “What does this text say?” or even more personally, “What does this text say about me?” Standing under the Word leads to a different proclamation than standing over or poring over the Word does. Who is the agent of shaping the sermon? The preacher who offers up his hard earned insights? Or God whose Word has hammered and shaped the preacher and the sermon so that the proclamation is the Word of God, not a word about God? We don’t need to burn our commentaries or jettison other aids for preparation. We do need, however, to take stock of where we stand.

If we need to be labeled, may the label accurately define where we stand: under the Word of God. How does hypologian sound? A good theologian would be a good hypologian.

The Meaning of Words, a Man’s Word, the Word of God — Part II

pomeranus — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 06:05:54 +0000

One of the things which saddens me most about the present state of the Lutheran Church is the basic lack of integrity among those called to proclaim and teach God’s Word and rightly administer the sacraments. By this I do not mean the human weakness and sinfulness in which we all find ourselves. We all are tempted. Only Christ was and is without sin. My concern is more focused and is basic to the health of the Church and the proclamation of the Word. Rather than beat around the bush, I’ll get to the point. If a pastor is going to be a faithful servant of the Word, he has to be a man of his word. Pastor’s make solemn vows when they are ordained. Those vows are not coerced, but freely spoken. They are not based on some fine print which the pastor has overlooked, but on years of hopefully careful study and acquaintance with the teachings of the Church, especially Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. Studying the ancient languages, learning to listen to God’s Word through careful and faithful exegesis, being immersed in the witness of the consensus of the church catholic in general, and the Lutheran Church specifically — these are not mere hurdles to be jumped, but preparation for ministry and a part of the informed consent involved in the ordination vows and subscription to the Confessions. The Church, including the average person sitting in the pews, should be able to trust that the pastor before them did not cross his fingers when saying his vows. The hearers of the Word should be able to trust that the man in the pulpit did not engage in some Lutheran form of the Jesuits’ reservatio mentis when he promised fidelity to God’s Word as witnessed in the Lutheran Confessions.
While I would be saddened should a pastor come to a point in his life where he could no longer with a good conscience preach and teach in accordance with his ordination vows and subscription, I would have respect for him as a man, if he would resign his sacred office rather than break the promises so solemnly and publicly made at ordination and installation. If a pastor can no longer do what he promised to do when he signed a letter of call, the manly and honorable thing to do is to resign, respecting the rightful expectation of a congregation that a pastor who professes and promises to be a Lutheran pastor will be and remain such. Lutheran pastors have been willing to suffer humiliation, poverty, persecution, imprisonment or death rather than break their vows. How can we sing Paul Gerhardt’s hymns if we do not honor and emulate his faithfulness. How can we extol Loehe or Walther if we despise what they upheld?
As sad and disappointing as a resignation might be, there is still a certain amount of integrity and honesty involved in respecting the congregation. What I find unconscienable is when pastors seek to change the confession of a congregation by undermining confessional loyalty. There is no integrity to that. That man’s word is worthless. He is unworthy of the Word and Sacraments entrusted to him. He is unworthy of the congregation placed in his care. He has not only deceived himself, but the Bride of Christ. But God will not be deceived and will hold him accountable. Pastors are also called to hold one another accountable through mutual conversation and the consolation of the brethren. This is more than shooting the bull, guzzling coffee, devouring donuts, bragging about successes and complaining about alligators. It is about studying together, receiving the Body and Blood of Christ together, helping one another keep the vows they all made. When the Means of Grace given to the Church are neglected and the main focus is on strategy and tactics for tallying up numbers, the first steps have been taken to forsake the ordination vows. Pastors are bound as brothers to help each other focus on Christ. Pastors are trained and called to be insightful enough to cut through mere usage of words and phrases and to always help one another to leave empty words behind and return to the Word which never returns empty to God. (see Part I)
As in Part I, this rubber does hit the road. The present situation in the ELCA could only have come about if pastors did not mean what they said at their ordination vows or if they were not manly enough to at least keep their word by resigning before they broke it. The question has to be raised: Are ordination vows taken in all piety and seriousness or are they first de-constructed only to be reconstructed? Are pastors men of their word or weasels and deceivers? Have pastors who promote the ordination of practicing homosexuals deceived themselves to such a degree that they no longer recognize the fraud they are perpetrating on the flocks entrusted to them? The people deserve some honest answers. God demands some answers.
Pastors in the LC-MS need to ask whether they are men of their word also. Can worship forms which are expressions of non-Scriptural, non-Lutheran theologies be employed without working against what one has promised to nurture and uphold? While some pastors who tend to be more liturgical are accused at times of Grabauism and/or tyranny, is it not deviously tyrannical to lead people away from the Confession one has promised to uphold? Is it not a misuse of one’s office. Where is the pastoral integrity in the Ablaze! mission service discussed below? Have vows been broken? If so repentance is in order. If a pastor does not want to repent, he should at least be man enough and a man of his word so that he tenders his resignation, respecting the Church, the people and his vows.
This requires some self-examination. Pastors some times slip and err out of weakness or lack of knowledge or insight. In such cases they should deal gently with one another. At other times they knowingly and willfully break their vows. In such cases admonitions of a stronger and perhaps even more public nature are in order.
Perhaps our comments here can serve to build one another up through mutual conversation and consolation of the brethren.

The Meaning of Words, a Man’s Word, the Word of God–Part I

pomeranus — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 04:36:59 +0000

We live in a paradox in the world of blogs. On the one hand, the importance and power of words underlies the whole blogging enterprise. On the other hand, post-modern thought tends to downplay the meaning of words per se and centers meaning in the hearer. The former is the underlying assumption of this post. The latter is a malignancy which threatens not just language, but faith, trust, integrity, and any sense of Truth. As Lutherans, we are very aware of the centrality of God’s Word not only in theology, but in the very existence of the Church and the genesis of faith. As Christians, especially as theologians, we have a decided interest in words and meanings. We also trust that no matter how much men may try to empty words of their meaning, no matter how worthless a man’s word may be, VDMA.
From my perspective, the whole post-modern enterprise is a matter of deception. It is a matter of deconstruction and reconstruction. What this entails in regard to words is to render words meaningless or to at least raise doubts as to the meaning of words. The reconstruction then takes those emptied words and fills them with a new meaning. The deception lies in the deconstruction and reconstruction taking place within a circle of elites or within the mind of an individual de- /re-constructor. The change in meaning does not take place by consensus or a process of seeking clarity and understanding, but by purposefully cultivating ambiguity. The hearer thinks he/she knows what is being heard. The de- /re-constructor is aware of what the hearer thinks, but subtly changes meanings without the consent or participation of the hearer. Were the de- /re-constructor to openly engage in changing meanings, the changes would be likely be resisted as the intent of the changes became transparent. This is not just a matter of theory, but of daily practice among many entrusted with words.
For theologians, this literally becomes a matter of life and death — eternal life and death. When those entrusted with not just words, but the Word of God, de- and re-construct, they are in effect engaged in deceit. The words are reshaped sometimes to have a meaning contrary to what once was known as the clear meaning.
Lutherans are in the midst of changes being effected by this de- /re-construction of meaning. It is happening in different ways in different synods or church bodies. The newly changed meanings may differ, but the result is the same: words once having agreed upon meanings are given new meanings without discussion, reflection, or consent. The change is dictated by those who acquire power or influence. They maintain their power by insisting that the words have not changed. They conveniently neglect to mention that they regard words as mere vessels which can be filled with any meaning which they (those in power) choose. Any attempt to challenge the changes is met with various tactics which avoid real discussion, reflection, or consent. One tactic is to insist that the same words are being used, so there is no reason to worry about meaning. This can lead to serious misunderstandings. For example, Mormons baptize in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit. Their understanding, however, is not even close to the meaning agreed upon at Chalcedon. but rather a sort of tri-theism. The question which shaped our learning as catechumens was, “What does this mean?” It is a question avoided not just by Mormons, but by those within the Church who would change meanings in order to be “relevant.”
One might expect that such deception and self-deception would take place only in “liberal” denominations. Mere conservativism does not impart immunity to the ravages of de- /re-constructors. Conservatives might be less likely to merely jettison established terms. They may, however, be just as suceptible to deceiving themselves or being deceived by claims that the use of certain words is evidence that change has not taken place. Allow me to give an actual example. Lutheran theologians are well acquainted with Luther’s phrase, simul justus et peccator. At a conference on post-modernism I attended, a Lutheran pastor remarked that the concept of simul justus et peccator was Lutheranism’s gift to the rest of Christianity. He went on to note that simul justus et peccator means that the task of a Christian is to balance out the good and evil in his life. I was outraged, but could not get recognition by the discussion leader in order to point out that Taoism was being clothed in Lutheran terms. The discussions plodded on, but no one dared or was allowed to point out the crass change in meaning which had been asserted and accepted. Looking back, I should perhaps have simply broken into the discussion and pointed out the deceit. That would probably have had the effect of my being chastized as being rude and coarse, which would have excused everyone from having to reflect on the distortions inherent in the new take on simul justus et peccator. Even when the de- /re-construction is noticed by someone, niceness and calls for unity are used to smother discussion and reflection. Under such circumstances, consensus is not arrived at, but imposed — however soft the imposition might be.
Thus far I have laid this out in general terms. There are two concrete circumstances which cry out for discussion and reflection. I ask the reader to join in that process to counteract the de- /re-construction taking place in the ELCA and LC-MS. The process is quite far along in the ELCA and permeates much of the thinking among the elite and a good portion of the clergy. The laity are for the most part unaware of what is happening—no discussion, no reflection. If they ask questions, they are given non-answers or outright lies. The struggle has gained its focus in the attempts to re-define marriage, chastity, and the Biblical understanding of sexuality. I ask the reader to reflect on the re-definition of family, the disengaging of sexuality from pro-creation, the various efforts to undermine the clear witness of Scripture in regard to homosexual behavior, the tendency to silence or ignore the voice who still take “What does this mean?” seriously. There are many other fronts on which the de- /re-construction is being implemented: the doctrine of sin, Christology, ecclesiology, pneumatology, etc. Once one begins to reflect, one sees just how much the process has insinuated itself into the fabric of faith and life in the ELCA. I invite you to share insights into the present situation. I also invite you to join in discussing remedies.
In the LC-MS the process has not yet permeated thought and practice to the extent it has in the ELCA, but it is well on its way. It manifests itself on a different front, but based on what has happened in the ELCA and other bodies, it could likely end at the same destination: a Lutheran Church which is no longer confessional and sadly no longer church. The church is kyrieke —that which belongs to and pertains to the Lord. If the world becomes the measure and determines the means and the goals, the church will belong to the world rather than to Christ who redeemed the church. Then the meaning of “church” will have been radically changed. It will be as oxymoronic as “Wiccan Church”. That is the danger. Where and how is this happening? Declarations are made that no one understands the language of the church, the traditional liturgy is no longer relevant, doctrine alienates people, people want something new. This is all a part of the de-construction process. The solution offered is not to renew, revitalize, recatechize, but to re-construct. That process affects music, architecture, divine service, sacramental practice. It is not merely a matter of the same content and meaning in updated forms like changing “thee” to “you.” It is a matter of changing meaning, of offering a different Gospel. As the Apostle Paul makes clear in his Epistle to the Galatians, a different gospel is not a matter of indifference. The pillow of unity and cushion of civility are wielded to silence and smother cries for the Truth. Sometimes more aggressive forms of suppression are employed as in the case of Issues, Etc. Again, I invite the reader to reflect with me and others on both the de-construction and re-construction taking place in the LC-MS. I also invite you to offer remedies.
Please join me in Part II for further reflections.

A Thoughtful Reflection on Issues, Etc.

pomeranus — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 04:28:20 +0000

For a thoughtful reflection on what Issues, Etc. has meant for the Church and what its loss means, go to this link. Pastor Ruesch is to be commended for his tempered discussion.

Issues, etc. Taken Off the Air

pomeranus — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:29:21 +0000

Host Todd Wilken and producer Jeff Schwarz have had their employment terminated. The web presence of Issues, Etc. has disappeared in a matter of minutes. No explanation has been forthcoming. The old Lutheran question becomes pressing: What does this mean? Was ist das?

What are the reasons for the decision to eliminate an important witness?
Why was the termination so abrupt?
Who made the ultimate decision?
What does the decision imply?
What is the proper response?
What does this mean for the future directions of the leadership of the LCMS?
Quo Vadis?

Posted by pomeranus.

Lent Renamed: “Christian Ramadan”

pomeranus — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:19:05 +0000

Foolishness is rampant among Christians in the West. It is equaled only by ignorance. This article relates how Dutch Catholics have renamed Lent. They now call it “Christian Ramadan.” This action demonstrates ignorance in a number of ways:

Christian observances of fasting and devotion predate Islam and its practices
the 40-day preparation of catechumens is well-documented and well-established by the third century
“Ramadan” is the Islamic name for a month, not for a period of fasting
the “fast” of Ramadan is only a daylight fast. After sundown, over-indulgence is not uncommon
Christian Lenten observance is focused on Christ; renaming it to “Ramadan” changes the focus

The foolishness of this renaming reflects a foolishness which is thoroughly human and contrary to the foolishness of the Cross. The renaming demonstrates that

post-modern “spirituality” has created a synkretist mindset which very superficially blends practices and observances which at their core are distinct and even mutually exclusive
political correctness has convinced people that accommodating Christian faith and practice to Islam will appease the blood lust of Islam
a basic difference between Islam and Christianity is that Muslims find redemption in shedding infidel blood; Christians know themselves to be redeemed by the blood of Christ

Given the decline in Lenten Observance in the United States, how long is it before some congregation in the name of “outreach” renames Lent and makes it more acceptable to the culture around us?

Posted by pomeranus