Thursday, June 2, 2022
Wednesday, May 18, 2022
Dr Jason Lisle on UFOs and Extra-Terrestrial Life
Check out this recent post by Dr. Jason Lisle of the Biblical Science Institute in Colorado.
Also another helpful resource on this subject is Alien Intrusion by Gary Bates from Creation Ministries International.
A long time coming...
At last the liturgical manual for Lutheran Service Book is to be released this summer. It looks to be well-worth the investment (Check out the PDF sample). Its the Lutheran Service Book: Companion to the Services from Concordia Publishing House, available for pre-order.
Friday, April 3, 2020
Consecration of the Holy Supper, the Office, and Local Fellowship in Dispersion
Consecration of the Holy Supper, the Office, and Local Fellowship in
Dispersion
Rev. John A. Frahm
III
In his 1533 treatise, “The Private Mass and the Consecration
of Priests,” Luther mentions how Christians in isolation in Turkey are advised
to respond to their lack of clergy and their desire for the Holy Supper of
Christ’s body and blood:
And what must the Christians do who
are held captive in Turkey? They cannot receive the sacrament and have to be
content with their faith and desire which they have for the sacrament and the
ordinance of Christ, just as those who die before baptism are nevertheless
saved by their faith and desire for baptism. What did the children of Israel do
in Babylon when they were unable to have public worship at Jerusalem except in
faith and in sincere desire and longing? Therefore, even if the church would
have been robbed completely of the sacrament by the pope, still, because the
ordinance of Christ remained in their hearts with faith and desire, it would
nevertheless have been preserved thereby, as indeed now in our time there are
many who outwardly do without the sacrament for they are not willing to honor
and strengthen the pope's abomination under one kind. For Christ's ordinance
and faith are two works of God which are capable of doing anything.[1]
Notice here in this radical situation, nay “emergency,” what
Luther does not suggest or improvise. The
further one departs from the institution of Christ, the more doubt creeps into
the picture and consequently the certainty and foundation of faith begins to
fall away. The solidity of hope in Christ turns into nothing more than a
wishful leap into the Deus absconditus
(the “dark” unrevealed aspects of God, apart from His Word). Nothing can be
more certain than that which is done according to the mandate and institution
of Christ. Faith clings not so much to
what could possibly be in the abstract, nor to what we think “God would
understand in our circumstances,” but rather to His mandate and institution and
the promises therein.
Luther makes the point in 1533, in “The Private Mass and the
Consecration of Priests” that the reason why he holds to the position on the
consecration he does is that all may be certain for faith. The private mass
Luther is dealing with are masses performed by Roman priests for money often to
release souls from purgatory. They are celebrating masses without the
congregation gathered. Such masses were
done where none of the people communed, and the notion of the propitiatory
sacrifice of the mass was promote in the Roman church. The Lord’s Supper was turned into something
human beings do rather than something Christ does. In discussing the private mass, Luther says:
But I have not been commanded to
perform the private mass and it is uncertain. In short, as St. Augustine says: Tene certum, dimitte incertum - “Rely on
what is certain and abandon what is uncertain.” Yes, I even add, because it is
uncertain whether the body and blood of Christ are present in the private mass
and because it is certainly a purely human trifle, therefore you should never
in your life believe that Christ's body and blood are present; for faith should
be sure of its affairs and have a sure basis concerning which one must not and
should not be in doubt.[2]
Luther notes the instrumentality of the called servant:
So it is not our work or speaking
but the command and ordinance of Christ which make the bread the body and the
wine the blood, beginning with the first Lord's Supper and continuing to the
end of the world, and it is administered daily through our ministry or office.[3]
Throughout this treatise Luther deals with the certainty for
faith which comes from heeding the institution of Christ. Previously, in 1527, Luther wrote in his
tremendous, “That These Words of Christ, ‘This is My Body,’ Etc., Still Stand
Firm Against the Fanatics,” in summary form:
We know, however, that it is the
Lord’s Supper, in name and in reality, not the supper of Christians. For the Lord not only instituted it, but
also prepares and gives it himself, and is himself cook, butler, food, and
drink, as we have demonstrated our belief above. Christ does not say, in commanding and
instituting it, “Do this as your summons to mutual recognition and love,” but,
“Do this in remembrance of me” [Luke 22:19, I Cor. 11:24].[4]
Perhaps, in part, has explained a Luther preference for
referring to the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar as ‘the Lord’s Supper,” or the
‘Holy Supper.’ We receive this
sacrament, as with all the mysteries of God, as it is given from the Lord (see
1 Corinthians 11:23-26). The pastor is
particularly charged to be the local steward of the mysteries of God, which
includes, but is not limited to the Lord’s Supper. He is steward but does not own it. He may not do with it as he pleases or as it
seems best to him. As it is given to us
from the Lord through the apostles so we deliver it to the Church for her
nourishment in the wilderness of this world in the end times. It would be a foolish, arrogant, and
troubling thing to tinker with what the Lord has given even with “missional”
motivations of heartfelt origin or vision. There is no ecclesial bureaucratic license to
exception. The Bride of Christ receives what the Bridegroom has provided. The Lord’s mysteries do not need adjustment
for the culture to be relevant or adequate, but the Blessed Sacrament is the
medicine of immortality and antidote to death as we confess with the ancient
church.
The institution of the means of grace and the office which
is charged with divine authority to deliver them for the church is a divine
office that is enacted in real flesh and blood men. The
Book of Concord begins the discussion of the office of the holy ministry,
with a bridge from Article IV to Article V of the Augsburg Confession. The
office of the ministry is established so that such justifying faith in Christ
(by grace) may be created, conferred, and sustained through the spoken and
sacramental Gospel. The German speaks of the Predigtamt – the preaching office, which implies someone in the
office. The Word and Sacraments are confessed as the exclusive salvific,
faith-engendering instruments of the Holy Spirit. And then there is the
condemnation of the Anabaptists and other schwärmer,
who teach that the Holy Spirit works apart from the external Word and
sacraments through our own preparations, thoughts, and works. In the teaching of these fanatics, the
working of the Holy Spirit was separated from the external Word and moved to an
internal experience, desire, or concept.
The claim to be spiritual does not detour around the apostolic word.
The liturgy is not the “work of the people” as Rome has
said, or put in protestant terms, our praise and worship experience for
God. To be sure there is response, but
the initiating, primary, divine monergism of the Divine Service is so that
everything in the Church, as the Large Catechism says, may be so arranged that
we may daily receive the forgiveness of sins.
This is done through the Christ-provided means of grace. The point of the Divine Service isn’t about
“getting people involved” (work of the people, ala Rome, said in a protestant
way) but being at the receiving end of all that the Lord desires to give in His
particular way in His spoken and sacramental gospel. So, indeed, as St. Augustine says, for the
sake of faith, cling to the certain, and depart from the uncertain. And the glory of the means of grace is that
they are plural. This blesses us even
in situations of pandemic social distancing, travel, or other forms of local
separation. “Behold, I am with you
always” at the end of the Great Commission to the apostles is not a separate
saying but is indicative of the localized presence of the Lord for them and the
Church in the means of grace (“all things I have commanded you”). As Luther put it succinctly, “If you want
to have God, then mark where he resides and where he wants to be found.”[5] In times of distress it does us no good to
try to relocate the Temple from Jerusalem to Mt. Gerizim, or to baptize by a
fire hose. While all baptized
Christians are priests by faith, our understanding of the office of the
ministry is not primarily priestly (sacrificial) but as ambassadors and
householders of the mysteries as spiritual fathers. The sons of Korah (Numbers 16) thought Moses
and Aaron were free to re-allocate the callings of the Lord since all in Israel
were holy by His name.
In the apostolic ministry the teaching and miracles of Jesus
continue in the Word preached and the holy sacraments administered (Acts 1:1-5;
1 Corinthians 3:5-11). When
considering the administration of the Lord’s Supper it is not merely that the
pastor can broadcast his voice in a “live” setting (over a public address
system, television, or internet) but rather is the whole and undivided
sacrament administered. If the intent
is to consecrate bread and wine (or grape juice, sic!) over a “livestream” or
broadcast to another location with lay administration on the other end. The one broadcasting a recitation of the verba testamenti cannot “take the bread”
or “give it to them” etc where the sacrament is intended to be
administered. It has lost its union or
never had it. It is utterly
dubious. St. Augustine shouts out: tene
certum, dimitte incertum! The
“this do” is violated. Stewardship is
broken. Faith needs the marks of the
church to have divine integrity not human imprimaturs or licensure or pastoral
exceptions by authority of personal feelings.
Our first LCMS President, Walther, writes:
The great majority of our
theologians, Luther in the forefront, believe that the holy Supper should never
be administered privately by one who is not in the public preaching office, by
a layman. That is partly because no such necessity can occur with the holy
Supper, as with Baptism and Absolution, that would justify a departure from
God’s ordinance ( I Cor 4:1; Romans 10:15; Heb 5:4); partly because the holy
Supper “is a public confession and so should have a public minister”; partly
because schisms can easily be brought about by such private Communion…[6]
On the other end of the livestream or by delegation by
pastoral letter, directing the laity to take upon themselves what Luther was
unwilling to suggest in 1533 and what the Augsburg Confession denies in Article
XIV is schismatic and good old-fashioned fanaticism. No doubt, one can engage in vision casting
over an internet livestream, but dividing what Lord has joined together
dislocates the object of faith as the speaker and the bread cannot complete the
action. In Luther’s day the church
inherited whispered Words of Institution in a problematic canon of the mass
eucharistic prayer. Now recent ersatz pastoral innovations to adapt to
the temporary state of quasi-quarantine, while not done in malice, are
ill-conceived, and attach an urgency to a temporary disruption of corporate
Divine Services that is incongruous with the typical tangential use of the
sacrament in many liturgically loose locales.
Assumed-emergencies, quasi-exiles, and exuberant pastoral
desire deliver the gifts by innovation can bring out the pre-existent fractures
more dramatically and reveal the need for further study and reflection so that
the marks of the church are not compromised and zeal for accomplishing
something does not undermine the goal of faith being given certainty in the
Word and the sacraments according to Christ’s institution.
The Words of our Lord which used within the institution
command “this do” inhabit a context for the mandate to be fulfilled. With regard to the office of the ministry we
ought to bear in mind the fact pointed out earlier, that in "The Private
Mass and the Consecration of Priests" of Luther in 1533, he does not
condone or recommend any attempts of "lay consecration" of the Supper
but simply recommends for exiled Christians in Turkey to be content, given
their situation, with their hunger and thirst for the Sacrament. The Lutheran fathers, including Chemnitz and
Formula of Concord, walked a fine line.
So in their denial that, "No man's word or work, be it the merit or
speaking of the minister," brings about the real presence is not to deny
that the body and blood are, "distributed through our ministry and
office" (cf. FC-SD, VII.74-77). Chemnitz states clearly that, "it is
with those who are legitimately chosen and called by God through the church,
therefore with the ministers to whom the use or administration of the ministry
of the Word and the sacraments has been committed."[7]
The office is not the source of the authority but the means
by which Christ serves His people in the Lord's Supper, the Divine Service. It
is "apostolic" in that pastors are called and sent by Christ for the
benefit of the church. They are “your
servants for the sake of Christ.” They
have His authority in the mandates He has given the holy office. We may point
to Apology XXIV, under the discussion of the term "Mass," where the
liturgy is identified with "the public ministry." Even when the "emergency" case is
cited from the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, it must be
pointed out that this emergency only mentions Baptism and Absolution and not
the Holy Supper. The Lord’s Supper
cannot be an emergency need the way Baptism or Absolution can be. Means of restoration and conversion are not
the same as means of sustenance or the “solid food” of faith.
The “action” of the Lord’s Supper, as it is described by the
orthodox Lutheran dogmaticians is a threefold action of the Supper. Consecration, distribution and reception are
what belongs to the institution. The office bearer consecrates and distributes,
all receive. Not only are the body and blood present in the reception, but also
in the distribution (according to the Lord’s word), in the thought of the
Confessions. The Formula of Concord
summarizes (emphasis added):
In the administration of Communion
the words of institution are to be spoken
or sung distinctly and clearly before the congregation and are under no
circumstances to be omitted. Thereby we render obedience to the command of
Christ, ‘This do.’ Thereby the faith of the hearers in the essence and benefits
of this sacrament (the presence of the body and blood of Christ, the
forgiveness of sins, and all the benefits which Christ has won for us by his
death and the shedding of his blood and which he give to us in his testament)
is awakened, strengthened and confirmed through his Word. And thereby the
elements of bread and wine are hallowed or blessed in this holy use, so
that therewith the body and blood of Christ are distributed to us to eat and to
drink, as Paul says, "The cup of blessing which we bless," which
happens precisely through the repetition and recitation of the words of institution.
The Words of Institution "are under no circumstances to
be omitted." More than this they are to be spoken or sung "clearly
and distinctly before the people." Through this, the bread and the wine
are consecrated. Hence in the understanding of Formula of Concord-Solid
Declaration VII and the Large Catechism, the Words of Institution are said
simultaneously over the elements and before the people. Does a livestream do this? Let’s cling to the certain and depart from
uncertain. Let’s not in times of crisis,
when faith is tried, further introduce doubt or shadows on the object of faith. Let’s avoid the edge of the cliff, the
shadows, the lay ministry, the grape juice, the video communion, the postal
delivery, the coffee creamer hermetically sealed elements, etc. Cling to what is certain and depart from
what is uncertain. Be stewards of the
mysteries of God, be a brave and steadfast spiritual father.
In such unusual times as a pandemic we rejoice in the
manifold instruments that the Lord has given to bestow forgiveness, life, and
salvation, by the work the Holy Spirit.
The reading of Scripture does not require an emergency circumstance for
its verbal delivery in , as Luther admonishes the head of the household (hausvater) to teach the Small Catechism
in his home, which includes the use of Scripture. The royal priesthood of baptized believers in
Christ and the pastoral office each have their realm of service and
duties. We appreciate each best when we
receive them as the Lord uniquely gave each one rather than in terms of
comparisons or even in terms of lists of functions. The mutual conversation and consolation of
the brethren wherever two or three are gathered in the name of Jesus is a great
resource in times of exile, temporary separation, and waiting upon the
Lord. It is also an opportunity to
recover our devotional use of Scripture, rejoice in our Baptism, and speak
words of forgiveness to one another in our households. Even when we go through a period of not
communing, we have been sent forth from the altar to our homes to “proclaim the
Lord’s death until He comes” to one another.
[1] "The
Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests" (Luther’s Works, AE:38; p.207).
[2]
“The Private Mass…”, p.163
[3]
“The Private Mass…”, p.199
[4]
“That These Words of Christ, ‘This Is My Body,’ Etc., Still Stand Firm Against
the Fanatics” (Luther’s Works, AE:37,
p.142).
[5]
Sermon on John 6:51, Luther’s Works AE:
23, p.121
[6] C.F.W. Walther. Pastoral Theology. Trans. John M.
Drickamer. (New Haven: Lutheran News Inc, 1995); p.134
Friday, September 13, 2019
Forthcoming book of interest: Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom: Michael Rectenwald: 9781943003266: Amazon.com: Gateway
Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom: Michael Rectenwald: 9781943003266: Amazon.com: Gateway: Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom [Michael Rectenwald] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom begins with familiar cultural politics as points of entry to the book's theme regarding the reach
Lutheran Reflections on The Benedict Option
Lutheran Reflections on The
Benedict Option: A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation by
Rod Dreher
Rev. John A. Frahm
III
Rod Dreher is senior editor of The American Conservative magazine. He was an adult convert to Roman Catholicism
but then became Eastern Orthodox in mid-life.
He has authored other books, including Crunchy Cons: The New Conservative Counterculture and its Return to
Roots, and leans more toward Agrarian paleo-conservatism rather than more
interventionist Fox News neo-conservatism, like the journal he edits which was
co-founded by Patrick Buchanan. Dreher
is a layman in the Eastern Orthodox Church and is married with children. He is stepping out on a limb, to a certain
extent, to attempt to learn from the past and make suggestions for the present
and future out of concern for traditional Christianity in the western world.
Dreher’s book,
along with a recent publication by Anthony
Esolen, have attracted attention from conservative Christian thinkers and
theologians from across denominational lines.
Some have noted that these men and others are trying to build upon the
thinking of The Naked Public Square
by the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus of First
Things magazine (a former Lutheran who became Roman Catholic). These men and others are attempting to come to
grips with the cultural and civil implications of the new era that the Church
is entering, at least in the western world.
While the matters of homosexuality,
gender,
and marriage
are current areas of attack, they are by no means the only areas of concern.
It is generally recognized that we are entering what has
been variously described as a “Post-Christian” era or a “Post-Constantinian”
era for Christianity in the western countries of the globe. The protections, support, and public regard
for Christianity that emerged with the Edict of Milan in 313 and what followed
from that over centuries are now evaporating in culture, government, and in the
moral and intellectual fabric of western culture. While many have been listening for the other
shoe to drop to signal the arrival of massive persecution on a grand scale, it
is more likely to emerge as “death by a thousand cuts” or something more
piecemeal. The inroads abortion,
euthanasia, support for homosexuality, transgenderism, rejection of
religious freedom, and attacks on the tax status of religious entities are all
indicators of some larger changes emerging below the surface. Dreher also provides some very helpful
critique and suggestions in regard to the dangers and masked damage that modern
technology poses for Christians and churches.
Dreher’s book is an attempt to help Christians cope based upon the
history of St. Benedict of Nursia in a time when barbarian heretics overtook
Rome. Dreher is not suggesting we all
go off to start a monastery or enter into cult-like compound, but to engage in
some practical and purposeful strategies to be a parallel culture within a
hostile society.
Now as a Lutheran reading Dreher’s book there are some things
that stand out. More than once Dreher
refers to the Lutheran Reformation as a “revolution” of Luther. Dreher doesn’t make any real distinctions
amongst the various Reformers. He
doesn’t understand that Luther was a conservative, catholic reformer as opposed
to the radical reformation of the Anabaptists, and others. He isn’t really familiar with Luther but
only a common caricature. This isn’t
surprising as Dreher is of Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox background
primarily. Dreher does mention Dietrich
Bonhoeffer positively. Early on in the
book Dreher also makes a critique of Occamist Nominalism, which is an entire
discussion in and of itself. Here I
would say that Dreher himself is somewhat out of step with his own Eastern
Orthodoxy and still has a foot in Roman Catholicism. Dreher does, however, mention more than once
in the book, that he is not suggesting that his plan is a substitute for the
theology of one’s confession of faith.
Dreher is not writing to do our theology for us.
As other reviewers have pointed out, Dreher does good
cultural and moral analysis in his book, but presents an idealized picture of
Benedictine Monasticism. Of course, in
the evangelical and catholic confession of the
Book of Concord, Lutherans have some concerns with monasticism on various
grounds. As the Confessions see
monastic life, what was originally a voluntary association became a burden upon
conscience beyond the confines of the Word of God. Those who did not have the personal gift of
being single often suffered damage to their faith through the obligations of
monastic life, as was also the case in regard to mandatorily single
clergy. Dreher is not making that kind
of a suggestion, thankfully. No doubt,
this is something he understands having moved from Roman Catholicism to Eastern
Orthodoxy. Now undoubtedly many good
things came from monastic life in terms of scholarship, resources for the
prayer life of the church, artistic works, and so forth but notably the
Augsburg Confession observes:
They taught that vows were equal to
Baptism; they taught that by this kind of life they merited forgiveness of sins
and justification before God. 12] Yea, they added that the monastic life not
only merited righteousness before God but even greater things, because it kept
not only the precepts, but also the so-called "evangelical counsels."
13] Thus they made men believe that the profession of monasticism was far
better than Baptism, and that the monastic life was more meritorious than that
of magistrates, than the life of pastors, and such like, who serve their
calling in accordance with God's commands, without any man-made services. 14]
None of these things can be denied; for they appear in their own books.
Not only did monasticism lead to justification by human
works, it also grossly led to a distortion of the biblical understanding of a
Christian’s various daily vocations in life where God has put them in relation
to their neighbor in the world. It
would be well to review what the Augustana and Apology as well as the
Smalcald Articles say about the problematic aspects of monasticism. But herein is where Dreher can be helpful in
our day to keep us in the tension between being “in the world but not of
it.” “Fasting and bodily preparation
are certainly fine outward training,” is something we subscribe to. Dreher points the reader toward asceticism
as “askesis” or “training” in self-denial to focus on the things of God. So long as such is not done for
self-justification then we might regard such as “fine outward training” when
interpreted in an evangelical way. And
here is where a Lutheran is going to say, “I wish he was familiar with a
Lutheran understanding of vocation.”
In terms of area of practical consideration Dreher strongly
commends Christians mutually supporting one another without attempting to
dilute one’s theological confession or engage in unionism. He’s suggesting cooperation in the context of
social interaction, mutual business support, homeschooling, and other
educational enterprises where proper.
Dreher also points to the need to be shrewd in regard to matters of
government, religious liberty, and free exercise of religion in the public
square. He means for Christians to be
prepared legally, financially, and in terms of options for education and work
for income. The LCMS has wisely sought
expertise from outside organizations like The
Becket Fund and the Alliance Defending
Freedom for our post-Roe vs. Wade
and post-Obergefell society. Various other pro-marriage,
pro-life and civil liberties groups are also active in
defending religious liberty and the rest of the Bill
of Rights, which are important for Christian and non-Christian citizen
alike. These realistic and very
plausible observations in The Benedict
Option are important for us all to consider to be “wise as serpents but
innocent as doves” and good stewards of what is entrusted to us.
The subject of education takes up a good amount of space in The Benedict Option. Dreher commends the renewal of classical
Christian education. Many confessional
Lutherans have already been taking up this cause for some time. The Consortium
for Classical Lutheran Education has been hard at work on this and the
online venture of Wittenberg
Academy provides a virtually global resource for the church. Dreher likewise strongly urges that where
classical Christian education cannot be had reasonably or where there are
families who cannot afford it, that homeschooling be done wherever possible, or
in some combination. Dreher, along
with others, have come to the conclusion that in most places the public schools
are for the time being a lost cause to protect our children from the new
morality (as others have pointed out, a
Gnostic morality) but also to properly catechize children in a way that is
not compartmentalized.
In terms of higher education, Dreher observes that
Christians will need to reclaim their higher education institutions for
theological orthodoxy and serious piety.
In other places he suggests a theologically rigorous while personally
supportive campus ministry program (though he doesn’t use the term). The more full-time, and serious, the
better. Dreher is quick to observe that
just because a person goes to a Christian school or a school within one’s own
denomination, this does not guarantee any more likely result of theological
orthodoxy amongst the faculty (not just the theology department or dean of
chapel), or a more holy and edifying lifestyle on campus amongst the student
population. Oversight visitation of
church college campuses in these various moral and theological matters is due
now just as seriously as we had done with our seminaries in days past. The examination of the theological faculties
and chapel services are not the only aspects of campus that are matters of
confession. A little leaven leavens the
whole lump. As Dreher points out, when
we are moved to start new faithful schools at various levels, Christians need
to be prepared to bear crosses and not to make as much money yet also consider
the needs of those Christians who are unable to pay as much. Dreher also emphasizes also that Christians
need to give sacrificially so that those with expertise, training, and good
professionalism are honored respectably.
With these changes on the horizon, this also means that we need to find
ways to bolster caring for church workers and other Christians who need help in
retirement or disability as a diaconal manifestation of mercy.
Throughout the book Dreher commends strong catechesis in
churches that is not compartmentalized to simply just be a “class” with
minimalized expectations and detached from the larger liturgical life of the
church. While from a confessional
Lutheran point of view there are issues with how Dreher speaks of sacramentalism
and his theology of liturgy, his general call for returning to historic
liturgical practices with solid theology behind it is laudable, all within the
context of a solid life of prayer and notably, church discipline that is
holding up Christian truth. The work of
the Concordia Catechetical Academy
and recent resources
published by Concordia Publishing House can help in this regard. (But perhaps there will come a time when
publishing and literature distribution may need to be done underground.) The
challenge of the Church Growth Movement and its related spawn have urged
confessional Lutherans to go back and study their own liturgical
theology and hymnody. But there are
many quarters of our synod where that is still unknown and barely
tolerated. There are some quarters where
catechesis is only a shadow of what it once was. May we remain faithful to those treasures and
not seeking to import what is not of our heritage from either direction.
Additionally, opportunities and facilities for retreats to
help sustain not only church workers or age-segregated groups but families and
Christian singles in the faith amid the cultural onslaught could be something
given a more deliberate and liturgical consideration among us. Perhaps congregations in more peaceful or restful
and isolated places, Lutheran camps, campuses, campus ministries, or cottages
or even urban apartment complexes could be organized not as “camps” for 1960s
style age-segregated
religious recreation, but as serious spiritual retreats and places of
continuing catechesis and training in the faith but with a Lutheran
understanding of vocation and justification by grace alone undergirding it
all. They could also serve as
inexpensive hostels for faithful Lutherans traveling and so become something
like a modern version of that mutual support and hospitality the early church
knew in Acts 2. They can’t cost us
thousands of dollars to make use of these things. Chaplains, deaconesses, and theological
faculties could be engaged to help enrich, oversee, and strength such places
and be a clearing house for materials to take home back into the battle. These, then, in turn can become mission outposts
for the times of nihilistic darkness.
We will need retreats, as the world we live in is surpassing the vision
of Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, as well as other dystopian authors who forecasted
a Malthusian eugenics-driven, technocratic police state of globalist
proportions… a beastly Tower of Babel
2.0.
Part of what Dreher is attempting to do with The Benedict Option is to learn from the
experience of Christians past chapters of Christian history where there has
been oppression and alienation from the culture or government. Dreher suggests cultivating “parallel
structures” to that of the Post-Christian culture. Dreher points out how some attempted to do
this under Communism in Poland. Dreher
wants to limit the exposure of Christians and especially children to the
corrosive effects of the hostile culture as well as provide practical resources
for even ordinary aspects of life that may be taken away because of edicts of
political correctness or outright hostility (Christians providing baked goods
or arranging flowers without being forced to compromise their confession of the
faith). In some instances, Christians already have
some “parallel structures” to offer alternatives to organizations that have
either watered down their Lutheran commitments or abandoned it altogether. Parallel structures or ending old weakened
institutions in favor of newly constituted Gnesio-Lutheran institutions may be
needed for education at various levels, finances, legal, insurance and
retirement benefits, hospitals, retirement investing, alternatives to
compromised monetary systems, church resources, construction, resources for
changing tax situations for our institutions and clergy, Fourth Amendment
protections, multimedia for education, vacation spots, safer technology,
etc. Maybe there is room here to
strategize on providing alternatives for probably scenarios where Christians
may lose their businesses or where our confession of faith could be compromised
by continuing to use a traditional public service or business. Here there are some cautions in terms of vocation
from a Lutheran point of view, but at the same time Dreher wants us rightly
to think of this in terms of the newly emerging context.
Dreher covers a lot of territory throughout The Benedict Option. One thing that I find notably absent from Dreher,
at least in a direct reference, is a clear sense of or articulation of
Christian eschatology. It may be there, but it isn’t evident to
me. Perhaps pop American Christian views
on eschatology have soured some on speaking in these terms. Perhaps some would take speaking of the End
Times and bearing the cross in that context as defeatist. “Why fight or do all this since it’s all
going to burn?” someone could cynically conclude, however wrongly. Perhaps good old Millennialism or the red
herring of Dispensationalism gave us a bad taste in our mouths to speak of
eschatology but given the global movements in these religious and
cultural/moral matters, one thinks of the saying of our Lord, “as it was in the
days of Noah, so it will be when the Son of Man returns.” In the days of Noah, the thoughts of man’s
heart were only evil all the time.
Perhaps it is in politically correct utopianism that people will say
“peace, peace” when the winnowing fork will be applied at the last. To be sure, we are not to be in the business
of predicting the day or the hour but we are to note the change of
seasons. Also absent from mention is
the fact that we
are not on a level playing field with Lucifer
and his demons about mounting covert attack and even becoming more overt it
would seem as wolves rarely feel the need to don sheep’s clothing anymore. The epistles are rife with eschatology and
encouragement to be watchful.
In Dreher’s The
Benedict Option (or BenOp, as its popularly abbreviated) the author
primarily calls out to conservative Christian laymen to be strategic,
thoughtful, and involved in preparing for the coming storm against the Church
in the western world. “The
prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it”
(Proverbs 27:12). We should not put our
trust in princes and where authority steps outside its bounds, obey God rather
than men. We would be wise in our
various stations in life and collectively as congregations, educational
institutions, church organizations, and synods to anticipate the coming changes
and prepare wisely but in faith.
There will comes to stand firm and
confess and suffer even martyrdom, and there will be times to flee to the
hills. And the Lord has promised that
the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church. That is, hell will not be able to withstand
its advance. At the same time, there is
no promise that a denomination, a synod, or a particular congregation will
abide unto the end. We are not the
saviors of the church, only the Lord is the Savior and foundation of the
Church. The church is founded upon the
foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ Himself as the
cornerstone.
Our call is to remain steadfast and
wise in our God-given vocations, give an answer for the hope within us, and to
be wise stewards of what is entrusted to us, discerning the seasons. We are to guard that which makes us
Christians and which makes the Church, being stewards of the mysteries of
God. The marks
of the Church, the rightly preached Word and the
rightly administered sacraments are the life of the church. To support those marks we might consider
Dreher’s analysis and suggestions and benefit from them. For the discerning and catechized
confessional Lutheran Dreher gives us some practical direction but our theology
must ultimately drive what is done (if that’s you, do read it). Will the culture come back around and the
rain shower of the Gospel come back through the western world on a similar
scale as before or will this be the situation we persevere in until the Last
Day? That we do not know. We confess the truth along a lonely way in
this world but it is also a well-worn path ahead of us. It is the lonely way… together, following in
the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
But either way, it is wise to
prayerfully consider these things and speak of these things with each other,
richly engrossed in Scripture and Confessions,
receiving the gifts of God in the Divine Service. But one thing is clear, we cannot wait
around with things on cruise control with the way we’ve approached things
collectively since the 1980s. We cannot
rest in nostalgia of “Garrison Keillor style church basement Lutheranism” or
wait around for the next Barna Research book or and then uncritically implement
whatever suggestions Barna offers to pander to the cultural trends and forget
preaching repentance. We cannot go on imitating
the Neo-Evangelicals or the ELCA’s
gospel reductionism or simply avoid theology ostrich-style. It is time to repent of looking for a magic
button. While it isn’t perfect or
complete, the BenOp is not a magic button.
Some have written thoughtful critiques that warn of the weaknesses or
blindspots in Dreher’s advice. Read
those as well as you discern the times. For us, however, it is time to be actively back
in the Scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions, learning from the saints who have
gone before us, with our heads lifted up watchfully looking for the return of
Christ while bearing our crosses through tribulation, surrounded by various
forces in spiritual war, and worshiping before the throne of the Lamb who was
slain and yet lives. I’m grateful to Rod
Dreher for getting us thinking about some of these things.
Saturday, February 6, 2016
Quotations from Martin Luther
About Christians Making The Sign of the Cross
1 In the
morning, when you rise, make the sign of
the cross and say, “In the name of
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.” [Small Catechism, Luther’s Morning & Evening Prayers][1]
_________________________________________________________
“It
is certain that if anyone could speak these words “And the Word became flesh”
in true faith and with strong confidence in hours of the greatest temptation,
he would be delivered from his trouble and distress; for the devil fears these
words when they are uttered by a believer. I have often read and also witnessed
it myself that many, when alarmed and distraught, spoke these words “And the
Word became flesh” and at the same time made
the sign of the cross, and thereby routed the devil.”[2]
________________________________________________________________
“You
must never doubt that God is aware of your distress and hears your prayer. You
must not pray haphazardly or simply shout into the wind. Then you would mock
and tempt God. It would be better not to pray at all, than to pray like the
priests and monks. It is important that you learn to praise also this point in
this verse: “The Lord answered me and set me free.” The psalmist declares that
he prayed and cried out, and that he was certainly heard. If the devil puts it
into your head that you lack the holiness, piety, and worthiness of David and
for this reason cannot be sure that God will hear you, make the sign of the cross, and say to yourself: “Let those be
pious and worthy who will! I know for a certainty that I am a creature of the
same God who made David. And David, regardless of his holiness, has no better
or greater God than I have.”[3]
_____________________________________________________________________
“Whoever
believes in the Son will have eternal life. Cling to His neck or to His
garment; that is, believe that He became man and suffered for you. Cross yourself and say: “I am a Christian and will conquer.” And
you will find that death is vanquished. In Acts 2:24 St.
Peter says that death was not able to hold Christ, since deity and humanity
were united in one Person. In the same way we, too, shall not remain in death;
we shall destroy death, but only if we remain steadfast in faith and cling to
death’s Destroyer.”[4]
_________________________________________________________________
“Now,
is that not a horrible disease and an abominable sin, one that should terrify
us so that we hate Mammon from the heart, make
the sign of the cross against him and run away as from the devil? Who would
not be terrified to fall into this and to hear this judgment spoken over him?
He will be called “God’s enemy,” one who not only despises God but even wishes
that God and His Word did not exist, just so that he could have the freedom to
do as he pleases and wills, to insult God and vex Him. Figure out for yourself
what the fate of such a person will be. He is saddling himself with a man who
will eventually prove to be too heavy for him.”[5]
[1]Tappert, T. G. 2000, c1959. The Book of Concord : The Confessions of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church
(Small Cat.: VII, 1). Fortress Press: Philadelphia
[2]Luther, M. 1999, c1957. Luther's Works, vol. 22 :
Sermons on the Gospel of St. John:
Chapters 1-4 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.).
Luther's Works. Vol. 22 (Jn 1:15).
Concordia Publishing House: Saint
Louis
[3]Luther, M. 1999, c1958. Luther's Works, vol. 14 :
Selected Psalms III (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.).
Luther's Works. Vol. 14 (Ps 118:6). Concordia Publishing House: Saint Louis
[4]Luther, M. 1999, c1957. Luther's Works, vol. 22 :
Sermons on the Gospel of St. John:
Chapters 1-4 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.).
Luther's Works. Vol. 22 (Jn 3:20).
Concordia Publishing House: Saint
Louis
[5]Luther, M. 1999, c1956. Luther's Works, vol. 21 :
The Sermon on the Mount and the Magnificat (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald
& H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works. Vol. 21 (Mt 6:25). Concordia Publishing House: Saint Louis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)