Paul in Athens

I should have something good about mothers. But instead I’ll just pass along what they’d want me to say. God says give your mother a call. Honest, it is in the Bible somewhere. Ok, it’s not, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Talk to your mother today. Tell her you love her.

Our first reading for this Sunday from Acts 17 has had its share of acclaim recently. There was a boomlet of taking Paul in Athens as the model for evangelism in the modern world. In some ways it was rehashing part of Richard Neibuhr’s Christ and Culture. That mid-20^th-century work, when the culture at large would still listen to a theologian, examined various ways the church could interact with society. Christ against Culture (the culture war crusaders), Christ of Culture (Christendom) and three versions of Christ above culture (those who opt out like the Amish, two kingdoms overlapping, or a transformation.) As Lutherans, we tend to find a sweet spot in that two kingdoms approach. Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is Gods. The call of the Kingdom of God is above the culture without denying that culture has its place. And its role can be good or bad. The Paul in Athens boomlet was very much transformational. Find the best in the culture, claim it for Christ, and demonstrate how it points to the fulfillment of Jesus.

The Athens of Paul’s time was long past its glory days, although they would regale you with plenty of boring stories. That was the main vocation of the Aeropagas. Imagining themselves as the heirs of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Epicurus and debating the ideas of the day. Rich people would send their kids to Athens for a year or two like we would send our bright young things to Boston. Various Philosophers would compete for the tuition dollars and think deep thoughts. Those heirs stumble across Paul reasoning in the Synagogue and preaching in the marketplace and bring him to the Aeropagus to understand what he is teaching. Now that description I’ve given is a little rough, but I think it captures Luke’s feeling when he summarizes, “Now all the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there would spend their time in nothing except telling or hearing something new.”

Paul’s approach is classic Christ Transforms Culture. He ID’s something he finds good. “Men of Athens I see that in every way you are very religious, you even worship an unknown god.” He claims this good for Christ. “What you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.” Along the way he claims a couple of their poets. “In him we live and move and have our being” and “For we are indeed his offspring.” If you really want to find the fulfillment of what those poets spoke of you need to understand Christ.

This is the method of every evangelical youth pastor. But saying that you can see how easy it is to mock. Instead of claiming the good, the true and the beautiful, we claim the latest Pixar film. “See Nemo/Elsa/Anna/Riley really is a Christ figure.” (And yes, I can point you to every one of those essays. And they aren’t all completely dumb.) Take something your audience already knows and ask them to see something more. It becomes a rhetorical trick. Not something of real transformational value.

Not transformational like the preaching of the resurrection. Paul’s entire rhetorical strategy is a wind up to “an of this he has given assurance to all by raising Jesus from the dead.” Of course our lectionary cuts it out there, because Paul the great Apostle walks off triumphant converting the entire Aeropagus, right? Not right. Continuing past the lectionary end, “Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked, some said we will hear of this again, but some men joined and believed, Dionysisus and woman named Damaris.” A far cry from the 3000 that were converted at Peter’s simple proclamation on Pentecost.

After Athens, Paul goes to Corinth. And it is at Corinth that Paul tells us “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified…my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power (1 Cor. 2:2,4 ESV).” A complete change of even rhetorical strategy.

The church for decades I think has been trying to be winsome for evangelism. And I’m not saying it is time to be a jerk for Christ. But when we talk about evangelism, I’d turn less to Paul in Athens, and more to Paul in Corinth. We preach Christ crucified. To some this will be a stumbling block. To some foolishness. But the lambs who hear, the power of God. The world is the world. Evangelism is calling the lambs of the sheepfold out of the world to follow the good shepherd who has given his life for the sheep. They will hear his voice.

A Good Life Script

Sociologists or Psychologists might use the term life scripts. They are simply narratives of how one might see his life playing out if everything went perfectly. Nothing ever goes perfectly in life, but a general life script is rather robust. Before the great disruption these were things fathers gave to sons and mothers to daughters almost by default. Those life scripts did a couple of things. First, they passed on the collective wisdom of the ages. But then they also gave society’s general approval to accomplishments that benefited both the individual and society. Graduating from school, getting a job, getting married and having kids is a successful life script. If you followed it and stuck with it you will find your share of satisfaction out of life.

But for many people those life scripts were thrown out around mid-century. On the one hand, it opened life up to an endless series of choices which could be more rewarding and fulfilling than the defaults parents used to hand on. It opened up self-actualization on a clean sheet of paper. On the other, if you were not able to set your own goals, and society stopped rewarding and often punished as “square” the former choices, many thinking they were chasing self-actualization simply shipwrecked their lives.

It is spring, and as they say that is when “a young man’s heart turns to love.” I also just saw past my 25^th anniversary. And something as a pastor that I do want to encourage is a piece of a life script with biblical backing. The very first act of God toward mankind is officiating a wedding. We Lutherans might not call marriage a sacrament, but that is more because sacraments are a definitional game, and we are very specific. A Lutheran sacrament is for the forgiveness of sins (along with instituted by Christ and having a visible means.) But the first blessing of God to all mankind are the vocations of husband and wife. The right and proper life script of a Christian most likely involves marriage. We will discuss exceptions which are not about self-actualization. Our culture is still pushing that well past its sell-by date and even defines marriage around it. But a marriage that is about individual self-actualization is not a marriage.

So first, what is a marriage? Jesus centers marriage in his teaching in Matthew 19 and Mark 10 and he quotes from that first marriage, almost like he was the officiant. The picture given is that marriage is the creation of “one flesh (Gen 2:24).” The individuals are gone, the marriage is the reality. And from here I am roughly going to follow the marriage liturgy’s description. That reality of our marriages is a reflection, an icon, of the union of Christ and the church. And just as you cannot imagine Christ and the church splitting, a rupture in an icon of it tells us something has gone wrong.

But what is the purpose of marriage? Marriage is first “intended by God for the mutual companionship, help and support that each person ought to receive, both in prosperity and adversity.” If we are seeking self-actualization, when things aren’t working to our personal advantage, we take off. The Christian marriage is made of sterned stuff. Marriage is about the sexual union. “God has not called us to impurity but in holiness.” Sex is an aspect of marriage and apart from that is an act of theft and falsehood. Why exactly? Because “God also established marriage for the procreation of children.” This is the one that bothers the self-actualization folks the most. Marriage has a purpose outside of the self. And that purpose is the creation of the living one flesh union of children. The last purpose the liturgy gives us is that marriage exists so that those children “may be brought up in the fear and instruction of the Lord.” This is a primary Christian calling. God blessed it in Eden before the fall. And paradoxically sacrificing the self for the union and the kids will lead to much greater satisfaction than most self-actualization schemes.

So what can we say about exceptions? The apostles, after hearing Jesus’ teaching on marriage, decide that “it would be better not to marry (Matt 19:10).” It is something of a crude joke ala “heh, if I can’t divorce why would I ever marry. I’ll just fornicate.” And Jesus responds to them that their assumption is wrong. “There are eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom.” The apostle Paul elaborates on this in 1 Corinthians 7. The married person “is anxious about worldly things (7:33).” Things like husband and wife and their welfare. Things like kids and their instruction. But the single person has the ability “to secure undivided devotion to the Lord.” Not to self-actualize to the maximum, to live only for the self. But that calling is to live for God. There is a reason both Jesus and Paul think that is a tougher calling. Jesus adds his phrase, “Let the one who is able to receive this receive it” which I always read as him thinking not too many.

So, you do have the Christian freedom to follow different life scripts. But contrary to the world there are God ordained paths. Marriage is a likely path for most. And something to be held up for honor.

Religious Taxonomy

I’m sure it is passe, or as discredited in elite spaces as the resurrection, but Bloom’s taxonomy for education still makes sense to me as an intellectual model. A Taxonomy is simply a description of the way things are. The glaring error, if there is one in Bloom’s description, is that it is intellectual. It makes no room for emotional reality. And if you think we are first emotional elephants with little riders occasionally with great effort altering the course of the stampede, that is a big error. But it’s the best I’ve seen. It holds that the foundations of all learning are: Knowledge, comprehension and application. Knowledge is simple facts, 2+2 = 4. Comprehension means not just memorization of facts, but some understanding of what they mean. That in 2+2 you are doing addition. And then application means some of the facts can change. If you know 2+2 is 4, and the concept of addition, you can then answer 2+3. Learning things like facts is deeply out of fashion, but without a broad base of facts that you understand and can apply, the rest of the taxonomy is meaningless. The rest of the taxonomy is analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The levels do tend to blur together a bit, but analysis would be something like realizing 2+3 = 3+2. The order of addition doesn’t matter. Synthesis takes multiple analyzed things and creates something new. It’s how you would go from addition to multiplication. But then evaluation at the very pinnacle would ask things like what am I multiplying and should I? Running gain of function research on a virus in a Chinese lab to escape US laws is an amazing act of synthesis. It is a terrible act of evaluation. Somewhere you hope that your rulers are skilled at evaluation, which could also be known as wisdom.

Most of Catechism class is knowledge, comprehension and application. Do you know the 10 commandments? What do they mean? Can you apply them to your life directly? There is a reason that we still half-heartedly attempt to memorize the catechism. It gives everyone a foundation of what the Christian religion teaches. Because I do happen to believe that we are emotional elephants with little riders, catechism also tries to teach a bit about prayer. Prayer is arming the rider or giving him some reins. But I attempt to end catechism with a bit of those higher level skills. Hopefully having a basic understanding of the religion you were baptized into, that your parents have attempted to hand onto you, can we look at other world religions in analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

If anyone went to college and was forced to take a comparative religions class, this is often the exercise that schools used to tear down a naïve faith. Sometimes intentionally, sometimes just because that faith never matured beyond knowledge, comprehension and application. Generations of students who had little depth in knowledge, comprehension and application would be lead through a project of analysis of all religion and fed an evaluation that they were all the same and all false. I run through it in catechism more as an inoculation. You can do this and come to a much different evaluation. Also as an invitation to a mature faith, opening a door that says you have only scratched the surface, and the making of a good theologian is life with reflection.

As my framework I use something original with Dr. Stephen Prothero. His primary categories for religions are: problem, solution, means of solution, exemplars, texts, and organization. So as an act of analysis answering this for Christianity should be easy for a confirmand. Problem: Sin. Solution: Salvation. Means: Grace, Faith and works/love. (As Lutherans we dramatically downgrade works, but we have a tight distinction between justification and sanctification.) Exemplars: The saints. Texts: Bible, The Confessions (which for the students is the catechism.) Organization would be the various denominations or theological traditions. As a comparison Islam. Problem: Pride, Solution: submission, Means: 5 pillars of Islam, exemplars: Muhammed, texts: Quran, Hadith, Organization: Sunni, Shia. When you introduce a second set you can do some evaluation, like asking the question what is the difference between saying the problem is sin and saying it is pride?

Over the years, as I’ve run this final exercise I’ve started to think of another religion. We have all been catechized to some extent in a new dominant religion in the west. What does it say the problem is? Not pride, certainly not sin. I think it would assert the problem is intolerance. The solution is acceptance. I’ve got my own synthesis of what the default religion of the US is. It has means, texts and is creating organization. But it’s an interesting exercise for understanding the world you live in and the mission of the church in it. And then the deeper question is one of evaluation. How does this new dominant religion compare to Christianity (or other world religions)? For me I think its problem and solution are as oblivious of actual humans as Bloom’s Taxonomy not even thinking about emotions, but such things are the mediation of a mature faith.

Lord and Christ

Peter’s Pentecost sermon – which a portion of it is our first reading today, the full sermon is in Acts 2:14-41 – is worth pondering deeper.

What gives Peter the opportunity to preach? Something has happened. We know from reading the story that what was happening is the Holy Spirit has come, but nobody else understands that. In fact everyone else, all good Jews who have gathered in Jerusalem for one of the travel holidays, think that what has happened is something scandalous and embarrassing. Peter and the disciples are drunk at 9 AM. The modern environment of the church can be described as being surrounded by good Jews to the extent that Americans right now seem to be in a moralistic and judgmental mood. There are unwritten rules of society that gets enforced in quite extreme ways. You can find yourself canceled. And what the church has to say on many things is scandalous and embarrassing. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. Jesus told those disciples this before the passion. “And when [The Holy Spirit] comes, he will convict the world concerning sin, and righteousness and judgement. (John 16:8).” It is the work of the Holy Spirit in what from the world’s perspective are scandalous things that is the opportunity to proclaim the good news.

How does Peter’s sermon start? He grounds his proclamation firmly in the prior works and words of God. Peter quotes a long passage from the prophet Joel, an apocalyptic passage. What do I mean by apocalyptic? I mean in the simplest definition of that word, a revelation. God has revealed himself. Any time God reveals himself is in an apocalypse. And there are all kinds of apocalypses. There are personal revelations. When the sinner is convicted of their sin, it is an apocalypse. All the way up to the final apocalypse, when every knee shall bow at the revelation of Jesus Christ in all his glory. When the man comes around. The church’s message is always grounded in the self-revelation of God.

What particular revelation is Peter bringing before his audience? “Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know.” The greatest of these signs is his crucifixion and resurrection. You killed him, but God raised him up. Whatever prior revelation you are holding onto. In the case of those Jews Peter assumes it is the Davidic promises. We all might have revelations that we are holding onto. Like Peter himself wanting to build booths on the mount of transfiguration. These are all insignificant compared to the bare facts of the passion and resurrection. “Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that the Father has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

That proclamation is both law and gospel. It is law to the extent that I and my sin crucified him. To the extent that I want to keep my revelation about him, it is a judgement. But it is also the sweetest gospel. This Jesus whom we know is Lord and Christ. The Lord is not Caesar or any other tyrant, but Jesus. The Messiah, the one we have been looking for, is not some political personage or charismatic movement, but Jesus. This Jesus whom we crucified, but who prayed for our forgiveness. Being convicted of sin is also being convicted of righteousness. My sin killed him, but His Grace has given me his righteousness.

Being convicted the crowd asks, “what shall we do?” Peter’s simple answer is “repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus. Receive the Holy Spirit.” This revelation is not just for some Jews. This revelation is for you and for your Children. This revelation is for all who are far off whom God is calling to himself.

Peter’s sermon has new relevance in our world. The church scandalizes the world. But the church is still a revelation. It reveals to the world its sin, its righteousness and its judgement. It places before the world Jesus Christ. Here is your Hope and Salvation.

Quasimodogeniti

Did anybody read the Hunchback of Notre Dame? See the cartoon? Does anybody remember what his name was? Hint: It wasn’t “Hey, hunchback.” Insert Jeopardy theme….

Ok, we are back. What was your answer? The right answer is Quasimodo. Which is a strange name. Anybody care to hazard a guess where that came from?

Every Sunday of the church year has what are called propers. They include the introit which is the entrance hymn/chant, the prayer of the day, the appointed readings and a few other things. If you were doing a choir led mass, the propers are all the parts that the choir and minister would probably chant. The congregation itself would probably be relatively non-participatory, the high church version of the worship band. The Lutheran Reformation gave to the congregation the role of the choir. With angels, and archangels and all the host of heaven, we laud and magnify the name. But the important proper of the day for this pastor’s corner is the introit.

The same way that people used to sign letters “On the Feast Day of St. X” or something like that to date correspondence, the weeks were actually known by their introits. Specifically the first word of the introit, in Latin because that is what the church used and many propers even after the reformation would remain in Latin for a long time. If you have an old copy of The Lutheran Hymnal (TLH) published in 1941 lying around, you can see that those old names are still on the church calendar for many weeks – the weeks after Transfiguration, the weeks of Lent, the weeks of Easter. Easter 2 was known as Quasimodogeniti. Quasimodo the hunchback was born on this Sunday and given the name from the Introit.

When the propers went to a three year cycle many of those old names were broken. They had already been strained when everything went into the vernacular as long time ago. But the Introits are meant to carry a theme for the service and the week, which they do very well in the Sundays after Easter. Quasimodogeniti is Latin for “as newborn infants.” As newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow into salvation, if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.

Easter 2 in the church year is a day of infancy on the faith. Thomas hasn’t seen, so he won’t believe, until he places his fingers in the holes in the hands. We start reading from the Epistle of First Peter which tells us that we have come into our inheritance in the resurrection. “He has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” And as such infants, “long for the pure spiritual milk.”

What is that pure Spiritual Milk? The Introit’s answers are: “Give thanks to the Lord, call upon his name, make know his deeds among the peoples, sing praises to him.” Thanksgiving, prayer, proclamation and adoration. What are the things that allow us to grow up into that full inheritance of the resurrection? Hearing the word proclaimed and believing it. Returning in proper thanks for all the Christ has done for us. Trusting in the Lord in prayer. “Seek the Lord and his strength, seek his presence continually.” Never forgetting the proper adoration due to God Almighty. “Glory in His Holy Name!” These are the things of pure spiritual milk that you might grow up to salvation.

And unlike our physical selves who outgrow milk, the Kingdom of God is a land flowing with milk and honey. Every Sunday one can return to that pure spiritual milk: the word, thanksgiving, prayer, and adoration. If indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.

Link to the Propers for Easter 2

Resurrection Life (Pastor’s Corner for Easter Sunday)

A Happy Easter to Everyone.

One of the things that Luther found helpful in his spiritual life was a work he thought was written by Tauler, the Theologia Germanica. It’s a work of medieval mysticism. You might consider it something like “The Imitation of Christ” by Thomas a Kempis. Or even later maybe the “Spiritual Exercises” by Ignatius Loyola. Calvin, being the strictly logical lawyer, rejected it completely. The more radical reformation picked it up and much mischief was done. Those two facts are probably what fed Protestantism’s allergy to even slight mysticism. Of course since it was a Luther favorite, it was eventually banned by the Catholic church in 1612. Although they removed the ban in the 20^th century.

I bring that up for two reasons. First, I know that I wouldn’t bring up mysticism inflected things into the pulpit, so in a week that I need three sermons it is safe to use for this article. Second, I do think that a bit of mysticism is healthy for the soul. One of my sources of this is the sayings of the desert fathers. These sayings and honestly their entire lives are just so radically different than ours trying to ponder what they say puts me way out of my comfort zone.

On Easter, pondering the resurrection, I wanted to share a story that strangely enough is repeated in the collection of sayings. The first one by Macarius the Great. He was a monk around 390 AD. The entire movement was inspired just a bit earlier by Anthony the Great. Many men and women born to great families and wealth would give it all up to live in the Egyptian desert. Macarius’ story is of meeting a distraught widow. Her husband had taken a deposit of money on trust and hidden it. But he had died and not disclosed to her where it was. Their children would have been taken in slavery if she could not produce it. Macarius asks where the man was buried and tells her to go home. He proceeds to the tomb and asks the corpse, “Where is it hidden?” The corpse replied. Macarius then tells the man to return to resting until the final resurrection. He tells the widow where it is, and she frees her children.

The second version is about Abba Spyridon. A young girl had been entrusted with a valuable ornament that she hid. But she too died soon after without telling anyone where it was. The depositor came asking for it and pressed the girl’s father. Abba Spyridon went to the girl’s tomb and asked God, “show me, before the time, the resurrection promised her.” His hope was not disappointed as she appeared alive to her father and named the place.

What do I say about these? Well, that is part of what mysticism is about, I don’t exactly know. And it is probably different for you anyway. But this is what I would say. We live in time and are worried about many things. Like where our treasure is buried. The truth is that our treasure is buried with Christ. And Christ is risen. Nothing that we think is lost is truly gone. It is with Christ. Whatever we entrust to him we have for eternity. And that is an eternity that starts today. Do we all have resurrection appearances to us? No. And in our skeptical age I’m not sure we’d see even if we did. But the desert Fathers were open to such things. We are all one in Christ. And Christ is not dead, but lives. He lives to make us free.

The Path of Evil

There are six things that the LORD hates,

seven that are an abomination to him:

haughty eyes, a lying tongue,

and hands that shed innocent blood,

a heart that devises wicked plans,

feet that make haste to run to evil,

a false witness who breathes out lies,

and one who sows discord among brothers.

– Proverbs 6:16-19

Proverbs as a book is part of the wisdom literature. The Hebrews have a three-fold segmentation of the Old Testament: the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings. The Torah is the first five books of Moses. The prophets are the history books and the individual prophetic books prior to the exile. The writings are the Psalms, the wisdom literature and any book that came during or after the exile. Part of the purpose of the division is a statement on the authoritativeness of the work. The Torah or the law was deadly serious. Think the 10 commandments carved in stone by the finger of God himself. The prophets are authoritative, but they are also influenced by their specific situation. The writings are even more free. It is all the word of God, but the Spiritual Insight to directly apply something from Proverbs is much higher than from the Law. Christians have often followed something similar in the New Testament. Everybody accepts the binding nature of the Gospels, Paul’s Major Letters and 1 Peter, 1 John, and James on the Christian life. Likewise the Pastorals and 2 Peter, 2-3 John are solid counsel. But as much as Revelation fascinates us, you don’t base any dogma of the church on that apocalyptic work alone. Saying the scriptures are readable by the common man, is not also saying that every reading is appropriate or that there aren’t better and worse readers of the Scriptures.

I saw someone quote the above in an interesting way. They essentially asked: how does Satan work in this world? There are certainly ways that Satan works against individuals, but Lewis’ Screwtape is interesting in this. Individuals are left to minor tempters like Wormtongue or Screwtape himself. The demonic hierarchy is focused on longer term projects. They are always attempting to build the Tower of Babel. So how is that done? According to this interpreter here is the devil’s playbook in this world.

It starts with “haughty eyes.” The old King James translators said “a proud look.” It is something of an idiom in the original that we don’t really have an analog for. Or maybe we do, but it’s rather crude. Someone whose “farts don’t smell.” If you had an Alexa around an 8 year old you know that “Alexa, make a fart noise” was one of their favorite things. Likewise the movie Minions gave them “the fart gun.” Scatological humor is something that kids get, because they aren’t worried about pride. They know we are ridiculous creatures made of dust. Satan’s first act is to get us to think much more of ourselves than those giggling kids. To enter the Kingdom is to be like a child.

Lying and pride go hand in hand. We lie to protect our own picture of ourselves. We might even go so far as to kill someone to protect the lie. Imagine an entire nation engaged in pride, and a lie that leads to bloodshed of the innocent.

The progression of evil is from the heart that devises wicked plans to those who run to carry them out. It starts with a single heart that despises the order of God. It ends with partisans and armies hastening to build concentration camps and gulags and security states. The modern Towers of Babel.

But we aren’t stupid. How do we get led down such paths? The bold lies. The false witnesses. The big lies. Whose purpose is to sow discord among brothers. Those who should feel the bonds of fraternity and fellowship are set against each other.

There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination. It’s from the book of Proverbs. It is not the gospel that assures of our eternal salvation in Christ. It is wisdom for living this life. It is the Word that might help us find the “you are here” marker. You know a tree by its fruit. Is it producing innocent blood, evil works and discord?

Needing a Sabbath

“The Lord will get his Sabbath, one way or another.”

That’s an older proverb I unexpectedly heard someone quote the other day. I say older when I mean archaic. Because you’d have to know what a Sabbath is first. Then you’d have to know both who The Lord is and that he commanded one. And it would probably help to understand that this Lord had a bunch of fights in his own day about the Sabbath. All things which are no longer common knowledge. But it struck me that ears might be deaf to exactly the wisdom they need to hear.

The first thing I always ask when I hear a proverb is “Is it True?” In this world that is on something of a sliding scale and it often depends upon the context. There are rock solid proverbs – “A fool and his money are soon parted.” There are marginal ones – “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.” As long as you are content with marginal returns, accepting what the universe gives you, this is great advice (and holding an MBA and CFA exactly what I’d tell 98% of people), but it is terrible advice to anyone who is after excellence. Financially, you wanted all your eggs on Amazon at almost any time in the past 25 years. If you want to make the Big Leagues, that better be what you are doing all the time. In asking “Is it True?” one of the big helps I find is asking, “Is it biblical?” “Cleanliness is next to godliness” is not, neither is “God helps those who help themselves.” What about this one?

It is not directly a biblical Proverb. You won’t find it attributed to Solomon. Neither does Peter, James or Paul mouth it. But there is a deep way in which “The Lord will get his Sabbath, one way or another” is biblical. When the Israelites took the land of Canaan, God gave them larger Sabbath commands. Every 7 years they were to allow the land to lie fallow. Every 50 years, the completion of seven sevens, was the Jubilee year. All slaves were manumitted, all debts forgiven, any land sold reverted to the family who owned it originally. The Jubilee turned everything Israel thought they owned into a stewardship arrangement. You never actually bought a field, you stewarded it for at most 49 years. Of course there is no actual record of a Jubilee ever actually happening. The Sabbath of Sabbaths was not taken. And no farmer let his field go fallow every seven years, are you crazy!?! What is God going to do, send manna? 2 Chronicles 36:20-21 tells us the 70 years of exile were 1 year for each missed Sabbath. The Lord would get his Sabbath, one way or another.

The second thing I ask when I hear a proverb is “how is it used?” When would someone quote this proverb. The most logical time to quote this is to the work-a-holic. The point being that you should take a rest. The implied threat being that if you don’t willingly take a rest, your body will probably fail in some way forcing a rest. But there is a second time it might be quoted. When someone has put all their eggs in the basket of the world, you might quote this to them. The intention being something like “don’t forget the sacred or the spiritual.” It would be akin to “man does not live by bread alone.” And that is where I wonder if we have become deaf.

Luther’s explanation of the Sabbath commandment is nothing about a seventh day, but about the deeper recognition of the Sabbath. As the Lord of the Sabbath said, “it was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” And that deeper recognition is that we should not despise preaching and the Word, but hold it sacred and gladly hear and learn it. Keeping the Sabbath day is about maintaining a proper reverence for the Word of God. It is by the Word we were created. It is by the Word that we have been saved. And it is by that same Word that we live in the promise of the resurrection. That day is coming when “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess (Isa 45:23).” The Lord will have his Sabbath, one way or another. The question is: Is your Sabbath one of grace or compulsion and exile? Today we are invited to a Sabbath of grace made for us, but the Lord will have his Sabbath.

What’s a Member?

Membership is an interesting term these days. What does it really mean?

There is a Lutheran theological idea that goes by the name Two Kingdoms. If you read about the Two Kingdoms, you will hear the terms Kingdom of the Left and Kingdom of the Right. Those terms depend upon an old understanding of left-handedness and right-handedness. Right, being the majority, is the direct and straight and powerful. The Kingdom of the Right is the Kingdom where God rules directly. The left, being the sinister (the latin word for left), is the sneaky and winding and weaker. The Kingdom of the Left is still ruled by God, but it is ruled by means. It is ruled through other, sometimes fallen and sinful, things.

Most things we come across in this life are part of the Kingdom of the Left. The church is said to be part of the Kingdom of the Right, but even then I’m quick to say we have to be careful of what do we mean by church. Jesus would remind us that the wheat and tares are sown together. The Augsburg Confession picks up on this in Article 8. “Strictly speaking, the church is the congregation on saints and true believers. However, because many hypocrites and evil person are mingled in this life, it is lawful to use the sacraments administered by evil men…Both the Sacraments and Word are effective because of Christ’s institution and command, even if they are administered by evil men.” The Kingdom of the Right is found there in the Word and Sacraments. These are the things that Christ rules directly. The Word goes out and does not return empty. Christ is present in the bread and wine whether you believe it or not. Which is why we are warned to discern it. These are how God works in this world. Yet, the church is not purely of the Kingdom of the Right. It must exist in this world. And existing in this world means all kinds of troubles: politics, arguments, decisions, financial worries, human traditions, the list could go on. And most of these things are not necessarily troubles, they are simply the tasks delegated to the Kingdom of the Left. They are the things still under God’s providence, but that he has left to us. The Augsburg Confession also teaches that “the church is the congregation of the saints in which the gospel is purely taught and the Sacraments are administered correctly.” When Jesus says go and make disciples of all nations he follows it with the means: baptizing them and teaching – word and sacrament. This is the mission of the church in this world.

So what is membership? In the Kingdom of the Left, which is a necessary thing, it is things like keeping a roster, tracking attendance, seeking people to serve. Soon we are going to need a Treasurer – notoriously one of the tougher roles in the Lefthand Kingdom to fill. The negative side of all of this is when people come to think that because my name is in somebody’s spreadsheet in the church office, I am saved. Just because the Kingdom of the Left recognizes your membership, doesn’t mean The King does. “Many will say Lord, Lord, we ate at your table…Go away, I do not know you.” The real meaning of membership is found in that Righthand Kingdom. The questions that are asked in the Reception of members are many of the same questions asked in the Baptismal liturgy – “Do you believe in God: The Father, Son and Holy Spirit?”. They are the same questions asked of confirmands – “Do you intend to hear the Word of God and receive the Lord’s Supper faithfully?” They are sometimes hard questions – “Do you intend to continue steadfast in this confession and to suffer all, even death, rather than fall away?” Membership in the Kingdom of the Right is about faith. It is about being part of the saints and true believers.

The church operates in both Kingdoms. But at all times we need to remember that the Kingdom of the Left exists and operates at the command and purpose of the Kingdom of the Right. Having all the T’s crossed and I’s dotted, but lacking faith is not the church. But likewise we can’t go bury our talent expecting God to prosper it. We must at least give it to the bankers to receive it back with interest. The talents, God’s providence, is given to us to use.

What is membership? It is the saints putting the talents given to work.

Filling the Void

Today is a tongue in cheek day in the office. Somehow Annessa and I both will root for Duke. As I say to my boys when they ask incredulously “how can you root for Duke?” Sons, you’ve got to respect greatness. But today Duke is playing the University of Pittsburgh, an institution I am an alumnus of and have been a cheering fan of ever since. It isn’t the Alma Mater, but Grove City is not in the ACC, so there are no loyalty pangs. When I was attending the school Basketball was the thing. The football team was mediocre and had been losing to Syracuse and West Virginia, the real rivalries. The Basketball team had even climbed to a number 1 ranking a few times. But since that coach (Jaime Dixon) left, the team has been on the slide. But someone got smart, hired a former Duke player (Jeff Capel) and the team got better. And it really got better this year when Coach Capel finally realized that Pitt was never going to be Duke and started using the transfer portal to bring in talent. Predicted to finish last, they ended up in what was a 5 way tie for the top. Which places pastor and secretary on opposite sides today.

That is all fine and good, but this is pastor’s corner, aren’t you supposed to say something at least vaguely spiritual if not downright theological? Yes, yes I am. So here is the connection. If you have been part of our mid-week bible studies, this past week was the Jacob and Leah and Rachel and Bilhah and Zilpah story. And I only somewhat tongue in cheek held up that competition as a scoreboard. If you know the story the rivalry was between sisters married to the same man. The scoreboard was number of sons. It is a story of competition and longing and attempting to fill that gnawing void.

Any athlete, other than Michael Jordan who is still attempting to crush his enemies and friends, will eventually tell you that winning is great, but what they miss when they can no longer play is being part of the team. That’s why many hang around too long. They know they can’t do it anymore, but they need that team. The smarter of them will move to coaching, the smartest to the front office. The dumb but really good will eat forever on faded glory. When you see one of these in their 60’s you realize your crumbs of adulation mean more to them to fill that void than they mean to you as a curiosity. It is the rare athlete that figures out how to fill that void in other ways. Roger Staubach never had that void being the Navy man. Barry Sanders didn’t need it and even left early while he could still walk. Philip Rivers for me was always a fascinating case. Our sports press is terrible around religion. They are a bunch of atheists covering usually a group of believers and so don’t get it. Rivers never won a Super Bowl. Those Chargers teams with Ladanian Tomlinson and Junio Seau and a bunch of other names were great. They should have won 2, maybe 3. Most athletes the never-was would eat up. Seau died early. Rivers is accepting. I’ve only seen one reporter ask him this question. And Rivers points at his wife and 9 kids and his faith. That void is more than filled.

That is the place where Leah eventually gets to. She will have a relapse or two. Sin is tough, we all do. But after her 4^th son Leah says, “This time I will praise the LORD.” That child was Judah who would be the heir of the promise. Leah had been trying to fill the void with a competition she would never win. And even if she did – and you can argue that she did – it still wouldn’t or didn’t fill the void. Augustine’s famous quote is that we are restless until we find our rest in thee. His confessions are one long tale of competition that never fills the void. Of stealing pears because he could, but not even eating them. But then finding what fills it.

Finding God, as Leah found out, doesn’t necessarily end the competition. We might even get pulled back into sinful ways of competition. But when that void is full, we can be happy warriors. The victory is ours. Whether today we win or lose, that distant triumph song steals on the ear. And hearts are brave and arms are strong. Hail to Pitt, today at least!