The apostle Paul wrote to the church in Corinth, “I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received, that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures.” (1 Corinthians 15: 3-4)
He also wrote to his young friend Timothy, “And what you have heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will be able to teach others as well.” (2 Timothy 2: 2)
The writer of the Gospel of John penned these words. “These are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in His name.” (John 20: 31)
The witness of Scripture is clear and strong. It does matter whether the message of the Bible is preserved, shared, heard, and believed.
The most sacred and precious time of the year for those who love Jesus is Holy Week. It is then that we hear and read once again of His triumphal entry, last supper, agony in the garden, betrayal, arrest, crucifixion, and resurrection. The accounts of this one week form the major part of each of the four Gospels, and we are fortunate to have four Gospel accounts. We know more about what Jesus did for our salvation because we have all four.
And yet what do we see going on now? A movement to “cancel” the passion narrative in the Gospel of John and remove it from the lectionary readings for Holy Week. The reason given is that the two chapters of John 18 and 19 are being accused of fostering antisemitism.
There is no doubt but that antisemitism is wrong, just as there is no doubt but that any form of racism is wrong. Historically, according to the Gospels, it was the Jews who cried for Jesus to be crucified. It was the Romans who carried out the crucifixion. But it was my sins that nailed Jesus to the cross, just as much as anyone else’s.
This movement to “cancel” John is “gaining steam” within the U. S. Episcopal Church. I am alarmed when I read comments also from ELCA pastors who would like to see the Gospel of John removed from the list of Scripture readings for Holy Week.
In my April letter from the director, which will be published in mid-April, I will tell more about this movement and how it is gaining ground within the ELCA. Here we see just one more way in which the authority of the Scriptures first is questioned and then is rejected. Anything difficult in the Bible is thrown out, rather than wrestled with and learned from. Any time when the voice of the Bible is in conflict with the voice of our culture, the voice of our culture prevails.
If the passion readings in the Gospel of John are thrown out, what will it be next? That is a question we continually ask regarding the ELCA. What will it be next? We already know of ELCA pastors who believe that the message of the cross is not that Jesus died for our sins. Instead it is a challenge to join God in the work of dismantling oppressive, political power structures. There are others who say that the main message and mission of the church is to support environmental causes and concerns. What will it be next? As everyone who has observed trends and events in the last decade knows only too well, it will not stop here. The departure from and rejection of traditional, Biblical beliefs and values will only accelerate.
What is at stake is the very heart of our faith – the message of the cross, the hope of the resurrection, the privilege and joy of knowing God as Father, Christ’s command to His church to fulfill the Great Commission, and God’s call to His people to holy living.
We of Lutheran CORE have been working hard to show you how the orthodox Christian faith and Biblical moral values are first being compromised and then rejected by such things as the embrace of critical race theory by many Christian leaders, the choice of keynote speakers for national youth gatherings, the ELCA’s full embrace of the LGBTQ+ agenda and values, and the way in which many in the ELCA twist the message of the Bible in order to support that agenda. Through our being one of the sponsors of the NEXUS Institute at Grand View University, our support system for orthodox seminarians, and our support group for younger persons, many of whom are planning on attending seminary, we are also working hard so that there will be Biblically faithful and Great Commission-minded pastors in the future. Thank you for your interest in and support of these efforts and your generous gifts to our Pastoral Formation Fund.
It is your ongoing prayers and gifts to Lutheran CORE that enable us to continue our work of being a Voice for Biblical Truth and a Network for Confessing Lutherans. Thank you for your prayers for us. Click here for a form that you can use to let us know how we can be praying for you.
Here’s a true story, related to me by someone who witnessed it. A small church, considering departure from the ELCA, solicited questions from the congregation. One question surprised people, but it was, apparently, asked in earnest: If we leave the ELCA, will we go back to being a church that bans people of color?
Wait—what? “Go back”? “Ban”? Some questions require their own hour to answer. Did the questioner believe that her congregation had once banned persons of color? Why? Also, had the questioner never heard that the ELCA is “the whitest denomination in America,” as one of its own pastors has called it (not that other Lutherans are far behind)? What string of pastors had neglected to teach, not only Lutheran failures in racial reconciliation, but also the Lutheran church’s rich contribution to civil rights, refugee resettlement, and the fair treatment of all people in congregation, school, and institutions of care?
I don’t know how the congregation’s leaders ultimately addressed that question, but it proves that the question of race is on people’s mind. Lutherans want to know where it resides in their faith and church’s life.
You know this. You can’t breathe in America and not know it. It has dominated the news, and one particular development has especially captured recent attention: critical race theory (CRT). In general, conservatives have balked at CRT, criticizing instances of “CRT training” that seem to demean and unfairly condemn people of European descent. States have begun passing resolutions banning its use in government and public education.
That criticism has echoed in the church’s halls as confessing Lutherans of various stripes point out where CRT differs from the Gospel’s more liberating message of “neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, nor male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). Yet a question lingers: if not CRT, then what?
How shall denominations, congregations, and believers critique the biases that linger within their own hearts and minds? Are there aspects of Lutheran church culture that have made it one of the whitest denominations in America, and how might the Gospel overcome that culture?
Real Forgiveness for Real Sins
I don’t pretend to have hard and fast answers. But as I’ve reflected on the question—and if you haven’t reflected on the question, it’s time to start, for the sake of the church you love—a few thoughts have struck me as worth sharing. You probably already know them, but it doesn’t hurt to see them in print. As St. Paul told the Philippians: repetition doesn’t hurt the author, and it’s good for everyone else (Philippians 3:1).
It would all seem to start with real forgiveness for real sins. It’s one thing to say, “We don’t rely on CRT; we preach the Gospel” (and that statement is fair and true enough), but it’s another thing so to preach that Gospel that it forgives a real sin brought to light. Where have you, your congregation, and your denomination been blind to persons of color? How have you or your church harmed them or rebuffed them, even if unintentionally?
These questions are safe for you to ask (that is, they may hurt, but they are ultimately secure and good), because you know the One in whose presence you ask them: Jesus, who has carried the sins of the world. You may let them have their way with you, critiquing, judging, and enlightening you, because you know that the more real the sin is, the more real the forgiveness that comes in Jesus’ name. So let the sins take shape, in even startling contour, and then let the grace of Christ clothe them in a brilliant mercy that overcomes them.
The church has its own language for this kind of preaching, distinct from the vocabulary of secular justice warriors. The Bible may not speak of racism and inequality or inequity, but it does speak of old-fashioned, rotten things like enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, pride, divisions, envy, greed, and the like. How do these works of the flesh, unearthed for us by the Spirit, illumine our problems with race, and what is Christ’s forgiving word for them?
Preach it, and expect that preaching to change things, including you.
“You Do Not Have Because You Do Not Ask”
St. James has his moments. The second verse of his fourth chapter might be one of the better ones: have you tried asking? Once God has spoken to us in our sin, we speak to Him by His generous grace. Only by His Word do we have words to speak, and when His Word calls out our sins and tells us, “These sins are forgiven; there is a limit to their power; you need not live under their bondage,” then we know what to ask. Ask Him for what He desires; ask Him for the sin to be overcome and healed; ask for your soul, your congregation, and your church to welcome the people of every nation.
There’s really not too much more to say about this call to prayer, I don’t think, except do it. Pray daily for the Gospel that we preach and the doctrine we confess to be the means by which the Lord draws all nations to Himself. Maybe you pray from a place where God’s answer to that prayer won’t change how your congregation or life looks very much—congregations reflect their neighborhoods, after all, and so not every congregation has to be a microcosm of “The Church,” somehow ideally diverse, and thinking that it does actually denies the catholic nature of Christ’s body—but you’re not praying for only parochial concerns. You’re praying for the whole Church, and for the Fisherman’s net to be cast across the world.
Pray, and say the amen in the confidence of God’s faithfulness.
The Grass Isn’t Always Greener
This last suggestion (I know: there are lots more things to be said; what we have here is just a smattering) runs afoul of certain strands of church critique. I call it (fairly, I think) the anti-institutional critique, which insists that buildings and polity and such things are irrelevant to faithfulness in mission, if not harmful to it. To be sure, the faithfulness of a church is never measured by its stuff. But stuff is no more irrelevant to the conduct of the ministry than our bodies are.
What checks the sins of enmity, pride, greed, and rivalry more than for those with the most to take a weekly pilgrimage to gather with those who have the least?
God will raise our bodies, and so He calls us to steward this flesh in a certain way. So also will He liberate creation from its bondage to decay, and so we steward creation in a certain way. In particular, the Lutheran church should probably start paying more attention to where it lays its foundations, as in, its literal foundations.
The church has always needed buildings for its mission. The fact that the church first met in homes wasn’t a rejection of public buildings as much as it was the commandeering of private buildings for public use. Throughout the church’s history, wherever missionaries spread the Gospel, they quickly built a shelter for its public proclamation, and they chose the placement of those shelters wisely. It was an incarnational move, seeking to proclaim by the place wherein the Body gathers who and what the Body is.
How our churches continue this ethic today may be key to understanding our problem with race. That is, looking at our buildings and where we put them may be one way both to identify our real racial sin and to welcome God’s gracious balm for it. For how we build has everything to do with how we use our money and why, and those economics may be the deeper root of Lutheran racial woes.
A case in point (another true story, and one repeated other places): a church in a mid-sized city had a beautiful neo-Gothic church in a busy, even crowded downtown. Because that downtown had grown so busy, and so few of the people at the church lived there any longer, they decided to sell that building in favor of building a new house of worship far on the city’s margins, surrounded by a lush, green campus—it’s fair to say, not too different from a country club. I knew this church a few years ago and just recently drove through its city. I decided to check on it, and what did I find?
I found the downtown church, still a bit crumbly but nevertheless standing and beautiful, purchased by another congregation with a more evangelical thrust and looking very well visited by a variety of people. As for the new Lutheran church—well, I almost didn’t find it. Surrounded by beautiful green trees and a busy, suburban commercial center, it was easy to miss. It would take effort, in fact, to find. It would also require a car to attend, and it would take some personal courage, I imagine, to drive up to such a very nice church with anything less than a very nice car.
Left and middle: St. Timothy Lutheran Church (ELCA), located in the Hermosa neighborhood of Chicago. And (far right) a city church (not St. Timothy).
So in the city where this church stands, where white people comprise the Very Nice Car classes and blacks and Latinos fill cheaper housing downtown near the bus lines, which of these churches will have a better start to overcoming racial barriers? In order to overcome such barriers, the church must be present as its Lord is present—and how present is a church hidden behind well-manicured trees?
I’m not saying, “Build it, and they will come.” We’ve seen that approach fail so many times. There’s no gimmick here, and the soul-work of preaching and prayer is more than everything else. I’m also not suggesting that persons of color are always poor or whites always rich. But I am saying, as many others have said, that racial divisions may find their deeper roots in class divisions, and the Lutheran church’s recent architectural history may illustrate the truth of it (as does the fact that that our churches appear to lack poor and working class whites as much as they lack persons of color!). The church must be present to those whom it seeks. It must bring the font and Bible and altar to them, clothed in their own neighborhood.
Taking up that calling will mean that those already in the church may have to dedicate their resources and wealth for local ministries and houses of worship either not in service of themselves or at a distance from their own homes, requiring them who are more equipped to travel to do so. Why not? What checks the sins of enmity, pride, greed, and rivalry more than for those with the most to take up a weekly pilgrimage to gather with those who have the least? Wouldn’t such a pilgrimage confess, “These sins are forgiven, and therefore, they no longer set the limits and conduct of our devotion”?
Yes, I know that persons of color are guilty of their own sins of enmity, pride, greed, and the like. I also know that they aren’t the ones most likely reading this article, and I know it because most of you are Lutherans, and Lutherans are one of the whitest Christian traditions in America. It needs some new and more Biblical attention. CRT is not the way, and so what is? Preaching, praying, and showing up to be present, all of it concrete and real and down-to-earth, seems to be the way I know, the way that I’ve been given to confess. What are some other parts of that way? I imagine you know, or that God will show it to you if you ask.
Repenting of the Sins of Our Nation: Part I — Accepting the Call
written by K. Craig Moorman | April 1, 2022
Editor’s Note: Pr. Craig Moorman is a board member of Lutheran CORE as well as a mission developer and pastor of River’s Edge Ministries (NALC-LCMC) in Mt. Airy, Maryland. This is the first in a series of articles entitled Repenting of the Sins of Our Nation. Future articles will focus on Proclaiming the Word and Stewarding the Awakening.
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ —
Over the course of the past few months, I have gained a much greater appreciation for the Book of Daniel and the message of hope that it brings to the Church for the living of these historically challenging days. But on a more personal note, on this particular day as I move into my 66th year of living, I’d like to make a b-day wish in the form of a prayerful declaration: I want to be like Daniel when I grow up! Here I am, nearly 35 years into my call, and only now am I beginning to understand the extent of what it means — and what it might mean — to be a disciple of Jesus Christ.
In Daniel 9:3-19, we hear this well-seasoned prophet pleading and imploring Almighty God to show mercy to His people, the Israelites. He begins, “Then I turned my face to the Lord God, seeking Him by prayer and supplications with fasting and sackcloth and ashes. I prayed to the Lord my God and made confession, saying, ‘O Lord, the great and terrible God, who keepest covenant and steadfast love with those who love Him and keep His commandments and ordinances; we have not listened to Thy servants …” (vv. 3, 4) Yes, I want to be more like Daniel with whatever time the Lord allows me in this precious gift of living. I want to turn and set my face continually to the Lord God. I want to seek Him earnestly, even ‘wearing’ sackcloth and ashes (in a non-Pharisaic sort-of-way) … and empty myself of self, in all humility at the footstool of His mercy seat. At this stage in my life, I desire to go deeper in my confession and repent, not on behalf of ‘their’ sins, but repent on behalf of our sins … my sins!
Throughout his seventy years in exile, Daniel remained a pliable vessel of God and continually sought out the Lord’s mercy and steadfast love on behalf of his people Israel. Again, only now am I more fully embracing this essential ‘detail’ of my call, truly bearing the priestly role. I guess some of us are just a bit more stubborn and slower in understanding what it really means to serve in the ministry of Word and Sacrament.
I’m also reminded of a letter written by one of the Apostolic Fathers, (Bishop) Ignatius of Antioch, who was eventually condemned and sent to Rome to be killed by ‘the beasts’ in the amphitheater @108 A.D. While journeying to this final resting place, Ignatius wrote letters to various churches in Asia Minor, including these words to the Church in Rome:
I am writing to all the Churches, and I give injunctions to all men, that I am dying willingly for God’s sake, if you do not hinder it. I beseech you, be not ‘an unseasonable kindness’ to me. Suffer me to be eaten by the beasts, through whom I can attain to God. I am God’s wheat, and I am ground by the teeth of wild beasts that I may be found pure bread of Christ. Rather entice the wild beasts that they may become my tomb, and leave no trace of my body, that when I fall asleep I be not burdensome to any. Then shall I be truly a disciple of Jesus Christ, when the world shall not even see my body. Beseech Christ on my behalf, that I may be found a sacrifice through these instruments.(Ignatius to the Romans, IV. 1, 2)
Bp. Ignatius of Antioch
Fascinating. I first read these words 37 years ago and am still challenged to the very core of my being, and wondering if I could ever present that ‘core of my being’ to the Lord in such a way? (cf. Romans 12:1) Ignatius continues in his words about what it means to follow Jesus Christ and be obedient in that calling, “Grant me this favour. I know what is expedient for me; now I am beginning to be a disciple.” (V. 3a)
Ignatius’ words are full of so much grace. Only “beginning to be a disciple” … This profoundly humble statement encourages me to remember, first and foremost, that as one called into ministry, I am to remain teachable and malleable. So, in light of the lives of Daniel and Ignatius — and all of the saints that have gone before us — it is with great humility that I begin this three-part article, Repenting of the Sins of the Nation. In Part I — “Accepting the Call”, you’ll quickly recognize that it’s a personal grappling — an open confession — with how I am trying to navigate through the turbulent waters of these desperate times. No doubt, this is a journey we are all needing to face, and necessarily needing to face … together. In fully accepting my call, I realize that these times require me to engage both pastorally and prophetically.
Suffer me to be eaten by the beasts, through whom I can attain to God. I am God’s wheat, and I am ground by the teeth of wild beasts that I may be found pure bread of Christ.
Bishop Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans, IV. 1, 2
There is something insidious permeating every nook and cranny of every segment of our present-day society. Have you felt it too? I believe it started with the mid-1960’s countercultural movement and it has evolved immensely over the past two decades. Some citizens of this country and much of the Western world have been more purposefully redefining new ways of living out truth, justice, compassion, love, etc., according to their own moralityand rooted deeply in secular humanism, Marxism, utopistic pursuits, etc. Let’s, then, call this redefinition, a transformative awakening.
Herein, we quickly discover that these redefined core values for living clashpainfully with more traditional systems of authority-governance, orthodox Judeo-Christian values, long-established interpretations of our history and the American Dream, etc. I believe the buildup of tension we are presently experiencing equates to a significant season of great shaking, shifting, and sifting in our nation and our churches. We reluctantly find ourselves at a most critical crossroads, a place of tension — this transformative awakening — where revolutionary choices will be made, new leadership will arise, causes will be defined, and life wholly changed. But we’ve been here before, this place of choosing (potentially) between life and death.
In Joshua 24, history records that Joshua “ … gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem, and summoned the elders, the heads, the judges, and the officers of Israel; and they presented themselves before God.” (v. 1) Then he continued speaking to the People of Israel, helping God’s People to remember who they were; and, thus, re-enter into a covenantal agreement with the Lord on that day: “Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve Him in sincerity and in faithfulness; put away the gods which your fathers served … choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” (vv. 14, 15)
Of course, this has been the story of God’s People, our story, from the beginning of time — facing many a crossroads and needing to choose between that which is life-giving or life-stealing! Darkness and Light stand juxtaposed — hoping to either take captive or captivate the souls of those most vulnerable or receptive. One entity, darkness, will coerce itself into/upon that life (*nephesh, נֶ֫פֶשׁ nép̄eš = soul) and, ultimately, steal away that life (John 10:10a); and, the other, Light, will graciously extend an invitation to that life to receive the fullness of Life (John 10:10b). (*It’s interesting to note that this Hebrew word, nephesh, when combined with another Hebrew word, rûach-רוּחַ, meaning “spirit”, connotes a part of humanity that has no physical form, like one’s mind, will or seat of emotions, intellect, personality, etc.)
At this monumental historic crossroads, who or what will win the day and take captive or captivate the life, the corporate soul — minds, wills, intellects, and personalities — of our nation? It seems clear that this transformative awakening will, I believe, produce either death or life in our nation, depending on how it unfolds. There is much conversation these days about the woke culture, a slang term that is finding its way into the mainstream vernacular. This word, added to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary in September of 2017, states: “If you frequent social media, you may well have seen posts or tweets about current events that are tagged #staywoke … awake is often rendered as woke, as in, “I was sleeping, but now I’m woke … ‘Woke’ is increasingly used as a byword for social awareness … Stay woke became a watch word in parts of the black community for those who were self-aware, questioning the dominant paradigm and striving for something better. But stay woke and woke became part of a wider discussion in 2014, immediately following the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.”
Unfortunately, the word woke became enmeshed with the Black Lives Matter organization and other radical, leftist organizations (i.e., Antifa, etc.) and is now being exploited to bring societal change through radical and often violent means. Its agenda is not life-giving, and its understanding of resolving injustice and racial tension is polar-opposite from that of a traditional, orthodox theology/ideology, where genuine reconciliation can be found. An even greater concern is that this form of bringing about a transformative awakening has infiltrated every segment of our society, including the government on all levels.
Our nation does not need a transformative awakening that is bent on dismantling and even destroying all that has existed for 245 years; it needs, instead, one that transforms the hearts and minds of her citizens with the Gospel of Jesus Christ through another Great Awakening. In fact, we need another awakening that would dwarf our country’s first two Great Awakenings in the 18th and 19th centuries. And with any Great Awakening, there should be a deliberate and long season of listening to the heart of God through passionate, intercessory prayer on behalf of the nation.
Again, I’m hearkening back to Daniel’s approach in continually (throughout the entire twelve chapters of the Book of Daniel) resolving (1:8) to confess and repent, seek out His mercies, pray, and give praise to the Lord for His sovereign goodness. Only then will we able to faithfully and effectively call the nation to repentance and graciously challenge her citizenry, beginning with us/me, to turn back to God, specifically in Jesus Christ. But, will I be part of it? Will we, as Lutherans, be part of it?
In Part II — “Speaking the Word”, I’ll be addressing how we are witnessing the rise and intensification of darkness; but I will also lift up the eschatological reality that during this same season of dread (cf. Matthew 24), the brightness of the Light will shine brighter through the grace of the Holy Spirit. So, we must hold on to such a Hope. In the meantime, and in the midst of it all, should we not be carefully weighing the cost and calling of entering into this reality? Everything is on the line. Again, what or who will take captive or captivate the soul of this nation, at this hour? If the Church remains oblivious of such a ‘harvest’ (cf. Matthew 9:35-38), then surely the devil and his minions will expediently pounce upon these ‘little ones’ and drag them into the pit of despair and darkness. Or we could rise to the occasion and be the Church — here and now, for such a time as this — and reap a harvest of souls who could be ushered into the transformative awakening of a life claimed by Jesus Christ! Amen?
Our nation does not need a transformative awakening that is bent on dismantling and even destroying all that has existed for 245 years; it needs, instead, one that transforms the hearts and minds of her citizens with the Gospel of Jesus Christ through another Great Awakening.
This is what I’ve been intensely struggling with, especially these past few months. In a nutshell, here’s my angst and concern in the form of a question: “Will I or will I not find the courage to accept the call to step into this place of mess, that chaotic void, and engage those who are desperately seeking truth, justice, compassion, love, etc. and point back to the cross, etc.” At the same time, I find myself crying out, “Lord, show me how to lead at this hour … beginning with my own family!” A simple question and plea, but wow, so difficult and complex at the same time. As leaders in the Church, we should be thriving now; but, to the contrary, it seems that many of us have been struggling and agonizing over how we should respond to this day and age. It is time, Brothers and Sisters, to reclaim who we are as “the children of the Kingdom of Light” (cf. 1 John 1:5-2:6 and Ephesians 5:8), and to remember that we have already been given all that we need to fully accept our call … and enter into the arena. (cf. Ephesians 6:10-20)
No doubt, many of you are familiar with one of the most widely quoted speeches of Theodore Roosevelt’s career; here’s an excerpt from that speech given on April 23, 1910:
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.
Theodore Roosevelt
Only by God’s grace will we be able to enter the arena of our culture. But enter we can and must. Certainly, there will be Jonah moments … fleeing from the Lord … experiencing mighty tempests … being tossed out of the boat … being swallowed by a whale … anger and regrets … but, in the end, I encourage us to assume the posture of another prophet, Daniel, and remain resolved and humble before the Lord (Daniel 1:8). Until next time, stay the course …
In Christ’s love,
K. Craig Moorman
Embracing the Challenges and Opportunities of Worship in the Digital Age
written by Don Brandt | April 1, 2022
Editor’s note: Congregations using music, videos, and other items downloaded from the internet should check on whether they have copyright permission for streaming them over the internet as part of worship services. CCLI and similar licenses often do not grant such permission. Read carefully in the documentation of your license to learn what you do and do not have permission to stream outside the building, or seek legal advice.
I know: The above title is too long. But let’s not quibble. This is too important an issue. And many of you reading this can do something to address this ministry challenge; hopefully sooner rather than later.
Fundamentally, this is about what is passing for streamed worship services during this pandemic, and how we can do so much better. Because here is the brutal truth: Worship life post-COVID will not be returning to the “normal” we remember before the year 2020. Why? Post-pandemic, in-person worship attendance will, for most congregations, be at least 25% to 40% below what they had in 2019. Too bleak? Well, as the saying goes, “Just wait.” Most congregations — especially those that just launched their online, streamed worship services in 2020 — will find that many of their members have grown too comfortable with the ease and comfort of in-home worship. And for those members who have largely avoided in-person worship since early 2020, it’s almost like they’ve left their congregational community for a one-year (or longer) deployment. As a result, many of them will find it’s easier to stay away than it is to return to in-person congregational life and worship.
So what can be done about this? The biggest initial challenge will be to focus on the mission opportunity that is before us. Because improving the quality of your online worship ministry can not only retain members; it can reach new people with the Gospel. However, before going over practical ways to improve your online worship ministry, one caveat: It will take a very intentional and on-going effort to motivate online worshipers to grow in their faith. More on that later.
Now for practical suggestions for improving the quality of your online, streamed worship services.
Online Worship Music
The first step is to recognize the obvious: That the online worship experience is very different than pre-COVID, in-person worship. I have watched online services from scores of different Lutheran churches over the last year. Some have been inspiring; most have been disappointing. My biggest disappointment has been online worship music; especially in the case of small and mid-sized congregations. Disappointing in what way? The lack of quality music. This has been true in respect to both congregational hymns/songs, and performed music such as anthems and solo performances.
Part of the problem here is that with online worship I find myself becoming even more of a music critic. With in-person worship not so much; partly because in the case of hymns and songs I am participating. With “couch potato” worship I tend to be a passive member of an audience of one. So if I notice the worship vocal team is struggling, or an instrument is slightly out of tune, the music becomes an unfortunate distraction. This critical appraisal also applies to solos; whether vocal or instrumental.
The solution? Only select the songs and hymns that can be done well. Remember that, in the case of online worship, this is essentially a performance for your online audience. So it needs to not only be easy enough for your musicians to do well; it also needs to be of high enough quality — both musically and lyrically — to do at all. For some smaller congregations with a limited number of talented musicians and vocalists available, this might mean less worship music than you offer at your in-person service. So in this case, “less is more.”
However, if you can access Christian music available from the internet for your online service, do so. This can be an invaluable and inspirational resource. If your congregation has the necessary technological capability to access online music videos, contact me. I have specific videos I can recommend.
Worship Liturgies for Online Worship
Move toward a “service of the Word” more than a full musical liturgy. Again, this is because your online worshipers are unlikely to participate in sung responses. The one exception to this principle might be if your liturgist has a solo-quality voice. In that case hearing the chanter sing both call and response portions of the liturgy might still be meaningful to your online worshipers. However, the overall principle is this: Online worshipers are more likely to participate in spoken liturgical responses than those that are sung.
Sermon Message
I have found sermons, by in large, to be effective and meaningful online. Suffice it to say that the great majority of recommendations for what constitutes quality preaching in person also apply to online messages. My one suggestion would be this: For pastors who have the time and energy, you might want to do a video sermon that is specifically crafted for an online audience. Especially post-COVID, the majority of your online worshipers will be very different than most of your in-person attenders. And the biggest difference will be the contrast between those with an unchurched vs. churched background. As an added bonus give different messages for your in-person and online service. You can encourage members to participate in both services on a weekly basis.
Communion Practice
It depends. If your congregation is more high-church you might want to offer consecrated elements to be picked up at church in advance. Perhaps you can even offer to deliver the elements to the homes of some members. If your congregation is more low-church, then invite online worshipers to have the elements ready at home so they can participate during that part of the service.
Online Worship and Technology
One final and obvious challenge in regards to providing meaningful online worship is the matter of the technology involved. There is no way to address this with detailed, specific recommendations due to the unique challenges faced by each congregation. But one important and more general recommendation: Whether it be your video streaming or sound system, only offer what you can do well. In other words, don’t let your creativity in worship planning get ahead of what your “systems” and tech volunteers can handle without major glitches or disruptions to the “flow” of your service.
None of the above recommendations address the significant and often overwhelming challenge of actually discipling online worshipers. I will address that in the May issue of this newsletter. (This article is already long enough.) My next article will cover, in some detail, the following strategies for discipling online worshipers:
1. in-home, “micro” worship gatherings
2. small group Bible studies
3. one-to-one coaching ministries; online, by phone, or in-person
A personal confession: I was, prior to retirement, a programmatic pastor. In my defense I wanted to increase the percentage of church members who were active rather than passive. And I was also motivated by the hope that more programs — and groups — meant more lay people exercising their ministry gifts in leadership roles. However, this pandemic has been a startling reminder of how quickly many of our church “programs” have become, under our current circumstances, untenable and perhaps even non-essential.
Author and pastor Thom Rainer — whom I know I have quoted in previous columns — addressed this issue in July. And given the fall COVID surge most states are currently experiencing, Rainer’s comments are still timely. Rainer writes, “It is time (for congregations) to revisit the need to simplify…to do only a few things well and eliminate the rest. Many of our churches have become so busy that we have hurt our best families. Many of our churches have become so cluttered with activities that we don’t give margin for our members to have a gospel presence in the community. The pandemic, for the most part, provides us a blank slate. It’s time to rethink our busy schedules and become a minimal church.”
Rainer continues, “A minimal church is not a church of minimal impact. It is a church that has decided … to unleash our members to have more time to disciple their families, to become a gospel presence in the community, and to develop relationships in their neighborhoods.”
An additional congregational challenge looms large during this pandemic; a challenge that is currently of far greater importance than most of our “programs.” This particular challenge has to do with the mental and emotional health crisis millions of Americans are enduring as a result of COVID 19. New York Times columnist Jennifer Senior, this last August, wrote about this crisis in American life: “Let’s start with the numbers. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, roughly one in 12 American adults reported symptoms of an anxiety disorder at this time last year; now it’s more than one in three. Last week, the Kaiser Family Foundation released a tracking poll showing that for the first time, a majority of American adults — 53 percent — believes that the pandemic is taking a toll on their mental health.”
Psychologist and author Daphne de Marneffe defines trauma, in the context of COVID, this way: “What trauma is really about is helplessness, about being on the receiving end of forces you can’t control. Which is what we have now. It’s like we’re in an endless car ride with a drunk at the wheel. No one knows when the pain will stop.”
So, what about your congregational members? How are they holding up? Do you have a clear picture of whether many of them — especially those who are living alone — are being overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness? How is your congregation doing, during COVID, when it comes to member care? This is probably a simpler task for small congregations than it is for mid-sized and larger churches. But the truth is this: Even in “normal” times most congregations have members who are “falling through the cracks” when it comes to pastoral care. But these times are anything but normal; they are extraordinary in the bleakest sense of that word. And the larger the congregation the more likely member care needs to be an urgent, organized effort. This is not about another program. This is about one of the most crucial and central tasks within the Body of Christ. The Apostle Paul sums it up this way:
But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. (1st Corinthians 12:24-26)
Pastor Don Brandt
A Sharp Contrast
written by Dennis Nelson | April 1, 2022
The Great Commission Society of the North American Lutheran Church is to be commended for the three-day, online missions conference which they held in early November under the theme, “Unveiled: Shining Light in the Darkness.” The comment was made at the beginning of the event that the only person that the conference organizers wanted to lift up is Jesus – not the structures of the church, not our own resourcefulness or efforts, but Jesus. I need a faith that focuses on Jesus. That is the kind of faith that I found nourished and sustained at the Unveiled Conference from the NALC’s Great Commission Society. I also give thanks for the gift of today’s technology, which made it possible for us to be blessed by such an event, even during the time of a pandemic.
Later in the day of the third session of the “Unveiled” conference I watched a webinar with Dr Thom Rainer of Church Answers. You can learn more about his ministry at https://churchanswers.com. His webinar was entitled, “Preparing for Revitalization in a Post-COVID World.” One of the points that he made that I thought was most insightful was his comment about how much COVID has accelerated change. Whatever dynamics and trends a congregation was experiencing prior to COVID have been accelerated by about four years. If a congregation was in decline, its decline has been accelerated by four years. But he also gave hope. He gave strategies for revitalization, and he is working to train coaches who will work with congregations in the process of revitalization.
Both of those webinars were life and hope giving. But what do I receive from the ELCA? A word that tells me that I need to repent of systemic racism and white supremacy.
The law is not life and hope giving. The law rightly applied shows me my sins and drives me to Christ. But the law wrongly applied only crushes, demoralizes, and discourages. If the main message the ELCA has to give is all of the ways in which I need to repent because I have acted contrary to all of their chosen priorities, then how can I ever expect that the ELCA knows how to renew congregations and help them recover from COVID?
True Unity: Reflections on the Augsburg Confession, Part 3
written by David Charlton | April 1, 2022
For it is sufficient for the true unity of the Christian church that the Gospel be preached in conformity with a pure understanding of it and that the sacraments be administered in accordance with the divine Word.
One of the most difficult and important tasks of pastors and
leaders in any congregation is to maintain unity. It is no easy thing to keep a
group of several hundred people united around a common vision of mission and
ministry. Many of you have experienced how painful and destructive conflict
within a congregation can be. Friendships are broken, people become
disillusioned with the Church and therefore with the Gospel itself. Some just
drift away and stop going to church altogether. Even when things seem to be
resolved, distrust can continue to simmer below the surface.
Politics are Divisive
One of the things that seems almost certain to cause
division and distrust in 2020 is politics. The division between Red State and
Blue State, conservative and progressive, Democrat and Republican is as wide
and deep as it has been in a long time. Just begin to discuss immigration, LGBT
rights, war, abortion, gun control, religious freedom, Israel/Palestine, global
warming, and a host of other issues, and the conversation will quickly become
heated. Express the wrong opinion and you might be shunned, or unfriended on
Facebook. In some cases, you may even lose your job or be sued. This is as true
in the family and the church as it is in the workplace or social media.
As a pastor, I have always worked carefully and diligently
to make sure that people of all political stripes feel welcome in my congregation.
I encourage each person to live out his/her vocation as citizen by voting,
volunteering and advocating for those causes that he/she believes are in accord
with God’s will. However, I have made it clear that the congregation and its
ministries cannot be used as a platform to advance partisan causes. For
instance, the congregation does not pass out voting guides or endorse amendments
to the state constitution.
And yet at the Synod Level
You can understand my dismay then, when I have seen the
annual assembly of my synod used as such a political platform. Several years
ago, members of St. Paul were shocked when they listened to a report given by
our synodical VP. They expected to hear about how the synod planned to proclaim
the Gospel. Instead, they heard a laundry list of political tasks the VP
insisted the Church must undertake. To add insult to injury, the VP suggested
that those who were skeptical of or opposed to her agenda were in the same
moral category as Nazis and White Supremacists. This same pattern of behavior
has continued for at least four years, if not longer. I can imagine the voting
members to the synod assembly thinking to themselves, “But pastor said that the
Church is not to be used as a political platform for one’s favorite political
causes. Was he being untruthful when he said that?”
Where Does the ELCA Leadership Stand?
The bottom line on all of this is that it is no longer clear
whether the leadership of the ELCA agrees with what the Augsburg Confession
(AC), Article VII, says about the true unity of the Church. It seems that many
believe that the true unity of the Church is found in a common socio/political
agenda. Those who do not share or will not support this agenda are anathematized.
A further problem arises when we consider what the AC,
Article V, says about the Ministry:
To obtain such faith God instituted the office of the ministry, that is, provided the Gospel and the sacraments. Through these, as through means, he gives the Holy Spirit, who works faith, when and where he pleases, in those who hear the Gospel.
The primary calling of the pastor and the primary mission of
the congregation is to preach the Word of God, in Law and Gospel, and to
administer the Sacraments. The Lutheran
Church confesses that it is through these means that God gives the Holy Spirit.
It is this Holy Spirit that gives the gift of justifying faith in Jesus Christ.
In turn, it is faith that becomes active in good works for the neighbor. (See
Article VI on the New Obedience.) You might say that through the faithful
ministry of the pastor and congregation, God brings about true change in persons,
communities and the world.
Lost Confidence in the Gospel?
One of my primary concerns with the current emphasis on
political advocacy and engagement in the ELCA is that it suggests we have lost
confidence in the power of the Gospel to change the world. It is often
suggested that the mission of the Church is to be transformative. It is our
calling to change the world. And it is through engagement in the issues of the
day and in the promotion of certain political causes that the Church truly
makes a difference. This turns the Augsburg Confession on its head.
Political Advocacy Is ELCA Pastoral Duty?
Of more concern is the notion that, within the ELCA, it is the
duty of pastors to promote the political causes and agendas endorsed by the
larger denomination. Wording in the standard letter of call in ELCA synods says
that a pastor shall “impart
knowledge of this church and its wider ministry though distribution of its
communications and publications.” When the focus of the ELCA was primarily on
Word and Sacrament ministry, this was not problematic. When the majority of the
communications and publications of the ELCA focus on political advocacy,
however, it turns the pastor into a political operative or press agent.
Unity via the Gospel and the Sacraments
The current
direction of the ELCA in regard to political engagement and advocacy presents a
serious challenge to the ministry of pastors and congregations as outlined in
the Augsburg Confession. It encourages and sometimes insists that we welcome a
major cause of division into our congregations at a time when the political
divide is at its worst. It would prevent us from finding the only unity that is
necessary, namely unity through the Gospel and the Sacraments.
Have you ever preached the Gospel
to people who don’t care about anything but the present moment? Or to put it differently, can you imagine
sharing the good news with people who don’t believe that the past and future
have any claim on today?
Past, Present, Future
A Facebook group to which I belong recently shared a “Preaching Moment” video by Thomas G. Long, homiletics professor at the Candler School of Theology, in which he addresses this situation. According to Long, the so-called “narrative” mode of preaching has become less effective in recent years because fewer people view their lives as a story with a past, present, and future.
“The narrative mode of preaching addressed this need: the need is, I have heard the gospel; I know the biblical message, but I am not existentially engaged with it,” Long explains. “And therefore I need to move from knowledge to delight.” Narrative preaching seeks to move listeners from passive knowledge of the Gospel to a lively faith in it by telling stories that help listeners see themselves within the grand narrative of Scripture.
Location on the Timeline
But you know how stories work: they
typically connect the past, present, and future, making sense of how one event
touches another. What if the culture to
which you preach lacks that sense of time?
That is, what if it lacks not only knowledge of the biblical narrative
but also what Long calls narrative
competence, the ability to view things in chronological relationship and
locate oneself within that timeline?
Referencing an Oxford scholar named Galen Strawson, Long points to the rise of people who understand themselves in this “episodic” way. People who think “episodically” know that certain things happened to them in years past, but they insist that those things don’t have a material effect on who they are today. Moreover, they don’t view their present in light of any anticipated future.
Instead, the present moment alone becomes the workshop of identity. A person’s origins, experiences, and ultimate destination have no necessary bearing on beliefs and moral decisions. “Who I am today may not be who I am tomorrow” — we’ll have to wait and see. (You may read Strawson’s argument here.)
You and I, like Long, may disagree with this episodic interpretation of human nature. It seems, perhaps, a bit defensive, like an argument for how someone wants things to be more than a confession of how things really are. But now consider some of the trends that we see in our culture and churches.
Trends and Doom
In the realm of identity politics and intersectional theory, both personal and national identities can be forged through hard breaks with the past that disavow its relevance for the present. Perhaps the past is viewed as too oppressive or indecent for serious consideration, even to the point of rejecting the literary and artistic accomplishments of prior eras due to their supposed moral degeneracy.
Likewise, scientific and
quasi-scientific foretelling of the earth’s future can sometimes paint such a
vision of doom as to deny any real future at all. Ecological prophecy can leave people anywhere
from dismal about tomorrow to blithely unconcerned about it. The future looks as impossible as the past
looks dangerous, rendering both irrelevant for the present.
Torching the Church’s Past
We have whiffs of this episodic malaise
in the church, too. Some of its leaders seem
intent on torching the church’s past, perhaps deeming it too white, too
capitalist, or too cis. Better, they
say, to remake the church in light of present sensibilities alone. Others, in their radical calls for social
justice, appear almost to despair of any future change, their cries
increasingly vengeful. Where, one might
wonder, is their enlivening hope in the advent of Christ? You can always smell a church without a
Christ-centered vision of the future, especially if you’ve had prior experience
in smelling corpses.
How Now Shall We Respond?
So Strawson and Long may have
touched on something significant. Their
reflections dovetail with what others have noted about the growth of a “new
paganism” in America, given that many non-traditional spiritualities also lack
a clearly linear conception of time.
But now the question is: how shall confessing Lutherans respond?
First, we should answer for
ourselves the basic challenges that the episodic mindset poses to our
confession of faith. For example, speaking
of forgiveness necessarily assumes the relevance of both the past and the
future to the present. Forgiveness only
matters as part of a story where people are otherwise responsible for their
past action and face condemnation in the future. But why should that be? Why should my actions yesterday have any
claim on who I am today? Don’t Lutherans
believe in a “new Adam and Eve rising daily” before God?
Why the Past and Future Matter
In response, Lutherans might start
with what we consider the hallmark condition for freedom and life before God: “the
righteous shall live by faith.” Trust in
Christ justifies the sinner, Scripture says, and just a little reflection on
the nature of faith will reveal why the past and future matter as much as the present.
Simply put, trust is necessary for
happiness. It is trust that allows us to
form commitments that provide us with daily security and open the future to
such fundamental things as love and family.
At the same time, trust thrives on the past and anticipates a future. Whether it’s trust in God or trust in our
neighbor, faith in anyone depends on the reliability of that person, a
reliability that is only known through the narrative of that person’s past. As a colleague of mine points out, you may
consider yourself as free of your past as you wish, but your boss may have
other thoughts. A boss relies on your
dependability in anticipation of the company’s future success.
Why Trade Freedom for Bondage?
Having reflected on those
connections between happiness, trust, and time, confessing Lutherans may then critique
the episodic mentality and answer its challenges with the renewing Word. By way of the Law, we may press a culture
that seeks to ignore the past and future with a simple question: why would you
trade freedom for bondage? Why give up
the necessary conditions for trust
and commitment and love (the life God would have for
you)?
Indeed, why not acknowledge things
for how they really are, even if it means finding yourself saddled with a
history of wrong? Facing our past error ultimately
sets the stage for greater trust, commitment, and love in the future by
exposing our unreliability and asserting that both God and we hope to end
it.
Then, having exposed the happy
life’s dependence on both the past and the future, we may introduce the
narrative of God’s utter dependability. His
trustworthiness, pictured through the history of Israel and fulfilled in Jesus,
not only justifies the existence of sinners now — they exist for His glory, as
it turns out — but it also opens the future with the promise of their ultimate
healing. Preaching this faithfulness of
God starts to root a rootless culture into His narrative.
Rise of the New Adam
It also allows us to grant the
episodic mindset at least one gracious nod.
Inherent to episodic thinking is the desire to be continually new. As noted earlier, some might say that
thinking episodically is good Lutheranism.
“Don’t Lutherans believe in a new Adam or Eve emerging daily?” Yes, it is essential to faith in Holy Baptism! Recognizing that the past and future play a
role in shaping identity should never steal from the believer that fresh joy of
Christ.
But now we can see what makes such joy possible. The believer only comes to newness of life by trusting God’s trustworthiness over the sinner’s unreliability. That is, it only comes by way of repentance, and that repentance is made possible only through trust in God’s mighty works and what they promise in the world to come. Only through this intersection of the Biblical narrative and one’s personal narrative does the New Adam arise.
A man tries to fix a broken hour glass in the forest.
I’m not writing these reflections to advocate a renewal of narrative preaching. To the contrary, I agree with Long that the narrative preaching of the last century has probably enjoyed its heyday. But consideration of how the church and its neighbors divide over one key aspect of narrative (time!) may help us speak the Gospel. It may lead us to understand better why some people are not hearing us, and how we may overcome that divide with the good news that turns past, present, and future into a really good time.
Reflections on the Augsburg Confession – Part 2
written by David Charlton | April 1, 2022
Pr. David Charlton
When John heard in prison what the Messiah was doing, he sent word
by his disciples and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to
wait for another?” Jesus answered them, “Go and tell
John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight,
the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and
the poor have good news brought to them. And blessed is
anyone who takes no offense at me.” (Matthew 11:2-6 NRSV)
There goes the Son …
Evangelical Lutheran Worship
These days, there are many who are offended by the God revealed in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Scriptures. The primary offense is caused by the name Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Others take offense at the masculine pronouns that the Bible uses for God. As a result, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, in its hymnal Evangelical Lutheran Worship, worked diligently to reduce the use of masculine pronouns to refer to God. This was particularly true in the translation of the Psalms. In addition, they provided an alternate invocation for the beginning of the liturgy that enabled congregations to avoid saying Father and Son. Many of the Prayers of the Day and all of the Proper Prefaces, were changed so that prayer was addressed to God in general rather than to the Father. Over the years, Sundays and Seasons, the electronic worship resource from Augsburg Fortress, has offered a variety of alternatives for those who are so offended. Finally, at the 2019 Churchwide Assembly, a social statement was passed calling for an even greater use of “gender-inclusive and expansive language for God.”
The Trinity
The Augsburg Confession, on the other hand, affirms the doctrine of the Trinity in the strongest terms, saying:
We
unanimously hold and teach, in accordance with the decree of the Council of
Nicaea,’ that there is one divine essence, which is called and which is truly
God, and that there are three persons in this one divine essence, equal in
power and alike eternal: God the Father,
God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.[1][emphasis mine]
What’s at Stake?
So what is
at stake? Is this just quibbling over
words? Are we as Lutherans bound to the
language used in the Augsburg Confession?
Will it really make a difference if we use expansive language for God?
The answer
is, “Yes!” What was at stake at the
Council of Nicaea was far more than a quibble over words. The Council was not engaged in an esoteric
debate about a doctrine that few lay people would ever understand. What was at stake was the Incarnation
itself. Is the Son divine, or only the
Father? Was God truly incarnate in Jesus
of Nazareth, or did it only appear to be the case? It was the position of the orthodox that the
Gospel and salvation itself were on the line.
Rejection of the Incarnation was a rejection of the Gospel. The Lutheran
reformers would have agreed.
The Gospel
Why is the Gospel at stake? To explain this, let me introduce a couple of terms with which you may not be familiar. The terms are general revelation and particular revelation.[2] General revelation refers to the knowledge of God that is available to all people. Romans 1:20 says:
Ever since the creation of the world his eternal
power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and
seen through the things he has made. (NRSV)
Some knowledge of God is available to all people. For instance, through the use of reason we can come to know that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. If we look at nature, at the beauty and precision that it contains, we can catch a glimpse of the Creator. If we pay attention to the moral law that is written in our hearts, we know that God is holy and righteous. Some of us have even felt God’s presence in our lives. Reason, nature, the moral law, and our feelings can give us some idea of what God is like.
What none of them can do, however, is enable us to know that God is a gracious God. Knowing that God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent doesn’t tell me whether God cares about me. What nature reveals about God is too ambiguous to tell me whether he is good. For every beautiful sunset, perfect snowflake and cuddly puppy, there is a hurricane, earthquake or an incurable disease. The moral law tells me that God is holy, but it doesn’t tell me whether God is merciful to sinners like me. My feelings about God are ambiguous as well. One minute I may have a sense of God’s love and peace, but another moment I feel abandoned or condemned by God. General revelation can take us no further. Luther says:
I
answer that there are two ways of knowing God. One is general, the other
particular. Everyone has a general knowledge—that is, that there is a God that
created heaven and earth, that He is righteous, and that He punishes the
wicked. However, regarding what God thinks about us (His will toward us), what
He will give or do to deliver us from sin and death, and how to be saved (for
certain, this is the true knowledge of God), they don’t know any of this. In
the same way, I may know someone by sight but not thoroughly because I don’t
fully understand that person’s feelings toward me; that is how people by nature
know there is a God. But what is His will and what is not His will, they have
no idea![3]
The God We Meet in Jesus Christ
Particular
revelation, on the other hand, which refers to God incarnate, Jesus Christ,
does. When we encounter God in the baby
in the manger and the man on the Cross, then we do know that we have a gracious
God. It is the God we meet in Jesus Christ
who enables us to have faith, to trust that we are loved and forgiven. Again, Luther says:
Christ
is the only means, and as you might say, the mirror in which we can see God and
by whom we can also know His will, for in Christ, we see that God is no cruel
and demanding judge but a Father of extremely goodwill, loving and merciful. In
order to bless us—that is, to deliver us from the law, sin, death, all evil,
and to grant us grace, righteousness, and eternal life—He “did not spare his
own Son, but gave him up for us all.” This is the true knowledge of God, the
divine persuasion that does not deceive us but paints us a trustworthy picture
of God, other than this there is no God.[4]
Offended by the Incarnation
This is
why traditional Lutherans are alarmed by the call for more “gender-inclusive
and expansive language for God.” It is
not because we oppose inclusive language in general, as is often alleged, or
that we want to subordinate women to men.
Something more is at stake. When
we are offended by the very words that Jesus used to name God, when we are
offended by his masculinity, as in the past some were offended by his
Jewishness, when we are offended by the claim that Jesus is the way, the truth
and the life, we are offended by the Incarnation itself. In that case, we are offended by the only
thing that makes it possible for us to know and trust that we have a gracious
God. The Gospel, justification by faith,
and salvation itself, are at stake. Instead
of being offended, we give thanks, as we do in the proper preface for
Christmas:
In the wonder and mystery of the Word made flesh you have opened the eyes of faith to a new and radiant vision of your glory: that beholding the God made visible, we may be drawn to love the God whom we cannot see.[5]
[2] Luther,
Martin. Martin Luther’s Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians
(1535): Lecture Notes Transcribed by Students and Presented in Today’s English
(p. 350). 1517 Publishing. Kindle Edition.
and the message of hope that it brings to the Church for the living of these historically challenging days. But on a more personal note, on this particular day as I move into my 66th year of living, I’d like to make a b-day wish in the form of a prayerful declaration: I want to be like Daniel when I grow up! Here I am, nearly 35 years into my call, and only now am I beginning to understand the extent of what it means — and what it might mean — to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. 
