The Gottesdienst Crowd

[Gottesblog] Nondenominationalizing Tendencies — Larry Beane

Nondenominationalizing Tendencies: Responses to A Tale of Two Synods

Response to “A Tale of Two Synods” has been interesting and illustrative: some people posting comments to the blog, some to the FB repost, and some to the editors via email. Although many of these responders would have no problem identifying themselves, I am protecting their privacy by not publishing their names and geographical clues that might identify them. It is their choice whether they wish to be made known or not. That’s not my call.

Clearly, this phenomenon is not just an American problem, as we received feedback from three countries. The slide of our churches into pop-music entertainment worship and/or a rejection of the liturgy is especially scandalous to those who, like me, converted to Evangelical Catholicism. It is often the convert who has actually studied the Book of Concord, and leaves a service scratching his head, wondering if the Lutheran congregation sold the building to a non-denominational church.

And since the faith is the most important thing in the life of the believer, he and his faithful wife are willing to pile the family into the car, sometimes with several young children, and travel ridiculously long distances to attend an authentically Lutheran Divine Service - often driving right right past several congregations who have traded away the treasure of their birthright for a bowl of junk food.

Maybe such families and individuals can’t do this every Sunday, but they strive to be faithful under trying circumstances.

Others have a similar story. And perhaps for political reasons, their stories are not told in Lutheran Witness, Reporter, in the publications of our seminaries, in our district publications, or in our congregational newsletters. It is as though they don’t exist, as they are stifled and hidden under the blare and bombast of the cacophony coming from the speakers of the “successful” church.

It is high time that we acknowledge this massive problem in our synod and in the various church bodies around the world that were either established by, or influenced by, the LCMS. And it is certainly overdue that we begin to push back against those pushing Nondenominationalizing Tendencies in our fellowship wherever that pressure occurs - whether it be in the seminary chapel, in the district office (the MMFs and DPs in particular), or in church publications.

I’ve been considering this issue quite a lot lately, and I believe there are indeed things that we pastors and laity can do together to take practical steps towards a renaissance of Lutheran Authenticity here and around the world. It will take persistence and patience - qualities that our progressive brethren have displayed over the long haul to get to where we are today. The time is long past for the ship to be righted. I’ll be writing more about that in the future.

But the first step is to get the problem out into the open and acknowledge it.

Here is a sample of some of the responses that we have received.

I wanted to convey to you the immense encouragement that I received from this post, which might seem somewhat unusual, because I think you wrote it with some exasperation about what's going on the LCMS.

Actually, it was just great to read something that someone had written that is so close to my thinking.... I actually wrote a public statement and left the [church body] in [country], which is much further gone than the LCMS. I can tell you more, but suffice to say, that I couldn't in good conscience remain. I've just started a small congregation here in [city], and I'm hoping to make some contacts with the ILC, and such churches. (I loved the video of Siberia that you posted.)

~ Responder

I also like how the older people tend to think that this is what us younger people want: bands and lights and smoke. Okay maybe it’s true. I want the one man band called the pipe organ, I want the candles, the incense, the liturgy, a meat and potatoes sermon that will feed me through the week. Divine Liturgy that lets me worship God by repeating his words back to him instead of repeating some endless chorus of the same watered down words of a praise song. I want to touch the hymn books and have the full experience. I want to hear the little children that can not read yet but have the Divine Liturgy memorized because church is the same every week instead of some rock concert.

~ Responder

Man this hits home! Okay, so, I live in [place name], which is the "Texas of [country], and the landscape here appears strikingly similar. That is to say, while the area itself is known to be politically conservative, the Neo-Evangelicalism by way of a lack of Confessional integrity, ejection of the hymnal and liturgy in favour of "creative worship" or non-denominational mega-church nonsense, is astounding. Like the LCMS, the divide… here is very real as well (although perhaps easier to navigate geographically as it appears to be east vs. west, generally speaking). I mean, even [among our seminaries], the attitude and emphasis is in such stark contrast that it is exactly as you say where it might as well be two synods (one catering to boomers, or the death of the [Lutheran] church, and the other authentically Confessional Lutheran serving as a beacon for the elect).

The proposed polity solution I could not agree with more and would love to see such a model…. . It would alleviate much of this tension and conflict, and perhaps be the answer to the problem of the microsynods who just can't stand to be in fellowship with a body that allows what it does. It also has historical precedence insofar as superintendents used to be in charge of setting the church order for their region and standardizing practice. Although, on that note, this would also be a good time to revert back to traditional language as Fr. Peterson makes a case for, opting for terms like diocese and bishop instead. Or, at least the Orthodox Lutheran districts can use such verbiage, the rest can continue to distance themselves from anything "traditional", "catholic", or "Lutheran" for that matter. Then if/when a split happens, it'll be much easier as everyone will already be organized and grouped together in their respective camps that honestly reflect what they believe and where they stand.

~ Responder

Anyone whose been around knows that you have to carefully check a church’s website or FB page to make sure they haven’t gone off the rails. “You should try the Lutheran church” could be the best or worst recommendation at the same time.

~ Responder

I want the Pastors, and District President (Bishop) of the Texas district to understand why and what I left. I converted to Confessional Lutheranism as an adult, a few years ago. Converting as an adult I left an American Evangelical church where I had volunteered as a small group leader, musician, and technical service (sound/lighting/projection). I was in a very comfortable position as a volunteer, esteemed by my co-volunteers, appreciated by the church staff. I walked away from it all. The concert sound, the theater lights, the visuals, and a musician I walked away from it all.

I walked away from rock concert church to join a "boring" small congregation with a pianist who doubles as the organist, and seasonally triples as a choir director. I walked away from the exciting flashy rock concert church so I could read the SATB notes in the service book and struggle to sing the bass line. I walked away from one church and don't think I won't walk away from an LCMS congregation that does the same, because I already did. I needed to attend an evening service on occasion and the closest LCMS church has a soft rock band. After posting on Facebook for another evening church I drive double the distance to go to a liturgical congregation.

It angers me to see our fellowship mixed with rock'n'roll, as if we could flirt with the world and not be changed by it. We don't avoid sins by flirting with them, which is what rock and roll church is all about. And on top of this all my wife was watching, and on rare occasion coming with me to see our services. She also left the same American Evangelical church only to find the same problem among us. Can you imagine a life long Baptist in a young marriage seeing what her husband is doing in such a different church and finding the same music that caused her to leave? She's already walked from a second Am. Ev. church! whose pastor she knew! Do you think she'll want to return to a congregation in our fellowship? As her husband I pray one day she does.

~ Responder

There is frustration, disorientation, and even pain in these responses, and in similar personal accounts that I have heard over the years - and yes, experienced myself as a layman who was actually shocked at what I saw in LCMS churches. It seems like our district offices are not listening, and they just down care.

Well, it’s time that they start caring. And the first step is to start listening.

TGC 120 – Argumentum ad Repititium

When contending for the historic liturgy of the church, we often hear the same arguments trotted out with a gotcha mic drop. In this episode, we look at a blog post by Larry Beane and build upon it to talk about how one responds to these same arguments.

Read the blog post here: Argumentum ad Repititium 

 

Host: Fr. Jason Braaten

Regular Guest: Fr. Larry Beane

Become a Patron!

You can subscribe to the Journal here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/subscribe/

You can read the Gottesblog here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/gottesblog/

You can support Gottesdienst here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/make-a-donation/

As always, we, at The Gottesdienst Crowd, would be honored if you would Subscribe, Rate, and Review. Thanks for listening and thanks for your support. 

[Gottesblog] Argumentum ad Repititium — Larry Beane

Argumentum ad Repetitium

When I get into discussions with people over the liturgy and traditional hymnody (over and against so-called “contemporary worship,”) a lot of the same arguments and assertions pop up.

First is the charge that I just want traditional worship because it is “just what I like.” In other words, it’s a matter of personal preference and taste. This accusation is more a revelation about what the one making the accusation believes, for “contemporary worship” is typically based on pop-music forms that are, well, popular. People want pop music because it is what they like, not because of its theology or particular confession, not because it reflects what God prefers from the Scriptures, or because it promotes the Word of God. No, people like pop music in worship because they like pop music elsewhere. If it’s good enough for listening to while driving to work, it’s good enough to listen to in the church service.

So the charge that traditional church music is “just what you like” sounds like a projection. For are there any people arguing that they don’t really like pop music, but it is the best music for worship? Is there anyone who champions guitars and drums in the chancel who leaves church and turns on the radio to listen to organ music and chorales? Admittedly, this is just a hunch, but I suspect that most proponents of “contemporary worship” actually prefer those music forms, and listen to them outside of the church service as well. In other words, “It’s what they like.”

One finger pointed at me, three fingers pointing back at thee.

To the contrary, my desire to uphold the traditional liturgy and hymnody of the church has nothing to do with my musical tastes. In fact, the vast majority of the music that I listen to is pop music. I like what is today called “classic rock.” I like hard rock and 1980s heavy metal. I do listen to some classical music as well, but the vast majority of my musical tastes are the very types of music that I would loath in the Divine Service, and would consider its use to be blasphemous against the Lord and a degradation to rock and roll. As the cartoon character Hank Hill famously told a Christian rocker, “You’re not making Christianity better, you’re making rock and roll worse.”

I’m a stickler for traditional liturgy and hymnody for several reasons. One of them is that this is what God likes. He is a God of order. He is a God of dignity. He is a God of beauty. He is a God of sacrifice, atonement, and forgiveness. One would be hard-pressed to find the self-serving desire to be entertained in Biblical examples of worship. In fact, after recording God’s worship style preferences over the course of seven chapters (Exodus 25-31): the beautiful tabernacle covered in magnificent fabric, an altar of bronze followed by a courtyard also outfitted with beautiful textiles and precious metals, exquisite priestly garments (as well as rubrics for ordination), the altar of incense, the bronze basin for ceremonial washing, the anointing oil and incense, and specific instructions for fine craftsmanship, we come to chapter 32: the rejection of all of this for a more entertaining worship style around the golden calf, “and the people sat down to eat and drink and rose of to play.” They played at their worship. There was no indication that God wanted the priests to “play” in the holy of holies, or that the laity should “play” while sacrificing animals as a type of the Lamb to come. Some believe the word translated as “play” may be a euphemism for erotic overtones in this worship service - something that comes to the fore in many popular “praise and worship” songs, many of which that can be embarrassing to read the lyrics out loud or to watch the gyrations of the often-female performers - or “ministers of music", “worship leaders”, or “worship pastors” as they are sometimes called.

By contrast, we see the Israelites who worshiped the true God repeating their ritual and liturgical actions of remembrance each year - and they were commanded to keep various feasts as a memorial. And to be a memorial, there must be continuity, both in ritual, and in the passing along of those rituals through the generations.

Every year, a lamb was slaughtered and it was cooked with bitter herbs. It was eaten on the same day each year, and the same ceremony was repeated again and again, century after century. There were readings, there were hymns, there were psalms to be chanted. Why? Because God commanded that it should be done each year. Why should it change, since ultimately, the Passover meal was a type of Christ, pointing us to the Eucharist and to the cross? The message doesn’t change, and therefore the rubrics of the meal do not change. For if they were to change even a little every year, in a hundred years it would look nothing like what it was supposed to remember.

And when God interacts with mankind, there is a coming of heaven down to earth. Something otherworldly, something holy is happening. “Holy” means “set apart.” So when Jacob saw the vision of the angels ascending and descending on the ladder, he set apart that place as holy, and marked it with a pillar that was anointed with oil. That place was no longer just a spot to bed down for the night, it was the gate of heaven.

God is also a God who is concerned with esthetics. He is the author of beauty. He is not indifferent about matters of style. For again, when God tabernacled with the children of Israel, he commanded a tent to be made up to His standards, with magnificent furniture, with gold and silver and fine-twined linen, beautifully woven fabrics of purple and scarlet. His tabernacle, and later his temple, was epitomized by exquisite beauty beyond what one normally had in his house and daily life. God ordered the priests to be vested, also in beautifully crafted textiles, rare jewels, and fine detailed ornamentation.

This is not my idea or preference. This was not the preference of the priests or architects of the House of the Lord. This was done according to God’s order. And God likes beautiful art - the cherubim above the mercy seat, the intricate carvings of almond flowers, palm trees, and pomegranates. Why? Because God likes this design. It’s what He wanted. It is not because the congregation liked it, or the priests, or the leaders. God also likes bells and incense. Why? I don’t know. He just does. He likes craftsmanship and high art. And this level of ornateness was not how ordinary people lived in their day to day life. The place where God made Himself present for, and with, mankind, this holy place, was set apart and beautiful.

How anyone can actually read the Bible and come away thinking that God prefers people to just “come as you are” and “don’t go to any trouble to make things nice” when they come into His presence? Or how can anyone conclude that God’s attitude is “do whatever makes you happy, whatever you like,” or “do whatever is cheap.” This is not the God of the Bible.

And related to this idea of God becoming present with His people, this is one major difference we have with Protestantism. We, along with the historic communions of Christianity, confess that a miracle happens on our altars when we celebrate the Mass, that Christ, the living God and King and Creator of the Universe, the Man who is perfect, comes to us literally and in incarnate form, as the bread and wine that are blessed by His Word are truly His body and blood.

And so, that Presence takes us out of our ordinary, pedestrian existence and places us at the table with God.

So is informality called for in times like these? Did Isaiah behave casually when he found himself in the throne-room of God, when the angels purged away his sin by bringing him a coal from the altar and placing it upon his lips? Did Peter, James, and John behave the same as they always did when Jesus transfigured before them on the mountain?

Do military men behave differently around an officer than when they are hanging out with their fellow soldiers, sailors, airmen, or marines? What about when a general enters the room? How about the president? Are there different protocols and ways of behaving around one’s superiors? And how would it be received if a soldier did not treat officers differently than their friends? Do these rituals and ways of carrying oneself communicate something? Are they for the good of the entire corps, the whole body of men united in service?

What if you were invited to a banquet at Buckingham Palace? Would you comport yourself the same as if you were at home in front of the TV with a bucket of KFC? Or would you maybe be more formally dressed, perfectly groomed, more aware of those around you, especially those of high social rank? Would you like to know what the rubrics for such an important meal are? Or would you be content to carry on the same way that you do at home?

Our formality in worship as Lutherans is crucial, because it is a confession that we do confess that Christ is miraculously present with us. We do not confess, as do many Protestants, that the Lord’s Supper is a symbol, or that our Lord’s flesh is far off in the heavens, leaving us with mere tokens that are at best some kind of “spiritual” presence. No, we confess that this is the eternal banquet that Jesus is always talking about, or at least a foretaste of it. The Divine Service is eschatological and brings us into contact with eternity. He is present under our roof, though we are unworthy. He says the Word, and we are healed. The King, God Himself, deigns to dine with us! This is not watching TV with KFC eaten out of a plastic container with a spork. Rather, this is the Holy of Holies, and Christ incarnate is present with us. And we not only eat with Him, but we feed miraculously on the true Passover Lamb, even as His blood is poured into us to mark us as His own, protected and saved from condemnation, from the Angel of Death.

And so, our worship is different than our day to day lives.

The hymnody comes from our rich tradition and is unbounded by fads or notions of what is popular today, but may well fall out of favor tomorrow. Our hymns not only praise God, but confess our faith rigorously and boldly. Our worship is dignified, and like the liturgical actions of remembrance of the children of Israel, it doesn’t change again and again, becoming unrecognizable in just a few years. Nor is it play - whether motivated by a desire for fun, or even tinged with eroticism.

Jesus said, “Do this in memory of Me.” He did not order us to change the liturgical action to bend it to our standards of entertainment, or to prevent it from not being “special.” And this is why the Church’s liturgy remains the same. It is a remembrance, just as the liturgical actions of the Old Testament Church were. Any changes are not made to reflect theological change, but perhaps to accommodate linguistic or technological shifts. And over the centuries, we have developed a corpus of the very best that the Church has in terms of liturgy and hymnody, not subject to fads and fashions. Our progressive culture routinely gets rid of the old in search of the ever-new. Our church’s heritage is a blend of the old and the new, not subject to “chronological snobbery” or Critical Theory that denigrates our own forbears.

And as a pastor, I want people to be taught (as ceremonies teach the people what they need to know about Christ, as our confessions teach us). I want my parishioners to have no doubts about what it is that we Lutherans confess about Jesus, and about what He Himself says in Scripture. This is communicated verbally in what is said, and nonverbally in what is done. Research suggests that 60% of what is communicated between people is non-verbal - meaning what we do and how we speak is as important, and perhaps even a bit more, than what is said in words alone.

An informal liturgy belies what is really happening: the miracle of heaven meeting earth and of Christ tabernacling with us. Pop music lowers the level of dignity, perhaps to the depths of frivolity and impropriety. And when we have centuries of magnificent hymnody, to settle for what is sung in Pentecostal or non-denominational churches is like choosing to eat cold Vienna sausages instead of the luxurious spread of delectable delicacies that you have been invited to partake of at the feast.

So far from being a matter of personal taste, the traditional liturgy and hymnody is what God wants, is a confession of who Jesus is and what He does, and is good pastoral care in terms of teaching and confessing our faith.

And this is why our forbears included Article 24. They did not just say, “Do whatever you like.” For while our Roman opponents were lumping us in with radical reformers that abolished the Mass, we vociferously deny such a scurrilous charge. To even suggest it is a gross insult, and resulted in an angry retort by Melanchthon, as well as a master class on what real worship is all about in the Augsburg Confession and the Apology.

It all boils down to Jesus, and what you believe about Him. Do you believe the Bible when it confesses that Christ is present with us? Do you take Jesus at His word when He says, “Do this in memory of Me?” Are you humbled at the Lord’s miraculous presence with us, like Moses, like Isaiah, like Peter, James, and John? Do you believe, teach, and confess that the presence of Jesus is the fountainhead of holiness, and so our worship in the holy place must itself be holy - as opposed to common and ordinary?

Are you willing to sacrifice your own personal tastes and desire to be entertained in the style to which you were accustomed in order to submit to Him and to receive His gifts - and to give Him thanks in return in the setting of His choosing? Do you actually believe what He says, and what the Church says about Him? Or do you hold the faith of another tradition, whose informal and casual worship is more fitting?

TGC 119 — The Lie of Secular vs Religious

We often hear touted the distinction between the church and the state, the religious and the secular. In this episode, our guest, Christian Preus, demonstrates the the lie behind this false dichotomy, particularly within education. There is no indifferent, middle ground, and that Christians need to be aware and beware of these false notions. 

For more information about Luther Classical College: https://www.lutherclassical.org

Host: Fr. Jason Braaten

Special Guest: Fr. Christian Preus 

Become a Patron!

You can subscribe to the Journal here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/subscribe/

You can read the Gottesblog here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/gottesblog/

You can support Gottesdienst here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/make-a-donation/

As always, we, at The Gottesdienst Crowd, would be honored if you would Subscribe, Rate, and Review. Thanks for listening and thanks for your support. 

[Gottesblog] A Christian Criticism of Critical Theory: a Word Fitly Spoken — Larry Beane

A Christian Criticism of Critical Theory: a Word Fitly Spoken

While on the treadmill at the gym, I was listening to a podcast, A Word Fitly Spoken. This particular program was about Critical Theory, and it was hosted by the Revs. Willie Grills and Zelwin Heide. The guests were the Revs. Adam Koontz and David Buchs. It was an outstanding presentation, and I commend all of our readers and listeners to give this episode a listen!

What was especially poignant for me was the juxtaposition of the bank of TVs on the wall and the messages being flashed before the eyes of the millions of viewers around the country. Right in front of me was a screen running the USA Network. There were closed captions, so I could glance at what was going on. But it was really the visual imagery that was telling - especially while listening to a biblical analysis of this very thing being promoted by the secular world in real time.

Television is a powerful medium. It not only sells Budweiser, Toyotas, Doritos, and innumerable pharmaceuticals, it gives something away for free: a worldview.

The USA Network was running a cop show (I think it was “Chicago PD”) featuring several encounters between police and criminals. In this episode, without exception, every violent thug was a white male. And with only one exception, every crime victim was black: the exception being a white female who was being brutalized by a white male.

Only glancing up at the screen without hearing dialogue or background music gave me a sense of disconnect that made it an interesting observation. One of the scenes involved a black female shoplifter who was attempting to steal a loaf of bread. The store owner, an angry white male, was aggressively trying to get the police to arrest her. He complained about junkies constantly ripping him off. The accused woman looked sad, sitting limply on the floor with big puppy-dog eyes. She told the female police officer that she wasn’t a drug user, but that she just wanted to make a sandwich for her boy. The female cop looked at her indulgently and sympathetically, and asked the scowling, angry white male shop-keeper the price of the loaf of bread which was a dollar fifty. But before paying for the woman’s bread, the cop told the shop-owner that she could probably find some code violations in the store. She immediately claimed to see mouse droppings on the floor, and a wire at the ceiling that was not up to code. She threatened to ticket the shop-owner for $20,000. In the face of this police shakedown, the store owner told the police to release the woman. The lady cop then paid for the woman’s bread and sent her on her way - before scolding the shop-owner one more time.

The racial component presented on shows like this are pushing a false narrative, one that simply doesn’t comport with reality, a narrative clearly designed to promulgate a lie to the detriment of the target demographic.

Another scene involved a cop questioning a suspect on the street by inserting the muzzle of his pistol into the suspect’s mouth and demanding answers in three seconds, then he started counting. Fortunately, the suspect was a white guy. Otherwise, the cops would have been seen as the baddies.

There was also a commercial for trans pride.

Since I don’t watch TV any more, this is all unfamiliar territory to me. But it’s very easy to see what’s going on. It’s brainwashing. It’s Critical Theory training in the guise of entertainment. It does not reflect reality, but it is designed to create resentment against the white male population. And it is working for people of every racial and sexual tribe. Whites are conditioned to hate themselves and see their own existence as toxic. Many a Christian parent has been shocked by their children coming back from college holding a completely different worldview - one formed by Critical Theory. Some return from school declaring themselves to be of a different gender identity, bearing a new sexual preference, holding radicalized political views, and even in some cases, confessing hostility to the Christian faith itself.

Parents generally blame the universities - albeit too late. But I think academe is only partly to blame. I believe that the universities are merely the last domino to fall. Children typically grow up watching a lot of TV. And all contemporary mainstream television programs - and the vast majority of movies and online series - are pushing a Critical Theory narrative. This is being done under the noses of everyone.

I don’t think Christian parents have a clue as to how formative and normative and powerful these TV shows are, nor the cumulative effect of the propaganda. They are based on a narrative - and the story is consistent, emotional, compelling, and part of a larger holistic model of re-education. But we have been boiled slowly like the proverbial frog in the pan of warm water. We are being lied to all the time. Reality itself is a casualty of Critical Theory.

As a Christian pastor, this is a source of frustration. If our parishioners attend Divine Service and Bible Class every week, we will get maybe two hours to preach and teach our Christian narrative, which is, the Biblical and liturgical Gospel of Jesus Christ that runs from eternity to eternity. The rest of the time, most of our parishioners are watching TV, movies, sports, and taking part in other aspects of popular culture - all of which push a narrative at odds with, and hostile to, the Christian faith. And as adults, we may well be able to roll our eyes and discern what we are seeing. But then again, let us not underestimate the power of the visual narrative on our minds and psyches. But think about children and youth - whose brains are still in a state of plasticity, whose minds and souls are being formed by a constant barrage of narrative in opposition to the Holy Scriptures.

So what should Christian parents - and even those who are not parents - do in the face of this onslaught? I would say to cancel the cable, and stop watching modern TV shows. Older TV is not nearly as toxic, and some of the older programs may even be neutral or uplifting. But even there, wisdom and discernment are called for. There are older movies - and perhaps a new one or two - that are not antagonistic to the Christian worldview. But allowing children unfettered access to highly suggestive Critical Theory training is, in the long run, as toxic as if they had such access to porn. These shows are designed not only to sell product, but to push a worldview, one that is, without exaggeration, Luciferian in its orientation.

Instead of sitting in front of the boob tube for hours on end, why not listen to podcasts that either uphold, or do not contradict, our worldview? Why not learn a new skill? Take up an instrument? Study a foreign language? Learn how to fix cars or quilt or do woodworking or cooking? How about daily reading or listening to the Bible and great literature?

One of the things that individuals and families can do is to replace the trash narrative of TV with the Holy Narrative of the Scriptures - by incorporating daily liturgical worship into their lives. The Treasury of Daily Prayer (which is also available as an app) is an accessible and yet robust resource for interacting with the Scriptures - especially the Psalms - in a liturgical way that counters the evil and unrealistic narrative and worldview promoted by the TV networks and by Hollywood. Children need to be reading a lot more and looking at screens a lot less. Adults too.

And the beauty of such prayer is that it is liturgical, providing an annual reading of the lion’s share of the Bible but set in a beautiful liturgical setting that can be spoken or sung, simple or elaborate. The liturgical repetition provides children with an anchor for their young memories. And technology has made it possible to hear and pray along with these daily prayer offices in their full majestic beauty as sung by the Concordia Theological Seminary Kantorei.

I recently stayed a couple days with a delightful Lutheran family that had three young children. They had a TV, but it was in the basement, and the children acted like they didn’t even know it was there. The kids were surrounded by books. They all excitedly clambered up next to me so I could read to them, and so they could read to me. These children really knew the Bible, the Catechism, and the liturgy of the church. The family prays Matins together every morning. Their six year old reads the One Year Bible (ESV) every day on her own - and was breathlessly explaining the narrative of the day’s readings to me. And the children’s reading was impeccable. Aside from Biblical names and foreign words (with the exception of the little toddler) the children could read and pronounce each word effortlessly and fluently - better than most adults that I know.

What was especially poignant was the fact that the biblical narratives are already embedded in the minds of these very young children. They know the stories of the biblical characters - and not just the usual felt-board Sunday School sections. They relate the Biblical accounts with excitement and intimacy as though they are telling about what happened at the swing-set with the neighbor children only yesterday.

These children are happy, well-adjusted, and intelligent. They are being well-prepared for a future in which their worldview will be challenged. They are being placed on the firm foundation of the Bible and the Confessions, of the liturgy and the Catechism, the Psalter and the hymns. These children clearly know the faith, and they know who (and whose) they are. And they weren’t only reading the Bible. They were also reading standard childhood storybooks and great literature and books covering a range of topics. But they weren’t reading anything about “Two Mommies” or any trashy kids’ books that one might find at a Drag Queen event.

In our modern world, there is huge pressure to conform. And children - especially if they are in public school - are subject to incredible peer pressure to watch those programs that are most at odds with our Christian worldview. This is increasingly the case even in kindergarten and nursery school. And by the time these kids face puberty, they are under enormous pressure to be anything but “normal.” It is, as though to be accepted, one must be of some exotic sexual identity or preference, not to mention, hold radical leftist political views and to question or repudiate the Christian faith. And if you understand Critical Theory, you will know that this is not by accident.

This is what Critical Theory is all about. We are seeing it bearing rotten fruit after many decades of patient brainwashing in school, on TV, in movies, in music, in sports, and in the mainstream media in general, not to mention benign neglect by Christian parents. It’s all about the replacement narrative and how to smash the old Christian worldview.

It is important for us Christians to know what the Enemy is up to, to sever our ties to Luciferian “entertainment,” to equip our children in our own Biblical worldview, and to instill it in their minds and souls through the church’s liturgy - which has formed minds into the mind of Christ our Logos for two millennia.

It is high time that the Church become unequivocally critical of Critical Theory and stop ignoring it or pandering to those who advocate it. We need to put our foot down and reject it at every level - from the parish and the district to the synod, from our publishing house to our universities and seminaries. Critical Theory is just one more serpentine “Did God actually say…?”.

I’d like to thank the guys at A Word Fitly Spoken for their solid analysis, and for their lively and informative program. What a blessing to have faithful pastors putting out programming that confirms, rather than contradicts, reality and the Christian worldview. The contrast between what I was hearing and what I was seeing could not have been more clear.

The Word is being fitly spoken indeed. The real question is, is it being fitly heard?

[Gottesblog] "Lutheran" Confessions Not Lutheran, Used by ELCA, Contain Hyper-Euro Sacerdotalism and Romanism, Authors Do Not Reply to Questions from GN — Larry Beane

"Lutheran" Confessions Not Lutheran, Used by ELCA, Contain Hyper-Euro Sacerdotalism and Romanism, Authors Do Not Reply to Questions from GN

Gottesdienst News (GN) has learned that the “Lutheran” Confessions (the Book of Concord) are not Lutheran.

The Book of Concord is used in an official capacity by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) - which denies the inerrancy of the Bible, ordains women, and is in fellowship with Greenpeace. Both LCMS seminaries: Concordia Seminary Saint Louis (which was named after a Roman Catholic saint - Roman Catholics deny the doctrine of justification and the inerrancy of the Bible) and Concordia Seminary Fort Wayne (founded by Wilhelm Loehe, hyper-euro opponent of C.F.W. Walther who did not believe in voters assemblies) use the ELCA approved texts in their seminary classes. Why would Bible-believing seminaries teach using the Book of Concord that is used by the ELCA?

Letters to both Dr. Thomas Egger and Dr. Larry Rast were not answered as of this publication.

The Book of Concord is a Romanizing book that never mentions the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod or C.F.W. Walther. The Book of Concord never mentions Walter A. Meier, nor does it denounce Seminex, Nadia Bolz-Weber, or Matthew Harrison. The Book of Concord never mentions the Brief Statement, and as far as we can tell, none of the authors of the texts even wore briefs.

 

Catholic

The Book of Concord never uses the word “Lutheran” or “Protestant,” but the word “Catholic” is used 13 times, and in the 1921 Triglotta translation, often even using an uppercase C. The Triglotta was published by Concordia Publishing House. Letters to Concordia Publishing House - demanding why a CPH product has uppercase-C “Catholic” being used to describe Lutherans - were not answered at the time of this publication.

The Athanasian Creed (which was not even composed by Athanasius) is included in the Book of Concord. The modernist Matthew Harrison-approved Lutheran Service Book (LSB) includes a translation of the Athanasian Creed that contains the following examples of Romanism: “Whoever desires to be saved must above all, hold the catholic faith.” This means that non-catholics go to hell. The Athanasian Creed says nothing about voters assemblies. The Athanasian Creed refers to the “catholic religion” and that “this is the catholic faith; whoever does not believe it faithfully and firmly cannot be saved.”

Letters to Pastor Athanasius were returned to GN unopened. The Roman Catholic Church - which denies the doctrine of justification, believes the pope to be the head of the church by divine right, and endorses funny hyper-euro hats, also approvingly confesses the Athanasian Creed.

President Matthew Harrison, who supports the use of Lutheran Service Book (LSB), has a mustache. Hitler and Stalin had mustaches. Many of the liberals who walked out of seminex had mustaches and long sideburns. C.F.W. Walther and Francis Pieper were clean shaven. Harrison is accused by some of not believing that congregations matter, that he, like Adolph Hitler, believe in centralizing his power. Letters asking why President Harrison continues to wear a mustache have not been answered as of this publication.

Pastor John Brentz, Minister of Hall, signed one of the documents in the ELCA-approved Book of Concord (the Treatise - which actually mentions “the Pope” in its official title - the Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church, which denies biblical inerrancy, the doctrine of justification, and does not celebrate Reformation Day) refers to the Lutheran Church as “the true and genuine catholic Church” and desribes Pastor Bugenhagen as “revered Father” (see below).

Neither Brentz nor Bugenhagen have responded to GN’s requests for an explanation.

 

Call No Man Father

The Book of Concord contains unbiblical language for pastors. Jesus said, “Don’t you be callin’ anyone yo’ daddy, y’all” (Matthew 23:9, ACT - A Confederate Translation). But the hyper-euro sacerdotalist Romanizers in the Book of Concord do not follow the words of Jesus. Pastor John Brentz called Pastor Johannes Bugenhagen “Father” (see above). Pastor Brixius Northanus of Christ Lutheran Church - Soest referred to “the Reverend Father Martin Luther” in his signature to the Smalcald Articles. The authors of the Formula of Concord (Pastor Jake Andrae, Pastor Marty Chemnitz, Pastor Dave Chytraeus, Pastor Nick Selnecker, and Pastor Andy Musculus) referred to Pastor Luther as one of “our dear fathers and predecessors.” Letters to Brentz, Bugenhagen, Luther, Northanus, Andrae, Chemnitz, Chytraeus, Selnecker, and Musculus have not been acknowledged or replied to by the time of publication.

 

Sacerdotalism

The word “priest” is used in the Book of Concord to refer to pastors more than a hundred times. The Latin word for “priest” is “sacerdos.” This is about double the amount of times the word “pastor” is used by the authors of the Book of Concord to refer to pastors. The Latin word for “pastor” is “pastor.” Often, especially in the Augsburg Confession and Apology, the expression “our priests” is used to refer to Lutheran ministers. Calls to Mister Melanchthon’s office at Wittenberg University were not returned.

 

Ordination as a Sacrament

Professor Melanchthon’s Apology (which is misleading, because he never says that he is sorry) includes other instances of sacerdotalism consistent with the hyper-euros when he calls ordination a sacrament: (“neither will we refuse to call the imposition of hands a sacrament”). Melanchthon also allows for marriage to be called a sacrament. The Roman Catholic Church, which denies the doctrine of justification and biblical inerrancy, as well as cheers for Notre Dame, likewise considers ordination and marriage to be sacraments. As of this publication, Professor Melanchthon has not written to GN to respond to our simple questions.

 

Mass

The Church Service is called “Mass” by sacerdotalists, Romanizers, and Hyper-Euros. The Augsburg Confession and the Apology both have an entire article (24) called “The Mass.” Melanchthon (see above) writes, “We have not abolished the Mass.” Roman Catholics use the term Mass. Roman Catholics deny the Doctrine of Justification, worship Mary, and often do not have red doors on their churches. Letters to both Melanchthon and the Pope in Rome seeking an explanation have not been answered. Science professors in the Concordia University System often refer to how much something weighs as “Mass.” Calls to Dr. Dean Wenthe and Dr. Daniel Gard, both formerly linked to CUS - both of whom have connections to Notre Dame University - have not been answered as of this writing.

 

Hyper Euro Polity

Instead of the biblical practice of having supreme voters’ assemblies, the Book of Concord advocates a hyper-euro system of bishops. Professor Melanchthon writes in the Apology (Article 14), “it is our greatest wish to maintain church-polity and the grades in the Church [old church regulations and the government of bishops]” and “we will gladly maintain ecclesiastical and canonical government, provided the bishops only cease to rage against our churches.” The Roman Catholic Church, which denies the Doctrine of Justification, teaches the unbiblical doctrine of Purgatory, and provides pointy hats for bishops, also has hyper-euro polity. It should be noted that the Ku Klux Klan has pointy hats as well. Calls to the KKK seeking an explanation were not answered.

 

Approvingly Quoted

The authors of the Book of Concord approvingly quote Bernard of Clairvaux and call him a “holy father” and a “saint.” Roman Catholic “Saints” Anthony, Dominic, and Francis are also called “holy fathers.” Pastor Clairvaux referred to Mary as a “shining and brilliant star” and that we should “call upon Mary” and that when we are troubled by sins to “think of Mary, call upon Mary…. invoking her.” The Matthew Harrison-approved LSB (which uses the English Standard Version as its biblical text) approvingly includes three hymns by Bernard of Clairvaux, and two by Thomas Aquinas (who taught Transubstantiation and engaged in philosophy).

Pastor Augustine of Hippo (whom, GN has learned, never even owned a hippo), a Roman Catholic bishop, is quoted approvingly in the Book of Concord - even in Latin, which was the language used by the Roman Catholic Church in its services (the Roman Catholic Church cheers for Notre Dame and does not have voters assemblies). Pastor Augustine is referred to as a “holy father” and a “saint” in the Book of Concord.

The Matthew Harrison-approved Lutheran Service Book has a day of “commemoration” for Augustine, “Pastor and Theologian,” as well as another day to honor Bernard of Clairvaux, “Hymnwriter and Theologian.” LSB also honors Hyper-Euro opponent of C.F.W. Walther, Wilhelm Loehe as well as various popes, including Gregory the Great (whom the Book of Concord quotes approvingly), Leo the Great (whom the Book of Concord also quotes approvingly), and Clement. Pope Gregory the Great and Hyper-Euro Wilhem Loehe both have a hymn each in the mustached-Harrison-approved LSB. Roman Catholic bishop Ambrose of Milan, who allowed himself to become a relic in a Catholic Church in Italy, is also approvingly quoted, has a “commemoration” in the Harrison-backed LSB, as well as three hymns.

The Book of Concord often approvingly quotes Roman Catholic canon law (which is misleading, as canon law has nothing to do with large mounted guns or a competitor to Nikon, the Roman Catholic Church also denies the Doctrine of Justification, Anathematizes the Gospel, and sings awful hymns). The Book of Concord never approvingly quotes the Brief Statement, the bylaws of synod, or Roberts Rules of Order (revised). Letters to General Roberts were returned to GN unopened.

 

Luther is Not Lutheran!

Pastor Martin Luther, author of three texts of the ELCA-approved Book of Concord, believed in “semper virgo,” the belief that Mary did not have other children (a belief shared by the Roman Catholic Church, which denies biblical inerrancy and does not cheer for any of the Concordia sports teams). Semper virgo is believed by the hyper euros today. Luther prayed a version of the Hail Mary prayer even after he became a Lutheran. Luther was baptized and ordained a priest in the Roman Catholic Church - and he was never called or installed to serve as a pastor by a proper voters’ assembly. Luther advocated for “high church hyper euro” worship practices, such as genuflecting and elevating and making the sign of the cross. Luther believed that the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ even if they were not consumed. Luther urged people to go to private confession and equated it with being a Christian. Luther called his German liturgy the “German Mass.” Luther never submitted a resolution to the LCMS convention.

 

Silent But Deadly

The silence is deafening. Not a single author or defender of the Book of Concord has returned GN’s calls, letters, emails, semaphores, texts, communications by radio, missives, epistles, unsavory implications, inquisitions, demands that they stop beating their wives, requests for high school year books, or simple questionnaires inquiring if they have renounced Communism, Matthew Harrison, and the heartbreak of Psoriasis.

Note: This is satire. As much as I hate to have to say so, if I don’t, Aunt Pitty will get “the vapors,” countless boomers will write to Fritz demanding that he fire me, millennial pastors will burn themselves on their soy lattes and send me nasty emails telling that their wives demand that I “be kind,” and even some of our loyal readers will miss the whole point. So here it is, boys and girls and purple penguins: this is a tongue-in-cheek homage to Christian News. And if you took the time to write without reading to the end, the joke’s on you! Thank you, ~ The Management

TGC 118 — Medieval Biblical Interpretation

The Middle Ages is often looked down up as a time of great darkness, a time when not much was happening in terms of great insight into pastoral care, biblical studies, and doctrinal articulation. In this episode, Karl Fabrizius uncovers the myth of that thinking. He tells us about the great insights in biblical interpretation that is going in at that time, and not just by the super stars of the era, but even by the lesser known pastoral theologians. Fabrizius breaks down for us what great insights that they uncovered then that we should emulate today. And he gives us some practical advice in how to cultivate this in our daily lives. 

Host: Fr. Jason Braaten

Regular Guest: Fr. Karl Fabrizius 

Become a Patron!

You can subscribe to the Journal here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/subscribe/

You can read the Gottesblog here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/gottesblog/

You can support Gottesdienst here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/make-a-donation/

As always, we, at The Gottesdienst Crowd, would be honored if you would Subscribe, Rate, and Review. Thanks for listening and thanks for your support. 

TGC 117 — Luther’s Liturgical Legacy

What is Luther’s liturgical legacy? What did he get right? What did he get not so right? What have his successors used for the edification of the church? What have they used or misused the he bequeathed to us? In this episode, we dive into find out these answers and more. 

Host: Fr. Jason Braaten

Regular Guest: Fr. Mark Braden 

Become a Patron!

You can subscribe to the Journal here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/subscribe/

You can read the Gottesblog here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/gottesblog/

You can support Gottesdienst here: https://www.gottesdienst.org/make-a-donation/

As always, we, at The Gottesdienst Crowd, would be honored if you would Subscribe, Rate, and Review. Thanks for listening and thanks for your support. 

[Gottesblog] A Tale of Two Synods — Larry Beane

A Tale of Two Synods

When someone posted the above video of the Texas District that was shown at the Texas District Convention, I responded on social media in a tongue-in-cheek manner, saying that Lutherans would do well to have such polished productions as this obviously non-denominational presentation.

I thought about responding here at Gottesblog with satire, sarcasm, and gallows humor. After all, the jokes do just write themselves. The Texas District logo not only appears to depict three martinis, they get increasingly out of proportion and dizzying as you navigate from the first to the third. This could not have been by accident. Some graphic designer was obviously being cheeky. For in a very real sense, this illustrates a practical way to deal with the district - especially at convention. Although the genuine Texas beverage might be a 64 ounce bucket of margaritas, I don’t know how well that would translate to a logo. So the three-martini motif will just have to do.

I thought about comparing the entertainment-based music and emotional imagery in this video - rooted in the spoken word of vague non-sequiturs instead of the incarnational reality of Christ coming to us to forgive us and transform us for eternity by means of His physical presence. And this is manifest not only in His historic enfleshment, His birth, cross, death, and resurrection, but also in His ongoing sacramental presence with us in the miracles of Holy Baptism and the Holy Eucharist - two themes that, though central to the faith, are pushed to the margins in this video. Instead, this objective ground of faith is jettisoned in favor of emotion and slick production. In this, the comparison to the Texas-sized Neo-Evangelical megachurches of the highways and byways of the Lonestar State - where indeed everything is Bigger - is unavoidable. It is no accident that the Reverend Father Joel Osteen is a Texas pastor with a Texas-sized church that is the envy of Church Growth Movement moguls everywhere. Indeed, the lust of our baby-boomer CGM experts for Bigness and the reduction of individual human souls to a Big number in a ledger or on an annual statistics form is insatiable. No Cialis needed for this passion.

I thought about performing a Rick-roll-like trick by inviting my reader to click on the link to the Texas District highlights, but replace it with the magnificent satirical video called “Contemporvent” or perhaps “The Worship Song Song.” Both make the point well.

I also thought about all the angles I could play because it is Texas. And I do love Texas. I love the history and heritage, the independent streak of the people, the sense of Bigness in everything, a zest for life, the unique foods and cultures and byways. Texas is a quintessential part of the South, which I hold dear. And Texas is (along with South Carolina) a state where you are just as likely to see the state flag as the US flag - and it may well even be flying on a pole of the same height as Old Glory. It is a state where people, following the observation of President Obama, “cling to their guns” and “religion,” not to mention to their Whataburger, beef brisket barbecue, and big honking belt buckles.

When I once traveled to Texas on business in my former life a long time ago, being on a company per diem, I ate a one-pound T-bone for lunch, and a two-pound T-bone for supper. You can get away with such things when you’re in your twenties. I also bought myself some cowboy boots. I did not buy a cowboy hat, but did wear my boots up north. My Texan friend who lives in North Carolina always brought his pregnant wife to Texas to give birth many times in the Lone Star State, thus assuring the transmission of his Republic of Texas citizenship to posterity. And I think that is a good and noble thing. It is part of what makes Texas unique.

These delightful quirks of Texas and Texans could have provided fodder for explaining the quirkiness of the LCMS in the Republic. Lutheranism has a long history in Texas - both in its German and Slovak heritages. But sadly, there is nothing endearing in the modern context about jettisoning the liturgy and our rich theology that are truly evangelical, and trading them for the pottage of non-denominational Christianity.

Besides, those accents in the video suggest that there is a lot of carpetbagging going on.

But after considering all of these angles, I decided to take a different tack. I’m still a big fan of dark humor and throwing stones at the dragon, for if nothing else, it breaks up the monotony, and sometimes gets other guys hurling a pebble or two. And who knows, there might even be a David out there whose stone hits the beast in the right spot. And even if it doesn’t put the monster out of our Missouri, the encounter could end up in a viral Steve Inman video for entertainment purposes. And that’s not for nothin’.

But there is also something very serious and sad about this video.

It shows that Pietism is still very much alive and well in our synod: the ginning up of emotion and the downplaying of the sacraments, the transformation of worship into entertainment instead of the Church’s timeless participation in the eternal liturgy that binds heaven and earth together - that unites the Church Militant with the Church Triumphant, offering a sacrifice of praise to our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the sacrificial Lamb whose blood saves us and who breathes the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, into us. And this is not a metaphor, but rather a flesh-and-blood reality by means of the ongoing miracle of God performing signs and wonders in our midst because His Word is still sounding forth, still creating, still redeeming, still sanctifying - still reconstituting the universe, and still drawing us into the incense-filled inner-sanctum of the very throne-room of God, where Isaiah once lay prostrate in fear, but where he was comforted by the purification delivered to his lips by a messenger bearing a burning coal from the holy altar.

Of course, to the Pietist, this is just boring stuff from an old book. That’s our grandfather’s church. To them, we need music, really exciting, awesome, fist-pumping, epic music - guitars and drums and emoting vocalists and a guy running a sound-board. And that music should be repetitive, it should cause one’s heart to skip a beat, it should tug at the heartstrings, it should induce dopamine so that a proper decision for Christ can be made. It should be the kind of music that fills the modular interlocking church seats the same way that stadiums are filled - thus also paying homage to the CGM Fetish of Bigness.

This is Texas, after all.

According to Pietism, we need pastors dressed just like us, who are excitable, who are dynamic, who are not stuffy and reverent and catholic. We need awesome vision-casting, leadership, leadership, leadership, and apps. We need high-tech. We need screens and PowerPoint. We need passion and programs and fun. Did I mention excitable pastors? We need to use the word “amazing” a lot - and new turns of phrase, like “on ramps for Jesus” (which is perhaps a Texas response to Oklahoman Carrie Underwood’s “Jesus Take the Wheel”). We need to de-emphasize “what goes on in these four walls” and focus on drawing people into the church from the world by not only going into the world, but by looking like the world.

The centrality of the Sacrament and the traditional liturgy really just get in the way of being “missional.”

The video had a lot to say about mission work, but it lacked authenticity. It just looked like well-heeled Texas suburbanites getting together with other well-heeled Texas suburbanites for brisket and music. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but that’s not really “missions.” Being missional is a big buzzword, but real mission work doesn’t much resemble watching NFL games while scooping peanuts from a tin bucket at a Texas Roadhouse. One fellow brought up the topic of Christian worship during communism and compared it to using Zoom during the pandemic. As the kids say, “Yeah, no.”

In fact, authentic Lutheran mission work is being done in the former Soviet Union. Here is a video showing how this missionary endeavor is carried out in Siberia, and how it is done in an authentically Lutheran way:

Note the Christological and sacramental focus of Siberian mission work. (Let’s just keep this between us girls, but Siberia is even bigger than Texas). As a bonus, here is a video of Siberian Bishop Vsevolod Lytkin speaking at a faithful Texas congregation, Faith Lutheran Church in Plano. This is quite the contrast to the Texas District video of the Cult of Bigness and the desire to adopt Neo-Evangelical worship.

Sadly, I often hear from faithful confessional Lutherans, seeking authentic Lutheran worship using the hymnal, who drive sometimes up to a hundred miles on Sunday morning, passing a wasteland of non-liturgical LCMS congregations, all in order to find a church that is liturgical, confessional, and reverent. It is a huge sacrifice, but it is worth it - especially to young families who want their children learning the catechism and being formed by the miraculous presence of Christ instead of being molded by vacuous entertainment. Sometimes, people have to face hard choices of either finding a Wisconsin Synod congregation (and promising to break prayer fellowship with the rest of the family and be subjected to a low view of the office of the ministry), or even attending Masses of a continuing Anglican tradition and forgoing the Holy Sacrament for a while. As I noted earlier, this desert of decent LCMS congregations in some places has led some of our laity - often young families with children - to physically move to where the liturgical parishes are. As my colleague Fr. David Petersen advises, there is another option: to start a new church. We need faithful lay people to consider such a drastic step - even if it means foregoing the Bigness and suburban wealth of the Texas-sized LCMS church up the road. For this isn’t about everything being Bigger - in Texas or elsewhere - it is about fidelity to Word and Sacrament, in doctrine and ceremonies. It is about teaching the people what they need to know about Christ.

And even Osteen’s Texas megachurch began very small - as did most of our LCMS church plants. In hostile districts, a confessional and liturgical congregation may well get snubbed by the districtocracy, even as money flows like the mighty Mississippi to church plants that downplay authentic Lutheranism and instead employ gimmicks. But remember, that the confession of the “one holy catholic and apostolic church” is located within the third article of the Creed - as the Holy Spirit is the “Lord and giver of life.” It is not mammon or district bureaucracy that quickens the church. It is not gimmicks or marketing that grows the church. For God Himself “has brought down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of humble estate.” Man does not live by District alone, and in fact, in our Lutheran tradition, both its history and its confessional writings, church bureaucracy is sometimes a hindrance to the Gospel. And when it is, it is best ignored. Certainly, our sixteenth century ancestors, who were attacked and harried by the worldwide, rich, and powerful church bureaucracy of the day, knew what it was to oppose them and stand as a “little flock” being implored to “fear not the foe.”

The adoption of Neo-Evangelical practices indeed leads to Neo-Evangelical doctrine. Lex Ordandi, Lex Credendi is not just a tee-shirt slogan for seminarians and geeky pastors. It is an ancient and wise observation that bears out our Lutheran forbears’ retention of the ancient ceremonies rather than throwing caution to the wind in search of something new. That is why Article 24 begins with the bold statement:

Falsely are our churches accused of abolishing the Mass; for the Mass is retained among us, and celebrated with the highest reverence. Nearly all the usual ceremonies are also preserved, save that the parts sung in Latin are interspersed here and there with German hymns, which have been added to teach the people. For ceremonies are needed to this end alone that the unlearned be taught [what they need to know of Christ].

~ AC 24:1-4a

One thing that is hammered home by this video is that we are two synods (at least). Can you even imagine one of the pastors in the above video standing in the pulpit and reading the above quote from our confessions to his parishioners? Or how about the Texas District President reminding his congregations that they are committed to this confession.

We can lie to ourselves that we are actually united as a synod. It just isn’t so. There is no way that I would visit and commune at the kinds of LCMS churches shown in this video. Nor would my parishioners. They would be scandalized. And there is no way that most of those folks would ever commune from my hand at the altar that I serve. We have a paper fellowship, at best, and a tenuous unity and koinonia based not on doctrine and ceremonies, but on a common bureaucracy and shared employment benefits. And as more and more congregations jettison Concordia Plan Services, even that link is being weakened. In some cases, the only thing holding the synod together is a sense of nostalgia and branding.

The Rev. Prof. Kurt Marquart of blessed memory suggested that we need a divorce in our synod. That would certainly be more honest than what we have now. And as painful as “The Walkout” and the subsequent breakup of the LCMS was in the 1970s, it was the honest thing to do.

But maybe there is another way that we could order ourselves more honestly. Perhaps what we need is to abolish the districts and circuits as they exist (as they reflect 19th century technological limitations). But why must our districts be geographical today? Why not reorder ourselves according to what we have in common - especially in matters of worship. And if we have two or three, or even five or six, subdivisions of synod, so what?

We currently have two non-geographical districts. We could have non-geographical “districts” where there is genuine agreement in doctrine and practice, and we could all keep the name and the benefits package. And if, down the road, it would be better to actually cut our ties, it would be easier to do in such a system. For right now what we have is not unlike what we have in the United States. Instead of federalism, we now have nationalism. And so US elections become a “winner take all” endeavor. And the losing side, which is typically very near fifty percent of the population - is held hostage to the faction that is bigger by only a percent or two (if that). Instead, we could decentralize our synod and let congregations have closer ties with other congregations that share their doctrine and practice - not unlike the situation in 19th century America, where small synods went into fellowship with one another.

One “district” may specify that only the ordo and hymns in the hymnal may be used. Another “district” may make it all optional. Yet another “district” might compile its own requirements as to what is permissible. Our “district” conventions would be much less the way of power struggles, and the Divine Services at the same would not be places of protest, either against the services with guitars and streamers, or with chasubles and incense. Such a scheme would provide homogeneity in matters of doctrine and practice, while allowing the synod branding and employment benefits to be shared by all. In such a structure, synod would not dictate from above, and “districts” could recognize fellowship with other “districts” based on their own criteria.

There are certainly dangers in such a polity. And there are likely unintended consequences. But what we have now is not working. We are engaging in a Mister Rogers style Land of Make-Believe fantasy that we are not in a state of impaired fellowship, and we are not involved in a power struggle between at least two opposing factions. By decentralizing the conflict, we can encourage church plants by “districts” without regard to geography, and our “district” mission funds could actually go to new congregations that reflect our confession and worship - whether Pietistic or confessional, whether normed by guitar or organ.

For what we have now is 35 civil wars and games of one-upsmanship - where the winners are determined by political means: running for office, navigating parliamentary procedure, and engaging in backroom arm-twisting of the kind we see in the secular political world.

At any rate, though we in The Gottesdienst Crowd are often marginalized and mocked by our Bigger brethren in synod (and sometimes that is a matter of the waistline and not only the waste-land), though our churches are generally smaller and often face financial struggles, let us not lose heart. Let us continue to be normed by the Bible and the Book of Concord, and let us continue to confess in Word and deed not only what Jesus has done for us, but what He continues to do for us in the Divine Service, where He comes to us in a literal and miraculous way that needs no distraction by entertainment or some Big New Awesomer Way of Doing Church.

We don’t need a new way of doing church. We need Jesus. We don’t need entertainment. We need authentic worship. We don’t need gimmicks. We need faith. And for you, dear reader, both layman and pastor, the following video (Have you seen the video?), produced by Gottesdienst, thanks to a grant from the LCMS, is an example of how “ceremonies teach the people what they need to know about Christ,” and how our bureaucracy can indeed teach the ceremonies to the pastors and laity alike. Instead of “contemporvence” grounded in entertainment, you will find reverence grounded in the reality that Jesus continues to join us in the miracle of the Holy Sacrament.

And that reality is even bigger than Texas.

 

[Gottesblog] Feminism Began . . . — Larry Beane

Feminism Began...

The new face of conservatism and the GOP?

…with a question that wasn’t really a question: “Did God actually say…?”

Feminism changed the world.

For with this rhetorical question, “Did God actually say…?” the first woman and her husband were enticed to deny God’s Word with the promise of changing the order of creation, with the opportunity to “be like God,” to have one’s eyes “opened,” or to put it into modern parlance, to be “woke.” This was the very first instance of “Smash the Patriarchy” - and the Patriarch was God.

Adam participated in feminism even though it sought to remove his leadership of the family, but there was a lot in it for him: the chance to likewise escape the hierarchical limitations of his own created order, his own vocation given to him by God.

Feminism changed the course of history, and not for the better. This act of rebellion against God’s created order of divinely created roles of the binary sexes of male and female, this Luciferian inversion of order into an unnatural chaos lured by the lust for self-gratification, brought death into the world, unleashed the forces of chaos and violence among all creatures in what was a perfectly harmonious existence, and placed the world on a trajectory of warfare in this life and enmity with God - a cosmic conflict that places mankind in the crossfire.

And the serpent continues to deceive, continues to ask, “Did God actually say…?”, continues to call into question the order of creation - especially in matters of sex and sexuality.

Today, chaos has been mainstreamed, even in defiance of the science that so many claim to believe in. Male and Female are considered social constructs. The natural family is considered no better for children - or perhaps even worse - than unnatural configurations. God’s created order of patriarchy and complementarily between men and women is attacked in both the secular and ecclesiastical realms. Biology is held in contempt. Natural Law is disdained. That which a normal person can posit by observation is denied. And of course, all the while, the serpent continues to lure men and women into questioning divine revelation by what is in it for them: be it money and power for women, or the lure of easy recreational sex devoid of responsibility for men. Men especially “benefit” from feminism, for they are absolved from their duty to love their wives and be willing to give up everything for her sake. Instead, they are free to pursue their lusts and treat their wives as cash cows, buying toys or funding the man-cave.

There is nothing in our culture and society that has not been corrupted and putrefied by the serpent’s original intersectionality. Especially in our western civilization, and especially in America: once the world’s beacon of freedom of belief, of speech, of writing and publishing, of political liberty, and of course, freedom of religion.

One example is the military: an institution whose purpose is to use violence to protect the country from invasion, from enemies both foreign and domestic. Note how feminism has shifted the raison être of the military from being an order of warriors formerly bound by an ethos of service to the nation and a chivalrous defense of the weak into being a grand radical social “Did God actually say…?” experiment.

If you haven’t seen the juxtaposition of recent military recruitment ads by China, Russia, and the United States, you probably should have a look.

Even Atheistic China still retains some moorings of natural law, as the masculine and feminine roles shown in their ad, as well as the unmistakable appeal to the warrior ethos of men to protect and serve, is apparent - even though this warrior spirit takes on a collectivist feel. The Russian ad likewise appeals to a man’s natural biological, psychological, and spiritual urge to protect and serve. But the Russian ad is aimed at the individual rather than the collective.

The American ad begins in the form of a cartoon and the story of a young girl raised by a couple of lesbians. There is no appeal to the warrior ethic, only a ginned-up feminized and radicalized message to appeal to so-called social justice issues, tugging on the heartstrings, as though the military’s job is to provide emotional sensitivity training and sexual propaganda instead of blowing things up when that is what is needed to defend our liberties and existence as a country. The only concession to a warrior ethic is the cartoon girl’s climbing up a rope. And at the end, the cartoon gives way to live video of the young woman, who inexplicably, in spite of her impressive academic credentials, is not an officer. Perhaps her decision to serve in the enlisted ranks regardless of her qualifications is yet another way to fight back against the notion of hierarchy.

At any rate, the contrast is stark. And should other countries become a military threat to the United States, one can only imagine how ill-prepared our country will be, with our warrior institution emasculated and our military turned into an institution of social re-education and a jobs program for people who reject traditional societal norms - not to mention reality itself.

“Did God actually say…?”

The serpent has also slithered up to the Bride of Christ and has posed the same question. He has gotten once-faithful church bodies, including Lutherans, to question God’s Word - from the days of Higher Critical Theory right down to today’s all encompassing Critical Theory (which manifests itself in matters of sex and race, imposing chaos and rebelling against the orderly goodness of God’s Word and His will).

When the push for women’s “ordination” began among historic communions of the church in the twentieth century, there were prophetic voices, like Bishop Bo Giertz, the great Swedish Lutheran churchman who appealed to the Bible and the church’s confessions. Giertz and others who shared this commitment to the Scriptures were pilloried and reviled as reactionaries and misogynists. The Bishop took the slings and arrows and mounted a defense against this Satanic invasion, but that battle was lost, as Swedish society had embraced progressivism over and against submission to the Word of God. And the winners have written the history and pushed their own narrative.

Today, priestesses outnumber priests in the Church of Sweden. Secular society is dominated by female leadership. And it goes without saying that Scandinavia has led the way in the feminization of society and the normalization of sexual deviancy in the Nordic countries. The results have been disastrous, as the cancer of the rejection of the order of creation has become dominant, even to the point of the Lutheran lesbian “bishop” of the Church of Sweden ordering crosses removed from a church to make Muslims feel welcome. This corresponds to the feminized secular leadership of Sweden, naive, emotional, and lacking the God-given instinct to protect the nation, opening the borders of the country, creating violent no-go zones and an active rape culture - apparently an acceptable price to be paid for pushing a “woke” agenda.

And the often pooh-poohed argument that the male pastorate mirrors the maleness of Christ is vindicated, and sadly so, by the re-creation of God in the image of woman by an ELCA congregation in San Francisco - one that prays to the goddess and employs a special goddess rosary. One of the former pastors of this “church” (so-called) has since become the world’s first transgendered “bishop” (so-called).

The gender issue has spread like a cancer, and there is more to come.

Another ELCA priestess gave an Easter Sermon that was all about self-pleasure - including in the sexual sense. If you don’t believe me, you can watch the video - especially beginning about at the 24:50 mark. It goes without saying that viewer discretion is advised.

The canard that a church can be both feminist and orthodox is disproven by simple observation of the fruits of the tree. And far from making us like God, knowing good and evil, it has distanced us from God, as we have rebelled and used our ill-gotten knowledge to choose evil. This is apparently what is known as “empowerment.”

And so in the face of the feminist heresy, let us join one and all and answer the serpent’s question with a hearty confession: “Yes! God did actually say! Amen.”