I want to know if anyone on the plane yelled out, “Do not lay hands on God’s annointed!”
Link: Wife of Joel Osteen Asked to Leave Plane – Yahoo! News.
Mental Reservation
This is a big story….one of the top officials in the Vatican is going to be on the hot-seat to explain how, or if, he applied the Roman doctrine of “mental reservation” when answering questions in earlier child molestation cases against Roman priests. This is going to be interesting.
A Sane Voice in What Seemed a Pretty Wacky Calvinist Reformed World
I’ve just made a new Blogosphre friend, Michael Spencer, of both Internet Monk and the Boar’s Head Tavern. He helped me understand that Dispensationalist Fundamentalist so-called “Reformed Baptists” attack-dogs like James White and others like him do not represent Reformed theology or Calvinism. I find this a relief, to say the least. Here is what Michael had to say over at Boar’s Head Tavern about my post on Calvinism.
Link: Boar’s Head Tavern.
Paul McCain on Calvinism
Paul McCain- Lutheran Blogger and recently in a fracas with Hays and White- posts his concerns with Calvinism: The Calvinist doesn’t have Jesus at the center of his “system.” It’s a serious charge.
While I wouldn’t write Paul’s essay exactly as he has, I think no one will be surprised that I sympathize with much of what Paul is saying and feeling, and it is part of why I no longer call myself a Calvinist. There is an issue here- an issue that even my Calvinistic friends in the BHT have to deal with. How many footnotes have to be inserted in our “Calvinism” to keep Jesus Christ- rather than some theological point in the mysterious nature of God- as the center point of our faith? If you choose to live in the “house of Calvinism” these days, how much time do you have to spend explaining that you aren’t like the people burning heretics in the back yard?
It’s a particularly good point to be made as we approach Christmas. I call myself a Christian Humanist because I meet God not in a theology text’s discussion of the attributes of the Divine Being, but in the point-in-time, historical, human person of divine infant in Bethlehem, fulfiller of all God’s promises made in God’s auto-biographical story of Israel and revealer of the God who is wholly other. Nothing is more admirable about Luther than his commitment to the quest to make Christianity a meditation on Christ Incarnate, Christ Crucified and Christ Reigning.
In my opinion, what McCain has experienced and read in some quarters of the Reformed blogosphere is the outworking of theological hubris that puts the theology of the adherent in far too prominent a place. It runs the constant danger of not being a confession of simple faith in Christ alone. In some versions, it seems to be the gospel of presenting a commitment to a system, some of which goes beyond the “revealed God” of the incarnation to the “mysterious counsels of God” deduced by the theologian’s ruminations.
What I would say to McCain is that his experience of internet Calvinism can be very deceptive. The Barney Fife’s make a lot of noise while they are nipping everything in the bud. The Tim Keller’s and the Michael Horton’s don’t spend their time gutting bloggers for trophy. When you calmly survey the entire reformed web, and don’t give too much place to the camp that sees dispensational independent Baptist fundamentalism as the only proper heirs to Reformed Theology, you will see a more balanced- and Christ centered- picture.
Internet Calvinists themselves know this. The lines in the PCA are clearly there to see, as well as many other places. Many Calvinists (see Founders.org for instance) are warmly Christ-centered, and put theology in its proper, helpful, but not central, place in the Church’s life.
The Conversion of the Evangelical Imagination
The Internet Monk has a great new article challenging the legalistism of those who would eschew the visual arts. Here is a snippet from it.
“The Great Christian Tradition- especially in its early centuries- was always visual without being idolatrous. It engaged culture through mind and imagination. The risks of idolatry were never absent, but the rewards of a holy, and living, imagination are too rich to avoid. In eras of illiteracy and spiritual warfare, the church sought to appeal to and capture the imagination of those who heard the Gospel. Whether liturgy, cathedrals, musical compositions or great works of visual art- all were arrayed for the purpose of taking the loyalties of the imagination captive for Christ the Lord.
Evangelicals have dabbled. They have denounced. They have demeaned. They have experimented. Are they ready to admit that we can preach through our engagement with story, image and aesthetic, and not only through propositions? Art and imagination, great writing and creative expresssion: they all preach the Gospel and engage human beings with the truth of God. If evangelicals are opening their minds to more than outlines and answers, will they seek out those God has gifted in the realm of the imaginative and release them to create, praise and evangelize?”
Link: internetmonk.com
Happy Fourth Sunday in Advent!
A happy and blessed fourth Sunday in Advent to you. For some reason this year I’ve managed to avoid the “Christmas rush” and the intolerable press of crowds at malls. Why? The Internet. I’ve done all my Christmas shopping on-line and, at least for me, it has made it possible for me to focus more on the meaning of this season, rather than worry about rushing about in traffic and crowds. Now, for some, this is all part of the fun of the season, and I recognize that. But for me, thanks to the Internet, what I find to be the more unpleasant aspects of Christmas have been removed. And that’s a happy thing. So, as we move into this the last week of Advent, may the Lord of Christmas, the Babe of Bethlehem, fill your hearts, and your minds, with peace and joy.
The Devil Hates to Hear This
Today is the Fourth Sunday in Advent and in many congregations of our church, the Annunciation will be read as the Gospel lesson. Here is a beautiful quote from one of Martin Luther’s sermons on the Annunciation:
“Our Lord Jesus Christ is true God and true man in one person conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin. It is an article of faith that provides unique comfort against the devil, yes, even over against all angels, as is stated in Hebrews 2:16: ‘For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.’ He did not become God and an angel, but God and man. He does not assume the nature of angels, but that of Abraham’s seed, a human being, flesh and blood. That is why he is called Immanuel, God with us; not just because he is around and with us, living among us and helping us. That would be well and good, but he became like us , of our nature. He assumed flesh and blood and bone like us, yet without sin, which is our lot.
“The devil hates to hear this joyful tiding, that our flesh and blood is God’s Son, yes, God himself, who reigns in heaven over everything. Formerly, each Sunday, when we sang Nicea’s confession of faith, formulated at the Council of Nicea, at the word Et homo factus est, that is, “And He became man,” everyone fell to his knees. That was an excellent commendable custom and it would be a good thing for us to still practice this, so that we might thank God from the heart that Christ assumed human nature and bestowed such great and high honor on us, allowing his son to become man. It almost seems as though God is at enmity with the world.
“Present conditions are so shameful all around us in the world, as God allows murderous mobs and rabble, so much violence and so much misfortune to prevail, so that we might think God is only Lord and God of the angels and that he has forgotten about mankind. But here in our text we see that he befriends us humans like no other creatures, in the very closest relationship, and, in turn, we humans have a closer relationship with God than with any creature. Sun and moon are not as close to us as is God, for he comes to us in our own flesh and blood. God not only rules over us, not only lives in us, but personally became a human being. This is the grace which we celebrate today, thanking God that he has cleansed our sinful conception and birth through his holy conception and birth, and removed the curse from us and blessed us. By nature our conception and birth are flawed and laden with sin. In contrast, Christ’s conception and birth were holy and pure. Through his holy conception and birth our sinful nature, flesh, and blood are blessed and made holy. It is on this basis that we are baptized, so that by means of God’s Word, the sacraments, and the Holy Spirit we might have the fruit of his holy conception and birth. May we always thank him for his grace and never become weary or surfeited in hearing and learning this. Unfortunately, most people in the world think they know it all, after they have heard it once.”
Source:
Luther’s House Postils
The Day of the Annunciation to Mary
First Sermon
Baker Book House: Grand Rapids, Michigan, pg. 292-293.
Where’s Jesus? An Expression of Concern to my Calvinist Friends
While I like, and respect, most of the Calvinists I’ve been privileged to get to know in various ways, I have profound disagreements and very serious reservations with Calvinism. I hope that is a distinction not lost on anyone. I regard Calvinism not as part of the church’s reformation, but as actually contributing toward its deformation. And here is why I believe this. This is a collection of several blog posts.
I don’t know about you, but nothing says to me, “Christmas is near”
more uniquely than the stories that appear in local papers this time of
year about people having their Jesus stolen from their yard manger scenes.
But it set me to thinking. I have to review a lot of Christian books
and other products. I read a lot about them. It’s kind of an
occupational hazard, I guess you could say. Well, it never ceases to
amaze me how often I come away from reviewing a book from a Christian
publisher, be it for adults or children, with the question, “Where’s
Jesus?” Oh, yes, there may be a lot of talk about God and about the
Christian life and all manner of issues, but….where is Jesus? Where
is the actual Gospel? You know the “I delivered to you what I received
as of first importance…the cross, the resurrection, forgiveness of
sins” You know…the Gospel. Where is the Gospel?
And lately I’ve been noticing this as a frequent characteristic of
Calvinist blog sites and theological discussions. Here’s an example of
it from a self-described Calvinist gadfly I’ve come to know. Alan
writes about himself and then concludes…
I am a sinner saved by God’s grace alone. He didn’t save me by
trying somehow to “woo” me by whispering in my ear hoping that I would
cooperate. He saved me when I was spitting in his face. God took my
creaturely rebel heart and sovereignly penetrated my will and performed
the miracle of regeneration by raising me up to spiritual life. It was,
and is, amazing grace. Cheers, Alan
Compare what our friend Alan has to say to how St. Paul talks in
Gal. 2:21. I trust you will notice a striking difference. I’m not
saying we have to mention Jesus with every other word, but….please
let me hear about Jesus, not just about the sovereign will of God. The
lofty grandeur of the God high in the heavens is a wonder indeed. But
that does me no good. No, talk to me of God who lies in the manger, for
me, as a baby. Let me hear more about God who lived perfectly in my
place, who walked this earth, in the same flesh and blood I have. Speak
to me of God who fed the crowds, healed the sick, raised the dead and
calmed the storms. Put my eyes on Jesus, God in the flesh, who took my
sins on his shoulders, who suffered and bled for me, as the
all-sufficient atoning sacrifice for my sins, and the sins of the whole
world. That’s the God I want to hear about more. You see, God has come
down in the flesh and now to all eternity, He is the only way I know
the Father, no other way. I can ponder the “sovereign will” of the
grand Creator, but I prefer to ponder God in the face of Jesus Christ,
who is, my Lord and my God. Let me hear of Jesus.He is the One who
shows us the Father. Please put Jesus back where He belongs.
In the process of trying to get to the bottom of
Calvinism, I’ve learned that Calvinism is somewhat hard to define, but
there does seem to be fairly universal consensus that the Canons of Dordt are the most commonly held principles of Calvinism…but….then you talk to other Calvinists who point you more toward the Westminster Confession. And then you have the Belgic Confession, and various other attending documents
that go along with Westminster Confession which are apparently of some
authority in various Calvinist churches. Of course, one could try to
fathom a rather complex chart explaining Calvinism’s view of how a person is saved.
I just feel sometimes that I’m trying to pick up
jello with my hands, or herd cats when I try to pin down precisely what
is the Calvinist confession of faith. I wish Calvinists could, like we
Lutherans, point to a single book and say, “Here is our definitive and
authoritative and normative confession of faith.” I appreciate the fact
that Lutheranism, though jello-like in its own unique ways, at least
brings to the table a single book, called The Book of Concord.
No, I’m not saying all Lutherans actually adhere to the Lutheran
Confessions, just as I would not suggest that the Presbyterian Church
USA is a paragon of Calvinist confession. We have our liberals.
Calvinists have their’s. I’m not concerned about either right now.
In my opinion, based on my observation and reading of
Calvinist materials now for many years, and most recently of course my
exchanges with several ardent Calvinists, I am all the more firmly
convinced that Calvinism simply does not put Jesus at the absolute
center of their “system.”
Am I suggesting that Calvinists don’t believe in
Jesus? No. That they don’t love Jesus? No. I’m simply saying that in
the Calvinist system of theology the “warm beating heart” is not to be
found, first and foremost, in Christ Jesus and the love and mercy of
the Gospel, the good news of forgiveness and new life and hope in Him.
For Calvinists it is my opinion that what “centers” them is not the
Gospel, so much as God’s eternal sovereign decrees. Am I saying God is
not sovereign? No. Am I saying God does not act sovereignly toward His
creation? No.
The concern I have with Calvinism is that the fuel
driving is train is not the dynamite of the Gospel of Jesus, the love
of God, the kindness shown by God to us in Christ, but….in God’s
essence and glory, which Calvinists see most clearly in His
“sovereignty” but not actually in His grace, love and mercy in Christ.
Of course, they protest this assertion. They say, “But that’s what we
mean when we talk about sovereignty.” Well, I say, “Then let’s hear
more about Jesus and the Gospel and God’s life-giving love and kindness
and mercy in Christ.”
I believe that the New Testament clearly indicates
that we can not, and must not, look any farther than Jesus Christ when
we talk about God. All talk of God that drifts free of Christ and Him
crucified leads in a wrong direction. Jesus Christ is the only way we
know God as He wants to be known. We are not to try to peer past, or
around, or above Jesus and try to look into the hidden counsels of God.
And his is precisely where I think Calvinism as a system is highly
problematic.
Is referring to Calvinism as a system unfair? I’m sure it could be so
in some senses, but, as one Calvinist web site puts it succinctly:
Calvinism is the name applied to the system of thought which has come
down to us from John Calvin. He is recognized as the chief exponent of
that system, although he is not the originator of the ideas set forth
in it. The theological views of Calvin, together with those of the
other great leaders of the Protestant Reformation, are known to be a
revival of Augustinianism, which in its turn was only a revival of the
teachings of St. Paul centuries previous. But it was Calvin who, for
modern times, first gave the presentation of these views in systematic
form and with the specific application which since his day has become
known to us as Calvinism.
It
is this “system” that has me worried for my Calvinist brethren, for it
seems to me that this “system” is quite a bit more concerned first with
an articulation of the eternal decrees and hidden counsels of God than
with putting Christ Jesus at the heart and center. Please let me
explain.
Calvinism concerns itself first with God’s glory and
making sure God gets what God deserves: glory. A noble goal! But, is
this truly the New Testament presentation of what is at the heart of
Christianity? It would, to me, seem to be working things from the wrong
direction. We are not given, first, to know and contemplate God in
Himself, but rather as He has chosen finally to reveal Himself to us,
and that He has done through His Son, Jesus Christ. This is not a
“system” this is a Person, the God-Man, Christ Jesus our Lord.
Beginning with God’s glory is stepping off on the wrong foot.
Consider this explanation of Calvinism’s “beating heart”
The
central thought of Calvinism is, therefore, the great thought of
God. Someone has remarked: Just as the Methodist places in the
foreground the idea of the salvation of sinners, the Baptist the
mystery of regeneration, the Lutheran justification by faith, the
Moravian the wounds of Christ, the Greek Catholic the mysticism of
the Holy Spirit, and the Romanist the catholicity of the church, so
the Calvinist is always placing in the foreground the thought of God.
The Calvinist does not start out with some interest of man; for
example, his conversion or his justification, but has as his informing
thought always: How will God come to His rights! He seeks to realize as
his ruling concept in life the truth of Scripture: Of Him , and
through Him, and to Him are all things. To whom be glory forever.
Here’s an example of what concerns me, from a self-described Calvinist gadfly I’ve come to know. Alan
is an earnest and sincere Christian young man who writes this about himself:
I am a sinner saved by God’s grace alone. He didn’t save me by
trying somehow to “woo” me by whispering in my ear hoping that I would
cooperate. He saved me when I was spitting in his face. God took my
creaturely rebel heart and sovereignly penetrated my will and performed
the miracle of regeneration by raising me up to spiritual life. It was,
and is, amazing grace.
Compare what our Calvinist friend Alan has to say to how St. Paul talks in
Gal. 2:20.
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ
liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the
faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
I trust you will notice a striking difference. I’m not
saying we have to mention Jesus with every other word, but….please
let me hear about Jesus, not just about the sovereign will of God. The
lofty grandeur of the God high in the heavens is a wonder indeed. But
that does me no good. No, talk to me of God who lies in the manger, for
me, as a baby. Let me hear more about God who lived perfectly in my
place, who walked this earth, in the same flesh and blood I have. Speak
to me of God who fed the crowds, healed the sick, raised the dead and
calmed the storms. Put my eyes on Jesus, God in the flesh, who took my
sins on his shoulders, who suffered and bled for me, as the
all-sufficient atoning sacrifice for my sins, and the sins of the whole
world. That’s the God I want to hear about more. You see, God has come
down in the flesh and now to all eternity, He is the only way I know
the Father, no other way. I can ponder the “sovereign will” of the
grand Creator, but I prefer to ponder God in the face of Jesus Christ,
who is, my Lord and my God. Let me hear of Jesus. He is the One who
shows us the Father. Please put Jesus back where He belongs.
The quotations in this post are from an essay based on the book The Basic Ideas of Calvinism, Chapter I, pp. 29-40 (Grand Rapids, Baker Book House, 1939).
It has come clear to me that for Calvinism, starting from the
premise that the chief characteristic of God is his “Sovereignty,” it
makes perfect sense that the Sovereign God would lay down hard and fast
rules and laws for all eternity but then turn right around and order
his people to break them by putting, for example images in the house
constructed for His worship. After all, in their system, this same God
is the one who, despite telling everyone through His Son that He loves
the whole world and that the atoning sacrifice of His Son was for the
sins of the whole world, turns right around and decides to create some
people just so He can send them off to roast in Hell, while others, He
determines to be in Heaven. You don’t really need the atoning sacrifice
of Christ in this system. You see the Sovereign God simply is
Sovereign. That settles it. I’m not really sure what point there was
for Him to send His Son anyway, but I guess that too is just to be
chalked up to the Sovereign God.
And this Sovereign God is also so remote and “other” from His
creation, that we can not possibly suggest that this infinite God is
capable of associating Himself with the finite. In fact, it is an
affront to this Sovereign Other in Calvinistic thinking to suggest that
the actual humanity of a human being is so closely united to Divinity
that He is now truly, actually present in, with and under bread and
wine of the Holy Supper, even as he was in, with and under the assumed
humanity from the God-bearer, the Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin.
Jesus is God, in the flesh, in the womb of the Virgin Mother. Christ,
is God, in the flesh, on the cross, crucified, died and buried, risen
again for our salvation.
And so it then is necessary for Calvinists to speak of a “spiritual
presence” of Christ, but in such a way as to avoid at all costs
actually regarding him as truly present where He promised to locate
Himself: under bread and wine, with His actual body and blood, given
from the hand of the pastor, into the mouth of the communicant. His
Glory dwelt between the Seraphim, but it seems for Calvinism, that
can’t be truly said of the Man Jesus Christ, now and into all eternity
as our Ascended Lord and King.
All this has come very clear to me and frankly the way my Calvinist
friends over at Dave and Tim’s place are handling images, is perfectly,
rationally consistent with their theology. Rather than starting in the
Mercy and Grace of God, made flesh in Christ Jesus, Calvinism proceeds
first from speculations about the Sovereign Lord and then works itself
out from there.
In this Advent season, I rejoice in God my Savior, who has blessed
us all through the humble Virgin Mother of God, through whom He took on
human flesh and blood and now, and for all eternity, is united with our
humanity in such a way that truly we look at the man Jesus and say, “My
Lord and My God” and receive the body and blood of this God-Man as the
atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, into our mouths, for
the blessing of both body and soul.
But I find myself concerned when I survey Lutheranism. How many
Lutherans in this country believe that the best way best to reach out
to people is by using methods and techniques that embody and rely on
essential characteristics of Evangelicalism, Non-Denominationalism,
Pentecostalism and the like.
These revialistic measures are reactions to Calvinism! They are not
compatible with Lutheranism. When there is such a rich, warm, glowing
treasure of truth at the hearth on which the fire of Biblical
Lutheranism blazes, why do we feel such a need to run outside and pick
up a few Calvinistic Reformed/Evangelical or Revivalistic sticks to rub
together for light? Do we not realize that American Evangelicalism and
Revivalism is the natural reaction to Calvinism’s dreary
double-predestination and lack of certainty about the presence of
Christ in His Word and Sacraments, its distortion and confusion of Law
and Gospel, its emphasis on the Sovereignty of God at the expense of
the mercy and love of God in Christ?
When a theological tradition holds out the message that there is
finally no way to know if one is saved, or damned, other than to throw
oneself into the arms of a Sovereign God’s whims, is it any wonder that
the response to this will be emotionalism and revivalism, trying
desperately to work up in the human psyche some assurance of salvation?
When Calvinism holds out empty sacraments that are mere legal
requirements to be obeyed, rather than actual saving actions of a
merciful, loving Christ, present among His people as He has promised to
be, is it any wonder people run from such “Sacraments” and the
“Sovereign God” and throw themselves down at the feet of false prophets
like Joel Osteen and other wolves in sheep’s clothing like him? ?But
why would we Lutherans want to mimic sterile worship spaces, and
revialistic practices? Why would we want to have among us practices and
techniques that mirror revivalism and emotionalism and then expect
anyone to bother much with what Lutheranism is all about? This has
given me much to think about indeed.
Let this point be clear and may God grant it for Jesus sake . . .
The differences between Lutheranism and Calvinism, and all those
churches that are spiritual heirs of Zwingli and Calvin, or reactions
against it: Reformed, Presbyterian, Episcopalianism, Methodism,
Baptist, Pentecostal, Non-Denominational, and all the rest – these
differences are every bit as harmful, serious and threatening to the
truth of God’s Word as the differences between Lutheranism and Roman
Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. One person I know suggested that
Roman Catholicism added to God’s Word while the Reformed removed things
from it. Simply affirming an inerrant Bible is no reason to assume that
the theological differences are either relatively minor or of no great
consequence. Affirming an inerrant Bible, which I do, is no guarantee
of fidelity to what the Inerrant Word of God teaches.
Am I with these remarks suggesting that Lutherans are perfect
people? No, quite the opposite. We are poor, miserable sinners who
deserving nothing but God’s temporal and eternal punishment. We daily
sin much and deserve nothing but His wrath and condemnation. We flee
for mercy to our Lord Jesus Christ, seeking and imploring God’s mercy
for His sake. Lutheranism has many failings and faults and
imperfections. Some of my Lutheran friends find these so disturbing
that they think the “escape hatch” is to be found in Eastern Orthodoxy.
But they are just deceiving themselves with the allure of grass that
seems greener on the other side of the ecclesiastical fence.
This blog discussion and debate over images and commandments has
really helped me realize what a stark contrast there is between
Biblical Christianity, and Calvinism and all derivations, or reactions,
to it. To whatever extent Calvinism does teach and cling to the
revealed Gospel in Sacred Scripture, I thank God, but to the extent
that it does not, I, with Luther must say, “They have a different
spirit. They can expect no fellowship from me.” And by this, I mean formal church fellowship, not the fellowship of friendship, but the fellowship of communion in holy things at altar and pulpit.
Calvinism represents not Reformation, but deformation. And I want Reformation.
For Narnia! For Aslan!
I urge everyone to go see The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the The Wardrobe. I just returned from seeing it with my family and I’m absolutely stunned and amazed at the depth of Christian content in this movie. I suppose those who have no idea that C.S. Lewis was, perhaps, the greatest Christian apologist and writer in the 20th century, may see the movie, and leave again, with no idea what this film is about; that is, what it is really all about.
Ironically, because of secularist reviewers trashing the movie for its “overt Christian symbolism” many people will be sensitized by those who despise the Faith to be aware of what the true meaning of this movie is.
I would be hard pressed to identify a better witnessing tool than Narnia. What a wonderful way to draw people into the “great story” of the Faith,without necessarily rubbing their noses in things that may seem so obvious to believers, but are not at all clear to unbelievers.
If we want Hollywood to be sensitive to the needs of the Christan community and if we want movies that reflect the truths we hold dear and the values flowing from those truths, we must support movies like this.
I believe you will be as delighted as I was by the quality of the movie. The special effects are truly amazing. I have to tell you that I’ve never read Lewis’ “Narnia” books and in preparation for this movie I began to read the second volume of the seven Narnia series, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but frankly, I got bored and put it down. I’m a huge fan of Tolkien and so I guess I expected something a bit more in-depth in the books.
Now, I’m rather pleased I only read half the book, for it gave me a chance to evaluate the movie more from the standpoint of not being familiar with the story’s details. The movie made perfect sense. The symbolism of Christ and His sacrifice and resurrection is keenly powerful. The realism of life as battle against evil and sin and death came through so strongly. How many of our Evangelical brethren wil catch the amazing symbolism of the Lord’s Supper in this film? Look for it.
Finally, the joy and promise of eternal life, given as a gift now, to be enjoyed forever brings the movie to a powerful emotional conclusion.
And so, I say, for Narnia and for Aslan, go see this movie.
A Muted Defense of the Unborn
The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod’s Commission on Theology and Church Relations is releasing this month a document concerning the status of so-called “pre-implantation embryonic life.” I prefer to refer to such things as: “children” or “human beings.”
No doubt more will be said going forward, but let this much now be said. Rather than sounding a clear trumpet call, the forthcoming document is off-pitch and muted. It spends so much of its time wringing philosophical hands over the “thoughtful” arguments put forward by those who would destroy the unborn children conceived in petri dishes that it winds up sounding an unclear signal. One is led to wonder if the drafter of this document in fact does clearly confess that a human life begins at the very moment of conception. I for one can not tell from this document if that is so, and that is deeply troubling to me. I would welcome clarification on this very point.
Consider this extremely unfortunate way of putting things:
“The approaches proposed thus far do not succeed in providing clear and
convincing evidence to lift the burden of proof that lies on those who
propose to destroy embryos . . . In the absence of
decisive arguments, pre-implantation embryonic life should be afforded
the benefit of the doubt and the benefit of life.”
Since when should the church ever even entertain any notion that would require it to “give the benefit of the doubt” to what Scripture is so clear about? Whose doubt is this report entertaining? That is the question that perhaps might be most disturbing to me.
I am more than extremely disappointed at what the Synod’s CTCR is offering up by way of “guidance” on this significant issues. And I assure you that many others are as well.
Touchstone magazine immediately saw the problem with this document and commented on it. Please follow the link for the whole story, as well as the official LCMS news release. Touchstone editor, David Mills, really nails it when he writes:
I
may be missing something, having only the press release to go by, but
arguments like “Is the absence of decisive arguments, pre-implantation
embryonic life should be afforded the benefit of the doubt and the
benefit of life” strike me as very odd. The commission seems unwilling
to grant the embryonic child an absolute right to life, despite almost
saying so here and there.I wouldn’t think this was a particularly difficult matter.
If the embryonic child isn’t a human being, what is he? There aren’t
any other options. And if he is a human being, why should his survival
depend on the “absence of decisive arguments” and “the benefit of the
doubt”?
Pastor, Let Our Gladness Have No End
I know there are many reasons for pastors to be concerned about the “commercialization” of Christmas, and generally most every pastor I know goes through his “I must rail against it” period. But hopefully, most grow out of it. I know I did. Pastors should realize that people gathering for Advent services and Christmastide services are there precisely because they do know, and love, the reason for the season: Christ. So, dear pastor, please stow the “Bah! Humbug!” attitude. You are just preaching to the choir. The faithful are joyful at this time of year, not because of the trappings and trinkets, but because of the Savior. Can we agree that the best way to “combat” the crass secularization of this season is not to send congregants on guilt trips about Christmas customs and holiday traditions? Pastor, we don’t need you to tell us how Christmas is too commercialized. We know it. Tell us of how much we need a Savior, and why, but don’t let your preaching of the Law at the time of year turn into a scold or nagging. Please help us take great joy in our Savior’s birth. Point us to the wonderful love Incarnate. Yes, point out our sins, but don’t let your Advent or Christmas sermons consume themselves with negative rants against the way “the world” comports itself. Raise our hearts, souls and minds to something better. Besides, you just never know who might be listening to you who has not been in church in a very long time, a person returning home to the community of the body of Christ. So, let our gladness have no end. Take joy in Christmas. Don’t let anything, or anyone, rob us of that joy.