Posted on

For Narnia! For Aslan!

Narnia_poster

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.

Posted on

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”?

Posted on

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.

Posted on

I Saw Santa Slapping Arius

Stnickofmyra22_3

Jolly old elf? Nope. The real St. Nicholas put the smack-down, literally, on the arch-heretic Arius. This Nicholas definitely found out who was naughty, and who was nice, when it came to Christology and … he did something about it. Apparently, Nicholas was so upset with the heretic Arius’ denial that Christ was in fact God incarnate, not a lesser god or a stepped-down version, but God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, being of one substance with the Father, by Whom all thing were made.

It got me to thinking. How best today do we maintain eternal vigilance, which is the price of orthodoxy, against false doctrine and even, if necessary, give it a firm slap, without so offending people that they won’t even bother to listen or pay attention? In our world today courtesy, tact, being nice and polite are cardinal virtues. And, intolerance is regarded by many as the chief vice.

We speak the truth, in love, and keep moving forward. I’m not so sure slapping heretics is actually the way to go, but you sure have to admire St. Nicholas for taking such a clear stand against error. The church that can not curse, can not  bless. We forget that sometimes.

Pastor Petersen has some helpful thoughts about St. Nicholas. He told me always to make sure to link to his site, so, be sure to click over there.

Legends abound concerning the generosity of St. Nicholas, Bishop and
Confessor. Mainly he is remembered for his charity to children. But
that is not why he is remembered in the Church. He is remembered and
celebrated in the Church because he was a Theologian, a Bishop, a
Confessor. He was one of the authors of what we call the Nicene Creed,
that ancient, genuine, and truly ecumenical confession of the saving
Faith. Through Nicholas, as through the prophets and apostles, God has
provided for us. He has handed the Faith down to us, delivered the Good
News of his generosity and compassion, bestowed upon us the Wisdom of
God which confounds the wisdom of men.

A less popular legend than Nicholas dispersing his inheritance to poor
children, is a story that he got so upset with Arius, who was denying
the Divinity of Christ in much the way the Jehovah’s Witnesses and
Mormons do today, that he slapped him. Because of this outburst of
violence he was to be suspended from his post as Bishop. Bishops rule
in the kingdom of the right, not the left. There is no place for
violence. After reflection and prayer, however, the Council decided not
to remove him for the offense. Not because Arius had it coming (which
he did,) but because Nicholas was repentant. Even Bishops of his
stature, generosity, and compassion can lose their cool, and the way of
the Church is forgiveness.

Nicholas struggled with his fallen flesh, even as we do. But God was
gracious unto him, restored him again and again through His Word and
Sacraments so that Nicholas, for all his weaknesses, was strong enough
to confess, and the grace of God was multiplied in, and through, him.
May God make us all such good and faithful servants, such grateful
recipients of His love, such bold confessors until He comes again to
give us even more. 

Posted on

Where’s Jesus? The Question That Comes to My Mind When Reflecting on Calvinism

Missingjesus_7

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).