When you’re bummed out, don’t give in to the cat-calls of the devil. Follow Dr. Luther’s prescription:

“Although I know this, I am of a different mind ten times in the course of a day. But I resist the devil, and often it is with a fart that I chase him away. When he tempts me with silly sins I say, ‘Devil, yesterday I broke wind too. Have you written it down on your list?’  …Thus I remind myself of the forgiveness of sin and of Christ and I remind Satan of the abomination of the pope. This abomination is so great that I am of good cheer and rejoice, and I confess that the abomination of the papacy after the time of Christ is a great consolation to me. Consequently those who say that one should not rebuke the pope are dreadful scolds. Go right ahead and inveigh against the pope, especially if the devil disturbs you about justification. He often troubles me with trivialities. I don’t notice this when I’m depressed, but when I feel better I recognize it easily.”

– taken from The Wit of Martin Luther by Eric W. Gritsch

From the archives:

The above picture shows my bibles. Not all of them though. This is just what I could dig up in the ten minutes I devoted to taking this photo. It does not include the four or five pocket New Testaments that I know are laying around somewhere or the paperback version of the KJV that I could not find.  I’d like to think I am an exceptional case, being obsessed with theology and all, but I suspect I am not. Most of my friends have two or three copies, and several have many more than I do.

How many do you have?

I’ll tell you why I ask.

Recently, several different streams of thought converged as I attended worship services over the Holidays, and during the course of my internet travels.  I spend a lot of time reading, writing, and commenting in the blogosphere, discussing and debating the Scriptures and theology.

Based on my observations both on the net and in the churches I have attended, Christians as a whole don’t seem to be very familiar with the Bible. I include myself in this category. Surely some are more well versed than others, but I rarely run into people with a real working knowledge and grasp of the scriptures. I am not talking about the ability to access our pocketfuls of ‘go to’ proof texts. .

I have been ashamed at times reading John Calvin, Martin Luther, and other reformers, by their intimate knowledge of not only the details of the biblical narrative but also it’s breadth. In forming and defending their teachings they were masterful in their use of the Bible. They did this not having the access to the scriptures that we take for granted today. Before the printing press, bibles were only found in churches and monasteries, and were very large and elaborate hand-written volumes. Even after the advent of the printing press it was quite a while before the common man had a Bible in his home.

This was brought to a head personally while doing some research on Islam.

In Islam there is a decided emphasis on memorizing and being able to properly recite the Quran…  all of it. In the original language.

There are schools for it. They have a number of different traditions that teach set bodies of techniques to accomplish this goal. I heard once that to be an Imam, you had to memorize the entire Quran. I have not been able to verify this particular fact, but the volume of material on the net and the seriousness with which Quranic memorization is pursued, leads me to believe that it is probably true in certain Islamic traditions. They call the ages between five years old and twenty three years of age ‘the golden years’ for memorization.

I wonder what shape our churches would be in if to be a pastor you had to memorize the whole bible, or large portions of it, or even just a handful of selected books of the Old and New Testaments. How would our churches be different if 10 to 15% of the laity memorized two or three books from the New Testament?

How many of us can recite the ten commandments or the Lord’s prayer from memory?  Yeah, I know a bunch of Lutherans and Anglicans who can, but what about Psalm 23 or the Sermon on the Mount, or the first chapter of the Gospel of John? ( The numbers drop off drastically here…)

For the sake of argument forget hardcore memorization of the scriptures. How many of us have read the bible from cover to cover, Genesis to the Revelation, just like you would read a novel?

Several years after I became a Christian I read the Bible from cover to cover. Subsequently, I read the New Testament completely through twice. That was a while ago though.

Now, I  read plenty of passages in my devotions and study, and hear lots of scripture in church and bible study, and read entire books of the bible from time to time, but I have not engaged in a large scale systematic reading of the scriptures in years. Neither have I committed significant portions of scripture to memory. Mark Driscoll recently interviewed an eighty-six year old pastor who was finishing up his 358th read through of the entire bible. That guy has forgotten more scripture than I know.

One of the things that I vividly remember when I read the entire bible was how much of the Old Testament is woven into every page of the New Testament. Not just phrases and quotes, but allusions and turns of phrase and tone. Some time after that, I heard a  ‘noted biblical authority’ expounding on the idea that the Old and New Testaments were far less related to each other than Christians thought. It was plain to see that he was talking out his posterior and just hadn’t done the reading.

So what is the take-away here?  I’m not big on making people (or myself) feel guilty. New Year’s resolutions don’t do much for me either. At the same time, I think we as a people need to take a look at our grasp of God’s Word and be honest about where we are and about what we need to change.

Its no secret that the church is in trouble on many fronts, and that many of us are hard-pressed spiritually. Being more familiar and well versed in God’s Word is one of the best moves we can make both personally and corporately.

The following links may be of help and encouragement as you consider these things.

Ryan Ferguson recites(preaches) Hebrews, chapters 9 and 10.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M52nUtfk3Jw

Here is a series of free e-books on the New Reformation Press site, freebies section, that are great for those new to reading their bibles.(NRP was given the rights to distribute them for free, and you may copy and share them if you find them to be of value.)

Ten Commandments of Bible Reading – Things to know before you start reading.

The Bible in Chronological Order – This is a complete reading plan, placing the entirety of the Bible in chronological order.

12 Obstacles to Reading the Bible- Common obstacles to reading and understanding the scriptures

Elsewhere on the net-18 Tricks to Memorize More Scripture- A helpful blog post that provides some good tips on getting started.

This wonderful Advent season post was sent to us and we thought it was quite worthy. It is by our friend, Pastor Schuldheisz, Associate Pastor at Redeemer Lutheran Church in Huntington Beach, California, and we are re-posting it here with his permission.

Enjoy! We pray you are having a wonderful Advent season and are preparing to spend time with family and friends as we eagerly look forward to the arrival of our Savior this month.

Every year at Redeemer the LWML ladies (Lutheran Women’s Missionary League) host an Advent by candlelight. I’ve been honored to join them and share a devotion along with the tea and table fellowship. Here’s the devotion from last night…along with something completely different at the end! Enjoy. And a Merry Advent to you all.

Advent is a peculiar season with a peculiar name. Thankfully, the word itself gives us the answer: Advent, from the Latin adventus, meaning to come, or appear. And knowing this simple definition helps us sort out the blessed peculiarity once we ask ourselves the Lutheran question, “What does this mean?” Who or what comes in Advent? Why do we celebrate this season? During this peculiar season, Christians must learn, not to be ambidextrous, but Advent-idextrous (Yes, I just made that up. If you’re in the Scripps national spelling bee the definition means to hold three teachings of Jesus in tension at one time; Language of origin – Latin and general Schuldheisz silliness). For Advent is somewhat like a triangle. Jesus’ Advent is three-fold: He came. He comes. He will come again.

Now we all know about Jesus’ first coming in human flesh, the God-man, the boy who lived come to die. But there’s more. That’s God’s way of doing things; there’s always more: more life, more forgiveness, more than you can ever ask for. The greatest joy in Advent is our hope of Christ’s coming in glory, precisely because He came in the flesh. We await this coming with hopeful and joyful, pregnant expectation. It’s like a mother in her 8th month of pregnancy. Baby’s coming soon. Can’t wait! So much to prepare. Readiness. Eager expectation. Holy fear. That’s Advent. Therefore we can be confident in Jesus’ second coming because of His first coming in the flesh. He came. He will come again.

And yet Jesus is not done Adventing Himself among us. As we joyfully celebrate His first coming in Bethlehem and as we await His second coming in glory. He comes now – not as a Child in a manger – but as a crucified and risen Savior. Jesus advents Himself in His Word of truth. Jesus advents Himself in the water of Baptism, washing us in His death and resurrection. Jesus advents Himself in the absolution, announcing peace on earth and good will towards sinful men. Jesus advents Himself in the Lord’s Supper, feeding us with the same body and blood that once lay in a manger, born of Mary. That’s Jesus’ three-fold Advent. Now, I’m not suggesting you twist your Advent wreath into a triangle – although that might be an interesting concept – but we do well to keep the three advents alive during this season.

Just like St. Bernard, a monk from the middle ages once said, “In the first coming, Christ comes in the flesh and in weakness; in the second, He comes in Spirit and power; in the third, He comes in glory and majesty; and the second coming is the means whereby we pass from the first to the third.”

So with that in mind…enjoy a new twist on an old favorite: Twas the Night Before Christmas…Advent style!

Twas the very first Advent when all through the earth,
All creation was groaning for life and new birth.
Though sin, death and darkness had caused such great fear,
There’s hope that a Savior soon will appear.

It starts with old Zach surrounded by holy smoke,
When right through the cloud of incense he spoke:
Mighty Gabriel came and promised a son,
John the forerunner of this Promised One.

Meanwhile in Nazareth of Galilee,
There dwelt a Virgin, favored and holy,
To whom the Lord sent the angel Gabriel,
Announcing a Savior from sin, death and hell.

When out of her mouth there arose such a wonder,
“I’m but a Virgin, how can this be, I ponder?”
“Do not be afraid,” was the angel’s word,
“For nothing is impossible for the Lord.”

In the months leading up to that first Christmas Day,
Joe’s fiance was pregnant – wait; what did you say?!
Unwilling to let his betrothed suffer shame,
He vowed not to let Mary take his last name.

While Joseph was nestled all snug in his bed,
The Angel Gabriel appeared over head:
“Do not fear to take Mary as your dear wife.
The Holy Spirit conceived this Child’s own life.

You shall call His name, Jesus, that Child within.
For He is the Savior from death, hell and sin.”
Isaiah foretold this great Immanuel:
His name means, “God with his people shall dwell.”

As the time of His birth drew closer at hand,
A census was ordered throughout the land.
“Man, woman and child: Go back where you’re from.”
So it’s off on the donkey to Bethlehem home.

In comfort the Emperor lay down his head,
While a Virgin and husband search for a bed.
No room was found but a manger lowly,
Jesus’ first Advent was humble yet holy.

When out in the fields there arose such a clatter.
The shepherd awoke to see what was the matter.
A myriad of heavenly hosts didst appear,
“I bring you good news of great joy, do not fear.”

“A Savior’s born yonder in Bethlehem town,
You’ll find Him swaddled, with hay for a crown,
Glory to God and on earth, He brings peace.”
This Child has come, your sin to release.

Away from the hillside they flew with great haste:
“We must find this Child, not a moment to waste.”
When, what to their wondering eyes should appear,
But a God-man, and Savior whose birth gives great cheer.

So the shepherds went forth with great joy and praising,
On mountains! On hillsides! Their voices were raising,
“Behold Zion’s watchmen on top of the wall!
The Savior is born, now tell all! Tell all!”

And that is the story of Christ’s first Advent-tide.
Yet still with His people He deigns to reside,
His Advent brings forgiveness in body and blood,
Through water and word in a Baptismal flood.

By His life and death He gives us new birth,
A blessed exchange, His death for our mirth.
But ’tis not the end of Christ’s Advent story,
Still we await His Advent in glory.

This Advent-tide let your wreath flicker with cheer,
In hopes that Christ’s second Advent soon will be here.
Come quickly, Lord Jesus. Come quickly, we pray.
We yearn for the dawn of that great Sabbath Day.

When not in a manger as in days long ago,
But a radiant Lamb, His glory to show.
When trumpets will herald our crucified King,
And the heavens with loud hosannas will ring.

He will spring to the earth, give His angels a whistle:
“Away sin and death and curse of the thistle.”
With rejoicing we’ll bow as He comes into sight.
A merry Advent to all, and to all a good night.

Also, a special thanks to Mark Beutow for the “emperor” line and Sean Daenzer for the shock and awe of Joe.

P.S. I found a triangle Advent wreath! (Ed. – It has been included at the top of this post.)

Posted with permission. Taken from Pastor Schuldheisz’ blog.

This post from the ‘We Are All Beggars’ blog was sent to us by a friend.  We thought it would be good to share with our readers.

A fun little piece on Beer in Luther’s Germany:

The Beers of Martin Luther: A Short History

Here’s an excerpt:

“… Because he traveled, Luther could have had many of these beers, but there is only one with claims to the effect that it was his favorite. Frederick Salem, in his Beer, Its History and Its Economic Value as a National Beverage (1880) notes, “Luther’s fondness for beer is well known, and on the evening of that eventful day at Worms, April 18, 1521, the Duke Erich von Braunschweig sent him a pot of Eimbecker (Einbecker) beer, to which he was specially addicted.”

Also saw this in my travels: Drinking With Calvin and Luther!: A History of Alcohol in the Church. Haven’t read it yet, but the reviews look pretty good. I will add that to my wish list.

Why are we ‘weak on sanctification‘ and why do we boast about our weakness by wearing a T-Shirt that says that?

Paul boasted about his weaknesses for the purpose of pointing to Christ. He took on the appellations and epithets of his opponents as badges of honor. That’s what we’re doing with our ‘Weak On Sanctification’ T-Shirt. It is a common complaint against Lutherans coming from outside the Lutheran circle; that we are uncomfortable talking about ourselves and our ‘growth in grace’ and shy away from exhortations to holy living for fear that someone might be led to believe they could work their way into heaven.

Also, more importantly, because in the equation of who does what (as with Justification) we bring our sin and brokenness while God brings everything else: in this case, His Spirit as a deposit to comfort us, set us apart and consecrate us. He also provides the good works, prepared beforehand, for us to do (Phil. 2:12-13, Eph. 2:8-10).

And we Lutherans do work this out with fear and trembling as St. Paul instructs; we’re awed by the fact that Jesus obeyed the law for us and died the death we deserved, transferring His law-keeping to us as a gift by declaration (Justification), as if we had kept the whole of the law ourselves. Additionally, He has also sanctified us (set us apart from the world while leaving us in it) by His Spirit for His purpose: our participation with Him in a massive rescue mission behind enemy lines.

So, just what is Sanctification and why is everyone so ‘worked-up’ about it?

We start with the Old Testament idea of being set aside for holy use (i.e., The Tent of Meeting, all of the utensils used in worship, the altar, the laver, the candle holders, the Ark, all the Priests, etc.) Sanctification is a status first and foremost and something that is done to the object being sanctified. The Old Testament Jews were set apart, sanctified as God’s holy, special ambassadors to the world. Israel, both the people and the land, were set apart from the other nations with special boundaries, special clothes, special food, special rules. What they did with that did not change their status because, ‘God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable.’ (Romans 11:29) The main gift was the Messiah, born of a people who were not a people before they were called. The Jews were to serve as a backdrop for the incarnation and they fulfilled that purpose.

We, too, as the new Israel (Jews and Gentiles together in the church as God’s ambassadors) have been set apart. We, too, have a calling and purpose (I Peter 2:10).

That purpose is to be a backdrop for the Cross of Christ, demonstrating His love to our neighbors and telling them the Good News of Jesus’ victory over sin and death for them. Along with our new identity as chosen, set apart people, acting in accordance with that new identity reflects well on the One who chose us and sanctified us for the job.

Now, this part, our actions in keeping with our status, is what most Christians usually think of when they think of the term ‘Sanctification’.

However, it is interesting to note that most of the passages that mention the word for ‘sanctify’ do not speak of it like it is some sort of school assignment to be turned in, contradicting the many churches which emphasize the opposite; churches where you go every Sunday to get your homework.

Out of the twenty-eight occurrences of the verb that gets translated as ‘sanctify’ or ‘consecrate’ (the Greek word for ‘make holy‘) in the New Testament and that apply to our topic, almost all are in the passive voice. When they are in the active voice, Jesus is performing the action, not we.

In other words, sanctification in these passages is something that is done to us.

Check out this selection from Jesus’ ‘High Priestly Prayer’ in John 17:

… I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. (vv. 15-19)

To get the Hebraic flavor of the idea of sanctification as it is expressed in the New Testament, check out the book of Hebrews. The verb for ‘sanctify’ is used and the concept explicated more completely in the book of Hebrews than in any other place in the New Testament. For example:

For the one who sanctifies (hagiazōn | ἁγιάζων | pres act ptcp nom sg masc) and those who are sanctified (hagiazomenoi | ἁγιαζόμενοι | pres pass ptcp nom pl masc) are all of one origin. That is why Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers (Heb. 2:11)

For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkled ashes of a heifer, sanctify (hagiazei | ἁγιάζει | pres act ind 3 sg) those who have been ceremonially defiled so that their flesh is purified, (Heb. 9:13)

By that will we have been made holy (hēgiasmenoi | ἡγιασμένοι | perf pass ptcp nom pl masc) through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Heb. 10:10)

because by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being made holy (hagiazomenous | ἁγιαζομένους | pres pass ptcp acc pl masc). (Heb. 10:14)

So Jesus also suffered outside the city gate in order to sanctify (hagiasē | ἁγιάσῃ | aor act subj 3 sg) the people through his own blood. (Heb. 13:12)

You get the idea.

What about ‘aggressive sanctification?’ Let’s get to the part where I can do something, eh?

Most of the stuff that has to do with moral directives for us (the last chapters of almost all the Pauline Epistles for instance) deal mainly (on the ‘sin’ side) with gross visible sin that might drive someone from hearing the Gospel — having sex with one’s father’s wife, for example. Even today, this behavior would be egregious and Paul says the guy who is doing this stuff should be disassociated from the church in the most extreme terms, because his actions skew the image of Christ in the church so badly as to make everyone else ineffective, killing evangelism. ‘Pagans do better than this!’ Paul says (I Cor. 5:1). Yet, putting this guy outside is also done with the idea that the clarity produced by separation will, in the end, save him too (I Cor. 5:5). Make no mistake, the Holy Spirit has been known to even bench people (Acts 5:1-11) if what they are doing messes with the fidelity of the witness of the Church, ‘that is why… a number of you have fallen asleep’ (I Cor. 11:30). Sabotage will be dealt with when it comes to the proclamation of the Gospel. Better they go to Heaven where they can’t do any more damage.

The instructions for ‘Good Works’ mainly have to do with hospitality, being a good host, a good spouse, a good parent, being polite, doing good, honorable work to support yourself, supporting the Gospel financially, being faithful and… singing.

All of of Paul’s admonitions involve some sort of action: don’t go to court against other people in the church — it’s embarrassing (I Cor. 6:1-11), don’t go to pagan temples and eat their food if it could wreck the witness of the church (I Cor. 8, Rom. 14), don’t say nasty things to others or hurt people with rough talk (Eph. 5:4), be winsome (I Cor. 9:22), don’t use this great freedom you have in Christ to burden others who think that what you do is not approved. Take the time to correct their error … gently. Always be working to help people you perceive as weaker than you and don’t rejoice or lord over their self-imposed prisons (Rom. 14 again). At least put the effort in to trying to let them out (specifically Rom. 14:16). Don’t be a braggart (I Cor. 4:6). Don’t be an ass (I Tim. 1:20)! Be a good host (Heb. 13:2). Sing great songs about Jesus to each other (Eph. 5:19) — someone outside might hear you and be converted (I Cor. 14:24-25). Try to be nice to people (Eph 4:32); live at peace as much as you are able (Rom. 12:18). Don’t have sex with everybody — that doesn’t reflect your calling (Eph. 5:3)! Don’t have sex with your dad’s wife — that’s a bad play (I Cor. 5:1). Be humble (Phil. 2:2-5), et cetera.

Basically, don’t make the church of Christ a byword by your actions.

The whole enchilada is external for St. Paul, something that can be seen or witnessed so as to bear fruit in others. None of his strategies for backing up the Good News with good actions involve an inward spiritual journey; The examination of the heart, if you are honest, is a dark labyrinth, and the little glowing light you find in there at the end of the tunnel, contrary to our brothers in Eastern Orthodoxy, is probably a train (sorry for the cliché, but it’s true). St. Paul would never hang anything so important as sanctification on something so treacherous as a spiritual inventory. He would hang everything on the Cross.

And when we screw up, which we often do, when we don’t act according to our new identity, when we sin in some way, we confess it, and Jesus forgives our sins and cleanses us from all of it, even the ones we don’t know to confess (Romans 8:28, I John 3:20). We have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous One, and He is the propitiation for ALL our sins (I John 2:1-2). They are washed away with the words of absolution and we’re clean again, like utensils in the Tent of Meeting or the Temple, properly cleaned and ready again for holy use.

Free to Fail Until You Die in Christ

Paul gives a message in his letters promising more freedom than most will believe. Even many Christians find the implications of what it means to be truly free in Christ (‘everything is lawful for me…’ (I Cor. 6:12) a dangerous notion and will marshal any passage as a remedy to balance this freedom for fear the whole thing will spin out of control (usually verses taken from James which is one of the reasons why Luther and Lutherans often go buggy about James). The emphasis on the idea of a progressive sanctification commonly taught in most churches is the result. Jesus saves you, but he will be waiting with some sort of stick if you mess it up; even though you are saved, you will be weighed in the scales at the Last Judgment. Some churches have built-in control issues (nudge, nudge, wink, wink).

In extreme cases, churches which emphasize holy living can become what I call ‘weed-wacker churches’, trying to clear out the tares before the Lord’s appointed harvest (Matt 13:24-30; 36-43). Discipline may or may not be a mark of the church (we Lutherans don’t believe it is), but we’ve all seen our share of the marks churches which emphasize ‘holiness’ leave on abused Christians.

I think what Paul wants to do is get people to act like who they are in Christ, primarily to facilitate getting the Gospel out. When we manage this, it complements a good witness; when we don’t, it can muddle our message to the world. Paul is like a football coach encouraging his bedraggled team and strategizing with them how to get the next down or make a field goal. When the goal of the game is winning others for Christ, the whole game should hopefully become a joy. Sometimes a painful joy, but a joy nonetheless.

To me, the term ‘Progressive Sanctification’ can be misleading. It gives the idea that we can do some sort of bar-graph or Gantt Chart to measure our (or someone else’s) growth in grace. I figure mine would probably parallel the recent stock market fluctuations if, indeed, it could be charted.

The idea of ‘progressing’, cleaning-up our own act and ‘getting right with God’ appeals to the Old Adam (case in point: Benjamin Franklin on attempting moral pefection). We prefer our spiritual life to look like a collection of episodes from This Old House. Renovation is the thing. Jesus is more into Extreme Makeover: Home Edition where the old house takes a dirt nap first before any really cool stuff happens.

I prefer the term ‘cyclical sanctification’ over ‘progressive sanctification’ to describe the Christian life in this area.

I’m using ‘Cyclical’ in this sense: We screw up. Eventually, we come to a realization that we screwed up, probably by the hearing of Scripture, and we flee to Christ for forgiveness which He gives freely. The Pastor absolves us and hopefully we do a better job the next week… right.

We go through the whole thing again the following week — lather, rinse, repeat. And the week after that. Variations on a theme the following week. You see the pattern? Do we make progress and break out of the cycle? Maybe, but doing better at living the Christian life is completely subjective! St. Paul says, ‘I don’t even judge myself’! (I Cor. 4:3-4). How would you measure your ‘progress’ anyway? By the results it produces? By the way you feel about yourself? By what others say about you? None of these are reliable methods for determining how well you are doing.

I say leave the ‘how well you are doing’ part to Jesus knowing that He planned out the whole thing for you and it will turn out better than your wildest hopes — better than anything you or I can imagine (Matt. 25:37-40, I Cor. 15:35-58). For He who began a good work in you is able to complete it (Phil. 1:6).

And anything we do, even if it is the best thing that anyone has ever seen, is not worthy to be compared to what we have in store for us in glory (how can we not share this!). Paul compares the difference between life now and resurrected life after we are glorified to the difference between a tiny, insignificant seed and the awesomeness which springs from it,

What you sow does not come to life unless it dies… So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body… (I Cor. 15:35-44).

It is best to look to Christ and realize that your life and everything you do and say from this day to forever is hidden in Him (Col. 3:3-4). Your whole life is hidden in Jesus; all your worst sins and all your best (probably not so good) works. He is able to sanctify you. The whole of you is washed, now it’s just down to the feet and keeping them clean.

Jesus demonstrated that he was not above washing feet (John 13:1-17). He told the Disciples that they should do it for each other. I don’t think this is just something that should be done ceremonially in the church, as Anglicans and Catholics still practice this on Maundy Thursday (the whole Gospel of John is, in part, about how we look at things in an earthly way (Jesus washing feet) and Jesus is constantly pointing to a heavenly reality (Jesus as High Priest cleaning the dirt of use off of a consecrated instrument, His Apostle Peter)). For us as readers/hearers of this passage, I think it has to do with absolution, getting rid of the road grime of the world by pronouncing forgiveness on each other in Jesus’ name.

Bottom line: Satan would have us spend all our time measuring our good works and nervously playing interior decorator for the Jesus who is knocking at the door of our heart. St. Paul would have us not worrying about that sort of thing at all, giving us that time back to focus on Jesus, the great gifts and consolations He gives to us, and also focus on others for His name’s sake.

Let’s face it, we are in Romans 7 with St. Paul for the duration. Being a Christian is a struggle. You can call it defeatist, but I rejoice in saying with the Apostle, ‘Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:24-25). What a Doxology!

_________________

— A point of grammar for all those indispensable grammarians out there: with active verbs, you have the subject doing the action and the direct object receiving the action. With passive verbs, the passive subject receives the action and the passive object does the action. Hey, at least I looked it up, o.k.?

— Also, I was unable to give proper attribution on the picture. If anyone knows the title of it or the name of the artist, I would appreciate it.

I was recently pointed to a blog where there was a critique of the description of one of our shirts in our store and have been perusing some of the doctrines being taught there. Wow, as much as I’ve heard how bad it is out there from some of you, it really made me shake my head. No wonder people walk away from Christ, let alone the church! I can’t imagine being on a never ending treadmill of “maintaining my salvation through my own constant active efforts to be better than the sinful guy I was yesterday”! (I’m actually very surprised that the shirt being talked about was not our Weak On Sanctification shirt. That one can make some people completely lose it!)

I’m not going to link to the blog because too many of you know the sound of this kind of teaching already—”now that you’ve been saved through Christ’s justifying death and resurrection, you better get busy with your part of the deal!” Yikes.

And too often I find the kinds of people who promote this sort of me-focused teaching also tend to be what I call “fruit measurers”. They spend an inordinate amount of time “measuring” the faith of others by analyzing the fruit of that faith. Out of such analysis we get wickedness in terms like “backsliding” or conversations being started with, “Brother, I’m concerned about your faith.” To the “fruit measurers” there is no such thing as being content with one’s faith, finding assurance of one’s salvation in Christ’s words and works and death and resurrection—the believer always must be retaining his salvation by actively striving towards his sanctification.

After having conversations with folks who have been burned by teachings like these—some of whom walked away from Christ entirely, some who just refused to go back to church but seemed to miraculously retain some level of faith—I’ve come to consider what fruit these teachers are producing. What does it mean that the fruit of one’s teaching is that people are being driven away from Christ and His church? I’ve tried to investigate that sometimes with such teachers, but I never get any sense of guilt from them about the spiritual carnage lying around them, no repentance.

Some would like to (errantly) apply the term “antinomian” to anyone who recognizes that our sanctification is a work of the Spirit as much as the gift of faith in the first place, allowing faithful believers to be content and happy in their faith knowing that the Spirit does produce good works from them in their faith whether they choose to strive consciously towards them or not. At the same time the kinds of teachers I’m talking about can be found errantly taking the duty of sanctification away from the Spirit and placing it on our own shoulders, yet there is never a concern that there are people entirely walking away from Christ because they’re simply tired of “failing” at their own sanctification. How awful! And I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard this story first hand. It’s just terrible. And I can’t offer enough comfort in a reasonably short number of conversations to heal the damage. Believe me, I’ve tried.

Is that what Christ wanted? For us to teach from Scripture in ways that end up driving people away from Him? How does that make any sense?

So again, I offer this short quote from Gerhard Forde, for your edification and your comfort:

Talk about sanctification is dangerous. It is too seductive for the old being. What seems to have happened in the tradition is that sanctification has been sharply distinguished from justification, and thus separated out as the part of the “salvationing” we are to do. God alone does the justifying simply by declaring the ungodly to be so, for Jesus’ sake. Most everyone is willing to concede that, at least in some fashion. But, of course, then comes the question: what happens next? Must not the justified live properly? Must not justification be safeguarded so it will not be abused? So sanctification enters the picture supposedly to rescue the good ship Salvation from shipwreck on the rocks of Grace Alone. Sanctification, it seems, is our part of the bargain. But, of course, once it is looked on that way, we must be careful not to undo God’s justifying act in Christ. So sanctification must be absolutely separated from justification. God, it seems, does his part, and then we do ours.

The result of this kind of thinking is generally disastrous. We are driven to make an entirely false distinction between justification and sanctification in order to save the investment the old being has in the moral system. Justification is a kind of obligatory religious preliminary which is rendered largely ineffective while we talk about getting on with the truly “serious” business of becoming “sanctified” according to some moral scheme or other. We become the actors in sanctification. This is entirely false. According to Scripture, God is always the acting subject, even in sanctification.

(Taken from Christian Spirituality: Five Views Of Sanctification)

I would also like to add that, whether you’re one of the “victorious” in self-sanctification or one of the multitudes who are failing, you must visit Pastor Tchividjian’s blog and read his recent post on sanctification, “The Gift Of Self-Forgetfulness.” It is simply dead-on and completely Christ-centered. I had a very hard time choosing a quote from his post. In my opinion, that is a rare talent—to write so succinctly and on-point that any one sentence you write is quotable. Don’t miss it. Here’s just one paragraph:

Ironically, what I’ve discovered is that the more I focus on my need to get better the worse I actually get–I become neurotic and self-absorbed. Preoccupation with my performance over Christ’s performance for me actually hinders my growth because it makes me increasingly self-centered and morbidly introspective–the exact opposite of how the Bible describes what it means to be sanctified. Sanctification is forgetting about yourself. “He must increase but I must decrease” (John 3:30) properly describes the painful sanctification process. “Decreasing” is impossible for the one who keeps thinking about himself. In Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis reminded us that we’ll know a truly humble man when we meet him because “He will not be thinking about humility: he will not, in fact, be thinking about himself at all.” When we spend more time thinking about ourselves and how we’re doing then we do about Jesus and what he’s done, we shrink. As J.C. Kromsigt said, “The good seed cannot flourish when it is repeatedly dug up for the purpose of examining its growth.”

Pastor Tchividjian’s post reminded me of another great Forde quote regarding sanctification in the Christian: “Sanctification is the art of getting used to your justification.”

Amen, amen and amen!

by Rick Ritchie of OldSolar.com*

“You’ve been learning a lot of Reformation doctrine lately. But it seems to me you are hanging Reformation doctrines onto the grid of your old theology. I think it’s time to throw out your old grid and get a new one.”

I said this once to a co-worker at a Christian bookstore where theological conversation was common. My friend’s background was in the holiness churches, but he had been studying Reformation doctrines and listening to the White Horse Inn radio broadcast and attending theology lectures. His study had moved him to embrace several doctrines at odds with his tradition. Sometime after I made my statement and he had joined a church more in line with his new beliefs, he said that I had given him the most helpful advice anyone ever gave him on that journey.

So what did I mean by a grid? I meant that there was a core set of assumptions to a theology. The individual doctrines about baptism or certain aspects of Predestination, important as they are, are often determined by core assumptions. Original Sin is a core assumption. It tells us the problem for which salvation is the solution. It has a lot to say about who is baptised or what baptism can do. If babies are born without Original Sin, it makes more sense that they might not need baptism. If they are born with it, then they will likely need baptism. Even which issues are central issues versus which are peripheral are often based on core assumptions. When we don’t recognize this, we speak past each other. We assume that even when we are divided on the answers, we all agree what the important questions are. But sometimes this is not the case, and the problem is not stupidity or lack of insight.

By “hanging Reformation doctrines on an old grid” I meant that many of the core assumptions hadn’t been questioned. Individual doctrines were replacing their old counterparts in my friend’s thought. He was convinced that several Reformation doctrines were Scriptural. But he was treating these doctrines as individual items that could be studied one-by-one. And in some sense this is right. Our writers will often write books on the Lutheran doctrine of Baptism, for example. But in aother sense, even when they write these books, they address the core assumptions, too.

At a certain point, if an individual finds that several doctrines from another theological system make sense, he or she has to ask whether at a deep level, the core assumptions behind those doctrines don’t also make more sense than those of their old grid.

If the goal is to arrive at full truth, we have to be a little strategic. We probably won’t have the time to do full justice to every different position on every different doctrine that is out there. There are too many. And when we find that there are core assumptions behind such doctrines, we often find that it takes a certain amount of time when looking at a doctrinal system to see if it has its own organic unity. Even many false systems will have their own unity that we might miss if we only ask what they say about this or that subject. But we haven’t really understood their teachings until we have seen this unity. We will probably never see all the systems out there for what they really are. Strategy means we acknowledge our limitations, but still try to do as well as possible despite them. No general in a war does better for not knowing his real strength.

When I told my friend he needed to dump his grid, it was because I had a picture of what his study would be like for him if he continued the way he was going. He would hear of a new Reformation doctrine. He would get interested in it. He would have conversations about it with people from his church. They would look at him like he was from Mars. Then some time would be taken up with church work that he would not be doing if he believed fully in the Reformation doctrines. (A revival, for example. Others from his church would say “Our church is having a revival this week.” The natural Reformation response is, “How do you know?” If we believe in divine initiative in salvation, a revival is out of our hands to plan.) So my friend would be slowed down. Some day he might finally have adopted enough of the doctrines to decide to switch churches. And then he would kick himself for all the wasted time. I wanted to save him the wasted time.

This is not an argument of “I’m right. You’re wrong. Just agree with me and it will be easier.” I would never have made my statement if my friend wasn’t already finding himself agreeing with us on a number of issues he had studied at length. After much study, he was satisfied on several points already. My statement was more a recognition that you also have to be in a church to see what a theological system is. From the outside, I can call it a “grid” because as a formal system of doctrines, it is a coherent whole. But from the inside, most of these systems form coherent wholes because they form a church life. And that life cannot always be guessed from the formal doctrines.

The Lutheran doctrine of the Lord’s Supper was intellectually compelling to me after I had done a lot of reading. But because this practice was not at the center of church life in my Presbyterian congregation, I had a difficult time imagining that it could be a central issue. After being involved with an Episcopal congregation for some time, certain objections just evaporated. They didn’t make sense. Such as, “But doesn’t it say to do it in remembrance?” As if believing in the Real Presence made looking back on what Jesus had done more difficult. It does not. And given that we practice Communion weekly, I get to spend more time doing this.

I would advise people that if they have found themselves in agreement on a number of key points with a given church body, they might consider joining that body sooner rather than later. This is also for the sake of peace. If you agree with several doctrines of a church body different from your own, and have strong convictions on these points, it is unlikely you will ever be in full agreement with your current church. And while you remain, you will be tempted to convert others to views that the church does not support. If you make the move to the body you agree with, there is a reasonable expectation that since truth is one, you will find the other doctrines hang together with the ones you adopted. As foreign as some beliefs seem, they are probably rooted in core assumptions you have adopted.

Further, you are more likely to take the stance of a learner in the new church. (Please do! It is so common for people to begin with the attitude of “The historic theology of my new church has enriched me greatly. I will return the favor by teaching them some new things.” I have watched people come to regret this attitude. I don’t just mean people joining our Lutheran congregations. It happens to many people in many traditions. Allow some time for things to settle. More time with the new core assumptions might change your perspective on some things you currently see as strengths in your old church. It doesn’t mean that some of the people you think are dead as doornails now you won’t think the same of later. But your idea of what they would look like alive might change. The lot of you may be in need of a change in a third direction. That may require a real revival. And, as I stated above, you are not in a place to plan for that. (Do pray for it, though.)

Changing to a church that fits your doctrines also makes for greater transparency. If you want to convert your old friends from your past congregation, at least people will see that they are being persuaded by someone from outside their group. This is honest and straightforward. Congregations know that their people will be challenged by other viewpoints in social situations. They just don’t want to see it happening from their own members on the patio. We shouldn’t have stealth agents in other congregations. I don’t think that is how God works. Let the evil one work that way.

Taking on a new grid takes time. I have been Lutheran for close to fifteen years. And I am still surprised by how the distinctive doctrines of Lutheranism were not the only thing that changed for me. There is a whole character of thought that marks Lutheranism. It colors everything to a degree I did not expect. But I am happy that at a fairly early point, I did make the change. Not without deliberation. Not without a lot of soul-searching. But once enough issues had resolved themselves in that direction, it made sense to switch. And when I was in the new church body, there was a whole new type of learning that was able to begin. The grid became a body of doctrine describing a church life in which I now live. I found that my intellectual struggles ended not merely in new answers, but in a new church life. Sharing that is an incentive for the kinds of discussions I had with my co-worker. Or for writing about the same.

*re-published with Permission

From one of my favorite (for obvious reasons) episodes of the TV show Cheers:

Sam: “Hey, what happened?”

Woody: “Kelly and I found out we’re from different religions.”

Frasier: “I thought Kelly and you were both Lutheran.”

Woody: “Oh, well, that’s what I thought. It turns out she’s the Lutheran Church of America, I’m Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod. But if we had children we’d have half-breeds.”

…

Frasier: “Perhaps Lilith and I could provide some help.”

Woody: “Oh, that’s nice, Dr. Crane. I’ll ask Kelly. If she’s not too busy begging at airports or whatever those people do.”

…

Kelly: “Hi everyone.”

Frasier: “Kelly, I admire you for coming.”

Kelly: “I believe a marriage is worth saving.”

Woody: “That’s not all she believes. Ask her why she thinks the Book of Concord and the Scriptures are on the same level. Go ahead, ask her.”

Kelly: “Because they’re not.”

* Woody makes buzzer sound *

Woody: “Ask her why the sacraments are considered vehicles of grace. Go ahead I dare you!”

Kelly: “They’re symbolic memorials.”

Woody: “Heretic!”

…

Lilith: “Your religious differences are extremely inconsequential. One is reminded of Gulliver’s Travels in which two countries warred over which side of an egg gets cracked, the narrow end or the rounded end.”

Kelly: “Well that’s ridiculous, of course it’s the rounded end.”

Woody: “Oh, Kelly, I don’t even know who you are anymore!”

Do you find the above exchanges funny or puzzling? It’s such an insider joke in many respects that we in my family have always been amazed that the live audience laughed at all. We couldn’t believe they ‘got it’.

Why does this matter? Consider this – why would any outsider be expected to know doctrinal discussions and differences within a denomination or church body which is unfamiliar to him? Of course, he wouldn’t.

I say this because I would like to address the dust-up that occurred recently over at InternetMonk.com and GeneVeith.com, two of our regularly visited blogs and ones which we’ve happily supported over the years. In this particular case, Chaplain Mike over at Internet Monk has written a couple entries recently about his experience with Lutheranism. He has been investigating the Lutheran church for some time, so this is not necessarily news. But something happened after his recent posts caused some interesting discussion between him and the non-Lutheran readers of Internet Monk.

Not long after Chaplain Mike posted his posts on Lutheranism, Dr. Veith posted a link to one of them on his blog for his readers’ perusal (many of whom are Lutheran). What happened next was unfortunately something that I’ve seen way too many times.

Some Lutherans were immediately critical of which Lutheran church body Chaplain Mike has been looking into, in this case the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA). I believe the readers of Dr. Veith’s blog tend to be members of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS) and there are distinct and important differences in doctrine between these church bodies, as you would expect.

A bunch of outsiders to Lutheranism were just exposed to one of the issues with Lutherans – that is that the time and place they choose to hash out or “clarify” differences in doctrinal points of view can be horrible! To the outsider this looks like they’re making mountains out of mole hills. To the outsider it resembles choosing odd hills to die on. And ultimately, it can make Lutheranism repulsive to others who may have otherwise been open to learning more and may have already been curious. Talk about a bad PR campaign!

There is a time and a place for everything. We here at NRP, though Lutherans ourselves, deal primarily with non-Lutherans. I consider it a badge of honor. I think many outsiders to Lutheranism, upon discovering bits and pieces of Lutheran doctrine, become curious about what Lutheranism is all about. Hopefully they know some Lutherans who are properly joyful, content and at peace in their faith and aren’t overly corrective. But what a contrast when they just start to try to find out more about Lutheranism to suddenly start taking heat from Lutherans because they didn’t do something “correctly” or didn’t make the “right” decision. Or maybe the outsider still clings to doctrines and beliefs from their former denomination which conflict with Lutheran doctrines even after having recently converted to Lutheranism.

And after dealing with outsiders for so long, and having watched others around me do so very successfully, I can say with full confidence when I run into such people, “So what?!”. Is that the time to deal with such concerns? Absolutely not!

What these poorly timed attempts to correct “errors” in the curious outsider to Lutheranism or new converts to Lutheranism reveal is a significant shortcoming some folks have when dealing with people. The differences between Lutheran church bodies are not new. But they are new to non-Lutherans and recent converts. This is what must be considered when choosing a proper time and place to address such concerns.

Also consider this – everyone’s faith is a path on which they travel their entire lives. It is never static. We study a living Word. Many generations have mined the depths of the Word of our Heavenly Father and still we experience new epiphanies which former generations had not.

Are there going to be significant and important differences between Lutheran doctrine and those of other denominations? Of course. Tragically, there are many who want to make sure that any newcomer’s position is “correct” or “pure”. No church or church body has ever had this. Ever. Because the church is made up of sinners, we can always count on differences (sometimes significant ones) within one’s own church body.

We here at NRP are members of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS). Does this mean that we can count on a particular church which is a member of the LCMS to properly preach Christ crucified each and every week and not have doctrinal positions which would concern us? Of course not! And thus it will always be.

But too many outsiders to Lutheranism are searching for a church which offers them much less strife and much more comfort than they’ve been getting. Others are simply curious and would like to know more. When these people are driven away from Lutheranism by the purists who wish to beat all perceived error out of them, I get particularly upset. I’ll be honest, I had been wanting to get into that mix and fight it out a little bit. This particular issue is one I find us dealing with in Lutheranism (and especially in the LCMS) relatively frequently and it’s one of those things that should be dealt with behind closed doors. But every once in a while these things boil over and become public.

So at this time, I would like to offer a sincere and deep apology to any non-Lutherans who ran across the post at Dr. Veith’s site or Internet Monk and who were (appropriately and with much just cause!) offended and, at the very least, irritated by what they read by self-professed Lutherans there. This fight isn’t yours and you shouldn’t have to bear its weight. As I said, all churches and church bodies have internal fights… this one is ours.

We are Lutherans because we believe it is the clearest and most Christ- and Gospel-centric view of Christianity available as well as the happiest and most comforting. But sometimes some Lutherans’ need to be “right” can overshadow that when dealing with outsiders to Lutheranism. I hope and pray that if you’ve had such experiences with Lutherans that it doesn’t cause you to close the door on Lutheranism entirely. It is definitely worth learning more about even if you never “switched teams”. I mean, all of Protestantism essentially started with Lutheranism. Over time there were simply folks who decided to make some modifications and form another Protestant denomination. If you’re a Protestant of any kind, by learning more about Lutheranism, you’re learning more about your roots.

“Christ says that not alone in the Church is there forgiveness of sins, but that where two or three are gathered together in His name they shall have the right to promise to each other comfort and the forgiveness of sins.” – Martin Luther

Often times, we don’t put enough stock in this great privilege that has been given to us — to pronounce God’s forgiveness to our neighbor; to say, ‘I forgive you in Jesus’ name.’  Also to hear the words, ‘you are forgiven!’ Whether from the lips of the Pastor or friends who pray for you, ‘faith comes by hearing.’ (Romans 10:17)

We have a fantastic audio presentation  that covers this topic: Confession and Absolution by Dr. James Nestingen

If you’ve ever had questions about ancient practice of confession and absolution, this audio is for you.

Also, check out in the ‘freebies’ section: