Yawn

Biblical Text: Matthew 5:21-37

I’m going to pat myself on the back here. Takes some guts to title a sermon “Yawn”.

The text is what I usually call Jesus re-upping the 10 commandments, while turning them to 11 on the dial. And if you are reading them the interpretation is rather straight-forward. Having focused on the law last week, and given the basic understanding, I turned this week to how we receive Jesus’ preaching. The focus is on what I label the strangeness of Jesus. We are able to “Yawn” at reading something like “leave the altar immediately” or “cut the body part off” because it is old hat or because it doesn’t get past the surface that this is GOD ALMIGHTY saying this. 2000 years can make any claim venerable. Those hearing Jesus were hearing that claim for the first time. How strange. And it hit them with a crisis. Do you believe it? If you believe it, the preaching demands something deep. Something more than a “yawn.”

I might end this on a questionable story, but it comes from a group that is no longer yawning. Waking from our spiritual slumbers is first hearing anew the claim of messiah.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Rectification of Names

I understand that it can be tedious. But somewhere between High School and my ordination I became a big fan of Confucius. Why you might ask. Seems odd for a Lutheran Pastor. The biggest reason was his answer to the question: If you were made Emperor, what would be the first thing you would do? Confucius’ answer was: the rectification of names. What did he mean by that? All words being used would be clearly defined before they could be used. In a united and functioning society nobody thinks about this because they all roughly share the same definition. Even in an early stage Weimar Republic people share enough definitions to communicate. But then you get to the stage where people start electing Nazis to fix it. Different groups have their own dictionaries. Smart people learn to “code switch” knowing which dictionary to use by which group they are in. Which of course penalizes the less verbally adaptable. And you find yourself in hot water because the dictionary changed overnight and you didn’t get the update. Ancient China in the time of Confucius was at that point. And instead of electing Nazis to kill everyone not using the correct dictionary, Confucius thought there was a better way – the rectification of names. Call things what they are with clear definitions first for to the good of everybody.

The second generation of the Lutheran Reformers – names like Chemnitz, Andrea and Chytraeus who you probably haven’t heard about – were good Confucians. Not only did you have a Roman Catholic dictionary and a basic Lutheran dictionary, you started to have Calvinist Dictionaries, and Radical Reformer dictionaries, and more important for them intra-Lutheran splits. Their answer is something called the Formula of Concord. The Formula is the last confessional work that all Lutheran pastors subscribe to as part of the Book of Concord. It is the last binding dogmatic work of the Lutheran Church. And it is almost completely a work of Rectification of Names.

Every place where Lutherans were fighting Lutherans would have its own article to address the argument. The first part of every article is “The Status of the Controversy” which was a paragraph that defined words used and captured the basic argument between all sides engaged. The Concordists would not allow disagreement to fester through the use of squishy terms that meant different things to different people. Nor would they allow any group to not recognize their position. After everyone agreed upon terms and what the argument was, they addressed the argument in two ways. First, they made affirmative statements. One of the famous Lutheran phrases comes from these, “We believe, teach and confess…”. They set forward on the basis of scripture and plain reason what the doctrinal teaching of the church should be in regards to the controversy. This usually took a few steps to really address it, but the point was concord – a true peace between people arguing, an agreement on truth. After they affirmed what the true teaching should be, they condemned various false teachings in the air (“We reject and condemn…”).

How do we find ourselves in Weimar? We allow people to change definitions and use private dictionaries. Instead of positively putting forward in the best way possible what we believe, teach and confess, we rely on tribal markers to sort good guys and bad guys. (Oh, you aren’t using my dictionary, you go on the bad guy list.) Our politicians and church-politicians today, instead of saying “I’m for X” all compete to say nothing, hoping that you read into whatever they do, say what you think, and so vote for them. And maybe more importantly we never clearly state what is out of bounds. Why do we find ourselves here? Because saying things like “deeds, not creeds” sounds like a warm fuzzy. And for a while you can coast off of previously shared understandings or at least known boundaries. Because Weimar, at least early Weimar, is profitable to the powerful who can surf the dictionaries and attempt to enforce theirs. Making everything a power game of who has the biggest megaphone helps the powerful.

None of that is the Way of Jesus Christ who said things like: “whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops. (Lk. 12:3 ESV)” and “have no fear of them, for nothing is covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. (Matt. 10:26 ESV)” and “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. (Matt. 5:14 ESV)” The way of Christ is the way of all hidden things being brought into the light. The way of Jesus includes clear teaching, not the soft lights of Weimar to hide the things done in the darkness.

Legal Recourse

Full Sermon Draft Download

Biblical Text: Matthew 5:13-20, Isaiah 58:3-9

I don’t do these types of sermons that often. Most Sunday’s I try and proclaim the gospel. That proclamation of the cross of Jesus for you is the primary job. But occasionally the text seems to call for a catechetical or teaching sermon. In this case the question both the OT and the NT passages want us to ponder is: What is the purpose of the law? And this is a very important teaching of the church that we have simply lost today. This sermon looks at the two ways the church can lose the true purpose of the law: works righteousness (over-playing the role of the law) and antinomianism (underplaying the role of the law). It then turns to the catechism and confession’s three uses of the law with a specific meditation on almost a precursor to the formal law, a 0th use or a an expanded 1st use. Why expanded? Because none of the teachers of the church could imagine a people rejecting the natural law at such basic points.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

What About My Dead Cat?

Our mid-week bible study was on the flood this week, so the combination of two by two and recently putting down a pet cat had me thinking about the animals. It is a cliché question, “will I ever see my beloved pet again?” And that question is usually treated in one of two ways. The elder being questioned might simply answer “yes” from a caring but ultimately patronizing place. It is what the questioner wants to hear, so you say it. The flip side of this elder is the one who has read Aquinas and thinks it the height of spirituality to tell the questioner, “no, animals have a lessor spirit” thereby initiating them into higher spiritual knowledge. But let me suggest that the biblical picture is more nuanced. I’m still going to say yes, but this is more about the reasons why.

The first reason is that God created them and declared it good. “And God said, ‘let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds – livestock and creeping things and beast of the earth according to their kinds…and God saw that it was good.” To do away with something that is good would itself be an evil act. That is ultimately what Satan wishes to do, negate every good thing. The good has its own existence from God. All evil can do is attempt to negate it. But one day, that last evil, death, shall be put away and the Good shall be crowned.

The second reason follows that act of creation. As Luther would add to his explanation to the first article of the creed, God not only made me and all creatures, but “he still preserves them.” The bible is full of passages about God’s care for the creatures of the earth. My two favorites are from Jesus and Jonah. Jesus takes the sparrow as his example. I think he takes it because of its complete humbleness. Nobody goes, “oooh, a sparrow.” Yet Jesus says, “are not 5 sparrows sold for 2 pennies? And not one of them is forgotten before God.” A little bit later he will talk of the Ravens who have always had an air of woe about them long before Poe took up his pen. “Consider the ravens, they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them.” God remembers even the sparrow and feeds the haunting raven. But the one that sticks in my mind is from Jonah. Jonah is sitting outside Nineveh, the work of preaching done, wanting and hoping for its destruction. The last line of the book is “should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than 120,000 people who do not know their right hand from their left, and also many cattle.” One gets the sense that Nineveh’s deliverance might be more because of those cattle than anything. The animals are part of God’s continued providence.

But all of that simply points at stuff within this world. What gives me a sense of the animals’ spiritual worth? The funny story of Balaam gives me one point. We talked a bit about that story in last week’s sermon. Balaam’s donkey eventually prophesies to Balaam. But before that there is this humorous scene of Balaam riding the donkey and an angel appears holding a sword. The donkey can see the angel and it stops. Meanwhile Balaam is blind to the spiritual reality. The poor animal tries to save Balaam by turning aside. Balaam responds by beating the poor beast. But the donkey persists in trying to warn Balaam in multiple ways. The animals can at times be more spiritually aware than we are.

When you layer on top of that potential spiritual awareness two other things. First being that God’s covenant after the flood is not just with Noah, but is “an everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.” The animals are worthy of the covenant. The Apostle Paul talks in similar ways in Romans 8. “All creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it in hope.” All creation waits with eager longing for the revealing. Those animals that are part of the Noahide covenant wait with longing for the final revelation and the freeing of our bondage. All creation has this hope. If you aren’t going to be there, why hope for it?

I’ll finish this mediation by returning to Jesus’ word’s about the sparrows. “They are remembered. Not one of them is forgotten before God.” In this sense all those animals are very much like us. Our hope is in God remembering his covenant. He has engraved us on his hand and will recall us from the pit. The same type of statement is given about the sparrows sold for pennies for sacrifice. God remembers them.

So I think that simple “yes” is correct. But there are some mighty good reasons behind it. Reasons that go to the heart of the Gospel. The entire world is Gods, and he’s going to remake it all good.

Answer Me (Testify to the Mountains)

Full Sermon Draft Download

Biblical Text: Micah 6:1-8

This text is one that is often appropriated for its final verse. And honestly I hate most of those appropriations. They rip it out of its context and turn it into a pure law. You better walk humbly with God, usually meaning adopt my entire ideological program, or let me tell you. But the context is pure Gospel. In seven verses everything that God does for us is placed before us. God calls on the heights and the depths to testify to this. And he calls on Israel to answer him. Which they do, with what I take as true contrition. And that verse that so often gets changed into law in the service of our desires? It is God’s absolution. What do we do? From this day walk rightly.

On a personal note, I love preaching on the Old Testament. Maybe I’m odd, but it always feels so much more present to me. I get it. Of course we Christians read the OT through the NT lens. But to me what the NT represents is largely the OT books of Exodus and Joshua. The rest of the OT is our lives. Where Israel struggled and failed are good lessons for our learning.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

How to Have an Argument

The season of Epiphany this year gives us a continuous reading from the book of 1^st Corinthians. Our Sunday morning bible study is using that as a springboard to study at least some of that letter a bit deeper. The context of at least the first four (4) chapters of 1 Corinthians are divisions or arguments in the church. And I’m not writing this up because I think or feel coming a great argument within Mt. Zion. I’m writing this up because the time to think about arguments is when you aren’t having one. When you are having them, all we sinful humans think about is winning them.

What Paul does in the first two chapters of First Corinthians is make a clear distinction between how arguments in the world take place and how they should take place within the church. How they take place in the world is that we run to various forms of power. We make appeals to authority: “I follow Paul…Apollos…Cephas…Christ.” And in making appeals to authority, we seek to trump whoever else has been claimed. But in our claiming of these various authorities, we assert that they would disagree with each other. Within the church this is out of bounds. Paul does not disagree with Christ. We might not yet understand how they actually agree, but the fault is with our understanding, not the scripture or the apostles. “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?” The answer is no. The task is to understand why, repent and reform our lives together.

Anselm would call that “faith seeking understanding.” Paul in 1 Corinthians would just call it life under the cross. In the world, if we do not have an authority to invoke, or if all authorities are hopelessly corrupted, we would turn to a couple of other arguments: reason and practicality. “Jews demand signs and Greeks wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified.” Now signs could be demands for miracles, but they are also just the pragmatic question “does it work?” If it does you should be able to show me something. Likewise, we should be able to reason together. The problem with these things in spiritual matters is that we are sinners and our vision is hopelessly clouded. What is wisdom to us is foolishness to God. Our natural ways will never bring us to God. “No human being might boast in the presence of God.” Instead “we boast in the Lord.” Anything we know spiritually comes first as a revelation of Jesus Christ. And the greatest revelation is that cross. “God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise. God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong.” Strength usually works. Wisdom is a good thing. But in spiritual matters? They will fail you. Lean not on your own understanding, but have faith that Christ is the way and the truth.

Why is this the case? Because “the natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God.” The indwelling of the Spirit is necessary. Which you have from your baptism. Faith is a prerequisite to arguing with each other correctly in spiritual matters. Why? Because we then share the same Spirit. We then “have the mind of Christ.” If we are worldly, what we want to do is win the argument. And the ultimate way to win is to destroy the other. If we are spiritual we want together to receive the gifts that Christ has given us. You have received the Spirit from God such that under the cross we might together remain reconciled to Christ and to each other. Reconciliation, which is foolishness to those who have the Spirit of the World.

That basically brings you up to where we are in our study. I’d invite you to join us on Sunday morning after snacks.

Learning Repentance

Full Sermon Draft Download

Biblical Text: Matthew 4:12-25

The text is the calling of the first disciples from Matthew’s Gospel, two sets of Brothers – Andrew and Peter, James and John. And right before that calling you have Matthew’s summary of the Preaching of Jesus, at least in the days in Galilee, “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.” So, the sermon’s main concern is the idea of discipleship. What does it mean to follow Jesus? And a big part of that answer is to learn the meaning of repentance. This particular sermon walks through what I tend to think is the modern church’s biggest problem – worldliness.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Three Points and a Poem

The old, by today very old, cliché about preaching was: three points and a poem. I haven’t researched it, I’m too lazy to really establish it, but having read a lot of old sermons it strikes me as gaining its form in the late 19^th century – a time when poets were still an important part of life. And not just to egg-heads like me or emo-theater-kids, but the Psalms from the King James, and the Romantics (Byron and Shelley), and the occasional line from Virgil or Homer (or if you were more naughty from Martial’s epigrams) would be part of the common man’s existence. They didn’t have TV to distract or the NFL to take away the day the church used to own. Those 19^th Century divines, mostly Anglican, the Lutherans were still in German which I can’t read, would preach for an hour and wrap it up with a poem. The form became the cliché in the mid-20^th century. By which time the preachers no longer had as much poetry memorized at their predecessors nor did they have a willing hour in the pulpit. That and the demands of the parish itself were changing. Even if they were given an hour, the study necessary for that was no longer available. The reasons are numerous, and we live after the deluge.

Personally I can’t imagine trying to create three points. As a homiletics prof said in an unguarded moment, “all we can handle is one.” And my stock of poetry is even less than my mid-century peers. I was only forced to memorize two poems in all my schooling plus the scattered verse I’ve assinged myself. But I do have this stack of poems that I’ve saved along the way. Saved dreaming of putting together a collection. But making no claim to being from a wide choice. Most poetry, like most creative works, has meaning to you, your mother and maybe your wife. Editors of lit mags have favorites and favors to repay and sinecures to grasp hold of. And my taste and desires are decidedly not the current lit mag editor’s taste. But a Dana Gioia, or a Mary Karr, or especially an A. E. Stallings occasionally passes through the filter simply on the power of their verse.

And what is that power? I’d say the same as the power of Scripture, capital T Truth. Luther in his Heidelberg theses posits, “A Theologian of the Cross says what a thing is.” He contrasts that theologian of the cross with a “theologian of glory” and the defining trait of the theologian of glory is to “call the bad good and the good bad.” Why did poets fade from importance? I’d say the same reason as pastoral theologians. They stopped being vessels of truth. They became masters of a colloquial phrase: polishing a…oops, I almost didn’t receive the call over things like that. They put forward very pretty lies, because their faith in the Cross, and their faith in their audience to hear it, wavered.

A cry of the reformation was “Ad Fontes” – to the sources. To Luther and the boys that meant scripture and the original languages which they felt had been obscured by the pretty words of Philosophers and Scholastics and Prelates more concerned with paying for St. Peter’s than preaching the gospel. I’ve spent more time than I’d like to say pondering what we’d say stands in our modern way. What pretty lies do we tell ourselves? And are we willing to grasp our cross, and call a thing what it is? Or does the recently departed Christine McVie still have the anthem of the age, “Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies.” Or as an old poet said, “humankind cannot bear very much reality.”

The Logic of Sacrifice

Full Sermon Draft Download

Biblical Text: John 1:29-42a

John the Baptist points at Jesus and says “Behold, the Lamb of God.” This sermon meditates on the meaning of that phrase. First thinking about the logic and meaning of sacrifice, which oddly has both left our world and in coming back in all kinds of ways. It thinks about how that logic of sacrifice doesn’t really work, at least not with how God has provided the lamb. The last point it contemplates is what happens when we find what we are seeking and it is the lamb of God.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Solar Array (An Object Lesson)

The house that we bought had installed a rather large solar array. Unfortunately, we learned about a month after moving in that something was wrong and it wasn’t working. We learned this when the new electric bill came and there was a zero on produced electricity. The frustration was doubled when the supposed fix was delayed for another month when the scheduled repairman bailed out on the initial date. Other than the occasion to sin as several words got taken in vain over that time, it was also an occasion to learn a few things. I did manage to learn that the installation was still on warranty, who the company was and how to contact them. I learned that they provide both a website and a phone app that monitors and reports on solar production, to which I am now addicted checking the status. I also learned a bit about the actual physical installation which I think is a possible if flawed object lesson in two types of righteousness or the righteousness of the law and that of the gospel.

I’ll say the solar array has three parts: the panels up on the roof, the wires and gauges, and something called an inverter. The panels produce direct current (DC). The electricity that comes from APS is alternating current (AC). The DC produced has to be converted to AC to be used. That is the purpose of the inverter. What was out on my array was the inverter. So, when I got access to the reporting app, I could see Watts being produced by the panels, but it all went nowhere. They were being sent into a non-working inverter.

Luther would talk about moral and civil righteousness. Moral righteousness is that vertical standing with God. Civil righteousness is our standing with each other. The only way we receive moral righteousness is by faith in what Christ has done. The reason we can stand is because Christ has given us his righteousness that covers all our sin. Civil righteousness works much differently, and it has some interesting quirks. Civil righteousness is active. We do it. The real question is if what we are doing is truly righteous or just what we or our society think is righteous.

The law of God, like those solar panels, makes use of the light given. The law is good and wise and tells us what is truly righteous. But like those panels, the law by itself has no ability to produce usable power. And what it does produce can be wasted. We know what is right, but we don’t feel like doing it, or worse we twist it to support what I want to do. By ourselves we are like those DC solar panels. The light of the law wasted. A direct current to nowhere good.

It is only by the indwelling of the Spirit creating faith in the work of Christ that creates something usable. That inverter is able to make two useful things out of the law. First is it able to make us aware of our sin. When we look at the cross we become aware that however we have been counting righteousness, it doesn’t work. Our righteousness with God is something that only comes through Christ. The second thing it can do is start to move what we receive from God into the right directions with our neighbors. Without faith in Christ we might be producing a lot of DC current, but it does nothing. It is only by that great inverter that the light of the law can be turned into righteousness. We receive passively the moral righteousness of Christ, and we are then empowered, producing the right current, to love our neighbor.

Like all object lessons, it isn’t perfect. I could pick it apart and probably declare myself heretical. But it does strike something core: “One thing is needful”. And without that faith everything is lost.