LENT HAS A JOB TO DO—from Pastor Rod (3/1/11)
It’s starting later this year than in many years prior – Lent, that
season in the Church Year where the Church is called to a time of spiritual reflection and preparation. Pr. Tom Weitzel -
in his Lenten handbook (available in the Narthex once again) – gives us a very helpful explanation of Lent: The word
“Lent” comes from the old English word “lencten” (meaning lengthen), and is a reference to the lengthening
of days that occurs during this time of the year. For that reason, Lent is associated with Spring. As the earth sees a rebirth
and renewal of the plants and flowers during this season, so Lent is a time for Christians to consider our rebirth in Baptism
and engage in spiritual renewal as preparation for Easter. To assist in that spiritual renewal, the Church makes noticeable
changes in its worship. The “Alleluia” (Hebrew for “Praise the Lord”) and the Hymn of Praise (“Glory
to God,” “This is the Feast”) are removed from the liturgy. All hymns and songs become more reflective in
nature. The paraments and banners are darker in color. Crosses and crucifixes are covered with veils to emphasize how sin
separates us from God. Everything turns inward until the victorious Resurrection when the colors brighten, the veils are removed,
and the Alleluias and praises break forth in joyous celebration. Lent is 40 days long, counting from Ash Wednesday (and
minus the six Sundays, which are little celebrations of the resurrection). Those 40 days identify with Jesus' 40 days of fasting
and prayer in the wilderness as he prepared for his ministry; with Moses' 40 days of fasting and prayer on Mt. Sinai as he
waited to receive the Law from God; and with Elijah's 40 days of fasting and prayer on his way to Mt. Horeb, the mountain
of God.
A Handbook for the Discipline
of Lent by The Rev. Thomas L. Weitzel, Director of Communications, Florida-Bahamas Synod, Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America
Lent does have a job. This “work”, if you will, is not about “giving
up” something (although this is not a bad thing!) so much as “taking on” something: a journey where we listen,
watch, pray, fast, and share with others the embracing love of God the Father given in His Son, Jesus. Through Baptism we
are linked to the saving work of Christ, taken from death into life. Lent allows us to ask the question, what do we fear,
love and trust more than God? A significant part of Lent’s job is found in the word, repent: a turning around or a change
in our life’s direction. The message of Lent is to give us a renewed focus and direction in our lives as followers
of Christ Jesus. This year we shall once again gather in the midweek for a simple meal of soup and salad (6 pm – Parish
Hall) and a Liturgy based on each midweek theme. Our theme will center on what Martin Luther called the “un-holy trinity”
– sin, death, and the power of the devil (see the flyer elsewhere in this month’s Messenger). It is important
that every Christian make provision for worship during Lent. Whether on Sunday morning or Thursday evening – at our
regularly scheduled celebrations of the Eucharist – the Word of God comes to us in its vocal and visible forms
so that we may be invited into the loving purposes of God through His Son.
In the Lenten Journey together, Pr. Rod +
From Pastor Cathy (3/1/11)
Some of you have been asking for a summary of Bishop Mocko’s and Dr. Benne’s
presentations at the “Christian Toolbox” workshop. I’ll give it a go; this certainly isn’t meant to
be exhaustive, but I hope it will give you a sense of what was discussed.
Feedback, by the way, was quite positive; there have been requests for a follow up session featuring a proponent
of the current ELCA understanding of Scriptural authority and sexual ethics. I’m in the process of gathering names and
will let you know what develops.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bishop Mocko’s theme was the authority of Scripture as that which undergirds
any reflection on Christian ethics. He began with his “take” on the new ELCA Social Statement on sexuality; he
deemed it bulky, wordy, poorly written, and based on a non-traditional Scriptural “hermeneutic” (a Greek word
meaning “method or way of interpretation). Then he took us through an interesting exercise: examining Bible passages
representing some of the oldest known statements about Jesus – and words of Jesus. Because people have different methods
of interpreting who Jesus is and why he is central to our faith, Bishop Mocko felt that it would be helpful to walk us through
a simple exercise in seeing what Scripture, at its earliest “layer,” actually says; what we can conclude from
that; and which hermeneutic forms the most accurate and solid basis from which we may do theological and ethical reflection.
St. Paul’s letters all pre-date even the earliest written Gospel; and some of them contain catechetical and creedal
statements from the very earliest days of the Church. The solemn account of the core of Paul’s teaching to the Corinthian
congregation about Jesus’ resurrection (found in 1 Corinthians 15) is an example of this; the phrasing is Aramaic into
Greek, unlike St. Paul’s own educated Greek style. It also has some of the “flavor” of an official statement
(rather like we know something is a resolution because it has a lot of “whereas” and “therefore be
it resolved” phrases) that had been proclaimed as definitive and passed on unchanged. What we learn from this
is that the central message of the very earliest Church was that Jesus suffered, died, and rose again, according to the Hebrew
Scriptures; that he appeared bodily to the disciples, to more than 500 people at once (and Paul could name names); and to
Paul himself; and that all of this was for the forgiveness of sin. This – not Jesus the inspiring teacher or anti-Roman
revolutionary or wild-eyed apocalyptic – was the earliest Gospel message, as determined by methods any scholar could
agree upon. Similarly, Bishop Mocko discussed five Aramaic phrases of Jesus that were carried into the written Gospels (all
originally written in Greek). They’re words almost all scholars – liberal, conservative, whatever – agree
are original to Jesus. They are: • Amen – “Truly I say….” Unique to Jesus is beginning, rather
than ending, his words with Amen. This indicates not only a personal “quirk” but a sense that what follows is
a solemn pronouncement. • Ephaphtha – “Be opened.” Said to the deaf and dumb man. Jesus does
miracles of healing with a simple command.
• Abba – “Father; daddy.” Jesus’ relationship to
the One named Yahweh is unique;
and he bequeaths to his
followers the right to use this intimate form of address.
•
Talitha coumi – “Little girl, arise.” Spoken to Jairus’ daughter. Again, with a word,
Jesus discloses power to heal - even sickness that is unto death.
• Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani “My God, my God, why have You forsaken
me?” –
Gasped out by Jesus on the Cross, this
is the first line of Psalm 22. It begins with a
lament
that God has abandoned His servant, but ends with triumphant vindication
and praise. Once again, we get from these few phrases the picture of a man who had a unique relationship with
God; who could heal, raise the dead, and make solemn, lordly pronouncements and interpretations of Scripture; who could feel
the penalty for human sin (God-forsakenness) even as he quoted a psalm that ended in triumphant vindication. So… what
does this have to do with the ELCA sexuality Statement, or about Christian ethics in general? According to Bishop Mocko, three
important things:
• The “traditional”
faith confessed by the early Church; summarized in the
ecumenical
Creeds; and attested to in the Lutheran Confessions, is solidly
grounded in a close, attentive reading of Scripture, using criteria accepted
by almost all Biblical scholars.
• If this can be trusted, then we have pretty solid grounds for accepting a relatively
“traditional” understanding of critical issues in Christian ethics,
including
the doctrine of marriage; and therefore the
early church Fathers and
the Lutheran Confessions are
also trustworthy resources for understanding
and interpreting
such matters.
• Those who advocate a revised understanding
of marriage and sexuality often
base their understanding
upon a different grounding in Scripture. They
may assign
different weight to (or find different emphases in) the tradition
and the Confessions. A serious question arises: does this also lead to a different
understanding of who Jesus is, and what the central message of the Gospel
therefore is? Although that isn’t an automatic “yes,” thoughtful
Christians
ought to ask that question and probe carefully
as they discuss these
matters.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. Benne’s afternoon presentation focused on a discussion of how Christians
have understood marriage across the centuries. He referred to two books which he used in his course on Christian sexual ethics
at Roanoke College. One is John Witte’s From Sacrament to Contract— Marriage, Religion, and Law in the Western
Tradition; the other, John Grabowski’s Sex and Virtue—An Introduction to Sexual Ethics. His main thesis
was that through the centuries, the West had a “thick” understanding of marriage; until very recently, that “thick”
notion, based in theological reflection, was also accepted widely in secular society. Key to this “thick” understanding
of marriage:
• A lifelong one-flesh union between a man and woman
• Based on natural law (note: this is not identical to modern scientific/biological
studies, although there is a relationship. This also takes into consideration
that
our current world, and our human nature, are distorted
by the effects of sin and
evil – which biology,
chemistry, etc. don’t address)
• A (not THE,
but A) primary end is the begetting and rearing of children
•
A solemn covenant sealed by sexual intimacy (which therefore rightly comes after,
not prior to or apart from marriage)
•
Consensual
• Has a public/social, not just private/personal
character (in part, as a way of restraining sexual chaos and sinfulness; also, as the most helpful estate for the raising
of a new generation of good citizens)
Whether one was
in a Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed or Anglican country (all of
which
had unique emphases and twists), these elements were common to all, and were accepted within and outside of the Church. However,
since the Enlightenment (17th century philosophical revolution embodied in people like Rene Descartes and David Hume), this
“thick” understanding of marriage has been “thinned out” so that by the late 20th century in the West,
its primary character is that of a private contract between two consenting parties, who bring to that contract their own personal
understanding of what constitutes the content of that contract.
Dr. Benne talked about the strengths and weaknesses of the various theological
“flavors” of “thick marriage” – the sacramentality of the Catholic
understanding, etc. An important point (found especially in Grabowski’s book) was the importance of recovering an understanding
of all Christian ethics based in the practice of positive virtues (as opposed to ethics being a series of Thou Shalt Nots,
followed by profuse finger-pointing and tongue-wagging). Key to a proper doctrine of marriage and sexuality is a proper
understanding of the virtue of chastity. A memorable quote – based on John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, is:
“Chastity is a form of self-possession that makes self-donation possible in the Christian’s proper vocation—singleness,
celibacy, marriage. Chastity governs imagination, passions,
thoughts,
will, and actions for the proper ordering of sexual desire toward its proper vocation.” Dr. Benne ended his presentation
by discussing a survey he used in his classes. Somewhat surprisingly, many students strongly commended a fairly traditional
understanding of fidelity and chastity within and outside of marriage. Regardless of their thoughts on same-sex unions, almost
all of them wished the ELCA Sexuality Statement had been less wordy and vague and had clearly stated a teaching. And even
those who were not from traditionally religious backgrounds agreed that the Church should not “lower the bar”
as it taught sexual ethics. As one Catholic student put it, “I need to know what I might be rebelling against. I need
to have my feet held to the fire – AND I need something to aim for!”
Easter Sermon
Easter Day (Christ is risen - 4/12/09)
