Sheep are stupid
I don’t think that the Holy Ghost’s use of a pastoral analog/metaphor in Holy Scriptures was merely a matter of “cultural relevance” — No, I think there’s more to it than that. Yes, it was an understandable metaphor at the time Scripture was written; however, it is one that is still quite apt today, even among those of us who are not pastorally oriented/savvy. Why/How?
Sheep are stupid.
We are sheep.
We are stupid.
When it comes to the really important things — i.e., what we need — we dumb sheep are eternally focused on what we want instead. Even when God has clearly blessed us with Word & Sacrament, and with meet, right, and salutary means & rites by which those gifts are to be given & received, we still focus on what we feel & desire, even if it’s at the expense of that for which we are truly needful. One need only look at the continual & insidious growth of things like “Contemporary Worship” (which is neither “contemporary” nor “worship” [well, it might be worship directed at ourselves, but it's not really, at the heart of it all, directed at God...]).
Pastor Jim Haugen (St. John Evangelical Lutheran Church, Strongsville, OH) has two recent postings (Post #1 & Post #2) that clearly & accurately state several reasons why CCM (”Contemporary Christian Music”) should not be allowed into the church, and must not be allowed any opportunity to usurp the Divine Service that is based upon the Historic Liturgy. I thank God for faithful undershepherds like Pastor Haugen, and that I have access to resources like his blog. Check out Pastor Haugen’s writings on this topic — you’ll be glad you did!
I’m a sheep. Thankfully, I’m a sheep that has been claimed by the Good Shepherd, and brought into the safe fold that is the one true faith. I am also grateful for having been blessed by God through the care of a solid, faithful, & orthodox undershepherd — one who loves me enough to feed me the Word & Sacrament that I need to sustain me in the one true faith unto life everlasting. Amen!
-ghp
Piper Posts Pet Peeve
How’d you like that alliterative title? Eh? EH? heheheheheh 
Anyway, Tim over at Beggars All has posted yet another wonderful & insightful entry regarding a pet peeve of mine — i.e., the “Children’s Sermon/Message.” [BA's other poster, Caspar, has also astutely weighed in on this topic, in the form of a comment left over at Balaam's Ass...].
Let me state the clearly at the outset: I don’t like children’s messages. They serve no real constructive purpose (unless, of course, it’s considered “constructive” to undermine the meet, right, and salutary nature of the historic liturgy…). We should be rid of them.
Children and, and do, learn from the hearing and repeating of God’s Word that forms the historic liturgy. Children are no different than adults in that respect. Faith & salvation come not from understanding God’s Word, but from hearing it [Rom 10:16-18] — so the argument that children need something on “their level” so that they can feel properly involved is completely bogus. In fact, I would contend that it’s far more likely that adults like having a “break” in the service, especially one that makes them feel warm & fuzzy — and all the better if it provides the chance for a Kids Say The Darndest Things! laugh/chuckle.
Besides, it’s hard enough to write a good Law & Gospel sermon, so why would we expect our pastors to also have to develop another one for the kiddies, too? And let’s not even get into the whole morass of having a layman (male or female) assume, nay usurp, the Public Office for the purposes of delivering the oh-so-adorable kiddies message. Btw, have you noticed that many/most of the kiddies messages out there are based on analogy/metaphor? You know, conceptual stuff like, “Hey, kids! What am I holding in my hand? What do you do with this? Well, this is like God’s love for us in this way…” And the analogy/metaphor is one that really doesn’t make all that much sense, to be honest, or if it does, it’s a concept that many of the adults don’t properly grasp either.
Nope, everyone would be better served by a good Law & Gospel sermon. And children would be infinitely better served by learning (sooner rather than later) that they are full participants in the Divine Service, and that the liturgy benefits them just as much as it does the adults — i.e., that they are not an inconvenience and/or an unwelcome participant in the service.
Ah, but then I’m just a nasty, grumpy old curmudgeon… 
-ghp
Preaching & “felt needs”
Once again, Dr. Al Mohler has put out a very insightful blog posting today, this time on the subject of preaching’s precipitous decline in both form and function. Here’s a great snippet:
The current debate over preaching is most commonly explained as an argument about the focus and shape of the sermon. Should the preacher seek to preach a biblical text through an expository sermon? Or, should the preacher direct the sermon to the “felt needs” and perceived concerns of the hearers?
Clearly, many evangelicals now favor the second approach. Urged on by devotees of “needs-based preaching,” many evangelicals have abandoned the text without recognizing that they have done so. These preachers may eventually get to the text in the course of the sermon, but the text does not set the agenda or establish the shape of the message.
…
Shockingly, this is now the approach evident in many evangelical pulpits. The sacred desk has become an advice center and the pew has become the therapist’s couch. Psychological and practical concerns have displaced theological exegesis and the preacher directs his sermon to the congregation’s perceived needs.
The problem is, of course, that the sinner does not know what his most urgent need is. She is blind to her need for redemption and reconciliation with God, and focuses on potentially real but temporal needs such as personal fulfillment, financial security, family peace, and career advancement. Too many sermons settle for answering these expressed needs and concerns, and fail to proclaim the Word of Truth.
Now, I’ve quoted these paragraphs not to obviate the need for you to read Dr. Mohler’s posting in toto. No, I’ve done it because it’s something with which I strongly agree, and which I have (sadly) observed happening in far too many Lutheran pulpits. It is for this pottage of pop-culture feel-goodism that so many in the LCMS have traded their/our birthright of substantial orthodox & confessional Lutheranism. The path of least resistance has been chosen, in the name of a flaccid, wimpy, so-called “love,” that will only result in folks getting “loved” straight to Hell. And that makes me angry. Thus, I can/must/will speak out against it whenever I can!
-ghp
Liturgical Truth
FatherDMJ (of LiveJournal’s Uneasy Priest fame) has posted an entry that speaks much truth. I’m begging his indulgence by quoting the whole chunk of text upon which I wish to comment..
My reprinted copy of Paul Lang’s outstanding book “Ceremony and Celebration” arrived Monday. I’ve read it before but a re-read is always a good idea. Lang is brilliant. He dares to be a true Lutheran in every sense of the manner with reference to the liturgy and ceremonial. His defense of Lutheran ceremonial from our confessional writings places ALL the burden of proof for so-called “Contemporary Worship” on those who claim to see the Book of Concord and Blessed Martin Luther say that tinkering with the liturgy or that liturgy is something that can be changed and reformed at anyone’s whim. I know of some pastors who will say the Confessions and Luther defend the right of a congregation to change corporate worship to suit cultural or other needs. Those folks are wrong. Using those documents to prove something wrong is wrong. They run against the grain of thousands of years of consisent church practice. To do such a thing would be disastrous for unity in the Church.
Which leads me to another point. It is becoming very difficult to argue such matters these days because the world has bought into the lie of “all truth is relative”. Putting it another way, as the theme song from “Diff’rent Strokes” says, “What might be right for you/May not be right for some”. Absolutes are absolutely forbidden. Everything is up for reinterpretation according to culture and especially according to getting people in church.
Lutherans are apologizing for being Lutheran. That’s the bottom line. It’s like saying “I’m sorry for breathing in oxygen.” Es ist ein undig.
How do we fix it? We don’t fix it by ourselves. We hit our knees and pray the Lord God to strengthen our preaching and teaching with a ready defense using His Word and the Lutheran Confessions (the correct interpretation of Holy Scripture). The ship wasn’t turned overnight but it happened quite quickly. It won’t be a quick return.
Patience: the most despised virtue of all. I don’t have much of it. God grant me a double portion of it as long as I live.
Now, there’s a whole lot of good stuff, however, I think it can be distilled into the following points:
- Liturgical integrity has meaning and importance.
- Change for the sake of change is hurtful to faith.
- Culture does not dictate orthodox doctrine.
- Relativism is evil, and religious relativism particularly so.
- We need never apologize for having been given the Truth - indeed, we dare not do so!
- We’ve been on a long journey downward.
- Heterodoxy emerges more quickly than Orthodoxy can be reclaimed.
- God will give us the patience & strength to stay the course & fight the battle.
Apologizing for being Lutheran. May God keep me from ever falling prey to that snare!
-ghp
-
Analytics & Hosting
