... I've not dropped off the face of the earth...yet. Just been away at pastoral conference for the last three days. I must confess, it is beyond shadow of doubt (in my opinion) the best pastoral conference that I have EVER attended in my years of ministry. I hope to share some more on that later, but for now, picture this:
A bunch of pastors (and a deaconess!) spending three days together with the following worship:
Noon on Monday - Responsive Prayer I
Monday Evening - The Divine Service, Setting 3
Tuesday Morning - Matins
Tuesday Evening - Evening Prayer
Wednesday Morning - Morning Prayer
Wednesday Noon - Responsive Praeyr 2
The room we worshipped in had great acoustics and we were blessed with the altar, pulpit, lectern and keyboard from Messiah Lutheran Church in Lebanon. The worship throughout was led in a reverent and joyful way. The times for worship were probably my favorite moments in the conference.
Our first speaker was Pastor Klem Preus. There are no words to describe how outstanding his presentation was. Our second speaker was President Herbert Mueller who led us through a thought-provoking document he had drafted on what makes worship "Lutheran." Tuesday ended up with a most soul-searching address by Issues, Etc. speaker Pastor Todd Wilken. Two pastors from the district (Pastor Cameron and myself) responded to the papers presented and then we had some open and frank discussion about them. The plea that Pastor Heath Curtis made resonated with me particularly:
"Can't we agree to use what's in the book? In the LSB?"
That was not saying: No praise band. That was saying, whatever instrumentation we use, we use the services in our book. I wish I had spoken up in the panel discussion about one thing in particular. I'll throw it out on the table now: at St. Paul's and in my pastoral practice I observe what's in the book, but I also add in further practices that I know have historic precedence and worth. I would gladly give up ALL those that go beyond the book, if all my brothers in this District would simply agree to use what is in the book for the sake of holy love (and not out of any "legal" necessity) and thus remove the scandal and contentiousness from our midst that departure from our traditional norms have introduced.
By the way, I have decided that what the world needs more of is evenings with Pastors Michael Kettner and Mark Beutow holding forth for our entertainment.
21 comments:
That's the way our "contemporary" service is -- liturgical, but with "contemporary" music.
I can deal with that -- even if "contemporary" means only one kind of contemporary and other contemporary music not performable by an ecclesiastical rock band gets left out too.
I've suggested using words other than traditional and contemporary to describe our services, since the terms so often connote liturgical and non-liturgical as well in the "worship wars". All of our services are liturgical, some use hymns and some use CCM style music.
Toss the Vatican II for Lutherans stuff from the LSB and I'd be with you on that. DS I and II and the three year lectionary, to be specific. However, the inclusion of the Eastern "In peace let us pray to the Lord" from LBW on makes the two services an advance over their novus ordo originals, which cobble the confession of sin and the kyrie all to pieces. DSIII is magnificent IMHO. Though I'll probably never hear it in my home parish!
Why can't Lutherans just use the historic Liturgy as it has been practiced, believed and used for over a thousand years? Do Lutherans have more insight into the God then the Holy Fathers? Why is the Rite of St. Gregory the Great not sufficient? Why must everything be tweaked to the point that the Liturgy becomes a farse, a comical entertainment venue? Contemporary is just a synonym for irreverent.
I'm thankful we don't have this problem in Orthodoxy.
Well, the Lutheran liturgy, I'd argue, IS a form of the Rite of St. Gregory, as the Orthodox are wont to call the Roman Rite. As Past Elder likes to point out, in a number of ways it is kept more faithfully, though, by Lutherans than by Rome herself. In any case, I agree with you that the liturgy must be reverent - that is, we must never forget that we gather in the presence of the glorious Trinity and that He is the thrice Holy One!
The Apology speaks of the sacraments as visible words. I like to suggest to folks then that in the liturgy we turn off the audio and watch the visual and see what the visual communicates about what is happening here. I think a reverent service, where the acknowledgment of God's presence as the All-Holy is shown in the way pastor and people conduct and express themselves can be SEEN.
At my district Pastor's Confereance(Pacific Southwest District) a breakout session on Old Liturgy with New music was available. One of our churches has developed hauntingly beautiful new music using praise band instrumentation for not only the liturgy but Luther's cathechetical hymns. This may be the solution for our Synod. As far as the Orthodox go, I am surprized they think it is any of their concern how Lutherans worship. The Holy Fathers deserve respect but seeing how they distorted the Apostolic Gospel of Christ with their doctrine of theosis they must be taken with a grain of apostolic salt. Thankfully in the West God raised up Luther to restore the true orthodox and catholic doctrine of Justification by Faith alone.
Greg
Greg,
Well, you'll not find me agreeing that theosis is a distortion of the Gospel; I believe it is what Lutherans used to call the mystical union, and which theologians such as Johann Gerhard wrote a great deal about. It's not so much, in my opinion, a wrong teaching as a wrong emphasis. It's not the center, but the result of the center!
Greg,
I am a former Lutheran and I still keep up with things that go on in the LCMS. The (lack of) Liturgy was the main reason for my departure to the Holy Orthodox Church.
And why do you not answer me on the premise of my post, namely that the Liturgy has been degraded and thrown out in the LCMS? I mentioned nothing about theosis. Please don't bring up red herrings. It is intellecutally dishonest and does no service to you or to me.
Chris,
If I am not much mistaken, Greg went in the opposite direction. Of course, I may be much mistaken.
P.S. Christopher, I think you would have had your heart gladdened by the Offices and the Divine Service at the conference - it was truly beautiful, reverent, joyous. We chanted Psalms, sang hymns, and everything, everything was out of the book - the rubrics respected and used to focus everything on the Lamb and the saints who sing His praises eternally and with whom we gather together with the angels. The feast of St. Michael was transferred and observed on Tuesday - and angels were much in our thoughts all day long.
Oh! One thing not out of the book was a great hymn on St. Michael and the holy angels by Pastor Fritz Baue and set to music by Jon Vieker. It was truly a GREAT piece. I don't know why it is not in the hymnal. But the LITURGIES were right out of the hymnal as well as all the hymns but that one.
I for one am glad you are back - I have eagerly. . . well. . . every once in a while when I get the energy up walked to my laptop to see if you have any pearls of wisdom.
Oh, and so you know - the rule I have set down here is - we use the book. No hymns from outside the book. We'll use the book. Of course - if I use anything other than pg 184 I get stern looks of disapproval (trying to teach matins. . . sheesh!) but eventually - I'll use what is in the book.
Eric,
It's music to my ears - your commitment to use the book, I mean. Are you feeling any better? How long does it take to get over this? I'm thinking I heard once six months is not unusual. I sure hope that's not the case for you!!!
By the way - I didn't comment, but love your latest post on the dreaded "catholics." :)
on a completely different note from previous comments: I nearly fell out of my chair laughing when I read your last sentence! Having Buetow in our district is evidence that God does work good from all things, even Hurricane Katrina and CRM (which Buetow refers to as Sheol). It's been a long time since I laughed so hard. unfortunately (especially for Lutheran Lucciola), Kettner and Buetow conversations are one of those things that you can't describe, you just have to be there. The one downside was that I went to bed WAY too late... ended up being so sleep deprived that I wondered on Wednesday morning how good of a Lector I was going to be. I'm just glad we didn't pray Morning Prayer BEFORE breakfast!
Oh, and I think Fritz will give you permission to post his hymn. He said he was going to make copies available at the District Office, with permission for congregations to use it. (I love the parallelism in the first and second stanzas - and the imagery of the angel *flinging* the tomb's stone as if it was nothing - "like a frisbee", he told me.
From a cantor's point of view -- I'd gladly give up a gradual now and then for a full psalm! Mike Stivic's line from All In The Family comes to mind -- "New and improved is necessarily better than old and lousy!"
Not quite better - in fact I shut everything down yesterday and didn't do the LWML bible study today - I pushed myself too hard the previous week and started to relapse. I figured I'd just work through the fatigue, but when my throat started hurting and I lost my appetite, it was time to stop and rest - I'm already dropped 10 pounds (which I could stand to lose), and although I'd like to lose more weight, not via miserable starvation.
Um -- post your sermon early - least I don't actually get one written. I should tomorrow or Saturday -- but just in case >=o) 3+ years and all in one congregation doesn't give me the option of recycling.
Actually, never mind about the sermon (well, still post it) but you got my juices moving and God gave me a burst of adrenaline, and three days worth of rumination came out. I feel much better right now. Worn out and achey, but much better.
Pastor Weedon- I do not think you and I are in disagreement about theosis. I agree with the doctrine of unio mystica as articulated by both John Gerhard and his good friend Johann Arndt. I think theosis is an acurate discription of both sanctification and glorification. I would agree with you that it results form the center-Justification. I think that by making theosis the center of their thinking on salvation the Orthodox distort the Gospel. I think you and I are on agreement on this.
Greg
Chris- I think that contemporary worship is a passing fad and in 50 years will be a bad memory. I do not think that liturgy has been abandoned by the LCMS. The publication of the superb LSB is a testimony the liturgical soul of our denomination. Most LCMS churches that offer contemporary worship also offer liturgical worship.
Greg
"I think that contemporary worship is a passing fad and in 50 years will be a bad memory."
I don't think so. Considering how many Lutheran Churches are adopting this, if not outright, but as "alternatives" to the Liturgy, this "contemporary" or, more appropriate labeled, "irreverent" worship will be around for a long time. It may stop being the dominant model, but its ugly head will still be reared.
Lex orandi, lex credendi. It is impossible to suggest that "irreverent" worship actually upholds the teachings of the faith when clearly, the very nature of "irreverent" worship is to appeal to the senses of individuals, of "me." As if individuals actually know better than the Holy Fathers of the Church or what Christ bestowed upon His apostles.
As far as your take on theosis goes, this is not the cornerstone of Orthodox theology. We Orthodox do not classify doctrines as Lutherans are prone to do by rigorous categorization and hair splitting. But you are wrong to suggest that theosis is nothing but glorification. For how can the glorification of Christ be without His cross? Such for the Orthodox. Our becoming like God means following the way of the cross and dieing to ourselves and our sinful nature. The problem with Lutheranism is that you view salvation, glorification, justification, what have you, in only legal terms. How much you have cut yourselves off from a more full and orthodox (small-o intended) understanding of Christ's incarnation and redemptive work on earth.
Christopher,
I don't think it is right to speak of the Lutheran take on salvation "only in legal terms." That's not accurate at all. The foundational catechetical manual of our church teaches, as you know, that "where there is forgiveness of sins, there is life and salvation." None of those are strictly legal. The whole idea that Lutheranism is obsessed with the juridical metaphor is, I have come to believe, a straw man. Lutherans USE that metaphor, but they do not use it exclusively by any stretch.
Orthodox also use the forensic metaphor, but we don't use it to the great extent that Western Christianity does. I have found that emphases often become the pars pro toto. This, I have observed, even in Orthodoxy, especially when it comes to veneration of the saints, particularly Augsutine. But since Western Christianity has used Augustine primarily as its basis for its doctrines such as original guilt, the forensic, juridical and legal metaphors always take center stage.
On this board, several months ago, there was a discussion of Fr. Schmemann's book on the Eucharist. I remember many Lutherans on this board commenting thatt his book was near heretical because his terminology didn't focus exclusively on the "forgivness of sins" and thus play up the justification and legalistic emphases of salvation. Regardless of what Lutheranism may teach in the confessions, it's main salvaic emphasis has been juridical, hence the doctrine of justification of sinners as the chief article.
Just to note, though, that forgiveness is not juridical lingo; its equivalent for that would be "pardon." Forgiveness is personal and relational lingo, more akin to "reconciliation" talk than "pardon."
Post a Comment