Showing posts with label ELCA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ELCA. Show all posts

Sunday, May 18, 2025

Love for All Creation

 This message was intended to be given during worship this weekend, however, with some miscommunication, I did not end up preaching as planned.  That said, I think the message worthy of sharing, so this is offered now for those who wish to enjoin with it regardless if I was able to deliver it this weekend.


Love for All Creation

 

Acts 11:1-18; Psalm 148; Revelation 21:1-6; John 13:31-35 (White)

 

Key Verses

 

6 As I looked at it closely I saw four-footed animals, beasts of prey, reptiles, and birds of the air. 7 I also heard a voice saying to me, ‘Get up, Peter; kill and eat.’ 8 But I replied, ‘By no means, Lord, for nothing profane or unclean has ever entered my mouth.’ 9 But a second time the voice answered from heaven, ‘What God has made clean, you must not call profane.’ – Acts 11:6-9

 

5 Let them praise the name of the Lord,

    for he commanded and they were created.

6 He established them forever and ever;

    he fixed their bounds, which cannot be passed.[a]

7 Praise the Lord from the earth,

    you sea monsters and all deeps,

8 fire and hail, snow and frost,

    stormy wind fulfilling his command!

9 Mountains and all hills,

    fruit trees and all cedars!

10 Wild animals and all cattle,

    creeping things and flying birds! – Psalm 148:5-10

 

1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. 2 And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. – Rev 21:1-2

 

34 I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” – John 31:34-35

 


 

Message

 

“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”[1]

 

Let us pray.  “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable to you, O Lord, my rock and redeemer.”[2]  Amen.

 

Good afternoon and welcome to the eve of summer.  This week’s weather certainly made it clear that winter is past and we are in for a very warm period ahead.  In ruminating on the appointed scriptures for this week, I couldn’t but be pulled towards and underlying theme that permeated through them.  There are also several contemporary events and shifts that spoke to me.  So, as I dive in here, I wish to beg some forgiveness if I go a bit too deep into what I am hearing here and maybe you are not.  To me, this set of lessons is all about God and His creation, specifically God and His creation and our role and how we are to view it and act within it for his glory and the glory of all He has made.  As you may be well aware, one of my core passions is related to sustainability and care for creation, and as such, this, again, may be “tickling my ears” in some sense.  I hope that what I share, however, resonates with what the Spirit is calling us all to hear.

 

Let’s begin with the oldest of the scripture readings this week, which, of course, is not the first lesson, but the Psalm.  The psalms are too easily forgotten as lessons to us, but they too are a part of the scripture.  Martin Luther famously leaned on the psalms, especially Psalm 118, during his imprisonment at Coburg Castle.  As Stephen J. Nicoles puts it, “Luther loved the Psalms, first lecturing on them in 1513–1516. His immersion in the Psalms certainly impacted the events of 1517. After the Ninety-Five Theses, Luther returned to the Psalms again and again. He started a practice of reading the Psalms through the day at seven designated times. This enabled him to read through the Psalter in two weeks. He kept disciplined at that practice throughout most of his life. He read the Psalms hundreds of times. He studied and lectured on the Psalms. He translated the Psalms into German. It is fair to say that Luther lived in the Psalms.”[3]  To that, we ought not forget that the Psalms speak to us as scripture as much as any other part of the Bible, this week’s selection being a case in point.

 

Psalm 148 is clustered at the end of that book and is among the “praise psalms” that bring these numerous ancient songs, poetry, and canticles to a conclusion.  What is striking here to me, if we look back at the verses, is how this litany of praise centers heavily on the nature of creation and the created order.  Specifically: 

 

“5 Let them praise the name of the Lord,

    for he commanded and they were created.

6 He established them forever and ever;

    he fixed their bounds, which cannot be passed.[a]

7 Praise the Lord from the earth,

    you sea monsters and all deeps,

8 fire and hail, snow and frost,

    stormy wind fulfilling his command!

9 Mountains and all hills,

    fruit trees and all cedars!

10 Wild animals and all cattle,

    creeping things and flying birds!”[4]

 

Alongside angels and the heavens, are “creeping things and flying birds.”  More than half the verse speak directly about creation and about how creation is itself a demonstration of God’s glory and grace in the world.  And it makes clear that creation is fully part and parcel to every single aspect of life, the life he gives and calls us to live.

 

As I am sure you are well aware, we now have a new Pope in Rome, Leo XIV who is the successor of Pope Francis.  Leo, like his predecessor, has already made clear that caring for creation is an imperative of Roman Catholics.  This is evident and made clear in Francis’ first encyclical, “Laudato Si”: On Care for Our Common Home.  While not a Lutheran document, and admitting that encyclicals can have their issues, this one has so much that transcends denominational boundaries.  To that, Francis echoed Psalm 148 when he offered that, “The entire material universe speaks of God’s love, his boundless affection for us. Soil, water, mountains: everything is, as it were, a caress of God.”[5]  This was certainly presaged when the ELCA adopted the Social Statement, “Caring for Creation:  Vision, Hope and Justice” back in 1993.  This earliest of social statements of our church offers that “Scripture witnesses to God as creator of the earth and all that dwells therein (Psalm 24:1). The creeds, which guide our reading of Scripture, proclaim God the Father of Jesus Christ as “maker of heaven and earth,” Jesus Christ as the one “through [whom] all things were made,” and the Holy Spirit as “the Lord, the giver of life” (Nicene Creed).”[6]  It goes on to say that “God blesses the world and sees it as “good,” even before humankind comes on the scene. All creation, not just humankind, is viewed as “very good” in God’s eyes (Genesis 1:31). God continues to bless the world: “When you send forth your spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the ground” (Psalm 104:30). By faith we understand God to be deeply, mysteriously, and unceasingly involved in what happens in all creation. God showers care upon sparrows and lilies (Matthew 6:26-30), and brings “rain on a land where no one lives, on the desert, which is empty of human life” (Job 38:26).[7]

 

This is evident in the first lesson for today and the dream sequence that Peter experiences.  Peter still caught up in his Jewish identity, has been focusing on what is “clean and unclean” to the exclusion of the call by God to recognize all of his creation was created good.  In this dream God shows Peter a host of creatures that Judaism and their misapplication of the Mosaic codes had declared “unclean”.  “… four-footed animals, beasts of prey, reptiles, and birds of the air.”[8]  God instructs Peter to “Get up, …; kill and eat.”[9]  Peter’s reply?  “By no means, Lord, for nothing profane or unclean has ever entered my mouth.”[10]  It seems that Peter forgot to hear Jesus when he “… called the crowd to him and said to them, ‘Listen and understand:  it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles.’”[11]  Peter however is reminded in this dream that “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.”[12]  No, instead, that what God has created is “good” and not profane.  And we have a calling to both remember that and act accordingly.

 

On this topic, Luther, in his Large Catechism, speaks emphatically about creation and our role in it.  He offers “For even though otherwise we experience much good from men, still whatever we receive by His command or arrangement is all received from God. For our parents, and all rulers, and every one besides with respect to his neighbor, have received from God the command that they should do us all manner of good, so that we receive these blessings not from them, but, through them, from God. For creatures are only the hands, channels, and means whereby God gives all things, as He gives to the mother breasts and milk to offer to her child, and corn and all manner of produce from the earth for nourishment, none of which blessings could be produced by any creature of itself.[13]  In another place Luther offers, “Now, since all that we possess, and, moreover, whatever, in addition, is in heaven and upon the earth, is daily given, preserved, and kept for us by God, it is readily inferred and concluded that it is our duty to love, praise, and thank Him for it without ceasing, and, in short, to serve Him with all these things, as He demands and has enjoined in the Ten Commandments.”[14]  “For if we believed [this] with the heart, we would also act accordingly, and not stalk about proudly, act defiantly, and boast as though we had life, riches, power, and honor, etc., of ourselves, so that others must fear and serve us, as is the practice of the wretched, perverse world, which is drowned in blindness, and abuses all the good things and gifts of God only for its own pride, avarice, lust, and luxury, and never once regards God, so as to thank Him or acknowledge Him as Lord and Creator.”[15]

 

In other words, God exists, in with, and through all of creation, and what we do to and with creation is an expression of what we believe about God.  If we abuse the world, the creation, we are abusing God, we commit sin.  Instead, we are called to respect, love and tend to the garden, the creation, that God has blessed us with.  Yet, if we are paying attention, we are not doing that very well.  This is clearly evident in the continuing climate crisis that, and as my colleague Curt Stager at Paul Smiths says, “The truth is, the overwhelming consensus — from climate scientists, the U.S. military, global insurers and even Exxon’s own researchers — is that human-driven climate change is real, it’s mainly being caused by the combustion of fossil fuels, and it’s already reshaping our world.”[16]  Curt, a climate scientist, and former human caused climate change skeptic, has been accumulating one of the most robust sets of local climate data we have on record.  From temperature change to when ice goes in and out on St. Regis Lake, to days of snow ground cover, to changes in local plant and animal species, he has demonstrated with clear evidence that the warming of the planet is having effects on all of us here and now.  As he says, “The science behind human-driven climate change is so strong now that denying the central role of greenhouse gases is a waste of time that serves nobody but the fossil fuel interests who continue to fund such naysaying. Moving forward to find solutions with the support of the best available science is both a responsibility and a path to empowerment. It’s about choosing to be well informed, to care for our communities, and to protect the people and places we love.”  While not using the language of faith, he is saying the same thing Francis, and Luther, and scripture itself tells us, we have a responsibility to care for creation.

 

But for how long are we to care for creation?  To what end?  Those are great questions. And we get a glance at that in our second lesson today.  John of Patmos, in his cataclysmic vision, helps us to understand the end-game for God and his creation.  AS it is written there:  “… I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.”[17]  It goes on to say that “See, the home of God is among mortals.  He will dwell with them; they will be his peoples, and God himself will be with them and be their God; …”[18]  And it offers that God is “… making all things new.”[19]  What John is seeing here is that creation itself has a huge role to play in the end times and the finality of all things.  We are not going to be whisked off to some far off heaven, as the false throey of the rapture would have you believe.  No, this very creation we live in, itself, will become a new thing.  God will remake it, come down and make it wholly restored.  This is precisely what we are praying for when we pray in the Lords prayer that “May your kingdom come. May your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”  So we are to care for creation, be its good stewards, and take part fully as we go headlong into the end times, the times we are in today.

 

God, knowing we needed signs and tangible markers of his truth.  So he did indeed, come down from heaven, and became a human, in our likeness as the creeds tell us.  Christ, God incarnate, was and is, and ever will be our guiding light to understand what God’s glory means for us.  This is why in today’s gospel, Jesus articulates his relationship with God and as God; glories, upon glories, all brought together in creation itself.  And it is also whey Christ instituted holy communion, a sacrament that helps us, today and whenever we celebrate the eucharist, tap into this God-power of glorious grace and love.  God distills out of the meekest parts of his creation, grains of wheat and fruit of the vine, a corporeal instance where he is intimately in touch with us through his body and blood.  He is declaring, through this sacrament that He is “through, with, and under” all of creation, but especially in this celebration, for the forgiveness, and ultimate unwinding of sin.

 

So, as we continue on our journey, it is upon us that we listen to and do what we can to steward those things we have been given, ourselves, our time, and all of creation.  All creation is a sign of God’s unending love.  As he implores us in the gospel today, we need to love one another, each person, each plant, each animal, each stone.  We need to love as God has loved us.  We are to be visible signs, just as much as the signs we see in the incarnation of Christ and in the eucharist, for the world.  We need to be seen by everyone that we are His disciples.  And to do that we have to have love for one another.  Let us go out, then, and demonstrate our love for all of creation.  Amen.



[1] 2 Corinthians 1:2

[2] Psalm 19:14

[4] Psalm 148:5-10

[5] Laudato Si, 84

[6] Caring for Creation:  Vision, Hope and Justice, ELCA, 1993, pp. 2

[7] Caring for Creation:  Vision, Hope and Justice, ELCA, 1993, pp. 2

[8] Cf. Acts 11:6

[9] Cf. Acts 11:7

[10] Cf. Acts 11:8

[11] Cf. Matthew 15:10-11

[12] CF. Acts 11:9

[17] Cf. Revelation 21:1-2

[18] Cf. Revelation 21:3

[19] Cf. Revelation 21:5


Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Where we should go Camping, or Not

Where we should go Camping, or Not


As some probably well know, I spend some time on social media.  Among the feeds I typically follow, and often comment on, is the “ELCA” closed Facebook group.  ELCA, meaning: Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, being the Christian denomination I am a part of.  One of the moderators, Pastor Clint Schnekloth of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Fayetteville, AK, posted the cover of a Lutheran theological journal, “Logia”, to prompt a discussion; and so it did.  This journal is published for the express purpose to “promote the orthodoxy of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.”[i]  This said, the point of his posting it was to cause us to think on the cover image for ourselves in order to reflect on it and its critique of, or lack thereof, its titled discussion point:  Lutheran Triumphalism.  Helpfully, one commenter actually posted the journal editor's comments, which also includes a picture of the cover for your review:  http://www.logia.org/logia-online/a-word-about-the-cover2017.

What got me to respond was a comment made to the effect of, “is the person pictured, then, to not be considered in the ‘good camp.’”[ii]  This really struck me that one of the immediate reactions was to think about which "camp" someone is in, and caused me to respond both specific to the questioner, and as well to the broader question.  The immediate response simply referred back to the editor’s note, but my broader response is as follows:

“’Good Camp?’ now that's an interesting response/question.

[Y]our phrasing of the question is highly illustrative of a problem I'm seeing more and more in society here in the US.  We seem to immediately want to know what the "good" is from the "bad", as if every [point of view (POV)] is one or the other automatically.  Many in this group, including myself on occasion, slip into that false dichotomy of bipolar attitudes (good/bad, right/wrong, us/them) as if that is the primary objective and way we should relate to information and one another.

How very sad a fact that is.

If we are to imitate Christ, who we call our savior, we need to really confess our sinfulness, as I am now likewise doing, that we've fallen into this trap.  Are there absolutes that God has put forth in this world?  Yes.  Is there evil that should be countered?  Certainly.  But Jesus makes it clear how we are to judge:  "Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; give, and it will be given to you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For the measure you give will be the measure you get back" (Luke 6:37-38 RSV).  We need to hear these words as not just about being careful in calling out evil, but also in being self-satisfied with what we think is "good".

The question isn't if the character on the cover is good or evil, it's what can we learn about ourselves, our relationship with one another (especially as Lutherans), and about our relationship as God's children, his disciples, and a part of his creation?  Does the image bring us closer to truth and in what ways does it take us further away?  There is both Law and Gospel at play here, and in almost everything.  Do we have the eyes to see and the ears to hear?  Or are we living with blinders or are our ears clogged with earbuds?  I pray and hope we become more open and learn to stop asking the  "good camp"/"bad camp" question as the critical point of how we relate to one another and our ideas/motivations/information in our society.”

Obviously this post relates directly to a specific religious discussion context, but it has broader implications socially, ethically, and personally regardless of faith background.  My critique here is that we need to step back from the constant need to find tribe and gravitational pull to poles.  Rather, we need to think about what is also universal, what is common, and what transcends.  Certainly we can find comfort and minimal resistance to our POV among those that are like minded, live in the same places, and function in similar social and work circles, but that can’t be the only way we define ourselves and those around us.  Yes, we are of those things, but we are also, in equal measure, part of one planet, one species, and one physical life to be lived on this planet for each of us.  Does it really matter which “camp” we are in at the end of the day?  I really think it is not; not in the least.  What matters more cannot be defined or even enjoyed based on the “camp” you are in, it’s about quality of life, it’s about freedom and liberty, it’s also about love for those closest to you and for each other so that you don’t fear for the lives of those you love.

So, it’s not about what “camp” we are in.  It’s ultimately about being good campers, period.  It’s agreed that we can’t and shouldn’t all try to fit in the same camp site.  Nor should we splintered into a myriad of unsustainable, undefendable, or unwarranted camp sites.  We need to keep a reasonable number of not too many and not too few, but always remembering that it’s not the camp site that matters, it’s the planet, the creation that you are supposed to be focused on first and foremost.





[i] Cf. the Logia Mission Statement, obtained at http://www.logia.org/mission-statement/ on 18 January 2017
[ii] Its noted I am not going to point out the commenter or the specific response to him, give the nature of this being a closed group, and honoring that discussion’s privacy.

Friday, July 24, 2015

Response/Comment to a thread on the ELCA Facebook Group regarding a Post by Frank Reichert about Pr. Mark Surburg's Blog Post

The following is a rather long response/comment within a thread on Facebook within the closed ELCA discussion group.  For those encountering this on my blog, you may be able to get enough context clues, and using the endnotes read some of the context for yourself.  That said, while “closed” by Facebook lexicon, the group is essentially anyone that wants to talk about the ELCA, Lutheranism, and so forth.  Many non-Lutherans are on, as well as many clergy, lay people and workers from the ELCA and other Lutheran churches.

A long thread already, I know, but I want to get back to several points made in the blog post and by Frank Reichert as this conversation has developed.

First the Mark Surburg Blog Post:

Pr. Mark Surburg, begins his exegesis the wrong way.[i]  He states “[t]he first three chapters of Genesis lay the foundation for understanding everything that follows in the Bible.”[ii]  While I concur fully that the Pentateuch provides for us key context for the salvation history that is about to be laid before us in Holy Scripture, the foundation, the cornerstone, is Christ.  We as Christians must and have to look at the scriptures through the lens of the cross and Christ.  Pr. Dr. Carl Braaten, an esteemed theologian in his own right, offers in “Principles of Lutheran Theology” that “Luther’s decisive break with medieval theology rests on this massive simplification of the manifold character of scripture:  the heart of Scripture is the promise of the gospel that is brought to expression in the Christ event.  Its authority is not of a juridical kind; it is not a book of legal doctrines, inerrant reports, or devotional material.  The Scriptures convey the life giving word of salvation in Christ to those who accept it through faith alone.”[iii]  It is from Christ and through Christ and his sacrifice on the cross that we, as people in his death and resurrection, need to look at the entirety of scripture.  “Christ is our cornerstone”, the famous hymn proclaims, but not Surburg in this post.

Pr. Mark then rightly speaks about the union that is found in Adam and Eve, the initial, if not penultimate, example of marriage (that being between Christ and his Church; us the people of God) concluding with the most famous of the provisions, found in Genesis 2:24 (“For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”[iv]).  He then goes on to cite provisions of the holiness code found in Leviticus and aides in our biblical understanding of the situation Lot had before the gates of Sodom.  He offers, “More importantly for our topic, we know that when Jews around the time of Jesus talked about the events at Sodom, they focused on homosexuality as being the main issue.”[v]  He uses this foil, then, to offer[vi] much context on Jewish commentary of Christ’s time.  He cites extensively from Josephus, who provides much commentary on the derision of the Gentiles and the history of homosexuality from a Judeo-Greco perspective.  Pr. Mark then turns to Philo (interestingly, now, using Hellenistic justification, instead of Judaic) to show that not only had the Jews turn against, and held against homosexuality, but so had the Greeks.  All of this is well and good, but it misses Christ, until, that is, he comes to Christ speaking about divorce, to whit he cites Matthew 19:3-6, using that as his concluding proof that man and woman are the only union justified by Jesus.

I am not here to defend definitions of marriage, per se, but I am here to refute the sentiment that Pr. Surburg has “debunk[ed] yet another myth”[vii] that “[b]ecause Jesus didn’t condemn homosexuality, the conclusion is drawn that it therefore must have been acceptable to him.”  Frank Reichert cites Pr. Mark, to this end:  “The argument is made that homosexuality and same sex marriage are morally acceptable because Jesus didn't say they are wrong.  However a knowledge of the Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism quickly demonstrates how absurd this argument is.”[viii]  If the defense of ostracizing LGBTQ is held on the grounds of the knowledge and the validity of the “Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism” (which, even if the quote by Frank is not attributable to Pr. Mark, is the center of Mark’s thesis), then I have good, Gospel, news, for “[t]he curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.”[ix]  Such a thesis is more than worn bare by the death and resurrection of Christ.  Here is the striking fact of the cross:  it stabs deep into the heart of the Judaic holiness code and justifies the unholy.  It does confront the woman at the well, but instead of condemning, shunning and ostracizing, calls her to witness and sin no more.[x]  The cross spats at the scholar of the law and holds up the Samaritan as the true witness of salvation.[xi]  Christ sees the adulterous woman and calls the Pharisees and Sadducees to “cast the first stone” if they are blameless.[xii]  He even is anointed by a “sinful woman” on his way to the Cross as witness that it is not within human eyes to judge the merits of salvation.[xiii]  All of these are to say that we cannot fully know the mind of Christ, God, and the Holy Spirit as we only have what is recorded in Scripture.  Assuredly, however, the witness of the Christian Testament is not limited to how Jews, Hellenes and how like-minded philosophers of the day felt about the Old Testament of Moses and the Hebraic witness.[xiv]  Rather our call as Christians is to how Christ, and those that saw, knew, and felt him, acted and professed.  These said, that in Christ we are “all are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus for all of who are baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.  There are neither Jew nor Geek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”[xv]  It may have taken the Council of Jerusalem to fully endorse this, but it was clearly the will of the Spirit that spoke to them in this regard.  Let us therefore, acknowledge that Pr. Surburg has not proven his case here.

Second to Frank:

You offer:  “It wasn't my purpose to toss a grenade into the room. I am surprised that some here might agree with you, that I did that.  I posted it for discussion purposes only on an issue that is still ongoing and active here, and nothing I did was intended otherwise.  smile emoticon”  Let me start with Luther’s explanation to the eight commandment.  “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. 
What does this mean?  Answer[:]  We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.” [xvi]  I take seriously this confession and admonition of Luther.  I believe that both you and Pastor Mark come from a place of bound conscious.  And as Luther cited at Worms, it is not healthy or sane for you to go against your conscious.  That said, Luther offered that if “scripture and plain reason” could convince him, he would no longer be so bound, but could form a conscious that understood, and even endorsed a different point of view than his current entrapped moral formation allowed.  To that end, I highly doubt that you did not seek a reaction from the statements that were made and your continued participation only cements that perception.

In your comments, for instance, you ask “Are you offended by sound Biblical scholarship?”  Such presumes your opponents do not take scripture seriously.  As I hope I have shown, just check the endnotes, I certainly do.  Yes, the witness of the Old Testament provides many strictures on behavior, but Christ and his witnesses, even Paul, made it clear it was not the “mark of circumcision” that made and makes us Holy, but our wearing Christ that made us Holy.[xvii]  So, no sir, I am not and cannot be offended by “sound Biblical scholarship.”  Rather, I feel redeemed, justified and fully supported by the witness of Christ, the living word, and the witness of Scripture as our partial glimpse into the mind of the Almighty.

Frank, you offer, “[h]owever, Holy Scripture doesn't reveal everything that Jesus spoke or did.  For example, it never discusses such things as Jesus going to the bathroom to "relieve himself" although scripture reveals He ate and drank.  He is fully man and fully God, so we assume he did the former.”[xviii]  Succinctly, I do not assume anything, but Christ crucified, resurrected, and redeemed.  Christ, for certain, did relieve himself, but the evangelists make it clear he did much, much, more.  One has to ask oneself in this inquiry, what did Christ focus on?  The temple rules?  The meritocracy of purity established by the Levitical and Hebraic codes?  No, rather, he focused on the soul, the heart and the salvation of all of human kind.  You’re correct in saying that not every part of Christ’s life was recorded or revealed to us in scripture (perhaps that is why one needs a rubric to understand and apply it?).  But this doesn’t mean that he didn’t express his core commandments to “Love God with all your heart and mind and soul, and to Love one another as I have loved you.”[xix]  At some point, just like with the two thieves at the cross, this means that the unworthy are justified.[xx]  It means that God is phenomenally unfair, he forgives everyone.[xxi]  And it means one has to assume what is unwritten in scripture is more about Gospel than about judgement.[xxii]

Frank you wrote that, “Pr. Surburg’s stellar scholarship from a Biblical and Confessional Lutheran perspective, and believe’ such voices deserve a seat at the table on various discussions in a pan-Lutheran setting.” [xxiii]  You go on to say, “I mentioned a pan-Lutheran discussion (table).  Pr. Surburg speaks to a much wider audience than LCMS obviously.  I've already gone far beyond what should be expected of me insofar as why I believe the ‘table’ should large enough as not to exclude Confessional Lutheran theologians.”[xxiv]  And finally you profess, “But Church doctrine and practice is obviously something that Confessional Lutheran members in the ELCA are not so happy with.  Unfortunately too, many who have already bailed out of the ELCA were coerced into doing so; and I know that first hand.”[xxv]

Let me offer unequivocally that I am 100% a confessional Lutheran.  As such I am more than willing to “keep the Mass”[xxvi] and decidedly biblical.  Thus I admonish you to be careful of the cape upon which you wrap yourself.[xxvii]  I say this because I am not too certain you can or should speak for “Confessional Lutherans” in so much as I am uncertain what Lutheran confession you are pointing to as the support of the positions outlined by Pastor Surburg.  Not once did he provide a reference to the Book of Concord or its contents.  Not once did he speak to or from a principle of Lutheran theology or perspective, other than to say that he is a LCMS minister and thus it is a Lutheran speaking/writing from his personal perspective/conscious.  If candidly evaluated for its theology, the whole line of his argument is fundamentalist Christianity and strongly “Pharisetic.”[xxviii]  Be that as it may, I concur with you that everyone that takes on the name Lutheran should be able to speak in Lutheran circles.  Such “pan-Lutheranism”, however, is never simply a matter of the American expression thereof.  Your use of the term “pan-Lutheran” is clearly used to indicate a spectrum of ELCA-LCMS-WELS-NALC-Lutheran Brotherhood-etc.  Pan-Lutheran, however, also needs to include the Church of Sweden, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Namibia, etc., etc.  Do those voices not also need to be heard?  Are they at the table you describe?  Because, I am certain, and know this well, that the interpretations of scripture on the topic being discussed here varies across the complexity of the Lutheran witness the world round.  I am saddened that there has been exclusion to varied points of view and announcements of bigotry being made by those that support LGBTQ marriage.  But in that sadness I am cognoscente that people on all sides are holding true to their perspective and conscious on the matter, and am careful not to imbue on myself or them labels of being any more or less confessional or Lutheran in my/their own understanding.

Closing remark:

I began this post on Wednesday evening as the conversation spun up, and finished most of the above yesterday (23 July 2015) morning.  I was going to keep it as a private reflection, but given the continued level of activity in the thread, I felt it appropriate to share at this juncture.  To conclude, I want to offer that I am gravely concerned that in our church and in our public debates relating to religion and Christian morality, all sides are paramount guilty of eisegesis; a sin that I myself fall into from time to time.  I also know that how we communicate is far removed from how scripture was transmitted and even the way things were passed along in the 16th century.  The above refutation is less about “setting things straight” and more a warning that we need to be careful in our reproof and in our discussions within and without the church to not lose sight of the centrality of our faith, Christ, Christ Crucified, and Christ risen again.  Our Lutheran witness is that we are justified by faith, a faith given to us by God’s grace, which we are assured of thanks to the Living Word in Christ.  Whether it is this issue, or any other issue, we need to always return again to the cross and start there before we speak, think, and do.  The spirit of this thread was not premised on that, it was premised on a pre-conception of what was supposedly known as true.  The reality is that the truth is Christ[xxix], and we are wisely told that we can never fully understand God[xxx], so we need to start from a position of unknowing and learn, listen, and pray that we can hear the “still small voice”[xxxi] of our Lord’s instructions to us.




[i] And candidly, it seems that he may be treading more into eisegesis.
[ii] Surburg’s Blog, http://surburg.blogspot.com/2015/07/marks-thoughts-jesus-didnt-say.html
[iii] Braaten, Carl, “Principles of Lutheran Theology”, pp. 3
[iv] NIV
[v] Surburg’s Blog, http://surburg.blogspot.com/2015/07/marks-thoughts-jesus-didnt-say.html
[vi] Ironically, he doesn’t offer the same on Genesis and it relationship to Mid-East mythology and oral tradition
[vii] Frank Reichert, post on Facebook to the ELCA Group, 22 July 2015
[viii] Cited as a quotation by Pastor Mark Surburg by Frank Reichert, in post on Facebook to the ELCA Group, 22 July 2015; it is noted I cannot find this as a quote of Pr. Surburg in a fairly simple search of his blog or through Google.
[ix] Mark 15:38, NIV
[x] John 4:4-26
[xi] Luke 10:25-37
[xii] John 8:1-11
[xiii] Luke 7:36-50, also Mark 14:3-9, John 12:1-8, Matthew 18:23-34
[xiv] Saul, renamed Paul, knew this and knew that our justification is found in another place.  Namely, he offers in Galatians that “All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, …”  Gal 3:10, NIV
[xv] Galatians 3:26-28, NIV
[xvi] Luther’s Small Catechism, http://bookofconcord.org/smallcatechism.php#tencommandments
[xvii] 1 Corinthians 7:19
[xviii] Frank Reichert, post on Facebook to the ELCA Group, 22 July 2015
[xix] Mark 12:30-31
[xx] Cf. Luke.
[xxi] Cf. John 3:17
[xxii] Cf. Romans 15:4 and The Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article XI:  Election, “However, any interpretation of Scripture that weakens or removes our hope and encouragement is certainly contrary to the will and intent of the Holy Spirit.”
[xxiii] Frank Reichert, post on Facebook to the ELCA Group, 22 July 2015
[xxiv] Ibid
[xxv] Ibid
[xxvi] Cf. Augsburg Confession
[xxvii] After all, us Confessional Lutherans have quite a bit of explaining to do on the Holocaust and the failure to challenge the Nazi regime; thankfully we have a superior witness such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer (and his “Confessing Church”) to point to in reply.
[xxviii] One has to be aware that what is thought of as “Lutheran” being uttered by a person who claims membership in the church, may or may not be in keeping with scripture, church doctrine, Lutheran theology, and/or our confessions.  American Lutherans forget how much “public Christianity” has affected our viewpoints and thoughts about what our teachings are.  Likewise, given the general cross-pollination within Protestant churches in America coupled with a general lack of adult catechesis, there are certain to be some decidedly non-Lutheran doctrines and practices at play in any congregational setting and even by the Pastor.  I can’t help but think that is very much at play in these discussions and in the post by Pastor Surburg.
[xxix] “I am the way, the truth, and the life” John 14:6
[xxx] 1 Corinthians 2:16
[xxxi] 1 Kings 19:11-18