The Visitation

Today is the Church festival commemorating the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary to her cousin Elizabeth. Aardvark Alley outlines the account from Saint Luke and makes a few observations on the occasion.

The Seal of the Confessional

Q: What is the seal of confessional?

A: The “seal of the confessional” is a guarantee that sins confessed to a minister of the Gospel will never be divulged at any other place. Most pastors extend this confidentiality to anything else said in their presence. Of course, this may occasionally set a pastor at odds with the law of the land, which in some cases mandates that certain suspected or confessed crimes must be reported by those who discover the truth. Many of us have seen news items or read or viewed fictional books and movies in which clergy members are jailed because they refuse to violate either formal oath or an implied unbreakable trust relationship.

Some churches have special vows taken by their pastors. This may be, for some, the primary reason why they do not speak of privately confessed sins elsewhere. There’s also a practical dimension, since few people would seek counsel from someone with a wagging tongue. In the Lutheran Church, this seal involves not only an oath but also a proper understanding of the Gospel: Once a sin is confessed and forgiven, God forgets about it completely. In His eyes, there is no sin. Thus, His servants the pastors likewise cannot divulge or hold against someone that which doesn’t exist. For a fuller understanding of Confession and Absolution, you might also want to read Confession and Forgiveness by God through Man.

Of course, all Christians should consider their responsibility to their neighbors when it comes to holding on to private information and be very careful in making any decision to pass it on. Gossip brings harm to others and no true honor to ourselves when we share it — regardless of whether or not we’ve been pledged to secrecy by a friend, taken a formal oath as pastors, or just overheard a harmful bit of information in passing. No one wants his embarrassing, painful, or damaging secrets exposed by his confessor — nor by the friend he trusted.

Peter reminds all people, both clergy and lay, to “keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins. (1 Peter 4:8)” Silence usually provides the greatest covering, allowing us to show the deepest love. Regarding friendship, Proverbs 17:9 provides a special caution: “Whoever covers an offense seeks love, but he who repeats a matter separates close friends.”

If anyone seeks a simple guide for dealing with confidential information, I recommend saying nothing in all circumstances unless keeping one’s mouth closed will certainly bring great harm to another. Especially in matters of sins confessed and forgiven, remember that silence is more than “golden” — it’s the Gospel!

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: seal of the confessional | silence is golden | Gospel | Confession | Absolution | Confession and Absolution | gossip | confidentiality

Sweet Counsel Gone Sour

Q: About whom was David talking in Psalm 55:14 when he said, “We used to take sweet counsel together”?

A: Forthright conversation with trustworthy friends constitutes an enormous blessing. David’s son Solomon noted in Proverbs 27:9, “Oil and perfume make the heart glad, and the sweetness of a friend comes from his earnest counsel.” Most of us have enjoyed and benefitted greatly from such open, honest relationships. However, many of us also have been victimized by a false friend who either deceived us during “earnest counsel” or who later divulged the secrets of our conversations.

Here in Psalm 55, David said, “We used to take sweet counsel together; within God’s house we walked in the throng.” Note that this relationship was so close that they even went to the Tabernacle together. Yet as he composed these words, the “sweet counsel” was already in the past. This Psalm reveals that the king was betrayed by one with whom he had shared many of his most intimate thoughts and evidently deals with the events surrounding Absalom’s rebellion.

While Scripture doesn’t mention his betrayer by name, the Aramaic Psalms Targum specifies that David wrote about Ahithophel, who later committed suicide. You can read the history behind the Psalm in 2 Samuel 16:15-17:23.

Many theologians treat this whole event as a form of prophetic occurrence (typology), where one historical event actually serves as precursor to a greater event, often involving the life of Christ or His Church. While I’m not sure I agree with treating this narrative typologically, I’ll present the bare bones of this assessment: Under this understanding, David (type) anticipated Jesus (antitype), his greatest Son and his true Lord. Ahithophel (type) was thus a foreshadowing of the great betrayer, Judas Iscariot (antitype). Note that like Judas, Ahithophel, after he “set his house in order,” went and “hanged himself, and he died. (17:23)”

Unlike Judas, who killed himself in remorse over what he’d done, Ahithophel did so because Absalom ignored his advice in favor of Hushai because “the Lord had ordained to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, so that the Lord might bring harm upon Absalom. (2 Samuel 17:14)” Another difference is that while Judas was buried in the potter’s field purchased with his returned blood money (Matthew 27:3-10), Ahithophel “was buried in the tomb of his father. (2 Samuel 17:23)”

This Psalm reveals rich treasure for both study and devotion. It comments on the history of Israel and the life of its greatest king. It shows the response of a believer to the peaks and valleys of life and displays complete confidence that God will ultimately set things right: “Cast your burden on the Lord, and he will sustain you; he will never permit the righteous to be moved. But you, O God, will cast them down into the pit of destruction; men of blood and treachery shall not live out half their days. But I will trust in you.”

Art from The Bible and Its Story (1909, Public Domain).

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: sweet counsel | Psalm 55 | David | Jesus | Ahithophel | Judas Iscariot | typology | type | antitype

Judge Me not Only by My Friends

But Also by My “Enemies”

Shades of Screwtape! Ask the Pastor was just listed among the “Links I Despise” by Prince Beelzebub of Beelzeblog. He’ll receive a fittingly reciprocal link upon my next blogroll update.

In a similar vein, you might want to check out the Aardvark’s little blurb, Oh! The Wormwood and the Gall. Laughter is still effective both as a weapon against the Adversary and as a means of educating God’s people.

Technorati Tags: Beelzeblog | Aardvark Alley | Screwtape Letters | Screwtape | humor | laughter

Prayer in Public Schools

Q: I am doing a speech in my school about school prayer. I know that prayers in school are not to be government led, but I need some insight and support on why prayer sessions and such should be put back into school daily. Why do schools need prayer and religion? I need some expert advice and asking you seems to be a good idea. Thanks!

A: When I was in elementary school in the 1960s, public school prayer was still common. The U. S. Constitution’s so-called “Establishment Clause” still was understood to mean that the state should not interfere with the churches, not that churches should have no say in affairs of state. (Indeed, when first adopted, this portion of the First Amendment specifically applied only to the Federal Government — many of the original states had established, state-sanctioned churches.) The Supreme Court later reinterpreted this basic law, essentially saying that church and state should be almost completely divorced.

Yet you cannot keep “religion” out of schools unless you keep anyone who is in any way religious out of schools. Ultimately, this would mean that even atheists would be uneducated, since they have strong faith that there is no god in which to have strong faith — in other words, they make themselves and human reason to be their gods. As a Christian, I think it is good when Christian faith lives in our schools and when the morals and ethics of the Bible are lived to their fullest.

Yet many atheists, non-Christians, and quite a few Christians think that using state-funded schools to impose participation in a strange belief upon those of different faiths is wrong. Among these, many Lutherans in the United States disagree with many other Christians and oppose sanctioned, public school prayer for many of the same reasons as do atheists and believers in other gods.

We think that many of these “prayers” are not good and proper prayers. We also think that including unbelievers causes them to sin doubly; first they deny the true God, then they practice deceit by verbally acknowledging a Deity they deny in their hearts.

On the other hand, we’ll also fight to allow those who choose to have times of group prayer, even on school property, provided that this won’t interfere with the schools’ ability to function in their primary task of imparting earthly knowledge to the students. This means that we support before- and after-school prayer or Bible study groups and the like. In this way, Christian students and teachers may testify to their faith in God without making others mouth words they don’t believe or else sit through religious rites that aren’t part of their faith and values.

The public schools are not there to give Christians a captive audience for evangelism. We certainly wouldn’t like to live in a non-Christian land and be forced to participate or sit through school prayers to Allah, Vishnu, or other false gods. We would rightly cry out that the schools are there to educate about all things possible without favoring another faith above our own. We would say, “Do it on your own time, not on school time.”

Finally, an old joke (or proverb) reminds us, “As long as there are tests in school, there will be prayer in school.” There is no overwhelming need for public, school-sponsored prayer, since each Christian may pray at any time and under any circumstances. God encourages each of us to, in Jesus’ Name, call upon Him in every trouble, pray, praise, and give thanks. Students may do this quietly at their desks, with fellow believers around the lunch table or in extracurricular organizations, on playground or athletic field, or anywhere else they choose.

State sponsored education involves a government that is of all the people — Christians and non-Christians alike. Yet the state allows, mandates, and pays for not only non-Biblical but anti-Biblical teaching (such as evolution or condom-based sex education) while not allowing the Church a dissenting voice. The best response is Christian parochial and higher education or Christian home schooling. This not only negates the wrong messages but allows the integration of Christian teaching and a Christian worldview into all subjects. From physics to physical education, the arts and sciences all involve divine order and speak to our Christian vocations.

Such an educational opportunity for my children helped me decide accept the call to my present congregation. One of my daughters has already graduated from Saint Paul Lutheran High School in Concordia, Missouri and the other just completed her elementary education here at Holy Cross and will enter Saint Paul in the fall. In such an environment, they learn that God, not random chance brought all that is into being and that God is an active, although often hidden, participant in human history and all affairs of the cosmos.

Previous posts dealing with unionistic and syncretistic prayer practices include Should Christians Pray with Non-Christians and More on Syncretism.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: school prayer | unionism | syncretism | Establishment Clause | Saint Paul Lutheran High School | Christian Education | parochial school | home school | public school | prayer | Lutheran | Christian | confessional Lutheran | Ask the Pastor

A Christian New Year?

Q: Why don’t we celebrate December 25 as the new year? We separate BC and AD according to the birth of Christ, so why not use the 25th to begin the new year?

A: Not all of our divisions are according to the Christian calendar. The new year and our division of months comes from the Roman calendar. So do the names of the months. Our day names come from German-Nordic and Roman sources.

The beginnings of the “BC-AD” division began soon after Jesus’ Ascension. Marking and agreeing upon the dividing point took a few centuries to hash out — and still, we aren’t certain about some of the dates. Anyhow, as Christians started thinking about the history of the Church and its Savior, events from the life of Christ were imposed upon a Latin calendar. Of course, we need to remember that Jesus would have ordered much of His earthly life according to the Hebrew calendar.

Not only is there no exact match for some of the dates, the division given for BC and AD is incorrect. All the Scripture evidence points to Jesus being born several years BC. I’ve read anywhere from 3-8 BC (or even earlier) as possible birth years. Our current system formed slowly but received much of its final structure — and great impetus for its adoption in the Church — through the work of Saint Bede in the 8th Century AD.

The start of a new year is somewhat arbitrary, anyway. Why use the birth of Christ? Why not His resurrection, when new life began? Pentecost, which was the “birthday” of the Christian Church would be another possibility. In much of Christendom, the beginning of the Church’s new year is the First Sunday in Advent (four Sundays before Christmas Day). I wrote more about this in Happy New Year!

For more on what BC and AD mean and the growth of the Christian calendar, please see my previous post, Notes on the Christian Calendar.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: new year | calendar | Advent | Before Christ | BC | Anno Domini | AD | Venerable Bede

Ascension and the Cross

As I prepared for tonight’s service for The Ascension of Our Lord, I found a wonderful quote from Saint Cyril of Jerusalem. Here, Cyril shows how Christ’s cross and ascension provide strength for our pilgrimage through this life. I found especially fascinating his connection with Christians making the sign of the cross with our Lord’s blessed ascent to His Father’s right hand:

13. But when Jesus had finished His course of patient endurance, and had redeemed mankind from their sins, He ascended again into the heavens, a cloud receiving Him up: and as He went up Angels were beside Him, and Apostles were beholding. But if any man disbelieves the words which I speak, let him believe the actual power of the things now seen. All kings when they die have their power extinguished with their life: but Christ crucified is worshiped by the whole world. We proclaim The Crucified, and the devils tremble now. Many have been crucified at various times; but of what other who was crucified did the invocation ever drive the devils away?

14. Let us, therefore, not be ashamed of the Cross of Christ; but though another hide it, do thou openly seal it upon thy forehead, that the devils may behold the royal sign and flee trembling far away. Make then this sign at eating and drinking, at sitting, at lying down, at rising up, at speaking, at walking: in a word, at every act. For He who was here crucified is in heaven above. If after being crucified and buried He had remained in the tomb, we should have had cause to be ashamed; but, in fact, He who was crucified on Golgotha here, has ascended into heaven from the Mount of Olives on the East. For after having gone down hence into Hades, and come up again to us, He ascended again from us into heaven, His Father addressing Him, and saying, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

Cyril quoted from the Catechetical Lectures, c. AD 348. Public domain.

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Jesus | Christ | Ascension of Our Lord | Ascension | sign of the cross | Cyril of Jerusalem

I’ve Got “Issues” Today

Issues, Etc., the afternoon radio and internet program of KFUO radio, needed a pinch hitter due to a death in a scheduled guest’s congregation. God willing, I’ll be on with host Todd Wilken at 5:30 p.m. CDT (17:30 hours, 22:30 UTC) today. The topic will be Constantine the Great.

Da Vinci Code: Was Christ Married?

Q: Was Jesus ever married? The Bible says no, but The Da Vinci Code and some things I’ve seen recently on television suggest otherwise.

A: Although I wrote on this topic several months ago, the flurry of misinformation surrounding the film’s release has led several people to continue asking, so I’ll provide a brief response. The usual argument is that no rabbi of Jesus’ time would have been taken seriously without being married. Also, some question how Jesus could have been faithful to all of God’s Law if He didn’t marry and be “fruitful and multiply. (Genesis 1:28)”

Regarding marriage, God never set it as an absolute command. As I said previously, “He instituted marriage. He blesses marriage. He provides marriage for all who desire familial companionship, sex, and children. However, Jesus transcends these things. Earthly marriage is, in large part, for procreation. Jesus didn’t come to earth to have children. Instead, He came to make children for His Father.”

Concerning the argument about His rabbinic credibility, there’s no evidence that all the rabbis of Jesus’ day had wives. Even if they did, why should we be surprised if Christ differed from them in this regard — after all, so much else about Him wasn’t like all the others. Remember that people said of Him, “What is this? A new teaching with authority! (Mark 1:27)”

Jesus also pointed to the resurrection, when people “neither marry nor are given in marriage. (Matthew 22:30)” He came to die and rise again, preparing the way for us also to enter eternal life. His own death would annul any earthly marriage; He was preparing for His eternal marriage with His beloved Bride, the Church — that is, the entire number of believers from Adam through the end of time (see Ephesians 5:22-32 and Revelation 21).

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Jesus | Christ | married | Da Vinci Code | marriage feast of the Lamb | Bride of Christ

Da Vinci Code: Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Martin Luther

Q: A review of the new movie The Da Vinci Code from Entertainment Weekly said that “it can’t be proved that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were ever intimate (though Martin Luther believed so).” Amazing! Is there any truth to this?

A: Like many a good lie, there’s a very small kernel of truth contained within. Since a recent essay from Aardvark Alley dealt with this question, I include portions of it (with permission) in my response.

The Aardvark notes, “Are [these comments] baseless slander? Do they have a germ of truth behind them? Or did Martin Luther actually believe and say such things? Actually, these are not our only choices. I contend that [Da Vinci Code author] Dan Brown [and others] ... misunderstood the Reformer and distorted his words.”

Luther came from our Western Christian tradition that often associates Mary Magdalene with some of the unnamed sinful women in the Gospels, although there’s no Scriptural evidence to support or deny that assertion. Of Jesus, sex, and marriage, Luther actually said, “Christ was an adulterer for the first time with the woman at the well, for it was said, ‘Nobody knows what he's doing with her’ [John 4:27]. Again [he was an adulterer] with Magdalene, and still again with the adulterous woman in John 8 [:2-11], whom he let off so easily. So the good Christ had to become an adulterer before he died.”

Anyone who reads Luther’s Table Talk laments that the students taking notes didn’t always include much context. Particularly in this case we wish that John Schlaginhaufen would have let us know what provoked this comment. Still, as the Aardvark says, “There are a few things that we can know from understanding all of Luther’s theology and beliefs.”

He continues, saying that we know that Luther was a firm believer in Scripture’s testimony concerning Jesus and there’s nothing in his mature writings to indicate that he believed that our Lord ever married. Instead, Luther “properly understood that Christ came to claim and cleanse the Church as His bride (see Ephesians 5:22-32 and Revelation 21).”

The Aardvark goes on to point to one of two possible conclusions. One is that “Luther may have been examining Jesus from the perspective of His First Century witnesses, who were shocked that He ate and drank with ‘sinners’ and that He’d sit and talk one-on-one ... with a woman. With Luther’s frequent invective against gossips, we can easily imagine him paralleling the suspicious minds and wagging tongues of Christ’s time with those he knew in 16th Century Germany.”

His other possible conclusion “is that Luther was speaking theologically [specifically, Christologically]. Talking with, granting forgiveness to, and allowing anointing by these women was emblematic of Jesus’ entire earthly ministry.... While sinless, He took our sins upon Himself that He might fully forgive us. Paul summarized this work in 2 Corinthians 5:21, saying, ‘For our sake [God] made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.’

“Hanging cursed upon the tree because of our transgressions, Jesus, in the Father’s righteous judgment, had become ‘adulterer’ to save sexual sinners. Likewise, He was ‘murderer’ to save the hateful, as well as ‘oath-breaker,’ ‘liar,’ ‘sorcerer,’ and every other type of wicked person, even though He never committed a single one of these sins.”

Since we’re left with only the fragmentary quote from Luther, we cannot finally choose between either of these interpretations. They both fit the facts; perhaps Luther intended both meanings to continue in his students’ minds. However, neither interpretation gives any credence to the pack of lies, historical distortions, and theological errors Dan Brown has worked into his book and film.

Luther quoted from Luther’s Works, Volume 54: Table Talk, © 1967 by Fortress Press.

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Jesus | Mary Magdalene | married | adultery | Martin Luther | Da Vinci Code | Dan Brown | Entertainment Weekly | Aardvark Alley

Click to purchase Table Talk through Barnes & Noble

Christ as God and Man

Q: How can Jesus be both God and the son of God? Isn’t that illogical?

It is illogical from a human perspective, yet that is how the Scriptures identify Him. He is of one substance or essence with the Father and the Holy Spirit, yet is a distinct Person. How this can be is impossible for reason to resolve. Yet if not so, it renders Christ’s own words and those of the prophets and the apostles false and empty.

As God, the Son has only one Parent (God the Father); He is eternally begotten, yet never born (according to His deity). As man, His parents are the Father and the Virgin Mary. God deemed both to be necessary in order to accomplish our salvation. Although I don’t understand how all this may be, I accept this word on faith because Christ has accepted me by grace.

Since various questions touching on Christ’s humanity and deity regularly come to me, I’ll point you to some other posts dealing with various aspects of your question. Here they are, in chronological order:

  §  Jesus Christ: True God
  §  The Son of Man
  §  The Humanity and Deity of Christ
  §  Questions about God and Jesus

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Christ | Jesus | God | man

Luther, Jesus, Mary Magdalene

Old lies never die — they just become fodder for the entertainment industry. That’s the case, anyhow, with the fable that Martin Luther believed that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had gotten married. Now CNN has picked up an Entertainment Weekly review of The Da Vinci Code that perpetuates the fraud. Meanwhile, Code author Dan Brown keeps an archived Time magazine article about the novel which bears the same false testimony on his own web site.

Since Brother Martin’s good name is being dragged through the thick Brown mud, I encourage you to read what Luther actually said and study the accompanying commentary in Luther, Jesus, and Mary Magdalene at Aardvark Alley. For a bit more on the misunderstood maiden of Magdala, the Aardvark’s earlier post, In Memory Most Maudlin, is helpful.

Technorati Tags: Jesus | Mary Magdalene | married | adultery | Martin Luther | Da Vinci Code | Dan Brown | Time Magazine | Entertainment Weekly | Aardvark Alley

Carnival Submissions Due Tonight!

I’ll join Orycteropus Afer in reminding readers that today is due day for submissions to the next Lutheran Carnival. Sam graciously volunteered Nerd Heaven as host, so see what he says about participating in Lutheran Carnival XXIV. After you review the submission guidelines, select your best effort(s), and send in your submission.

Food for Thought 3: Eating Insects

Q: In Leviticus 11:20-23, God spoke of insects as food: “Yet among the winged insects that go on all fours you may eat those that have jointed legs above their feet, with which to hop on the ground. Of them you may eat: the locust of any kind, the bald locust of any kind, the cricket of any kind, and the grasshopper of any kind. But all other winged insects that have four feet are detestable to you.”

My problem is that there are no four-legged insects. God created insects — wouldn’t He know how many legs they have? How can this be explained?

A: None of my resources go into any detail as to why this wording is used; only a few even note the obvious difference in the number of legs. Thus, I’m forced to offer an educated guess. Since these are being compared with various other clean and unclean animals, I take “all fours” to stand for walking bugs as opposed to those that crawl about. This could come from the fact that many walking insects have two hopping legs that might be are considered separately from the other four.

For many people, the very idea of eating a locust — or any insect — let alone having it declared good to eat, seems strange. Yet among the foods that are allowed or disallowed to Israel, here we find them listed.

This chapter begins a major shift in the theme of Leviticus. The first ten chapters deal primarily with atonement, forgiveness, and cleanliness. Most of the rest of the book deals with what defiles or makes unclean God’s chosen people. Areas of concern include diet, disease, personal relationships, birth, and death. Thus, they deal less with how God forgives and deals with a sinful people in grace (justification) and more with how God’s people act in response to His grace (sanctification).

While the other classes of living creatures include some general summary of what makes them “clean” or “unclean,” the only insects or other creeping things allowed are those mentioned specifically in verses 20-23. While God doesn’t explain Himself, and while His treatment of certain animals seems arbitrary to human understanding, setting these particular creatures aside as permitted food makes sense. When we look at the other creatures, we see that predators and scavengers are generally excluded. The diet of these locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets is exclusively vegetarian and they would not be associated with having come into contact with either dead creatures nor to have eaten the blood of a living creature — both of which also were acts that caused defilement for Israel.

Many of the dietary and other commands don’t appear to be health-related. Instead, they are “worship-related”; that is, they are ways in which God separated the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob from the surrounding nations. God took away from Israel many of the options in dress, eating, and other behavior that were allowed to the children of Adam and those of Noah and all their descendants. This was part of their being set aside.

Among this people God set apart, He called a select few to special service. Among these was the most famous “bug eater” in Scripture, John the Baptizer. Along with his “garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist,” people recognized this special messenger of the coming Christ because of his diet of “locusts and wild honey. (Matthew 3:4)”

As Christians, we realize that God, through Moses, gave this portion of the “Levitical Law” exclusively to Israel. Just as the other 600-odd individual laws or commandments in Leviticus, Exodus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy pertained specifically to the Hebrew people, so also these dietary regulations.

Christians, however, aren’t bound by God’s Law in most of these areas — only a handful of the commandments to Israel are reenforced by Christ or His apostles in the New Testament. Yet even in freedom, Christians still have specific responsibilities, best summed up by Saint Paul: “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. (1 Corinthians 10:31)”

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: diet | insects | bugs | Israel | John the Baptizer | John the Baptist

Food for Thought 2: Our Daily Bread

Q: Luther’s explanation of the Fourth Petition of the Lord’s Prayer begins, “Daily bread includes everything that has to do with the support and needs of the body.” Some commentaries understand it to mean heavenly bread of communion. Are both views correct?

A: Many commentators include a spiritual interpretation of the Fourth Petition in their discussion of the Our Father. I don’t object to this being a part of the understanding of this petition. I disagree when they make it the only allowable interpretation, or even the primary meaning.

Jesus certainly anticipated things prior to accomplishing or instituting them. He taught Nicodemus about baptismal regeneration in John 3 and spoke of eating and drinking His flesh and blood in John 6. Yet the Lord’s Supper was only instituted on the eve of His Passion and Baptism received its mandate after the Resurrection. Likewise, He foretold His coming death several times before it actually happened. So, too, this prayer could be looking forward to the Eucharist.

However, the prayer’s context suggests that we be careful about allegorizing or spiritualizing any of its parts. It sits among words concerning praying, fasting, and almsgiving. Many abused each of these practices and Christ applied His corrective in the Sermon on the Mount. Like fasting and helping the poor, prayers are not to be spectacles. They are simple requests concerning our human needs, for “your Father knows what you need before you ask him. (Matthew 6:8)” These needs are spiritual, mental, and physical — and “daily bread” most simply and directly concerns everything not belonging primarily to the spiritual realm.

Certainly, the Church has traditionally prayed these words immediately before the Lord’s Supper, as a sort of “table prayer.” The entire prayer must include proper reception of Holy Communion, for the Supper belongs to God’s name, kingdom, and will; it involves physical eating and drinking; it brings forgiveness, guards from evil, and leads us from temptation to God’s truth.

Yet to restrict the Fourth Petition to Communion downplays God’s involvement in His physical creation, including the Incarnation of His Son. God created matter, designing us to eat and drink, and He wants us to remember that He is the Source of all earthly support and life as well as the Giver of blessings of new and eternal life.

If anything, the placement of the petition — surrounding the physical, temporal state with the things of the spirit and eternal life — argues for a face-value interpretation. The proportion of earthly requests compared with the spiritual requests runs counter to our own inclinations. Left to our own devices, if we prayed at all we’d probably load up on the specifics of this life, including food, drink, house, home, and health at the expense of submitting ourselves to God’s will, trusting in His grace, and seeking new life here and eternal life in the resurrection.

Allowing the words of the text to speak for themselves acknowledges that we are both flesh and spirit and confesses our need for God to provide every needed blessing of body and soul.

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: daily bread | body of Christ | Holy Communion | food | Our Father | Lord’s Prayer | Fourth Petition | Sermon on the Mount

Food for Thought: Veggies, Meat, and Genesis 1

Q: Genesis 1 seems to say that we are not to eat animals’ flesh. In verse 29, God gives us every herb and fruit for meat. Does this mean we should not eat the meat of animals?

A: First of all, remember that “meat” has changed meaning in the English language. Older translations often use it where we would normally say “food.” So it is here. However, whether we say “meat” or “food,” the Lord clearly prescribed a vegetarian diet. Verse 30 extends this beyond humanity; vegetation was also the food given to “every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life.”

Man lost dominion over the animals with the first sin. Many of the creatures created physically able to prey upon others now began to do so, and death spread with the Fall. However, God didn’t change man’s diet when He sent Adam and Eve from the Garden. He told Adam, “Cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field (3:17-18)”

The Lord said nothing more on the human diet until Noah built the Ark. After He commanded the loading of the animals, God told Noah, “Also take with you every sort of food that is eaten, and store it up. It shall serve as food for you and for them. (6:21)” This language continued the diet given in the garden. However, change was on the way.

After the Ark landed, the Lord told Noah, “The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon every bird of the heavens, upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea. Into your hand they are delivered. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. (9:2-3)”

At the same time, He forbad man to eat flesh with the blood still in it (v. 4) and our own lifeblood was specifically declared sacred. God said that man and beast alike faced divine reckoning for taking the life of any human being (vv. 5-6).

So choose your diet for health concerns, by reason of what tastes good, or according to what you can afford. Should you continue to eat meat (as I myself plan to do), it’s certainly proper to give a special word of thanks to God that He allows other creatures’ lives to end that ours may continue.

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: diet | vegetarian | meat | carnivorous | omnivorous | blood

The Fourth Man in the Fire

Q: Who was the fourth man walking around in the fire in Daniel 3?

A: The Bible doesn’t tell us for certain, but it appears that it was either an angel or else God Himself — specifically, the Son of God, the preincarnate Christ — taking human form as He came to save His faithful servants. The technical term for such an event is theophany — an appearance of God to man. Even the pagan Nebuchadnezzar recognized the fourth person in the flames with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego as “like a son of the gods. (v. 25)”

Compare this appearance with Abraham’s visitors prior to the destruction of Sodom (Genesis 18), the “Angel of the Lord” who met Hagar in the wilderness (Genesis 16:7-13), and with the One who wrestled with Jacob at the crossing of the Jabbok (Genesis 32:22-32). Perhaps in all of these, the same principal Actor intervened in the lives of the affected people — a Person who, in the fullness of time, would Himself assume human flesh and intervene on behalf of all people.

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Daniel | Nebuchadnezzar | fiery furnace | Shadrach | Meshach | Abednego

Steeples

Q: What do you know about the origin of church steeples?

A: Building towers above churches obviously occurred after Christianity became a “legal” religion and began in earnest around AD 600. The practice seemingly came from military architecture. Before that time, Christians took great pains to divert attention from their gathering places. Once special houses of worship came into being, various projections started to arise from them. The use of elaborate towers developed in medieval times. From these came our modern steeples.

These towers allowed churches and cathedrals to stand out among other buildings in the cities or among the hills and trees in the country. They saw their greatest expression in the strongly vertical architecture that was common in the Gothic period and beyond. Their designers hoped to lift eyes (and thoughts and emotions) above ground level and man’s earthly concerns by building these soaring structures. This thought appears in the construction practices of many non-Christian religions, as well.

As bells became more common, steeples were also used to house and elevate them. Sound traveled much greater distances when starting high above the ground and reached more members of the community with the ringing call to worship. The bells also announced fires, oncoming enemies, and deaths of congregational members through an organized pattern of rings and tolls. Thus, there were practical, aesthetic, and spiritual reasons for the development and use of steeples.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: steeples | church architecture | bells | bell towers

Submission in Marriage

Q: What is submission in today’s terms regarding husband and wife? Does this have anything to do with today’s life among Christians?

A: When we read Ephesians 5, we see what true submission is all about. Paul first asks all Christians to be “submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ. (v. 21; emphasis added)” Only then does he say, “Wives, submit to your own husbands. (v. 22)”

True submission is not the abandonment of self as much as it is the realization of self in the person and life of another. The wife to her husband — as the Church to Christ — submits in obedience — not blindly, but with eyes wide open. The Church knows that heeding and obeying her Savior’s words is the greatest love she can return to Him. So also the Christian wife knows that her greatest gift of love to her husband is to allow him to occupy the divinely ordained headship of the family. In her submission, she models the relationship that the Church has with Jesus.

The husband also is told to submit, for He is commanded to love his wife “as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her. (v. 25)” The husband’s very life is secondary to the good of his beloved. Note that this is not romantic love, although that may be part of the marriage relationship. Rather, Paul emphasizes divine love (agape), even when (imperfectly) practiced by humans. Agape gives without counting the cost and always places the good of the other above good for self.

Even in these latter and “liberated” days, wives submit more enthusiastically and joyfully when their husbands practice truly Christlike love in all they say and do. Likewise, husbands give of themselves much more willingly and completely when their headship isn’t constantly challenged by their wives.

While this submission is modeled in Christian marriages, it isn’t restricted to the relationship between husbands and wives. All believers need to remember that Christ-like submission, unlike desire, isn’t “you first” but “me first.” True love seeks to serve, not to be served, to give, not to take — this we see clearly and completely in Jesus’ entire life of serving and suffering on our behalf.

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: submission | headship | wives submit | husbands love | Bride of Christ | marriage

The Didache

Q: What is the origin of the writing known as the Didache?

A: Didache is Greek for “Teaching.” The full title of this brief compilation is The Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles by the Twelve Apostles. While some dispute its antiquity or authenticity, a large number of Christian scholars and historians believe that the Didache, a Syrian Christian document, was written around AD 100, perhaps several years earlier.

From its early date and location of origin, many consider it quite possible that the authors personally knew one or more of the Lord’s apostles. The Didache serves as both a manual of rites and usages and as a handbook of theological interpretation and application. From it, we have a window on the very early Church’s understanding of various Scriptures and can learn about such things as communion practices and the instruction of converts to the Christian Faith.

For more on the Didache, please see Early Christian Writings and Wikipedia. These both include links to Greek texts and English translations, along with supplemental material.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Didache | Church history | doctrine | teaching

Sanctification: God’s Work or Man’s?

Q: What is the Lutheran view of Sanctification? I understand it to be wholly God’s work and that human merit is not necessary. A Catholic show claimed most Protestants believe sanctification is by human merit and necessary to retain salvation. I believe they are wrong in asserting this claim. However, I came to realize I did not have a clear or thorough understanding of the issue. Thank you for your time.

A: Let’s make sure we understand our terms before continuing. “Sanctify” and “sanctification” stem from the same Scriptural root words often translated as “holy” and “holiness.” Ultimately, this state of being only applies to God. Only He is completely without sin, incapable of sinning, and absolutely hating sin. Regarding Christians, it comes to us extra nos (from outside ourselves) as both a forensic declaration and as a Spirit-worked changing of our hearts. However, we need more than just a dictionary definition; we need to know what God considers holy as much as knowing what makes us holy and how we act in a holy manner.

The central tenet of Biblical Lutheran theology is justification by grace for Christ’s sake through faith in Him. We teach that Jesus’ death on the cross paid for all sins of all people for all time, whether they believe or not. We sometimes call this “objective justification.” We then speak of “subjective justification” — this is when the individual appropriates this forgiveness through Holy Spirit-created faith in Christ. Both the objective (Christ’s sacrifice) and the subjective (conversion, faith, new life) are completely God’s actions. One was done for us, the other is done to us.

Lutheran dogma on justification differs from both Roman Catholicism and mainstream Protestantism in certain areas. Most other churches inject some degree of human works, at least in the subjective realm. If nothing else, they consider belief itself to be a human choice or action rather than a divine creation.

To be free from sin is to be holy, therefore, to be justified (declared sinless by God) is to be sanctified. So in one manner of understanding, sanctification is an immediate result of justification. However, our sinful natures persist. Even as faith moves us to cling tightly to Christ, trusting in His merits, our Old Adam desires its own way, corrupts our relationship with God, and leads us back to active sins of thought, word, and deed.

Those seeking to increase their own righteousness make themselves into modern Pharisees, moving away from a right relationship with God even as they attempt to approach Him on their own merits. Believing holiness to be primarily a human endeavor, they prescribe various self-disciplines. They focus on self-denial, self-sacrifice, and self-mortification.

They urge the Christian to move himself into less sinning, more active love, more fervent faith, more joyous praise. They will challenge you to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12)” but forget that “it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. (v. 13)”

“Most Protestants” (to quote your source) — and most Catholics — see sanctification mainly as what the Christian does. Human morality becomes the standard of measurement: Act morally; become more sanctified. Lutherans, of course, don’t oppose morality. However, we profess Scripture’s testimony that the Holy Spirit makes us holy by justifying us: He creates, sustains, and grows faith through Gospel and Sacraments.

God declares us holy from without, cloaking us in Christ’s righteousness. He also cleanses us within, changing our hearts and minds to reflect the heart and mind of Christ Jesus. Purified through God’s grace, the believer’s God-given “clean heart” and “right spirit” (Psalm 51:10) live a life reflecting God’s holiness. When holiness is emphasized either in Protestant or Catholic theology, it usually becomes some form of holy actions leading to a holy state of being. Lutherans say that true sanctification involves one who is already holy acting that way.

We only “work out” our salvation because Jesus worked it out for us through His life, suffering, death, and resurrection. Justification puts to death our Old Adam and creates the Christ-like new creature who gladly and willingly does the things of Christ. Sanctification isn’t you working toward God, but “God who works in you.” As Paul told the Philippians, the Christian desires and does that which pleases God.

You cannot desire to do that which is not part of who you are. James asked, “Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? (3:12)” Only a holy person thinks holy thoughts or does holy deeds. Bearing “fruit in keeping with repentance (Luke 3:8)” is thinking, saying, and doing what you believe about the One who forgives you. It reveals the indwelling presence of His Holy Spirit.

Sanctification expresses itself as “faith working through love (Galatians 5:6)” This only comes as “the God of peace” equips us to do His will, “working in us that which is pleasing in his sight. (Hebrews 13:20-21)” Human merit is not “necessary” for salvation or sanctification. However, meritorious behavior is a “necessary” result of being justified and sanctified.

True good works — Christ working good in and through us — evidence a living faith. That’s why James said that “as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. (2:26)” Similarly, Paul wrote that while it is “by grace you have been saved through faith, (Ephesians 2:8)” you are God’s “workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. (2:10)”

Touching on the final bit of your question, what is “necessary to retain salvation” isn’t doing more and better works. You “retain salvation” as God continually forgives and renews you through Word and Sacrament by the power of His Holy Spirit. You show that you are saved as Christ honors the Father and loves your neighbor through your words and deeds.

The divine irony is that it took the death of our Savior to gain us this new life we live now in time and there in eternity. As He died for our sins, He leads us to did to our sins, repenting and receiving absolution that we might arise to live the new life of loving service He gives us.

For related posts, please see the following:

  §  On Being Christ-Like
  §  Athanasian Creed: Trinity, Good Works, and Salvation

Scripture quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version™, © 2001 by Crossway Bibles.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: sanctification | good works | Christ-like | merit | salvation | justification

The Stations of the Cross

Q: I’m curious about the “Stations of the Cross.” What are they and are they found in Scripture?

A: The Stations of the Cross remember various stages of the Passion. Some Lutheran, Episcopal, and other churches set them up, although they are most used in Catholicism. I’ve seen several churches that have plaques or the like indoors, but they began as outdoor shrines, where one could “walk with the Savior,” stopping to think and pray at each.

They are most usually arranged at intervals around the walls of a church nave. The traditional Stations trace a path known as the Via Dolorosa (Way of Sorrow) as Jesus was led out from Jerusalem to be crucified.

The Stations may be of stone, wood, or metal, sculptured or carved, or they may be painted or engraved. Some are renowned art works, such as those in the cathedral in Antwerp, Belgium.

The construction and use of the Stations become common somewhere around the end of the seventeenth century and but they are now found in most Catholic churches.

For some time, the number of Stations varied, but fourteen are now prescribed by Roman Catholic authority. As you read about them below, you see that some have Scriptural background, while others are derived from pious fable or myth.

The fourteen accepted by Rome are 1) Christ condemned to death; 2) the cross laid upon Him; 3) His first fall; 4) He meets His mother along the way; 5) Simon of Cyrene is forced to carry the cross; 6) Christ’s face is wiped by Veronica (the origin of the story of the veil that supposedly held the image of His face from that time forward); 7) His second fall; 8) He meets the women of Jerusalem; 9) His third fall; 10) Stripped of His garments; 11) His crucifixion; 12) His death on the cross; 13) His body taken down from the cross; and 14) laid in the tomb. In non-Roman Catholic versions, the multiple falls are usually omitted, as is the Veronica Station.

A variant that doesn’t follow these exact steps originated in the Vienna area around the year 1800. Its eleven steps are 1) Agony in the Garden; 2) Betrayal by Judas; 3) Scourging; 4) Crowning with thorns; 5) Christ condemned to death; 6) Meeting Simon of Cyrene; 7) Women of Jerusalem; 8) Tasting the gall; 9) Nailed to the cross; 10) Death on the cross; and 11) His body taken down from the cross. Those uncomfortable with the Roman Catholic insertions of non-Scriptural Stations choose this latter variant or some other format that holds only Biblically attested events.

I’ve seen some displays that work a Pietà (a portrayal of the dead Christ in His mother’s arms) into the station where He is removed from the cross.

A few other optional stations have also arisen. One shows the Savior’s agony in the Garden prior to His arrest. Another, gaining considerable popularity, concludes the Stations with the Resurrection.

Indoor settings are normally permanently mounted for display and use as devotional aids. This is so for many outdoor Stations also, although some are only displayed during the Lenten season.

The outdoor arrangement is becoming more common in many parts of the United States. Churches will set them on their lawns, in their parking lots, or elsewhere room permits, often including benches or other seating for those who wish to stop for a time to rest, contemplate, and pray at each Station.

However the stations are displayed, they should not be considered as granting some special spiritual blessing; nor should hosting churches or individuals force visitors to the Stations pray or meditate according to any one set form.

Still, when used correctly by faithful Christians, the Stations of the Cross are a powerful and potentially edifying series of devotional settings.

So how does one approach the Stations of the Cross? The simple answer is that Christians should come with faith grounded in the death and resurrection of Jesus as recorded in Holy Scripture.

Beyond this, the believer should avoid seeking emotional stimulation. I don’t mean that we view the Stations as zombies. The visual power of the images coupled with the testimony of Scripture will, of course, trigger our emotions but placing emotionalism above edification certainly lessens their spiritual impact.

To guard against this, it helps to approach the Stations after having recently read the Scriptural accounts of the Passion or following a sermon on Christ’s suffering and death. Take along prepared prayers, meditate on the Ten Commandments and your failure to keep them, pray the Our Father, and confess the Creed.

Some people might want to travel the Stations by themselves. This can help them look honestly at their own sins without fearing the judgment of companions. However, others may find greater benefit in going with close friends or family. This allows them to comfort, pray with and for, and forgive each other. It also gives the individuals opportunity to confess their faith with like-minded people, perhaps encouraging them also to be more comfortable sharing their faith with unbelievers.

Obviously, Lent is the peak season for meditation upon the Stations of the Cross. Yet is there any time of the year when sin fails to oppress us, doubt assail us, or Satan confound us? If you find value in such contemplation during Lententide, you will during the rest of the year, as well.

Send email to Ask the Pastor.

Walter Snyder is the pastor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, Emma, Missouri and coauthor of the book What Do Lutherans Believe.

Technorati Tags: Stations of the Cross | devotion | Passion | Via Dolorosa | crucifixion