Several nights ago, I found myself out with some friends at a nice little drinking establishment. There was an older gentleman at the bar. He motioned to the bartender and told the bartender to buy us a round. Completely unexpected since none of us knew him. He did make one request, that we would put our cell phones away. Well, if someone is buying you a drink, you tend not to argue with the sponsor of your drink.
A short while later, he came over and introduced himself. His name was Gio. Gio went on to say that he was a bartender, and had been for some time, and that one thing that really annoyed him was people coming into a bar as a group and all of them playing with their phones. "When you come into a bar, you're suppose to talk to people", Gio said. "You're there to socialize, not ignore everyone."
I could also tell that Gio was a little intoxicated, but that really didn't bother me. We kept talking. I found out a bit of his life story. Gio had grown up in Chicago; his mother was an immigrant from Ireland. When I had mentioned that I had lived in Chicago for a few years, he became very excited. We talked about Chicago and Chicago politics. We talked about his growing up in Chicago and his love of the Cubs and the Blackhawks. We talked about life in this modern world. We talked about how young people today show no respect to others, that they would rather tune out the world listening to their iPods than actually talk to one another and see and hear the world.
Gio talked about the civil rights movement growing up in Chicago. You could see in his eyes that he was playing back those memories. He was happy that I knew about that time. He talked about being a Roman Catholic and how he still attends Mass.
Gio talked about going to visit his mother soon. I didn't ask, but if I had to guess, she was probably in her 80's. He said he would be gone for a month. At first, I didn't quite understand where he was going. I thought it was back to Chicago. I asked again where he was going to see his mother. He replied with a gleam in his eye, "Ireland." He went on to tell me about how he was happy to be going there. How to get to where his mother lived was a two day trip. Day one was flying to Ireland and driving to a long time family friend's place. He would stay overnight with his friend and the next day take the ferry to the island where his mother lived.
The hour got late, my friends had been long gone, and I had finished my drink. I wished him safe journeys.
As I left the bar and headed towards the door I looked back. Gio was sitting there with a smile on his face. I think he was happy that he had a night of being able to talk to someone and tell his story. While most would have dismissed him as an old drunk and would have stopped talking long ago, someone actually listened to him.
Sometimes living out one's Christian vocation is as simple as sharing a drink and letting someone talk.
I don't know if our paths will ever cross again. I do know that both of us parted ways with one of us feeling a bit younger and the other feeling a bit older. It was worth putting down my phone and listening.
I will end this with a bit of wisdom that Gio shared with me:
As the dyslexic theologian once said, "I believe that there is a dog."
March 30, 2010
March 29, 2010
Someone You Should Be Afraid Of
I will make this statement before I go any further. I do not condone the actions of any individual who abuses children. It is a most deplorable act and may God judge those unrepentant individuals severely. Furthermore, I do not condone any person, or persons, who, claiming to be acting for the good of the church, cover-up such previously mentioned actions.
With that being said, I will continue.
Who is this man? This man is Jeff Anderson. Mr. Anderson has made a career out of filing lawsuits across the United States against dioceses of the Roman Catholic Church for clients who were abused by priests. I understand that for those who were abused as children, money doesn't even come close to healing the pain that was caused by these individuals.
Why should you be afraid of Mr. Anderson? Read this article about him. Read what motivates him. Read what he believes in. He is an ex-Lutheran, recovering atheist, "religious" type who is bent on toppling a church. As he says, "I came to the stark realization that the problems were really endemic to the clerical culture, and all the problems we are having in the U.S. led back to Rome," Anderson said. "And I realized nothing was going to fundamentally change until they did."
Put away your papist bashing feelings for a moment and listen.
Why am I afraid of Mr. Anderson?
When he's done having his way with the Roman Catholics, and that church body is left in ruins, do you think he'll quit? What will he do for an encore? He has no religious affiliation to make him stop.
As the article states, "His office, however, is full of religiously symbolic art and sculpture, as well as items salvaged from churches - including a kneeler and confessional booths.
Anderson downplays the significance of the Christian objects, pointing out he also displays Buddhist and Native American religious relics.
"I like religious iconography," he said."
There are plenty of other church bodies left for him to collect and hang a few more trophies in his office. I mean "religious iconography."
So, please, take note:
If your church body has been harboring criminals, now's the time to turn them over to the proper authorities before Mr. Anderson shows up to publicly destroy your church body and leave it in ruins. Covering up such actions in the name of the church is no excuse. If your church body hasn't learned from the mistakes of the Roman Catholic church, then a visit from Mr. Anderson may be in order.
March 25, 2010
I Don't Know If That Was From God Or The Devil, But It Sure Wasn't Lutheran!
This past Sunday I went to church at another parish. Not one to go to strange places of worship, I went since this was a celebration of the grandmother of the woman in my life. Keeping in line with the 8th Commandment, I shall not say where this parish is located, or whom the pastor is that serves there.
What I will say is that the parish is in the country and the pastor there was an Alternate Route graduate of seminary. He was a Lutheran school teacher for several years before going to the seminary.
The service, how to put it nicely, was tolerable? Actually, it was quite grating on my nerves. This pastor had to announce everything, as if I could not read and follow the order of service myself. Of course, I also had to be told that the Gospel reading was going to be the sermon text, which then was re-read at the beginning of the sermon. Wow! Thanks for the heads up there! I would have been lost not knowing what you were going to preach on! The pastor seemed uncomfortable up there. The way he acted, I figured he must have graduated from seminary only two, maybe three years ago.
The sermon was an absolute disaster. I can't say that if was all Law, or if it was all Gospel. I do know it was not a sermon. It was more along the lines of having a grade school teacher lecturing to the students below their grade level. This guy felt it was necessary to explain to us what a parable was! Really? I guess the 90-year-old woman sitting in front of me had never known what a parable was until you came along! The "sermon" was just insulting. It was nothing more than a poorly taught Sunday School lesson. As much as I despise them, I've heard children's sermons that had more substance and Law and Gospel than this train wreck.
Yes, it was that bad.
I was sitting there, reading Luther's Small Catechism in my hymnal. (Thank you to the Commission on Worship for including that!) Trying to keep my mouth shut and trying to keep my sanity. Just thinking to myself about how this sermon reminded me of being in Homiletics I in my seminary days. I also remember that a majority of my classmates got better with their preaching over the years of study at the seminary. I just sat there and thought to myself, "He MUST have graduated from St. Louis! A Ft. Wayne grad would NEVER be this bad at preaching!"
After the service was done, we retired to the church basement where we had some time to kill (it's a dual parish, the one we were at was the early service). A few of us visitors (a.k.a. family) spoke of what had just occurred upstairs. I wasn't the only visitor that day who felt the same way. There was agreement that we would have been better off going to our own parishes for Mass then coming for the potluck at noon.
Noon rolled around and it was time to eat. As the afternoon wore on, the pastor made the rounds welcoming the family and the visitors who came. He stopped by our table. In the course of conversation with him, we found out that he had been a Lutheran school teacher for 14 years; was an Alternate Route student at seminary; graduated from seminary in 2002; that this was where he served as vicar and then became the pastor; and he was a graduate of Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne, and his favorite professor was Dr. Fickenscher, who has a doctorate in Homiletics!
What do you say after that? "Maybe you should ask the seminary for a refund for the Homiletics courses?", or "Did you actually take any classes with Dr. Fickenscher?", or "Was Dr. Fickenscher in a coma the day you preached in class?" I was shocked. One of my other thoughts was to immediately take up a donation to buy this pastor a subscription to Concordia Pulpit Resources. Granted, those aren't the best sermons, but at least they have more substance than what he just preached.
I just couldn't believe it.
What are they teaching there?
They are not teaching how to preach and not how to conduct a proper Mass.
Ah, the days of Prof. Reuning teaching students as to the how of conducting the Mass are long gone. All replaced by esoteric thoughts and teachings on worship.
What I will say is that the parish is in the country and the pastor there was an Alternate Route graduate of seminary. He was a Lutheran school teacher for several years before going to the seminary.
The service, how to put it nicely, was tolerable? Actually, it was quite grating on my nerves. This pastor had to announce everything, as if I could not read and follow the order of service myself. Of course, I also had to be told that the Gospel reading was going to be the sermon text, which then was re-read at the beginning of the sermon. Wow! Thanks for the heads up there! I would have been lost not knowing what you were going to preach on! The pastor seemed uncomfortable up there. The way he acted, I figured he must have graduated from seminary only two, maybe three years ago.
The sermon was an absolute disaster. I can't say that if was all Law, or if it was all Gospel. I do know it was not a sermon. It was more along the lines of having a grade school teacher lecturing to the students below their grade level. This guy felt it was necessary to explain to us what a parable was! Really? I guess the 90-year-old woman sitting in front of me had never known what a parable was until you came along! The "sermon" was just insulting. It was nothing more than a poorly taught Sunday School lesson. As much as I despise them, I've heard children's sermons that had more substance and Law and Gospel than this train wreck.
Yes, it was that bad.
I was sitting there, reading Luther's Small Catechism in my hymnal. (Thank you to the Commission on Worship for including that!) Trying to keep my mouth shut and trying to keep my sanity. Just thinking to myself about how this sermon reminded me of being in Homiletics I in my seminary days. I also remember that a majority of my classmates got better with their preaching over the years of study at the seminary. I just sat there and thought to myself, "He MUST have graduated from St. Louis! A Ft. Wayne grad would NEVER be this bad at preaching!"
After the service was done, we retired to the church basement where we had some time to kill (it's a dual parish, the one we were at was the early service). A few of us visitors (a.k.a. family) spoke of what had just occurred upstairs. I wasn't the only visitor that day who felt the same way. There was agreement that we would have been better off going to our own parishes for Mass then coming for the potluck at noon.
Noon rolled around and it was time to eat. As the afternoon wore on, the pastor made the rounds welcoming the family and the visitors who came. He stopped by our table. In the course of conversation with him, we found out that he had been a Lutheran school teacher for 14 years; was an Alternate Route student at seminary; graduated from seminary in 2002; that this was where he served as vicar and then became the pastor; and he was a graduate of Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne, and his favorite professor was Dr. Fickenscher, who has a doctorate in Homiletics!
What do you say after that? "Maybe you should ask the seminary for a refund for the Homiletics courses?", or "Did you actually take any classes with Dr. Fickenscher?", or "Was Dr. Fickenscher in a coma the day you preached in class?" I was shocked. One of my other thoughts was to immediately take up a donation to buy this pastor a subscription to Concordia Pulpit Resources. Granted, those aren't the best sermons, but at least they have more substance than what he just preached.
I just couldn't believe it.
What are they teaching there?
They are not teaching how to preach and not how to conduct a proper Mass.
Ah, the days of Prof. Reuning teaching students as to the how of conducting the Mass are long gone. All replaced by esoteric thoughts and teachings on worship.
March 17, 2010
An Interesting Option
It is interesting what you can find on the internet. The picture above is the coronation of Archbishop Metropolitan Sherman Randall Pius Mosley as the primate of the Old Roman Catholic Church of America. The article and photos about this coronation is quite interesting. What is even more interesting is that there are still a few newspapers, such as the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, that still cover religious events locally and on a consistent basis.
Prior to finding this article, I was not familiar with the OCCA. Reading their history, it shows a familiar pattern of the Roman Catholic Church excommunicating people who disagree with them publicly about doctrine that should be opposed publicly. (For the lazy folks, those who won't read the article or the website of the OCCA, one of the main issues of the break with Rome was papal infallibility.)
This is a very interesting church body. They allow for the marriage of their priests. They hold the liturgy in high regard. Almost a tempting option instead of waiting for Rome to issue its "Great Invitation" to disaffected Lutherans.
This might be worth further investigation.
March 10, 2010
The Great Invitation
I am still torn on this one.
Since the issuance of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus by the Vatican in November 2009, I have been wondering and, dare I say it, waiting. Waiting for the Lutheran version of this "Great Invitation." You have to admit, this is a great end run by the Holy See. Recognizing that the Roman Catholic Church is not getting any larger, that there is great turmoil in the Anglican fellowship (and some big cash in the Episcopal Church in the United States), and that there is phenomenal growth of a conservative branch of the Anglican fellowship in Africa, this is a win-win for all parties involved. Right?
I admire the love and forgiveness that the Roman Catholic church shows in this "Great Invitation." They love the possibility of gaining churches, priests and members by setting up an Anglican Rite subsidiary, allowing a large part of the Anglican theology and practice to survive. They show great forgiveness with regards to the shunning and ostracizing of believers in England and, lest we forget, the outright slaughter of Roman priests in England. All this for switching one's allegiance from the Queen to the Pope. Again, not a bad deal. Also, I wonder, will there be a blind eye turned to the Anglican idea regarding divorce?
Luther gets excommunicated. War is declared on the kingdoms that embraced the Reformation. The Counter-Reformation goes out of its way to burn books and believers alike. Yet, nothing. Not even an, "Oops. That was our bad. Sorry. What can we do to make this all better?" Yes, yes, I know, it's not as simple as that. I know that the Lutheran Church did a wonderful job of ostracizing Roman Catholics. (It was fun back in the 1950's when the local Lutheran high school played the local Roman Catholic high school in basketball. It was like the Reformation was being fought all over again.) Never, do I recall, someone from the Lutheran camp gathering an army with the sole purpose of killing Roman Catholics because they weren't Lutheran. Nor, have I ever read about the Lutheran Church being formed for the purpose of making a divorce an easier thing to acquire. Yet the Anglican Church gets welcomed back to the fold letting bygones be bygones. Reminds me of a line from the Monty Python's Holy Grail movie. "Let's not argue about who killed who."
No, I am not about to "jump ship" and find the nearest Roman Catholic Anglican Rite church to join. I am just wondering where the "Great Invitation" from the Pope is? I want my "Great Invitation." Lutheranism's history with Rome isn't that bad, is it? After all, the late Pope John Paul II the Great did call Lutherans "separated brethren." Doesn't that count for something? I think Lutheranism has met a majority of the terms to be offered an invitation to join. Let's see, dissatisfaction with women's ordination, check. Conservative theologians upset and being marginalized, check. Liturgical worship frowned upon, check. Inept leadership that is doing more to divide than to "walk together", check. What are the other qualifications that have not been met? What more needs to be done? When will there be a Roman Catholic Lutheran Rite established? When will there be issued a "Great Invitation" to the Lutheran Church?
I would hope never. I would hope that things would not get to the point that the remaining confessional, liturgical type Lutherans would seek protection from the Pope. I guess this is one of those "only time will tell" things.
Since the issuance of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus by the Vatican in November 2009, I have been wondering and, dare I say it, waiting. Waiting for the Lutheran version of this "Great Invitation." You have to admit, this is a great end run by the Holy See. Recognizing that the Roman Catholic Church is not getting any larger, that there is great turmoil in the Anglican fellowship (and some big cash in the Episcopal Church in the United States), and that there is phenomenal growth of a conservative branch of the Anglican fellowship in Africa, this is a win-win for all parties involved. Right?
I admire the love and forgiveness that the Roman Catholic church shows in this "Great Invitation." They love the possibility of gaining churches, priests and members by setting up an Anglican Rite subsidiary, allowing a large part of the Anglican theology and practice to survive. They show great forgiveness with regards to the shunning and ostracizing of believers in England and, lest we forget, the outright slaughter of Roman priests in England. All this for switching one's allegiance from the Queen to the Pope. Again, not a bad deal. Also, I wonder, will there be a blind eye turned to the Anglican idea regarding divorce?
Luther gets excommunicated. War is declared on the kingdoms that embraced the Reformation. The Counter-Reformation goes out of its way to burn books and believers alike. Yet, nothing. Not even an, "Oops. That was our bad. Sorry. What can we do to make this all better?" Yes, yes, I know, it's not as simple as that. I know that the Lutheran Church did a wonderful job of ostracizing Roman Catholics. (It was fun back in the 1950's when the local Lutheran high school played the local Roman Catholic high school in basketball. It was like the Reformation was being fought all over again.) Never, do I recall, someone from the Lutheran camp gathering an army with the sole purpose of killing Roman Catholics because they weren't Lutheran. Nor, have I ever read about the Lutheran Church being formed for the purpose of making a divorce an easier thing to acquire. Yet the Anglican Church gets welcomed back to the fold letting bygones be bygones. Reminds me of a line from the Monty Python's Holy Grail movie. "Let's not argue about who killed who."
No, I am not about to "jump ship" and find the nearest Roman Catholic Anglican Rite church to join. I am just wondering where the "Great Invitation" from the Pope is? I want my "Great Invitation." Lutheranism's history with Rome isn't that bad, is it? After all, the late Pope John Paul II the Great did call Lutherans "separated brethren." Doesn't that count for something? I think Lutheranism has met a majority of the terms to be offered an invitation to join. Let's see, dissatisfaction with women's ordination, check. Conservative theologians upset and being marginalized, check. Liturgical worship frowned upon, check. Inept leadership that is doing more to divide than to "walk together", check. What are the other qualifications that have not been met? What more needs to be done? When will there be a Roman Catholic Lutheran Rite established? When will there be issued a "Great Invitation" to the Lutheran Church?
I would hope never. I would hope that things would not get to the point that the remaining confessional, liturgical type Lutherans would seek protection from the Pope. I guess this is one of those "only time will tell" things.
March 8, 2010
What is the role of the pastor in the world of politics?
Like most Americans who are somewhat interested in the current debate on health care reform, it is interesting to see the passion, almost to the point of fanaticism on this topic. It is amazing to see how partisan the politics have gotten. I'm not here to say which side I believe is right or wrong. Both sides of the debate do have something to offer, sometimes even constructive in nature.
I have been somewhat concerned as of late. Actually, for quite some time. While I realize that as a citizen in this land voting for elective offices would fall under the 4th Commandment, as well as obeying our leaders, I would expect my pastor to remind me of these duties. I am disturbed though by those pastors who believe they have a voice in this debate, or any political debate for that matter. Does the pastor get to have a voice in politics?
I like my pastor. He's a nice guy. Very solid in his teaching and preaching. This is what confuses me: What gives him the right to give me a lecture on his political beliefs? I don't know if he is speaking ex cathedra since he is speaking to me either in his vestments or while wearing his clerical. I apologize for sounding old-fashioned here, but I always thought that if the pastor was wearing his clerical that he was "on duty" and representing the Office of the Ministry.
I wholeheartedly believe that one who is serving in the Pfarramt should remind me that abortion is wrong, that the world that we are just passing through is sinful and corrupt, that there are things happening that we should be aware of and speak out against that affect us as Christians. Yet, I really don't want to know, or should know, that my pastor is a fan of Rush Limbaugh, CNN, Bill O'Reilly, Keith Olbermann, Michael Medved, Michael Moore, Fox News, ad nauseam. (Actually, I can't stand any of the aboved mentioned persons or news outlets. I get my political news watching the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, who do a wonderful job of poking holes in politicians and those who report on them.)
Before you jump right to making a comment, hear me out. Again, I understand that there is a duty to let the flock know that this modern world is not all that great and we, as sheep, love to go astray. My point is, which path is the pastor to be keeping his flock on?
According to AC XXVIII:
Why must my pastor, and other pastors that I have encountered, wear their politics on their clericals? What is the reasoning for this almost obsessive need to try to "fit in" with the rest of the world and proclaim to be a member of some part of the political spectrum? Whatever happened to the thought of being in the world, but not of it? As Romans 12:2 states, "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God."
If anything, a pastor should be apolitical regarding politics. A pastor should know that there is not a party that fully embraces all of Christianity, especially a Lutheran understanding. It does not take a theologian to know that something man made like political institutions is inherently corrupt. As Psalm 146 states, we should "trust not in princes." Why do some want to do that?
I have been somewhat concerned as of late. Actually, for quite some time. While I realize that as a citizen in this land voting for elective offices would fall under the 4th Commandment, as well as obeying our leaders, I would expect my pastor to remind me of these duties. I am disturbed though by those pastors who believe they have a voice in this debate, or any political debate for that matter. Does the pastor get to have a voice in politics?
I like my pastor. He's a nice guy. Very solid in his teaching and preaching. This is what confuses me: What gives him the right to give me a lecture on his political beliefs? I don't know if he is speaking ex cathedra since he is speaking to me either in his vestments or while wearing his clerical. I apologize for sounding old-fashioned here, but I always thought that if the pastor was wearing his clerical that he was "on duty" and representing the Office of the Ministry.
I wholeheartedly believe that one who is serving in the Pfarramt should remind me that abortion is wrong, that the world that we are just passing through is sinful and corrupt, that there are things happening that we should be aware of and speak out against that affect us as Christians. Yet, I really don't want to know, or should know, that my pastor is a fan of Rush Limbaugh, CNN, Bill O'Reilly, Keith Olbermann, Michael Medved, Michael Moore, Fox News, ad nauseam. (Actually, I can't stand any of the aboved mentioned persons or news outlets. I get my political news watching the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, who do a wonderful job of poking holes in politicians and those who report on them.)
Before you jump right to making a comment, hear me out. Again, I understand that there is a duty to let the flock know that this modern world is not all that great and we, as sheep, love to go astray. My point is, which path is the pastor to be keeping his flock on?
According to AC XXVIII:
8] This power is exercised only by teaching or preaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments, according to their calling either to many or to individuals. For thereby are granted, not bodily, but eternal things, as eternal righteousness, the Holy Ghost, eternal life. 9] These things cannot come but by the ministry of the Word and the Sacraments, as Paul says, Rom. 1:16: The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. 10] Therefore, since the power of the Church grants eternal things, and is exercised only by the ministry of the Word, it does not interfere with civil government; no more than the art of singing interferes with civil government. 11] For civil government deals with other things than does the Gospel. The civil rulers defend not minds, but bodies and bodily things against manifest injuries, and restrain men with the sword and bodily punishments in order to preserve civil justice and peace.
12] Therefore the power of the Church and the civil power must not be confounded. The power of the Church has its own commission to teach the Gospel and 13] to administer the Sacraments. Let it not break into the office of another; let it not transfer the kingdoms of this world; let it not abrogate the laws of civil rulers; let it not abolish lawful obedience; let it not interfere with judgments concerning civil ordinances or contracts; let it not prescribe laws to civil rulers concerning the form of the Commonwealth. 14] As Christ says, John 18:36: My kingdom is not of this world; 15] also Luke 12:14: Who made Me a judge or a divider over you? 16] Paul also says, Phil. 3:20: Our citizenship is in heaven; 17] 2 Cor. 10:4: The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the casting down of imaginations.
18] After this manner our teachers discriminate between the duties of both these powers, and command that both be honored and acknowledged as gifts and blessings of God.
20] When, therefore, the question is concerning the jurisdiction of bishops, civil authority must be distinguished from 21] ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Again, according to the Gospel or, as they say, by divine right, there belongs to the bishops as bishops, that is, to those to whom has been committed the ministry of the Word and the Sacraments, no jurisdiction except to forgive sins, to judge doctrine, to reject doctrines contrary to the Gospel, and to exclude from the communion of the Church wicked men, whose wickedness is known, and this without human force, 22] simply by the Word.
Why must my pastor, and other pastors that I have encountered, wear their politics on their clericals? What is the reasoning for this almost obsessive need to try to "fit in" with the rest of the world and proclaim to be a member of some part of the political spectrum? Whatever happened to the thought of being in the world, but not of it? As Romans 12:2 states, "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God."
If anything, a pastor should be apolitical regarding politics. A pastor should know that there is not a party that fully embraces all of Christianity, especially a Lutheran understanding. It does not take a theologian to know that something man made like political institutions is inherently corrupt. As Psalm 146 states, we should "trust not in princes." Why do some want to do that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)