gabas notebook

an answer to an enemy of the sacraments

2012-01-28T16:41:00.000-05:00

Traditions are rooted in Scripture The Journal Gazette Fort Wayne, IN

The link above will take you to an article I wrote for the Fort Wayne newspaper when I stilled lived there. It was after my unpleasantness with the bureaucrats but before I finally decided to move back to Milwaukee. In other words, it was an interesting time. I was without "direction" in life; had no "plan." One thing I knew, however, was that I couldn't pass up a chance to engage a raving Protestant in the public square. I just about forgot about this article until I came across a link to it today. If I could do that article over again, I definitely would. It was my first attempt at such a form, and unfortunately that's quite obvious. Also, the title was imposed by the paper editor. It's an awful title, but she didn't like mine, I guess. Anyway, there it is, for what it's worth.

Sherwood Anderson on New Orleans

2012-01-21T22:44:00.000-05:00

Spend even a short time experiencing the unique culture of New Orleans, as I did a couple years back, and you begin to appreciate what those who live there know in the core of their being, that it has an intangible quality which makes it conducive to the arts, and to an artistic view of life. In 1922 the great writer and friend of William Faulkner, Sherwood Anderson, articulated this truth in his own way, in an essay aimed at encouraging other artists to come to New Orleans. I came across it recently, and thought I would share it here. Cheers.

I address these fellows. I want to tell them of long quiet walks to be taken on the levee in back-of-town, where old ships, retired from service, thrust their masts up into the evening sky. On the streets here the crowds have a more leisurely stride...I stick to my pronouncement that culture means first of all the enjoyment of life, leisure and a sense of leisure. It means time for a play of the imagination over the facts of life, it means time and vitality to be serious about really serious things and a background of joy in life in which to refresh the tired spirits.
In a civilization where the fact becomes dominant, submerging the imaginative life, you will have what is dominant in the cities of Pittsburgh and Chicago today.
When the fact is made secondary to the desire to live, to love, and to understand life, it may be that we will have in more American cities a charm of place such as one finds in the older parts of New Orleans now.

a liturgical irony

2012-01-16T23:28:00.001-05:00

It is very common in Lutheran churches for the Gospel reading in the Mass to be read exclusively by an ordained priest, whether he be the pastor or some other priest. This is well-intentioned, and is, in the grand scheme, a positive tendency. I could comment on how making the Gospel reading the exclusive domain of the presbyterate is an inadvertent rejection of the office of deacon, hallowed as it is by millennia of churchly practice, but that is not the point of the present observation. Instead, and I don't say this against any particular pastor or church, but against an odd way of thinking that seems endemic in modern Missouri, I find an interesting irony. Namely, this rule is kept even in many of the places where lay preaching routinely occurs, such as seminary field education parishes and seminary vicarage parishes.

To be clear, I do not mean to imply that lay folk ought to read the Gospel in the Mass. They should not. Neither should they preach, though that also must be another discussion. My point is that I find it funny, and ironic, that we let these guys preach, but we don't let them read the Gospel. It is somehow inappropriate for them to read the Gospel upon which they will preach. Are you picking up on the queerness of this line of thinking? It's perfectly okay for a layman to publicly preach if he is deemed by the synodical apparatus to be an acceptable exception to what we claim in the Confessions, yet the reading of the Gospel is sacrosanct, the sole domain of the pastor. The question is, if a seminarian can be assigned preaching duty in the Mass, as they routinely are in the vicarage year, why is he kept from reading the Gospel? Why is reading the Gospel considered more important than preaching?

I will argue against seminarian preaching on another occasion. Here I just wanted to highlight a particularly odd example of what I would call inconsistent thinking.

a surprise gift

2012-01-15T16:15:00.000-05:00

Last night a six-pack of Lakefront Beer was left at the back door of my apartment. It didn't have a note on it, but was clearly left right at my door, so while I was curious about it, I did the only natural thing, and put it in my fridge. I even drank one last night. Right now, as I watch one of my favorite movies (Into Great Silence) I am drinking another one.

Just a few minutes ago, there was a knock at my kitchen door. It was my landlord. We had a chat on various matters, and then I said, Say, I found a six-pack at the door. He was like, Oh, that's for you. It's your favorite beer, right? I said, Yes, it is. Thanks.

I have a kind friend for a landlord, and for this I am thankful.

fleshly perception vs perception of Christ's flesh

2012-01-10T22:02:00.000-05:00

One of the scripture texts cited by the deniers of Christ's real presence in the Holy Sacrament is the fifth chapter of Saint Paul's second letter to the Corinthians, where he speaks of the fact that it is not Christian to regard others, even Christ, in terms of the flesh.

Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

But what is Paul really driving at in this passage? And who are the ones truly guilty of viewing matters from a fleshly point of view? As it turns out, these questions, and Luther's answer, are manifestly relevant in our Protestant Gnostic world. So I share what Luther says on this in his Great Confession.

It is well to understand that he does not refer here to Christ's personal flesh, as this spirit foolishly imagines, for that remains Christ's flesh in eternity and all the angels will recognize him in it eternally. But just as we regard our brothers in a spiritual, no longer a fleshly manner, so much the less do we regard Christ in a fleshly manner. Formerly, he means to say, when we were holy in Judaism and in the works of the law-which the false apostles are once again promoting-we knew nothing spiritually about Christ, but what we sought was merely fleshly. For "we had hoped that he would redeem Israel," Luke 24, and would regard our holiness and glorify us according to the flesh. This was really to know Christ according to the flesh-a real fleshly perception. But all this has now passed away and died with him. We no longer regard him so, for all this has vanished and we are entirely a new creation in Christ. This interpretation is given you by Paul himself; just read and examine the text rightly.

Now, all who regard and know Christ from a fleshly point of view are inevitably offended at him, as was the case with the Jews. For since flesh and blood thinks no further than it sees and feels, and since it sees that Christ was crucified as a mortal man, it inevitably says, "This is the end; neither life nor salvation is to be found here; he is gone; he can help no one; he himself is lost." But he who is not offended at him must rise above the flesh and be raised by the Word so that he may perceive in the Spirit how Christ precisely through his suffering and death has attained true life and glory. And whoever does this properly, whoever is able to do it, is a new creation in Christ, endowed with new spiritual knowledge. Just so, even now, all are offended at Christ if they view his Supper in a fleshly manner, as the fanatics do. They are the ones who regard Christ according to the flesh, as they accuse us of doing. For flesh cannot say or know more than, "Here is bread and wine," therefore it must be offended at Christ when he says, "This is my body," for it is an old creation in Adam. If it is not to become offended, it must rise above this flesh and believe the words, "This is my body"; then it will understand that this bread is not mere bread but the true body of Christ.

It grieves me, indeed, that the devil should thus ridicule God's words. But it moves me to pity that the poor people should not see how the fanatics use these vague ideas as the foundation of their fantasies. They boast, swearing by all they hold dear, that they have learned nothing from us. Really, this is not necessary. Their writings show it all too plainly, without boasting on their part.

from the Great Confession

2012-01-07T22:41:00.000-05:00

One of my favorite theological works of all time is Martin Luther's Confession Concerning Christ's Supper (usually referenced simply as The Great Confession) of 1528. Besides being a brilliant work in terms of its spiritual, theological, and exegetical qualities, the reader also gets some delightful bonuses. For example, in some places he gives the Zwinglians lessons in grammar. In some, like what you will see below, he also gives them lessons in logic. To round out the classic trivium, let me add that the whole book is a lesson in rhetoric. I thought I'd share a particularly juicy passage from what is truly one of Luther's most important works. Enjoy.

In the sixth place, he wishes to prove that Scripture also is opposed to our interpretation. The first passage is precisely this one: "This is my body which is given for you." It is not true that this is Christ's body in the form in which it was given for us, for it was given visibly for us. This we answered above, showing that this spirit makes a quality out of a substance, by a very faulty syllogism in which there are four terms, no universal premise, no essential predication, no distributed middle, and many other faults, for logicians know full well that "an accidental term cannot be subsumed under a substantial term." Such reasoning, however, passes for Scripture and God's Word with this spirit!

In plain language, we do not say that Christ's body is present in the Supper in the same form in which he was given for us-who would say that?-but that it is the same body which was given for us, not in the same form or mode but in the same essence and nature. Now a particular essence can very well be visible at one place and invisible at another. Oh, this is fool's play! No one will answer us. All they want to do is talk twaddle and show off.

Again, it is allegedly opposed to the text, "As often as you eat this bread," etc. Because here the word "this" refers to the bread, therefore in the other expression, "This is my body," it must refer to mere bread, etc. I reply, it is not necessarily so in every instance, nor can this be shown to be a necessary consequence; we have already proved the opposite, that in both places the word "this" refers to the bread, which is the body of Christ, and that neither refers to common bread only.

Again he cites St. Mark, "The Lord was taken up into heaven," and "I am leaving the world and going to the Father" (Jn 16), and, "I am no more in the world, but they are in the world" (Jn 17), and many other passages in which Christ is declared to be in heaven. Well, we also believe and teach all this. We did not need to be taught it. What they do need to teach, however, is that because Christ is in heaven, his body cannot be present in the Supper. This "impossibility" they ought to prove, then we would be convinced that these passages are opposed to our interpretation. But they always teach us with great loquacity what we already know, and meanwhile masterfully keep silent over points about which we are asking. Therefore we must hold on to our interpretation.

Indeed, Christ himself explains what "being in the world" means, in Luke 24, where he says, "These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you." What! Was he not still with them? And did he not eat with them after his resurrection? Certainly he was no longer with them in the manner in which he had once been with them, in mortal form and limited to this life in the present world, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 concerning the natural and the spiritual man. But from these expressions it cannot be proved that he cannot be present bodily. For as has been said, he sat and ate and spoke with them-and yet he is no in the world. Thus also, "You also have the poor with you, but you will not always have me with you" (Mt 26). What is meant here by the expression "with you" is explained by the text itself, and is easy to see, namely he is not with us in the same way as the poor are with us. And so forth. To whatever further passages they may introduce, one may briefly reply: Christ is not with us in mortal and earthly fashion, as the poor are.

Hence they cannot by this method succeed in proving that our interpretation is contrary to Scripture. But it is Zwinglian logic to take substance for accident and "which" for "of what kind," as if I should say, "Christ is not present in the Supper in a certain form, therefore he is not present bodily"; "Christ is not with us in a certain form, therefore he is not with us at all," jumping right from a particular to a universal. "The mayor is not in the bath in his red breeches, therefore he is not in the bath." "The king is not at the table with his crown on, therefore he is not at the table." All this is child's play and buffoonery, as the schools are well aware, but among these spirits it is supposed to pass for Scripture and the Christian faith.

If they insist on the basis of these passages that Christ is no longer with us, they must also conclude that Christ is not with us spiritually either. For the words stand there clearly, "I am no more with you," which declares positively that he is not with us at all. "Yes," they say, "bu we have clear passages to the contrary which assert that he is with us spiritually, such as John 16, "We will make our home with him," and Paul in Ephesians 3, "Christ dwells in your hearts," etc. I reply: My friend, why shouldn't they also find the text in the Supper to be opposed to the same? If Christ can be present with them in a certain form without contradicting the text, "I am not with you," then he can also be present with us in the Supper, notwithstanding the same text, "I am not with you." If that text does not invalidate their passages concerning the spiritual nature of Christ, neither does it invalidate our text concerning the invisible nature of Christ in the Supper.

Thus their objection is as sharply opposed to them as to us, and by whatever means they extricate themselves they extricate us also. And our interpretation remains unimpugned: "This is my body." For if they prove anything with their passages, they prove that Christ is not present in the Supper in a visible, mortal, and earthly mode-a thing which it is not in the least necessary to prove, for we acknowledge it all. But what they ought to prove is that our interpretation is false and that Christ lies when he says, "This is my body." But no one steps forth to prove it, for they are nothing but fickle windbags, soiling a lot of good paper with vain and worthless words and making fools of poor simple Christians.
(Robert H. Fischer's translation, AE 37)

Litany of the Most Holy Name of Jesus

2012-01-01T16:30:00.001-05:00

If the circumcision of Christ is one of the focuses of this day in the Church Year, the other focus is the naming of Jesus. And one of the thoughts to which this led me, as I was sitting in church waiting for Mass to begin, is that this is an especially appropriate occasion on which to pray the Litany of the Most Holy Name of Jesus. It is one of those traditional, yet non-liturgical, litanies with which Lutherans are all too unfamiliar. After all, it's not in a CPH book. Luckily, I had with me this morning a book which does include this litany. What follows is the Litany of the Name of Jesus, and I recommend it to your devotion, today or any day.

Kyrie:

Eleison.

Christe:
Eleison.

Kyrie:
Eleison.

O Jesus, hear us:
O Jesus, graciously hear us.

O God, the Father in Heaven:
Have mercy upon us.

O God, the Son, Redeemer of the world:
Have mercy upon us.

O God, the Holy Ghost:
Have mercy upon us.

O Holy Trinity, one God:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Son of the living God:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Splendor of the Father:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Brightness of eternal Light:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, King of Glory:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Sun of Justice:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Son of the Virgin Mary:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, most amiable:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, most admirable:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, the mighty God:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Father of the world to come:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Angel of Great Council:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, most powerful:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, most patient:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, most obedient:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, meek and humble of heart:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Lover of Chastity:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, our Lover:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, God of Peace:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Author of Life:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Model of Virtues:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, zealous for souls:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, our God:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, our Refuge:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Father of the Poor:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Treasure of the Faithful:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, good Shepherd:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, true Light:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, eternal Wisdom:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, infinite Goodness:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, our Way and our Life:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, joy of the Angels:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, King of the Patriarchs:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Master of the Apostles:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Teacher of the Evangelists:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Strength of Martyrs:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Light of Confessors:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Purity of Virgins:
Have mercy upon us.

Jesus, Crown of all Saints:
Have mercy upon us.

Be gracious unto us:
Spare us O Jesus.

Be gracious unto us:
Graciously hear us, O Jesus.

From all evil:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

From all sin:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

From the crafts and assaults of the devil:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

From the spirit of fornication:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

From everlasting death:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

From the neglect of Thy inspirations:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By the mystery of Thy holy Incarnation:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Nativity:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Infancy:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy most divine Life:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Labors:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Agony and Passion:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Cross and Dereliction:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Sufferings:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy precious Death and Burial:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Resurrection:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Ascension:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Institution of the Most Holy Eucharist:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Joys:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

By Thy Glory:
Deliver us, O Jesus.

O Lamb of God, that takest away the sin of the world:
Spare us, O Jesus.

O Lamb of God, that takest away the sin of the world:
Graciously hear us, O Jesus.

O Lamb of God, that takest away the sin of the world:
Have mercy upon us, O Jesus.

O Jesus, hear us:
O Jesus, graciously hear us.

Kyrie:
Eleison.

Christe:
Eleison.

Kyrie eleison. Amen.
Our Father who art in heaven. Hallowed be Thy Name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our Daily Bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation. X But deliver us from evil. Amen.

Let us pray:
O Lord Jesus Christ, Thou hast said, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you"; mercifully attend to our supplications, and grant us the grace of Thy most divine love, that we may love Thee with all our hearts, and in all our words and actions, and never cease to praise Thee.   Make us, O Lord, to have a perpetual fear and love of Thy holy name, for Thou never failest to govern those whom Thou dost solidly establish in Thy love. Thou who livest and reignest, world without end.
Amen.

From the Divine Office today

2012-01-01T16:00:00.000-05:00

R. Not knowing man, the Virgin Mother gave birth wihout pain, and brought forth the world's Redeemer ; * And he, the King of the Angels, received nourishment from a heaven-filled virginal bosom.
V. The mansion of the modest breast becometh a shrine where God shall rest : the pure and undefiled one within her womb conceived the Son.
R. And he, the King of the Angels, received nourishment from a heaven-filled virginal bosom.
V. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost.
R. And he, the King of the Angels, received nourishment from a heaven-filled virginal bosom.

(from the office of Matins for the feast of the Circumcision of Christ)

Saint Ambrose on the Circumcision of Christ

2012-01-01T15:46:00.001-05:00

This day in the Church Year marks two things in particular, the circumcision of Jesus, which took place on the eighth day after His birth, and the holy name of Jesus, given on the same occasion.

Regarding the circumcision of Christ, let me share with you a wonderful litle word from Saint Ambrose, assigned to the Divine Office this morning. As you read this, take note of a few things: 1. the christological focus of Ambrose's reading of the Old Testament, 2. the rich imagery Ambrose employs as he develops the notion of Mary as an icon of the Church, 3. and what I find to be a subtle but significant point, namely, that Ambrose does not say that Christ opened His mother's womb (he couldn't say that, since that didn't happen) but nevertheless uses that imagery to make a point about the fruitfulness of the Church.

But since the body and mind of man remain yet infected with a proneness to sin, the circumcision of the eighth day is meant to put us in mind of that complete cleansing from sin which we shall have at the resurrection. This is doubtless to be inferred from the words : Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy unto the Lord. That is, these words are literally true only of the delivery of the Blessed Virgin. Verily, he that opened her womb was holy, for he was altogether without spot. And we may gather that the Law hath this meaning because the Angel said almost the same words : That Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Among all them that are born of women the Lord Jesus Christ stood alone in holiness. He alone, because of this immaculate birth, felt no contagion from human corruption ; it came not near him because of his heavenly majesty. Otherwise (that is, if we are to apply this passage of the Law literally) we are obliged to say that without exception every male that openeth the womb is holy ; and how then shall we explain that so many were unrighteous? Was Ahab holy? Were the false prophets holy? Were they holy on whom Elijah justly called down fire from heaven? But he to whom the sacred commandment of the Law of God is mystically directed is the Holy One of Israel. And he alone hath opened the secret womb of his holy virgin-bride the Church, filling her with a sinless fruitfulness whereby to bring forth the People of God.

a christmas day picture

2012-01-01T14:50:00.000-05:00

A scene from Christmas Day. Two of my nieces (Ali on my right wearing my top hat and Kate on my left) are posing with their crazy uncle. I decided for the fun of it to wear my Indian kurta for the occasion.

Blessed Childermas

2011-12-28T08:24:00.000-05:00

I wish you a blessed Childermas, and hope you have a chance to attend Mass, or at least to take a moment and remember the witness of the Holy Innocents in your prayer and meditation. Above is the slaughter as interpreted by Peter Paul Rubens.

the octave drenched in blood

2011-12-26T23:41:00.000-05:00

The most important feasts of the Church Year are celebrated for a full octave of days, each day of which is treated as though it were a sort of replay of the first. Or to put it another way, each day of the octave is a celebrating of the same feast. Much as a wedding feast in the ancient middle east could last several days, so also the Church on certain occasions celebrates the life of her Lord and Redeemer, and the marital life she shares with Him, as a full eight day feast, the number of the fulfillment of the new creation, the resurrection life which we have in our Baptism (which assumes and is never separated from the Paschal mystery of the death of our Lord, into which we are baptized).

Yet the feast of the Nativity of Christ is unusual in that it does not take an unmitigated tone of joy, but is significantly filled with death, mortality, even violent martyrdom. It is called the bloody octave, for in its course we celebrate the victory of many holy martyrs, as we begin to see even today on the second day of Christmas. There is Stephen, whose holy diaconal witness to Christ, even at the cost of his life, is described by the Evangelist in downright Christic terms. Then we have the feast of the beloved disciple, who may or may not have died in bloody martyrdom, but whose whole life and episcopal ministry was a martyrdom for his beloved Lord. Then we have Childermas, on which we remember the heavenly reward of the children who suffered at the hands of a self-absorbed despot. After that, we get to celebrate the twelfth century witness of the holy bishop of Canterbury, Thomas à Becket, a man whose life, at once human and holy, and whose violent murder at the hands of men who despised both the Work of God (the Liturgy-in this case, Vespers) and the workers of God (in this case, the bishop) cannot help but move the Christian even eight centuries later. Two days after that we get the feast of St. Sylvester, who did not die a martyr in the classic sense, but much of whose life saw great persecutions of the Church in the days before its toleration with the Edict of Milan. And the Octave culminates in the observance of the first blood spilled for our redemption (for Mary shed none herself at the birth of her Son) namely, that of our Lord Himself at His circumcision.

It is a hard road that Jesus came to earth to travel, a hard and lonely way. For ultimately it is the way of the Cross. And His life, death. and resurrection (these things are really a singular Paschal mystery) is lived out in the lives of His members, even today. Our way, too, is the way of the cross, and ours is His victory. We are walking examples of the reality that Christ makes all things new, whether or not we feel it. For our lives are now patterned after Him, the New Man Who daily comes forth and rises in our life and confession and witness, no matter what end we might meet. The life of Christ is also the story of the life of His mystical Body, and each member thereof. Let this ocvate serve in part to help you meditate upon this truth in Christ.

the Christmas Eve Service

2011-12-25T08:58:00.002-05:00

Last night we had a Christmas Eve Service at Luther Memorial. It was very nice. There were hymns, readings, more hymns, more readings, and some good preaching. I was a bit disappointed when I sat down and then looked up at the altar, and didn't see a chalice veil there. I was sort of expecting the Mass. But it's really no one's fault but mine for this surprise, and disappointment. Nowhere in the church literature did it claim Christmas Eve would be a Eucharist. What it said in the schedule, looking back, was "Christmas Eve Service" and I let it get into my head that it would be the Mass. When you think about it, that phrase Christmas Eve Service is really just shy of one word that would have signified, in modern LC-MS parlance, that there would be the Eucharist, namely, Christmas Divine Service. You see where I'm driving? My mind probably saw "Christmas Eve Service" and read into it "Christmas Eve Divine Service."

Again, I don't blame anyone at Luther Memorial. However, this all points to a couple of notions. One is that it would have been more clear and explicit if the schedule would have said something like, "Christmas Eve Lessons and Carols." But another thought regards the ambiguity of the term Divine Service. The phrase Divine Service, as I say, has come to mean in modern LC-MS parlance the Holy Mass. I suppose this started with Lutheran Worship's use of the term for its Mass orders back in the 1980s. In fact, however, it is worth pointing out that Divine Service does not imply the Mass. It implies public worship. It would be more accurate to say something like Chief Divine Service if you wanted to signify the use of the Holy Mass, which of course begins to beg the question of why we think we must always add more words to make something clearer.

There is another solution. Namely, there is a certain practical genius in the practice of using the word "Mass." For in that case there would have been no mistake. That is, one look at the church's schedule would tell you that one any given occasion you will either have the Mass, or you won't.

On another note, if modern Roman Catholic practice undervalues and under-utilizes noneucharistic aspects of the Church's liturgical tradition, like the Divine Office, modern Lutheran practice undervalues the Mass, and under-utilizes the Church Year's opportunities for celebrating the Mass. This is just the way it is. Many of my friends prefer to look at the glass being half full, and speak of how things have improved, etc. I don't deny that, but I also see it getting worse. How can both be true? I don't know, but it should alarm us. I think modern Missouri has become a "big tent" and you can see in it whatever you want to see. It's like a Rorschach test. But the test doesn't determine whether one is an optimist or a pessimist, like some claim. Rather, it determines what it is on which you are choosing to focus, and maybe whether you are being a realist or a positivist.

None of this is to deny, mind you, that I'm better off now than I was with the incompetence and false teaching at a former church. However, I can't go through life merely contenting myself with the thought that, at least this isn't as bad as that over there.

merry christmas

2011-12-24T22:49:00.000-05:00

Milad Majid

Joyeux Noël

Gëzuar Krishtlindjet

Feliz Navidad

Gaudete! Christus natus est.

Christmas Tree with Dorian

2011-12-24T22:45:00.000-05:00

This is our Christmas tree. In years past we used artificial trees, since a real one would not have coexisted very well with our cats. Oddly, they had a habit of attacking the tree anyway. This year I decided to try a real one. I felt I knew Dorian well enough by now to know that he wouldn't be too freaked out by a real tree. So a few days ago I went to a Christmas tree lot downtown with my friend Mike. We went to the lot on Van Buren & Kilbourn, across from the cathedral. The guy didn't have many trees left; I told him I was interested in a small one, one that would fit a small apartment. He showed me the smallest one he had left, and it too was bigger than what I wanted. So he offered to cut off a portion and give me a deal on the price. I said, cool, and he pulled out a chainsaw, and cut off a whole section from the bottom, and even tied the tree to the top of the car for me. Very helpful and friendly man.

I am really loving this tree. I love the scent it gives the place, and I love the way it looks, with all of Ruth's decorations (some of which are her own origami ornaments). Ruth has been feeding it water every day or so, and Dorian loves to lay right behind it. I suppose he thinks he is in his own forest, or perhaps just a garden. I think we'll do the same next year.

a Christmas Song from the Holy Land

2011-12-24T17:02:00.000-05:00

An Arabic-Syriac Christmas song.

Bruce Springsteen 'Merry Christmas Baby'

2011-12-24T09:35:00.000-05:00

Eucharistic Implications of the O Antiphons

2011-12-24T00:10:00.000-05:00

The liturgy is filled with implications that we too often fail fully to appreciate. So it is worth meditating upon the liturgy of the Church, and praying that we may gain a fuller view of what it is teaching us. Through the Church's liturgical tradition, there is always more that God would show us of His wondrous love for us in Christ. Let us recall that while the liturgy as such is not divinely inspired, it is filled with God's creative Word. And so Saint Benedict calls it the Work of God. It is fitting to pray, in other words, that God would open our eyes, that we may see the wondrous things in the liturgy (Ps 119).

And so one thought that strikes me lately is in regard to the increased popularity in recent years of the O Antiphons, that is, the proper Magnificat antiphons for the seven days that lead up to the holy Vigil of Christmas. It is a fine custom to celebrate the Divine Office of Vespers, and to use these venerable antiphons; yet it is valuable to consider what the Divine Office, and in this case particularly the O Antiphons, might be assuming about our liturgical life. What is assumed in the Divine Office, including the O Antiphons, and indeed is an essential key to fully appreciating the Office, and the Antiphons, is the regular celebration of the Holy Eucharist.

In the final week before Christmas Eve, the Church focuses more intently on preparing for the coming celebration of the birth of the Theanthropos, the God-man, and does so, for example, by praying for His advent among us in the Magnificat antiphons, each one calling Him by a different name, and crying out for His presence. Veni, Come. Christ's coming in the world is always an intersecting of this world and the cosmic reality wherein Christ holds all of creation, and all of history, in His hand. Interestingly, we have come to view the final coming of Christ as a parousia, which connotes for many a glorious coming of Christ on the last day, but really it would be better to convert our thinking around, and see that in fact every coming of Christ is a parousia, a making Himself personally present in this world, which is a gracious and comforting presence for those buried by baptism into His death, and fearfully damning to those not ready for it. He comes to judge, but for the Christian covered by the blood of the Lamb that judgement is a gracious sentence. He came into the world about two millennia ago, assuming our human nature, and became man. He will also come again in glory at the close of this world. However, there is another coming of Christ. Namely, His coming, in the flesh, in the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, in which the Christian is united with Him sacramentally. This also is Christ's Parousia among us. This, the celebration of the venerable Eucharist, is the fulfillment among us, in real time, of the prophecy that Christ is Emmanuel, God with us. Indeed, the seventh of the O Antiphons calls upon Christ as Emmanuel.

It is well worth meditating upon the O Antiphons in detail, but it is also worth stepping back, and gaining an appreciation for what we are confessing in them when viewed together. This comes out more clearly when they are read in the Latin. For there we see that the O Antiphons are designed in such a way so that the first letter (after the O) of each antiphon is part of an acrostic, read backwards, which spells Ero Cras, Tomorrow I shall come. Admittedly, for those who follow the English medieval custom of adding an eighth antiphon in honor of the Virgin Mary, the acrostic will spell Vero Cras, Truly tomorrow, which is only slightly different. What is this but a confession that on Christmas, which is fast upon us, the Church celebrates the solemn and joyful mystery of the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ among us. All that we ask for in the O Antiphons comes about in the celebration of the Christmas Mass. Christ, our Wisdom incarnate, comes to teach us what we need to know of Him. Christ, the Adonai, comes to us, that is, our Redemption draws near, the One Who saves us by stretching out His arms on the cross and bringing the fruit of His suffering to us. Christ, the Root of Jesse, Who has become for us the tree of life, comes to deliver us. Christ, the Key of David, comes in apocalyptic authority, and opens the kingdom of heaven to us right here and now. Christ, the Dayspring, comes and enlightens the darkness of our hearts with His good gifts. Christ, the King, comes to bring salvation to us. And indeed, Christ, our Emmanuel, proves Himself to be God Who is there for us. He is with us. All of this is fulfilled in the Holy Mass, where we hear our Shepherd's voice, and are united with Him personally in the most venerable Eucharist.

There are Lutheran churches that confess these things, with the revival of the O Antiphons, and yet will not have the Sacrament on Christmas because it falls on a non-communion Sunday. The praying of the O Antiphons, like the praying of the Divine Office in general, assumes and can only be fully appreciated in light of the regular and frequent celebration of the Holy Mass. We implore Christ to come to us. And this is not a hopeless cry, but a cry of faith, for all the while we are also confessing that He will come to us. And then He does. Let us not make of the liturgy a lie, but a confession of the true vitality of the sacramental life of our church.

freight train

2011-12-22T08:08:00.002-05:00

http://youtu.be/mTq3zu61ZMg

Lulu coupon for Dec 21st

2011-12-21T07:58:00.000-05:00

If you buy a book today at Lulu.com, you can get a second one at 50% off by using this code at checkout:

21DEC

Shortning Bread on three harmonicas

2011-12-21T07:52:00.001-05:00

The other night I saw Lil Rev, Steve Cohen, and Jim Liban down the block at Linnemans. A great show, as one might imagine. Here is a little taste. (This particular video is from the show they did a few months ago, which was also a great show.)

Lulu coupon for december 20th

2011-12-20T07:49:00.000-05:00

If you make a purchase today and use this code at checkout:

20DEC

you will get 30% off hardcovers. Do it. You won't regret it.

santa cycle rampage

2011-12-19T22:38:00.001-05:00

If you were out and about in the city on Saturday, you too may have seen the army of Santas on their bicycles. It's at the same time one of the many expressions of Milwaukee's bicyle culture and one of the many signs that you are in Milwaukee at Christmas time. Admittedly, the Santa Cycle Rampage can be found in other cities as well. But this one is surely the best, and I say that for two reasons. 1. The people involved are the Milwaukeeest people of all the Santa Cycle Rampages. And 2. the Santa riders are riding through Milwaukee, which, let's face it, is hands down the Milwaukeeest place of all. So there's just no comparison. Convinced yet?
Check this link for one writer's take on the event, along with some great pictures. And while you're at it, take note of the picture of the beer hall at my brewery.

And here is a video of the santa cycle ride from a couple of years ago:

God is born

2011-12-19T19:55:00.001-05:00

A now famous video by an imam, in which he decries Christmas as the observance of God being born on December 25th, has been well attacked and picked apart in the Christian blog world. I'd like to respond to what one person said over at bureaucrat Paul McCain's blog. (McCain and I have similar policies about allowing each other to participate in our blogs; nevertheless, sometimes I see something there that is worthy of discussion here.) The comment first proclaimed that the Imam is wrong, and at that point I thought, okay, he's going to point out that Christmas does not imply that Christ was born on this very date. But no, his point, it turns out, was that what was so fundamentally wrong with the Imam's diatribe is the view that Christians believe that God was born. This is an apt occasion, therefore, to make the point that indeed, there is nothing wrong with saying that God was born. On this point the Imam got the Christian message right. It is right and Christian to say that God was born.

Now of course we must add that such phraseology can be misunderstood. In a similar way, I know that the repulsion to the practice of referring to the Virgin Mary as the Mother of God can be divided between those who are true believing Nestorians on the one hand and those who misunderstand the intent of the phrase on the other.

It is vitally important, from a christological perspective, to be able to say that the One Who was born of the Virgin, the One Who allowed Himself to be held, first in a womb, and then in the arms of humans, and ultimately, to be carried and lifted up by the cruel nails and harsh wood of the cross, and finally held again in the arms of His holy mother, this man Who has assumed our flesh, is also the One Who made the world, and holds the universe; He, the man Jesus, is Himself God, the Pantocrator, the Uncreated Angel of Great Counsel Who goes ahead of us and fights His own battles and announces His own Message of victory. For He is the Message, and He is our Victory. God became man, and dwelt among us. Indeed, He still dwells among us in the Holy Eucharist. The liturgy is Good News, but not merely in some informational way; it is the holy ground of God's personal advent among His beloved people. What if all Christians were to behave in church as reverently as Muslims are reputed to conduct themselves at prayer? The reality of the Christian mystery might sink in and be taken more seriously by those within and without.

I think this particular Imam (I have not figured out his name) gets it, at least to some degree, and one of the lessons to be drawn from the fact that an Imam recognizes one of our major points of doctrine is that seeing it or "getting it" does not guarantee faith, but can be a great place in which to begin to really talk, unlike the foggy, vacuous dialogue promoted by the Christian theologians whose jello-like doctrine gets less real the more they talk.

when does Christmas begin and end?

2011-12-18T23:02:00.000-05:00

Lulu, the company that is facilitating my self-publishing efforts, is doing a series of promotional coupons which employs the theme of the twelve days of Christmas. That is, a different coupon is being offered each day for twelve days. I am glad to take advantage of this, and promote these coupons at my blog, etc. But the problem is that these twelve days of coupons for the twelve days of Christmas began a few days ago, and will end on Christmas Day. This confusion is found not only at Lulu, but really all over our American culture. I recall one year seeing Jimmy Falon's late night show, where the same thing happened; he did a comedy bit in which a different ugly Christmas sweater was highlighted for each of the twelve days of Christmas, and sure enough, those twelve days were the days leading up to Christmas. As I say, this seems to be the common view in secular American culture.

It just goes to show that the world's view or take on matters, even when it intersects in superficial ways with the Church's perspective, is skewed; it is off the mark. The accent is wrong, just by a little, but enough to show that it is incapable of truly appreciating the spiritual significance of these observances.

So let us be clear. We are in the season of Advent. It is a fasting season, a penitential season, though at the same time a season in which we look towards and prepare for the Christmas festivities. The two seasons, Advent and Christmas, are interrelated, interdependent, and interlocking; and yet each is distinct.

Advent culminates in a special way with its final eight days. That is, the 17th through the 23rd of December are days in which we cry out for the coming of our Lord among us, and look forward to the celebration of His holy birth. We do so, eg., with a special set of antiphons for the Magnificat at Vespers called the O Antiphons. In a sense this week of prayerful anticipation of the coming solemnity is like the novena of days in which the Church anticipates the coming of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost. Then, the final day of Advent is the 24th, ie., the Vigil of the Nativity of Our Lord. That is traditionally one of the so-called fish days, ie., it is a day in which Christians traditionally abstain from the meat of all land animals and fowl, making final preparations for the festive Christmas celebration in prayerful penitence.

Then, at midnight, as though we cannot wait any longer for the festivities to officially begin, and to mark the traditional nocturnal timing of the holy event, the Church begins her season of Christmas with the Holy Mass, the first of three proper masses that day. Christmas continues with a full octave, and since the next season doesn't begin until the 6th of January, there are really twelve full days of the holy and festive season of Christmas, from the 25th of December through the Twelfth Night, which is on the 5th of January.

Many things could be said of those twelve days, and how some take on their own liturgical character, etc. And I do not know if I will be able to get to any of that here this year, due to the fact that so much of my energy during the week is taken up with my job. But I did want to clarify and remind the general readership that Christmas does not culminate on the 25th. It only begins on that day. Let us celebrate the twelve days of Christmas, with devotions and festivities in our families, and with liturgy and prayer in the church, and thus once again be a positive example for the culture around us.

communion hymns

2011-12-18T20:22:00.002-05:00

I suggest that for the "communion hymns," ie., the hymns sung by the congregation during the Holy Communion at Mass, that it would be appropriate and make the most sense to sing hymns that are actually communion hymns, ie., hymns about and in praise of the Blessed Sacrament. Seems logical enough. And it's not as though we suffer from a lack of such hymns in our language. There is even a whole section of hymns in Lutheran Service Book devoted specifically to this subject. Several of them are actually worthy of being used in the Church.

And yet, in my experience in Lutheran churches it is virtually never the case that the hymns during Communion are reserved for singing about the venerable Eucharist. It seems far more common for the communion time to be peppered with hymns directed or loosely about the sermon theme of the day, or hymns of praise, or hymns on the doctrine of justification, or a combination of the above. Pastors who are slightly more eucharistically conscious will throw in maybe one eucharistic hymn, maybe two, usually just one. At my own parish it seems to be usually the second hymn at communion. I attended Mass recently at another church where there was not one eucharistic hymn; all the hymns during Communion dealt with the theme of the day. This is not to pick on any one congregation or pastor, for it seems to be a matter, rather, of the current culture of our church.

I challenge the reader, both lay and clergy, to take this as an opportunity to think on this issue. And then think some more. I know it is longstanding custom to sing a very limited number of eucharistic hymns, if any, during the celebration of the Eucharist. But ponder what is going on. Meditate upon the holy mystery that is taking place during that time. The tradition of the Church has given us some great hymns for this purpose. If we end up singing them more often than we have been accustomed to singing them, the awful consequence will be that we will actually get to know them better. They will come to occupy a deeper place in our hearts. And they will prove to be a great aid to our devotion and worship. They would help make of that moment more than the utilitarian "distribution" time, for we might actually, as a church, come to see that time as a Holy Communion with Christ our Immanuel, our Eucharistic Lord.

Lulu coupon for dec 18th

2011-12-18T09:15:00.001-05:00

If you purchase a book today at Lulu.com, enter this code at checkout:

18DEC

and you will get 15% off today's order.

Consider these titles:

Lord, Teach Us To Pray (there are many books by this title-I recommend the one by me)
The Essential Lutheran Prayer Book

Lulu coupon for Dec 17th

2011-12-17T10:04:00.000-05:00

If you make a purchase today at Lulu, use this code at checkout:

17DEC

and you will get free ground shipping.

Among the many things you can find at LULU.com, let me highlight a few books which I recommend for your consideration.

Lord, Teach Us To Pray.

This is a Lutheran prayer book, with several essential prayers and devotions for the young, for the family, and really for anyone. You can get it three ways. (Click below for links.)
hardcover
paperback
digital download

The Essential Lutheran Prayer Book.
This is like the one above, but also have a lot of prayer in Latin as well as English. Excellent for students, and all who want to learn many of our prayers in Latin. This book comes in three designs:
1. Black

hardcover
paperback
digital download

2. White

hardcover
paperback
digital download

3. with a photo of the sunrise (taken at Milwaukee's lakefront in November of last year)

hardcover
paperback
digital download

Arabic Christmas hymn

2011-12-17T09:09:00.002-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvjiVam2HO4

a thought on the page shuffling church

2011-12-04T20:08:00.000-05:00

It is to engage in a silly euphemism to refer to the guitar, amp, and drum-set led worship of some churches as "diverse worship."  The present reflection, however, is not about those churches. Rather, I suggest that where the term "diverse worship" might just as well fit is in the many churches, school chapels, etc., where the prevailing practice is to make use of the diversity of mass forms within the same book, and in today's LC-MS that tends to mean the much hyped Lutheran Service Book.
But it is always worth assessing the wisdom of what one is doing; it is always good for a church to ask itself not merely whether it is achieving its own goals, but whether it is being blind to what it is missing by going with this diverse approach to worship. Is there a wisdom to the ways of our church's liturgical past, which we fail even to consider? Maybe we failed fully to appreciate the wisdom of nondiverse worship even when it was our prevailing practice (which was not all that long ago). Nevertheless, as I say, it is always worth asking these questions.

One consideration I would suggest is that when a church uses two or more of the mass forms in LSB, and it seems increasingly the case that churches are using three to five of these masses, the church is driving further down the road away from realizing its own heritage of being the praying Church (ecclesia orans).  Now why would I say such a thing? Let me clarify that I don't mean that when a congregation uses the Common Service alongside the inventions of Hillert, and Starke, et alia, in some cases spread out throughout the year and in other cases all within the same month or several weeks, that the people are not in some way praying the liturgy, just that the degree to which the liturgy is truly prayed is necessarily lessened, and our growth in the way of being the praying Church is necessarily retarded. This is because the people are much less likely to know, deep down, the words of the liturgy on any given Sunday. They are less likely to know it, and they are ipso facto less likely to love it, deep down in their heart. Sure, they enjoy it. They have been told it is a good thing; and besides, some of the tunes in these newer masses are rather catchy, at least to women. Yet enjoyment is not the same as the place the liturgy could have in the hearts of the faithful if it were known the way it once was.  You may think your people do know and love it just fine. After all, you have been at this since 2006. As I say, it is always worth reconsidering things you have come to assume.

No, instead of embracing our heritage and nature as ecclesia orans, we have become ecclesia legens, the reading Church. Just look around in church next time you are at Mass, and think about what is happening. Let's say you have been using Divine Service "Setting" 2 for a few weeks, and today all of a sudden you turn to the first page of the worship handout and learn that today you are going to use Divine Service "setting" 4. How many people will be dependant on keeping the book in their hands? In fact, it is my contention that this is not even a matter of people being a bit confused the first Sunday that such a switch happens, but that it has simply become the unthinking custom among us, pretty much year round, to keep the book in our hands, and to be a page flipping church. We look down at the book in our hands, replete with sloppily worded footnotes reminding us that the Church once got to use the word "Catholic," and we look down at the handout, and notice its quirky font patterns and occasional typos, or maybe its erudite commentary on the liturgy we are supposed to be busy celebrating and praying. We don't get to look up anymore.

There is, it is worth noting, rich diversity inherent in the Church's liturgical tradition, and I mean even within a single rite, or ritual use, such as, say, the Lutheran Common Service tradition. This happens, first of all, with the change in propers each Sunday and feast, and it also happens with variations of musical usage. But the modern Lutheran Church has given in to the diversity even of the texts and order of the ordinary parts of the Mass.  And a full appreciation of the diversity built into the Church's liturgy is one of the casualties of the confused sort of diversity we have come to embrace.

Despite all of the complaints I have against the modern Roman Rite (and I have virtually nothing positive to say of it), one thing, specially relative to the present topic, is worthy of comment. And it has especially come to light in the past week or so, as the new English translation of the Mass is being set in place throughout the English speaking parts of the Roman Catholic world. Namely, one type of diversity you will not see in the Roman Rite (except by priests who are openly defying their own ecclesial authorities) is that of the texts of the mass itself. After the revision of the English translation had been worked on, argued over, and finally implemented, it is simply understood that this is now the text of the prayers. That doesn't mean it will be equally liked by everyone; in fact, it is kind of funny to read some of the reactions. Consider one woman's reaction after experiencing the new translation for all of one week (as reported in this AP story) :

Maribeth Lynch, 51, a publisher from the Milwaukee suburb of Elm Grove, said she was "distraught" over the changes and would refuse to "learn the damn prayers." "It's ridiculous. I've been a Catholic for 50 years, and why would they make such stupid changes? They're word changes. They're semantics," she said. "It's confusion. All it's doing is causing confusion," she said. "You want to go to church and be confused?"

Don't get me wrong. The new translation is, in my view, a marked improvement, and I am happy to see it in place. Hopefully Mrs. Lynch and others like her will acclimate to it. The reason I highlight the negative reaction to it is that it shows that one thing Catholics instinctively expect is consistency of the texts of the prayers of the Mass (It also goes to show that people -even modern Americans- are by nature traditionalist, though not always in a well informed way). Throughout the English speaking world, a Catholic can expect to hear Mass celebrated using the same prayers, verbatim, as back in his own home parish. On this count, the Roman Catholic Church has managed to preserve something that was once instinctively understood by Lutherans as well. Disunity of prayers within the same church is so foolish as to be unthinkable.

How much better would the spirit of worship be in our churches if we could pray the prayers, chants, canticles, responses, and hymns by heart. We would be able to set the book and the printouts down. We would be free, if we wish, to fold our hands in the classic manner, palm to palm, in the spirit of prayer and reverence. We would be free to stop reading as though we were at a symposium or in a lecture hall, and to lift our eyes off the literature in front of us, and look up. Hopefully, what most Lutherans would then see, and maybe rediscover, are the sacred mysteries being reverently celebrated in sacred space, around sacred furniture, and amidst sacred art. We might actually notice the christological symbolism on the back of the celebrant's chasuble (like the Y shaped cross). We might even see the crucifix, reminding us that it is Christ's redemption that is being lavished on us. We would see the altar, the great symbol of Christ our Sacrifice, and ponder that right here and now, in the Holy Mass, we are blessed to look up, for Christ our Redemption is drawing near.

why & how I respect the altar rail

2011-11-27T13:27:00.170-05:00

The altar rail is used by many good Lutherans as a place on which to rest their hands and arms, a crutch to help them as they kneel down, a stable surface on which to lean, and in the case of children it is sometimes used as a device on which to hang their arms like a monkey. Every case is different; it does no good to stereotype or judge. The way you choose to conduct yourself, and allow your children to conduct themselves, at the altar is your decision. Seriously. It's no skin off my nose. What I would like to do, however, is share with you my own thinking on the altar rail, and why it is that I behave the way I do around it.

The altar rail is not really meant to be a handy surface for our hands or elbows. Rather, it is a sacred object meant for sacred use. It is an extension of the altar itself. Tradition would have us treat it as we would the altar because liturgically speaking, it is, in fact, an extension of it. In this sense one may say that he has received communion at the altar. When we learn to view the altar rail as an extension of the altar we begin to understand why, in former ages, the altar rail would be dressed, or we might say vested, with a special linen reserved for this purpose. It is worth reminding ourselves also that the altar, and therefore also the altar rail, is a symbol of Christ Himself, our Sacrifice for sin. Seeing the altar rail this way is reason enough to approach it with reverence, and refrain from touching it as much as possible.

But there is another reason, and it is related to the other reason why the altar rail was traditionally covered with a linen. It was a way of helping to catch any particle of the Host or drop of the Precious Blood of Christ which may happen to fall in the course of the Communion. This linen is called the communion cloth, or the houseling cloth, and there is a rich history of its careful and reverent use in Lutheran, Roman Catholic, and Episcopal churches. Whether your church still uses this cloth, or gave it up decades ago, or the practice was never known in your parts, this tradition points us toward another reason for the traditional reverence with which the Christian approaches and behaves around the altar rail, namely, so as not to get in the way of its function of catching and holding particles of the Blessed Sacrament until the ministers of the Eucharist can tend to them. Perhaps you are thinking: surely it is quite rare that a particle of the sacred Host would fall onto the altar rail. Perhaps you are even a pastor and are thinking: I have never seen this happen. I am not here to dream up far fetched scenarios, and draw out theologies around them. My point is that if a particle of the Host were to fall, or if a drop of the Precious Blood were to fall, it would be better for it to fall unto the altar rail than onto your sleeve, or your little nephew's neck.

Both reverence for the altar rail as an extension of the altar and the sense of awe and care with which the Christian conducts himself around the Sacred Species impel me to behave a certain way at the altar rail. In particular, I have trained myself to kneel down at the rail without using the rail as an aid. I make sure that I kneel with good posture, with my hands held before me, palm to palm, fingers extended, not touching the rail. And after I have received Holy Communion and have been dismissed, I rise, again, without touching the rail, turn, and return to my place. I am not sure I have touched an altar rail in years, except in caring for the church as deacon at my former congregation.

Now clearly the aged and those with weak knees, etc., will have much more difficulty doing likewise. I do think that it would be good if we fostered this sort of reverence once again for the altar rail, and assisted those who might want to kneel but may need help in doing so.

I tend to act as though that rail were not even there. Now it is worth noting, however, that the rail also serves a very visual purpose. Namely, it helps remind us that there is a holy and sacred space at the altar. This is why we call it the sanctuary. The rail sort of marks this space. Not just anyone may approach the altar, and manhandle the Sacrament, all in the name of Christian freedom. That's not how the holy things, the mysteries of God are given good stewardship. Frankly, the rail also reminds us that the Holy Communion is closed to those outside of Christ's fellowship. There is, in other words, a boundary around the altar, so to speak. And those of us who are called to this Most Holy Sacrament are in holy communion with the sacramental Body of Christ, yet also with the ecclesial, or mystical Body of Christ (not merely with the number of those we see there on Sunday morning). And in some churches the rail is actually curved, which helps to remind us that the fellowship of the altar extends all the way around that altar, so to speak; that is, it encompasses the goodly fellowship of the saints whom we see only with the eyes of faith.

Let all these considerations be for you food for thought as you approach the altar next Lord's Day.

why I kneel before the eucharist

2011-11-20T21:41:00.023-05:00

Whether at my own new home congregation, or really any other church I might visit, I would not be surprised if some people see that strange guy in the next pew and wonder at his unusual practice. They might even ask themselves questions like these, Why is he kneeling on the floor? or, Is he Catholic? or, Does he think he is more pious than everyone else? or, Is he trying to draw attention to himself? or maybe, Is he worshipping bread? These are good questions, and so I'd like to address the general concern behind them by reflecting briefly on exactly why it is that I kneel in church.

According to Lutheran doctrine, doctrine that is rock solid and stands firm against all opposition because it derives from the Word of Christ Himself, the bread of the Lord's Supper is the very Body of Christ, and the wine of the Supper is the very Blood of Christ. To be clear, when I say "of the Lord's Supper," what I mean is the valid celebrations of the Holy Eucharist, not the documented cases of liturgical fraud perpetrated by so-called deacons and so-called vicars who think it is their place to play pastor. Let me also clarify that the reason Lutherans traditionally add the word "very" to such a statement is to signify that when we say "body" we actually mean Christ's own real body, His true flesh and blood. This doctrine cannot be emphasized enough in today's religious milieu, wherein Protestants, Roman Catholics, and even many Lutherans fail to appreciate what it is that Lutheran theology holds regarding the presence of Christ in the holy Eucharist.

When, for example, Lutheran theology speaks of the consecrated bread as bread, neither is it a denial of the presence of Christ's holy Body in the Sacrament nor does it imply a so-called consubstantiation. It is, rather, an insistence on taking every part of the Words of Christ's Testament seriously, and an understanding that there is no need to infer an annihilation of the physical elements that were placed upon the altar. I do fear, however, that too many Lutherans have been cheated out of being trained properly, by catechesis as well as by liturgical example, in the wonderful, awesome, and comforting reality of the presence of Christ's very body and blood in the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar, and so in many cases are actually harmed by hearing the Lutheran teachers in their life who tend only to speak of the consecrated bread, to the exclusion of it being the real Body of Christ in our midst.

Consider for a moment the genius of Luther's Little Catechism on the what of the Eucharist:

What is the Sacrament of the Altar?
It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, under the bread and wine, for us Christians to eat and to drink, instituted by Christ Himself.

Every part of that statement is important and meaningful, yet the very core statement by which it begins, before all the commas, is true in and of itself. It is true that the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament are sub pane et vino (as it says in the Catechism), yet if one cannot bring himself simply to say of what is in the hand of the celebrant, after the Words of Consecration have been spoken, that it is the very Body of Christ, then he has yet to appreciate the eucharistic realism of Lutheran doctrine. That is, he has yet to appreciate the reality of what is going on in his midst. Nor does Luther in this brief definition feel the need to resort to any of the handy formulae to which we have become so accustomed, like the ubiquitous prepositionally plentiful formula in, with, and under, though some feel it to be sine qua non to the Lutheran understanding of the Sacrament.

In fact, while I don't absolutely condemn them, it is worth noting here that conceptions such as the spatial prepositions in, with, and under are understood by Luther (eg., the Great Confession of 1528) and the Lutheran Confessions (Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration VII) to be inferior to the plain identification language of Christ's own testament. Consider, eg., this riff in the Great Confession:

Even if nothing but bread and wine were present in the Supper, and yet I tried, simply for my own satisfaction, to express the thought that Christ's body is in the bread, I still could not say anything in a more certain, simpler, and clearer way than, "Take, eat, this is my body." For if the text read, "Take, eat, in the bread is my body," or, "With the bread is my body," or "Under the bread is my body," it would immediately begin to rain, hail, and snow a storm of fanatics crying, "You see! do you hear that? Christ does not say, 'This bread is my body,' but, 'In the bread, or with the bread, or under the bread is my body!'" And they would cry, "Oh, how gladly we would believe if he had said, 'This is my body;' this would have been distinct and clear. But he actually says, 'In the bread, with the bread, under the bread, so it does not follow that his body is present." Thus a thousand evasions and glosses would have been devised over the words "in, with, and under," no doubt with greater plausibility and less chance of stopping it than now. (306)

Luther would have us recognize with the eyes of faith, first of all, the radical and wonderful reality that in the Blessed Sacrament the real Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are present. His Body and Blood are present not merely when we have engaged in all of the requisite action of the sacrament, but by His Word spoken by His called and ordained Minister over the bread and wine in the eucharistic celebration. The Words which bring about that which they declare are Christ's. The priest and celebrant of the Sacrament is Christ. So no, it is not the celebrant's act of speaking the words that makes the Sacrament, nor his faith, nor our faith, but Christ's own testament and Word, which He declares in our midst through the mouth of His servant, and by that Word and testament (made effective like all testaments must be, ie., by the death of the one who gave it), His real flesh and blood are present, right there on the altar.

Now before proceeding, let me emphasize that the stark terms by which I describe the Presence of Christ in the Sacrament are intentional and chosen with due consideration. But does this not mean that the Lutherans believe in a sort of cannibalism? No. For that notion implies a mode of Christ's presence by which He is present in a circumscribed manner, and is gradually eaten up, part after part (as though one person takes this part of Christ's arm, and the next takes His little finger, etc.). Yet we have always taught, with Thomas Aquinas and all of churchly tradition, that Christ's holy Body is given out, in each particle, to the first as to the millionth. He gives His all to each one. While He is consumed by the communicant, yet His presence, like the burning bush of old, is never consumed. As Luther said to Zwingli at Marburg in 1529, "God is above all mathematics." Or as we confess in the great seventeenth century hymn by Johann Franck:

Human reason, though it ponder,
Cannot fathom this great wonder
That Christ's Body e'er remaineth
Though it countless souls sustaineth

And yet we need not shy away from realistic terminology in order to protect ourselves from the accusations of a capernaitic or cannibalistic eating. These charges are baseless, and we need not buy into their premise. So Luther, for example, in his Great Confession of 1528, is bold to assert that the communicant tears Christ's Body with teeth and tongue:

Therefore, it is entirely correct to say, if one points to the bread, “This is Christ’s body,” and whoever sees the bread sees Christ’s body, as John says that he saw the Holy Spirit when he saw the dove, as we have heard. Thus also it is correct to say, “He who takes hold of this bread, takes hold of Christ’s body; and he who eats this bread, eats Christ’s body; he who crushes this bread with teeth or tongue, crushes with teeth or tongue the body of Christ.” And yet it remains absolutely true that no one sees or grasps or eats or chews Christ’s body in the way he visibly sees and chews any other flesh. What one does to the bread is rightly and properly attributed to the body of Christ by virtue of the sacramental union.

Luther did not invent this realism; we see great precedent for it. First, of course, I would argue that we have Christ's own preaching, given to us by the beloved disciple, in his sixth chapter, where Jesus is bold to use an earthy, realistic verb like trogein, which gives the picture of chewing and masticating. I bring this up, knowing that John six, and its place in a theology of the eucharist, is much controverted among Lutherans, and will be dismissed out of hand by many. We also have a long tradition of theological and devotional testimony, stretching from the early church through the medieval age. Take, for example, Berengar's often forgotten first confession of 1059, which speaks of the body of Christ being chewed by the teeth of the faithful. Or take these words of St. John Chrysostom from the fourth century:

Wherefore this also Christ hath done, to lead us to a closer friendship, and to show his love for us; he hath given to those who desire him not only to see him, but even to touch, and eat him, and fix their teeth in his flesh, and to embrace him, and satisfy all their love. (quoted in Alvin F. Kimel's article, "Eating Christ", Pro Ecclesia Vol. XIII, no.1)

Or take this prayer to the eucharistic Lord, ie, the Sacred Species after the consecration:

Hail forever, most holy flesh of Christ, before all else and above all else the highest sweetness! Hail forever, heavenly drink, before all else and above all else the highest sweetness! (a medieval prayer, from the Sarum Missal, quoted in Kimel's article as above)

And despite how some mistakenly use a passage in the Formula of Concord as a statement against the stark realism of Luther's Great Confession as being dangerously capernaitic, we must make clear that the Formula of Concord actually perpetuates this realism by its full endorsement of the Great Confession:

Now, as regards the various imaginary reasons and futile counter-arguments of the Sacramentarians concerning the essential and natural attributes of a human body, concerning the ascension of Christ, concerning His departure from this world, and such like, inasmuch as these have one and all been refuted thoroughly and in detail, from God's Word, by Dr. Luther in his controversial writings: Against the Heavenly Prophets, That These Words "This Is My Body" Still Stand Firm, likewise in his Large and Small Confession Concerning the Holy Supper, and in other of his writings, and inasmuch as since his death nothing new has been advanced by the factious spirits, we would for the sake of brevity have the Christian reader directed to them and have referred to them. etc.

Many Lutherans, unfortunately, give in to the notion that Luther was guilty of a crass capernaitic understanding, and so they come up with ways to soften his eucharistic realism, claiming, for example, that we may speak of Christ's body in the Sacrament but not His flesh, or that it is in no way accurate to speak of Christ being physically present, but rather that He is substantially present. While a term like physical can be misleading, if it is not qualified by pointing out that Christ's presence in the Supper is not of the same local, or circumscribed mode as is my body in this room right now, nevertheless, using such a term as physical not only cannot be ruled out per se, but can actually be helpful, especially over against the protestant gnostic worldview that is all around us today. Further, while one can certainly argue that the term substance is accurate and even preferable, if properly understood, it too can be misleading, for it can actually lead to a softening of the reality of Christ's presence in the minds of our people.

As Dr. John Stephenson puts it in his article, "Reflections on the Appropriate Vessels for Consecrating and Distributing the Precious Blood of Christ" (LOGIA, January 1995),

Luther's consistent testimony that not the mere idea or substance of Christ's body but rather the "true, natural Body" itself is present in the Eucharist prompts one to deem it appropriate to label the real presence a "physical" presence, while making the qualification that the body naturally present is present in the definitive and not in the circumscriptive mode.

I find it unfortunate that popular LC-MS publications give in to just the sort of softened language which sets up, intentionally or not, a distancing from the realism of Luther's language. Take, for example, the 2010 CPH book, Lutheranism 101, which out of an admirable desire to clarify matters, ends up awkwardly distancing its position from language used by the Blessed Reformer, and taken over into the Confessions. On page 150 we read:

Yikes! Are Lutherans Cannibals?

Because Lutherans teach that Jesus is really present with his body and blood, they have been accused of cannibalism. Rest easy; it isn't true. A cannibal eats physical flesh with his teeth. While we teach that Jesus is bodily present, we do not teach that He is physically present. Things are physical when they take up space; we believe that Jesus is really present with His body and blood but in a mode that doesn't take up space. Can He do that? Yes!

It is all very admirable what the writer is here trying to do, but he ends up twisting himself in a knot to stay clear of the capernaitic position. Luther's realism is not capernaitic, and his contemporary opponents knew this. So all this twisting, in which, mind you, the writer unfortunately does a lot of relying on the spatial preposition "with" (an over-use of which is suspiciously Philippist) ends up unnecessarily leading us away from good earthy realist terms like flesh.

Even Pope Paul VI, a bona fide Thomist, in his encyclical Mysterium Fidei, says that in the Sacrament:

Christ, whole and entire, in His physical 'reality' is bodily present, although not in the same way that bodies are present in a given place.

The reality, then, is that in the Holy Mass, ie., in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, the true Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are present on the altar, on the paten, in the chalice, and in the pastor's hand. And as you approach the altar, He is there waiting to be joined with you in this great and mysterious way. Already, while you wait for the usher to get to your pew, there are people, your brothers and sisters in Christ, who are going back to their pew, bearing in their bodies the Eucharistic Lord. And then you get to the altar, and kneel down. The pastor walks toward you. His thoughts might be on what is doing. They might momentarily stray to things he sees around him, or what he said in the pulpit, or what he will do later. Nevertheless, the Lord Jesus Himself, in His sacred Body, is in the pastor's hand, and is being placed on your tongue. The real and precious Blood of Jesus is then given to you. Even as you get up, and walk back to your pew, He abides with you. In those moments you, and those around you, are veritable tabernacles of the presence of Christ in the venerable Eucharist. What could this be but holy ground?

Let us also note why it is that Christ makes Himself present in the Holy Supper. He does so not to be worshipped. In fact, He knows full well that in the Sacrament of the Altar He will be disregarded, even abused, by many in this world. He makes Himself present precisely for us. He became a man for us men and for our salvation. The same incarnational reality obtains in the Holy Supper. He comes to us in the Eucharist to bring to us that salvation which He earned in His bitter passion. He wants to deliver and serve it to us personally. In uniting Himself to the communicant in the Holy Supper, the baptized Christian finds the high point of his life in this world, and realizes his true identity as one whose soul is espoused to Christ. In that gift, that self-giving, Christ promises the forgiveness of our sins, and the gift of utter forgiveness leaves us with pure and true life itself, life in its fullness, and thus salvation. The unbeliever who receives this awesome and holy Presence, on the other hand, is confirmed in his unbelief; he is totally unprepared for such a gift, and can only be harmed by it.

Christ nowhere demands to be adored and worshipped in the Eucharist. It is not as though He has said, "At what time ye hear the sound of the sanctus bells, ye fall down and worship My presence the Blessed Sacrament." Those who make this point are quite right. He doesn't make such a demand. Our Christian brethren of past ages, and even today in other lands, however, faced with the awesome reality of the salvific gift of Christ's holy Body and precious Blood in the Sacrament, have preferred to approach the matter of their posture or comportment from a different perspective, namely, by the simple thought, Why would I not fall to my knees and adore Him here, where He has promised to be present?

And so, in traditional fashion, some of us will, even in twenty first century America, kneel down during the consecration, and for the entirety of the Communion. It is a good way to prepare oneself in prayer. It is a good way to remind oneself of what is happening. It is a good way to thank Him afterward. And it is a good witness.

In case anyone is tempted to think of this as an aping after Roman Catholic practice, let us set the record straight. Matters are not nearly so clear cut and easy to divide into the neat categories too many of us were taught by our teachers. On the one hand, Eucharistic adoration, though you may not see it much among your friends or in your own congregation, is truly at home in the Lutheran tradition. And on the other hand, the common Lutheran notions of the ritualism and reverence to a fault that will be found in Roman Catholic churches are really cute, but sadly naive. There are many Roman Catholic parishes today, and in some places virtually whole dioceses, where Roman Catholics are ridiculed by other Roman Catholics for daring to genuflect or kneel before the eucharist. They are mocked as "cookie worshippers." In terms of actual Catholicism on the ground (instead of, say, rumors, folklore, or centuries' old texts) what we see is that in many places Catholics (including some pastors and bishops) are repulsed and embarrased by traditionalist Catholics in a way reminiscent of the attitude of the Philippists of old, for whom adoration of the eucharist was artolatreia - bread worship. It does not, therefore, appear that the Mass is more devoutly celebrated among our adversaries than among us. So no, I am not copying the Roman Catholics when I kneel; rather, too many Roman catholics have become Philippist in the brave new post-conciliar age. I am daring not to go with them.

What is the Christian thing to do with the weaker brethren in your midst? We all know the answer to this. We are patient with them. We make allowances for them. Faced with the true presence of the Creator of all things, Who comes to me in the holy Eucharist, my heart and knees fail me. They are too weak to stand before Him. I am bold to approach, for He invites me. But I do so with awe and wonder. I cannot not kneel. And so now you know, dear friends, my reasons. Bear with me, even as we bear one another's burdens.

looking for help

2011-11-04T17:59:00.000-04:00

In my spare time, and with my presently limited resources, I have been searching for some texts, with no luck so far. So I thought I would throw this out there in case anyone might have an answer, or a good lead.

The Small Catechism of Martin Luther, as it has come down to us, includes a couple of sections which for various reasons are not included in the Small Catechism as it was published in the Book of Concord, and therefore I have found it very difficult to find the Latin texts of those parts. They are the following:

1. The three questions on The Office of the Keys:

What is the Office of the Keys?

Where is this written?

What do you believe according to these words?

2. The Christian Questions With Their Answers (for those who intend to go to the Sacrament)

Obviously, these texts in English come down to our use in the Missouri Synod most directly from their German antecedents. My hypothesis is that both of them also were in Latin use in the 16th and 17th centuries. And I want to find them. If anyone can help, I would be grateful.

Mad Men Picnic

2011-10-21T09:03:00.000-04:00

I've been watching Mad Men via NetFlix, and I had to laugh at what happens at the end of this scene. Notice with what care they handle their trash. No wonder America in those days had to trot out the Indian with the tear in his eye.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roREnVhd_og

message from another world

2011-10-20T07:42:00.000-04:00

Perhaps this weekend I'll be able to get back to a bit of blog writing. But for now I thought I'd share something I found at work. Lakefront Brewery's new warehouse and distribution facility is "new" to us, but had a former life. It used to be the Wilke Dairy Company. We are rehabbing it for our purposes. I still have memories of drinking Wilke milk as a child. Anyway, among the relics of the past is the Wilke packaging for butter by the pound. And when you open up one of the ends, on the inside flap you find the following:

TO THE HOUSEWIFE:
This butter is doubly protected, by parchment and by a paraffined carton, to insure its reaching your table with all the original flavor and quality. BE SURE TO KEEP IT IN BOTH UNTIL SERVED

Lakefront 88: Bridge Burner

2011-10-09T14:20:00.000-04:00

The Traditional Lutheran View of Mary's Virginity

2011-10-09T09:28:00.336-04:00

For the past few weeks Dr. Kenneth Wieting at Luther Memorial Chapel, in Shorewood, Wisconsin, has been teaching a class on the Epistle of St. James. It has been a wonderfully insightful study, and I have appreciated it very much. He very insistently teaches, however, that the James who penned this epistle is a brother of Jesus in the literal, narrow, modern, Western sense of brother, ie., that he and Jesus both issued from Mary's womb. The notion that Mary had only one Child, and remained a virgin all her life is, to Dr. Wieting, an unbiblical mariology that arises only several centuries later. I respectfully disagree, and would offer an alternative view.

In differing from the commonly accepted notion that Jesus had maternal siblings, I am not merely diverging from this or that eminent theologian, like David Scaer, but also from virtually all of modern Biblical scholarship. And I think that is actually a good note on which to begin this discussion. That is, despite the fact that the advocates of the view that Mary had other children base their argument upon a conviction that the New Testament and the earliest centuries of Christianity are on their side (a notion which is debatable), the first point which needs to be made is that their view is the modern one, and goes against millennia of churchly tradition.

My conviction is that the Blessed Virgin Mary was mother to precisely One, and that He displayed His divine nature even in the fetal stage of His earthly sojourn by preserving His mother's virginity. I did not come to this conviction first by exegetical study, nor by ante-nicene historical findings, nor by the theological value of such ideas (though something could be said in all three of these areas), but by the overwhelming weight of the Church's tradition. In view of the thoughtful and rigorously theological tradition of churchly devotion, confession, preaching, and discourse, and of the respect given to such tradition by the Lutheran Confessions, the modern denial of Mary's perpetual virginity would certainly strike both those who penned and those who signed the Lutheran Confessions as a "new" doctrine, ie, that against which the Lutheran Symbols firmly take their stand.

To those who insist, out of an admirable desire to rest on scripture alone, that they will believe it only when they see it, ie, that they will accept the perpetual virginity of Mary only when shown explicit references to it in sacred scripture, I would introduce an idea that will seem at first ridiculous. Namely, the true value of approaching the life of Mary in a way in keeping with the evangelical tradition of the Church is that one finds the opposite to the be the case, ie, the traditionalist Lutheran begins to see it in scripture (the absence of explicit proof texts notwithstanding) when he approaches the scripture with this belief. You will, in fact, to turn a phrase on its head, see it when you believe it. And on this count I do not merely have in mind a few isolated verses, which I choose to read in a traditional manner, though of course such texts are worth pondering (such as Ezekiel 44), but an extended pattern, stretching from the Old Testament into the New; a pattern, moreover, with deeply christological and ecclesial dimensions.

Let us establish first, for the record, that the perpetual virginity of Mary is not merely the view of a few bishops of the fourth century, nor merely the prevailing view of the Medieval Church, nor merely a characteristic aspect of Roman Catholic mariology, but is undeniably the traditional and universal view of the Lutheran fathers, beginning with Luther and the sixteenth century divines and continuing through every succeeding epoch into the twentieth century. In the Latin edition of the Lutheran Book of Concord, published in 1584, we have the following Catholic confession of the Evangelical Church:

That the Son became man in this manner, that He was conceived, without the cooperation of man, by the Holy Ghost, and was born of the pure, holy and always Virgin Mary.

That term "always" is not in the German text of this confession, as the deniers of Mary's perpetual virginity are quick to point out. Nevertheless, it is clearly part of the official Latin edition of the Book of Concord, and it received no objection when it was published, no objection in the sixteenth century, no objection until pretty much our own times. Moreover, it is in no way unfair to Luther's view. We need not belabor this blog post with many quotations, for Luther's firm stand on Mary's virginity before, during, and after the birth of the Christ is well established. We may consult his comments in the Personal Prayer Book, for example, or his Christmas preaching, for good material on this topic.

Also in the Book of Concord, I hasten to add, and in the indisputably authoritative German text, is a christological passage in the Formula of Concord which in one fell swoop confesses both Christ's birth in clauso utero and Mary's perpetual virginity. I refer to the following:

On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed Virgin, bore not a mere man, but, as the angel testifies, such a man as is truly the Son of the most high God, who showed His divine majesty even in His mother's womb, inasmuch as He was born of a virgin, with her virginity inviolate. Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin.

First, this clearly confesses the rather amazing paradox that, though Christ had a true physical birth, He nevertheless does not open His mother's womb. He passes through the birth canal much the way He would enter the closed room years later after His resurrection. This, in itself, I would argue, has implications for the lifelong virginity of His mother. Second, this passage also testifies to the perpetual virginity, by means of the grammar which does not come across well in translation, which however has proven to be obvious to native German speaking theologians, even some who had no bias toward the perpetual virginity, like Herman Sasse.

My point in making these references to the Lutheran Confessions, let me make clear, is not to impugn the Confessional loyalty of those today who do not hold to the perpetual virginity of Mary, only to establish the point that may be surprising to some, and may need to be reemphasized to others, that Mary's perpetual virginity is not a notion held by a few Lutherans here and there in the sixteenth century, but had and has a firm part in Lutheran tradition. When did it become such a minority view? Not until very recent times. I would suggest that in the Missouri Synod world, it may have been the switch to seminary theological study taking place in English (which may vindicate Loehe's warning against moving away from teaching theology in German).

What the Lutherans of the theologically rigorous age of Lutheran Orthodoxy, and the arguably even purer theology of Luther, held regarding Mary, was a tradition preserved for them by the ages which came before. While we could show ample evidence of the Church's stand on Mary's perpetual virginity for the thousand years which preceded Luther (and I have done so at this blog in the past), suffice to say that this is not in dispute. What is claimed by many of the deniers of Mary's lifelong virginity, rather, is that it was introduced only after Mary's life, indeed several centuries later, for that is when we begin to see open and explicit reference to it.

When we examine those early explicit references to Mary's perpetual virginity (third and fourth century), however, a couple of things are worth noting. One is the deafening lack of objection to them. They seem to cause no scandal at all. There are a few scattered voices in the Early Church opposed Mary's perpetual virginity; we see names like Tertullian and Helvidius, but no one of unblemished orthodoxy. The other noteworthy thing about the first plain references to Mary's perpetual virginity is that they actually seem to imply that they are merely upholding already established Church teaching. Take, for example, the case of Origen in the third century (and let us emphasize that means the 200s-he died in 253). Origin writes in his Commnetary on John:

There is no child of Mary except Jesus, according to the opinion of those who think correctly about her.

Origen here is making reference not only to Mary's perpetual virginity, but also to the fact that this was the commonly accepted view of his day. That in turn strongly implies that it predates his age, that it was handed to his generation by the ones that went before. In fact, Origen's phrase "think correctly" likely signifies the doctrine of the Church.

Also noteworthy is the second century claims of the Protoevangelium of James. This work, of course, was not brought into the canon of scripture. That is not surprising, since it does not major in what is vital to salvation, and since, frankly, it is pseudepigraphal. Nevertheless, it is an important witness for two reasons, 1. its antiquity, and 2. the fact that what it tells us on this topic was not controverted or condemned. In other words, it is representative of the belief of the early second century (it was written as early as A.D. 120), and therefore also implies a connection with the immediately preceding age, which takes us to the first century, and the lifetime of the Beloved Disciple, who was entrusted by Christ with the care of His mother, and who tradition tells us took her to live out the remainder of her life in Ephesus. While the Protoevangelium of James does not explicitly speak of Mary remaining a virgin till the end of her life, it does imply it by its interpretation of the "brothers of the Lord" as sons of Joseph before his marriage to Mary. In fact, Johannes Quasten in his Patrology claims of this document:

The principal aim of the whole writing is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ.

So what is a "brother" in the ancient Greek world? The word for "brother" in Greek, adelphos, is a term which often means much more than just a literal son of the same mother. Knowledge of classical Greek literature, or even just reference to Liddell & Scott, shows us that adelphos can easily be a reference to a "near kinsman." Unfortunately, seminarians and theologians too often rely on the biased definitions and word studies of theological lexicons.

Of course there is more to say on this topic, but I must get up for work in the morning, so I will have to continue this in the next day or two.

It's going in my chart.

2011-10-02T13:36:00.001-04:00

I have the habit of making little notes to myself when I hear or see something about which I might want to read or write or think more later. This morning after Mass Ruth admitted to me that she gets curious about what I write in my little notes. And so of course that reminded me of the episode of Seinfeld in which Kramer plays a doctor, and gets the idea to take a sample of a man's skin with his new meat slicer. So of course I must share a clip of it here.

Bridge Burner

2011-10-01T02:38:00.000-04:00

It is wonderful to be working for a local Milwaukee company whose products I have long enjoyed and loved. And one of the perks, my discount on beer, has enabled me to try some of the beers I have not had before now. My favorite beer for many years has been Lakefront's East Side Dark, and it is still my regular choice. The beer I would like to highlight for you here today, however, is so good there might now be a tie for my favorite beer. I'm referring to Bridge Burner. Billed as a "special reserve ale," it is essentially a barley wine.

I recommend using a large brandy snifter for this brew. It comes in a 22 oz. bottle, and merits being appreciated slowly, perhaps with a good theological or literary text in hand. And when you pour it into that glass, you will see a dark red opaque beer, with a strong head. It's earthy nose is complex, and will offer something different each time you inhale. It has both a prominent hop flavor, and a good maltiness. It is a strong beer, at 8% alcohol, and it is worth all 8%.

Why is it called Bridge Burner? The name is a reference to the Milwaukee Bridge War of 1845, an important, if no longer very well known, moment in Milwaukee history. For those of you unfamiliar, before Milwaukee officially became a city, it was three distinct settlements, and two of them, Kilbourntown and Juneautown, named after their founders Solomon Juneau and Byron Kilbourn, were rivals. They were divided from each other by the Milwaukee River, and the rivalry culminated in the disputes over whether and how to build the bridges over the river, thus connecting the towns. This dispute came to a heated head with the bridge burning. The aftermath, however, was real man to man talk, and the creation of the great city of Milwaukee. The name is an homage to the heritage of the city of which Lakefront is proud to be a part, and also a reminder that this beer makes a strong statement, just like the bridge burners were willing to make in the civic travail which culminated in the birth of the city.

There is a good variety of Bridge Burner reviewers on Youtube. I will share some of them here, beginning with this one:

Traditional Lutheran Prayer

2011-10-01T01:25:00.001-04:00

There is a general failure in modern American Confessional Lutheranism to use Martin Luther's Small Catechism nearly as fully or thoroughly or consistently, in teaching and in life, as it should be used. The good news about the state of Lutheran catechesis and spirituality today, conventional wisdom against rote forms notwithstanding, is that Luther's Small Catechism remains the staple, the core and foundation, for the catechization of youth. This good news means that there is hope for the richness of the catechism to be rediscovered and exploited in each generation. So it is well worth examining the ways in which we might be missing out on appreciating the Catechism more fully.

One such area of neglect is the prayer life the Catechism would have us know and live. The Catechism amounts to a couple dozen pages, and yet latter day Lutheranism has torn faith from life, doctrine from practice, to such a degree that many catechumens are made to spend more time with the modern explanations of the catechism than with the prayers that are contained in the catechism text itself. We shall set aside for now the fact that the "explanations" of the Catechism bring with them additional problems, such as the fact that they teach Lutherans the unfortunate practice of turning the sacred scriptures into atomized, versified, prooftexts. More relevant to the present discussion is that one can find many a parish where children are required to regurgitate answers from the explanation, and then everyone goes downstairs where they gather around the pot luck dinner, and instead of the prayers of the Catechism, all join in with a table prayer that comes from Moravian Pietism, a prayer which in no way merits the place it has been given in Lutheran homes. I can only conclude that if this prayer were introduced today, the average Confessional Lutheran with his head screwed on properly would immediately reject its rhymey cuteness as unfit for regular use in the Lutheran home.

Here is what Luther instructs in the Catechism:

How the Head of the Family Should Teach His Household To Ask a Blessing and Return Thanks

Asking a Blessing

The children and members of the household shall go to the table reverently, fold their hands, and say:

The eyes of all wait upon Thee, O Lord, and Thou givest them their meat in due season; Thou openest Thine hand and fillest all things living with plenteousness.

Note: To fill all things living with plenteousness means that all living things receive so much to eat that they are on this account joyful and of good cheer, for care and avarice hinder such satisfaction.

Then shall be said the Lord’s Prayer and the following:

Lord God, Heavenly Father, bless us and these Thy gifts which we receive from Thy bountiful goodness, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.

Returning Thanks

Also, after eating, they shall, in like manner, reverently and with folded hands say:

Oh, give thanks unto the LORD, For he is gracious, and his mercy endureth forever, who giveth food to all flesh; who giveth fodder unto the cattle, and feedeth the young ravens that call upon him. He hath no pleasure in the strength of an horse. Neither delighteth he in any man’s legs. But the LORD’s delight is in them that fear him, and put their trust in his mercy.

Then shall be said the Lord’s Prayer, and the following:

We thank Thee, Lord God, Heavenly Father, through Jesus Christ, our Lord, for all Thy benefits, Who livest and reignest forever and ever. Amen.

Let us note, first, that much of the Catechism is spent explaining the Our Father in its nine parts (the introductory address, the seven petitions, and the concluding Amen). This Luther does so that we may fruitfully use this prayer in our daily lives. Then, in the section on daily prayers, he actually gives us examples of the Our Father being used in various contexts. So we must note well, first of all, that the Catechism would have us pray the Lord's Prayer, both before and after the meal. For this, the model Christian prayer, is so rich that it can be employed in virtually every circumstance in life.

Second, though many Lutherans are unfortunately taught to look down upon the very concept and appropriateness of monastic life, we should recognize that one of its geniuses is that it has given us this very pattern of prayer. In monastic communities of many different orders, even today, the practice is to pray the Our Father along with a prayer very much like the "Lord God, Heavenly Father" above, and the "We thank Thee," etc. after the meal. These prayers would be preceded by what is most properly called an antiphon. We may call it an antiphon even though we do not necessarily repeat it after the prayer. The antiphon is usually a portion from the Psalms, and monastic practice has many of these antiphons, each appropriate for a different time of year. In traditional monastic practice these antiphons are followed by the Gloria Patri.

There would be nothing wrong , in principle, with a Lutheran family from time to time making use of a variety of seasonal antiphons. While at first such an idea may seem like it would cause confusion or a jarring unpredictability at the table, this need not be if the antiphon is given by the head of the house.

The antiphon "The eyes of all,"etc., is from Psalm 145. And the antiphon "Oh, give thanks unto the Lord,"etc., is from Psalm 136 and Psalm 147. Both are wonderfully fitting, of course, for year round use.

It is also worth noting that it is often the case that this whole pattern, in practice, is traditionally prayed only after the Sign of the Holy Cross is made with the Trinitarian Invocation. Even though this is not explicitly called for in the Catechism, it might very well be presumed as a near universal Catholic practice in traditional Christian homes.

My own recommendation is to pray the Invocation, with the Sign of the Cross, and then the whole pattern of prayer as above, and then, again, the Invocation. And when time is pressing, or for some other reason a shorter form is desired, I suggest saying the Invocation, followed by the prayer, "Lord God, Heavenly Father."

The other circumstance for which the Catechism gives us certain prayers, or rather a certain pattern of prayer, is at the very beginning of the day, and then the very ending of the day. As Luther, the Blessed Reformer of the Church, instructs us:

How the Head of the Family Should Teach His Household To Bless Themselves in the Morning and in the Evening

Morning Prayer

In the morning, when you rise, you shall bless yourself with the holy cross and say:

In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Then, kneeling or standing, repeat the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer.

If you choose, you may also say this little prayer:

I thank Thee, my heavenly Father, through Jesus Christ, Thy dear Son, that Thou hast kept me this night from all harm and danger; and I pray Thee that Thou wouldst keep me this day also from sin and every evil, that all my doings and life may please Thee. For into Thy hands I commend myself, my body and soul, and all things. Let Thy holy angel be with me, that the wicked Foe may have no power over me. Amen.

Then go joyfully to your work, singing a hymn, like that of the Ten Commandments, or whatever your devotion may suggest.

Evening Prayer

In the evening, when you go to bed, you shall bless yourself with the holy cross and say:

In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Then, kneeling or standing, repeat the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer.

If you choose, you may, in addition, say this little prayer:

I thank Thee, my Heavenly Father, through Jesus Christ, Thy dear Son, that Thou hast graciously kept me this day; and I pray Thee that Thou wouldst forgive me all my sins where I have done wrong, and graciously keep me this night. For into Thy hands I commend myself, my body and soul and all things. Let Thy holy angel be with me, that the wicked foe may have no power over me. Amen.

Then go to sleep promptly and cheerfully.

The pattern we are given for beginning and ending the day is, like the table prayers, inspired by Luther's own monastic training. What he did in this case was not so much take exactly what was done in the monastery, but, rather, the spirit or essence of the canonical hours, and made of it what might be loosely called a "short breviary" for the common Christian.

As we look more closely, we see, first, the Sign of the Holy Cross. This brings the Christian back to the promises of Holy Baptism. It reminds him, in good days and bad, that he belongs to Jesus, by Whose death we have life. It reminds him that the whole of his life is patterned after the cross of Christ, in which the love of the Triune God is revealed.

Second, we see that we are instructed to say the Creed, that is, the Apostles' Creed, and the Our Father. Luther has no need to spell out these prayers here because they are so fundamental, they enjoy such an assumed part of the Christian life, that the Christian family, including the small children, will have no trouble learning them by heart if only they pray them regularly.

After this, Luther suggests a prayer which is very similar to one which comes right out of monastic usage. Luther only slightly modified it. And the corresponding prayer at the end of the day Luther composed, as a beautiful parallel to the one in the morning. As Dorothea Wendebourg writes in the Summer 2005 issue of Lutheran Quarterly ("Luther on Monasticism" 149),

The original prayer came from a Latin collection of late medieval texts and spiritual instructions by the Dutchman Johannes Mauburnus (d. 1501/02). Here, too, it was to be combined with other liturgical elements, of which Luther kept only the first, an invocation of the Trinity together with the sign of the cross (in Mauburnus the invocation was christological, followed by the above mentioned prayer, a petition to the Blessed Virgin Mary asking her blessing, a psalm of praise and a hymn to the Virgin which referred to her as the source of our salvation and our praise). In Luther's version the prayer is in German, therefore shorter and stylistically more simple than the original, but in other respects more specific. E.g., Luther gives thanks for "protection during the night from all perils and dangers" (where Mauburnus has only a general thanksgiving for protection at night), he asks for protection from "all sin and evil, that my entire life and work may please thee" (where Mauburnus asks that "my service [servitus] may be pleasing to thee"). Luther also added a formula of commitment which entrusts one's whole life to God, and a plea for protection by God's guardian angel.

Finally, Luther recommends a hymn in the morning. And at night (a time which calls for the most simple and regular prayer) he simply calls upon the baptized Christian to take his rest with a cheered heart, a theme reminiscent of the office of Compline. Thus we see, to reiterate, a pattern which suggests itself as being a sort of "short breviary" for the Christian.

Based upon all of the above, I would conclude with two thoughts.

1. On the one hand, with such a rich tradition of prayer, given to us in the Catechism itself, we cheat ourselves and our children if we leave it behind us and embrace instead prayers which come to us from lesser traditions, or the mere improvised prayers from the heart.

2. On the other hand, with the genius of such a beautiful and profound richness in simplicity, which we have in these prayer forms, which, again, we might call a brilliantly distilled "short breviary," it is unnecessary and unwise, I suggest, to give people the impression (as I have seen happen, e.g., through the well intentioned enthusiasm for modern compilations like Treasury of Daily Prayer) that what they need for a healthy prayer life is to buy new books, even books with all sorts of wonderful traditional material. I say this as someone who has books of his own, and who is happy to sell them. But we ought never teach prayer in such a way as to give people the impression, either directly or indirectly, that to have a rich prayer life they need to buy more books. We truly have everything needful in those simple yet endlessly rich forms that we were taught as children, or should have been taught. The rest, for the common Christian layman, is icing on the cake.

I hasten to add that school children ought to be taught the Latin forms of all of these prayers as well. They are not germane to the present discussion, but you will find them here when you least expect it.

Lakefront IBA Information

2011-09-23T21:44:00.000-04:00

discount on books at Lulu

2011-09-23T20:47:00.000-04:00

Get 15% off any purchase at Lulu, through 26 September. Just enter this code at checkout:
OCTOBERFEST305

Celebrate Octoberfest by Buying a Book

2011-09-19T07:34:00.000-04:00

Get 15% off anything at Lulu.com, from now through 23 September. Enter this code: OCTOBERFEST305

Tell your friends.

Reflecting on Early Milwaukee's Drinking Culture

2011-09-18T22:50:00.003-04:00

In an article published in the Milwaukee Sentinel on 21 February 1932, Gunnar Mickelsen offers what I consider to be a very insightful argument for the virtue of a robust and healthy drinking culture in a city. I would highlight and reflect upon certain aspects of his argument, but I also recommend to the reader the whole article; it makes for good reading. You can find it here.

Writing in 1932, Mickelsen is looking back at what he calls the "beer age," ie., the era when beer brewing and drinking were integral to Milwaukee life to a degree that was not possible during the Great War and then of course during Prohibition. The reason for his lament is that, even though both of those two cultural atrocities were over, Milwaukee was still suffering their lasting effects. From our modern, rather myopic, perspective, we are tempted to conclude that we are in a "beer age" of our own. In many ways, Milwaukee did bounce back, and our culture certainly seems as beer-centered as ever. Yet it is helpful to consider the voices from our past, with their clearer view of their past. And when we do, we see that in Milwaukee's golden era of beer there was something more than merely the unbridled consumption of booze and brews. The beer was part of an intellectually rich culture, one which we have today as well, yet not, I fear, to the degree in which it flourished in the post-World War I years. More on that as we go along.

I love his opening line:

There was in the United States, in the beer age, no more delightful a city than Milwaukee, in which to spend a day, a year or a life.

But what exactly was so special about Milwaukee in those days? Or, put it another way, what is so special about a culture that values drinking, and makes drinking part of its public life? Mickelsen argues that the open exchange of ideas, which is necessary to the human spirit, and conducive to an intellectually productive culture, is encouraged and inspired by a robust social drinking atmosphere, and that without such an atmosphere, the exchange and expression of ideas is stifled, and therefore the overall happiness of a city is affected for the worse. As Mickelsen writes:

Now, it is our theory that Milwaukee was happy because it talked. The urge to hold conversation, to communicate ideas and experiences, is one of man's major motivations...Beer and wine make for communication. There is in liquors of mild alcoholic persuasion that which quickens the flow of the thoughts in a man's cranium, loosens a notch the belt about his reticence and releases upon his tongue the fruits of his meditations.

Meeting together in public houses and talking about one's work, whether that work be physical or intellectual, is not a novel notion, but enjoys a noble history. In theology we could think of the Black Bear Inn in Germany and the White Horse Tavern in England. The myth of the Prancing Pony as a place where folks may gather to find refuge from the various troubles that may be brewing in the world, while enjoying some good brew in the company of friends, is believable precisely because it is rooted in a noble and endearing tradition of Western culture.

And indeed, Milwaukee's cultural scene was far richer than we can appreciate todday. It was known as the German Athens (Deutsches Athen). It had numerous non-English newspapers (especially German), and the arts flourished. It is fair to say that the American sense of free expression, artistic and intellectual, was appreciated and realized in this city.

The ravages of a world war, and one which particularly devastated a Germanic city like Milwaukee, followed by the culturally deadening effects of Prohibition, left Milwaukee a palpably different city. Writes Mickelsen:

Those twin blights have robbed Milwaukee more finitely of its Germanesque mood of "gemuethlichkeit," than it seems possible could have been accomplished by any other agencies under the sun.

During Prohibition drinking was taken, all too literally, underground. Of such establishments:

They exist in dank airs, away from the sun, under conditions of mummery and secrecy that smack of the reopened grave.

By contrast, consider the scene that flourished previously:

Pour beer out upon the locality and it won't be long till the ground is dotted with gardens. They will grow and bloom so long as the beer continues to nourish them. One of the first to take shape here was that of H. Kemper, built by him in 1850.
Under the affable personality of Pius Dreher, the garden came into its best days. Beneath its trees on the block between State, Fourteenth and Fifteenth streets and Prairie avenue, there were 500 tables and at least 3,000 persons could be seated there.

(Mickelsen goes on to describe many other beer gardens and taverns which were part of Milwaukee life in those decades.)

Men can adapt, and learn to drink and gather in speakeasies, and even learn to love such a covert arrangement. (Today we even pay homage to that era with the Safe House.) Likewise, there are times and places in which the Church has faced quite open and hostile opposition, necessitating her gatherings to be hidden from the world. The Church can adapt, and conduct her most essential and sacred rites in the dank airs of the Catacombs. Nevertheless, it is the open and free light of day that best befits the Church's liturgical proclamation; it is beautiful edifices that best befit her eucharist. Likewise, it is in the open and free light of day, with society's full civil sanction, that the drinking community will enjoy its most wholesome life and have its fullest effects on the culture of a city.

Today, Milwaukee drinks like there is no tomorrow. And there are some great beers, now that we are in the microbrewery age; and some great bars, I might add. And yet, I think it is unfortunate that more and more of these places are filled with big screen TVs, and have become places to sit next to other people and, instead of interacting with them, watch a game on the screen, just as happens all too often with our loved ones in the home itself (which is a separate problem). For entertainment in these gatherings, before there was TV there was communal singing. For social interaction in these gatherings, there was once far more in the way of the intellectual expression of ideas and arguments, and perhaps a bit less of the meat market which prevails today. Here's to hoping we can take our love of beer, and recapture some of that old Milwaukee sense of noble sociability. If so, there may be hope for modern American culture.

The Rising - Bruce Springsteen [DVD Live in Barcelona 2002]

2011-09-18T09:41:00.001-04:00

You may have noticed that for the past several days I have posted a number of Springsteen songs here. It was not, in fact, merely an expression of my ordinary Springsteen fanaticism. There was a theme. Namely, from last Sunday, 9-11, to today I have posted a series of songs from the 2002 album, The Rising, all of which are in some way inspired by the events of 9-11. Many of them have a hopeful note, though in some it is kind of buried or subdued. In this final song, "The Rising," however, there is a definite theme of optimism, of rebuilding, rising again, etc. The songs from the album which I did not post here do not have as dominant a connection to 9-11, but they are all good songs. They are more along the line of what one might expect out of Springsteen, you know, like the working class struggles of the mining industry on Mars. Over all, The Rising is one of my favorite albums.

Coffee Brewing Techniques with George Bregar - Alterra Coffee

2011-09-17T16:46:00.000-04:00

PRO SERIES BEER KITS: LAKEFRONT BREWERY

2011-09-17T16:03:00.000-04:00

a poetic meditation on the Anima Christi

2011-09-17T15:47:00.001-04:00

Some of you may know my friend Mike Carter. He loves to meditate on the faith in poetic verse. You may also know the medieval prayer, Anima Christi. It is a wonderful prayer to the crucified Christ. I recommend its use anytime, but especially after receiving Holy Communion.

(For those not familiar, here is the traditional text:

Anima Christi, sanctifica me.
Corpus Christi, salva me.
Sanguis Christi, inebria me.
Aqua lateris Christi, lava me.
Passio Christi, conforta me.
O bone Iesu, exaudi me.
Intra tua vulnera absconde me.
Ne permittas me separari a te.
Ab hoste maligno defende me.
In hora mortis meae voca me.
Et iube me venire ad te,
Ut cum Sanctis tuis laudem te.
In saecula saeculorum. Amen.

And here is a classic translation:

Soul of Christ, sanctify me.
Body of Christ, save me.
Blood of Christ, inebriate me.
Water from the side of Christ, wash me.
Passion of Christ, strengthen me.
O good Jesus, hear me.
Within Thy wounds, hide me.
Suffer me not to be separated from Thee.
From the malignant enemy, defend me.
In the hour of my death, call me.
And bid me come to Thee.
That, with Thy saints, I may praise Thee,
World without end. Amen.

And here is another version I like, this one a bit more of a free translation, from the nineteenth century, by Cardinal Newman:

Soul of Christ, be my sanctification.
Body of Christ, be my salvation.
Blood of Christ, fill all my veins.
Water from Christ’s side, wash out my stains.
Passion of Christ, my comfort be.
O good Jesus, listen to me.
In Thy wounds I fain would hide.
N’er to be parted from Thy side.
Guard me should the foe assail me.
Call me when my life shall fail me.
Bid me come to Thee above.
With Thy saints to sing Thy love.
World without end. Amen.

But this is not really a blog post the Anima Christi. That merits a separate entry, which I hope to do some time.) My point here is to introduce you to a poetic creation which Mike has produced. It is based upon the Anima Christi, and I think it lives up to the venerable tradition of that prayer. Please find it here:
http://stronginhope.blogspot.com/2011/09/soul-of-christ-sanctify-me.html#comment-form

Nice job, Mike.

Bruce Springsteen - Paradise

2011-09-17T15:23:00.000-04:00

Vaccinating Against Sexually Transmitted Infections

2011-09-17T10:19:00.003-04:00

Lately there has been much chatter in the political sphere about the vaccination for the Human Papillomavirus, in light of the recent debate among Republican contenders for the next general presidential election. I propose to offer here what I would call a Traditionalist Lutheran view on the whole matter, which is not the same as a politically conservative view. My position on this issue intersects with the conservative position, yet they are not coterminous. They are distinct, as you will see, for the accent is different.

When Texas Governor Rick Perry issued an executive order that girls in his state be injected with Gardasil, the vaccination for HPV, he was surely acting upon his concern for the health of the girls and women of Texas, though a cynical assessment would also beg the questions raised by the curious coincidence of the financial support he has received from Merck, the manufacturer of the popular brand of vaccine. His defenders are quick to point out that one could opt out of the vaccine, and that Perry has repented of the way he pursued this policy (ie., by executive order). His critics on this issue point out that we cannot be completely sure of the safety of this vaccine (the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has a history of taking back its approval of drugs years after initial approval); that, despite the technical opt-out clause, the obvious pressure is on the girls to go ahead and choose the default option of getting the injections; and that a matter of this sort ought to be deliberated in the legislature, rather than dictated by executive order. For the most part, these have been the parameters of the controversy as it has been argued in the political realm.

What is unfortunate to me is that conservatives, by and large, are not looking deeper, to the real issue of the appalling moral scandal of vaccinating our girls to protect them from infections and diseases that are sexually transmitted. Even apart from a government mandated vaccination, as what happened for a time in Texas, for several years now we have been in the brave new culture of the HPV vaccine. On the one hand, I admit that the distinction between having an opt-out or an opt-in is valid and important; in other words, the former still preserves the individual's legal freedom in the matter, while the latter places the burden on the individual to step up and say, I opt out. On the other hand, however, in a certain sense the scenario which obtains where there is no such executive mandate, say, here in Wisconsin, for example, is just as damaging to a young lady, and it is damaging to our culture's moral climate.

Let us be clear. HPV is sexually transmitted. I repeat, HPV is a sexually transmitted infection (STI). There is no case, of which I am aware, of someone contracting this infection without sexual activity. Now let us be even more particular. The promoters of the vaccine are keen to point out that intercourse is not necessary in order to get HPV, for all that is needed is genital contact. So isn't my statement, then, that HPV is sexually transmitted, false? No, for I do not define sexual activity so narrowly as to exclude everything but intercourse.

Young Christian men and women, I say this to all of you. Immodest behavior betrays the dignity of your person; it betrays your Creator; it betrays who you are in Christ; it betrays the Spirit of God Who dwells in you. Immodest behavior brings with it deep emotional dangers, which only makes sense, for the body is a wondrously integrated organism, and compartmentalizing may seem clever and mature, but it is in fact an unnatural fragmenting of life, and quite dangerous. And above and beyond all of that, the more we learn in the scientific realm, the more we see that immodest behavior often also leads to physical consequences. Modesty is the best policy. To put it another way, leading a chaste and decent life in word and deed (which includes such things as how you behave on Facebook and how you dress your body) befits your wondrous creation; it befits who you are in Christ; it befits your life and body as an abode of the Spirit and as a living epistle; and it honors the Triune God, Who has real plans for your life.

Yes, HPV is one of those physical consequences to which I was just alluding. It is a potential and not uncommon result of contact with the genital area of another person. And to be quite frank, it, in turn, can result in cancer. Just as the dangers of the previous paragraph are interrelated, some modeling themselves after others, some resulting in others, etc, likewise, we cannot clinically compartmentalize life by supposing we can remove the danger in one area, and content ourselves that at least now our young people are safe from the physical consequences of their behavior.

The media campaign, to which girls and their well meaning mothers fall prey, funded by the drug manufacturer, and the readily available nature of the vaccination, is in some ways a situation analogous to the culture of the acceptance of condoms (which is a stunning reversal from the social place of condoms just a generation or so ago), and their easy availability today (some public school systems even give out condoms in the nurse's office). There are differences, of course, but there is an analogy. And yet, look at how the thinking has broken down, or at how lazy we have become on these issues (issues which require of us vigilance). Rush Limbaugh would ridicule the condom culture by performing radio stunts, stretching a condom over his microphone, and calling it "safe talk," etc. Now there is hardly a peep in popular conservative culture about the inappropriate nature of giving our young people a medical treatment for something that they will never get apart from choosing to engage in sexual activity. Instead the debate turns to the question of whether Perry will survive this politically, whether Bachman goes too far in her talk of the dangers of vaccines, etc.

A woman's brain is a wonderful creation of God. To be fair to what we know scientifically about that brain, however, we must admit that it is not fully developed in its capacity to make emotionally mature decisions until around the early to mid twenties. Yet there is to a large extent a hands-off approach to parenting in our culture. The decision to get the HPV vaccine, too, is too often left to the girl and her mother. How often does the father, even where there is one, assert his authority in a matter of this sort? Just as the family is incomplete without the dynamics of the emotional subtleties of the feminine, likewise, it suffers when left without real leadership from the father. Fathers, your leadership is needed. Just say no to bad ideas. And lead also by positive conversation and life.

And churchmen, can you not find it in yourselves to say something on these issues? We can study how matters of casuistry were argued three centuries ago, and we should. That is a fine endeavor. But until we learn to promote consistently a culture of life today, life in all its fullness (which is not limited merely to protesting abortion), our people will be effectively left to their own devices against Merck, against the music and entertainment scene, against pressure of every sort, including the old Adam which rages in each of us. It is the New Man, Christ Himself, Whose resurrection life renews itself each day in the life of the regenerate Christian. Let us preach His cross, and His life, for His sake. For He is the One Who takes upon Himself our immodesty, our betrayal, our sin, and bears it up the hard and lonely way to where it is all nailed to His holy Body. He thus unites Himself to our sin for us. And He rises triumphant over that sin and the death which sin produces. You and I who are baptized are thus buried into that death, and immersed into that victory. Our life is His. His life is lived out in the members of the body, both in the sense of the mystical body of the Church and quite literally in the members of your body. Let us bear all this in mind, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our Lord.

Bruce Springsteen, You're Missing, Wembley Arena 2002

2011-09-14T12:24:00.000-04:00

Beer drinkers leave established beer brands for microbrews

2011-09-13T22:26:00.000-04:00

Beer drinkers leave established beer brands for microbrews

A nice little piece on the rising popularity of craft brewers.

bruce springsteen - empty sky (acoustic)

2011-09-13T10:14:00.000-04:00

Lakefront Brewery Eastside Dark Episode 7 of "30 in 30 under $100"

2011-09-12T08:55:00.000-04:00

Bruce Springsteen - Nothing Man

2011-09-12T08:00:00.000-04:00

mad men and the church

2011-09-11T23:08:00.000-04:00

For some reason I decided to start watching Mad Men. I heard it was an interesting show, and we don't get whatever channel that carries it (at least I don't think we do), so we're going through the series via NetFlix, albeit at a rather slow pace. Today we saw the fourth episode of the second season, titled "Three Sundays" (if you wish, you might want to view it, maybe through hulu or netflix or whatever) and I found two moments of the show to be especially noteworthy here. The first I found very humorous, and the second I found to be a subtle but serious violation of priestly vows. Both are good lessons for priests and seminarists, except that most these days, I fear, wouldn't even notice anything amiss in these examples.

1. A priest, Father Gill, is invited to a family dinner, and being set in the early 1960s, this Roman Catholic family naturally shows great respect, some practically fawning over him. He is given the honor of saying grace, and so he prays a short but somewhat eloquent prayer that is clearly invented on the spot. When he has completed this prayer, the lady says to him, "That was beautiful; are you going to say grace now?" He then makes the sign of the cross, and says the traditional table blessing. I loved this scene. Whether intended as such by the writers or not, what it says is that people have a sense of tradition, and this woman in particular just didn't feel as though grace was said, however eloquent and meaningful the priest's prayer from the heart was. When asked to stand up and pray, a priest does well to reinforce (and indeed in some cases reintroduce) the traditional prayers of the Church, such as the table blessing Luther preserved for us in the Catechism.

2. In the confessional, a woman confesses, among other things, the sins of her sister. She is angry about her sister getting away with her liberated lifestyle, and she spills the beans about the baby her sister has had out of wedlock. Later in the episode, on Easter Sunday, the priest sees the woman (who secretly has a child) and hands her an Easter egg, and says, "for the little one." This may be a clever way of "ministering" to her, of "opening lines of communication" with her, or whatever. But one thing is for sure. He has acted upon information he learned in the confessional, and he is out of line in doing so.

Thoughts?

life before fort wayne

2011-09-11T16:57:00.001-04:00

My wife was looking at pictures, for some reason, and showed me this one. It brings back memories. This predates our move to Ft. Wayne. Late 90's. We were living in the campus house at University Lutheran Chapel. The background in this picture is the kitchen of the apartment where we lived, right off the chapel. Fr. Wiest and family lived above us, on the second and third floors. I'm actually not drinking beer at the moment of this photo; it is root beer. That is the unique and wonderful Maple Root Beer, from Lakefront Brewery. The amazing thing to me about that bottle is that it seems to be a glass bottle. Lakefront bottles the root beer in plastic bottles; so I guess they bottled it in glass at one time, and I just don't remember it.

Nothing like a hyper-ritualist being in his native environment.

Bruce Springsteen - Into The Fire - 9/11 WTC Tribute Video

2011-09-11T15:33:00.000-04:00

Lakefront Brewery - Meet Phil

2011-09-11T14:24:00.000-04:00

Joyce Carol Oates Part V

2011-09-10T20:42:00.000-04:00

made in milwaukee festival

2011-09-10T20:16:00.000-04:00

Last weekend my wife and I took the time to go to the Made in Milwaukee Festival at Cathedral Square. Like all great free street festivals in Milwaukee, the Made in Milwaukee Festival had a good variety of entertainments and activities, like dance, music, and crafts. But what was best about this event was that a great plenitude and diversity of local businesses was highlighted. One could sample the coffee of three local coffee roasters, or find produce from area farms, as well as many booths with local artists, and business of all types. It was a good way of promoting local businesses, and local art, as well as other institutions, of Milwaukee.

One of the fun opportunities was to pose with a sign on which you write your favorite local business. You can find mine here. (And that was before I was offered a job at Lakefront.)

At another booth, people were encouraged to pick one of Milwaukee's famous statues, and pose the same way as the statue. I chose to pose like the Robert Burns statue, which is over on the Lower East Side, on Prospect Ave. Here is my pose.

It was a nice Milwaukee summer afternoon.

Joyce Carol Oates Part IV

2011-09-09T12:28:00.000-04:00

an anniversary

2011-09-08T21:09:00.000-04:00

It was on this day, the Feast of Mary's earthly birthday, that I started seminary classes. It was a Monday that year. I remember thinking about how fitting it was that my seminary formation would begin with a Marian theme. I don't remember chapel that day, though I rather doubt that the Mother of God came up. I didn't mind too much though. I knew that I had embarked on an exciting new chapter in life. And indeed, it was a great ride.

The course of life changes. But one thing remains the same: Theology rules, guides, and is the passion of my life. Theology is not only the Queen of Sciences, it is the highest Art. More than that, it is the only truly satisfying pursuit. I think of it as life itself, life in its fullness. And so, my time in the seminary was worth the while. And whatever happens from here, I am grateful. For like the obscure handmaiden who was called upon to be the God-bearer, my soul, and in Christ the whole of my life, magnifies the Lord, for He has regarded my low estate. I don't see much strength in my own life, but the important thing is that the Lord has shown strength with His arm; He that is mighty has done to me great things, and holy is His name. May I always know it, and tell it.

Daughter of Mossad Chief: I Refuse to Enlist in the Israeli Military

2011-09-08T14:51:00.000-04:00

I find this to be a very interesting trend. And aside from the Israeli/Palestinian issues, there is another problem, namely, the very fact that women are recruited and conscripted for military service in Israel. I believe that when a country drafts women into the military, it is no longer a civilized nation. So I support the objections of these young men and women objectors, and add that for the women they have a second, and more basic, ground of objection, whether they realize it or not. Unfortunately, they probably do not realize it, for feminism (that is, the war against the essential dignity of a woman's femininity) is so ingrained and institutionalized in the culture that it will take a major cultural shift, over time, for it to be displaced.

Saint Bernard on the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary

2011-09-08T11:03:00.000-04:00

From a Sermon of St. Bernard, the Abbot.

Behold how many things shine like stars in the geneology of Mary! First of all, that she was sprung from kings; that she was of the seed of Abraham; that she was of the noble lineage of David. If this be too little, add thereto: that she is known to have been divinely granted to that lineage on account of its singular privilege of holiness; that she was promised from heaven to the fathers thereof long beforehand; that she was befigured by mysterious wonders; that she was foretold in the oracles of the Prophets. For she was prefigured by the priestly rod of Aaron, blossoming without root; by Gideon's fleece, full of the dew of heaven in the midst of the dry threshing-floor; by the eastern gate in the vision of Ezekiel, which had never been opened to anyone. Again, it was of her, above all others, that Isaiah foretold. First, he speaketh of the rod that would rise from the root of Jesse; and then later of the Virgin that would bring forth Emmanuel. Rightly doth the Apocalypse say: And there appeared a great wonder in heaven: for this same had previously been figured from heaven by all these things granted therefrom under the Old Covenant.

Alterra Coffee - Art of the Pour

2011-09-08T10:39:00.000-04:00

St. Jerome on the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary

2011-09-08T10:30:00.000-04:00

A Homily by St. Jerome, the Priest.

In Isaiah we read: Who shall declare his generation. But let us not therefore conclude that there is a contradiction between the Prophet (who implieth that this thing cannot be done) and the Evangelist (who bringeth his Gospel by doing it). For the one speaketh of the generation of the Divine Word by the Eternal Father, and the other of the family in which the incarnation took place. In other words, Matthew beginneth with carnal things (contrariwise to the Prophet) that by learning of men we may go on to learn of God. And when he saith: The Son of David, the son of Abraham, he reverseth the proper order, for Abraham came in time before David. But this reversal is necessary to his account, for if Abraham had been put first and David afterwards, Abraham would have had to be mentioned again, in order to marshall the pedigree properly.

Thus Matthew in the first place nameth as Christ the Son of these twain, namely, Abraham and David, without making mention of the others, because unto these twain only was promise of Christ made. Unto Abraham, where it is said: In thy seed, that is, in Christ, shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. And unto David, in the words: Of the fruit of thy body shall I set upon thy seat. The Evangelist continueth: And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar. Here it is to be remarked that in the geneology of the Saviour none of the holy women are named, but those women only are named against whom the Scripture hath something to say amiss. He who came to save sinners was born of sinners, that he might wash away all sin. Thus afterwards, are named Ruth, who was a Moabitess, and Bathsheba, who had been the wife of Uriah.

Matthew continueth: And Jacob begat Joseph. This is one of the passages which the Emperor Julian put forward against us as an instance of mutual contradiction between the Evangelists. For, whereas Matthew here saith that Jacob begat Joseph, Luke saith that Joseph was the son of Heli. And herein Julian shewed how little he understood the use of Scripture. For one Evangelist speaketh of the father of Joseph by nature, and the other speaketh of the adoptive fatherhood according to the law. Thus the Mosaic ordinance, which was held to be a command of God, ordained: If brethren dwell together, and one of them die and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger; her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her; and it shall be, that the first-born which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel. And when ye read: Joseph, the husband of Mary, let not this title of husband lead thee to suppose that the marriage had already taken place. Remember rather the use of Scripture, which is to speak of the bride and bridegroom as husband and wife.

Joyce Carol Oates Part III

2011-09-08T08:56:00.000-04:00

Saint Augustine on the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary

2011-09-08T08:40:00.000-04:00

From a Sermon of Saint Augustine, the Bishop.

Dearly beloved, the day for which we have longed is come, even this holy-day of the praiseworthy and Blessed Ever-Virgin Mary. Let our land laugh and sing with merriment, bathed in the light of this great Virgin's rising. She is the flower of the field, from her the priceless Lily of the valley hath blossomed. With her that dolorous sentence which was pronounced over Eve ended its course. To her it was never said: In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children. She brought forth a child, even the Lord, but she brought Him forth, not in sorrow, but in joy.

Eve wept, but Mary laughed. Eve's womb was big with tears, but Mary's womb was big with gladness. Eve gave birth to a sinner, but Mary gave birth to the Sinless One. The mother of our race brought punishment into the earth, but the mother of our Lord brought forth Salvation. Eve introduced sin, but Mary righteousness. Eve gave a welcome unto death, but Mary welcomed Life. For Eve's disobedience, Mary offered obedience. For Eve's unbelief, Mary offered faith.

Mary singeth, as it were, to an instrument of ten strings, and between its quick notes soundeth the timbrels of those who celebrate this new kind of motherhood. Therefore let the gladsome choirs join with her, to sing antiphonally her lovely hymn. O hearken to the melody which she maketh as she proclaimeth: My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour; for He hath regarded the low estate of His handmaiden; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed; for He that is mighty hath magnified me. The song of Mary hath brought to an end the lamentations of Eve.

Joyce Carol Oates Part II

2011-09-07T19:08:00.000-04:00

Lakefront Brewery -Bavarian Purity Law of 1516

2011-09-07T19:06:00.000-04:00

Joyce Carol Oates Part I

2011-09-06T18:06:00.001-04:00

Joyce Carol Oates, the reader of this blog may have inferred over time, is one of my favorite modern writers. I happened to come across this video of an appearance she made at a book shop recently. It is in several parts, and so I will share it here in several installments. Those not particularly interested in the writings of Joyce Carol Oates will find this interesting nevertheless. She touches on a number of issues and topics, beginning with the virtues of real books. Also, writers, and aspiring writers, will find interesting insight into the craft, the art, the life, of writing. Enjoy.

P.S. Let me just add, no offense meant to the host of this event, but I can testify that Oates's memoir of widowhood was an excellent read but does not bring everyone to tears.

St. James Infirmary -

2011-09-06T16:43:00.000-04:00

Next Year in Gaba

2011-09-06T16:24:00.000-04:00

Some of you thought that Gaba was merely a state of mind. In fact, it is also a place. Gaba is a town in Iraq. Specifically, it is in the As Sulaymaniyah region, just 169 miles out of Baghdad (pardon me-in local terms the distance to Baghdad is 272 kilometers).

To go to Gaba is to see what life is like in the future, for while it is 3 p.m. in Milwaukee, it is 11 p.m. in Gaba. Even at 11 p.m. it is 30 degrees, that is, 86 degrees Fahrenheit.

If I ever travel the world, I want Gaba to be on the itinerary.

non moriar, sed vivam

2011-09-06T13:32:00.000-04:00

Have you stopped lately to consider the amazingly defiant tone of Psalm 118? It includes one of my favorite phrases in the Psalter, what amounts to a bold Christian confession:

I shall not die, but live:
and declare the works of the Lord.

If you want to affirm life, amid the horror and absurdity that surrounds us in the modern world, I'm telling you, pray the Psalms. The Psalms do not dreamily portray a life to which we cannot relate. They reflect our struggles in every way. Yet they also orient us to the reality that we cannot see very clearly with our eyes of flesh. They remind us that in Christ we do live life more abundantly. The martyrs knew this, even as they faced their tormentors. You and I, too, can face the lies with which we are battered by the devil, by the world, and by our own selves, and in the face of those lies about life confess life itself, Life Himself, the One Whose way is the way of truth and life.

The Christian, despite the fact that even he may see all sorts of evidence to the contrary, can truly confess, I shall not die, but live, for his life is in the One Who lives, and Who is life itself, Christ our Lord. For we who are baptized into Jesus Christ are baptized into His death. Consequently, we are buried with Him, by baptism, into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also have renewed life.

This is the confession and Christic content of the psalms.

the Proustian Oates

2011-09-06T12:33:00.002-04:00

I just started reading Bellefleur by Joyce Carol Oates (picked it up cheap at a thrift shop on Brady Street yesterday as my wife, one of my lovely nieces, and I enjoyed an afternoon outing). I knew it was one of her longer length family chronicling novels, a family saga which spans a number of generations, and I've been wanting to read it for some time. What I didn't know was that the novel is only partially set in the real world, that to a great extent it plays with the sequence of time, and other aspects of reality as we know it. It is a gothic novel elevated to high art, a highly symbolic work, ripe with religious meaning. So I very much look forward to seeing what the Bellefleur family and the Bellefleur castle have in store for me.

I really don't think that I would say there is such thing as a typically Oatesean sentence, in the sense that Joyce Carol Oates has a particular or signature style, except that she is exceptionally good at setting her writing in the unique feel of the novel or story she is writing. In that sense she is very economical in her writing; that is, it is all presented intentionally in a certain way, in order to help in the construction of the world of the story. In the case of Bellefleur, the opening paragraph struck me as oddly Proustian. For it is a single sentence, and reminded me of many passages in Proust's great work, which perhaps coincidentally or perhaps not coincidentally also delves in many ways into the theme of time, and the sequence of time. (The Bellefleur family, by the way, is also French.) The construction of long sentences, like the use of long words, can be clumsy, pretentious, poorly executed, or just inappropriate for the context. (Proust himself could write very short sentences just as effectively as the long ones.) In this case, it comes across beautifully, and begs the question (in my mind anyway) as to what this sentence might be telling us about the whole sage that is about to unfold.

It was many years ago in that dark, chaotic, unfathomable pool of time before Germaine's birth (nearly twelve months before her birth), on a night in late September stirred by innumerable frenzied winds, like spirits contending with one another-now plaintively, now angrily, now with a subtle cellolike delicacy capable of making the flesh rise on one's arms and neck-a night so sulfurous, so restless, so swollen with inarticulate longing that Leah and Gideon Bellefleur in their enormous bed quarreled once again, brought to tears because their love was too ravenous to be contained by their mere mortal bodies; and their groping, careless, anguished words were like strips of raw silk rubbed violently together (for each was convinced that the other did not, could not, be equal to his love-Leah doubted that any man was capable of a love so profound it could be silent, like a forest pond; Gideon doubted that any woman was capable of comprehending the nature of a man's passion, which might tear through him, rendering him broken and exhausted, as vulnerable as a small child): it was on this tumultuous rain-lashed night that Mahalaleel came to Bellefleur Manor on the western shore of the great Lake Noir, where he was to stay for nearly five years.

Life on an oil field 'man camp'

2011-09-05T10:52:00.000-04:00

Life on an oil field 'man camp' _ not for everyone - National Business - MiamiHerald.com

As I was skimming the Sunday paper after Mass yesterday, I came across this AP article (linked above) about the enormous oil boom in North Dakota. There is so much work on the oil field right now that the hundreds of workers far outnumber the available housing in the region of Williston, North Dakota. So they've constructed a camp full of temporary housing units, which are minimalist one bed dorm rooms, in which you share a bathroom with the guy in the next room.

The smell of plastic (a main component in the walls of these temporary structures) and pesticide (mice and insects are problems out here on the prairie) also can be a little overwhelming. But to most of the men who come here, especially those who've lived elsewhere on the oil fields, the accommodation is just fine.

A worker really doesn't need much more than a place to lay his head, though, since the long hours of hard work leave a man without time or energy for much else. But the money is good. Very good. The article highlights one worker who is making six figures, and reports:

He figures that, with more experience and plenty of overtime, he'll take home $4,000 to $5,000 a week.

As someone who has been out of work for too long, I admit I am tempted to look into a job in the North Dakota oil fields. There is a modern oil rush there, and men from a variety of backgrounds are finding work. Could there be work there for me, a man with no skills in that line of work? And if there is unskilled work there, does it pay well enough to justify staying three states away from home? I don't know, but I'd like to find out. My landlord, too, is out of work. He has an engineering degree, and has had to take temporary jobs here and there. Right now he's got a short term job in the western part of Wisconsin, mining the earth for sand, which gets shipped down to Texas to aid the oil drilling there. There does seem to be manufacturing jobs in remote places. I hear that next year iron ore mining might open up in northern Wisconsin. Those jobs are said to be in the neighborhood of $60,000/year. Again, it's probably just a dream that I could get into something like that. But I'll look into anything at this point. Who knows? Maybe my future is with the taconite in northern Wisconsin, or the oil in North Dakota.

Neo-Nazis and Anti-Neo-Nazis in Milwaukee

2011-09-04T22:43:00.001-04:00

While I was going about my business yesterday in what some consider the "bad" or "dangerous" part of Milwaukee, it seems that there was a Neo-Nazis demonstration and a simultaneous protest against this group, which all took place in West Allis. There does not seem to have been any major violence, however, on either side. Five people were arrested; the West Allis Police, with help from the Milwaukee Police Department and the FBI, did a good job of making sure it was safe for everyone there.

The demonstration was organized by the National Socialist Movement, of which I know very little. I will share two thoughts, just based on my immediate impressions. 1. They seem to have very snappy uniforms, for an organization that does not admit homosexuals.

"Party Membership is open to non-Semitic heterosexuals' of European Descent. If you really care for your heritage and for the future of your family, race and nation, fill out a Membership Application today."

2. Those crosses on their armbands remind me of the seminary (of course I am referring to the shape of those old four-in-one study carrels at Walther Library).

But seriously, what struck me, when I watched clips of some of the speakers on the news, was just how surreal it is to hear these white supremacist statements coming from people who actually seem to mean it. Really, they look like a caricature of themselves.

Each race in modern America should have as its collective prayer, "God save us from our enemies, and from our friends."

a great show at Linnemans

2011-09-04T21:57:00.000-04:00

I heard a few weeks ago that Lil Rev and Jim Liban were going to be playing together at Linnemans this weekend, but I did not have high hopes of being able to make that show. I'm still quite unemployed; times are tough. Late this past week, however, I fell into just enough cash to make the cover charge with enough left over to get a drink. So I dropped in there last night (Linnemans is a great little place, right in Riverwest, just a few blocks from my apartment), and my brother, and our friend Chris, met me there. We were in for a real treat. Anyone who has seen Lil Rev knows what a great musician and showman he is. A Lil Rev show is always a rewarding experience. Jim Liban is a living legend, a true bluesman. He also could hold the stage on his own. And they were joined by another great musician, Steve Cohen, whose blues voice, guitar work, and harmonica I'd love to hear again. The three of them, for about four hours, took turns picking what they would play.

It was a great night for the blues, a truly outstanding show. I must say that one of the things that made it so special was that, beyond the great music, there was a real engagement with the crowd. I could envision a great musician playing a whole set without ever interacting with the crowd. (In fact, I saw Bob Dylan do this once at Summerfest.) Not so with these three; they were all very engaging; Rev, though, seems to go the extra mile. His banter, his getting the crowd to sing certain parts, his humor, it all elevated the collective mood in the room. He often tells a story before playing a song, about its writer, or about his own experience, or whatever.

In fact, one of my favorite moments of the night was when they played Lil Rev's own bluesy version of "Saint James Infirmary", and Rev introduced it by talking about the great music scene in New Orleans. He said that there is a certain club in New Orleans (I don't recall the name of the place) where you will find a sign that actually gives a price for requesting certain songs. "Saint James Infirmary" is one of them. My brother had his fancy phone with him, and took a few seconds of video during this song:

I don't think I have ever heard two harmonicas at one time. Last night that happened quite a few times. All three are great harmonica players. In fact, for one song, all three were on harmonica.

Especially meaningful for me was when Lil Rev took a few minutes to talk about his greatest personal harmonica influence, my late pastor, Stephen Wiest. All in all, it was a splendid night. I got out of there at about half past midnight, which of course I shouldn't do on the night before the Lord's Day, but hey, maybe tonight or tomorrow I will catch up on sleep. Below are two pictures that my brother took. The guy on your right is Jim Liban. The one on your left is Steve Cohen. The one with the hat is Lil Rev.

quotable Maher (Terry, that is; not Bill)

2011-09-04T08:53:00.001-04:00

What's that you say? You want another juicy quote from Dr. Terry Maher? Okay, just for you.

"Sometimes the best constructio on something is that it is a pile of crap."

yet another contrarian & judgemental post

2011-09-03T16:39:00.000-04:00

Saint Gregory the Great had the nerve to die during the Lenten fast (12 March, 604). For centuries and centuries, consequently, the Church had the misfortune of being stuck with Gregory's feast taking place in Lent, since for almost fourteen hundred years there was no one smart enough to figure out a solution to this travesty. It really was annoying how Gregory's Day kept ruining our Lenten observances. Thank God that finally Annibale Bugnini and his liturgical experts came along to set things straight. The obvious solution, it turns out, is to decide that it's all the same if you just pick some other occasion for the date of a saint's feast. How about his birth? Maybe his first Communion. Maybe the day he lost his first tooth. In this case, 3 September presented itself, since that is the date, in 590, on which Gregory was consecrated Bishop of Rome.

In case you couldn't tell, the paragraph above is written with not a little sarcasm. One of the traits of a traditionalist is the notion that the dating of a feast is not a problem to be fixed, not a situation to be improved, not a thing to be reinvented. I do understand that a saint's death was not in every case the occasion for his feast. But that is the general pattern. A very beautiful and meaningful pattern, by the way. These feasts remind us that the saints, too, are flesh and blood; they too had to suffer certain consequences of sin and a fallen world. In short, they followed Christ. Even their death is in Him. Likewise, all of us who are baptized into Christ's death will walk through that dark door of death, and find on the other side the heavenly universe of eternal life with God. In Christ, ours too will be bona mors, a happy death.

So I observe Gregory's feast on its traditional date, the 12th of March. Let me assure the reader, however, that I am not just any traditionalist, but a Lutheran one. In other words, I won't be celebrating Pius X's feast today either.

One more thought on Gregory for now. For the record, I have no gastric uneasiness about the word "pope." It is an important and a valid and historical term. In a certain sense, indeed, Gregory was a pope. On the other hand, any fair treatment of Gregory would have to show that he was, as Luther pointed out, a true bishop, in some ways, the last of the true bishops of Rome, more than a pope in the later sense of the term. Gregory had no pretensions of papal power as later realized by his successors. Therefore, for example, I would advise against portraying Gregory in the triple tiara, which wasn't even used until the fourteenth century, when rival popes asserted competing claims over which pope was the one who really had power over "every living creature" (as it says in the bull Unam Sanctam). Gregory preferred to be known as servus servorum Dei, and is thus best honored by us.

Time Lapse: Milwaukee Art Museum - Calatrava - Burke Brise Soleil - HD

2011-09-03T14:35:00.000-04:00

Saint Stephen of Hungary

2011-09-03T00:58:00.001-04:00

As much as I love and admire Hannah, the saintly mother of the Prophet Samuel, I prefer to recognize 2 September as the feast of Saint Stephen, King of Hungary.

Saint Stephen, a man of the late tenth and early eleventh centuries, brought the Christian faith to his native Hungary. He was Grand Prince of the Hungarians until he was made the first King of Hungary in 1000. From then until his death in 1038 he poured his energy into the establishment of the Church in his country, founding and funding bishoprics, churches, and monasteries. He hoped for his son, Emeric, to succeed him as king, but Emeric's life was cut short. He died in a hunting accident, and Stephen's words of mourning for his son reveal a devout faith and knowledge of the scriptures:

By God's secret decision death took him, so that wickedness would not change his soul and false imaginations would not deceive his mind, as the Book of Wisdom teaches about early death.

Stephen fell asleep in Christ on the Feast of Mary's own dormition in Christ, 15 August, 1038. His canonization and the transferal of his relics took place on 20 August, 1083. For this reason 20 August was his longstanding feast day, which in the seventeenth century was moved to 2 September, to honor the Christian victory over the Ottoman Turk in Budapest. The 20 August feast, however, remained a national celebration in Hungary, a feast which was co opted and perverted by the Communists during the Cold War.

Thank God for the way He advanced His Church by the devout lives of men such as Stephen of Hungary. Christians of Hungarian heritage, and of the whole Church, owe a great deal to this Christian of ten centuries ago. Let me just add one thought to this brief reflection. Stephen was a great Christian influence on his country, yet that was only possible because his mother, Adelaide of Poland, was a devout Christian, and in Christ influenced both her husband (who was a pagan) and her son. As with Saint Augustine, it was the mother whose faith in Christ planted the seed which came to full flower only after her earthly life had ended.

la fabbrica di San Pietro as life lesson

2011-09-02T23:21:00.000-04:00

The building of Saint Peter's Basilica was a far longer and more complex project than the modern observer tends to appreciate. It took two centuries, and the reigns of thirty popes, from Nicholas V to Alexander VII, to complete. There were many intrigues along the way, many ups and downs; it was an epic filled with disasters, failures, terribly mixed motives, and also great examples of genius and true art. If it could be said of ancient Imperial Rome, Roma die uno non aedificata est, then Renaissance Rome, with Saint Peter's as its crowning glory, was likewise much more than an overnight phenomenon. From the point of view of the middle of the project it looked for a long time like a hopeless endeavor, one that had no apparent end on the horizon. In fact, the very phrase la fabbrica di San Pietro took on the idiomatic meaning of a project that has no end in sight.

My point, besides the fact that I think this is interesting history in itself, is that I think the building of Saint Peter's is analogous in many ways to life in general. God knows what is planned for your life, and for mine. He knows what will be accomplished, what will be the final result. He sees the beauty and genius of it from His perspective. We see the raw material; He knows that in and through it all He is bringing about something great.

The Lord rarely calls us to see our own success. He does call us to see with the eyes of faith that He is succeeding at doing His will in our life, and to trust that it all works together for good, a truly great good. He has our life in His gracious and almighty hand, and sees that what He has done is good. He beholds it, and sees that it is very good. For we are called according to His purpose.

All manner of sin was involved in the building of Saint Peter's, and yet that is only a type of the great sinfulness of our own lives. Out of the building of Saint Peter's came a work of monumental beauty; how much more so is the beauty of one human life in Christ.

I encourage you to consider your own struggles in this light.

a good sermon on Matthew 16

2011-09-01T19:05:00.000-04:00

Last Sunday I heard Fr. Kenneth W. Wieting preach one of the best sermons I've heard in a while. I notice the text of the sermon is now posted at the Luther Memorial Chapel web site, so I thought I'd link and promote it here.

It is one of those sermons that lets the cross shine through in all of its condemning power, and in all of its joyous comfort. I'd call it a theology of the cross sermon, one which makes me think that Dr. Wieting has been meditating on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation.

Thank God that there is preaching in His Church which condemns and edifies so beautifully.

till it happens to you - corinne bailey rae

2011-09-01T17:24:00.000-04:00

Phyllis Gaba

2011-09-01T16:03:00.000-04:00

My mother, Phyllis Gaba, was born on this day in 1935. So today she would be 76, except that the Lord took her to Himself in 1993. He thus ended her struggle with cancer, rescuing her from her intense suffering.

In the final analysis, perhaps the most pertinent facet of her life is that she gave us everything, since in and through her poor life she gave us Christ. The devil, the world, and my mother's own flesh attacked her in manifold ways. Through the rear view of several years, after so many miles down the road, I can begin to appreciate the fact that her physical suffering, and death, was ultimately a small and hollow victory for the devil. Painful though it was for all of us, with the eyes of faith we can look through that suffering, and see that though she was indeed very poor in spirit, in and through that poverty, she was truly blessed, for she possessed the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5), which is to say that she belongs to Christ. Christ, the Man of Sorrows, the poor man par excellence, the one who is acquainted with grief, He was with her the whole time. He, and His victory over sin and the devil, was in her, and she in Him. Christ, her Shepherd, is nigh at hand, and has given her everlasting rest (II Esdras 2).

J.S.Bach, Fantasia & fuge in G minor BWV 542 - Raúl Prieto Ramírez, organ

2011-08-31T18:43:00.000-04:00

working at being holy

2011-08-31T15:10:00.001-04:00

On my way back from Mequon the other night I was listening to an interview on the Catholic radio station. An author was discussing his new book on the lives of various saints. And in the course of the discussion a statement was made which caught my attention. It was about how Christians should "work at being holy." Such phraseology does not quite sound right (or shouldn't anyway) to the Lutheran ear. It is a window into a basic difference between Lutheran theology and Roman Catholic theology. To clarify, it might be worth breaking this down into a few basic areas.

First, let's talk about sin. When a man sins against God's law, he does not become a little less holy. Rather, he turns away from God. Sin results in not merely physical, but also spiritual death, ie, the soul's alienation from God. The soul is made for communion with its Creator, and when that communion is broken, the soul is effectively in hell. We might say this state is a living hell, whether or not it is perceived as such. As Luther said of Adam's spiritual condition after he sinned, "He was in the midst of death and hell." Sin does not result in being somewhat less holy; it results in utter unholiness, a rupture in one's relationship with God, which must be repaired.

What, then, is holiness? Holiness is the blessed life of communion with God. It is life as it was meant to be, life in its purest form. If I may borrow a thought from Saint John's Gospel, it is life in its abundance or fullness. As I say, the holiness of the soul is the state of being in communion with its Creator, to dwell in His presence. Now let me add, sort of parenthetically, that we may also speak of being in the holy presence of God, when, for example, we approach the altar and take our Eucharistic Lord into our bodies. And on that count, it is worth making a distinction. Entering into communion with God, say, for example, in the Holy Supper, does not in and of itself, make one holy. For if one is unprepared, then the presence of the holy God will have the opposite effect. It will harm the one who is unprepared, and confirm his unbelief. I am reminded of something David Scaer writes in one of his essays:

Unbelievers are kept away from the holy supper because their bodies are receiving what their souls despise, and they are tom apart in the very midst of their existence. Christ's body, intended to join human beings in the depths of their existence with God, becomes destructive of this unity and destines them to the most severe of all judgments. What unbelievers despise with their souls they eat with their mouths and it is joined to their bodies. An act of redemption becomes one of condemnation. They thrust themselves prematurely and unprepared before the judgment throne of Christ.

As with Moses before the burning bush, so with us today. God draws close to us, and draws us close to Him, yet we dare not approach thoughtlessly or unprepared.

Now, what exactly is the proper preparation of which we speak? As intimated in the passage above, we are not speaking of some subjective or moralistic preparation. Rather, faith itself is what grasps the presence of God, and apprehends it. Looking at the more general question again, we are now able to answer the question of just what makes a man holy. The answer is simple. When we hear the Gospel, and receive it in faith, the soul is reconciled to God, and brought into communion with Him. As Luther writes of the spiritual condition of Adam and Eve after God preached the Gospel to them, promising the Savior:

This text it was that restored Adam and Eve to life and raised them again from death to the life which they had lost by their sin...This text is the absolution acquitting him and us all. For if this Seed is so strong that He crushes the head of the serpent, He also crushes all its power; so, then, the devil is conquered, and all damage which Adam suffered is repaired. Adam enters again the estate in which he was before.

Which is to say that no matter what effects of sin we must suffer in this life, by faith in Christ we are even now in paradisal union with God.

To be sure, some Christians have a stronger faith than others, but it is not a certain level of strength that is required in one's faith for him to be worthy or prepared or able to receive God's gifts to his profit. We approach in faith, and bare our wounds, our shame, our weakness, which is to say, our weak faith, and what we receive in the Gospel, along with the forgiveness of our sins, is the edifying and strengthening of our faith. Faith itself is a gift, brought about by the Holy Ghost's work as He employs the powerful instrument of the Word. And all the gifts He gives us in the Church make us holy, for they bring us into the salvific communion with our loving Father in Christ.

There is such thing as increasing in holiness in this life. But it is not anything that I can accomplish by my own work. It is the work of God in me.

These are just some thoughts in response to what I think is a theologically sloppy mode of expression. And it is not to say that Roman Catholics would necessarily disagree with all I have written here. Nevertheless, these matters merit fleshing out. In fact, they merit more than I am giving them here.

the quotable Terry Maher

2011-08-31T14:37:00.000-04:00

"Stick that in your next Communion service COW."

My favorite line today from this online discussion.

Bruce Springsteen - Kitty's Back / Passaic 1978

2011-08-29T20:12:00.003-04:00

What's that? You're wondering why I haven't played any Springsteen in a while? Okay, just for you, here is the 13 minute version of "Kitty's Back", from the Darkness on the Edge of Town tour. As you will see, it was Little Steven's beret period. And Max's sunglasses period. And apparently Clarence's open shirt period. This song has a lot of great moments, the sax work, the guitar work; one of my favorite aspects of it is how Roy on piano and Danny on organ complement each other. Enjoy.

Saint Ambrose on Saint John the Baptist

2011-08-29T10:56:00.000-04:00

In the Divine Office this morning we have the following for the Feast of the Beheading of Saint John the Baptist.

From St. Ambrose's book on Virgins:

The memory of Saint John the Baptist is not to be passed over hastily; it is important that we should notice who was killed, and by whom, and for what reason, how, and on what occasion. The just man is killed by adulterers, the death sentence is passed on the judge by the guilty. And so the reward of the dancing-girl was the death of the Prophet. Finally (which would horrify even barbarians), the order to carry out the cruel deed is proclaimed amid feasting and merry-making; and from the banquet to the prison, from the prison to the banquet, the obedient messenger of this cruel crime goes back and forth. How many crimes are contained in this one wicked deed!

These words of the holy bishop lead me to the thought that John's death was profoundly Christlike. At the first station of the traditional Way of the Cross we reflect on the irony of the sinless Christ being condemned by sinful man. Soon after Christ's earthly sojourn we are told of a deacon who is full of faith and the Holy Ghost, whose fearless and powerful preaching, like the Forerunner's before him, gets him in much trouble. In fact, Saint Luke describes Stephen's violent and cruel murder in terms which cannot help but remind the hearer of the Passion of Christ. How appropriate that Saint John, the last of the Prophets, and Saint Stephen, arguably the first Christian to really get it and take the Gospel seriously, both die in ways which bear certain resemblances to the death of their Lord. John points to Christ by means of his death as surely as he does in his life and preaching, which is to say that his ministry included his martyrdom, his ultimate witness. And Stephen points back to Christ by means of a pure, Christlike diaconate, one which culminates in the laying down of his life at the hands of evil men, all of which, by the way, gives a lasting impression on one who will later be snatched up by Christ personally for His service throughout the Roman world.

The mystery of Christ's holy suffering, death, and resurrection is the once for all sacrifice for sin. It is also the pattern for the lives of those baptized into Christ. The cruciform life of the Christian is to be expected, for the life we now live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son of God, Who loved us, and gave Himself for us. Therefore, take heart when men revile you, and persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for Christ's sake. You don't feel blessed, but you are. The prophets were treated likewise. And they in turn were simply treated like the greatest Prophet Himself, Christ our Lord.

cleave to my inmost parts

2011-08-28T22:18:00.002-04:00

After receiving Holy Communion, it is my habit to pray this prayer:

May Thy Body, O Lord, which I have received, and Thy Blood which I have drunk, cleave to my inmost parts, and grant that no stain of sin may remain in me, whom these pure and holy mysteries have refreshed, Who livest and reignest world without end. Amen.

The phrase cleave to my inmost parts caught my attention and imagination this morning. It reminded me of what Moses writes at the end of Genesis 2.

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Some of you are thinking that the point at which I am driving is obvious. Nevertheless, it is worth meditating upon a truth this beautiful. This is the type of truth that should not be learned once and then thrown into a corner (as Luther laments too often happens with the Catechism). Rather, it is the law in which the Christian, as Christian, exercises himself day and night (Ps 1).

In the Holy Supper Jesus unites Himself with us as surely and intimately as a man unites himself with his wife. In fact, all human marriage is but a dim reflection of the union between Christ and His Bride (the Church-and on the personal or microcosmic level, the Christian soul). That is the one true, model, marriage. Christ is the true Man, Who left His Father in one sense, and His mother in another sense, and cleaves to His holy spouse. He does this for us, and out of His infinite love for us.

In our flesh we are thoroughly sinful, and in the Eucharist Christ imparts to us His forgiving touch. In the struggles of life in this world, both as the result of our sin and that of others, we are afflicted with trouble of every sort, assailed by the devil, and hounded on every side by the morbid culture of the world, and in the Eucharist Christ comforts us with His pantokratic and vivifying presence. He holds us to Himself, and in His Eucharistic embrace He renews our life.

And this eucharistic and mystical union, let us emphasize, is always fruitful. He plants the seed of His sacramental Word in us, and it bears much fruit, far more than the most fruitful of human marriages.

The whole of the Christian life is soaked in the promises of Baptism. This insight is one of the geniuses of Lutheran theology. At the same time we should think on the fact that the whole of life for the Christian is eucharistic, not merely the hour and ten minutes you are in church, or the ten minutes or so in which you have the Eucharist within you, but the whole cycle of your days and weeks, your activity and passivity, your work and your rest, your relationships at home and at work, your commutes and your lunch breaks, your mental life and your verbal and active life, your phone calls and your Internet activity, your reading, writing, art, and conversation. The whole pattern and trajectory of your life. It is the sacrificial life of Christ lived out in your life. It is Christ's witness, His martyrdom, in His members. You and I are His fruit in this world, even when we don't see it and feel it. We can assess our lives in terms of our sinfulness. Yet at the same time, too often we forget that we can also train the eyes of faith to see life in terms of our holiness in Christ. The eucharistic life is the life of our Eucharistic Lord made manifest in our various callings. This is part of the truth behind the old saying that our whole life flows out of the Blessed Sacrament, and back to it.

It is worth keeping in your prayers the profound truth of our life in Christ, and the life of His which He imparts to us in His Supper. I especially encourage you to meditate upon this the next time He does unite Himself with you in this way. Kneel down for a moment, if you can, and just think about the rich truth of His presence, and its implications.

Brewers win again

2011-08-28T21:12:00.000-04:00

Here is a recap of today's Brewers game.

As a lifelong Brewers fan, it's fun to watch them this year. I remember vividly the 13 game winning streak in 87. I was a waiter at the Ramada Inn Downtown, and I still remember listening to that 12th game on the radio in the kitchen with some of my coworkers. I barely remember the World Series of 82. And the Hank Aaron years were before my time. In some ways, though, the 2011 Brewers are better than ever. For the past month they have been the hottest team in the major leagues. Right now they are ten and a half games ahead of the second place team in our division, and it seems that at Miller Park lately they can't be beat.

I must say, baseball this good goes especially well with a stadium as cool as Miller Park, which turned ten this year. If interested, you can read this piece about Miller Park, and watch this video which shows the park from the inside, and shows how quickly the convertible roof closes.

The Brewers home game is a unique experience, with the tailgating, the sausage race in the 6th inning, featuring the batwurst, Polish sausage, Chorizo, Italian Sausage, and hotdog; and of course the singing of "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" & "Roll Out the Barrel" in the 7th inning stretch (notice the people actually dancing the polka in this video). There's also Bernie Brewer, who used to slide into a giant beer barrel. Unfortunately, he no longer falls into beer, but just slides from point A to point B, which strikes me as almost pointless.

Admittedly, I say all of that as someone who hasn't been to a game in several years. It doesn't have a place in my budget. So I catch games when I can via TV, radio, and mostly reading about them the next day. I've been to Miller Park once so far, and that was for a Springsteen concert in September of 03. I could tell right away, though, just walking into the place, that it is 100% better than County Stadium, for baseball, or anything. I once took Ruth to a game back in the days of County Stadium, and our tickets ended up being for seats that were right behind one of those posts that blocked the view of the field. That was one of our more extravagant dates. And yet she married me.

Win or lose, Brewers baseball is part of Milwaukee, but it is especially fun right now.

Jim Liban Combo with Denny Geyer (Don't Start Me Talking)

2011-08-27T17:55:00.000-04:00

This video features Denny Geyer's guitar work, and Jim Liban on vocals and of course harmonica. Jim Liban, by the way, is my favorite blues harmonica player (in the post Wiest era). This performance was in the 3rd Ward at the Italian Community Center. FYI, I hear Jim Liban and Lil Rev are going to be at Linnemans next week (I gotta double check the date).

stir up the gift of God

2011-08-26T14:48:00.000-04:00

When a man is ordained into the priesthood, he is set aside and consecrated for a holy and necessary role in the Church. That role is described succinctly for us by the Augsburg Confession, where it is called the Ministry of teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments. One need not be a pastor to be faithful to these essential functions of the Church's ministry. No matter what his title, whether it be pastor, seminary recruiter, campus pastor, military chaplain, hospital chaplain, seminary instructor, headmaster, editor for the publishing house, translator for the publishing house, driver for the synod president, or whatever, a presbyter will be judged according to his faithfulness to the teaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments.

If you are an ordained priest in the Lutheran Church, and you haven't said Mass for years, or even months, I call upon you, and your confession calls upon you, to remember what the ministry is, and what you are. You are a man to whom God gave a great gift by the laying on of hands. You never lost that gift, by the way. It is still in you. It is a gift "which is in thee" as St. Paul says. He doesn't say, "which was in thee." What you need to do is to stir it up once again. Pray for the gift of the Holy Ghost, that He would renew all His gifts in your life, and that He would renew your commitment to the ministry of the Word of God. He will reorient your life. Ask Him. Ask Him every day, until He both shows you the way, and gives you the courage to take it.

I disagree with the notion that seminary professors ought to be made to serve as parish pastors, for 1. it would be unfair to them and to the people to expect that all presbyters would make good pastors, 2. even if one would be good at being a pastor, it would be unfair to a church to get a pastor for only a short duration, even if it were a year or two, and 3. there are many ways they could keep themselves connected with the ministry of Word and Sacrament. The same goes for the bureaucrats, heads of schools, and whatever else. When you see opportunities to celebrate the Holy Supper, and to preach, take them. When someone asks you to hear his confession, don't go through your mental files of all the reasons why you shouldn't do it. Just do it. You say you are out of practice? I know you are, and hearing confession is the sure way to solve that problem. No one ever asks you? Then you are not writing, teaching, and preaching about it. Not enough anyway.

If you are currently serving in "Word and Sacrament ministry," then I call upon you nonetheless to strive constantly to renew your commitment to it. Ask the Holy Ghost to give you a pure love of the Eucharist. Ask Him to make you a better minister of Christ and of Christ's Church. Ask Him, for He Who can renew the face of the earth can also renew the dry soil in you. He Who brought light to the world by His word can enlighten the darkness in your heart. You don't see any noteworthy darkness in your heart that harms your life of ministry? Have you stopped to think about it lately? Ask God. He will show you.

Christ our Lord, Who gave His life to atone for the sin of the world, wants to give the forgiveness and life that He won for us on the cross to men, women, and children here in the modern world, through your life, work, and witness. His boundless love gushes from His pierced and sacred heart even now. It does so through ministries that are shaped by His cross. Let your ministry bear the marks of the Lord Jesus. If it does, then no man can ultimately trouble you, not even the Old Adam in you.

CONAN on RODEO ROAD!

2011-08-23T22:17:00.000-04:00

Nacho Libre - I Only Believe In Science

2011-08-23T14:06:00.000-04:00

a thought on the nature of a seminary

2011-08-23T11:10:00.000-04:00

Before there were seminaries, and even before there were universities, it was the bishop himself who was responsible for a candidate's training. That was the purest and most direct form of priestly formation. From the bishop a candidate learned holy doctrine. From the bishop he learned how to handle the holy things. And from the bishop he learned holy living. By contrast, our seminaries barely manage to teach the first of these three. (To be sure, I am a fan of the concept and tradition of the seminary-I just wish modern seminaries would pay more attention to their genuine responsibilities, and clean their house of the distractions of their contrived responsibilities.)

In the course of time, priestly formation began to take place in other ways, such as monastic training, cathedral schools, universities, or the modern seminary. And yet, even when a man is prepared for churchly ministry in one of these other ways, it is still the bishop who is responsible for his training. The bishop is merely entrusting, or delegating, certain aspects, or even all, of the training to this or that specialist, or to a school, etc.

The relationship between the parent and the primary & secondary schools is perhaps an apt analogy. It is the parent who is called upon to raise and train the child. The school, the teachers, even a private tutor, these are only taking on certain aspects of this training/raising on behalf of the parent. Likewise, the bishop is the spiritual father of a church, and he is called upon to teach and train. The seminary merely takes on this role on his behalf.

In terms of the LC-MS culture, this is not a readily apparent truth. For we have a less than traditional concept of episcopal authority. Seminarists on their year of training in the parish ("vicarage") often refer to the vicarage supervisor as their "bishop." There is truth in this, and I don't discount it. Yet it would be good for the seminarist to recognize that his bishop is still the one who sent him to seminary, which in one sense is his home pastor, and in another sense is his home district president.

Interestingly, LC-MS custom seems to implicitly recognize this, since ordination is reserved for the district president, who may delegate it to another pastor.

Saints Timothy, Hippolytus, and Symphorian

2011-08-22T11:44:00.000-04:00

Along with this being the octave day of the Dormition of the Mother of God, it is also the day on which the Church remembers three martyrs.

In the early fourth century Timothy of Antioch started preaching in Rome. The prefect had him arrested and sent to prison, after which he was scourged for his refusal to sacrifice to the gods. Finally, he was beheaded.

The facts surrounding Hippolytus are lost. We are told in the martyrology, however, that at Ostia he was bound hand and foot by Emperor Alexander and thrown into a pit of water. His body was recovered by Christians, and buried nearby.

Symphorian was a young man of the late third century. For his faith he was brought to trial before Emperor Aurelian. His mother encouraged him thus, "My son, think of eternal life. Raise your glance to heaven and behold your eternal King! Your life will not be taken from you, but transformed into a better one!"

All three of these holy men were called to give witness to Christ their Lord. The same goes for all Christians today. The difference is simply that of circumstance, and that in some cases witness takes the form of bloody martyrdom, while in other cases our witness takes the form of what the Church calls white martyrdom, that is, the witness of the sacrifice of our whole life for the sake of Christ.

Let us remember with gratitude these martyrs, and consider what the Epistle to the Hebrews calls the "end of their conversation," and let us strive to follow their witness, in whatever way God calls each of us to do.