I want to pick back up the subject from yesterday. And I want to do it in a very specific way. We can trace a bunch of the problems within the denomination or you could say within the 1st world western church back to the 1960’s. Historically they go back farther, but that is when they erupted. I’ve got a book sitting on my shelf that is one “go-to” historical reference for a prior time of eruption – the reformation. That book is Ozment’s – The Age of Reform. The subtitle is 1250 – 1550. Think about that for a second. When we talk about the reformation we usually think 1517 (Luther’s 95 Theses) and forward through maybe 1648 and the Treaty of Westphalia where the Reformed (i.e. Calvin) received official sanction. In Ozment’s construction Luther was the eruption at the end that brought a bunch of streams together. The Council of Trent put a capstone on that age. Everything after that was learning to live with the separate theological peaces negotiated. From a Lutheran perspective our theological peace is expressed in the Book of Concord. The two biggies there are the Augsburg Confession and the Formula of Concord. The formula closed up Pandora doctrinal box for Lutherans just like Trent did it for Catholics. The Reformed would have a more difficult time. There are a bunch of reformed confessions that closed the box for many different groups, but that stream liked opening the box much more. They were “reformed and always reforming”.

Just for a second I want to scan the contents of that last eruption: Original Sin, Free Will, Righteousness of Faith, Good Works, Law & Gospel, Third Use of the Law, Holy Supper, Person of Christ, Descent of Christ into Hell, Church Practices, Election, Other factions and Sects. There are some weighty topics there, but today I can believe in original sin in the form of total depravity and my Catholic neighbor can believe in original sin but expressed more as an inheritance from Adam of an inclination to sin and neither of us will decide that “I need to get a sword and chop off his heretical head”. Not that these things aren’t important, they are, what we think on these things effects how we live even if we don’t know it, but they are settled things. Of those things the reformation peace on the Lord’s Supper is probably the widest. As a Lutheran I might believe, teach and confess that transubstantiation is a little too specific, but the body and blood are truly present , and I think that is the best way to talk about it, but can I really say that Roman Catholics are out of Christ or Zwinglians are heading to hell? The writers of the Concord would probably have said yes. But 430 years later that is a very tough statement. Especially given that all three groups are still around. Unlike the resolution of the early Trinitarian doctrines in the creeds, and especially the Athanasian Creed which states that “whoever wishes to be saved must hold the catholic faith…and the catholic faith is this…” we just don’t put that forward with confessions. Some do, but I think you could get a good consensus around something like: Creeds – definitive doctrine, Confessions – internally consistent ways of living the one Catholic faith.

Now we come to the modern troubles. If I were trying to sit down and write a modern confession that would close Pandora’s doctrinal box I think here are the headings I would start with: science, medical technology, man and woman in Christ. Under science I think you would address things like evolution and modern philosophy. Under medical technology you would address end of life issues and the death penalty but also early life issues such as IVF, birth control and abortion. Then under man and woman in Christ you would discuss such things as divorce, sexual mores, the ministry, and what might be termed gender roles.
What I want to do is flesh some of the controversies and stumble toward some possible confessional statements. Now some of these are what we might think of as “no brainers”. Some, like sexual mores, have very strong and core biblical statements. Others like who is in the ministry are much more muddy than the sides in the controversy would think. And still others are pure extrapolation from biblical principles such as IVF.

Again, this is me thinking out loud. I’m trying to separate true theological thinking from simple justification of “that is the way we always lived, so the modern world must be wrong”. The next time I’m going to start with the easy things – sexual mores. Then I’m going to extend that to IVF & Birth control.

I’ve been lax about writing, but I wanted to update everyone about what’s been happening at St. Mark’s Preschool! In the beginning of November, we finished up our Creepy Crawlies theme by learning about spiders. The children loved reciting along with “The Very Busy Spider” by Eric Carle. We spent the rest of the month learning about Thanksgiving. We discussed what it means to be thankful, drew pictures of things we’re thankful for, and read a lot of Thanksgiving books. The children also colored wooden turkeys and took them home to their families. When they came back after Thanksgiving break, we talked about our favorite parts of the Thanksgiving celebration.

Over the past couple of weeks, we’ve been learning about gingerbread. We read two different versions of “The Gingerbread Man.” Tomorrow, we’re going to ice and eat our own Gingerbread Man cookies!

We’ll be spending the rest of December learning about Christmas. We have a lovely Christmas tree in our room, which we’ll be decorating tomorrow! We’ll talk about the first Christmas and the birth of Jesus, as well as current Christmas traditions. Watch for more updates about our Christmas theme!

When we tell the story of Jesus there really are two biblical starting points. You can start like the Gospel of John – ‘in the beginning was the word…”. Or you begin like Matthew & Luke with genealogies or human origin stories. One is called a Theology from Above. The eternal Word descends to earth for a time of humiliation and returns in exultation. The other is a Theology from below which essentially says its fine to talk about the pre-existent Christ and God and God, but we know Him revealed in human form as Jesus. This Jesus was actually born and lived among us. In his life, death and resurrection He revealed His deity. Take a quick look at the Nicene Creed 2nd article. Where does it start? “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds…” A pure theology from above, the pre-existant Christ. Then look at the apostle’s creed. “And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by they Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary” A theology from below. It begins with the baby and Mary.

If you were asking me, the theology from below is the theology for times of philosophical materialism (like now). The theology from above is for times of philosophical idealism. Big words those, so give me a couple of sentences to explain. If you look at the world and say or even just act on a daily basis that ‘this is all there is’ or that ‘only what I can see, taste, touch, smell or manipulate is real’, congratulations you are a philosophical materialist. If on the other hand you look at a chair or lets say a room full of chairs and ask, “what really makes a chair or defines a chair, what is chair-ness?” then you are an philosophical idealist. Just the fact that “chair-ness” probably caused you to snicker, or if you break out into hives at the thought of someone “finding themselves”, you are at least a functional materialist. This split has been around a long time. A picture nearby is of the famous paint the school of Athens. In the middle are Plato and Aristotle. Plato points up saying –“the chair-ness is not in this world”. Aristotle points down – “it’s all here Plato, baby.”

Long lead up to the Hymn I want to look at. We will sing this hymn this week. It is Praise Be to Christ which is number 538 in the Lutheran Service Book. The words are written by the living writer Timothy Dudley-Smith whose inclusion in the Lutheran Service Book is one of the best things about the new Hymnal. He is a former Bishop in the Anglican Church. An evangelical within that tradition and a longtime friend of the recently deceased John Stott who himself was a leading smart voice in evangelicalism. The tune is a public domain repurposed German Tune from Stuttgart that has some drama. If you listen to it you can feel it build right up until the end.

Now for what hopefully is the payoff. The Lutheran tradition, largely German, loves its idealism. The tune to this hymn was originally paired with the text – O God, of God, or light of light. Idealistic theology from above all the way. This is my and any materialists problem with that – how do I know and talk about such lofty things? The pitfall of a theology from above is thinking that we know the mind of God. We only know about the God from above through revelation. And that is where Dudley-Smith is a great theologian. He thinks as a Trinitarian.
Look at the first line of the first stanza: Praise be to Christ in whom we see the image of the Father shown, the firstborn Son revealed and known…

We can’t know the Father or as even John would say no one has seen the Father (John 1:18). But the human Jesus Christ, the image or to use a more loaded term the icon of the Father shown, has revealed and made known to us God. If you have seen me you have seen the Father. (John 14:9) The Theology from above and the theology from below meet when you think the Trinity. They meet in the person of Jesus. Stanza three of this hymn: Praise be to Him who Lord Most High, the fullness of the Godhead shares, and yet our human nature bares, who came as man to bleed and die. Very God of very God was made man. This hymn holds those in tension. It speaks to the idealist who wants to hear of God above. It also speaks to the materialist who says give me something I can really see. You can have good theology in almost any philosophy. This is a great example of a hymn that stays true to theology.

I don’t usually add these occasional sermons. They usually are so specific to the event that I don’t think there is much that someone could get out of them without that background. This is one I think a little differently about. I really liked this sermon (if I do say so myself). It is short, a quick read and I think presents the gospel in a light and attractive way. It might be worth your 5 minutes whether married 5 mins or 10 years.

 
Text: 1 Cor 12 – 13
“Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends…”
Our generation has been chastened from some of those stark statements, but we still gather in joy at weddings. Brides – like Delia here, and grooms –like Curtis – will come before God and their assembled family and friends and promise shortly to love, honor and keep in sickness and in health. They will pledge to each other their faithfulness. In other words, to promise that love never ends.
But St. Paul – the writer of those words – is not naïve about love. Listen to how he defines love. It bears all things. So when the mountain top experience of the wedding day is a distant memory replaced by the mountain of laundry. Love bears it.
Love believes all things. I don’t think that St. Paul is asking us to be intentionally stupid here, but is saying that love puts the best construction possible on your spouse’s actions. So when he’s watching football on your anniversary – it is not because he’s an ingrate, but because he really means it’s a big game. Or when she claims that new furniture is needed or that you need to forget about the game to decorate a room – love believes this is a necessity.
And probably most importantly – love hopes all things. Your hopes are now for each other and jointly as a couple. Love chooses to place its hope in your partner – even when it might not be the smart thing. Love choses to hope in the union – when something else might look more hopeful.
And all of these bearing, believing, hoping, enduring…these actions of love are not easy, but they are your choice. The world wishes to say that love should be easy. From mountaintop to mountaintop. God’s revelation is that love is both easy and hard…and much more defined by the hard…and it is in our hands. We choose to continue to love, even when something might not be loveable.
The truth is that none of us will ever live up to that. But we have been given an example and a promise. Christ loved his bride the church. Such that he bore the cross for her. Believes that she is the best thing even though church history might say otherwise, continues in word and sacrament to hope for her… and Christ’s love for His bride the church does not end. How Christ deals with the church is the ideal for marriage – with hope and faith , with forgiveness, and greatest of all, with love.
So we gather in joy for a wedding, because we commit ourselves to that ideal. And we commit to that knowing that Christ has already lived it for us. That when we are weak, He still loves us…and allows us to renew our lives though His never-ending love. Amen.

This is cute, but somewhat silly…