St. Mark's Lutheran

The Best Poet of the 20th Century on Liturgy

Parson Brown — Fri, 18 May 2012 15:25:38 +0000

Two Realms and the New York Times

Parson Brown — Fri, 18 May 2012 14:45:32 +0000

David Brooks is like the one eyed man in the land of the blind.

The people who pioneered democracy in Europe and the United States had a low but pretty accurate view of human nature. They knew that if we get the chance, most of us will try to get something for nothing. They knew that people generally prize short-term goodies over long-term prosperity. So, in centuries past, the democratic pioneers built a series of checks to make sure their nations wouldn’t be ruined by their own frailties…Neither the United States nor the European model will work again until we rediscover and acknowledge our own natural weaknesses and learn to police rather than lionize our impulses.

I say one eyed man because David Brooks understands the law. Not the civil law, but the natural law or the religious use of the law. He understands 1 John 1:8, “if we say we have no sin the truth is not in us”. Many politicians of the left and the right think that if only we could implement out program we would get it right. That is a form of denying the truth. Because as St. Paul says all the law does is increase sin. (Rom 5:20). But David Brooks only has one eye. That part after the ellipsis in the quote gives it away. He thinks that just acknowledging original sin or our inclination to break the rules will restore good government. Now turning from complete falsehood to truth might lead to better government, but it might just as well lead to another rash of “men of iron” who would seek to impose that better way. Since all men are rule breakers we need that “strong ruler” to keep them in line. That thinking lead to Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and every homicidal dictator of the 20th century left and right. Hitler won elections. Stalin was popular.

The second eye is the gospel. Those founders understood that law only leads to sin. They also understood that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness had political dimensions, but were largely spiritual in nature. For a democratic government to survive required citizens of private virtue (4 Cardinal: Prudence, Patience, Fortitude and Temperance; 3 Theological: Faith, Hope and Charity). And the only way to sustained private virtue is conversion and the indwelling of the spirit. You can have the best system set up with complete understanding of the law, but absent private virtue it will come to naught.

What the democracies of the west are reaping is the coming to naught. Virtues are not built and practiced because the Spirit has been denied. The Spirit has been denied because the Spirit testifies to Christ alone. And we do not want Christ. We can do it ourselves. We can perfect our democracy and our safety net and our war machines. We do not want the grace. Especially a grace given from a cross. Empire always looks better than the cross, until you live in it or under it as the case may be.

Paragraph to Ponder

Parson Brown — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:34:51 +0000

From Fr. Raymond Brown’s Anchor Bible Commentary on John, John 17:9-16…

If the disciples are sent by Jesus into the world, it is for the same purpose for which Jesus was sent into the world – not to change the world but to challenge the world. In each generation there is on earth a group of men given by God to Jesus, and the task of the disciples is to separate these sons of light from the sons of darkness who surround them. Those given to Jesus will recognize his voice in and through the mission of the disciples and will band together into one.

Alternate Universe Sermon…

Parson Brown — Tue, 15 May 2012 15:50:51 +0000

I’ve had a couple discussions following up on this past Sunday’s sermon. And I want to flesh out what a biblical consistent counter-factual would look like. The short version of that sermon was a confirmation of what the church teaches about marriage and sexuality. 1. All people are called to chastity. 2. Some are called to that within marriage while others are called to that being single. Being chaste is not being a prude, it is an act of love for God, for Christ and for your husband/wife or you community. It is an act of faithfulness and a statement of the hope that we have. 3. Without doing great harm to how the church has interpreted marriage and the chaste life, there is no way that same-sex marriage falls within those teachings.

The alternate universe sermon, or probably a sermon that did take place in this universe in a mainline denomination where the preacher still felt tied to grounded interpretation of the bible, would have been based on the first reading of the day Acts 10:34-48. The story is about St. Peter meeting the gentile Centurion Cornelius. Peter has been given a vision of formerly unclean food being made clean. He has made the journey and now finds that God has included the Gentiles. But even at that he would have been reluctant to baptize. It was the appearance of the Holy Spirit on the Gentiles talking in tongues (the Gentile Pentecost to the original Pentecost preacher) that moves Peter to baptize. God made this change abundantly clear to Peter, and Peter followed God.

This alternate universe Sermon would then jump to Paul and quote Paul in Gal 3:28 – neither jew nor greek, slave not free, male nor female. It would tie Peter to Paul and both of them to John, with some statement that the Holy Spirit is moving in regards the male/female portion and a further revealing of the truth.

That alternative universe sermon is candy on the ears, and even has the chance of being true. BUT, BUT, for it actually to be the case, this is what is needed. First you have to claim that the Holy Spirit is acting and He should be acting in a way that is completely undeniable. Peter sees the gentiles assembled speaking in tongues and extolling God (Acts 10:46). To give this alternate universe sermon the preacher would have to declare what are those acts today. Is anyone willing to standup and say such a thing? Second you really have to claim the prophetic mantle. Without Peter’s visions of the risen Lord showing him the unclean food and declaring it clean, this never would have happened. Jesus made it very clear. So, to change 2000 years of teaching on sexuality, the prophetic element would have to be equally dramatic. Again, is anyone willing to standup and say such a thing? And here is probably the bigger thing. Alternative universe Parson just doesn’t have the authority or calling. The vision and the experience went to Peter. It was Peter’s words in Acts 15 on the same matter that sways the Jerusalem Council. Paul could say that the gentiles were good, but who was Paul? [Think about that for a second, St. Paul was not enough Acts 15 makes clear.] The equivalent of Peter would have to have this kind of change. And I’m sorry ELCA or TEC, presiding Bishop Hanson is not Peter nor is Bishop Jeffers-Schiori. Now if Matthew Harrison (President of the LCMS) were to in the course of a week or so suddenly change his tune, I’d have to give that some attention. But even that wouldn’t be Peter. Even in Lutheran understanding, if only by human means, Peter was still the leader of the apostles. Even in a fractured church, nobody is going to call the LCMS president the leader of the churches/bishops.

One does not have to be a Roman Catholic believing that the bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ and the direct heir of that original Peter, to say that the closest we come today to a Peter is the pope. If Benedict XVI came out and did what Peter did – confirm a movement of the Spirit with clear examples – I’m sure many would go back to ‘whore of Babylon’ language immediately, but for me that would make that alternate universe sermon plausible.

That is what I think a biblically consistent counter-factual would look like. I think that is something of what Rod Dreher is onto in this piece. I also agree with him that I think this will cost the orthodox church significantly over the coming decades.

The Putnam-Campbell data suggest the real battle will not be over whether or not churches are going to embrace gay marriage. As I said, the churches that do aren’t benefiting from it, overall. The question is going to be whether or not young people remain Christian in any sense connected to the Great Tradition. Homosexuality is a clear, bright line. The Rachel Held Evanses need to ask themselves if they would be willing to follow Jesus Christ if in doing so, they would have to take a countercultural position on the issue. To embrace same-sex marriage from a Christian viewpoint is a radical shift, one that repudiates two millenia of Christian thought and teaching.

Are we really so sure that we 21st century Americans have this right, and everyone that came before us, including St. Paul, was wrong?

All of which is to say that I expect a severe winnowing in the ranks of Christians over the course of my lifetime.

Christian Marriage

Parson Brown — Mon, 14 May 2012 15:15:34 +0000

Biblical Text: John 15:9-17
Full Text of Sermon

Finding poignancy in pop songs is pretty tough. Lady GaGa flirts with it before retreating to camp and a great bass line. There are the ever so earnest indies. The ingenues like Adele whose combine the virtues of youth and a healthy supply of talent, but that usually doesn’t age well. Something close to of the moment (I’m a pastor with three young kids, so cut me a little slack) – “somebody that I use to know“. One of the pop lines that has stuck with me is from Matchbox 20′s Real World. The Chorus, after having the singer imagine that he’s rainmaker, sings about the real world – “Please don’t change, please don’t break. The only thing that seems to work at all is you.” I remember thinking when I first heard it that the song feels the fallen world. A bunch of people looking for something that works knowing that everything eventually breaks.

That is where the orthodox understanding of marriage comes in. Everything in this fallen world breaks: towers and titans, marriages and friendships, toys and trinkets. And when we move past bargaining- “Please don’t break” we move toward acceptance, at least if pop psychology is correct. Acceptance in the realm of marriage looks like what we have – a landscape full of people that we used to know, maybe even those living with us.

But acceptance is not the endpoint of the Christian story. We might accept that things break, but not for the purpose of excusing them or making the brokenness normal. If we say the brokenness is normal, we lose the gospel. Instead we teach repentance – I’m broke. And we teach restoration – Christ makes all things new.

In regard to marriage we could teach acceptance, but that is what Moses did, that is what the law does. And the law permits divorce. In this day and age it is permitting a whole bunch else as well. But Jesus didn’t teach that. If he did, we wouldn’t have the cross, because that is what Jesus did for his bride the church. And you don’t do the cross if there is another way out. We are broken. We live in a broken world. But Christ was not. Jesus fulfills the covenant that marriage is a glimpse of. The bridegroom shares 100% of himself with his bride. The crucified one is the only thing around here that works.

Preschool Firetruck Visit

Parson Brown — Fri, 11 May 2012 15:04:31 +0000

Exciting times at St. Mark’s Preschool, the firetruck and the firemen came to visit

Revenge

Parson Brown — Wed, 09 May 2012 21:23:58 +0000

I’ve got bad habit that I have no desire to break. ABC’s soapy concoction Revenge (Wednesdays @ 10 PM) hits way to many sweet spots. I mean who doesn’t like a show that casts one of the ultimate girl next door actresses in a generational vendetta settling mastermind role. Amy Abbott from Everwood all grown-up ninja. A one woman Karma squad.

Last week’s episode was even titled absolution with our anti-hero narrating that is the one thing her enemies will never get. The Revenge plot is a staple of entertainment, but at a gut level we all know that it is false – like the karma dream that drives it. We wish that people got what they deserved. We invent religions and philosophies about how the cosmic scales will balance. But, as fun as they might be, we know they are the equivalent of candy. A sweet spot in our fallen selves. Instead, the world as it is is not one governed by karma but by the cross and by grace. The cross is the judgment of this fallen world. The scales don’t balance. The innocent are tortured. The lamb bleeds. And the blood is offered free and clear. You don’t get what you deserve from this world. And you don’t get what you deserve from God. Cross and grace. The scales don’t balance. Revenge and Karma are fun on the TV, but we know they are false. And when the show is over, we can return to grace.

Roses, vines and tools

Parson Brown — Tue, 08 May 2012 04:41:08 +0000

Biblical Text: John 15:1-8
Full Text of Sermon

“I am the true vine…remain in me.” That is the core of the text. As I say in the sermon reflecting on the seven I am saying of Jesus in John, I am the true vine and my Father is the vine dresser to me is the more complex or deepest. Unlike say the good shepherd which makes immediate intuitive sense, or the bread of life which also has a real referent, we know vines and vine dressers, but applying it to humans and the Christian life quickly gets tough.

What I try to do here is trace out a matrix of Biblical meaning and I throw it against an episode of my personal life. Writing and delivering sermons is a process of reading and proclaiming three different things. The biblical text is of primary importance. It has something to say that is for all people. But the congregation and the preacher also need to be read. A perfectly fine sermon for Saint John the Divine parish might be horribly wrong for Saint John the mundane. Likewise there can be perfectly orthodox sermons given by Pastor Emo that given by Pastor Study would be false. That is why we hold the Sermon to be God’s Word for the people of that time and place. It is also why the sermon is a spoken form.

I can’t really describe this one beyond saying I think you’d have to listen to it.

Argh! Coding Changes

Parson Brown — Sat, 05 May 2012 00:19:03 +0000

Once upon a time I had some coding chops. Now, not so much. And Facebook changed something. I logged in and found nobody in the facebook “fan box”. Wondering what had happened, I started checking it out. What had been the facebook page had been deleted, so there go a few hours leaning what the new approved method is. This is in some ways a test. If you have any problems with the site please drop me a note: pastor at saintmarkslutheran dot org.

Stunning

Parson Brown — Wed, 02 May 2012 20:19:21 +0000

I’m just stunned at this. I feel like it must be a hoax. It’s like we’ve just completely forgotten WW2 and “life unworthy of life” (in German: “Lebensunwertes Leben”).