What’s a Lutheran? Let a traditional Lutheran explain it
If you’re an Evangelical, have you ever wondered how a traditional-orthodox Lutheran might feel about him or herself? Or how a traditional Lutheran pastor might feel about Evangelicals?
I just came across an interview posted at The Gospel Coalition blog titled “Those Dern Lutherans“. Blogger and Reformed pastor, Rev. Kevin DeYoung (RCA), interviewed Rev. Paul T. McCain, an orthodox Missouri Synod Lutheran pastor (LCMS) who is the editor at Concordia Publishing House, and who blogs at Cyberbrethren. Let me say that he sure can tell you what Lutheranism is about. I have been a reader of his blog for years. I’m not a traditional born-and-bred Lutheran; I’m an evangelical transplanted into the Lutheran church–so I provide this disclaimer–”What I say about Lutheranism is not necessarily representative of most Lutherans”. In this interview, Pastor Paul says it well.
Question 9. “Anything else you think the world needs to know about Lutherans?”
Answer: “I would say this: I think Evangelicals often find themselves searching for something they feel might be a bit “missing” in their Christian walk, and think that Rome or Eastern Orthodoxy may fit the bill, while all the while Lutheranism is there, right around the corner. Often when they find a traditional Lutheran Church they are surprised to find a robust, rich worship life, rooted in the Scripture (which is what the liturgy is, in its entirety). They find a rich focus on Christ and the Gospel–Lutherans are adamant that Christ is the heart and center of everything, and they also find a tangible experience with God, not based simply on feelings or emotions, but on a concrete and objective experience with God’s grace through the sacraments. And all this is wrapped up in such a vibrant passionate love for Jesus. We Lutherans combine the best of what is Evangelical, with the best of what is truly catholic about the Church, with the rich heritage of the Lutheran Reformation. I think it is a winning combination, but of course, I’m kind of biased.” (…Read full interview)
I think he’s right in what he says about some Evangelicals–whether we admit it or not. Evangelical theology has much to learn from Lutheran theology, albeit, the opposite is true too. The same goes for worship-liturgy too. If you’re Lutherans, sorry but the vice versa is true too.
When all is said and done, I can honestly say that every denomination, church, or tradition, e.g., Lutheran, Presbyterian, Evangelical, etc., we have much to learn from one another.
Movie: The Grace Card, out on DVD August 16
Question: “Is it easier to receive grace than it is to offer grace to those who don’t like us?“
This question represents the crux of this life-changing movie. The movie: The Grace Card (2011) is a powerful movie that personally touched me in a big way. The movie is about two police officers, one whom is also a part-time Nazarene pastor who is challenged by his partner’s dislike of him. They both learn about grace and forgiveness–big time.
Okay, I admit a few tears flowed near the end (and I don’t cry easily). Talking about offering forgiveness to someone you don’t like is easier said than done. When it comes down to actually forgiving others, it’s a different story. As I watched this movie, I was challenged and reminded about the power of God’s forgiveness working in the lives of Christian believers. The film did this in a very powerful way for me recently. I was reminded that, rather than justice, it is forgiveness that brings healing to broken hearts in our world. It will definitely inspire viewers to depend upon the power of God who strengthens us. It will also inspire us to offer others the gift of forgiveness to those who do not necessarily love or like us. What an awesome example of what grace can do!
It came out in theaters back in February 2011 and is now available on DVD starting August 16, 2011. It’s a well-made quality movie. Go get it and show it in church, your youth group, or just watch it at home. Available at: Christianbook.com, Outreach.com or at your local Christian bookstore.
Justin Bieber’s mom’s testimony of salvation
I just finished watching the Justin Bieber movie and wanted to find out more about his family’s life. I was surprised to learn of his mother’s Pattie Mallette’s testimony of how she received Jesus Christ into her life as a young rebellious teenager. She raised Justin Bieber as a single mom which was very difficult. This was Justin Bieber before he was “Justin Bieber” the 15 year-old music sensation, and before his first recording contract. There are four parts to the interview : Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 (with Justin)
I hope that Justin and mom Pattie will remain true in their faith and in their relationship with the Lord. Below is a clip from 100 Huntley Street.
Author: Rob Bell.
“Love Wins: a book about heaven, hell, and the fate of every person who ever lived” (HarperOne, 2011).
I liked Rob Bell’s Nooma series and have used it, but this book has stirred so much controversy that the evangelical and protestant world is still reeling from the aftershocks. There was a lot of controversy when it came out earlier this year and I thought: “What’s the big fuss all about? I’ll have to read it myself.” Many bloggers have already blogged about this so I’m a late-comer adding my two cents worth to this discussion. This is definitely not an indepth review but just a few of my thoughts.
In his book, Bell is trying to simplify the Christian faith by removing, or (and I’ll borrow Bultmann’s terminology) “demythologizing” the theological images of the Christian faith that may be out-of-touch with today’s postmoderns. Take the cross for instance; it was used for capital punishment in the Roman Empire and has become the prominent symbol of the Christian faith for the past twenty centuries. Today, the equivalent of this symbol might be the electric chair or lethal injection in some U.S. states where capital punishment is law. So why stick with the “cross” terminology/imagery? That’s a good question. Bell’s demythologizing of the cross can be useful and easier to stomach, but his demythologizing of hell has definitely not been welcomed. This is what the fuss is all about. It is heresy to most evangelicals and traditionalists including myself, initially at least.
As an evangelical Christian, I try to simplify the Christian faith as much as possible. The Christian faith can be as complicated or as simple as one makes it. Theology can be complex, but a simplified interpretation of one’s theology can make religion a little easier to grasp and take a hold of. Furthermore, simplicity of faith makes spirituality easier to receive and embrace. Perhaps, this is what Bell was trying to do in his book.
Personally, I feel this demythologizing of the cross isn’t as bad as the demythologizing of hell (which was really a garbage dump just outside of old Jerusalem called “Gehenna”). Most Christians interpret “hell” in the traditional sense of the word. To many of us, hell is a place of eternal fire and brimstone reserved for the evil one, his demons, and his followers.
To interpret hell as anything other than this would definitely invite accusations of blatant heresy. Then, it’s no wonder Zondervan rejected Rob Bell’s book. They knew this would spark such a controversy that it might affect Zondervan in the negative way…and it would have. Zondervan’s rejection of Bell’s book is a benefit to HarperOne’s benefit….but doesn’t Harper Collins own Zondervan anyway? (In the end, “Harper Wins” 
)
Despite these controversies, Bell’s book has, and will, help its readers expand their interpretation of theological ideas and images of the bible with a wider lense.
Personally, I don’t think Rob Bell has become a universalist, as some evangelicals may have accused him of being. So has all this big fuss gone overboard? I think so. His language may sound universalist but I have my doubts whether he has actually converted. I think he is more of an inclusivist, which is in-between an exclusivist and a pluralist. He probably leans closer to that of Clark Pinnock’s than Karl Rahner’s; so his theology should still be within the bounds of orthodoxy. It kind of sounds like he has drawn his theology from Pinnock because he used some similar language. Now I’m defending Bell. Where Bell went wrong was his vagueness and lack of clarity in language, which only added to people’s misperceptions of him. A few of Bell’s statements in his book might be interpreted as universalist, but I think they can also be interpreted as being inclusivist (however, I could be wrong). But if so, why hasn’t Bell defended himself as an inclusivist or made reference to people like Pinnock? If Bell is actually an inclusivist, his theology is nothing new; it has been taught for decades by teachers like Clark Pinnock (Baptist), Karl Rahner (Catholic), and others.
On numerous television interviews, and as some of you already know (here, here, plus many more), Bell intentionally avoided answering some questions, for fear of being misinterpreted by his fellow evangelicals. I am not certain about Bell yet but I am certain that he has not been clear-cut and straight-forward in speaking about his theology of hell as we would like him to be. He seems to like to keep it vague… and probably intentionally so. Let’s hope Bell’s theology hasn’t veered too far from orthodoxy.
Thanks to HarperOne for sending me this book to review.
Might be going minimalist
I occasionally run into a few blogs that are life-changing. Here are a couple by the same author on minimalism that has just influenced me to think about making a change in my life. It fits well with, and lends to my previous post (or rant) on materialism. To me, this is kind of a spiritual issue in life.
I’m sitting here in Starbucks enjoying a cup of coffee (Pike Place roast). This relaxing [in]activity gives me an opportunity to do a little self-reflection. Seems like it’s not often I get to do this these days. While on vacation in Vancouver (my birth place), I noticed some changes since I moved away from this city many years ago: old buildings and houses torn down to make place for new buildings; increased real estate prices; lots of fancy cars; good food; and etc–all the fanciful things one would want to satisfy a carnal life. What has not changed are things like: damp weather caused by rain-cloud covered skies; green trees & grass; the rush of people and traffic; and the beautiful mountains and ocean sitting in the background.
What seems to have changed the least and also the most, are people’s self-perceived need for material things. On one hand, materialism has always been prevalent in the heart of humanity. On the other hand, materialism has never been as popular as it is today. When lives seem empty, we try to fill it with things, and more things. Such things might be things-to-do and material things—all to satisfy our need for affluence, status, and pleasure. Why? Someone once said:
“Much of our activity these days is nothing more than a cheap anesthetic to deaden the pain of an empty life.” – anonymous-
Mahatma Gandhi said:
“Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed.”
How true?! We try to spend money to buy things to impress people and/or gain status. We think that status, affluence and pleasure come from having more material things. This is a deception. When human beings chase after the material things of this life, this chase can take forever and never have an end to it.
The sad thing is that the Christian church has also fallen prey to this deception. Many of us Christians have grown up listening to the false and twisted gospel of prosperity—that God gives to those who help themselves. Some actually think this is a quote from the bible. What has happened to our Christian understanding that discipleship involves suffering and sacrificial giving? Jesus’ message of the cross has been forgotten.
How did we become so ignorant of what brings true happiness and freedom? When we began to believe that our security comes from having enough money and material possessions. Rather than being liberated and free from material things, we have become enslaved to it. Materialism, the idol of the 21st century, is an endless and futile chase for things that can never satisfy our human spirit. When our inner human spirit (which is immaterial and created for spiritual things) becomes dependent upon earthly things (which is material), we become self-enslaved to an insatiable desire for more material things.
The love of money and material things is a distraction to the kingdom of God. Regarding the kingdom of God, St. Paul the Apostle said:
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils” (1 Timothy 6:10).
The love of money and material things is a distraction to the kingdom of God. If Christians are to have a clearer understanding of the kingdom of God, we must realize that our spiritual nature was created to live in fellowship with the Spirit of God. Such is the will of God. Holy Scripture also says:
“Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for [Jesus] has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you” (Hebrews 13:5).
The Spirit of Christ wants to fill humanity with himself in order that we may live in unity with our Creator God. When Christ enters our lives, the Spirit of God becomes our endless source of joy and freedom. God is humanity’s only and final source to true fulfillment. Spending more time to contemplate upon such things of God’s kingdom affords one the opportunity to seek the things of God. Allow the Spirit of God to fill you with more of God’s Self.
The series is now tied 3-to-3. The last game tonight, Game 7 (5PM PST / 8PM EST), between the Vancouver Canucks and Boston Bruins, will be a “winner take all”. I can’t believe it!…but I still believe!
The historic Boston Bruins has not won the cup in 39 years, and the Vancouver Canucks has never won the cup in their 40 year history. Both teams and their fans want to end their drought and win the cup badly, but I think Vancouver fans want it more. As usual, the street parties will be crazier than what it was during the Vancouver 2010 Olympics.
No one thought it would come down to the last game for the Stanley Cup finals. It has been a totally confusing series to predict because both teams won all their games on home ice, and lost all their games played away from home. I can’t predict which way it will go anymore because it has gone so differently from what we all expected–Boston fans included.
Bruins goalie, Tim Thomas, has been playing great in this series–better than Canucks goaltender, Roberto Luongo. Canucks star players, the Sedin twins, have been shut down by Boston; so it’s come down to the other three lines to get the job done for the Canucks. Personally, I like the passing-skating game but I think the Canucks must play a physical-hitting game like they did in games 1, 2, and 5 in order to defeat the Bruins.
As crazy Canucks fans, we’re really hoping for the Canucks to hoist the cup. Tonight, I believe Luongo will play well again at home…the Sedins will show what they can really do… The Canucks will refrain from taking dumb penalties, and take advantage of powerplays…and of course, Canucks fans will show our support for our team–from sea to sea, from Vancouver Island, Saskatchewan, Toronto, to the Atlantic provinces.
Do you believe?…
Canucks will win one in Boston
I’ve been here in the Atlantic east coast of Canada for a week doing a couple intensive courses in my D.Min. program
and I’ve been feel blessed about it so far. One week left to go. I’m feeling elated that the Vancouver Canucks (my team since a teenager) are in the Stanley Cup Finals. Last time I saw them in the finals were in 1982 and 1994. Now is the year to win it all–Lord Stanley’s Cup in 2011. Canucks fans can taste it now–O so close!
Time to brag a little…no I mean blog a little..about the Vancouver Canucks. Vancouver has the best fans ever. Even though they’re playing Games 3 and 4 in Boston’s TD Gardens, Vancouver Canucks fans will be watching these games together at the sold-out Rogers Arena in Vancouver. What devotion! And not the brag but just before the game started, a bunch of guys and I were together and I predicted a 3-2 Vancouver win over Boston– and I was right. Yeah I guess that’s bragging but how often do you get a chance to brag about getting it right on? Yep, not often.
If there are any Boston fans reading this blogpost, I’m sorry. I think Vancouver has the better team so I predict they will win one of the next two games in Boston, then win the Stanley Cup in Game 6 in Vancouver. GO CANUCKS GO!
The Vancouver Canucks have been playing great hockey. They managed to win two straight games on home ice against Boston. That’s a good position to be in if you’re a Vancouver Canucks fan. Now they’re only two games away from winning the Stanley Cup and they’re going into Boston to play for two “away games” in front of Boston fans. Can the Canucks win the fourth game in Boston? Will it be a 4-0 sweep? Maybe, but I would also love to see the Canucks win the Cup on home ice too.
If the Canucks win the Stanley Cup, it will be their first time in their 40 years of franchise history.
Go Canucks Go!!
Clergy and study leave
As pastors, most of us get two weeks off for study leave (or continuing education, i.e., C.E.) per year so I’m taking advantage of this. Some pastors don’t use their study leave even though it’s available to them. Do you think pastors should be taking study leave every year? Do you think it’ll help the ministry of the local church, or is it stealing time away from church ministry? Does your pastor take advantage of study leave?
I’ve been really busy with ministry, plus preparing for my upcoming two weeks of intensive courses (biblical studies, then theology, with a ton of readings, reflection papers, etc.). This will give me a good break away from ministry, but it’ll still be work nevertheless because it’s the learning type of work (full days too). Study leave is not a break but it’s a chance for me to keep learning new things. I’m really looking forward to these 2 weeks coming up for C.E. as part of my D.Min. program.
The Mushy Middle series: on ministry
… a series of posts on politics, church life, culture, theology-discipleship, and ministry
It seems that it’s not only the mushy middle in church life, culture, and theology, that are being pushed out, but also the mushy middle in practical ministry. It used to be that young Christian men and women would only consider attending the seminary of their own denomination. Today, this has all changed. Generations of young Christians entering the ministry today want to pursue entry into whichever seminary/bible college will teach them to innovatively and effectively participate in God’s mission. They are not satisfied in merely maintaining the status quo, as much as, they are desiring to deepen the faith of their people, to be the salt and light to others in a culture of darkness, and to evangelize greater society. The status quo in most of our mainline church-run seminaries are not working because we have lost our missional focus (or have never had one)–and as I said before–our churches are languishing or dying. This sense of not having a focus, passion, and purpose for mission and evangelism does not sit well with the mushy middle.
Prior to starting my Continuing Education (C.E.), I struggled over whether I should do my C.E. in a Lutheran setting, for which I have been grateful for in my M.Div. After prayer and consultation with people I trusted, I decided to do my C.E. in practical ministry at an evangelical seminary due to the expertise and knowledge of its instructors, its history, and its reputation for innovative ministry and leadership training. ( There’s my plug for Acadia; and if you’re interested in knowing how I am experiencing the D.Min. program at Acadia Divinity College (located in Wolfville, Nova Scotia) feel free to contact me via email ).
My point in this post is this. The mushy middle in practical ministry also seems to be in the process of being pushed out. Seminaries stuck in yesterday’s world of ministry, and that maintains the status quo is ‘on the out’. Today’s generation of young Christian men and women called into ministry seek cutting-edge education where they teach bold and innovative ways of discipleship and evangelism that will work effectively in today’s post-modern context. Wishy-washiness should no longer be tolerated. It’s time to say “bye bye” to the mushy middle attitude.
… a series of posts on politics, church life, culture, theology-discipleship, and ministry
It seems that it’s not only the mushy middle in politics, church life, and culture, that are being pushed out, but also the mushy middle in theology. It used to be that generations of Christians stuck with the church/denomination of their parents. However, this is also the way of the mushy middle. Today, Christian young people are moving around from one church to another (church hopping) because they have a spiritual need that is not filled. They want a theology that is stable, rock solid, and not one that’s wishy-washy and changes with the times. Pastors and denominational leaders in established mainline churches hate it when we lose the few devoted sheep whom we are desperately trying to hold onto. We end up accusing other churches (e.g., charismatic/evangelical that tend to be missional) of sheep stealing.
The fact is that it was never a matter of “sheep stealing” in the first place; rather, it was a matter of not adequately feeding our own sheep. Hungry sheep are always looking for green pastures to feed on. Many parishioners, especially in our post-modern age, who really do care about their own spiritual growth do not care so much about which church they are attending, as long as, they are growing in faith and deepening their spirituality. I know this because I am a product of this myself. We, who are ministry leaders and clergy, need to be actively engaging and providing our sheep with substantial “spiritual food” to deepen the faith of our own flock. Otherwise, we will lose hungry sheep to “greener pastures”.
In most cases, “sheep stealing” might not an appropriate description of what is happening. Even the very churches that are experiencing growth are also experiencing big fluctuations within their attendees; however, it doesn’t bother them because they accept what is happening, and they are adapting quickly enough to improve their methods of ministry and discipleship. Today, it is no longer “the big eat the small”; it is “the fast eat the slow”, as Pastor Mark Driscoll says.
My point in this post is this. The mushy middle in theology and discipleship also seems to be in the process of being pushed out. Today’s generations of young Christians in this post-modern culture are willing and able to join Christian communities where they can deepen their Christian faith and spirituality. Wishy-washiness is no longer tolerated. It’s time to say “bye bye” to the mushy middle attitute.
The Mushy Middle series: on culture
… a series of posts on politics, church life, culture, theology-discipleship, and ministry
It seems that it’s not only the mushy middle in politics and church life that are being pushed out, but also the mushy middle in culture. Our culture in the western world was satisfied with the way they receive news in the form of newspaper and television media. They took in whatever the television news media dished out as unbiased news. Young people of post-moderns do not buy this today. All news are biased. Younger generations want their news personalized to suit their taste and interests. With the news media of iPods, smart phones and Internet, they are able to receive exactly the type of news they want. They can filter out news they are not interested in watching or reading. When I read news today, I rarely read from a physical newspaper. I either get my news from the Internet or have it sent to me via email. I go directly to the category of news I want to read or watch, e.g., world, technology, health, etc.
When young people shop, they rarely go to big department stores to buy all their items. Department stores tried to cater to everyone’s needs. This was wishy-washy and is the mushy middle. It is not sexy, and is no longer the way to shop. Department stores are increasingly in danger of shutting down. Young people prefer to shop at specialized stores that only offer blue jeans, cell phones, women’s or baby clothing, sporting equipment, running shoes (not everything). Big department stores are even attempting to divide their floor space into specialized sections so that they look similar to small specialty stores. My point in this post is this. The mushy middle in culture also seems to be in the process of being pushed out. Today’s youth and post-modern culture want to receive whatever they consume in specialized formats.
The Mushy Middle series: on church life
… a series of posts on politics, church life, culture, theology-discipleship, and ministry
It seems that it’s not only the mushy middle in politics that is being pushed out, but also the mushy middle in church life. Take a look at the life of the established (or rather, de-establishing) mainline churches. The United Church and Anglican Church have been the fastest dying churches in Canada for years. The Lutheran Church is also headed in a similar direction today. The United Church of Christ and the Presbyterian Church (USA), amongst others, are also quickly emptying out in America (see 2011 Yearbook). Today, there is a feeling of desperation—a desperation to find a last gasp of air before easing into oblivion [maybe this is an exaggeration, but it's only to make a point].
Soren Kierkegard, a Lutheran religious philosopher, railed on the wishy-washiness of the spiritual state of cultural Christians and state-run Lutheran church in the 18th century (Attack upon Christendom). Today’s state of Christendom in the northern hemisphere is in a similar state—a state of death and dying. The numbers of young people attending historic mainline, and some mainline evangelical churches, are decreasing each year (Hat Tip: Rev. Tim Keller). The mushy middle within church life today is too comfortable. There is no need to have a clear conviction in one’s personal religious beliefs or any need to live as devoted disciples of Jesus Christ. Many pastors are no longer preaching Law and Gospel. Their faith does not really mean very much to them, and lacks any sense of urgency or intent. If you’ll allow me, I wonder what would happen if our churches were to burn down? Would it upset many Christians who are in the mushy middle? I suspect that it might not affect many in “Christendom” This explains today’s closures of our mainline congregations.
As a result, generations of children of unchurched families rarely ever darken church doors (except for the occasional wedding, funeral, confirmation, and infant baptism). Spirituality in their eyes is privatized and is not lived out in fellowship/communion with other Christian believers. Today, as a result of generations living the mushy middle life of “church-ianity”, people have either become atheists/agnostic, or living like as if they were one. This is why there is an increasing number of people who are declaring themselves as ‘non-religious’, ‘agnostic’, or ‘atheist’. The alternative, which is increasingly more popular today, is that they are rejecting the wishy-washy ways of their parent’s past life, and are seeking to live a more devoted Christian life, and are attending church more often and regularly. This explains the growth of evangelical churches.
Here’s my point. The mushy middle in church life seems to be in the process of being weeded out. People who do want a new way of living in spiritual/faith community will find it. They want to be a part of a spiritual Christian community in which they are challenged to live as devoted disciples, othewise, they may choose to have no part of the church at all. Wishy-washiness should no longer be tolerated. It’s time to say bye bye to the mushy middle attitude.
The Mushy Middle series: on politics
I am starting a new series I’ll call The Mushy Middle: (a term I borrowed and used to kick-off this series from [HatTip] Pastor Tim Keller)… a series of posts on politics, church life, culture, theology-discipleship, and ministry
It seems that the mushy middle on the political landscape is being pushed out. When the Tea Party Express rolled into many states in this last election, a large number of conservatives, mainly Republicans, were suddenly elected into Congress, which may have been unexpected. People understood the clear intent and purpose of the Tea Party Express and where it wanted to take the country. Clear intent tends to foster a trust and a common goal; whereas, mushiness tends to foster vagueness and lack of direction.
As I stated in my previous posts on our recent federal elections in Canada, the wishy-washy Liberals were unkindly ushered out the door, and Quebec’s Bloc were completely obliterated off the political landscape. The two parties that faired best in this last election were the Conservative Party of Canada and the New Democratic Party (NDP). The Conservatives and its leader, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, are mostly clear on where they stand on the political right-of-center. The NDP and its leader, Jack Layton, are also clear on where they stand on the political left. Perhaps, as a result of their stand, the people chose to give the Conservatives majority government status this time. Likewise, as a result of the NDPs clear stand on the left, the people (especially in Quebec) also chose to empower the NDP, moving them from an insignificant political party of the left into the status of Official Opposition. The most seats they ever had was just over 40; but this time they surprised Canadians by winning 102 seats!
My point in this post is this. The mushy middle seems to be in the process of being pushed out. The public wants a new politics where they know where their elected leaders stand. They don’t want a wishy-washy attitude.
