Catechism Highlights, Pt 2

I almost forgot to do this! There are a lot of questions to cover, so I may miss some that caught my eye.

105. What is the Christian's proper response to theories of evolution regarding the beginning of the world?

The catechism's way of addressing the issue of evolution is pretty fideistic. It essentially says "The Bible speaks of a young Earth, so that must be true!" It also calls evolutionary theories "scientifically unverifiable."

This implies the LCMS holds to a Young Earth Creationism (YEC) understanding of the world - a literal seven days of creation, with the universe being around 6,000 years old. Although I once held to YEC I now consider myself an Old Earth Creationist (OEC). I accept scientific aging of the universe at about 13.7 billion years old, as well as a very old Earth and evolution. This is due to me mostly being an evidentialist - I go where the evidence takes me. Up until now I haven't seen very much evidence pointing to the viability of a young Earth. I see YEC/OEC as a doctrine of secondary importance, so I don't mention it often nor do I try to persuade others' stance on it.

107. Do people still have the image of God?

According to the catechism, we don't bear the image of God anymore because of sin. We are not the image-bearers that many people like to tell us. By accepting Jesus the image is rebuilt in us but won't be fully completed until after the end of this age.

108. How does the universe still depend on God? and 110. What does God do to take care of me?

One of the questions I've been wondering is, how active is God in my daily life? Or in general, just how much involvement does he have? Does he oversee and care for every single detail, or does he let us decide how the paths of our lives will go? The answers to 108 and 110 suggest that God sustains the physical world (by digging a bit into the grammar of the Greek it seems to be a passive thing) and he provides for and defends his followers. In his foreknowledge, God established the universe in a way that, through natural occurrences and human action, that his will would be done.

140. Has Christ redeemed only you?

A shock to my system: Christ has redeemed everyone, not just believers. This notion, called universal atonement, is a bit foreign to me. I suppose while everyone is redeemed, not everyone is saved because they lack faith.

213. For what do we pray in the Second Petition?

The Second Petition is the line "Your kingdom come" in the Lord's Prayer. I have long thought this was a petition for God to bring the end time sooner. Under Lutheran teaching, God's kingdom is already present. So in saying this we ask that the already present kingdom may be further edified.

215. What is the good and gracious will of God?

Christians today seem to obsess over knowing what God's will for their lives is. Who do they marry? What country should they be a missionary in? What should be their major in college? There are books and sermons on discerning God's will, even though he has shown himself generally tight-lipped in talking about it until we need to know.

The answer to this question is nicely summed in three phrases: obedience, evangelism, and proper instruction. How the specifics are worked out are left to God and man's free will.

218. How is God's will done in our lives?

Answer: when God defeats plans which oppose his, keeps us following godly behaviors, and supports us throughout our lives.

226. What does God want us to do for those who sin against us?

The answer to this is a real challenge for me to carry out. We are to forgive them and do good to them.

249. If Christ has already won forgiveness and salvation for us and gives us all this by grace alone, why do we still need baptism?

Apparently I'm not the first one who thought saying Jesus alone saves, but then adding baptism, seemed wonky. This is the closest the catechism came to answering the objection I had to Lutheran doctrine. Jesus alone saves, but it's distributed in baptism. I am not entirely sure this satisfies my objection.

269. What special authority has Christ given to His church on Earth?

This introduces a doctrine called the Office of the Keys. Honestly it's something I could devote an entire blog post to. In short, ministers can withhold divine forgiveness from unrepentant people, and it will be as effective as if God himself were denying them forgiveness. It is a bit weird but also understandable. Pastors work in the place of Christ and act on his authority.

292. Do all communicants receive the body and blood in the Sacrament, whether or not they believe?

I wonder how this applies not toward unbelievers, but those churches that don't believe the wine (or grape juice) and bread really are the body and blood of Jesus. It would appear that they still really are taking Jesus's body and blood, even though their official doctrine says it's just symbolic.

One to Another

Tomorrow I will most likely be finishing my reading of the Small Catechism. Eventually I will try to get a post up with the thoughts I had on the remaining questions I read in the explanation of the catechism.

I have already picked what I want to read up on next. Coming from an Assemblies of God church, I have been taught a more literal, millenialist teaching of Revelation with a focus on a pre-tribulation Rapture. Lutherans don't hold to a literal reading of Revelation. The book was mentioned in discussion the other day and it made me curious. I looked up a study on Revelation and found this one. I'll go through it over the course of a couple weeks or so, just depending on how I pace myself. It will be really neat to get an understand of Revelation that pre-dates what I was taught originally.

Catechism Highlights, Pt. 1

Here are a few things I've read in the explanation to the Small Catechism that I've found interesting.

4. What is the key to the correct understanding of the Bible?

The answer indicates that the core to meaning the Bible is Jesus. In other words, whatever is read must be understood in light of the death and resurrection of Jesus. In some things this may be hard to notice. Parts of the Old Testament gain new meaning when you factor Jesus into the equation. Often I am inclined to read the books of the Bible as separate works with different genres. But they are unified through the message of Jesus.

5. How is human reason to be used in understanding Holy Scriptures?

The thing that interests me is how the answer indicates that it's OK to use reason when trying to understand the Bible (including philosophy), but it has to be subject to the Holy Spirit. This is another strike against the claim of fideism I've put on Lutheranism in general.

36. Does God require us to observe the Sabbath and other holy days of the Old Testament?

This is one of the more radical things I've read thus far. Radical in the sense that the answer indicates we as Christians are not required to pick a day to observe as a Sabbath. Rather, Jesus Christ is our Sabbath, our rest (Matt. 11:28, Matt 12:8, Col. 2:16-17, Heb. 4:9-10). Through Jesus Christ we have a perpetual, constant Sabbath rest even if we're not physically relaxing.

37. Does God require the church to worship together on any specific days?

The answer here is that while God does command us to worship together, there is no day we're required to meet up on. Most Christians have church on Sundays. Seventh Day Adventists prefer Saturdays. There is no set date for it. Indeed I have seen instances of churches holding services on Sunday, but also Wednesdays and Saturdays. Sunday is the normal day of worship mainly because that's the day Jesus was resurrected on.

53. Does anyone have authority to take another person's life?

I was surprised at this answer. The catechism says "yes" - lawful governments are authorized to execute criminals and fight just wars, which include taking lives.

56. What does God forbid in the Sixth Commandment?

Divorce is unacceptable except in cases of marital unfaithfulness. This includes adultery, but also desertion. From the Bible verse used to support the desertion parts it seems to imply the deserting member is an unbeliever. Maybe it's also expanded to believers as well. I'm a little surprised abuse is never considered a reason for divorce. I personally would not bat an eye over that being a reason people get divorced, because it strikes me as completely out of God's will for someone to remain with an abusive partner.

71. What does God mean when He threatens to punish the children for the sin of the father to the third and fourth generation of those who hate Him?

It seems Martin Luther didn't realize that the above statement wasn't meant to literally mean punishment for sin would extend to one's children. He cites Ezekiel 18:20 saying that sons will not be punished for their fathers' sins. The statement the question addresses, if I recall correctly, is a reference to how the gods of the neighboring nations actually would place a generational punishment like this. By mentioning it, God speaks of how powerful he is. It is a sort of metaphor which speaks of God's sovereignty.

80.  How many kinds of sin are there?

The catechism mentions two types of sin: original sin and actual sin. Actual sin is the stuff we do, and nobody seems to deny it's there. Original sin states we are wholly corrupted due to the first sin ever committed by Adam and Eve. I know this is something not everyone agrees with, although I haven't really focused much on it.

Reading Through the Small Catechism

As I mentioned a couple months ago, I went through the membership class for the LCMS and received a copy of the Small Catechism. It came in a small book with a blue cover. At least, I think it's blue - I'm colorblind so I might be wrong. After the Small Catechism, the book goes through the various parts of the catechism and addresses some 300 questions about the various parts of it.

I have this thing where I get a little bothered by people not knowing what they believe or why. So imagine the plank in my eye when I realized that even though I called myself a member of the LCMS church, I really did not have an expansive understanding of what it teaches! So recently I have committed myself to reading 5-10 of the questions in the explanation of the Small Catechism on a daily basis. Overall it should take me a month or two to finish.

While there is a lot of information that I'm processing, and much of it stuff I already figured out, every now and then I'm running across something that stands out as a "Hmm, that's kind of cool" thing. I may end up writing a post about these as I find them.

More about Music

It's been a couple months since I last mentioned music on here, but in the time my opinion hasn't really changed. I've noticed traditional Lutheran worship to be very, very musical. It's not just the hymns. It's also the traditional songs with fancy Latin names which are tripping me up.

Something I have come to realize is that I will probably never really enjoy a traditional service. The first time I participated in one, it was a very cool experience. I felt like I had been teleported back into the Middle Ages, hearing the organ being used to indicate to the congregation where to start and stop a song, move to the next segment of the service, and so on. But having spent the past summer in that kind of service I can honestly say... it's really not the thing for me.

Liturgical music like the Gloria In Excelsis, Kyrie, or Sanctus have proven very hard for me to learn. That's because they were each written at least a thousand years ago. Gloria In Excelsis dates to the AD 300s. The age doesn't bother me as much as the extreme lack of rhythm. I'm no musical expert, but these songs were clearly written in a different setting than a modern Western society. Evidently what passed as good musical composition was unlike the tastes of today. I've tried listening to a couple in their original Latin texts, and even then I was underwhelmed.

Hymns are a bit more tolerable because at least they have a more consistent flow. But I guess you could say they lack energy behind them. By and large the songs sound flat to me. A couple of them throw in catchy inflections of the tone but the rest are rather... bland.

Honestly, sometimes I have to remind myself that God accepts any style of singing intended to worship him. Because I wouldn't be terribly impressed if I were in his place. It also surprises the heck out of me that I've come across people in my age range who actually prefer this style of service.

Don't mistake this as me judging the traditional type of service, or those who enjoy it. To each his or her own. But I guess that after being fed a steady diet of rock and pop, hymns on an organ really don't stir me. I find these kinds of things too hard to learn. I don't mind singing in church (you can thank my four years in the Assemblies of God for that!) but most tunes are really hard for me to catch on to.

I strongly prefer a contemporary style of service. Mainly because we're not spending ten minutes singing the same ancient songs that we've going over hundreds of times. Also because there are - gasp - guitars used! That said, I don't have a problem with traditional liturgical songs popping in to the contemporary service every now and then. I guess I just object to the idea that every other part of a service needs to be sung with an organ.

Confirmation.rar

A couple months ago, the pastor of my home church offered to teach me the basics of the Lutheran doctrine needed to be considered worthy of taking Communion. I kind of let the offer slide because it would be one-on-one and I find such situations quite awkward. But one thing led to another and we ended up arranging a set of three meetings, where he would teach me the proper material.

Perhaps because he saw that I already knew a lot of the stuff, he ended up going over the stuff more quickly than he would with a Confirmation class. The whole thing took about four hours over the course of three meetings. At the last meeting he gave me a small book containing the Small Catechism and expansive explanations of the various parts.

It impressed me just how much the Lutheran church wants you to know before you can take Communion. For a denomination that comes off as fideistic to me, they sure expect you to know quite a bit! When I wanted to get membership in the Assemblies of God I was simply given a small paperback book explaining their main doctrinal points. But to get into the Lutheran church you need to know the Ten Commandments, the Apostles' Creed, the Lord's Prayer, as well as understanding of baptism, Communion, and confession. That's pretty intense, and I daresay thoroughly Biblical. In a couple weeks I will be making an affirmation of faith, but even before then I think I'm now "qualified" to take part in Communion in the LCMS.

Impressed

The LCMS has impressed me recently, in two ways.

First: last Sunday was the first Sunday after Independence Day (4th of July). As expected, there was some mention of America and the freedom we have therein. But our pastor started off with some pretty clear-cut words. His words were essentially, "We are blessed to be in America, although the nation has declined morally and deviated from the Constitution."

Wow. That's bold to say in this day and age. I agree on both accounts, of course, but a pastor saying that requires some real gall. It's all too easy to lose congregants for speaking truth. I value and admire any pastor who would be willing to speak an inconvenient truth such as that.

Second: I am pleased as to how thoroughly scriptural Lutheran theology is. I've seen how other denominations have needed to input their own understandings or interpretations to get their particular beliefs. Then I read instructional material given by a Lutheran church and, my goodness, the stuff is referenced and cross-referenced every which way. They also have the backing of history, a second way of validating their beliefs. All told, I can feel confident that what I'm being taught is indeed sound doctrine.