Of the Father's Love Begotten (Lutheran Service Book #384)

Of the Father's love begotten
Ere the worlds began to be,
He is Alpha and Omega,
He the source, the ending He,
Of things that are, that have been,
And that future years shall see
Evermore and evermore.

Oh, that birth forever blessed,
When the virgin full of grace,
By the Holy Ghost conceiving,
Bore the Savior of our race,
And the babe, the world's Redeemer,
First revealed His sacred face
Evermore and evermore.

This is He whom seers in old time
Chanted of with one accord,
Whom the voices of the prophets
Promised in their faithful word.
Now He shines, the long expected;
Let creation praise its Lord
Evermore and evermore.

O ye heights of heav'n adore Him;
Angel hosts, His praises sing.
Pow'rs, dominions, bow before Him
And extol our God and King.
Let no tongue on earth be silent,
Ev'ry voice in concert ring
Evermore and evermore.

Christ, to Thee, with God the Father,
And, O Holy Ghost, to Thee
Hymn and chant and high thanksgiving
And unending praises be,
Honor, glory, and dominion,
And eternal victory
Evermore and evermore. Amen.

Text: Aurelius Prudentius Clemens, 348-c.413; translation- John Mason Neale, 1818-66, stanzas 1-4; translation- Henry W. Baker, 1821-77, stanza 5

Tune: Plainsong, 13th century, mode V

Meter: Divinum Mysterium

Merry Christmas to one and all!!

Anger Cleansing

I was so angry while on my daily walk this morning. I won't go into detail about why I was angry, but suffice to say that it sure made walking more brisk than usual. I huffed and puffed for about 45 minutes and then continued my romp and stomp through the house and into the shower. I was so angry I was talking to myself out loud. In the shower. Then I schemed and planned to bring the perpetrators of my anger to justice. I thought of ways to make them pay through the nose, or at least ways to apply the screws even tighter and put them under my thumbs. All of this while I was lathering, shampooing, and rinsing.

But the more I talked and pretended to be the tough guy in the right, the angrier I got. I was turning into a beast. My breathing was shallow. I was shaking. I started to get dizzy. My face was turning red. That was one of the roughest showers I had ever taken. I've taken them before, but never like this. I'm surprised I didn't rip my own scalp off.

Where did all of this anger come from? It just welled up inside of me and reached boiling point. I'm glad I got to release it, but then what about my planning and scheming to right perceived wrongs committed against me? Will I still carry them out?

It was then that I realized something. I don't know where this came from, but out of the blue came this thought that said, "What you plan to do will only make things worse." I argued against that thought. It didn't seem right because, dagnabit, someone has to conform to my standards that, prior to today, did not exist.

But was that really fair? It was then that I remembered something I had read in my Pastoral Care Companion about anger-- anger comes from an unwillingness to forgive. I forgot the exact quote, so I went to the Companion to read exactly what it says. And here it is:

Sinful anger and bitterness are destructive emotional responses expressed an unwillingness to forgive others. When not dealt with, they devastate a person's relationship with God and the neighbor. The pastor will use the Law to reveal such anger and bitterness as a fruit of unbelief. (Pastoral Care Companion, p. 315)

Wow! That was a hard pill to swallow. A fruit of unbelief. I didn't like it, but somehow it rang true. It doesn't matter if I like it or not. I was exposed. But it didn't get rid of my anger. Now I was angry that I was angry. Being shown that anger is a fruit of unbelief cuts deep. I had harbored hatred toward those I was angry with, and I was paying the price. I was finally coming to my senses, realizing that I was just being a jerk, if only in my imagination. My anger began to subside.

The Pastoral Care Companion goes on:

Proclaiming the unconditional forgiveness won by Christ, the pastor will point to the love of Christ, which constrains us to relinquish anger and to forgive those who have sinned against us even as God in Christ has forgiven us.

That's ultimately what changes the heart-- Christ! I can't change it myself. I'll just look for more reasons to be angry. The Gospel reminds me that I've been cleansed from hatred and malice. It constrains and reduces me to forgiveness and mercy. Now I can breathe! Anger cannot exist in a clean house.

I'm sure that anger will come back someday to dirty things up again, and I'll make a mess of myself. But I think that's the whole point. I know that I'll always be struggling with things like this until the day I die. But the struggle is good, because then God shows His best work in Christ in reminding me of my cross-shaped identity. I'm covered and am drawn out from a will in bondage, to one that is free and clean.

A Personal Relationship with Jesus

Is there really such a thing as a personal relationship with Jesus? I struggle with that question because part of me answers in the affirmative, and another part of me answers in the negative. I'll deal with the latter, negative part of me first.

The skeptic in me senses that a personal relationship with Jesus involves the self setting the terms of the relationship. In other words, if one is going to have to have such a relationship it would be under the condition that Jesus sees things "my way". And aren't we really good at composing agendas for others to follow, especially demanding that Jesus conform to such an agenda? If that is what is meant by a personal relationship with Jesus, then I would have to say that there is no such thing. But there's also another dimension to this that is often overlooked.

Whenever in the Scriptures God deals with an individual, it was for the benefit of the whole. The covenant with Abraham was for him and his descendants, and ultimately his seed, who is Christ (see Galatians 3:15-18). Moses was given the stone tablets on Mt. Sinai for himself and for Israel. It was not a private affair between Moses and God. Jesus didn't die and rise for himself, but for all of us. It could be argued that Jesus had a "personal relationship with God", but that was only because he embodied all of humanity. Again, it wasn't a private affair between "me and God".

It appears that God deals with the individual, but only with the collective in mind. This is why it disturbs me when people look for "practical application" of the Scriptures, or when people ask, "How does this apply to me and my life?" Why is it so necessary that the Scriptures must have direct application to you? Or me? The Scriptures were not composed for the purpose of helping individuals live better or to give individuals a set of regulations that will guarantee happiness. The were written to gather a people, composed of individuals, yes, but not for the sake of the self. It is to take the self beyond the self so that the self is lost in an organic body of Christ which submits to the love and the grace of God. For we are one body and individually members of that one body.

Now answering in the affirmative, there is such a thing as a personal relationship with God insofar as it is recognized that said relationship is also true of other individuals in the body of Christ. Grace is all the same for everyone. God doesn't pay more attention to one person over another, although it may appear that way to us. But that is to misunderstand the relationship and misappropriate the grace of God as a talisman for the self. A personal relationship with Jesus is not measured by how many goodies one has but by membership in the body of Christ. By grace through faith we are granted membership.

Relationship with Christ automatically places us in relationship with others. The Christian tradition has always said that faith is never a private affair. It is always lived out in community for the life and salvation of the world.

So, in answer to the question of, "Is there any such thing as a personal relationship with Jesus?", it would have to depend on what is meant by "personal relationship".

Media Buffoonery

Did you happen to see an interview of the church security guard/former police officer who gunned down the shooter in Colorado Springs? I forgot which morning show I was watching, but I think it was the Today Show. It was a standard interview... "What was going through your mind?... What did you see?... How did you know what to do?"....

Typical, until the end of the interview. Before I continue, I need to mention one detail. The church security guard who gunned down the Colorado Springs church shooter is female, young, and extremely attractive.

Can you see where this is going?

The interviewer asked this attractive young woman, (paraphrasing) "The media at the press conference yesterday asked you if you were single. What was up with that?" Then they rolled the tape of that portion of the press conference.

Let's see-- innocent people were gunned down in two churches on Sunday, the gunman was shot down by this church security guard, and the big question of the day was about her marital status?

I know life goes on, but... sheesh! Is there no dignity after such a horrible incident? Yet another example of media slapstick and buffoonery.

The Hammer of God

I've just finished reading a book that I read back in my seminary days called The Hammer of God by Bo Giertz, a Lutheran bishop in Sweden. The book really didn't mean too much to me during my days at the sem. It's a novel about the heart of pastoral ministry. While it was an interesting story I didn't find it very helpful in learning how to be a pastor. That was then.

I happened to run across this book as I was sifting through some old boxes in my basement. I had forgotten the storyline so I thought it would perhaps be meet, right, and salutary to give it another read. I am so glad that I took the time!

I'll spare you the details of the story, but I will say that this novel is best read after one has been in the ministry for a few years. It's a good exercise in reorienting the trajectory and purpose of one's ministry, as it has now done for me.

The purpose of pastoral ministry is the proclamation of Christ. It's that simple. And it's that difficult. Simple, because Christ has equipped his Church with everything it needs in very earthy, concrete forms-- Scripture, water, bread, wine. All a pastor is called to do is implement these tools of the trade, these means and channels of God's grace. Difficult, because society prizes creativity and innovation. People want an "experience" of God apart from God's chosen means. And so, many look to their pastor for a spiritual high and warm, fuzzy feelings. There is the great temptation for pastors to adopt models of ministry that are based more on therapeutic processes and experiential spirituality. The focus is then turned onto the individual and his/her experiences rather than on the proclamation of Christ. It becomes all about pleasing the spiritual customer.

I will confess my forays into trying to adopt creative models for ministry. I've dabbled in church growth techniques, contemporary worship (whatever that means), and trying to be a superstar to the applause and accolades of the masses, or of those who came to church to hear me.

But now, as it was for the main character in The Hammer of God, a new day has dawned for me. I don't know where it will take me, but it really doesn't matter. What matters is that I proclaim Christ and the new creation, sticking with the Word of God, and being an instrument through which Christ hands out salvation, life, and forgiveness.

One Word

ZEPPELIN!!!!!

Marry Christmas

It's almost a first for me-- I have no weddings to officiate this month! It's amazing how many couples want to tie the knot around Christmas time. I've been spared this December. So far.

Shoppers and Seekers

I've been thinking about the kinds of people Trinity retains in its worship and membership. As many already know, New Lenox is a rapidly growing suburb of Chicago and many people moving in are looking for a church to attend.

Trinity is growing, but not as rapidly as other churches in town. We're wondering why that is, and I think I have a few answers. First, most of the people moving into town are Roman Catholic and seek the Roman Catholic church. St. Jude's is, by far, the largest church in town. Second, we seem to attract Lutherans who are beholden to the LCMS. They seek an LCMS congregation, period. They will join nothing else. They come, introduce themselves, and join, no questions asked. This is transfer growth, which is where the majority of our new members come from.

And then there are others who present, in my perception, an interesting phenomenon. They move into town are start looking for a church. They are not beholden to any denominational label, but they can be divided into two groups: shoppers and seekers. Many believe that anyone who's out looking for a church to attend are automatically "seekers". I disagree, which is why I believe the term "seeker sensitive" is a misnomer. Not everyone looking for a church to attend are "seekers". I would say the vast majority of them are "shoppers". There is a marked difference.

Shoppers are looking for amenities and conveniences. They look for a church that's entertaining, friendly, exciting, opportunity-filled, and has 24 hour day care (a bit of hyperbole on my part-- humor me a bit!!). Ask any of these people why they chose the church they attend and most will tell you how friendly the people are, how nice the pastor is, how fun and exciting the worship is, how good the messages are (read, they're entertaining and "practical"), etc. They are not true seekers.

It's interesting that very few of them will mention anything about Christ. These are the people Trinity has not retained. When a shopper visits Trinity, he/she will most likely not return, primarily because Trinity does not have what the church consumer looks for. We lack the niceties that this group desires in their idea of a church. For them, Christ is secondary. It's the goodies they're seeking.

Seekers, on the other hand, are looking for things beyond the goods and services they can obtain. They want to hear God speaking. They don't mind if no one says "Hi" to them, or if they don't get a cup of coffee, or if there's no children's church, or if there are no big screens or praise bands or sermons on stress reduction. They only want to listen deeply and edifyingly to God. That's all. They are the true seekers. And they're not looking for services that are "seeker sensitive" because they have very little consumer sensitivities when it comes to church.

There are not many of them out there. Most of the people looking for a church are shoppers. The true seekers are a decided minority. My experience has been that when a seeker, a true seeker, comes to Trinity, he/she stays. Why? Because there's a sense of transcendence and concrete expressions of the mystery of the grace of God. They know that there's something very special, tangible, yet beyond them, going on here. Through the reading and proclamation of the Gospel, the liturgy, the sacraments, the reverence, the hymnody, God is speaking for those who have ears to hear. Christ is proclaimed as the Author and Perfector of our faith. The ones who are truly seeking pick up on this and keep coming back.

Admittedly, Trinity would bore most people who are looking for something fun and exciting to do on a Sunday morning. But honestly, I wouldn't have it any other way. We're not a shopping mall or a jukebox or Starbucks. We are a little piece of the mystical body of Christ who recognize the human need for repentance and forgiveness of sins through Christ.

How Is It Possible?

How can anyone possibly out-sin the grace of God? God has been in the forgiveness business from the very beginning. That's thousands of years of human history. What would compel God to toss that all aside just because you had a fit of anger, or a lustful thought, or a couple of drinks too many? Are you arrogant enough to believe that you have that much of an effect on the Creator of the universe? What makes you think you can get God so steaming mad that He'll unleash His unencumbered wrath on you?

You are but a breath, a wisp of the paintbrush on the large canvas of time. You are a mere phantom as you walk to and fro. You are like the grass that withers and the flower that falls. The Word of the Lord endures forever! This isn't about insignificance. It's about perspective. You are not God, nor are you as big as God. You are not present everywhere. You don't know everything that can be known. You can't raise up mountains or carve out valleys.

Yet, God knows you. What are you that God is mindful of you? Everything you try to hide is laid bare before His eyes. Everything! You have God's attention, but not because you asked for it or because you're a distracting type of person. That's just the way God is. It has absolutely nothing to do with you (are you getting tired of me saying that?). This point cannot be stressed enough.

Christ Alone

You might be surprised to know that Christianity has nothing to do with Christians. It has nothing to do with how much money they have in their pockets, how many people they influence, or how good looking they are. It has nothing to do with how loudly they sing, how fervently they pray, or how often they attend Sunday worship. It has nothing to do with how many promises they keep or how friendly they are. None of that.

Christianity is about Christ. Christ alone.

Which brings up the issue of Sunday worship. It is not a time to cut deals, compare clothing, or impress people. It is the time when, for at least one hour, we gather corporately to listen to God speak in the various parts of the divine service--liturgy, hymnody, and preaching. Since Christianity is about Christ, Christianity's worship is about Christ. Christ alone. That's why it's called "divine" service and not "my" service. Christianity has nothing to do with Christians. In fact, it has nothing to do with anybody. Not even you.

A possible retort to the above could be, "If it's not about me, then why bother?" I understand that. That's the kind of culture in which we live. The great "me, myself, and I" is sovereign. We spend most of our lives maintaining the appearances of our supposed superiority over others. It's all about "me" all week long.

And that's precisely the reason why one should "bother"-- one finally is invited to participate in something that is not of themselves, but is a gift from God. We come with nothing except our failure to do what ought to have been done. We come with only the confession that we have failed; that we have lived our lives as if "me, myself, and I" mattered more than anything else. We do this, not to bludgeon ourselves into oblivion, but just as an act of sheer honesty that the great "me, myself, and I" isn't as great as I make it out to be. There's absolutely no self-help book, self-improvement program or Mike Ditka motivational seminar that can help me out of this predicament.

The only one who can release me is Christ. Christ alone. One might consider this to be disempowering to the self. But the problem is that the self has claimed too much power and is not willing to concede it. The self then becomes enslaved to itself. It's a vicious circle that no one can end. It's when we are led to realize that we can't fix ourselves, because it's not about ourselves, that grace comes pouring in like a flood. The chains come off, the old is put off, and we are made anew in the Kingdom of God.

War on Christmas-- What happened?

I haven't heard anything from the pundits who complain every year about the supposed "war on Christmas". Have you? Maybe I haven't been listening hard enough. Bill O'Reilly hasn't said anything as far as I know. I checked out his website-- not a word about it. Neither has Bob Gibson said anything, although he wrote a whole book about it, so that's probably complaining enough for a lifetime. Are we to assume then that the war on Christmas is over? Who won? Nothing is clear about this war, much like the war in the Middle East in which we are presently engaged.

Maybe that's how we fight wars in America now. We just complain and moan for a little while with no clear objective, perhaps except to just be heard and to make our presence known. That's all. Making any substantial change is far off of the radar screen. Bloviating seems to be the order of the day. Just be loud!

Back to the "war on Christmas". Christmas can never be eliminated completely because it is a Christian feast day. Got that? As long as there are Christians, there will be Christmas. What O'Reilly, et al were complaining about is the traditional cultural trappings of Christmas-- creche displays at city hall and retailers saying "Merry Christmas" are the two big ones.

Christmas was not developed by and for American society. To make the value of this holy day dependent on what a particular culture does (or doesn't do) civically or economically is to make a mockery of what Christmas is really about. It really doesn't matter at all if the traditional cultural trappings are mocked, or even outlawed. The real Christmas will survive in hearts of people and in the churches where the Christ Mass is celebrated-- where it matters most.

The celebration of Christmas has nothing to do with city hall and Wal Mart. Christmas is God becoming incarnate in the person of Jesus. It's more than the birth of a cute little baby asleep on the hay. It's God in the flesh on this planet to redeem and sanctify it, to begin a great deliverance and usher in the Kingdom of God.

Last week, one of Santa's elves wished me "Happy Holidays". I'm not bothered by that phrase one bit. American holiday tradition simply is not sacrosanct to me. We can burn all of the Christmas trees, smash all of the manger scenes, cut all of the wires on the strings of Christmas lights, fire all of the Santas and Salvation Army bell ringers, stop all Christmas music on the radio, schedule no Christmas television programming, and replace all of them with menorahs and crescents... there will still be Christmas! It can and will survive any so-called "war" as it has for centuries.

Christmas Blues

This is the time of year when stress levels reach all-time highs, and the accompanying anxieties and depressions come creeping in seemingly out of nowhere. I usually get depressed this time of year not only because of the expectations of the season, but also because of the added work load of gatherings and projects. Incidently, I shepherd a congregation that doesn't hold midweek Advent Services. Trinity, as far as I know, never has had Advent services. I've often thought about starting them, but I haven't. The congregation hasn't been clamoring for them so it's admittedly easier for me to just leave well enough alone. Rightly or wrongly, I do not conduct Advent services. As far as added work load is concerned, I don't envy the pastors who do. But I can guarantee you that I'm busy enough.

Anyway, there seems to be this underlying sentiment in our society that it's wrong to suffer from anxiety or depression. Television commercials reinforce this by the constant parade of depression sufferers who look like they are ruining their lives and causing their families irreparable heartache until, of course, they start taking the latest magic antidepressant pills after a consultation with the doctor who can prescribe them at the request of the poor suffering soul.

I'm not a therapist nor do I play one on TV, but I do believe that it's alright to be anxiety-ridden and depressive. Sufferers are not cursed. They are not pariahs. They are everyday folks like you and me who have been taught to believe that they are supposed to participate in life much better than they do presently. Any theology of glory will tell you that you are supposed to be hap-hap-happy all the time... "And here's how!" It's time to tune these "enjoying everyday life" people out.

If you're depressed, then be depressed until you're not anymore. You're not ruining anything. If you're chronically depressed, or have suicidal thoughts, then make an appointment to see your doctor. But please know this: you are very good at living life speaking from a strictly human point of view and tv commercials cannot change that essential truth. But your depression can serve to remind you that your life is not your own. You belong to your Heavenly Father who wonderfully knit you together, and to your Lord Jesus who died and rose from the dead to give you his life, and to the Holy Spirit who calls, gathers, and enlightenes you through the Gospel of grace and forgiveness and made you a member of the body of Christ.

I don't make any guarantees. I can't promise you that knowing this will rid you of depression. But I can tell you that as surely as Christ lives forever, you are a participant in a sacramental reality that the everyday hectic and hurried world can't possibly give you nor can it touch-- a true righteousness that is not of yourself, but rather a gift from God.

Dead Duck

Once there was a boy who had a pet duck. Well, I don't know if the duck knew that it was a pet. Let's just say there was this duck who frequented the farm where the boy lived. Why the duck kept coming back nobody knows. But the boy loved that duck. He would chase the duck around the barnyard, through the stables, and even across the front stoop of the house, much to the chagrin of the boy's parents. Such good times, and the duck didn't seem to mind playing with the young lad. In fact, the duck seemed to display a sense of loyalty to the boy, as evidenced by the duck's daily visits to the farm.

One day the duck didn't show up. The boy was disappointed but not disturbed by this development. Maybe the duck found a girlfriend or was just busy. Who knows? "Maybe he'll show up tomorrow," thought the boy. But the duck didn't show up. In fact, it appeared that the duck wasn't going to come back at all. After a week of waiting for the duck to come swooping in, the boy began to suspect that something happened to the duck. So the boy set out for the woods behind the barn to search for the duck. It didn't take long for the boy to find the duck lying dead on the ground, the victim of a hunter's bullet.

The boy picked up the dead duck and carried it back to the farm. He set it down in the barnyard and started to run in circles around it hoping the duck would awaken and join in the fun. But it didn't move. Then the boy picked up the duck by its wings and pretended that it was flying around. It remained lifeless. The boy then launched the duck into the air as to set it free to spread its wings and fly on its own. It crashed to the ground with a thud. "Perhaps it's just tired," reasoned the boy. "I'll take it into the barn and let it get some sleep."

The next morning the boy went out to the barn to find the duck as it was the day before. Lifeless. "C'mon Mr. Duck!" the boy shouted. "We've got some catching up to do!" The boy tried the same things he tried the day before with the same result. The duck was not going to join in on all of the fun. It remained quiet and still on the ground. The boy tried desperately to get the duck to do something. Anything. But there was nothing. And for each failure the boy tried even harder to make that duck respond to him as he continued to play with it.

All of this time the boy's father was watching his son try to play with this lifeless duck. Finally the father had seen enough and was not going to let his son continue with the charade. "Son!" exclaimed the father. "Stop playing with that duck!" The boy snapped back, "But dad, we have so much fun together!" "I know son. But the duck is dead and it's best to stop playing with it," explained the father. "Let's go bury your duck in the woods and give him a fitting goodbye."

Days passed and the boy missed the duck. He would stare out of his bedroom window thinking about all of the fun he used to have playing with the duck. But those days were gone now. The duck was dead and buried. End of story.

How often to we treat our sin like that duck? We chase it, play with it, carouse with it, give it attention-- we like it. It makes us feel alive and comfortable. It's like an itch that needs to be scratched. But it's still sin-- greed, lust, vengeance, vindictiveness, jealousy, violence, hatred.

Those sins were nailed with Christ on the cross. There they were put to death and buried. Our sins, like the duck, are dead. By virtue of Baptism into Christ we are declared "dead to sin", meaning that we have been separated from our sin and its accompanying bondage and guilt. At the same time we are declared to be "alive with Christ", meaning that we are free from having to revisit that which has been put off and dead.

I'm confused as to why so many of us try to conquer our sin. Beware of churches who give you tips on how to get rid of sin in your life, or how to overcome an addiction, or give you ten steps to root out jealousy, or five ways to beat stress at Christmastime, or anything else to keep you centered on yourself or with great potential of failure. What they're telling you to do is something akin to playing with the dead duck. Hopeless! And how often do these churches have you wallowing in your failure to root out jealousy, or beat stress, or conquer sin, by taking you right back to their lists and tips? They're just trips to play with the dead duck. And it's so much fun that they keep you coming back for more.

Our heavenly Father approaches us in grace and gently bids us, "Stop playing with that duck, trying to bring it back to life. It's dead. Leave it! Follow my risen Son, your Christ, into life and freedom. Your sin is paid for in full. You are granted forgiveness, life, and salvation."

So, instead of following yet another "to do" list, come to the banquet of grace and joy as Christ beckons and bids us to eat his body and drink his blood-- the place where the dead duck never comes to mind and our sin is remembered no more.

Rediscovery

I've listened to many voices. I've read the books. I've delved into the thoughts of many brilliant and eloquent people (mostly theologians) who have succeeded in shining bright lights on subjects I've known little or nothing about. I've had conversations with minds brighter than mine in areas of Biblical interpretation, theology, and sociology. I gave an ear to parachurch groups that have the best of intentions. I am truly grateful for everything I've learned and experienced. I've been granted knowledge beyond what I thought I was capable of.

I don't consider myself a very deep thinker. I'm not very good at "painting pictures". I'm most definitely a pointer. But I have been granted the ability to point at and identify things that I haven't been able to identify before. I have too many people to thank for their thoughts and perspectives that have been truly helpful in the ongoing formation of this clergyman.

After wading through and distilling all of the information packed into the gray matter between my ears-- not that I'm done, mind you (I'm probably still looking at the tip of a very large iceberg)-- I have been led to a place I didn't expect, and yet I'm not too surprised that it's where I've ended up.

That place is Lutheranism. With apologies to Teilhard de Chardin, I've rediscovered fire! I truly believe that the one church body that is best equipped to deal with the changes and chances of this postmodern transition is the Lutheran church. Here's why:

1) Its emphasis on grace. Grace must prevail.
2) Its depth as expressed in its doctrine, practice, liturgy, and hymnody.
3) Its suspicion of any system that tries to inculcate works as a path to forgiveness or that introduces abstractions or speculation.
4) Its sacramental theology that gives concreteness to the faith it professes.

I'm glad I'm a Lutheran, and I'm glad to have rediscovered this faith which is so profound in its simplicity.

Shoppers and Seekers

I've been thinking about the kinds of people Trinity retains in its worship and membership. As many already know, New Lenox is a rapidly growing suburb of Chicago and many people moving in are looking for a church to attend.

Trinity is growing, but not as rapidly as other churches in town. We're wondering why that is, and I think I have a few answers. First, most of the people moving into town are Roman Catholic and seek the Roman Catholic church. St. Jude's is, by far, the largest church in town. Second, we seem to attract Lutherans who are beholden to the LCMS. They seek an LCMS congregation, period. They will join nothing else. They come, introduce themselves, and join, no questions asked. This is transfer growth, which is where the majority of our new members come from.

And then there are others who present, in my perception, an interesting phenomenon. They move into town are start looking for a church. They are not beholden to any denominational label, but they can be divided into two groups: shoppers and seekers. Many believe that anyone who's out looking for a church to attend are automatically "seekers", hence they start to have "seeker sensitive" services. I disagree. Not everyone looking for a church to attend are "seekers". I would say the vast majority of them are "shoppers". There is a marked difference.

Shoppers are looking for amenities and conveniences. They look for a church that's entertaining, friendly, exciting, opportunity-filled, and has 24 hour day care (a bit of hyperbole on my part-- humor me!!). Ask any of these people why they chose the church they attend and most will tell you how friendly the people are, how nice the pastor is, how fun and exciting the worship is, how good the messages are (read, they're entertaining and "practical"), etc. They are not true seekers.

It's interesting that very few of them will mention anything about Christ. These are the people Trinity has not retained. When a shopper visits Trinity, he/she will not return, primarily because Trinity does not have what the church consumer looks for. We lack the niceties that this group desires in their idea of a church. For them, Christ is secondary. It's the goodies they're seeking.

Seekers, on the other hand, are looking for things beyond the goods and services they can obtain. They want to hear God speaking. They don't mind if no one says "Hi" to them, or if they don't get a cup of coffee, or if there's no children's church, or if there are no big screens or praise bands or sermons on stress reduction. They only want to listen to God. That's all. They are the true seekers.

There are not many of them out there. Most of the people looking for a church are shoppers. The true seekers are a decided minority. My experience has been that when a seeker, a true seeker, comes to Trinity, he/she stays. Why? Because there's a sense of transcendence and concrete expressions of the mystery of the grace of God. They know that there's something very special, tangible, yet beyond them, going on here. Through the reading and proclamation of the Gospel, the liturgy, the sacraments, the reverence, the hymnody, God is speaking for those who have ears to hear. Christ is proclaimed as the Author and Perfector of our faith. The ones who are truly seeking pick up on this and keep coming back.

Admittedly, Trinity would bore most people who are looking for something fun and exciting to do on a Sunday morning. But honestly, I wouldn't have it any other way.

Hiding

Christianity is an incarnational faith. God instills faith in God's people in order that they may be lights in the world and the salt of the earth with every fiber of being. I wouldn't call this "purpose" as much as I would call it "shape". We are shaped, molded, and formed into what God wants us to be. The form we are given is that of Christ. As we receive (not accept) Christ in Word, water, and meal, we are given what God desires to make of us.

Of course, as everything else, we can cover up or hide what we've been given. We can make Christ into personal property. Oftentimes we do just that. But that's not the reason we are given Christ. He doesn't hide in us. We hide with him in God (Colossians 3:3). We are God's property completely. Our entire makeup is lovingly submitted in Christ so that our lives are no longer ours. Christ is our life. This is our identity. Everything that we are and do are designed to flow from the sacred reality of being new creations.

As I mentioned in the last post, we often ask what we are supposed to do. That inquiry is secondary because it seeks to establish identity by virtue of works. Our primary inquiry is: whose am I? This is where our true identity derives. We are Christ's. And Christ is God's. By virtue of Baptism we have died and have risen with Christ. The life we live is not ours. The life we live we live by faith in the Son of God, who loved us and gave himself for us (Galatians 2:20).

Who we perceive ourselves to be can be quite different from who we are actually. I pray that we more and more perceive ourselves to be who we are actually in Christ Jesus.

Being Comes Before Doing

Oftentimes we stake our identities on our activities, or by what we do. I suppose that's just natural. After all, we are a "doing" kind of people. We "do" so that we "earn" the privilege to "be".

I propose that in God's economy, this is exactly backwards. Our identity is foremost in Christ and what he has done for us in the cross in the redemption of our bodies and souls. The activities in which we engage are to flow from this identity. Being comes before doing. If doing comes first, then we will make idols out of our activities and doings. Then we will stop at nothing to keep that idol going. We'll forsake our health, our relationships, our leisure time-- our being.

Ultimately, our identity is our image. Either we provide the image or God provides the image. If we provide the image it becomes an object of our affections and our worship. If God provides the image, then we give praise and thanks to our Creator by first being, and then through loving and serving our neighbor.

Okay, Enough Sarcasm

Using sarcasm and parody as my main devices, my last few posts have been complaints about the state of Christianity in America. It's so steeped in consumerism that going to church has become no different than going to the mall or the local country club. The real Jesus has been kicked out of the church and replaced with bellhops and Santa Claus. It's sad how most churchgoers, including me, forfeit grace and accept pabulum in its place. What is grace anyway? Is giving people only what they want so that they feel good about themselves qualify?

It's strange, this belief that if people's whims are satisfied that we've been "graceful". But I wonder sometimes if we really do a disservice to people when we do things just to pack people into the Sunday morning pews. Is this grace?

This is what I understand grace to be for churchgoers: coming to the worship space empty-handed. No preferences, no motives, no pride, no whims, no comparisons-- nothing!! It is only when we are empty that we can receive. As Luther said, "We are truly beggars." We come together only to get what we need, not in a therapeutic way, or to help us "get through the week". We come to be equipped with the love of God shown to us through Christ so that we may exercise our various vocations. We come to worship in the sanctuary so that we may worship in the world. It's the worship after worship.

For myself-- I would rather have 5 people in worship wanting to be fed with the Gospel than 500 in worship waiting to be entertained.

Worship-- It's All About Me

The consumer culture has infiltrated the church, and I'm afraid for good! Here's what all of the so called "praise" songs are really saying for those who demand only songs "I like". Too many churches cater to human whim instead of submitting to God's grace. Who is worship really all about anyway?

Life Coaching

You don't need life coaching.

Charles Manson needs life coaching.

You participate in life much better than you think.

Defeated

Christ defeated our sin on the cross, not so that we stop sinning, but so that our sins can't keep their hold on us any longer; not so that we try to free ourselves from sin, but so that we would already know that freedom; not so that we turn and fight our sins, but so that we repent and run from them.

The opposite of sin is grace, not virtue.-- Philip Yancey

I'm An Official Pokedad

My two sons love to play the Pokemon trading card game. I play the game with them every so often, but I've never really delved into the realm of being a Pokemon master.

That is, until yesterday. I bought a Pokemon deck. Hold your applause, please!

I have now entered the world of dueling little pocket monsters that evolve into dueling big pocket monsters. But I must say I do like the artwork and imagination that went into the creation of this game.

Anyway, I had a match with my older son, Chris, using my new deck for the very first time. I thought I was going to get creamed. Much to my surprise-- I won! And, quite soundly I might add. I don't gloat over my victory. However, there is a sense of satisfaction that I'm a not-too-shabby strategist and that I have a pretty decent deck.

Now, if only I could remember the name of my deck...

God Calls

For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.-- Acts 2:39

People are brought to faith in Christ by the promise of the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit who constantly places our attention on Christ. The Lord is the one who does it all through the proclamation of the Gospel.

I used to be one of those people who would try anything to get people to darken the doors of the church. The logic behind it was: get people in the pews and preach the Good News! The more people, the better!! Churches with huge budgets can do this. I used to envy them, but I don't anymore. Slick marketing and gimmicks get people to come. Serving Starbucks will draw people from all over the place. But who's being drawn-- disciples or customers? Those who are attracted by the grace of God or those who merely smell the coffee?

I think the mentality of "get 'em in the pews and preach to them" has it all backwards. It attempts to add to the numbers before the proclamation of the Gospel. This isn't the pattern in the book of Acts. Proclamation comes first, and the Lord adds to the number. In other words, the distribution of the gifts of God is primary. That is all the Lord requires. I see no command in Scripture to pack church pews.

The apostles certainly never rented buildings, launched balloons, had praise bands, or catered to consumer tastes with brand name goodies. They went out and proclaimed that Jesus is the Christ and used the Scriptures to make that proclamation! The Gospel is what draws people.

I'm not against Starbucks or gimmicks or advertising. I just don't think they're effective evangelism tools!

Burning Bushes

In Exodus 3 Moses sees a bush that is on fire but is not consumed. That's curious. How can this happen? It defies the logic of our modern scientific minds. Things that are on fire are reduced to ashes by the destructive power of the flames. But not so here.

We can stand around and debate whether this really happened or not, like saying that it wasn't really the bush that was on fire but was actually a flaming gas vent coming out of the side of the mountain behind the bush, and it just looked to Moses like the bush was on fire. Moses may have been mistaken. Someone actually made this claim not too long ago. Then we get hot and bothered because the integrity of the Scriptures is called into question, and we feel we have to come to the Bible's rescue and try to find a way a bush can burn without being consumed! Get out your bunsen burners!!

Instead of trying to determine if the bush was on fire or not, I feel it's best to look at how Jesus interpreted the Exodus 3 narrative. We find this in Luke 20:27-40. There we see that Jesus isn't really concerned about whether the bush was on fire or not. In fact, Jesus didn't talk at length about the actual bush at all, but only mentioned it for reference! He used the story as a launching point for a proclamation about God-- that God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.

That's the point of the story. God is God of the living, for all live to him. There's not any discussion on how a bush can survive a thorough torching. Instead-- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive! Resurrected, if you will. They weren't resuscitated and walking the streets of Jerusalem. They were covenant forefathers! Don't miss this. Life and living had little to do with organic existence, but with covenant membership. The ancient promises of God to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob were coming to bear on the people through the ministry of Jesus. The lost were being found. Sins were being forgiven. The last were becoming first. All were coming to know the visitation of God.

It's funny, really. We're so concerned about whether this or that actually happened. I feel that when we do this we are engaging in yet another exercise in missing the point. Jesus didn't miss the point. We should listen to Jesus more often for understanding and perspective.

Drive-Thru McChurch

This would be very sad if it wasn't so funny!

Christians Are Not Priests

This entry contains a lot of Lutheran lingo, so I apologize to my non-Lutheran readers ahead of time.

Today was our monthly winkel in Elmhurst with Dr. Roger Pittelko giving a presentation on the Office of the Pastoral Ministry based on a couple of essays from the April 2006 edition of Concordia Theological Quarterly (CTQ). There were some things that Roger pointed out that I had either never heard before or had heard at one time but had since forgotten.

Martin Luther is often credited with restoring what is commonly known as the priesthood of all believers. Dr. Pittelko claimed that there really is no adequate word in English to translate the Greek word hieros from 1 Peter 2:9, which Luther translated as "priesthood". A better word, though still inadequate, would be "offerers". The word "priesthood" is best used as a translation of the Greek word presbyteros, normally translated as "elder" (but don't tell that to Presbyterians-- they'll blow a gasket!). It could be that Luther was mistaken in his translation of 1 Peter 2:9 and the Protestant world never really caught on.

This was all brought up due to a long-time misunderstanding of where the office of pastor derives its authority. I was always taught a rather congregational derivation-- a congregation places a "call" to an ordained pastor and therefore "transfers" the Office of the Keys to that individual. In other words, the pastoral office derives its authority from the calling congregation. Today's presentation demonstrated that the pastoral office derives authority from Christ Himself by virtue of the "calling" (not congregational call) and ordination of the candidate into the pastoral office. Further, according to Dr. Pittelko, "calling" and "ordination" are synonymous.

In short, Christians are not "priests". Pastors (elders, presbyteroi) are priests by the authority of Christ Himself to administer Word and Sacrament for the purpose of building up the "offerers" to offer themselves as "living sacrifices" in loving and willing service to their neighbor.

I asked Dr. Pittelko if priests are therefore not offerers, but have been set apart (as it were) from that function. I asked that question to make sure I was understanding everything that was being said. All Christians are "offerers" by virtue of their call by the Holy Spirit through the Means of Grace. All "priests" are "offerers" as well. But not all "offerers" are "priests". So, instead of the priesthood of all believers, we should be talking about the offererhood of all believers.

To use an analogy, all apples are fruit but not all fruit are apples. Some are pears, peaches, plums, mangos, kiwi, strawberries, pineapples, blueberries, bananas, etc.-- but not apples.

What do I think of all of this? Let's just say I have a lot of reading and thinking to do because I was always taught the congregational derivation, that I derive the authority of the ministry of Word and Sacrament solely from the congregation I currently serve. I've also understood the Greek word heiros to be roughly equivalent to the Hebrew word kohen, meaning "priest", so I understand where Luther was coming from. I've read the articles in the aforementioned CTQ, and will now read them again with a keener eye than before. I also have a lot of questions about this ongoing sticky subject in the LCMS.

Again, I apologize to my non-Lutheran readers if some of this is foggy, but I tried to make it as readable as I possibly could.

I Was There!!

Here's a clip from a 1986 Van Halen concert at Joe Louis Arena in Detroit. I was in the audience on the main floor very close to the stage!!

Small Groups

Tell me what you think of establishing a small group structure in a church. I know there are arguments pro and con. Although I'm mostly for small group structures, I'd like to hear what you think about them. But first I'll tell you why I'm for them.

I see small groups as a way of extending Christian care and kindness to people who are already members of the church, as a way of helping new members get acquainted with the congregation, and as a way of bringing people to the church. I'm aware of the danger of small groups turning into "cabals", which is why I believe small groups should have a definite structure and purpose to them. I don't believe in "freewheeling" small groups, doing whatever "churchy" things they desire. But I do think that small groups can be a way of unifying a congregation if the structure is conducive to such unity. I also believe that small groups should be structured to multiply naturally. Breaking up is hard to do, even for small groups. But small groups don't have to "break up" necessarily. Small groups can "birth" other small groups while remaining intact themselves. It's almost like a pyramid scheme, except no money is exchanged, and circles of friends can be widened for those who desire such a big circle of friends.

What do you think?

Born of a Virgin

Was Jesus born of a virgin? Of course he was! However, I don't think you can use Matthew 1:23 as support for this. But we are so accustomed to doing this that we miss the greater message that Matthew is trying to convey, and that is, Jesus is "God with us". Matthew is not as concerned about biology as he is about the significance of Jesus' identity. See my previous post on "hook phrases".

I view Jesus' birth as the beginning of the re-creation of Israel embodied in one person. And from this one person God will reserve and preserve a remnant of others who see in Jesus exactly what God was up to. In other words, beginning with Jesus God will reconstitute His chosen Israel, raising God's children from the dust and ashes. St. Paul will make the bold claim that anyone who is in Christ Jesus is a new creation.

Many do not believe that Jesus was virgin born. And while I respectfully disagree, I don't believe that it's a point worthy of debate. I'm not downplaying the significance of the event. I just don't think that it's worth getting into a tizzy over because when we do we miss out on something that is so wonderful and profound. And while the virginal conception (which is a more correct term than "virgin birth") could be considered miraculous, the greater miracle is that God never gives up wooing God's people back to God's embrace.

Hook Phrases

Whenever the New Testament quotes a passage from the Old Testament, the intent is to "hook" the story of Jesus and his followers into the larger narrative of Israel. The message of the New Testament author is the same as that of the Old Testament author. Here's an example.

Isaiah 7 is a chapter in which the prophet deals with King Ahaz of Judah as he struggles with the oncoming invasion of a Syria-Israel coalition. Isaiah tells Ahaz not to worry because the coalition kings are just a couple of nobodies. He then tells Ahaz to ask the Lord for a sign. Ahaz refuses. Isaiah then informs Ahaz that he's going to get one anyway:

Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (7:14)

Before this boy knows how to choose the good and reject the evil, the two aforementioned coalition nations will be reduced to rubble. God will protect Ahaz and Judah from the Syro-Ephraimitic invasion because "God (is) with us", and the boy will serve as a reminder.

When St. Matthew quotes Isaiah 7:14 in the context of Jesus' birth, the message is the same-- God is with us, and he will protect us from the enemy! In fact, the enemy will be reduced to rubble.

The Impossibility of Meeting God Halfway

Many believe that God did his part in sending Jesus, and it’s up to us to meet God halfway. It sounds right to our ears, but how is it possible to meet God halfway? How far is “halfway”?

In this scenario, God is often portrayed as a kindly gentleman who stands around and waits for us to sojourn to where he is.

Sorry, but I don’t see this in the Scriptures.

Jesus had this habit of approaching people with the invitation, “Follow me.” That doesn’t sound like meeting Jesus halfway. That sounds like Jesus meeting us and inviting us to go where he’s going. Now, we don’t have to follow. Quite honestly, most of us refuse occasionally. But Jesus doesn’t stand around and wait for us. He goes to do what he does.

If we don’t follow, he doesn’t strand us where we are. He comes back in order to invite us again to walk with him and follow.

Jesus never said, “Prepare your own agenda for me to enact and meet me halfway.” He did say, “Take up your cross (his agenda prepared for us) and follow me.”

How Does It Fit?

I’ve recently come to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter who wrote the books of the Bible or when they were written. Theologians argue to no end about whether a certain book of the New Testament was written prior to AD 70 or after. And I don’t care. They can discuss and disagree about the authorship of 2 Timothy. Some of them say it was not written by Paul; some say it was. And I really couldn’t care less. And what about the Pentateuch? Was it authored by Moses, or was it a cut-and-paste job from various sources? How many Isaiahs were there? These are the kinds of questions that next to no one is asking anymore.

Who? When? Where? These inquiries waste too much energy and brain power. I’m not concerned if Jesus actually said what was written, or if he may have said something similar, or if he even said any of this at all. I don’t even care if Jesus actually existed or not. (I believe he did, but I’m not going to stand around and argue with someone about it.)

Here’s how I see all of this. We have this thing called the Bible. Right? It’s a very ancient book. Agreed? Obviously the books that are contained in the Bible “made it”. Why? My guess is that, politicking and power-brokering aside, they fit into a narrative scheme that is unmistakeable. We can spend all sorts of time arguing about whether such-and-such actually occurred, or if the Bible is applicable to our time or not, or whatever. These discussions are irrelevant to me. What I want to know is: What’s the story here? How does this passage, or book, or incident, fit into the larger canvas of the sweep of the Biblical narrative?

The pages of the Scriptures are all we have to work with, so my assumption is that it all fits together somehow. The interpretive task for our day may quite well be to answer the question, “How?” or “What’s the story here?” or “What is the author (whoever it is, and I don’t care who it is) trying to say here about the story of the Scriptures?” It’s apparent to me that the Biblical authors (whoever they were, and I don’t care who they were) were very knowledgeable of the Story and did the very best they could to maintain the integrity of their received texts and traditions.

What do you think?

Desert Living

If I'm ever asked to live in the desert, I'll hem and haw a bit, and then give a decisive "No!" I like the city, with all if its creature comforts and bright lights. I can't imagine living anywhere else. The closest I got to it was living in rural Iowa, but it wasn't overwhelmingly rural. The town I lived in was the county seat and had all the conveniences of a big city. Just not as much. It was alright, though. I didn't feel like I was lonely and isolated at all.

Eden was like that. Plenty of food, water, trees, wonderful irrigation, easy travel. It was a "garden" after all. Many of our urban areas are like gardens, but consisting of neon and concrete instead of chlorophyll and wood. But the idea is the same. It's paradise!

Sometimes we feel the need to get away from the urban jungle paradise and we go on vacation. Where do we go? Mostly to other places where we know our desires will be satisfied. Other places of paradise.

The Biblical narrative seems to imply that paradise is not where people think it is, mainly because people don't know what real paradise is. It has nothing to do with what we build to surround ourselves. It has to do with who surrounds us. Many times what people think is paradise turns out to be merely a cover and a cheap imitation of real paradise. This was the lesson the Israelites had to learn.

To them, paradise was the Promised Land. It was Eden. Jerusalem was the garden. The Temple was the Tree of Life. After 400 (or so) years of slavery in Egypt, the Israelites didn't go directly to Eden. They were desert dwellers first. 40 years of desert dwelling. They were formed out of the dust and had the breath of life blown into their nostrils, not to be physical beings, but to be a people, a nation, put together by the Spirit of God, to announce to the world that the darkness of their ways has been overcome by the light of God. And they were living, breathing proof of that!

God had molded and shaped them in the desert for this task. In the wilderness they learned that God can be trusted, meeting their every provision and need, and leading them to their mission. There, in the desert, God stripped them of all pretense.

But when they get to Eden, to Canaan, the Promised Land, the land of milk and honey (meaning, everything they could ever want) they'll forget. Tragic. Their priority became doing everything they could to hold on to the milk and honey. How? They ate from the tree they weren't supposed to eat from.

They worshipped the Baals and the Ashtoreths, made high places, built altars and temples. Now, they knew evil. Again. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil looked very much like the tree of life in their eyes. They knew evil, but at least it was comfortable. And they kept eating. And hiding from God. So, this is paradise?

A voice from the past echoes forth, "Adam, where are you?" Lost. In paradise. Can there be any such thing?

It's hard to get lost in the streets of Jerusalem, but easy to lose your way in the wilderness. But it could be the other way around. In fact, that will be the Biblical claim.

"God does not live in houses made with human hands."

"They (the Scribes and Pharisees) tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders."

Why would anyone have the urge to try to save themselves if they think they're in paradise? That is being lost!

It was time for another Exodus. The Eternal One has left the building! Will anyone follow?

Sorry, Folks!

I haven't blogged lately because my brain has been running dry. Please excuse my lapse of dedication to the blogosphere, but I want to make sure I'm on-post and following the theme of this blog.

Meanwhile, I'm on a personal quest to become more organized. I purchased an organizer/portfolio/calendar today and I'm becoming an organization freak!!!!

The Story as I Tell It-- Part Two

Israel failed to do and be what God formed and created them to do and be. In that we hear echoes of the Garden of Eden. Man and woman were formed from the dust of the earth (the desert), placed in the garden, and were confronted with choices signified by two trees. They could go God's way or take their own way. Are we supposed to be surprised by their choice? When we're offered something that's pleasing to the eye, good for food, and good for obtaining wisdom, don't we go for it? As we can see, it isn't always the best choice even though it seems to be the most expedient. Who doesn't want to be like God? But the problem with being like God is that there isn't enough room for the both of you in the status of godhood. One of you has to go, and it isn't going to be God. Off you go, back into the desert.

We may be tempted to believe that the Garden of Eden was a veritable paradise. It was in some ways-- plenty of water, lush foliage, rare and precious gemstones, communion with God. Who could ask for anything better? We may mistake it for a scene from The Lion King, when Simba ran away from home and befriended a warthog and a meerkat living in a jungle filled with sensual delights. Hakuna Matata, no worries, as they say. Even God declared everything to be very good.

Two trees, the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, were prominent in the garden. Eat from the former and enjoy lasting communion with God. Eat from the latter and be expelled from the garden. There's talk of expulsion in paradise? What kind of a paradise is this? Isn't paradise supposed to be a place of unconditional well-being and support? I didn't know Shangri-la came with an undercurrent of threat! What happened to Hakuna Matata?

So here's the deal-- If our first parents obeyed God they could stay in the garden. If they disobeyed God they would be expelled. Remember this because it will play prominently a bit later, but doesn't the choice seem obvious to you? Well, maybe it doesn't. That's alright if it doesn't. I'm starting to doubt if I would have wanted to stay in the garden.

But not so fast-- here comes a wily serpent to present the first couple with their options. Options in paradise? Isn't paradise supposed to be a place where one could be free of having to make choices. Having to make choices implies that there's something afoul here, especially when one of the choices had a penalty attached to it. Death. Separation from God. As I said earlier, the problem with being like God is that there's isn't room for the both of you. If you want to be God, and not represent God, you'll have to do it somewhere else.

The serpent analyzed the situation differently. "You won't get thrown out," he said. "God knows that, and God really needs you to stay and entertain him. He's quite an ornery old fellow, you know, and the only ones who can keep him happy are those who are just like him! He won't settle for anything less." How flattering!

They eat the forbidden fruit. Did they become like God? In a strange way they did, having the knowledge of good and evil. Even God admitted as much. But there can only be one God in the garden. Furthermore, no one can ever become God completely. The closest anyone can come to becoming God is to be, oddly enough, reduced (sic) to being a cheap imitation. Perhaps that's why God didn't want them to eat that fruit. God wanted them to be royalty, not court jesters.

Now they must die. This isn't a reference to physical and biological demise. If it were, they would've been struck dead on the spot. No, they must leave the garden to go back to the place from whence they came. To the dust. To the desert. It's barren out there. But there's hope out there, believe it or not. For in the desert dust they could be re-formed and re-created, to have God breathe into their nostrils once again and restore them to the life they once had. To become empty so that they may be filled with God's Spirit and Life. God will say as much through the utterances of the prophets.

Could it be that the desert is more of a paradise than a lush garden?

Part Three next time, but perhaps with a different title.

The Story as I Tell It-- Part One

As you can see, I've made some changes to my sidebar, as the purpose of this blog is ever-evolving. My thoughts on different theological issues are beginning to solidify a bit as I continue to piece together the many narrative threads that comprise the Scriptures. What I would like to do in this post is to give you an idea of the overall picture I see in the pages of the Bible.

Humanity has this uncanny notion that there is something really wrong with everyday existence. In light of the severe weather we had around here yesterday and overnight, our unease becomes more apparent with every flash of lightning and rumble of thunder. Yesterday on the Roe Conn Show on WLS, Roe was talking to a priest and was asking him if we've somehow made God mad that we're being battered by these storms.

That's the essence of what we think is wrong with our existence. God is angry and he punishes us with dangerous weather and other unfortunate events. People have felt this way from time immemorial. Ancient people figured that the only way to appease the meteorological wrath of the gods was to do things to make them happy. And so they invented rituals and religions, sacrificed animals and children, built temples, wrote myths, had sex, codified laws for living, etc. The will to survive is very strong. Personally, I think it's genetic, but that's beside the point. Genetic or not, we carry this angst of having a sense of being under the gun, as it were, to put things right or face the wrath. More often than not we choose to try to fix everything by trying to fix what we feel is wrong with God, or the gods.

"So, what's wrong with that?" you might ask. It seems to us to be a perfectly logical example of cause and effect. If the gods are angry, cheer them up. Problem solved! Right? Not exactly.

Things still don't seem to go right. We are vulnerable to a whole host of terrible misfortunes, even though we try our hardest to thwart them. We pray harder, burn more incense, and try to be good, hoping that the gods will see that we are indeed frightened of what they can do to us when they throw hissy fits. Well, angry gods produce angry and frustrated people who feel more insecure than ever before. And so the people begin to turn on each other. They invade, conquer, pillage, plunder, enslave, and slaughter each other in the hopes of compensating in areas where the gods have fallen short. Perhaps if the gods had more territory, then maybe they won't be so prone to temper tantrums.

Along comes an ancient people, called Israelites, who were given the task of telling a different story, thereby becoming a beacon of light to all of the nations on earth. Their story was about a God who loves people without having to be appeased. This God rescues people from their captors even though they don't build temples or give offerings to this God. This God provides crops without requiring anyone to do a rain dance. This God wants everyone to know who He is so that all nations would be united in Him. It was going to be hard sell, but God equipped the Israelites to be up to the task.

What did the Israelites end up doing? Just about everything the other nations were doing. Israel was supposed to be different. They ended up being the same. Instead of being a beacon of light they just blended in with the darkness. The end result was that God was being treated the same way the nations treated their own gods. God was not going to become known among the nations in that fashion. It's hard to tell who's who when everyone looks the same.

Part Two is forthcoming.

New Look and New Thoughts

I've given this blog a facelift. I like it, and I hope you do too, although I might lighten the text color a bit.

Do they have a mercy rule in the MLB? Did you see the final score of the Rangers-Orioles game last night? 30-3!! That's a football score! I know, I know-- never give up, quitters never win, the tough get going, yada yada. But 30-3? Sheesh!! God is merciful, but apparently human beings in the heat of sports competition will thoroughly spank the other team if given the chance.

Speaking of mercy, I received a question from a young parishioner today about attending worship on Sunday mornings. She wondered if it was bad that she skips worship on Sundays. Her life is frenzied and harried during the week, and she needs time to go somewhere to chill out. So she comes for Sunday School (not exactly a place to relax) and then goes home. She's wondering if this is bad.

What she's really asking, I believe, has to do with her standing before God. If we don't attend worship, does God count it against us? If we do attend worship, does God give us gold stars (or at least a pat on the back)?

I told her that I'm of the mind that people should come to church only if they really want to or if they feel they really need to. That's what people do anyway. But if people are forced to come to church through coercive tactics by church leaders or pastors (such as using Scripture to threaten or to heap guilt trips), they will grow resentful, perhaps even toward God. They may even begin to see God as a hard to please crybaby who has to have everyone's utmost attention. Who's going to want to worship a God like that?

God is not affected negatively by our choices. If He is, shouldn't we be busy thinking of ways to appease Him, or at least try to compensate for those times when we make God angry? What kind of a life would that be? Is that the way God wants to interact with us? Is it possible to be beyond the reach of God's love and mercy? I don't think so! What do you think?

A Codicil?

How do I keep finding all of these weird tv shows? Well, this morning I was flippin' around and came upon the Benny Hinn Show, a show in which the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have his own schedule but must conform to Hinn's. Mr. Hinn's special guest this morning was Pastor John Hagee, who said something that I had never heard spoken before. I'm interested in things like that, new ideas and whatnot. Here's what he said:

Romans 9-11 is a codicil that was added to Romans. Codicils are freestanding documents that are inserted into other documents. Hagee even clarified his interpretation by saying that Romans 9-11 has absolutely nothing to do with chapters 1-8 and chapters 12-16. You can therefore read chapters 9-11 by themselves without any context and still understand them completely.

I don't know about that. It sounds like that hermeneutic was pulled out of a hat for the sake of convenience. He presented little, if any, evidence to support his claim. He just said it and we're expected to believe it.

I find that chapter 9 flows very nicely from Paul's sentiments in chapter 8. At the end of chapter 8 Paul says that there is nothing that can separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus. At the beginning of chapter 9 Paul wishes that he could be cut off from Christ (meaning 'separated') for the sake of his own people, his own race, Israel. He isn't cut off (8:37-39), but he wishes he was if it would mean salvation for unbelieving Jews(9:3). Makes sense to me! I really don't see the necessity of lopping out three chapters of Romans so they stand alone.

One thing Hagee said in support of his interpretation was that one could read to the end of chapter 8, then skip to the beginning of chapter 12, and not miss a beat. Eh, maybe. But I'm afraid that amounts to a non sequitur.

Look out for these TV preacher creatures. They have political agendas and they'll twist and contort Scripture to make it look like God has the same agenda. Always question when they make blanket statements about portions of the Bible!

A Moment With Kahlil

Children

And a woman who held a babe against her bosom said, "Speak to us of Children."

And he said:

Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you,

And though they are with you, yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts.

For they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archer's hand be for gladness;

For even as he loves the arrow that flies, so He loves also the bow that is stable.

--Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet

Meaning

Recent events, such as the Utah mine, Hurricanes Erin and Dean, and the Lima Earthquake, have left people wondering and confused. How are we supposed to understand the love of God amongst natural phenomena that seem out of control? Some would say that God is doing these things for the purposes of punishing sin and rooting out evil, as if God is intentionally orchestrating disasters to occur. Others would say that God is an uncaring dolt because God doesn't stop these things from happening and innocent lives are lost, as if God doesn't have a hand in any of these things and turns away in apathy. Neither of these views put God in a very good light and the underlying thinking is that God is an ornery ol' fellow who is greatly affected by things we do.

What does God have to do with natural disaster as far as cause and effect is concerned? I honestly don't know how to answer that question, but I do know that God is neither tyrannical nor apathetic. God cares deeply about what happens. So then, why doesn't God stop earthquakes or at least keep people out of harms way? Why doesn't God steer hurricanes so they don't make landfall? Why did God allow those mine rescuers to be killed while they were doing something very noble?

I wish I had answers to those questions. They are good questions, but I'm wondering if those are the only questions to ask. I think there are other questions, and I also think we must look at the big picture. We tend to get myopic when disaster strikes.

It might be tempting to become a bit envious when we see stories in the Bible of storms being stilled, dead people being raised, sick people cured, and many other things that Jesus did. "Why doesn't he do them today?" we might ask. A different question, one that reflects curiosity of the bigger picture, is "Why did Jesus do these things in the first place?" He wasn't obligated by anyone to do them, and people certainly didn't expect Jesus to do these things until word got around that things were beginning to change for the better.

The significance here is not in what Jesus did, but in what Jesus did meant to the people. The meaning is what must be examined. In order to explore that angle a bit, here are some questions. Suppose God does steer Hurricane Dean out to open sea. What would that mean? Let's up the stakes a bit. What if God sheared the cloudtops off of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 so that her impact would have been severely attenuated? Would it mean that God is now obligated to rescue everyone on the planet from natural disaster by any means necessary? And is that meaning ultimately the one God wants us to have?

So, what did it mean when Jesus cleansed a leper? I don't think it's enough to say that his life was spared, he got his skin back, and he was now happy. That was certainly part of it, but why would that make him so happy? His healing had theological significance (remember, most of the lepers Jesus cleansed were Jews), namely, that he was now restored as a member of God's covenant people and a full participant in the age to come. It meant that God accepted him. That is what ultimately brought joy to cleansed lepers. They were reunited with Israel. To know that you were "in" and an heir of eternal life was a Jewish person's highest goal and joy.

Now, honestly, would averted natural disasters have that same meaning today? Probably not. We need to learn how to think in the overall scheme of God's acceptance of us in Christ Jesus. To believe that we have not been accepted by God or that we are unworthy of the New Covenant in Christ until we do something that is acceptable to God is, by far, the greatest disaster of all. This, I believe, is the greatest malady of our day.

To know that God has set us free from the bondage of works-righteousness systems through Christ was the greatest joy of the New Testament people. To believe that we are "in" because of what Jesus did and not because of some prayer we prayed or some incense we burned brought joy and peace to the hearts of the first Christians. It should also be the same for us!

Atheists Are Cool

I'm dovetailing a bit today off of Kevin's blog to say that I absolutely love and respect atheists. I've talked to many atheists in the past few years, and they are quite honest in their opinions of church life. They can do this because many of them used to be evangelical Christians, so they speak from experience.

I believe Christians become atheists, not because of spite or hatred of Christian people, but because of things they were taught that they found difficult to believe. Many of them were raised on the notion that God is someone to be frightened of because, as they were told, God holds their very lives over a firepit by a shoestring. And God is very angry at them, they were taught, and will remain that way until they repented, said they were sorry, and accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior. But until then, their situation was hopeless. They would remain sinners in the hands of an angry deity. Many of them were on the verge of insanity looking for ways to placate the wrath of a cosmic sadist and failing at every turn.

So they took leave of God. Can you blame them? If the only version of God available was the one they were fed as kids, then the only other choice was to not believe at all. I think they were given a bad story.

Let's take a cue from atheists and learn how to tell God's story in a way that is true to Scripture. Believe it or not, when an atheist tells you his/her story, he/she is doing you a big favor! Don't react negatively to their thoughts. Learn from them and understand that the version of God they ultimately rejected is a very unscriptural one. We should look to do the same!

No Paths

There are no paths to God, but that doesn't mean God is inaccessible. And just what are paths anyway? Aren't they ultimately just futile attempts to slavishly get on God's good side? If you view God as an angry deity to be appeased, you will try anything to avoid the wrath. Attempting to avoid punishment is hard work and is indicative of a guilty conscience.

Whenever I hear that someone is on a "path", I feel a combination of wonder and pity. I wonder why that person finds it necessary to be on a path. I pity them because I know that they are motivated by fear. Their feeling of angst must be excruciatingly life-sapping. And besides all of that, I know that God loves them passionately, but that love seems alien to them.

But people love their path. There are so many out there. There are even people who are willing to sell their path to you for three easy payments of $19.95 plus shipping and handling. These path "products" are usually nothing more than "to do" lists, giving the impression that God wants everyone to be slaves to the grind.

I'm beginning to understand why Jesus said that no one comes to the Father except through him. To us in the west it sounds like an exclusionary statement, but it's the most inclusionary statement ever made by a human being. It means that we can, all together, join hands and walk out of our slavery and into arms of God. If the cross demonstrated anything at all, it is chiefly this: that we have access to God, not by our humanly devised plans and paths, but by the Way that God himself provided. The Way to God is all God's doing. The only thing left to do is rest from laboriously inventing our own ways. We can stop being so religiously busy and tend to things that are more pressing, like justice, mercy, and walking humbly with God along the Way.

School of The Rock

Can I be frank here? When I was a kid, I hated school and I hated Confirmation. I got good grades, but, honestly, I did not work to my fullest potential. I did just enough to "get by". I only did my homework when it was absolutely necessary to keep my grades up. If homework didn't have any effect on the grade I didn't do it. I know that I wasn't the only one. Most of my schoolmates couldn't stand school. In retrospect I think I know why-- what we were doing to get the grade didn't match our abilities and didn't seem to be a useful way to spend our time.

It was the same thing with Confirmation. I went to a Lutheran school, so my confirmation instruction was during school hours. Pastor would come into the classroom and would recite things that we had to write verbatim. He would pause briefly to explain things, but mostly the class consisted of pastor talking and students writing. We got tested on what we wrote, which means we had to study and remember what we wrote. At the end of the year we were publicly examined in front of the Board of Elders, which meant more memorization.

It's safe to assume, again in retrospect, that after all the memorization and testing was done we promptly forgot what we memorized. There's a difference between rote memorization of facts and figuring out how to put facts to good usage.

Now I'm the pastor. In 13 years of ministry I've noticed that kids still hate school and confirmation instruction. Just about every year I've tweaked and primped confirmation to make it as effective as I possibly could. But the results have been the same-- kids (and parents) who couldn't care less. I think that's why we lose teens after they've been confirmed. They see no value in the knowledge they obtained during their time in confirmation. None of the information was useful. That's not education. That's schooling, and there's a big difference. I believe it's time for a new paradigm.

Here's the big problem I see with traditional methods of confirmation instruction: the pastor is the center of attention. I've thought about what would happen if the students were the center of attention instead of the pastor. What if the students were given the opportunity to match their abilities and talents to concrete ways to grow in their faith? What if I abandoned this notion that teens get confirmed because of what they know and replace it with teens getting confirmed because of who they are? What if I let the students themselves decide what and how they will learn the Christian faith? What if I handed ownership of the class over to the students?

The best I can hope for is to somehow get into the quality worlds of these kids. To them, confirmation instruction is just another version of school, which they can't stand. They won't learn anything by me standing up in front of the room lecturing them. As the addage goes: "Tell me, and I'll forget. Show me, and I'll remember. Involve me, and I'll understand!" Understanding is what confirmation instruction should be all about, isn't it? They'll understand if they are invovled in all aspects of their learning.

So, here's what I'm proposing for Confirmation instruction: no more books, no more lectures, no more worksheets, no more tests, no more rote memorization, no more desks. In their place: total personal interaction by letting groups of kids design and implement their learning. I believe it will be amazing to watch what these kids will be capable of doing. My task would be to listen, to give feedback, to encourage, to guide, to play, to interact. Many people (read "adults") will not like this. We are so accustomed to the old coercive system of schooling that we are incapable of considering the possibility that there's another way. But I have a question for you adults reading this. Why do you think it's right to put your kids through the very thing that you hated as a kid? We hated school when we were in it, and yet as adults we are the biggest cheerleaders for it! I'm finding it harder to cheerlead for something I couldn't stand as a child.

If you want to see a great model of what I'm proposing to do, watch the movie School of Rock, staring Jack Black. Watch what Black's character does with a room full of students. He trusted their natural abilities to be the very best that they could be. He taught them how to rock and roll, not by standing around and talking about it, but by actually doing it! And the kids were completely involved in every aspect of their learning. I know it's only a movie, but it touched on something significant-- that people (including children) thrive in an atmosphere in which they are not forced to do things they have no interest in doing.

Chosen

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.-- 1 Peter 2:9

I'll bet it pained Peter just a little bit to write these words. He was very slow in understanding that God's promises were also for the Gentile nations. It took a heavy dose of repentance on Peter's part to even have the strength to write these words. But because of the Spirit of Jesus his whole worldview was turned upside-down and would never return to upright position.

Perhaps our worldviews need to be shaken up a bit as well.

You may be tempted to think that the above Scripture reference excludes you for whatever reason. You may even have a hard time believing that the adjectives (chosen, royal, holy) cannot possibly describe you because you are treated otherwise.

By what standard do you exclude yourself? Here's a rule of thumb that I use:

Any standard that does not come from the mouth of God is to be ignored.

Not smart enough-- says who? Weigh too much-- did God ever say there's a correct weight? Teeth are crooked-- show me a dentist in the Bible. Nobody likes me-- how do you know? Ya know?!

Who came up with these unreasonable standards? God? I don't think so. Never measure your worth in the eyes of God using others as your measuring stick. God chose you. Period. Don't complicate God's choice with a bunch of stipulations that you cannot possibly live up to.

You are chosen!! Isn't it time to start getting used to it?

Circles

Who's in your circle?

If you remember the comic strip Ziggy you might also remember one particular cartoon in which Ziggy is standing and looking at a mall directory (I call it a mallmanac) and finds the X with the words "You are here" (I call that a here-o-glyph). There happens to be another here-o-glyph in the upper left corner of the mallmanac that says "Everyone else is over here". Poor Ziggy. What a loner.

Ever felt like that-- standing alone for whatever reason while it seems like everyone else seems so distant because of some supposed or apparent superiority on their part? Or like everyone is in the same circle except you because you just don't measure up and you've been relegated to your own circle.

We seem to divide humanity up into circles labeled "us and them", "in and out", "right and wrong", "good and bad", "beautiful and hideous", "worthy and unworthy"... you get the idea.

The idea that there are different circles is a myth designed to keep people we are uncomfortable with under our thumbs. Which leads to parable that Jesus told to a man who was an expert in circles.

This expert, who had his own circle, approached Jesus with a question, "What must I do to make sure my circle isn't breeched by people who don't belong in it?" Jesus answered, "You're the expert. Why don't you tell me?" The expert replied, "Love God and love my circle." "Right!," said Jesus. But then comes the $64,000 question posed by the expert:

"How big should my circle be?" (interpretation--You'd better say that it should remain small!) So Jesus told this story:

Once there was a man who had a circle much like yours, and as he was traveling from Jerusalem down to Jericho he was accosted by thieves who beat the snot out of him and took his clothes, leaving him hanging onto his life by a mere thread (interpretation-- the man's circle just got much smaller and was now filled with cooties-- a circle all to himself).

The man's pastor, who used to have this man in his circle, but no longer because of what just occured, happened to be walking down the same road. When the pastor got close enough to see the man, he made sure he walked around the man as far away as possible. "Not in my circle," said the pastor.

A few minutes later the assistant pastor happened to be walking down the road, and when he got close enough to see the man, he made sure he walked around the man as far away as possible. "Not in the pastor's circle," said the assistant pastor.

A few minutes after that and across the deep valley full of jagged rocks and steep cliffs there was a road for people who belonged to the "never goes to church" circle. On that road a man was traveling with his donkey. When he looked across the valley at the man who had been beaten and left for dead, he experienced an upwelling of compassion because he knew that the pastor and his assistant would have treated him the same way. He tethered his donkey, grabbed his bag, climbed down the steep and dangerous cliff, walked across the valley filled with sharp and jagged rocks, climbed up the other steep and dangerous cliff, and approached the man who was left for dead. He turned the man over and noticed that he was wearing a cross necklace.

"Oh! One of those 'goes to church' circle people," said the man under his breath.

But no matter. He opened his bag and pulled out some ointment and disinfectant. He applied them to the man's wounds and bandaged them as best as he could. He then lifted the man onto his shoulders, climbed down the steep and dangerous cliff, walked across the valley filled with sharp and jagged rocks, climbed up the other steep and dangerous cliff, placed the wounded man on his donkey, and took him to a place where he could be treated.

Now it was time for Jesus to ask his own $64,000 question:

"Which of those three men figured it was time to abandon the 'circle' mentality?"

"The one who went out of his way and risked his own life," mumbled the expert. He couldn't even bring himself to say, "The man who never went to church."

"Good answer!", declared Jesus, "and don't you think it's about time you did the same thing?"

The point of the story? There is only one circle of humanity, and everyone is in it, including you!

Thank You, Tim Hetzner!

A good friend and mentor, Tim Hetzner, President of Lutheran Church Charities, is going to teach a 30-week class on the book of Revelation, called Apocalysis Jesu Christou. Finally, someone is going to bring a sensible approach to this book. I've signed up our church as a site for this class that will be starting in September. Here's a excerpt of what Tim says about Revelation:

Revelation is a prophecy about imminent events – events that were about to break loose on the world of the first century. Revelation is not about nuclear warfare, space travel, or the end of the world. Again and again it specifically warns that “the time is near!” St. John wrote his book as a prophecy of the approaching destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, showing that Jesus Christ had brought the New Covenant and the New Creation. Revelation cannot be understood unless this fundamental fact is taken seriously.

Thank you, Tim!! I'm looking forward to this study!!

Okay, so I'm back!

I'm back in my office, but I'll be leaving again on Saturday for Orlando!! Hot, humid Orlando. Sunny, hot, humid, with brief afternoon thunderstorms Orlando.

Convention was good. Dull, but good. The LCMS declared altar and pulpit fellowship with the American Association of Lutheran Churches (AALC). That was nice, seeing that the LCMS hasn't been in fellowship with another American church body for over 30 years. The AALC is pretty small-- 72 congregations located across the US. There were some concerns about the establishment of fellowship with this body, but overall the delegates were for this declaration.

Houston is a great city between the hours of 7 am and 6 pm. At 6 most of the businesses close and downtown Houston becomes a ghost town. Seriously, this town has absolutely no nightlife. It's even worse on the weekends. Everything closes at 3 pm on Saturday and doesn't open again until Monday. It's probably for the better. Next to no one lives in downtown Houston, so it doesn't make much sense to stay open and not get any business. Still, if at least the restaurants would've known that there was a big convention in town...

But I found Houston to be a very nice city. It's clean, has a beautiful skyline to see at night, and filled with very friendly people. I enjoyed my stay and hope to return to visit sometime. The LCMS 2010 convention will again be held in Houston, but this time when the Astros are in town!

Mr. Hoag Goes to Houston

This next week will find me and the family in Houston, Tejas because I will be attending the LCMS Triennial Regular Convention as our circuit pastoral delegate. I'm not sure how I'm going to vote on things. I'm thinking about not voting at all and being a slacker. Seeing that I'm quite apathetic when it comes to power politics (which is basically the norm in all political arenas), I'm not exactly what you would call an ideal delegate. My instincts tell me to vote for the least qualified people. I would love to see a bunch of people in office who don't know what they're doing. I may even nominate myself to be president. Of course I won't win, but if I did win I would be in over my head and I'll probably spend much of my time in bed, giving no leadership at all and sending the synod into a tailspin. More than likely what the synod needs-- lack of leadership. What a refreshing change that would be!!

One of the issues that will be faced by the delegates is approving a resolution to secure altar and pulpit fellowship with the American Association of Lutheran Churches (AALC). I don't know much about this church body, and I honestly don't care, but I'm just glad that the LCMS will be in fellowship with SOMEBODY! It's about time!! It's really no wonder that a major publication a few years ago called the LCMS a cult. We were our own little island in American Christianity. Some groups are against this resolution, probably because they didn't think of it first.

I will refuse to listen to lobbyists who will no doubt be swarming the convention center. I'm not interested in anything they have to say. They're just a bunch of sad sacks with nothing else better to do than badger the delegates into voting a certain way. I may just pay some of them to leave me alone and let me do what I need to do in peace.