Don't Look and Don't Touch

With the repeal of the military's “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy, it is clear that a sexual revolution is continuing in the United States. In some ways, it looks like the rest of the nation is catching up with the UCC. Starting in 1985, our General Synod called up UCC congregations to identify themselves as “Open and Affirming (ONA).” “To say that a setting of the UCC (a local church, campus ministry Etc.) is “Open and Affirming” means that it has publicly declared that “lesbian, gay, bisexual” (LGB) people (or those of all “sexual orientations”) are welcome in its full life and ministry.” Underlying this position is a belief that “God's affirmation of the gifts of loving relationships and sexuality are not restricted to those who are heterosexual…the ONA movement helps to counter the widespread perception that “Christians think being gay, lesbian, or bisexual is wrong/sinful.” The ONA message is that sexuality is a good gift of our Creator, as is its responsible, loving expression.”

(Source: http://www.ucc.org/lgbt/ona.html#FAQ_about_ONA )

It is the right of human institutions, including denominations and congregations to set standards for membership and leadership. These standards inevitably include some limits on what sexual behaviors are lawful. As society changes, these laws change. Human laws can only deal with behaviors that are witnessed or confessed. As a result, hidden violations go unpunished. This has left societies and churches vulnerable to the charges of hypocrisy and selective enforcement. A divorced person cannot be a church leader, but a married person who carefully conceals their adulteries can be accepted as a pillar of the congregation.

Social standards reflect the way in which a society thinks and talks about sexuality. For example, the church of earlier times could not have standards relating to “sexual orientation” because that concept and that personal identity did not exist until the 20^th century. In our democratic pluralistic society, these standards reflect Biblical values, but they also reflect secular values that come from many sources. As a progressive denomination, the UCC also draws on many sources for its values including theology, philosophy, and science.

In a pluralistic society and in a denomination that values diversity, what is sexually lawful in human terms becomes a separate issue from what is sinful in the eyes of God. What is lawful for the community is decided democratically according to human judgment. What is sinful has to be decided by each Christian person according to their discernment of God's Will.

For an orthodox, Biblical Christian, this discernment must stand on the timeless Word of God, the person and teachings of Jesus our Lord and Savior. These standards tell us which behaviors are sinful—those that “miss the mark” which God has set for us. The exegesis (interpretation) of the Bible changes as the Church changes, but the Word of God never goes “out of date.”

There is no indication that our Savior viewed sexual sin as being any different from other kinds of sin. It is frequently pointed out Jesus spoke much more frequently of money than he did of sex! Jesus came to forgive sin. He also called us sinners to repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven has come near. Jesus did not expect his disciples to be without sin. His emphasis was always on forgiveness. For example, in Luke 17 Jesus says we must forgive again and again.

3 So watch yourselves.“If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. 4 Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them.” 5 The apostles said to the Lord, “Increase our faith!”

In Paul's letters, there is also an expectation that church members are also sinners. However, there is also an expectation that church members will repent of their sins and strive to live holy and pure lives. Paul clearly expected church members to live according to a higher moral standard than their surrounding society. As he stated in 1 Corinthians 5, those members who continue to behave sinfully were to be shunned by the rest of the congregation.

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

How does the Bible define sexual sin? The Bible concerns itself with sexual behaviors, not with “orientations.” These behaviors include both thoughts and actions. It is quite clear that for our Savior only one form of sexual expression is potentially free of sin—sex within a male/female married couple. The only other acceptable form of sexual expression is no expression—celibacy. This is not a cultural convention or a social construction. The Lord teaches us that it is part of the essential nature of humanity as created by God. These teachings are made clear in the Gospels and are further developed in the Epistles. Key texts include Mark 10.

4 They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.” 5 “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied. 6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

Also Matthew 19.

8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” 10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.” 11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Also Matthew 5.

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

In this teaching, Jesus makes it clear that the New Testament limitation on acceptable sexuality does not just apply to sexual acts. It also applies to sexual feelings and thoughts. The only sexual feelings and thoughts that are not sinful are those of husband for wife and wife for husband. All other forms of sexual expression, no matter how “harmless,” “innocent,” or “natural,” are sinful and must be confessed and repented. This includes homosexuality, but also premarital sex, “serial monogamy” (divorce), and masturbation. Not surprisingly, under this impossible standard, we are all guilty.

We are all guilty whether or not we subjectively experience any feelings of guilt. Whether something is sinful has nothing to do with how it makes up feel. Many “natural” and “normal” feelings, impulses, and thoughts are sinful. Sin does not automatically lead to guilt, regret, or repentance. Before the flood, “every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. (Genesis 6:5)” Yet as Jesus said, “For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. (Matthew 24:38-39)” Just because a form of sexual expression is responsible, loving, functional, statistically normal, biologically natural, or culturally acceptable does not mean that it is not sinful. God defines what is sinful. Sin is sin regardless of how we experience it and “the wages of sin is death.”

Paul translates Jesus’ teaching into practical advice for the Christian life in 1 Corinthians 7 and Ephesians 5. The most famous of these statements is probably 1 Corinthians 7, where Paul advises those who cannot be celibate, as he is, to marry.

7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. 8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Those who spend time arguing over the exact historical context and meaning of specific New Testament prohibitions of homosexuality are missing the point. The famous passage of Romans 1:26-27 is about the consequences of idolatry—it leads to sexual sin. However, when Paul’s letters are considered as a whole, we see that all sexual expression outside of male/female marriage is unequivocally condemned. For example, 1 Corinthians 5:1 “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife.” Paul asks the congregation to expel this man from the congregation to “hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.” For Paul, exclusion from the congregation was the most severe penalty recommended for sexual sin.

The celibate and the married are potentially able to live without sexual sin. Those who do so are very holy people. People who are faithfully celibate and faithfully married are special and different from the rest of us. I can sympathize with those who feel left out of this circle of holiness. Nevertheless, there are other circles of holiness that many of us can never enter. The celibate and married are especially blessed, but so are the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and those who are persecuted because of righteousness.

In my personal experience, sanctification is a slow process. Those who are in relation with Christ and belong to him continue to sin. Over time, the power of sin is weakened but it is often a slow and difficult process, with many steps forward and back. Many of those who die in Christ have continued to sin up to the last moments of their lives. Yet they are saved by Grace.

A congregation or denomination that is truly part of the Body of Christ is part of a fundamentally counter-cultural community. The Church is subject to an authority that transcends any cultural fashion. That power is the living, creating, sustaining, ruling, triune God. That God commands us to live under the authority of his Word. When we defy that authority, we sin. When we sin, we are judged and condemned. We are also forgiven and saved through the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross. Although the visible Church has itself sinned many times, the Church must always repent and return to the authority of God. If it does not, it ceases to be part of the Church, the Body of which Christ is the head.

The restriction of human sexual expression to celibacy and marriage is a core Christian value of the New Testament. It is about as clear and unambiguous are you could ask for. It is not a social convention or a practical guideline. It is the Holy Word of the most high God. That God is a power independent of all human preferences, desires, and conveniences. He speaks and we listen. We are judged and convicted by his Word, whether we like it or not. God judges our sexuality and our sexual sin is condemned by God without regard to our social conventions and conveniences.

If we are in relationship with Christ, we will stand convicted of our sexual sins, as well as all the other sins we commit each day. If we are in relationship with Christ we will confess, repent, and be forgiven of those sins each day. If we are in relationship with Christ, we will slowly or quickly grow away from those sins each day of our lives. If we are in relationship with Christ, we will not be perfected and fully holy in this life, but fully holy in the next, where “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

The nice Gay couple is condemned, as is the nice straight couple with the “open marriage,” the caring young single man who goes home after a long day at the office to unwind with a pornographic movie, the faithful wife who enjoys an occasional session in an “adult” chat room after her snoring husband is sound asleep, and the faithful husband who daydreams about how the college girl he passes on the street will look in the shower after a workout…all are judged and condemned. And if they belong to Christ they are also saved and sanctified.

Your Friend in Christ,

Pastor Dan

Bible quotations from the New International Version, ©2010 (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2010 by Biblica

1 Corinthians 3:11-15

One of the small jobs I had during our wonderful church building renovation was to dispose of some old boxes of old books up in the loft. As I sorted through the books, I felt a certain sadness. Most of the books were religious books on topics of current interest during the 1950s and 1960s. These topics included the family, sexuality, poverty, and war. Although “cutting edge” at the time, they all deal with yesterday's problems and ideas. There were also many booklets and pamphlets from the old Evangelical and Reformed Church. Although useful at their time of publication, they are now only of historical interest. To me they (like my sermons) are “ephemera,” things of no lasting significance that are now only of interest to collectors and archivists. I was hoping to find Bible commentaries or perhaps an edition of Luther or Calvin's works. No such luck. I guess my predecessors took such works with them when they moved on.

However, I did find two books that have changed my life as a pastor and a Christian. They are “God's Search for Man” and “God in Action” by Karl Barth. Rev. Kenneth Wobbe, who signed and dated them December 5, 1938, originally owned both books. Kenneth Hensiek later stamped his name on the inside cover, and they were both finally signed by Ernest Jordan. Both are early works of Barth, the first a book of sermons and the second a collection of theological addresses. God bless Rev. Wobbe for leaving them here for me. If you are not familiar with Barth, Princeton Theological Seminary's Center for Barth Studies provides this brief biography.

Karl Barth (1886-1968), the Swiss-German professor and pastor, is regarded by many as a modern day “Church Father.” Barth's great contribution to theology, church, politics, and culture will take generations to appropriate and assess. As the principal author of “The Barmen Declaration,” he was the intellectual leader of the German Confessing Church, the Protestant group that resisted the Third Reich. Among Barth's many books, sermons and essays, the multivolume Church Dogmatics -- a closely reasoned, eloquently stated argument in nearly ten thousand pages -- stands out as the crown of his achievement.

Based on reading Rev. Wobbe's two old books, I went to Kent Library and found two more books by Barth. They only whetted my appetite for Barth's masterpiece, his “Church Dogmatics.” Available in 14 and 31 volume editions, a set normally sells for hundreds of dollars. However, when I mentioned this to Dr. Kerry Wynn, he directed me to Christian Book Distributors, which is offering “Church Dogmatics,” in 14 Volumes for $99.99 a savings of 895.01 (90%) from the retail price of $995.00. I could not resist! After reading 165 of these ten thousand pages, I can see that I have made a good investment. I have to agree with those who say that “Church Dogmatics” is the most important theological work of the 20th century.

What is “Church Dogmatics?” According to Merriam Webster, dogmatics is “a branch of theology that seeks to interpret the dogmas of a religious faith.” What is dogma? “A doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church.” Part of Barth's appeal for me is that he calls his work “Evangelical Theology.” His immediate intention was to provide a sound theological basis for the German Evangelical (Protestant) Church. Barth wanted to bring together the Lutheran and Reformed (Calvinist) churches into a single confessing church, even if they were to remain organizationally independent. Sounds like the good old Evangelical and Reformed Church to me!

Barth believed that the Church must constantly revise and recreate it's theology for its own time, rather than uncritically following the doctrines of Luther and Calvin. However, Barth also decisively rejects what he calls modernist Protestantism. Leading modernist theologians included Rudolf Bultmann, Paul Tillich, Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Albert Schweitzer. I believe that modernism (also known as liberal Christianity, Christian socialism, and progressive Christianity) provides the intellectual foundation for post-modernist theology, liberation theology, feminist theology, and social justice theology. These are the predominate theologies of the United Church of Christ leadership and our seminaries. Although these fashionable theologies claim to have replaced modernism, I believe that in fact they are merely new forms of modernism and are subject to the same fundamental weakness that Barth identifies in modernism.

What is this fundamental weakness? It is a fundamental failure of faith in God. Modernism sees religion and theology as aspects of human experience. Knowledge of God is simply another form of human knowledge, fundamentally the same as scientific and philosophical knowledge. The flagship of modernist theology is historical/critical study of the Bible. In this approach the Bible is treated as a “text” that is subject to analysis by all available tools including history, archeology, physical and social science, and philosophy. The underlying assumption is that today's scholars are much more knowledgeable and enlightened than the prophets and apostles who wrote down our Holy Scriptures. The “higher criticism” disassembled the Bible into imagined sources that were supposedly written by fanciful authors and cobbled together by hypothetical editors. This has resulted in the absurd claims of the Jesus Seminar, where a committee of scholars votes on which statements of the Gospels were “actually” said by Jesus. Based on a series of arbitrary criteria they have concluded that there are only a about a dozen authentic statements of Jesus in the Bible.

Barth returns the focus where it belongs, on the Triune God. Modernism and its children are not Christian to the extent that they interpret Bible and the Church as part of a human reality, instead of “the acting of God himself.” The Church is a result of a divine action that cannot be understood or explained by any human category of knowledge, whether scientific, historical, or sociological. The Church is not a human institution such as a corporation, government, or nation. “The being of the Church is identical with Jesus Christ.” Jesus Christ is the “free Lord” of the Church’s existence who is never “restricted and conditioned by certain concrete forms of the human understanding of His revelation and of the faith which grasps it.” Colossians 1:18 states this eloquently. “And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.” Jesus is in charge!

Church dogmatics can only be seen and understood only in “the present moment of the speaking and hearing of Jesus Christ Himself, the divine creation of light in our hearts.” This means engaging the Bible not as a “text” to be deconstructed but as the Word of God that “is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:11-13) Barth is not a Biblical fundamentalist or literalist. However, in the Bible he sees the unique reflection of the power and mystery of our awesome Triune God. The Bible is the Good News that Jesus commissioned the Church to proclaim through preaching and administering sacraments. If we neglect this commission, we are no longer the true Church, the Body of Christ.

Barth embodies the values expressed in the constitution of our congregation: respect for Biblical authority and freedom of conscience. “Church Dogmatics” is the great gift of the German Evangelical Church to the universal Church. It is a tragedy that while Barth is increasingly influential in the Methodist, Mennonite, and Presbyterian circles, Barth's essential insights have been totally ignored by the leaders of the United Church of Christ. Starting in the 1930s, Barth worked tirelessly to rescue the Evangelical church from the heresy (false dogma) of modernism. In the 1960s, our denominational ancestors chose to ignore Barth's warnings. As a result, our seminaries have not provided a sound dogmatic foundation for our pastors and leaders. Even if our pastors and leaders are intelligent, well educated, and full of good intentions, without such a foundation they will labor in vain.

For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames. (1 Corinthians 3:11-15)

Barth quotes are from “Church Dogmatics, Volume I: The Doctrine of the Word of God”

Bible quotes are from New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2010 by Biblica

Even if One Was Sent Who Rose From the Dead

Luke 16:19-31 The Rich Man and Lazarus

19 "There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 "The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

25 "But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

27 "He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

29 "Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'

30 " 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'

31 "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

This parable confronts us with a challenge: will we listen to the Good News brought by someone who rose from the dead? Will we listen to the Good News revealed by God through Jesus? Or will we listen to mere human voices and end up worshiping the creature rather than the creator?

Natural Theology

There are two primary ways of thinking about God: natural theology and revealed theology. Natural theology claims that since God created the world, we can know something of God by using the human mind to observe and reason about created things. There are only two basic problems with this effort: (1) the human mind is sinful and (2) Nature is fallen into death and decay. Although it is possible to learn about God from nature, natural theology has always has led to idolatry and sin. Paul lays this out step-by-step in his description of the pagan world in Romans Chapter 1.

Natural theology: 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Idolatry: 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal human beings and birds and animals and reptiles.

Sin: 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. … 28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.

Note what we often ignore—Paul is saying that sexual immorality and other sin is a consequence of idolatry—turning away from the True God to worship created things. There seems to be an inherent weakness of the human heart: when people look for God in created things they inevitably confuse those created things with God and begin to worship and serve them.

Natural theology often boils down to what seems natural is what is good. In today's parable, the rich man probably assumed that he was rich because he was righteous and Lazarus was poor because he was a sinner. This is a pervasive idea in human life, often referred to as the “Law of Karma.”

Revealed Theology

Revealed theology comes from God through prophets and apostles, not from application of human reason to nature. The Word of God has full authority over those who receive the revelation. The Word is created by God and delivered through his chosen human agents. The Word must be understood, interpreted, and applied by human beings. The Word demands complete commitment. For each person there can be only one revelation.

For the Jews, this revelation was what we call the Old Testament. The rich man was living under the Old Testament revelation that the rich are to care for the poor.

Deuteronomy 15:10 Give generously to them and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to. 11 There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward those of your people who are poor and needy in your land.

The rich man ignored that revelation from Moses and the prophets and reaped the consequences. This revelation was sufficient. This revelation was all that he and his brothers needed to live in obedience to God. That was why it was pointless to send Lazarus back from the dead.

For us Christians, our revelation is Jesus. “Jesus Christ, as he is attested for us in Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God which we have to hear and which we have to trust and obey in life and in death.” (Theological Declaration of Barmen) This revelation tells us that Lazarus is our brother and that to love God and follow the commands of Christ, we must lift up our neighbor when he is in need. If we fail to do this, the failure is even greater than that of the rich man, for he only had the revelation of the law, while we have Jesus and the Spirit he gave us. We are convinced of this revelation because “someone rose from the dead.”

The Sin of Mixing Natural and Revealed Theology

Because of our sinful pride and vanity, human beings are always tempted to add our own “two cents” to the Word of God. We attempt to combine the results of applying human reason to created things (natural theology) with the Word (revealed theology). This goes beyond using reason to interpret and apply the Word. Instead, it uses reason to add new ideas, concepts, and beliefs to the Word. In the 18th and 19th centuries, new and fashionable ideas from science, philosophy, and literature were added to Christianity. This has continued to this day, now under the fashionable labels of “modernism,” “progressive Christianity,” “process theology,” and “postmodernism.”

This sin of Protestant modernism created a crisis in Nazi Germany, where the “German Christians” regarded the doctrines of National Socialism as expressing God's will through nature and claimed that Adolf Hitler was God's gift to the German Nation. In response, the German Evangelical Church met at Barmen on May 29, 1934 and adopted the “Theological Declaration of Barmen.” This declaration is widely accepted as one of the most important historic confessions of the Protestant church.

The Church is compelled to confess its faith in response to a threat to its integrity and purity. A confession is a statement in which the Church strives to apply faithfully the Word of God to a current crisis. Each point of the Declaration is a convincing interpretation of the Word of God as recorded in the New Testament.

This declaration not only rejected the attempt of the Third Reich to make the church serve the State, but it rejected all other attempts to subvert the authority of Christ over the church by importing foreign beliefs, including those of natural theology, into the Body of Christ.

We reject the false doctrine, as though the church could and would have to acknowledge as a source of its proclamation, apart from and besides this one Word of God, still other events and powers, figures and truths, as God’s revelation.

We reject the false doctrine, as though there were areas of our life in which we would not belong to Jesus Christ, but to other lords—areas in which we would not need justification and sanctification through him.

We reject the false doctrine, as though the church were permitted to abandon the form of its message and order to its own pleasure or to changes in prevailing ideological and political convictions.

Now, as then, there is a temptation to add human political, economic, and social theories to the Word of God. We may be tempted to interpret the parable of the rich man and Lazarus as an example of inequality due to a failed economic and social system. This leads to the temptation of campaigning to eliminate inequality by economic and social reforms through the power of the State rather than through Christians acting in the Name of Christ in his ministry and mission. Because the power of the State allows it to impose its will on all citizens, this becomes a tempting short cut. This leads to the false belief that State action can bring about the Kingdom of God. There are many dangers to relying on the State to carry out the will of God. Because of this, the Barmen statement committed the Evangelical Churches to complete separation of Church and State.

Scripture tells us that, in the as yet unredeemed world in which the church also exists, the State has by divine appointment the task of providing for justice and peace. [It fulfills this task] by means of the threat and exercise of force, according to the measure of human judgment and human ability.

We reject the false doctrine, as though the State, over and beyond its special commission, should and could become the single and totalitarian order of human life, thus fulfilling the church’s vocation as well.

We reject the false doctrine, as though the church, over and beyond its special commission, should and could appropriate the characteristics, the tasks, and the dignity of the State, thus itself becoming an organ of the State.

The Church Belongs To Christ and Only To Christ

No matter what the conditions in the world, or what developments have occurred in human knowledge or in prevailing belief, the Church must always belong to Christ. The Barmen Declaration states this quite eloquently.

The Christian Church is the congregation of the brethren in which Jesus Christ acts presently as the Lord in Word and Sacrament through the Holy Spirit. As the church of pardoned sinners, it has to testify in the midst of a sinful world, with its faith as with its obedience, with its message as with its order, that it is solely his property, and that it lives and wants to live solely from his comfort and from his direction in the expectation of his appearance.

We reject the false doctrine, as though the church were permitted to abandon the form of its message and order to its own pleasure or to changes in prevailing ideological and political convictions.

The church’s commission, upon which its freedom is founded, consists in delivering the message of the free grace of God to all people in Christ’s stead, and therefore in the ministry of his own Word and work through sermon and Sacrament.

We reject the false doctrine, as though the church in human arrogance could place the Word and work of the Lord in the service of any arbitrarily chosen desires, purposes, and plans.

Do Not Add or Take Away a Single Word

This Word of God, this Jesus, is all we need and all we have. If we think that because we can do anything apart from Christ, that our institutions and traditions have any value apart from Christ, or that the Church can bring about the Kingdom of God through guiding the State apart from Christ, we are to be pitied much more than poor Lazarus lying on the doorstep is.

Revelation 3:17 You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.

The Church must use human reason and knowledge to understand, interpret, and apply God’s revelation, not replace that revelation with human-made idols. If we think that because we are full of science, technology, and spiritual wisdom we can add or take away a letter from the Living Word of God, we are to be pitied more than the rich man tormented in the fires of Hades is.

Revelation 22:18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If any one of you adds anything to them, God will add to you the plagues described in this scroll. 19 And if any one of you takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from you your share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.

Luke 16:17It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

God has sent one who “rose from the dead” to give us the Good News. Are we willing to listen?

Amen.

Yours in Christ,

Pastor Dan

Bible quotations are from Today's New International Version (TNIV) © Copyright 2001, 2005 by Biblica

The Theological Declaration of Barmen can be found in the Book of Confessions of the Presbyterian Church, USA at http://oga.pcusa.org/publications/boc.pdf

1 Corinthians 3:10-15

10 By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. 11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person's work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames. 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 (Today's New International Version)

I had the privilege of going on a pastors' retreat the last 2 and ½ days. Thank you EUCC! The retreat was in a quiet and comfortable resort at the Lake of the Ozarks. I had the indoor pool to myself each morning before breakfast. I had forgotten how good a swim is for your knees and legs. The food was good if somewhat heavy and my roommate did not snore. Just about perfect. If only this hay fever season was not such a bad one!

The retreat program was presented by a well-known and respected academic theologian and teacher. He has published many books. His Bible knowledge was excellent and his presentation skills quite good. He is apparently considered a leader in the school of “process theology.” He has led churches and trained many new pastors. He was a self-declared progressive and an enthusiast of “postmodernism.” I spent some time with him across the restaurant table and he seemed to be a kind and openhearted person.

I enjoyed his talks and participated in the question and answer sessions. I found that he spoke my language, the language of the Bible, but I had an uneasy feeling that many words had different meanings for him than for me. A good example is the statement from Ephesians 5:23, “Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.” Our speaker referred to this as one of the metaphors used to described the church. I have never seen this as a metaphor. The risen Jesus Christ has a physical body, that “sits at the right hand of the Father.” Jesus Christ also has a spiritual body, the Church, of which he is Head, Lord, and Savior. Seeing this as a metaphor and seeing it as a Truth have greatly different implications for how we live in the Church.

On another occasion, referring to the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, he stated that he did not know what happened on those occasions, but that something must have happened. Rather than believing in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus as real events, progressives see them as a subjective experiences of the disciples which are significant only because of their impact on the development of the Church.

The speaker mostly operated in the “No-Jesus” zone. Christ was mentioned fairly frequently, but the name “Jesus” came up occasionally. The speaker was also frequently filling out his talks with non-Biblical materials from history, science, non-Christian religions and popular culture. I would cautiously say that he was using this material as independent sources of ideas and beliefs rather than as illustrations of Biblical concepts. As a postmodernist, he was accepting of beliefs that I would label as spiritually dangerous. Books like “The Secret” were subject to only mild criticism. Various “New Age” meditative and healing practices were held up for praise. There was no distinction between Christian and non-Christian practices and traditions. The speaker also lead us in our final communion worship. His prayers were very fluid and eloquent, but many of the expected elements of the communion prayer were absent. Throughout his presentation the word “sin” was rarely used and the passion of Christ was underplayed. He did not make any of the expected references to Jesus, “born of Mary, our sister in faith, Christ lived among us to reveal the mystery of your Word, to suffer and die on the cross for us, to be raised from death on the third day, and then to live in glory.”

I would have to say that our leader represented “progressive” Christianity at its best. He effectively conveyed the open and inclusive aspects of the progressive approach. His is certainly a dynamic faith, constantly open to new ideas, beliefs, and practices. Because he uses the Bible and generally follows the broad outlines of Christian belief and worship, his approach is superficially similar to confessional Christianity. However, he consistently selects and interprets scripture and tradition in ways that are consistent with the progressive agenda. In my opinion it is his progressive agenda, not his faith in Jesus that drives his work in the Church.

I believe his is building up the Church, but he is the builder Paul referred to who is using “wood, hay or straw” rather than “gold, silver, or costly stones.” I say this because he is using worldly materials rather than the Word of the living God. He spoke a great deal of religion and spirituality. We tend to assume that religious and spiritual words are Godly words. We tend to believe that talk about God must come from God. Yet there a kind of religion and spirituality that leans to heavily on the wisdom of created things rather than the Wisdom of God. Even though God created the world, the world is not God. We can learn something about God from the world, but we cannot learn what is necessary for salvation. That can only be learned from the revelation of God through his Son, Jesus the Christ of the Living God. The famous “Theological Declaration of Barmen” puts this very well.

“Jesus Christ, as he is attested for us in Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God which we have to hear and which we have to trust and obey in life and in death. We reject the false doctrine, as though the church could and would have to acknowledge as a source of its proclamation, apart from and besides this one Word of God, still other events and powers, figures and truths, as God’s revelation.”

1 Corinthians 3:12-15

Ecclesiology: theological doctrine relating to the church

Polity: the form of government of a religious denomination

The Missouri Mid-South Conference of the United Church of Christ recently posted an item on its website that reads (in part):

In 2009, the Rev. Clyde Steckel, Emeritus Professor of Theology at United Theological Seminary, wrote New Ecclesiology and Polity: The United Church of Christ. In it he proposes "that UCC ecclesiology (the doctrine of the church) and its polity (how the church is organized and operates) urgently need to be reexamined and reshaped if the church is to minister faithfully in a postmodern world.” Conference Minister Jeffrey Whitman invites you to join him in a series of conversations about the book's proposals.

I have not read this recent book, but I have read several other articles by Rev. Clyde on this subject. In my view, his discussion reflects a general misunderstanding about the nature of the Church. There is no problem with tinkering with polity, if you like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. However, the idea of a denominational ecclesiology is seriously misconceived.

First, Christian ecclesiology is clearly defined by the Bible, especially by Acts and the Epistles. The foundation of this sound ecclesiology is that the Church is the Body of Christ and that Christ is the head of the church. God created his Church and the incarnate God, Jesus of Nazareth rules the Church. Everything that is good in the Church comes from God. The Holy Spirit of God empowers the Church to do ministry and mission. The Word of God sets the standard that those of us trying to live in the Church strive to meet. It is not for us to form committees, draft resolutions, and vote on what the Church should be. The purposes of God for his Church are clear. God will judge us by how well we fulfill his purposes. As always, Paul puts it best.

12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person's work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames. 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 (Today's New International Version)

Second, although a confessing denomination should include summaries of Biblical ecclesiology in confessions and catechisms, there is no reason any Christian denomination should adopt a unique or novel ecclesiology in an attempt to distinguish itself from other denominations. Theologians are welcome to interpret and explain Biblical ecclesiology but there is no reason for denominations to choose a particular theological expression of this issue. Ecclesiology should unite, not divide.

Third, there is no Biblical basis for denominations. The Church consists of (1) the universal invisible Church and (2) the congregations that are the visible manifestation of that Church in a particular place and time. The statement from the website reflects the common and dangerous error that denominations are the Church. Denominations are merely human-created organizations of religious people. Denominations should exist to serve the local congregations and thereby serve the universal Church. Unfortunately, many local congregations across the board are finding that their denominations are more of a liability than an asset. The services congregations need (in worship, ministry, and mission) are often better provided by nondenominational or parachurch organizations or through local congregations banding together across denominations.

Fourth, denominations are an unfortunate symptom of divisions in the visible Body of Christ. The reformation should have reformed the visible Church. Instead, it split the visible Church and this process of splitting has accelerated to this day. Of course, this split is an illusion because Jesus Christ’s rulership of the Church remains unimpaired. We labor under the illusion that we are dividing the Church and this illusion enslaves us to mere human ends. Historically, denominations have reflected very human (and sometimes very violent) disputes that related to national, ethnic, and class divisions that had nothing to do with the Body of Christ. We should look forward to the coming post-denominational era with a sigh of relief. AMEN!

Philippians 2:9-11

From the viewpoint of this Christian pastor, it seems our culture (including our churches) is divided into a series of zones as far as “God talk” is concerned.

1. The “God Free” Zone: This is zone where God is never directly or indirectly mentioned. This is the zone in which secular culture thinks it lives. Most popular entertainments fall within this zone. I recently viewed the film “Date Night” thanks to Red Box. The movie was funny, if vulgar and it was a pleasant change to see a movie about a believable married couple. What was unbelievable was that God was never mentioned, much less prayed to, in a story line where the main characters were frequently in mortal jeopardy. This zone is supposed to be the most inclusive, but for those who believe God created and sustains everything, it is not a comfortable place to be. This zone keeps the atheists happy, but insults the beliefs and values of all theists.
2. The “Christ Free” Zone: This is the zone where God is mentioned and even prayed to, but where Christ is carefully avoided. This is the inter-faith zone. By default, this God is monotheistic and Unitarian. Again, the intention is to be inclusive because if God talk is kept vague nobody will be offended. An undefined God is inoffensive not just because he does not offend anyone’s doctrine, but also because he can only demand platitudes (“be nice to everyone”) that do not make serious demands on us. This God is the God of pantheists, Gnostics, and new agers, not the God of the Christian Church. Strangely enough, popular films such as “Book of Eli” and “Constantine” which appear to have something to do with the Church and Christianity generally operate in this zone. I was amazed that the “Book of Eli” could pretend to be about the Bible without ever mentioning Christ. The ending of the story puts the cherry on top of the Christ free sundae by returning the Bible to its proper place…on the bookshelf with the other “classics of Western Literature.” Give me a break!
3. The “Jesus Free” Zone: Much of the “progressive Christianity” operates in this zone. Some progressives deny the divinity of Jesus, but want to remain nominal Trinitarians. For them Jesus was just a “good teacher.” They believe that Jesus, as a moral example, reflected the goodness of God in the world. This Christ was present in Jesus, but is also present in all human beings. Jesus is avoided because he limits this universal Christ to a single gender and historical/cultural context. Avoiding the name of Jesus allows them to avoid the messy details of the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of the only person who was both Son of God and God. In this zone, the incarnation is just a symbol or metaphor, as is the trinity and the resurrection. When those who live in this zone talk about “Christ” they are not talking about Jesus of Nazareth. If you are in a church or other setting where you hear “Christ , Christ, Christ,” but you never hear the name of Jesus, run as fast as you can.

Philippians 2:9-11 (Today's New International Version)

9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place

and gave him the name that is above every name,

10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,

in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,

to the glory of God the Father.

Job 22:21

Earlier today, a friend showed me a bookmark sized statement of faith from a local church. The statement was a list of Bible verses all intended to support the belief in the “prosperity gospel.” My friend thought it ironic that the list started with Job 22:21. This verse reads, “Submit to God and be at peace with him; in this way prosperity will come to you.” (Today's New International Version)


In the Book of Job, this is a statement by one of Job’s “friends,” Eliphaz the Temanite. Job’s friends try to explain Job’s loss of God’s favor by some sin that Job has committed. Job is unconvinced and uncomforted by the arguments of his friends. In the end, both Job and his friends are silenced by the mighty voice of God, speaking out of the storm.

In the epilogue, God delivers his judgment on the “wisdom” of Job’s friends.

Job 42:7 After the LORD had said these things to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Temanite, "I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. 8 So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has." 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite did what the LORD told them; and the LORD accepted Job's prayer. (Today's New International Version)

It seems ironic that any Christian would view the “folly” of Eliphaz as a foundation of their faith. I prefer the Gospel of our Savior Jesus Christ.

Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it." (Today's New International Version)

AMEN.