Against The Dying Of The Light

Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night

         

Do not go gentle into that good night,

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,

Because their words had forked no lightning they

Do not go gentle into that good night.

 

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright

Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,

And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,

Do not go gentle into that good night.

 

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight

Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

And you, my father, there on that sad height,

Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

Dylan Thomas

Seditious Misgivings

The Prayer of Jabez

Many people have made much of the prayer of Jabez, especially the Reformed and Born Again Christians. I have to confess, though, that from the get-go, I was leery of this booklet, and that I quickly scanned it, and confirmed my fear. Here, then, is the particular passage:

“Jabez was more honorable than his brothers; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, "Because I bore him in pain." Jabez called upon the God of Israel, saying, ‘Oh that you would bless me and enlarge my border, and that your hand might be with me, and that you would keep me from harm so that it might not bring me pain!’ And God granted what he asked.”

My thoughts:

> “Name it and claim it,” huh? Yes, I can see how the prosperity theologians would have a field day with this passage.
> It seems to me that we human beings quickly, naturally, think of God’s blessings as PHYSICAL, and not SPIRITUAL also. For instance, we are so quick to ask God to give us food, clothing, shelter, and other physical, earthly blessings, which God himself commands us to do; but the thing is, we so often neglect to ask God for SPIRITUAL blessings: love for all men, but especially for those of the household of faith, patience in the midst of trials, hope in the midst of despair, eagerness to hear his Word, longing to receive his Sacraments, a generous heart ready to help those in need, compassion for God’s people, steadfastness in the one true faith, boldness in our confession of the Way, the Truth and the Life.
> The passage indeed says that “God granted what he asked,” but Wilkinson immediately reasons that this is because “Jabez was more honorable than his brothers.” Hm. I remember the phrase, “Facientibus quod in se est, Deus non denegat gratiam.” To those who do the good that is in them, God cannot deny grace. It is the Roman Catholic teaching on justification. The passage did not say “because Jabez was more honorable than his brothers, God granted what he asked.” The passage says, “God granted what he asked.” Period. I think the reason God granted Jabez his petition was because God is gracious, and not because Jabez was a good man. For if God grants our petitions because of who we are, then the thief on the cross, yes! we also, would be in dire straits. We would be hopeless.
> This passage, though, is a great opportunity to clearly distinguish between Law and Gospel. God grants our petitions not because we are good, but because God is good. Once more, listen to the dear Dr. Luther as he explains this in his Catechism:

I believe that God has made me and all creatures; that He has given me my body and soul, eyes, ears, and all my members, my reason and all my senses, and still takes care of them.

He also gives me clothing and shoes, food and drink, house and home, wife and children, land, animals, and all I have. He richly and daily provides me with all that I need to support this body and life.

He defends me against all danger and guards and protects me from all evil.

All this He does only out of fatherly, divine goodness and mercy, without any merit or worthiness in me. For all this it is my duty to thank and praise, serve and obey Him.

This is most certainly true. (italics mine)

The Means of Grace (Smalcald Articles III.iv-viii)

Sometimes we hear people ask, “Why do we need the Sacraments if we have the Word?” It’s an understandable question. We tend to think, “If God said He forgives us, and Christ died, why do we need Sacraments?” I’ve heard the question answered this way, “How often do you need to tell your wife you love her? Once?” No, of course not. We tell those whom we love how much we love them, often. And God is the same way. He gives His grace and mercy, lavishly.

Luther has a delightful way of putting it in the Smalcald Articles, “God is superabundantly generous in His grace.” The German word here for “superabundantly” is “überschwenglich” and means “effusive” and can mean “gushing.” A paraphrase might be, “God gushes grace!” The Latin translation of the Smalcald Articles says that God is “rich” (dives) and “liberal” (liberalis) in His grace and goodness” (dives et liberalis est gratia and bonitate sua.)

How so? Luther lists four ways: First, through the spoken word (Ger: mündliche Wort; Lat: verbum vocale), “through which the forgiveness of sins is preached in the whole world.” Second, through Baptism. Third, through the holy Sacrament of the Altar. Fourth, through the Power of the Keys. Luther here presents the specific means of grace, which are often referred to as the Word and Sacraments. The “particular office” of the Gospel (Ger:eigentliche Amt des Evngelii) is the proclamation of the forgiveness of sins, and the Sacramental means of that proclamation are located, by Luther, in Baptism, Lord’s Supper and the Power of the Keys, which Luther explains most specifically in Article VIII: Confession.

But Luther does not end his “laundry list” of the ways in which God is so lavish and generous with His grace. He explains that there is also a communication of God’s grace through the “mutual conversation and consolation of brethren” which Luther, in his German text, here uses Latin words to explain: “per mutuum colloquium et consolationem fratrum” and then cites Matthew 18:20, “where two or three are gathered, etc.”

Luther’s point in these articles is twofold: to affirm the variety of ways our good and gracious God provides His lavish treasures of forgiveness, life and salvation to us, and to affirm what God’s Word teaches about Baptism, the Lord’s Supper and the Keys. The key to understanding these gifts is the recognition that it is not in the act of doing them that grace is given, but that God has given us His word of promise connected to these simple, external means of communicating His grace to use: word, water, bread and wine. Thus Luther says of Baptism, that it is “nothing other than God’s Word in the water, commanded by His institution.” (Art. V.1).

In the article on the Sacrament of the Altar we have the most strikingly realistic assertions of what the Lord’s Supper is: “the bread and wine in the Supper are Christ’s true body and blood.” (Art. VI.1). Luther, with a verbal wave of the hand, dismisses the “high reasoning” and “sophistic cunning” that had developed in the Medieval Church to try to explain how it is that the bread is the body of Christ and the wine His blood, and then a way of justifying not distributing the blood of Christ to the laity. These theories, transubstantiation and concomitance, are speculative human theories which have nothing to do with Christ’s institution.

Here we should caution that often we hear Reformed Christians (heirs of Zwingli and Calvin) claim that they do not deny the Real Presence, but they just don’t try to explain how it happens. This is not the same thing as the Roman Church adopting a philosophical explanation for how the bread is the body of Christ. Reformed Christianity rejects the assertion that the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ, choosing instead to affirm, in various ways, that the actual body and blood of Christ as as far away from the elements of the Supper as heaven is from earth (this is what Calvin asserts in his writing the Consensus Tigurinus). 

The binding and loosing of sins in the Church is not a power and authority that is given to the Pope to distribute as he sees fit, but rather it is “given by Christ to the Church” (Art. VII.1). This article is followed immediately by Luther’s comments about Confession. “Absolution, or the Power of the Keys, is an aid against sin and consolation for a bad conscience. It is ordained by Christ in the Gospel. Therefore, Confession and Absolution should by no means be abolished in the Church.” (Art. VIII.1). This article really is more about Luther’s desire to assert the strength and power of the means of grace, which is located in the “spoken, outward Word” through which God grace His Spirit or grace “to no one except through or with the preceding outward Word.” (Art. VIII.3). 

Luther is very concerned to make these points clear because there were those in his days, as in ours, who were pointing people not toward the external, objective Word and promises of God given to us in Scripture and delivered through the outward preaching and teaching of the Word, but rather pointing people to their feelings, emotions and their perception of the Spirit’s promptings and stirrings. Luther rejects any such interior speculations, be they from radical reformers like Muntzer and others, or from the Papacy itself which Luther says is “sheer enthusiasm” since the Pope finally claims the right to decide and command based on the “shrine in his heart” as evidenced by the Papacy’s directing and teaching things that are “above and contrary to Scripture and the spoken Word.” (Art. VIII.4)

Rev. Paul McCain

Born Again?

I got this from one of my favorite websites, WELS.net:

Q: My question is about people that claim to be a Born Again Christian. I know of a lot of people that claim to be a Born Again Christian. I don't know exactly what they mean by this, and what they are trying to say, when they say it. Most of these people are members of churches like Assembly Of God, and other churches like them. Is there such a thing as a Born Again Christian, and what, and who are they. This really baffles me, because I don't know how to answer them. Thank You, 

 A: According to Scripture, the expression “born-again Christian” is redundant.  All Christians are “born-again Christians” (John 3:3).  Christians are born again when they are brought to faith through Holy Baptism (John 3:5) or through the preaching of the Gospel (1 Peter 1:23).

 As you’ve noticed, that’s not what most people mean when they use the expression.  It is generally used by churches with an Arminian theology that leads them to locate the cause of one’s salvation within the person who was saved.  These churches teach that one was “born again” if, while still an unbeliever, he prayed a prayer in which he “invited Jesus into his heart” or “turned his life over to Jesus” or “accepted Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior”  or “made his decision for Christ” (Interestingly, Scripture uses none of these expressions). 

 Most “born-again Christians” consider it very important to be able to pinpoint the moment that this happened to them, and they willingly share their “testimony”—i.e., their personal conversion story.  Usually these stories involve an intense emotional experience.  In fact, often the intensity of the experience is what convinces the “born again Christian” that his or her conversion was real. 

 That, of course, is part of the problem.  Our emotions, or even our conversion, are an inadequate foundation for our faith.  When our faith rests on the unchangeable reality of what Jesus did for us on the cross, it rests secure.  An additional problem is that an unbeliever can’t “make a decision for Christ” (Ephesians 2:1-5 et al.).  100% of the credit for our conversion belongs to God the Holy Spirit, as Luther beautifully expressed in his explanation to the Third Article of the Apostle’s Creed. 

 Personally, when asked whether I’m a “born-again Christian,” I’ve responded, “Absolutely!  I was born again on (...).”—and then I gave the date of my baptism.  Most people have been perceptive enough to realize that either I’m a lot older than I look, or I’m talking about something that happened when I was a baby. That has led to a discussion of John 3:3 and 5, and what “born again” actually means.

Durer's Agnus Dei

Ecce Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi! -John 1:29

On Prayer (think about it!)

For most people these days, death is the great boogeyman of a godless age and of secular people. It mocks the pretensions of self-made men and sleep is the great reminder. Nighttime and going to sleep, which everyone must do from the billionaire to the baby, is like dying every day. One must close the eyes. One must cease activity. How one faces this challenge tells much of how one regards mortality. 

And ... 

Nighttime can be harried in busy households. The urge to rush through or even skip the prayers at the end of the day can be strong. But we are not just hurrying our children to bed or slicing out a portion of a long day for some peace and quiet. We are imparting a posture towards death, teaching them how to die well, in trust towards the God who gave them life and will continue to give them life even in death. Evening prayers point to the Father who heard the prayer of his Son in the ultimate Friday dusk and hears our prayers at the ending of earthly light. We sing of eternal light which pierced the lonely tomb of Jesus and will carry us through to that same bright morning.

Seen & Read

The Twilight books, by Stephenie Meyer – I hope Buffy lives very far away from them. And there is Van Helsing and Blade too. . .

 The Deptford Trilogy, by Robertson Davies – I guess Robertson Davies isn’t well known here in the Philippines (or am I just out of touch with my writer friends?). Very well written, especially Fifth Business and World of Wonders.

 Babette’s Feast, by Isak Dinesen – I really believe pastors should read this short story. 

The Brothers Karamazov, by Fyodor Dostoyevsky – if you have to choose between reading Dostoyevsky or Tolstoy, go with Dostoyevsky.

 Dune, by Frank Herbert

 Taken, starring Liam Neeson and Famke Jannsen (she played Jean Grey) – good show! Liam Neeson’s wife recently died due to a skiing accident.

 7 Pounds, starring Will Smith and Rosario Dawson – good grief! Seven Pounds of what? Grief? Self pity? This is an over-acted, over-estimated, film. It has a preposterous theme: that the individual parts, i.e., Will Smith’s character’s organs, (and for the life of me, I honestly do not know how whoever thought of this thought of this) are greater than their sum. No wonder the guy committed suicide: he is not capable of facing, living with, nor telling, the truth.

 Iron Man, starring Robert Downey, Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow – I like Gwyneth.

 The Incredible Hulk – starring Edward Norton and Liv Tyler (she played Arwen – beautifully, I might add) – hey, what can I say? I’m a kid at heart who loves comic books. I love Edward Norton when he plays these kinds of characters, i.e., grief stricken, oppressed, downtrodden, etc., like the character he played in The Illusionist. His face tells all.

 recently read: The Hammer of God, by Bishop Bo Giertz

currently reading: Come Be My Light, the diaries of Mother Teresa of Calcutta; Christ Have Mercy, by Rev. Matthew Harrison.

If He Were To Appear To Me. . .

if He were to appear to me . . .

 And it is surely a great thing for God to appear to a human being and to fit His promises to a particular individual. For this reason many consider the saintly fathers far more blessed in this respect than we are, since they had such definite and individual comforts and appearances from God through the ministry of the angels. Someone will say: "If He were to appear to me, too, in a human form, what great joy this would bring to my heart! Then I would surely not be reluctant to undergo any peril or misfortunes for God's sake. But this has been denied me. I only hear sermons, read Scripture, and make use of the sacraments. I have no appearances of angels."

 I answer: You have no reason to complain that you have been visited less than Abraham or Isaac. You, too, have appearances, and in a way they are stronger, clearer, and more numerous than those they had, provided that you open your eyes and heart and take hold of them. You have Baptism. You have the Sacrament of the Eucharist, where bread and wine are the species, figures, and forms in which and under which God in person speaks and works into your ears, eyes, and heart. Besides, you have the ministry of the Word and teachers through whom God speaks with you. You have the ministry of the Keys, through which He absolves and comforts you. "Fear not," He says, "I am with you." He appears to you in Baptism. He baptizes you Himself and addresses you Himself. He not only says: "I am with you," but: "I forgive you your sins. I offer you salvation from death, deliverance from all tear ear and from the power of the devil and hell. And not only I am with you, but all the angels with Me." What more will you desire? Everything is full of divine appearances and conversations.

 Luther, Commentary on Genesis, AE, Vol. 5, 21.

Edgar Meyer/Bela Fleck

Found this link to a YouTube video on Rev. Harrison's blog.It's Edgar Meyer & Bela Fleck - B Song. Enjoy!

Those Dreaded, Damnable Chain Letters

Below is a Q & A on the topic of chain letters. I detest chain letters, no matter how noble or good or spiritual their intentions are. Remember: the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Topic: E-mail chain letters

 Author: Richard L. Gurgel

 Question: I received this e-mail: “I don’t think I know 10 people who admit they love Jesus. Do you love him? This is a simple test: If you love Jesus, send this to at least 10 people, including the person who sent it to you!” A poem then hinted that Jesus wouldn’t have time for me if I didn’t take time to pass this on. What should I do with such e-mails?

 Answer: I’ve received identical e-mails. Certainly, being ashamed of Jesus is a real temptation. Jesus warns us with his first disciples: “If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him” (Mark 8:38). Does my irritation with such e-mails arise from a guilty conscience? Am I embarrassed to profess that I love him who first loved me? Then such an e-mail may be a blessing. Not that it must lead my fingers to the keyboard, but because it sends my knees to the floorboards to confess my timidity.

 But I’m uneasy with such e-mails for several reasons. Although well-meaning, they essentially are shaming me into speaking of my love for Jesus—“If you don’t send this e-mail, you don’t love Jesus!” Daily calls to repentance help crucify my proud old Adam, but only the gospel empowers genuine fruits of faith. The true key is not how much I love Jesus (always imperfectly until heaven), but how much Jesus loves me. I can’t shame others into genuine fruits of faith. The only thing that empowers me to live my faith joyfully is to contemplate in Word and sacraments “how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ” (Ephesians 3:18). Sadly, as this e-mail seeks to move me to action, Christ’s love for me isn’t mentioned.

 That reveals another problem. If the purpose is sharing Christ, merely proclaiming “I love Jesus!” won’t bring anyone to faith. If outreach is the goal, there’s something better to do than telling 10 people in my address book that I love Jesus. It would be much better to pray for opportunities to share that Jesus is the answer to the sin that otherwise would destroy us. These e-mails are little more than the spiritual equivalent of a high school cheer echoing across the gymnasium of the world: “We love Jesus, yes we do, we love Jesus, how ‘bout you?” To my non-Christian friends, wouldn’t that appear as proud boasting?

 Speaking of boasting, it’s arrogant to say, “I don’t think I know 10 people who love Jesus.” I know hundreds, who, despite their sinful weaknesses, love Jesus. What is more, every Sunday I confess by faith—not by human judgment—that countless others love him who first loved us. That’s the beauty of the invisible holy Christian Church we confess every time we confess the Creed.

 So what do you do the next time an e-mail chain letter tries to shame you into sharing your faith? Before hitting “delete,” thank God for the well-meaning reminder that we aren’t to hide our light under a basket. Then thank God that your salvation isn’t dependent on the perfection of your love for Jesus but the perfection of his love for you. Next, pray that God would give you opportunities to share the gospel with those who need to hear not of your love for Jesus, but his love for them. Then, in good conscience, consign that e-mail to the cyber trash can—or hit “reply all” and tell whose love really matters!

 Richard Gurgel is a professor at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, Mequon, Wisconsin.

Various Observations

> God does not want us to change; he wants to change us.

> It's not how old you are; it's whether you're still alive.

> Secrets are secrets because they are seldom pleasant.

> Bertrand Russel: War does not determine who is right -- only who is left.

> Selfishness is not living as you wish to live; it is insisting that others live the same way.

> There is no greater pain than to remember in our present grief past happiness.

> Mother Teresa : I have foreseen many of the hardships and the difficulties which that life [life in Calcutta as a Missionary of Charity] will bring me - but I trust God blindly and I know he will not let me down, even though I may make a mistake.

> Everyone loves dinosaurs, but only because they are extinct.