Encore Post: Gnostics, pagans, agnostics, and atheists all tell us that the body is meaningless. The atheists will say that there is nothing beyond death. The Gnostics and pagans will say that the soul is the true nature of a person. Now, freed from this mortal coil, the dead are on to a permanent spiritual existence.
This is not so, dear Christians!
The unnatural, violent separation of body and soul in death is a temporary state. In the resurrection of the dead, the final judgement, and the life everlasting that follows thereafter, we will be reunited with our bodies in perfected glory.
“Oh, that my words were written! Oh, that they were inscribed in a book! That they were engraved on a rock with an iron pen and lead, forever! For I know that my Redeemer lives, and He shall stand at last on the earth; and after my skin is destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, And my eyes shall behold, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” (Job 19:23-27 – KNJV)
“But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.”(Philippians 3:20-21 – ESV)
So, what do we do between now and then?
In Christianity, we have maintained a high view of the body of those who die in faith in Christ. Our treatment of the dead flows out of our understanding of the resurrection. We confess that our Lord is not done with this body. He will restore life and vigor to our bodies and our souls to the same. We also confess the resurrection in the way we treat the bodies of the blessed dead.
We practice rites and rituals at the time of death. These include: the commendation of the dying, comforting of the bereaved, the funeral service, and the committal at the graveside. It’s erroneous to say these things are only for the living. We practice these rights for the living and the dead both. Now, there should be no confusion here. The disposition of the dead is determined entirely by the forgiveness of sins by the atoning work of Jesus and faith trusting in that same promise. But God is not done with the remains. So, we take great care to place the bodies of our loved ones into a safe resting place until the day of resurrection.
The scriptures have some indications of the practices we mimic. Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah, and Jacob are all buried in the cave of Machpelah in the field of Ephron the Hittite in Mamre. (Genesis ch. 23, 35, 49, & 50) The Cave of the Patriarchs is a religious pilgrimage site to this day. It is visited by Jews, Christians, and Islamists. The Islamist side of the Herodian building has a wall separating it from the other side. All visitors still visit the same site.
The committal at the gravesite is a significant part of these collected rites. Your pastor blesses the body in its casket/coffin for the last time. He blesses the grave itself. In many cases, the Pastor will remain with the body from its entrance into the church, though the funeral and interment, and leave only when the grave it being filled. He does this to serve as a visual representation of Jesus in whose stead and by whose command he speaks. In burial, we place our deceased loved ones to rest in a bed in the earth. There their bodies rest securely under a blanket of earth until the Lord’s return.
It is best for us to bury a body in a casket/coffin. Our Christian burial practices are different from the pagans. We confess the resurrection of all flesh. The pagans confess the end of the flesh. In their confession, burning the remains, scattering the remains, or exposing the dead for scavenging are all “natural” treatments of an empty vessel. Since they do not believe in a resurrection, they treat the body like refuse. Christians have only recently embraced cremation as an acceptable practice. It is not the best option.
“But, Pastor, can’t God put them back together?” Yes, but that’s the wrong question. What’s the best option? Burial of the body with great reverence and care, confesses the resurrection in word AND in deed. It does not challenge or test God. Instead, bodily burial reinforces God’s promise concerning the body.
“What about those burned in fire/destroyed in combat/buried at sea?” We will often go to extreme examples to carve-out defenses for less-than-defensible positions. We do our best based upon circumstances. When there’s near total loss, we bury what we can. Even the military will place limited remains into a casket for transport home to be buried.
Even burial at sea is also a deliberate, careful practice. The body is sent to rest in “the deep.” Davey Jones’ Locker or some other euphemism is a place. It’s not a place like a cemetery. But, it is a place in its concept. All the dead buried at sea go to rest in the deep together like those buried in a cemetery.
Mandy and I have intent for each other. For our bodies, we prefer to be buried without embalming in meager wooden boxes, preferably a coffin in style. The eight surfaces of a coffin continue to confess the eighth day baptismal promise in which we rest. We do not want a viewing of any sort or an open casket. Everyone knows what’s in that box. There’s no need to imply something else. And, lastly, bury us among other Christians awaiting the resurrection on the last day.
Let us confess Jesus Christ, even in death.
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
Encore Post: We have two examples of the dead interacting from where they await the resurrection of all flesh. These two share little with us. But we need to know what they do share.
In Luke 16, we have the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. In torment in Hell, the nameless Rich Man is allowed to see Abraham and Lazarus. He speaks with Abraham. There is no interaction between him and Lazarus. The Rich Man sees nothing else of Heaven or Earth. And Abraham defines their positions thusly: “…between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.” (Luke 16:26)
We are probably safe in assuming that this is an abnormal interaction. The Rich Man sees neither Heaven itself, nor the chasm separating them. His address to Abraham directing him to order Lazarus reveals no change of mind or understanding about his own state or lack of authority. He is hardened in his wickedness.
St. John reveals the souls of the martyrs under the altar, who speak. “When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. They cried out in a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.” (Revelation 6:9-11)
These saints under that altar have no love for the sin on the earth. They are purified of all sin. As a result, they see the whole earth as evil and in need of vengeance. We don’t want the souls at rest in heaven to see us. They will only see our sin. Jesus has compassion for us and is saving us. They do not and cannot save us. In part, this is also why we do not pray to the saints. They would cry out for our blood if they could hear us.
Thanks be to God, that we are separated from there. We have one mediator between God and man, between Heaven and Earth. Jesus speaks for us, forgives our sin, and prepares a place for us. In faith, we await our own admission. In faith, we will rest secure. In faith, we will receive a crown of glory we do not deserve.
Hang tight—What About the Disposition of Our Remains? comes next.
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
Encore Post: This is one of a host of throwaway platitudes we may say at the death of a Christian. We’ve inherited… Or, more correctly, we’ve been infected, by the language of a faithless culture around us. In the absence of the faith, in the absence of the certainty of the resurrection promise of Holy Baptism, the pagan world speaks from ignorance to sloppily salve suffering in grief.
None of these words come from an evil intent. It’s honorable and good to try to speak peace to those in grief. But, we’d do better to stick to the words and themes of the bible.
“Heaven needed another angel.”
No, we don’t become angels when we die. Heaven’s angels are fixed in number. They are created heavenly beings. (Colossians 1:16) They are the messengers of God. The angels are His army, His mighty host. (Joshua 5:14-15; 1 Samuel 17:45) The angels are fearsome in appearance. (Luke 2:9-10) And, God has charged His angels to protect and defend us from the minions of the Evil One.
The Evil One, Lucifer, the Devil was also one of God’s angels. (Luke 10:17-18) He and one third of the angels in heaven rebelled against God. They were cast out. (Revelation 8:10-11; 9:1-3) Satan and His demons (angels) now dwell in hell apart from God and make war to separate us from the Love of Jesus.
God didn’t send His Son to suffer and die to redeem the fallen angels. He did that for us. We are loved and have been redeemed and forgiven in a unique way. Saying that we will become them denigrates the angels. It diminishes God’s love for us to deny that our path to eternal salvation remains human and regains our flesh on the last day. Not angels–fully perfected human beings.
“He’s gone. She’s in a better place.”
Where’d he go?! Is she in a better place, like Antigua? He was hooked-up to an awful lot of machines the last time I saw him.
The science-y view of nothingness beyond death leads to language like passing away. They are “gone” in that there’s nothing more. When we say someone has gone to a better place. We’re agreeing that we don’t know where. It’s a grief-softening move for those without hope. But, we have great hope and a tremendous promise.
We Christians have more to say than that. We can speak the Words of the scripture to console and correctly locate our loved ones. The blessèd dead in the faith are at rest in Christ. The better place to which they’ve gone has a name. They have gone to heaven! We should leap at the chance to name the place where they are. That’s true, consoling, faithful, and beautiful.
The scriptures say that someone has died. (see all of Genesis 5). If we’re still uncomfortable saying someone has died, the scripture still gives us softer words. These softer words contain and still confess the hope we have.
Gained Heaven
We can say that they have “gained heaven.” “For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.” (Philippians 1:21)
At Rest
We should say they are “at rest.” “Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.” (Revelation 6:11)
“And I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Write this: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.” “Blessed indeed,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, for their deeds follow them!” (Rev 14:13)
If you go through an old Lutheran church yard (cemetery), you’ll see a curious thing. When the grave stones switch from English to German, the common phrases switch too. “Loving mother/father and beloved child” give way to something else. You’ll see things like: “Hier Ruhet.” “Ruhet in Gott,” or “Ruhe’ in Christi.” These mean: here rests, rest in God, and rest in Christ.
Let’s stick with the language and imagery of the Bible.
Hang on tight—What does happen when we die? comes next.
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
I’ve been grappling for several years with the notions of Christian submission under the 4th Commandment (or 5th, in the Protestant numbering tradition), and its interaction with a republican form of governance. Yes, the United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy, as is so often misstated in public discourse. But, I digress… How ought we navigate this interaction as Christians, or should we at all?
For clarity’s sake, I’ll be speaking here in terms of sin and the commands of God’s law. I’ll also be speaking of things that are speculative in my mind. So, I’ll expend every effort to parse one from another with concrete verbs (will, must, shall, etc.) for the clear understanding of God’s Law, and modal verbs (may, ought, should, etc.) for my own speculation concerning our peculiar system of governance. Additionally, by “submission” or “absolute submission,” I mean that submission, which Christians can in good conscience give to rulers, when there is no conflict with the first 1st Commandment or the other nine. No Christian may obey a ruler’s command to despise the Word of God, its preaching, or the holy day of rest and worship. Nor can we take oaths against the faith in God’s name. And we shall never acknowledge a power or authority over the Triune God.
With that out of the way, regardless of the numbering tradition your readers may understand, by the 4th Commandment, I mean this, “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.” (Exodus 20:12 ESV) All authority in Heaven and on Earth and under the Earth belongs to the Lamb in His kingdom. The Earth, His footstool, is given to temporal rulers, whose authority flows from the 4th Commandment.
Expounding upon the commandments is in keeping with the Lord’s presentation of the 1st and 3rd commandments in Exodus, chapter 20, and Jesus’s exposition on the 5th and 6th commandments in Matthew, chapter 5. Martin Luther teaches it this way in his 1529 Small Catechism. “As the head of the family should teach [the ten commandments] in a simple way to his household … What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we do not despise or anger our parents and other authorities, but honor them, serve and obey them, love and cherish them” (SC 1:4–emphasis mine). The other authorities bit gives us an understanding of the head of household duty for secular rulers and our duty to them as subjects.
These rulers are clearly due our submission in temporal matters. They are here to provide for our good, and rule justly. The dilemma, as I see it, in a republic such as the United States, lies in identifying who wears this hat of 4th commandment authority at which various times. In Luther’s day, there was no functional republic for him to observe or reflect upon. That places the onus upon us to apply his wisdom through that lens.
For Luther and the other reformers, kings & princes, electors & dukes were easily identified. They would often claim a divine right, that is, selection by God, to their governance. This is not entirely untrue. We Christians confess that all rulers, including Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus I, King George, and the President of these United States are placed there by God for our benefit. We owe them our respect, submission, and obedience.
There’s still a rub.
Who’s in charge in a republic?
The right answer is “many people” at various times. Between election cycles, the voters are subjects who shall submit within the bounds of the first commandment. During campaigns and elections, candidates are under the rule of “We The People.” After votes are cast, voters and candidates are submissive under the electors tasked with their duties. When the courts exercise their authority, submission goes to them. When legislators write and pass laws, review appointments, and scrutinize officials, they are to be obeyed. And all are bound to rule justly and in submission a sort of king constraining and conforming the republic.
We do actually have a king, but it’s a document. The constitution is the sole temporal governing authority in the land. This king pays honor to the Lord in recognizing rights in creation that precede itself. And it defines who does what, when, and with what powers.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” (First Amendment of the US Constitution).
This protection of political speech isn’t only a right, it guards a fourth commandment responsibility. You, the electorate, have a job concerning your own authority. This responsibility does not begin, nor is not limited to the ballot box. Participation in the entire electoral function is necessary for all Christians. This means Christians ought to engage in public exhibition of their opinion concerning candidates. Christians ought to engage in public discourse concerning their opinions of candidates. Christians ought to share ideas and attempt to convince other people of their opinions, informed and defended by the Christian faith, concerning the candidates up for election.
The “petition for the redress of grievances” is also a Christian’s duty. The electorate, who wears their ruling crown in these instances ought to be willing to file suits against the government for actions outside the bounds of their authority. The redress is not limited individual suits. We also should be engaged in public discourse on the matters, filing of briefs amicii, and financial support of the NPOs in these legal battles. Legals NPOs like the Alliance Defending Freedom is one such group heavily involved in defending the LCMS from such government overreach (point initiated by Rev. Bob Smith, 26 Sep 2024).
Side note on authority: under the 4th commandment, a father or mother shall not abandon their responsibilities as father or mother. Similarly, Christians in the electorate ought not to abandon or abdicate their responsibilities as absolute ruler under the constitution, during seasons of election.
Can a Christian vote for a sinful candidate?
There can be no doubt that every candidate who has ever run for office is a sinner. If we think otherwise, we have a much bigger problem than whether to elect Judy Smalls or Jacob Little. In choosing the sinner among us sinners, we must apply prudence and reason given to us by God to select the candidate who is the least likely to cause harm. In their sin, these men and women will sin in great and small ways while ruling justly over the people. This is no different than each of us. Elections are a zero sum game in our two-party system. A withheld vote is a vote for the winning candidate. With precious few exceptions, a vote for an inconceivable winner against the two major candidates is also a vote for the winning candidate.
This is the unique situation where our primary concern is the first use of the law. The first use, the “curb,” is chiefly the duty of civil government to prevent gross errors and sin from hurting or harming our neighbor. In the political process of a republic, you have a hand in selecting the officials who do or do not prevent this. This is where engagement in the political process is absolutely necessary. Christians ought to know the track record of the people they are electing. Christians should engage in moral triage.
By moral triage, I mean seeking the least evil and least harmful outcomes in civil governance. I don’t understand this to mean a binary moral standard, classifying a candidate as entirely “good” or completely “bad.” I would also suggest that personal life, though important, should take a back seat to the outcomes of governance in curbing great sin and violence with our society.
A potential or returning political candidate’s role is one of enforcing and uplifting the first use, civil law. That means the 10 commandments must be prioritized in our selection of leaders. We may not forget Cyrus, the great of Persia, all the good things done by wicked leaders like him at the Lord’s bidding (Isaiah 45:1-3; 2 Chronicles 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-8).
Using The Ten Commandments to Sharpen Our Focus
While selecting these leaders for their expected behavior in the case of the 10 commandments in the civil realm. In the case of the 1st through 3rd commandments, there is very little that government can do in particular in their first table function. The only thing that they can do is a very bad one. If government ever attempts to curtail religion, this is an evil thing. Pagans must be allowed to be pagans. priorBut more importantly, no activity of the Christian faith and life may ever be limited under constitutional governance. This is already prevalent in our society in varying degrees, and it must be pushed back. Even the rhetoric exposes a change in understanding that is deliberately put in play. At one time, the discussion will only concern itself with the “freedom of religion.”
Sometime around 2008, the language shifted to a different term. Candidates of all sorts began to speak about the “freedom to worship.” This is not concurrent with the language of a constitution that recognizes a previously existing free exercise of religion. The entirety of the Christian life and faith is protected in our republic, as it should be.
The second table of the law is the chief thing here, preventing gross wickedness by the threat of punishment, jail, or death. While a Christian leader would be preferable to a non-Christian leader, that does not mean that a Christian leader is a better selection than a non-Christian leader. This is a hard thing to consider, but the Christianness of the official isn’t a thing that will affect their governance directly. However, their behavior and policy making concerning things that effect their fellow man are directly effective in their capability or incompetence concerning governance.
The 4th commandment: honor your father and mother
A potential government official cannot step outside their own authority. They should submit when submission is required, and rule when ruling is their duty. Malicious prosecution, creation of rules that are not law but act as though they are, laws invented from the judicial bench, executives refusing to enforce the law, and actions like these are just a few examples of 4th commandment actions not in keeping with God’s law.
The 5th commandment: you shall not murder.
A political candidate cannot encourage murder. This does not mean capital punishment, and it never has. By the 4th commandment, the authority to exercise discipline and punishment, including death, is the authority of the civil government.
Murder does, however, include things that cause the death of others, or allow the death of others to be legally permissible. The discussion here begins and ends with abortion. A Christian cannot elect a candidate who approves of, encourages, or propagates abortion. There are two bodies in the decision, and one is granted no choice. God created the life of the unborn.
This also means the likelihood of murder in a particular jurisdiction determines whether the elected officials in that area are abiding by their God-given and irrevocably commanded responsibility concerning the lives of their citizens. If a city has the highest murder rate the nation, they are doing something wrong, and everyone who supports their system of governance is probably on the wrong side of this commandment.
The 6th commandment: you shall not commit adultery.
This one concerns itself less with the personal life of the candidate, which is still a concern, and more with the resultant waves that flow through society. A government that creates systems that discourage marriage and that discourage the union of man and woman in holy matrimony for the procreation and rearing of children is failing in their duty and opposing the 6th commandment. Again, this is on display in many jurisdictions and municipalities throughout the world. The United states where single motherhood is on the rise, marriage rates are on the decline. Government can encourage marriage. Government has encouraged divorce. This is evil. A candidate continuing these sorts of practices is not a suitable candidate to receive a Christian’s to vote. This is not in keeping with God’s law.
This a spot where we may confuse morality of character with a moral society. Even a scoundrel can legally promote the nuclear family unit and the stability it gives to children. This benefits all children under their governance by adding to the safety and stability of society as a whole. This is in keeping with God’s law.
The 7th commandment: you shall not steal.
Let’s just be simple about this one. Encouraging criminality which allows folks to deprive their neighbor of what they have is a thing that grows out of control when prosecutors will not prosecute crime. Those that do not enforce the law are unfit for office and have abandoned their responsibility according to the 4th commandment. They are not fit for office and ought to be removed. This is not in keeping with God’s law.
The 8th commandment: you shall not bear false witness.
This is most prevalent currently in the increasing flow of an intention to censor information that is determined to be seditious, dangerous, or “untrue.” In a society where free speech is a tenant of the function of life, all citizens must have equal and unfettered access to this right. That means allowing speech we don’t like to occur. In the current state of censorship, that speech which is censored is not censored because it is wrong. It is censored because it opposes the political ideology of the party in power. This is a false witness against those who are silenced. This opposes God’s law.
The 9th and 10th commandments you shall not covet.
Covetousness is a little different from theft. The covetous heart seeks to deprive its neighbor of what they have. The deprivation is the thing that makes the thing different from theft. It doesn’t matter to the covetous heart who receives, or if anyone received the spoils of deprivation. The covetous heart simply wants to see its neighbor lose what they have. This is the heart of the wicked evil of wealth envy.
It is statistically guaranteed that a person who has their wealth taken by way of irrational taxation will be deprived of what they have. It is also irrefutable that government waste, fraud, and corruption will destroy that wealth rather than using it. It is to the detriment of the entire society that that wealth should be taken rather than retained by its owner. The owner in a free society uses their wealth to invest, to purchase, and to acquire, which benefits their fellow man who works to provide services and goods that are desired by a wealthy person, or are employed by the same. When government steals, the wealth is simply destroyed. This is not in keeping with God’s law.
Use the reason God gave you, dear Christians. Speak to your friends and neighbors. Share your views, and kindly try to convince them. Wear the ruling crown, when it is yours, and cast it aside, when it is not.
All are one in Christ,
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
A friend recently shared a TikTok-style vertical video of some guy giving an “entirely informal” talk, leaning on the back of a gator, or some such vehicle, with excellent wardrobe and professional lighting. The guy is presenting a concept that folded hands, bowed heads, and closed eyes for prayer are not Christian. His video claims a Buddhist root to the common American prayer practice.
He’s partly right. Folded hands, bowed heads, and closed eyes are very recent Christian traditions. First, let’s consider the ancient traditions concerning prayer.
The head up, hands upturned, and eyes open posture. This position in ancient Christian art usually corresponds to one of two things. One, the presiding minister, leading prayer, has this posture, while others take a different one. Two, the resurrected Christ or the Lord in His triumphant return is right before those praying. This isn’t the common everybody-praying-together posture.
The most common posture for hands together prayer is flat hands with palms together. It’s most famously recreated by Albrecht Dürer’s 1508 “Praying Hands.” Herr Dürer didn’t invent the posture. It was commonly used and heavily represented in Christian art.
It is right and proper to bow our heads and/or our bodies at the name of Jesus. “And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore, God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:8-10) Not just in recognition of the Glory of God, but we ought to recognize how greatly Jesus humbled Himself for us. A little head nod is probably the least we could do in response.
You’ll sometimes see pious folks dipping their heads throughout the divine service. Usually, they are nodding their heads at every mention of Jesus’ name in the service, readings, and prayers. This is a good and laudable practice for Christians. The head nod requires more attention and focus than you might think.
“Oh come, let us worship and bow down; let us kneel before the Lord, our Maker! For he is our God, and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand.” (Psalm 95:6-7) Kneeling is also a good posture to assume. We even used to have kneelers in all of our pews for the Divine Service. It’s a posture at which 20th Century Christians may recoil with, “that’s too Catholic!” Here’s a shorthand question about those things considered Romanist (Catholic): Is this thing commended or encouraged by the scriptures? Yes? Then this thing might more likely be a catholic (Christian) thing than a Catholic (Romanist) thing.
Don’t stop there. prostration (lying face-down flat on the floor) is also an option. “Thus says the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nation, the servant of rulers: ‘Kings shall see and arise; princes, and they shall prostrate themselves; because of the Lord, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you.’” (Isaiah 49:7)
This one you’re most likely to see at an ordination. The rubrics indicate the candidate may lie prostrate on the floor before the altar. Yes, for quite a while. All of these revolve around us, the faithful, lowering our posture beneath the Lord, or indicating Him above us.
So, what about the “entirely informal” vertical video? The Buddhist source is highly unlikely given that the modern posture appears in the early 17th century, gathering steam, East to West across the U.S. into the 20th century.
Charles Grandison Finney, Upstate NY, 1830s
Too often things fall back to Finney’s tent revivalist new measures. During the altar call, the preacher would encourage everyone to pray silently for the Spirit to work among us, “…with every head bowed, every eye closed, and every hand folded.” He would speak while the band played quietly, manipulating emotions. “I’m looking for a sign, just a hand in the air, just a finger, indicating a desire to dedicate yourself to Jesus. Sir! You there on the right!” Whether the pressure of the crowd, a push from a crowd worker, or even just a plant, someone would begin.
Eric Enstrom’s famous photo “Grace” succinctly demonstrates the 90-year shift to a hands folded, head bowed, eyes closed prayer posture. The picture of Charles Wilden, a peddler and vagabond, was taken between 1918-20. Over the years, various tales have developed about its origin. A second official version of the photo added an ethereal light source from a non-existent window opposite Wilden. Countless color paintings and lithographs have been made and sold. In most cases these illustrations sharpen the details, the lighting contrast, and … oh, yes turn the dictionary on the table into a Bible.
The new revivalist prayer posture changed our perception of the room. “The Spirit’s at work!” Probably not. It’s more likely a manufactured situation or entire event to cause us to feel a thing. There’s no particular harm in praying that way. But, it’s not good to ignore the other postures in favor of Finney’s favorite either.
Come, let us fix our eyes upon Jesus,
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
Political discourse usually only makes it into our discussion circles when politicians ham-fistedly offer a theological soliloquy. This is one of those times. The politician is James Talarico, a Texas State House Representative of District 52: the Round Rock, Taylor, Hutto. And Georgetown areas of Williamson County.
James is a sitting representative since 2018 and an aspiring pastor, attending Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary. He expects to graduate with a MDiv in 2025. He’s active and preaches at St. Andrew Presbyterian Church, Austin (Politico). Considering that, his theological claims, which come from a mingled existence in the left and righthand kingdoms, are fair game for us to address.
Rep. Talarico recently gave a sermon at his home church, including this clip. (You can also listen here).
“Look around us. If this was truly a Christian nation, we would forgive student debt. If this was truly a Christian nation, we would guarantee health care to every single person. If this was truly a Christian nation, we would love all of our LGBTQ neighbors. If this was truly a Christian nation, we would make sure every child in the state and in this country was housed, fed, clothed, educated, and insured. If this was truly a Christian nation, we would never make it a Christian nation because we know the table of fellowship is open to everybody including our Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and atheist neighbors. Jesus could have started a Christian theocracy. But, love would never do that. The closest thing we have to the Kingdom of heaven is a multiracial, multicultural democracy; where power is truly shared among all people; something that’s yet to exist in human history.”
There’s a lot to unpack here. Much of it is delivered in a shorthand of sorts. So, let’s examine the bits individually. These are predominantly strawman arguments. In the strawman logical fallacy, the arguer creates a position you do not hold and assigns the position to you. Then they proceed to attack you for a position you don’t hold. It’s an error. But, it’s best done and can be effective when the false position is near to or can easily be confused with your own actual position.
“If this was truly a Christian nation…”
It is well established that the Christianness of the US is diminishing rapidly. Have a look at the Pew Research article “Nones on the Rise” here. Both the percentage of self-described regular churchgoers and the number of attendances currently considered regular are falling. Most recently, self-described “regularly attending” church goers consider once a month or more regular attendance. Thirty years ago, people would not identify themselves as “regularly attending” at fewer than three times a month.
The Christian nature of the founding of the US is debatable. We are certainly the product of a Christian moral and ethical culture, as well as a Christian influenced legal system. While morality and legal fairness are fruits of Christianity, they are not the Christianity which produces them.
Look at Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jews, Christian Scientists, and a host of other Christian adjacent heresies. These folks often make excellent neighbors. They are predominantly law-abiding patriots. But, their proximity to Christianity and the values thereby influenced don’t make them Christian. Only faith given by the Holy Spirit causes Christianity.
“We would forgive student debt.”
First, all debts are paid; either by the borrower or the lender. (James Grant) The concept of “debt forgiveness” is a misappropriation of the Christian doctrine of forgiveness. The forgiveness of sins is a free gift for us, received by grace through faith. Our debt was paid by Jesus’s suffering and death. Without His taking on the punishment, there is no forgiveness.
Forgiving a financial debt simply and only transfers the debt to the other party. Consider the commandments. “The Seventh Commandment—You shall not steal. What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we do not take our neighbor’s money or possessions, or get them in any dishonest way, but help him to improve and protect his possessions and income” (Small Catechism 1.7).
Externally removing a debt from the borrower, without a court’s adjudication, is theft. The money borrowed has been spent; the school received and spent it. The lender here pays the debt. In the case of federally secured student debt, you are paying the debt. There is no such thing as government money. There are only taxes, collected and spent.
“We would guarantee health care to every single person.”
The discussion of debt forgiveness above applies here too. But, there is another issue at play. There are only three things that can affect the distribution of a limited supply, outstripped by demand. Price control, supply & demand valuation, or rationing. The claim about guaranteed health care also ignores the undeniable access everyone has to emergency medicine.
In the case of price controls, we run afoul of the commandments again. “The Fifth Commandment—You shall not murder. What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we do not hurt or harm our neighbor in his body, but help and support him in every physical need” (SC 1.5). This is where we understand the evil of slavery. We may not take the life of our neighbor expended in labor without just compensation. The justness of pay is determined by negotiation of the laborer and employer. When that fails, the laborer is free to leave, seeking better opportunities.
When price restrictions are placed universally on medicine, our government seeks to compel labor from medical professionals without just compensation. Without lateral options outside of the employer/laborer dynamic, this takes a form of slavery.
Rationing creates a need for an executioner. Someone has to decide who does or doesn’t receive the limited supply of care. Or, someone has to schedule the limited supply of care so far in the future as to be useless. This is a fifth commandment problem again.
“We would love all of our LGBTQ neighbors.”
Rep. Talarico speaks from a true antinomian* viewpoint. He is speaking in the shorthand of his tradition to demand acceptance and glorification of the LGBTQ lifestyle. Antinomianism isn’t actually against the Law in function. It rejects God’s law and replaces it with a new law. The law of acceptance takes the place of the ten commandments. This new law doesn’t have an atoning savior. You must atone for your sins against “acceptance” for yourself.
(*Antinomianism–a teaching that rejects the Law of God entirely from the lives of Christians. Antinomian, the term is derived from the Latin prefix: “anti-” meaning against and the Greek word: “nomos” meaning the Law. The error pops-up often in Christianity. Antinomians must also reject the concepts of sin and guilt. “What shall we say, then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?” (Romans 6:1-2). St. Paul was speaking against this sort of thing.)
As we’ve heard many other times, that isn’t love. In love, we can never encourage our neighbor in sin. True godly love seeks to warn our neighbor of the danger of their sin. Love is kind, but love doesn’t leave our neighbor to perish in transgression.
“We would make sure every child in the state and in this country was housed, fed, clothed, educated, and insured.”
James Talarico is covering over the state’s wicked role in harming children by ignoring the decalogue. “The Sixth Commandment—You shall not commit adultery. What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we lead a sexually pure and decent life in what we say and do, and husband and wife love and honor each other.
Our rulers have and continue to build a society that encourages divorce and single parenthood. This causes great harm. Children in fatherless homes are four times more likely to end up in poverty (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Children’s Living Arrangements and Characteristics: March 2011, Table C8. Washington D.C.: 2011). The situation of poverty among children would be mitigated best by encouraging and rewarding marriage and child rearing within that estate. Discouraging divorce would follow behind as a close second.
“We would never make it a Christian nation because we know the table of fellowship is open to everybody, including our Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and atheist neighbors. Jesus could have started a Christian theocracy. But love would never do that.”
James is erroneously attributing Christian Nationalism to a non-specified group, intended to include all Christians. There simply aren’t these people in the US, or at least not in sufficient number to change anything. A Christian morality isn’t the same as Christianity. But, we spook at the accusation of Christian Nationalism. This isn’t an accident.
He is also speaking theologically from his Presbyterian position on fellowship in the Lord’s Supper. On the contrary, the table of fellowship is closed in the growing orthodox Christian traditions. We want folks to join fellowship and be catechized. But, the Lord tells us of the harm to unbelievers and those not instructed.
“You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” (1 Corinthians 10:21-22). “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 11:27).
“The closest thing we have to the Kingdom of heaven is a multiracial, multicultural democracy; where power is truly shared among all people; something that’s yet to exist in human history.”
This side of the resurrection, we will never see that perfection. That perfection can only be perfect and perfected in Christ Jesus. Humorously, Ronald Reagan said, “Communism [Socialism/Marxism/Progressivism] only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and hell where they already have it.” The Lord promised us a share in this salvation. “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.” (Galatians 3:27-29).
In the resurrection, we have a promise so much greater than the false flag of divisive multiculturalism. We have a promise of no nation, race, language, or culture. “After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, ‘Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!’” (Revelation 7:9-10). In the resurrection, all the divisions caused by sin’s corruption will be wiped away. We will be one again, praising with one voice, tireless and free from the corruption of sin.
All are one in Christ,
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar – Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
In a recent edition of my local paper, a letter to the editor bemoaned the current state of affairs. Many mainline Christian church bodies are embracing CRT, DEI, and LGBTQAI+ ideologies. She rightly observes, in part:
“Through a recent church letter, I have learned that plans have been in the making for a while now … to restructure some of the oldest, most established religions slash churches as diverse, equitable, and inclusive, plans are to allow homosexual marriages, officiated by their clergy, and to also now accept these beliefs into their religions. The clergy themselves may even be LGBQTIA+. In other words, making homosexuality compatible with Christian teachings.”
“[T]he UMC … with the backing of the ELCA, has decided to ratify the plan … to basically align with DEI … I would wager my last dollar that Martin Luther would “not” have been behind this blasphemy.”
“I was instructed as a young child to believe the words of the Bible. … Countless Christians will not support the very churches who chose to go this route of DEI, when previously, these very churches taught them to live by the words in the Bible.”
“When will people start standing up? When will people have had enough? When will God have had enough?” Glynis Tietjen — La Grange
(“Church and Pride,” The Fayette County Record, La Grange, TX, June 14, 2024, Volume 102, Number 64, page D2)
(In response to “Church and Pride,” June 14, 2024) Miss Glynis, I can understand your frustration and disappointment. Christianity used to be more serious about those things forbidden and commanded. You’re right to suggest that DEI and LGBTQAI+ ideologies are opposed to Christianity. The accepted culture of the first quarter of the 21st century doesn’t just encourage DEI and LGBTQAI+, it demands submission. Acceptance, the terminology of my youth, isn’t enough. The new order requires us to glorify sinfulness as a morally superior lifestyle. Movies, gaming, comics, books, music, and other products of the current mainstream culture attest to this.
I pray you’re right that a minority of folks in national church organizations, including the UMC, the UCC, The PCUSA, the Episcopal Church, and ELCA are behind the shift in official positions and activities. Regardless of who it is, the people of whom we speak are in power. They are driving the bus away from the Bible. Without the only certain witness of God’s Word, the Christian faith has no mooring. We’re certain to be lost apart from the Word of God, which entirely testifies to Jesus’s death and resurrection for sinners like us.
There’s been a bit of linguistic trickery for many years. It is as if Jesus’s love undoes the condemnation of the Law of God. It does not. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:17-18) That’s the last day, the judgement, and the resurrection of all flesh.
Jesus forgave and forgives sin even today. The message remains the same. “But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.” (Romans 5:8-10)
We are constantly being saved, reconciled by Jesus’s forgiveness. This is where the accepted culture falls down. “Jesus stood up and said to her, ‘Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?’ She said, ‘No one, Lord.’ And Jesus said, ‘Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.’” (John 8:10-11) The Gospel of forgiveness doesn’t grant permission to continue in sin. It also doesn’t bless those things that the Law of God condemns: adultery, homosexuality, idolatry, theft, covetousness, and the like.
The battle for the Bible started over 60 years ago. In those early days, the lines were fairly simple: is the Bible the inerrant Word of God or does it only contain the inerrant Word of God? The error we’re seeing on full display is this: if some of the bible isn’t true or isn’t normative to me, who decides that, and where does it end? Each one of us becomes the arbiter of God’s Word for ourselves. It ends when my pet sin becomes permissible. The temptation has never changed from the serpent in the garden. “… Did God actually say … you will be like God.” (Genesis 3)
All of God’s Word actually matters and He did actually say it. He has preserved His Word for us since ancient times in the original languages and in far better density and reliability than any other ancient texts. “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17) Even those bits I don’t like, those are still God’s Word. Especially the bits that accuse me in my sin, those are still God’s Word.
In the LCMS and other orthodox Christian traditions, we have held to the Bible as the rule and norm of the Christian faith. “We believe, teach, and confess that the only rule and norm according to which all teachings, together with all teachers, should be evaluated and judged (2 Timothy 3:15-17) are the prophetic and Apostolic scriptures of the Old and New Testament alone.” (Formula of Concord, Epitome, 1576) It’s been a long and lonely road, cleaving to the Word of God. But, it’s worth it.
You’re always welcome back over on the other side of the fence, where we hold fast to the Word of God. We’d love to have you and your friends among us.
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
Some people do share your opinion. I understand the motivation to a certain degree. There are many wonderful things about The Lutheran Hymnal, 1941 (TLH). Unlike the scriptures, the canon of the hymnody can never be closed. Like preaching, there is always something new and useful to say regarding God’s Word to His people. Like preaching, the older things should not be thrown away. And they’re not. 340 of TLH hymns are preserved in the Lutheran Service Book (LSB). That’s greater than 50% of its hymnody (h/t Rev. Dr. Paul Grime). TLH is still in print today. There are also congregations that retain the use of both TLH & LSB, and even TLH exclusively.
There are some historical failures of the church, leading to the notion that TLH is the only right hymnal. Emotions, which are a poor standard of decision making in most contexts, notwithstanding, poor timing is among the chief concerns.
There were theological errors in the Lutheran Book of Worship, 1978 (LBW), causing a stir at a time when a new hymnal was needed and desired. Our (LCMS) participation with the other Lutheran groups produced a hymnal, whose use we could not encourage. We had to back out of the project, but retained copyright usage authority over the materials produced.
This led to a hasty publication of the Lutheran Worship, 1982 (LW). That was a bad move. Simply stripping-out and correcting theological errors didn’t produce a good hymnal. In fact, it produced a fairly poor hymnal. It was not well received. At LW’s peak, it was in use in just over half of LCMS congregations. As evidence of that, the old LWs are even difficult to give away.
Among the complaints about LW are these: the defaced common service, organ arrangements, and altered text. By “Common Service,” I mean TLH p. 5/15, LW Divine Service I, and LSB Divine Service, Setting Three. The TLH and LSB settings are quite similar. The LW setting updated the Jacobean English and stripped the chorale harmonies from the pew edition. Further, LW has also removed and/or rewritten common chorale harmonies to several hymns. These were not well received.
All of this failure has encouraged the notion that TLH might be the only good hymnal. Even the great TLH contains some noticeable weaknesses. Some translations of the German hymns are theologically sketchy, leading to some of the revised wording more recently. A more subtle, but more significant, error comes from the sequencing of the services. The Order of Morning Service without communion on page 5 for use on Sunday is followed by The Order of the Holy Communion on page 15 are a two-fold failure. Prior to TLH there was no printed chief service for Sunday without the Lord’s Supper. TLH not only introduced an innovation but also gave it priority by placing it first in the book. This may have been an editorial oversight. However, it leaves the impression that not only is Sunday without communion normal, it may be preferable.
At a time when the frequency of the celebration of the Lord’s supper may have been at an historic low, TLH inadvertently or deliberately reinforced the same. For LCMS congregations that celebrated as infrequently as once a month, once a quarter, twice a year, or once a year, TLH gave at least a nod to encourage the practice. Ask some of your own elderly members. You’ll likely hear about how infrequent it was. You may even hear like I have, “Well, p. 5 comes first. That’s the one we used most.”
LSB is also not a perfect hymnal. It is a good hymnal. A harsh reality at its publication was division in hymnal usage throughout the LCMS. In 1999, 35% of LCMS congregations retained TLH only, 60% had adopted LW, and scant number had even adopted LBW (h/t Rev. Dr. Paul Grime). There was no hope of returning to TLH more broadly. LW had demonstrated the peak of its acceptance. LSB achieved its goal of unifying a greater number of LCMS congregations under a single, common service book. By returning to the TLH, page 15 liturgy (LSB DS 3), as well as the LW Divine Service II: settings one & two (LSB DS 1 & 2), LSB struck a balance. LSB also restored the original settings and text of many of the TLH hymns with a few translation corrections.
LSB enjoys greater than 70% adoption among LCMS congregations. It’s not perfect by any means. It does, however, improve the likelihood of lifelong Lutherans like us and new converts finding a familiar hymnal in use, when they travel or move their families.
That’s good for the synod as a whole.
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
Encore Post: Anachronism is taking any historical custom, person, object, or event into a time period other than its own. The Biblical narratives exist in time. (Narratives are those passages that relay specific events as a narrated story). They are to be heard and read from within their contextual window.
There was a common refrain around twenty years ago: What Would Jesus Do? The notion was that Jesus, as revealed in the scriptures, could be used as a moral guide to aid your decision-making process. If you would just imagine Jesus in your situation, the correct answer would become clear.
The anachronistic fallacy here is that Jesus does not walk the earth in my time. By trying to drag Him here into my situation, I’m ignoring the teachings in their context. And, I’m about to put my words into Jesus’ mouth somehow to sanctify my choices into biblical truth.
Let’s try another fitment. “Jesus was a socialist, distributist, capitalist, or anarchist.” Jesus lived 1800 years before most of the codified economic systems we know developed. His experience with taxes, market forces, production, and consumption looked far different from our own. The application we should pull from “render unto Caesar” is simply: be a faithful Christian first and the best citizen, resident, or alien you can be second. Anything further pulls Jesus into our temporal context.
For a more timely application that will likely age poorly, would Jesus wear a mask? He came healing the sick. So, surely, that means that he would wear a mask. Again, our specific time and concerns applied to Jesus. We couldn’t discern the answer to that question.
This one dials in more tightly upon the problem with that question. It’s not a good question. Jesus came healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, casting out demons, and forgiving sin as signs of what was to come. These signs demonstrate the fullness of God in human flesh subsisting. Jesus healed, recreated, forgave, and even raised dead to life again to teach what His death meant. Jesus died to forgive the sins of the world. All the brokenness and other evidence of the corruption of sin will fade away in the blinking of an eye at the resurrection of all flesh. His life and ministry testify to that. Who cares what political system, hand sanitizer, or chicken sandwich he may or may not have preferred?
Dear Baptized, let us abandon anachronism and bless the Lord of time and eternity! Thanks be to God!
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
Christianity is often a system of maintaining polar opposites without compromise. The law accuses us of sin (even in its instructive sense), and the Gospel forgives sin with no merit or worthiness in us. We receive salvation through God’s gifts of repentance and faith by Sacrament and Word. Damnation comes to unbelievers solely because of their stubborn unbelief and hatred of God.
These aren’t systems we built for ourselves. They are truths taught by God’s Word that leave us with concepts that defy our human logic. The tension makes us uncomfortable, leading us into accidental error. Arminian decision theology and Calvinist double predestination are two notable examples.
Jacob Arminius harmonized the clear teaching that damnation is our own doing and our own choosing in unbelief, by teaching that we choose salvation as well. “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.” (John 3:18-19 ESV) He was and is half right. Damnation is entirely on us and because of our sinful unbelief.
John Calvin harmonized the clear teaching that God chooses some for salvation, by teaching that salvation and damnation were solely by God’s choosing. “In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.” (Ephesians 1:4b-6 ESV) In Calvin’s desire to uphold God’s sovereignty, Calvin made God a capricious ruler, separating without discernible reason.
The biblical position, which we Lutherans hold, is that damnation is our doing and salvation is God’s doing. We sometimes call this single predestination.
The same sort of harmony confusion is at play here. We should much more correctly say that God loves us despite the way we are. Poorly hidden behind the God-loves-me-just-the-way-I-am view of myself is a desire to overwrite God’s Law. I don’t want to leave my former sins behind. I want God to bless my sin and call it good. I want Jesus to Jesus me in the way that I would have Him Jesus me, rather than the way that he does.
Jesus doesn’t bless our sin. He forgives it AND sends us off without sin. To the adulteress spared from stoning, He says, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.” (John 8:11b ESV) The forgiveness we receive delivers a clear conscience, which will flee from sin.
St. Paul describes our sinful situation as a state of death. Only God can bring life into dead things. “But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” (Ephesians 2:4-7 ESV)
God loved us despite our deadness in sin. His love revives us and sets us free from that sin. He has delivered us out from the “way we are” into the way He would have us be.
Go forth and sin no more,
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar Sole Pastor Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool La Grange, TX
