Author: Jason Kaspar

[Second in a series of posts on Last Things] 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 comes 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 blessed 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 churchyard (cemetery), you’ll see a curious thing. When the gravestones 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 happens when we die? Comes next.

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2022 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@msn.com.

Encore Post: The legacy of Saint Athanasius is one of standing firm in the face of opposition to the word of God. Throughout his 45 years as Bishop, including 17 years in exile, he stood unwaveringly against the errors surrounding him. The Arian heresy, denying the divinity of Jesus, and all the derived and adjacent heresies are still with us. But, we have a firm confession from the Word of God to fall back on in defense of the faith. That is the continuing gift given to us by Athanasius and those of his theological tradition. “I and the Father are one.” (John 10:25-30)

Alexandria in Egypt, the bishopric of Athanasius, is no longer a center of Christendom. Augustine of Hippo, who owes much to Athanasius, and is a father for us in the western church, presided over a region of North Africa that is no longer a center of Christianity. It’s wise for us to remember, but the centers of Christianity Today may not be the centers of Christianity tomorrow.

The concluding remarks of the Athanasian Creed are one that can give us pause. While reinforcing the bodily resurrection, there seems to be an assertion of works righteousness in the creed.

“He will come to judge the living and the dead. At His coming, all people will rise again with their bodies and give an account concerning their own deeds. And those who have done good will enter eternal life, and those who have done evil into eternal fire.”

We should always hear these words of judgement within the context of Jesus’ work of Salvation for us. The accounting of our deeds is not done according to human reason. Just as Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. So, by faith, we receive eternal salvation. Let’s consider the sheep and the goats.

The Gospel according to Saint Matthew, chapter 25:  “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.  ³² Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats … Then the righteous [sheep] will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?  And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? …  Then [the unrighteous goats] also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’”

Neither the sheep nor the goats can make any sense out of this accounting.  Those who are righteous by faith are ever more aware of their sin and their need for salvation day-by-day. Those who condemn themselves by their sin and persistent unbelief are ever self-justifying and judging themselves to be “good” by their own standard apart from faith. And Saint Paul gives us this useful nugget.

The epistle to the Ephesians, chapter 2: “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, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

The good works are credited to us, sheep. These works themselves are produced by faith, which is a from God, alien to our nature. And, those works are prepared for us beforehand. The works we set out to do may not even be among them. Dear Christians, live in the Word and in the Christian faith. The Spirit produces faith and good works from the Gospel of salvation in Christ Jesus.

Dear Baptized, let us celebrate the faith credited to us as righteousness!     

            Thanks be to God!

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2020 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com.

Encore Post: The errors faced by the early church in Alexandria were not just about the Trinity. There were also Christological confusions. Saint Athanasius was present and attentive for the decisions of the First Council of Nicaea (325 AD). Concerning the person and nature of Jesus Christ, the term, ὁμοούσιος (homoousios — of the same substance), was used to sort out the heresies. But, the wisdom of man thinks itself wiser than the wisdom of God.

The third section could almost be its own creed. It deals with Jesus’ incarnation. The two natures in the one person of Christ are on full display here.

In the Athanasian Creed we reject Eutychianism, that Jesus’ human and divine natures merged into a new, different nature. We also reject Nestorianism, that the two natures of Christ are not unified in His person. And, we reject the Gnostic notion that we will be free from matter and our bodies, specifically in the next life. These heresies or errors generally arise from an attempt to fill in the blanks of the mysteries of God with our human reason. That is not a good practice in which we should engage. Some things are known to us. And some are not yet revealed.

The Eutychians held that Jesus’ human and divine natures merged into a new nature. In their intent to firmly state the unity of God and man in Christ, they created a different thing. The Eutychian Jesus must be separate from the Trinity because he is of a different substance. His human and divine natures make him a new unique thing that is neither God nor man. Since it is not either, it cannot be truly God.

“But pastor, why does that matter?” That’s a perfectly fair question. Only God can atone for all the sin of all of mankind.  We know that Jesus died for our sins, each and every one, and all together. So, our understanding of the nature of Christ has to allow for that truth to remain constant. Instead we confess, “our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is at the same time both God and man.”

The Nestorians found the other ditch. Like the brilliant Vizzini from the movie: The Princess bride, “clearly I cannot choose the cup in front of you.” If the complete unity of the two natures into a new nature is wrong, then the two natures of Christ must not be unified in His person. This creates a host of new potential misunderstandings. Does Jesus retain his humanity? Did Jesus remain human throughout His ministry, life, death, and resurrection? Did God depart from the man, Jesus, at any point? The answers to those questions in many cases are their own unique error, which we may discuss at another time.

The rubber meets the road here. On the cross, God turned his back on Jesus, who is also God. On the cross, God the Son, died for our sins. And, God the Son was raised to life again. All of the hows, whys and wherefores are not for us to know. We’re given exactly what we need to understand and trust completely that our sin was atoned for on Calvary.

“He is God and man, He is not two, but one Christ: one, however, not by the conversion of the divinity into flesh, but by the assumption of the humanity into God; one altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.”

The Gnostics had a notion that we will be free from matter and our bodies one day. Specifically, we will be only spiritual in the next life. The taking up of Enoch and Elijah bodily into heaven speaks against this. Job’s confession that he will see God face-to-face with his own eyes does too. Mary Magdalene confesses the resurrection to Jesus just before he restores Lazarus to life. In the resurrection, Jesus eats and drinks with His disciples and invites them to touch Him. He is with them bodily, not spiritually.

In the Christian faith, we live in the certainty of knowing that the resurrection is a promise for us that will be whole and complete. This is a challenge, especially at the time of death of our own loved ones. We want to know that everything is complete for them.  We want to know that they are “in a better place.” Yet, the Bible teaches us it isn’t quite done yet. The promise of salvation isn’t full and complete until we are resurrected in our bodies to eternal life. We confess the resurrection of our bodies! “At His coming, all people will rise again with their bodies.”

Instead of intellectualizing the complex into a way that makes sense, we are better served by acknowledging the witness given by scripture. Some things are clear and known to us. Other mysteries are not revealed to us in this life. But, we can know with certainty that all of the things pertinent to our Salvation are clear and known.

Dear Baptized, let us praise the one Christ, truly God and truly man, for our salvation!      

            Thanks be to God!

Read the conclusion to the Athanasian Creed next.

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2020 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com.

Encore Post: The exact date and author of the Athanasian Creed are unknown. It derives its name from the theological tradition of Saint Athanasius. It is typically dated to the late 4^th or early 5^th century AD. Augustine’s On the Trinity (415 AD) has very similar language to the creed. Athanasius’ lifelong battle against the heresies prevalent in the early Christian church of North Africa built a theological tradition, which heavily influenced the Western church.

“Just as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so also are we prohibited by the catholic religion to say that there are three Gods or Lords.”

In the second section of the creed, we confess the personhood of the Trinity, each distinct from the other. This rejects Modalism, that God changes masks, appearance, or function, but is the same in person in each case. Rather, we confess that the individual persons of the Triune God possess unique attributes to the exclusion of the others.

This distinctness of a person also describes the divine economy. That is economy in the sense of interrelationship, not of money. Within the Trinity there is an economy of relationship between the persons. The Father is eternally neither made nor begotten. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father. The Holy Spirit is eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son, neither created nor begotten.

These expressions of the Christian understanding of the Trinity push against modalism by establishing a concurrence of personhood. It is impossible for the Father to put on a Son mask. He is eternally the Father, and His personhood is unique from the Son. The Son cannot put on a Holy Spirit mask because His attributes in His person are distinct from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot wear the attributes of the Father because they are unique from His own attributes. All of these attributes are eternally the attributes of the persons of God.

But, these immutable characteristics do not a hierarchy make. All persons of the Trinity are equally God. And, none is before or after another.

The Father is not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not the Son. The Son is not the Father. The Holy Spirit is God. The Son is God. The Father is God, coeternal and coequal.

Dear Baptized, the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity is to be worshipped!  

            Thanks be to God!

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, Texas

©2020 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com.

Encore Post: Saint Athanasius was bishop and patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt (under Roman control) from 328 to 373 AD. He attended the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD as secretary to his predecessor, Alexander. Athanasius was ordained as bishop and patriarch after Alexander’s death. In his 48 years presiding over the region, he was exiled five times, by four different Roman emperors, for 17 years, over theological controversies in North Africa.

Each of the three sections of the creed begins with a similar language. The Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds start with “I believe…” But the Athanasian Creed takes a different approach. Rather than solely confessing together with one voice. Here, we also exhort one another, “Whoever desires to be saved must, above all, hold the catholic faith.” Then, in each section, we confess the catholic faith.

We Lutherans need not fear the word “catholic.” The term catholic does not refer to the modern Roman Catholic Church, but to the universal, invisible, orthodox, faithful church of Christ on earth. We retain the use of the term “catholic” in the Athanasian Creed in opposition to the papal church of Rome. “Catholic” simply means “universal,” and as such, we boldly confess it from our Lutheran identity.

The first section addresses the unity of our Triune God. He is uncreated, infinite, and eternal, “not three gods, but one God.” This language rejects Subordinationism, that the Son and the Spirit are less God than that Father is God. Rather, God is of one substance. Subordinationism was, in part, an overcorrection for the error of modalism. Subordinationists were seeking to clarify the distinctness of the person within the Trinity. Their over correction created a theological position that hedged upon tritheism. To protect our understanding from merging God into just one thing of only one sort, they created an understanding where God can easily be three things of three sorts. And these three loosely connected God characters have a hierarchy within their pantheon. This is an error.

The modalist error is also addressed by the second section of the Creed. This serves to remind us that the opposite of an error isn’t always a truth. Sometimes the opposite of an error can simply be an error in the opposite direction.

“But the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.” The God-ness of the Trinity is whole and one. The attributes of God in His unity are shared and are one: uncreated, infinite, eternal, and almighty. But these are not a dozen attributes, four of each, unique to each person. There are four attributes that each person possesses as one. There are not three gods, but one God. There are not three lords, but one Lord. There are not three eternals, but one Eternal. We worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. 

Don’t let yourself be dismayed or discouraged by these complicated understandings. They were intense struggles for the early church and remain intellectual difficulties for us today. The big takeaway from the Athanasian Creed is that we can never fully understand the Trinity. We can, with the help of the fathers of the faith before us, identify those things that are outside the proper understanding.

Dear Baptized, let us celebrate the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity!         

 Thanks be to God!

Read section two of the Athanasian Creed next.

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2020 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com.

Encore Post: On Trinity Sunday, most Christian churches confess together the Athanasian Creed. The creed was composed in keeping with his theology about the Trinity, though not by St. Athanasius himself. The creed flagrantly uses the term “catholic” in a way that can startle us sensitive snowflakes of the Lutheran tradition.

St. Athanasius? Catholic? Are we Romanists, now?

No, we are not now, nor do we desire to be a part of the Roman Catholic church. “But, Pastor, we just said the ‘catholic faith,’ like three times in the Athanasian Creed last Sunday.” Yes, yes, we did. And I have good news! At Mt. Calvary, we confess it again on several Sundays throughout the church year.

Our Sunday bulletin at Mt. Calvary included this little note concerning our catholicity. “catholic faith* — The term catholic does not refer to the modern Roman Catholic Church, but rather to the universal, invisible, orthodox, faithful church of Christ on earth. We retain the use of the term “catholic” in the Athanasian Creed in opposition to the papal church of Rome. “Catholic” simply means” universal,” and as such, we boldly confess it from our Lutheran understanding.”

There are Christians that eschew the use of creeds in the church. They’ll say things like, “No creed but Christ” and, “no book but the bible.” But, those statements are creeds of their own. We derive the English word creed from the Latin credo, which means, “I believe.” So, our friends in the “no creeds” crowd are creedingly creeding a creed against the use of creeds. (The large majority of the global Christian community are from credal faiths like ours.)

The Three ecumenical creeds are: The Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed. Creeds, as a whole, exist to speak contrary to positions held outside the faith. Each of these creeds exists solely to communicate the faith we all hold in opposition to a novel heresy against the faith. Ecumenical refers to that which pertains to the whole Christian church. The ecumenical creeds are embraced and confessed by all of Christendom.

The Athanasian creed speaks primarily against the Arian sect of the early Christian church. Arius, for whom the sect is named, struggled with the stuff of which God is. He taught against the idea that God the Father and God the Son are of the same substance.

Now, the Nicene Creed says, “… of the same substance with the Father…” After the first ecumenical council in Nicea (325 AD), the notion that there are differences in substance should have been put to bed with all the subordination it entails. But, Arianism remained a problem for the church.

The creed can be treated as two or three parts. Three parts will work adequately for this discussion. The first part deals with the unity of our Triune God. He is uncreated, infinite, and eternal, “not three gods, but one God.” This language rejects Subordinationism, that the Son and the Spirit are less God than that Father is God. Rather, God is of one substance, not “three gods or lords.”

In the second section, we confess personhood, each distinct from the other. This rejects Modalism, that God changes masks, appearance, or function, but is the same in person in each case. Rather, we confess that the individual persons of the Triune God possess unique attributes to the exclusion of the others. The Father: unbegotten, The Son: begotten, and the Holy Spirit: proceeding, are all unique in function for us Christians. There are not three of any, but one of each person within the Trinity in Unity.

The third section deals with Jesus’ incarnation. The two natures of Christ are on full display here. The Son is “equal to the Father with respect to His divinity, less than the Father with respect to His humanity.” We reject Eutychianism, that Jesus’ human and divine natures merged into a new, different nature. “He is God, begotten from the substance of the Father before all ages; and He is man, born from the substance of His mother in this age: perfect God and perfect man, composed of a rational soul and human flesh; equal to the Father with respect to His divinity, less than the Father with respect to His humanity.” We also reject Nestorianism, that the two natures of Christ are not unified in His person. “He is God and man, He is not two, but one Christ: one, however, not by the conversion of the divinity into flesh, but by the assumption of the humanity into God; one altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.”

The third section also rejects the Gnostic notion that we will be free from matter and our bodies, specifically in the next life. On the contrary, we confess the resurrection of our bodies! “At His coming all people will rise again with their bodies.”

Dear Baptized, let us celebrate the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity!
Thanks be to God!

Read section One of the Athanasian Creed next.

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2020 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com

Encore Post: [Eighth in a series of posts on how to read the Bible] 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!

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2020 Jason M. Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com

[Thirty-first in a series of posts on church words] Encore Post: Iconoclasm is a $0.25 word we don’t hear in our circles much these days. We are, however, surrounded by its effects in our American Christian culture. Iconoclasm is an English word derived from two Greek words (εἰκών, I-kohn, “image, figure” and κλάω, Klah-ō, “to break”). Iconoclasts throughout history, in various religions, and in the public sphere, have sought to “break images.” In earlier times, these breakings were literal, violent acts. We moderns are far more enlightened. We stick to character assassination rather than physical violence.

For this discussion, We’ll treat iconoclasm, aniconism, and iconophobia as roughly interchangeable terms. The first refers to destroying images. The second implies the avoidance of images. The third suggests a fear of images. Since the thumbnail image would make them all similarly uncomfortable, we can speak of them all in a categorical group.

Iconoclasts are a historical minority in Christianity. Widespread use of Christian images, statuary forms, and crucifixes appeared only after Constantine’s legalization of Christianity in the Roman empire around the time of the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.

Byzantine Emperor Leo III issued edicts between 726-730 AD, against the veneration of images. Wealthier, Greek speaking Byzantines in the West resisted these measures. Poorer, Slavic, Arabic, and Farsi speaking Byzantines in the East embraced these policies. The issue may have been fueled by the strict outlawing of images in the theocracies of the Islamist world with whom the poorer Eastern Byzantines were interacting.

When the fires of iconoclasm dwindled again. The Eastern and Western Christian churches developed very different aesthetics concerning icons or images in the church. In the West, realism in painting and statues became the norm. Three-dimensional statues and paintings with a perceptible depth of field gathered common use in churches and homes, including primarily images of Jesus’ crucifixion.

In the East, iconography developed into a specific type of flattened painting style. Eastern Christian icons use a field of vision where the near ground is lower in the picture and sometimes larger. The background is higher and sometimes smaller. These also make significant use of words and names in the image to identify the subjects and events, including primarily the crucifixion of Our Lord.

In both cases, preference was given to events in the life of Christ, the prophets and saints of the church.

In the reformation era, Thomas Müntzer and Andreas Karlstadt (associates of Martin Luther) sought to purge the reforming churches in Germany by removing their statues and stained glass imagery. Luther opposed them. Afterward, Lutherans retained a love of sacred art and statuary at home and in their churches.

The radical reformers of the 16th century, including Calvin and Zwingli, rejected icons and statuary in their churches. These groups and their progeny certainly influenced American revivalist Christianity and, as a result, the common American expression of the faith. Ours could be called a semi-iconoclastic culture.

In the 16th & 17th centuries, one could scarcely find an example of crosses in use without some or most displaying a corpus (Jesus’s body). In modern America, we are nearly afraid of seeing Jesus on the cross … in a statuary form … on our walls at home or altars at church. (Paintings at home were fine). I think for German-American Lutherans, this stems from a uniquely American German expression: das ist Katolisch (that is Catholic).

[“I would also add that the specific Old Testament Commandments concerning graven images are right after they have left Egypt and aptly describe the mixture of animal and human characteristics in the idols of Egypt. Whereas God, who says make no such graven images, then immediately tells the Israelites how to make the Ark, the Menorah, the symbols of the Angels on the Ark, how to stitch Angels into the fabric and tapestry of the paraments for the Tabernacle, and then the Temples. Even in the tablets given to Moses, the Lord is clearly not opposed to sacred images, but to pagan, idolatrous ones.” (Rev. Larry R. Görlitz, in conversation, 22 May 2024) (cf. Exodus 25-28, 30-31, 35:30-39:43)]

German-American Lutherans were very sensitive to being confused by Baptists, Methodists, and the Reformed with Roman Catholics. Our chanted liturgy, non-English services, use of vestments, stodgy hymnody, and short preaching may have fed that confusion. But, the reaction, das ist Katolisch, revealed a willingness to allow some practices and images to slip away. There was a need to be seen as uncatholic.

These days arguments will revolve around statements of Spiritualized Christianity like: “We worship a risen Jesus.” Or, “The empty tomb is our hope.” The rarity of a barren cross and the near complete absence of the open tomb in pre-enlightenment Christian art should warn us against those errors.

We are better to speak with Paul, “For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles” (1 Corinthians 1:22-23). The risen Jesus is the proof of it. But Christ and Him crucified is our salvation. It is the very price paid for sin. Jesus’s death frees us from the fear of the pain of death in ourselves. We ought to celebrate and revere it.

Also, don’t forget the condition of Jesus as the disciples saw Him in the resurrection. “Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you.’ Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe’” (John 20:26-27). The lamb, who was slain and yet He lives, still bears the marks of our salvation in His flesh for us.

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2020-2025 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com.

[Tenth in a series of posts on church words] Encore Post: Orthodox is a term that is a bit like catholic in the minds of casual Christians. We hear these terms as they are applied to identifiable sects. That identification can cause us to assume that the word itself must mean the sect.

Catholic simply means universal or whole. So, in the Sunday morning prayers, when we pray for “the whole Christian Church on earth,” we could just as well say the “Catholic Church” on earth. Our friends in the Roman Catholic sect are the most significant association with that term, applying to a specific denomination within Christianity. There are also other non-Roman Catholic denominations that identify themselves as Catholic. Rome neither holds nor exercises exclusive rights to that term, though the pope may want us to think that.

Orthodox rings similarly in our ears. For those who’ve heard of the Eastern Orthodox Church, we assume those terms synonymously mean the Eastern Christian sect. That’s not exactly so.

The Eastern and Western Christians split in 1054 AD. The patriarchs of Rome and of Constantinople had a falling-out, which resulted in the split. The patriarchs of the Eastern churches sided with the patriarch of Constantinople. The Roman patriarch found himself alone, heading a large portion of Christianity. The churches we call Orthodox are from the Eastern side and those patriarchs. That time deserves its own treatment in another article or articles.

Ὀρθόδοξος (Orthodox) simply means straight teaching, opinion, or belief. For those of an etymological inclination, ὀρθῶς (orthōs) means straight, unbent, or unwavering. And, δόξα (doksa) means teaching, opinion, or belief. It is the foil of heterodoxy, which is mingled or combined teaching.

There’s more here than simply lexical understandings. Orthodoxy in Christianity is normed by the scriptures and our teaching drawn from it. The Bible is the norm which norms our teaching. Our teaching is the norm, which is normed by the Word of God, the Bible.

There are also orthodox teachers of non-christian religions. Orthodox adherents of Judaism, who may or may not be Orthodox Jews, will want to destroy the Dome of the Rock, rebuild the Jewish Temple, and resume the O.T. sacrificial system. Orthodox Muslims are politely called “extremists.” It is orthodoxy in Islam to desire and seek the death of the infidel, all non-Muslims. Orthodoxy in the Latter-Day Saints requires plural marriage and the rejection of all unbelievers (Christians outside the LDS). Former mormons receive the worst fate among orthodox LDS. They are the only ones who can go to “outer darkness.”

There is also an orthodoxy in all sects of Christianity. Orthodox Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists, and Methodists seek to maintain adherence to the teachings as we have received them. In a seeming incongruity, orthodox teachers of heterodox churches teach contrary to Christian orthodoxy and the Word of God from which it springs.

For we Lutherans, that means that we hold to our doctrines and remain in the Word of God, always ready to be corrected by the scriptures in our understanding and teachings. The five solas of the reformation (grace alone, faith alone, scripture alone, Christ alone, to the glory of God alone) constantly direct us back to the Word of God and conform our straight teaching to it.

By our Orthodoxy, we preach Christ and Him crucified.

Originally posted at What does this Mean? Blog: https://whatdoesthismean.blog

The posts in the blog What does this Mean? are now available at What does this Mean? | Rev. Robert E. Smith | Substack

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX

©2021 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@gmail.com.