Jason Kaspar – Page 3 – What Does This Mean?

Rule #8: Avoid Anachronism (or don’t make Jesus time traveler)

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

Rule #4 | Rule #5| Rule #6| Rule #7 | Blog Post Series

Doesn’t God Love Me Just the Way I Am?

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

Athanasian Creed: the Conclusion – Works and Faith, Sheep and Goats

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 of 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 into 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. ³²Before 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!

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

Blog Post Series

Athanasian Creed Section Three – Unity in the Person of Christ

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, different 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 that 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.

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

Athanasian Creed Section Two – Three Distinct Persons

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 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 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!

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX
and
Mission planting pastoral team:
Epiphany Lutheran Church
Bastrop, TX

Blog Post Series

Call… Your… Pastor!!

In the enlightened prose of a certain modern public figure, “seriously, not a joke, that’s no lie.” Call your pastor. “Call” doesn’t even have to be literal; call (and leave a message), send a letter, email, Facebook messenger, any sort of direct contact is good. Your pastor doesn’t know about the joys and sorrows in your life outside of the things you share with him.

But for goodness’ sake, don’t spread a rumor, expecting it to make it to your pastor’s ears. There are countless things he’s heard through the rumor mill. Your pastor is bound by the eighth commandment in the same way you are. He does hear about someone drinking too much, stepping out on their spouse, building their fence on the wrong side of the property line, being sad, being angry, or being ill. When he hears these things, he is also bound by God’s Law to put out of his mind the thing that he shouldn’t have heard about someone from someone else.

Please, call your pastor.

“Pastor’s are too busy to be bothered with [this event or thing].” Yes, pastors are frequently busy. But, pastors also constantly make adjustments to meet, talk to, and visit folks on a regular basis. We do this, I do this, because your concerns concern us.

Do you desire the prayers of the congregation? Call your pastor.

“Why wasn’t I included in the prayers?” Prayer requests are one link where the gossip chain breaks. Prayer requests from immediate family go right onto the list; requests from someone who heard from someone else that a third someone may have a need, do not so readily make the list. Since the Lord knows our needs, we also do not include details with requests. If you know, you know. If you don’t know, the Lord doesn’t require your knowledge to hear and answer the prayer.

AND, He does promise to hear and answer our prayers. (1 Timothy 2:1-8; Luke 18; 1 Thessalonians 5; Romans 5:26-27) The scriptures in no place require a detailed analysis of the situations of our prayers. Prayer is what the Lord requires.

Do you want a visit? Call your pastor.

He doesn’t know if you don’t contact him. He will spare no effort to meet your request. While we’re talking about it, contact him before it’s an emergency. I make visits most every week. The shut-in list gets the initial scheduling spots. Nota bene: the shut-in list includes folks who aren’t listed in the prayers by their own request. Additional notes: a visit from your pastor does not mean you are, or require you to be, near death. A visit is just a visit.

Seriously, call your pastor. – Pastor

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

Athanasian Creed Section One – Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity

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.

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

Blog Post Series

Introduction to the Athanasian Creed

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’ll confess it again every 4th Sunday throughout the Trinity Season this 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 identity.”

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 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 exist 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.

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

Blog Post Series

Church Words #30: Iconoclasm

Encore Post: Iconoclasm is a $0.25 word we don’t hear in our circles much these days. We are, however, surrounded by it 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 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 become 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’s 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 pogeny 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 seeing Jesus on the cross … in a statuary form … on our walls at home or altars at church. (Paintings at home were fine for some reason). 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 begins to tell 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 a 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 open tomb in pre-enlightenment Christian art should warn us against those errors.

[In a podcast from 21 May 2024, a former LCMS president parroted this exact error. He was bemoaning the apparent Catholic shift among current LCMS pastors (das ist Katolisch). This form of iconophobia runs deeply in American Christianity and even in the 21st Century LMCS.]

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.

Blog Post Series

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

Why does Pastor use people’s first names only in prayer?

Encore Post: That does seem odd, doesn’t it? It’s most noticeable when we pray of our national and synodical presidents: Donald J. Trump and Matthew C. Harrison. In the prayer of the church, they are Donald and Matthew.

Surely, not one of us would address Pres. Trump or Pres. Harrison by their first names. Our discomfort is informed by the 4th Commandment. We are to honor those who God has placed in authority over us. It feels uncomfortable to use familiar terms with these folks.

Though the common culture around us has left formality behind in the last 30 years or so, we still rebel in the church. Especially in our southern culture, there are still vestiges for forgotten formality. Our children often learn to address Ms. or Mrs. Linda, Becky, Lori, or Mandy with a title, even when speaking their first names.

But, in the prayers, we speak differently. Taking our cues from David in the Psalms, we pray in humility before the throne of the Lord. All sinners seeking forgiveness and blessing are of the same status coram deo (before God). So, in confessing the truth about ourselves and everyone for whom we pray, we use first names.

Even POTUS and our synodical president are Donald and Matthew on Sunday morning in the prayer of the church. If we were to pray for Pope Francis, we would pray for him using his Baptismal name: Jorge. This is how we pray.

Let us lift up our voices to petition God, Our Father, through Jesus Christ, His Son.

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