Sermon on Good Works

Some people listen to their Walkmans or their iPods when they exercise. Me? I'm weird. Sometimes I drag along my clunky old tape-recorder with me when I jog, and listen to a tape of a Bible class or the Divine Service that was recorded for the shut-ins. So this morning, I grabbed the tape on the top of my stack, popped it into the tape-recorder, and headed out the door in my tennies. Serendipitously, the sermon happened to be on Matthew 25:31-46, the passage assigned to the Second-Last Sunday of the Church Year.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.

Jesus said to His disciples:
When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, "Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me." Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, "Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?" And the King will answer and say to them, "Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me."

This is the Word of the Lord.
Thanks be to God.



Have you ever thought about the question, "Why am I a Christian?"

The answer to that question for every Christian rests in what Jesus has done for you. "I am a Christian," we confess, "because God visited me in my sinful condition. I was naked, and I was sick, and I was in a prisonhouse of my own making from sins from which I could not free myself, in bondage to death and the devil. And it was the Lord Jesus who visited me, who bound up my wounds, who set me free, who released the shackles of Satan and everlasting death. And He clothed my nakedness with a robe of righteousness." And He did so by a word: "Son, Daughter, I forgive you all your sins. Do not be afraid. Come, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world."

"I am a Christian," we confess, "because God's only Son came to me, in my sin and in my weakness, and suffered and died for me. He is my life. He is my salvation."

As Jesus said elsewhere, "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them" [in all of their sin and all of their weakness, and that's why I died for them], "and they follow Me, and I give them" [I give them -- it's a gift -- I give them] "eternal life." That's what faith is. That's why you and I are Christians -- because Jesus, God's only Son, in love, has visited us. By that word of forgiveness -- that sweet word of forgiveness -- in the waters of Baptism, in the daily hearing of the Gospel, in the Word of Absolution, in the testament of His body and blood -- that sweet word of forgiveness is what draws us to Him. And it is by that sweet word of forgiveness that we follow Him, wherever our life takes us. This is the meaning of St Paul's word in Romans: "A man is justified by faith," [faith in whom? faith in Christ] "apart from the works of the law."

Then why is it that in the Gospel for this Sunday, on the day of judgment, Jesus mentions works? You heard the words: "Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me." If it is true that a sinner is justified by faith in Jesus, apart from the deeds of the law, then why, why in this parable of the Judgment, does Jesus mention works?

It is for this reason: faith in Jesus is never alone. Faith in Jesus is always active in love: in love for the neighbor, in love for the enemy, in love for the unlovely spouse, in love for children who rebel and turn away from parents and despise their birthright, in love for the stranger, for the naked, for the sick, for the imprisoned. Faith is never alone. Faith in the Lord Jesus' love is always active in love to the neighbor, to the enemy. In this parable that Jesus teaches on the last judgment, He tells us something very profound and it's paradoxical. When you look at your neighbor, when you look at your spouse, when you look at your children, when you look at your enemy, you and I (according to the Gospel of Jesus) are called by faith in that Gospel to see in that neighbor, to see in that enemy, to see in that family member, Jesus Himself. That's a paradox. That is a profound mystery. Because when we look at our neighbor, we see a sinner. When we look at our spouse, we see a sinner. When we look at our children and our enemies, we see sinners. And yet faith in the Gospel of Jesus calls us to see behind that sinner Jesus Himself, our Lord. That's a paradox. That's a mystery.

Why does Jesus speak this way? Because faith that trusts in Him is active in love for those whom He has placed in our path, that you and I -- by faith in the Gospel -- might be to our neighbor (who doesn't deserve God's love) what Jesus is to us. For we were the naked ones. We were the sick ones. We were the imprisoned ones in sin and death from which we couldn't free ourselves. But Jesus visited us. And He loved us in place of Himself. And He laid down His life for our salvation. And it is because we believe this Gospel that faith manifests itself in love toward the unlovely, toward those who do not deserve it.

But such faith never trusts in the works of love that flow from it, as is evidenced in this Gospel. "Lord, when did we see You naked or sick or in prison? When did we come and visit You and clothe You?" That's because faith never trusts in its own works, but solely in the work of Christ.

Now, when you hear me preach this way on this text, honesty compels your heart to confess, "Pastor, I do not love the way you describe. Does that mean I am not a Christian?" No. Rather, it gives testimony to the sin which still rages in your heart. For the Old Adam in you and in me is always a self-righteous, works-righteous brute. Never loving, except those who deserve it. Never forgiving, except those deemed worthy of forgiveness. This is also why we are Christians, for to be a Christian is to daily be in repentance, returning to the voice of our Shepherd, confessing our faithlessness, and therefore confessing our lovelessness, that we might receive anew the word of His love, which not only sets us free again and again and again, but which also brings forth the fruits of His love in our lives, for loveless and unworthy sinners, like those whom He has placed in our path. Christians are Christians because of what Jesus did. And by faith we return to Him, again and again and again, to receive His Word and Sacrament, that we might learn to love as He has loved us. So that, on the last day, clothed with the righteousness of Christ, we might hear those words of eternal absolution: "Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit" [inheritance is always a gift] "inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world."

In the name of Jesus.
Amen.

Guns in the Home

Last September, I wrote about a local news item about the fellow who broke into a house in the middle of the night and was headed toward the children's bedroom while the dad was shouting at him to stop, to get out of the house. After sufficient warning, the home-owner shot the intruder, not to kill, but to stop him from advancing toward the children's bedrooms. The DA investigated for a couple of days and determined that no charges would be filed against the shooter/home-owner.

The intruder later decided to file civil suit against the home-owner. I've been wondering how the case turned out. A recent news article tells about the criminal case against the intruder. He was found guilty this week and will be sentenced several weeks hence. He is currently in prison for having violated parole. A snippet near the end of the article mentions that the civil suit (in Milwaukee county) against the home-owner was withdrawn and would be re-filed elsewhere.

So far so good. Hooray for the armed victim who protected his family. And hooray for a sensible court system which protected the real victim instead of the intruder who now walks with a limp.

Busy Work

My oldest three kids were insatiably curious. If I wanted them to read a book, all I had to do was bring it home from the library or leave it lying around the living room -- it would get read, consumed, devoured. But my next-to-youngest isn't as curious. He doesn't need to know how things work and what people think and what's going on in the world. Part of this may be due to his inborn nature just being different from his siblings. Part of it, though, is probably due to the amount of time we spent with his sister's doctors and therapists when he was just a toddler and preschooler. We didn't do as many science experiments, take as many walks, read as many kiddy books, as we'd done with the older children.

Since we've been homeschooling, I've despised busy work. It has always seemed like a waste of time. If the kids can learn something by practicing it 4-5 times, why make them do the handwriting or the math 30 times? If we can work on things orally, through discussion and reading and working out concepts, why make them sit in chairs and write just for the sake of have some worksheets filled out? We are people who know how true is the saying, "So many books, so little time!" Why divert our limited time from those books and those projects and those educational videos to something as dreary as seatwork?

But right now, I'm finding busy-work to be somewhat useful. If I have a kid who is perfectly content to read comic books and play video games all day, then I am not content. I can do interesting educational activities with him, and he will enjoy them. I can even make him study certain things on his own, but of course he retains very little of it. I am discovering, though, that busy-work doesn't hurt him. Oh, he may think it's injurious to his time in front of the computer or tv. But for some odd reasion, I just don't have a lot of sympathy for his grief.

For the older kids, busy-work distracted them from the excitement of learning. Because of that, I see busy-work as detrimental. But in recent weeks, I'm beginning to see that busy-work isn't altogether bad. It's certainly better than perpetually vegging out.

Government Goof-Up

Our state government had a slip-up in the past few weeks. They accidentally made public some information that had names and addresses, with SocSec numbers attached. It wasn't a big group of people, but I was one of the group. I got a letter yesterday informing me of the risk. Along with profuse apologies, the letter had all sorts of information about "fraud alerts" and "freezes" that we can get from the credit bureaus, and I need to figure that out. They've provided for insurance that will cover up to $20,000 to compensate victims of identity theft. (From what I've heard, that amount could be barely a drop in the bucket, given the trouble identity theft would cause.) They've offered to pay for a year of daily monitoring with the credit bureaus, in an attempt to protect the people whose numbers were released.

I'm trying to figure out exactly what "fraud alerts" mean. It sounds to me like the inconvenience of having a fraud alert on your record probably means something as inconsequential as not being able to get a new credit card while you're in line at the check-out of a department store. Like, maybe, before they extend credit to you, the company will actually have to verify your information like they all did 20-30 years ago.

They assure us and assure us and assure us that they take utmost care with our personal information and will never release it to anyone. I never believed that. I get called paranoid. I get told that I don't understand the high value businesses and government place on privacy. But mistakes happen. And sometimes (not this time, though!) there is intentional manipulation of private information too. But even if we believe that everybody in government or hospitals or insurance companies is honest and upstanding and completely moral, nevertheless, mistakes happen.

I guess we're going to learn more about credit bureaus this year than we intended.

Some Links

Elizabeth had a great post about the importance of vocational tech school, and thoughts about what kind of education/training might be good for kids after high school.

In the comment section on one of my recent posts, a friend pointed out Jonathan Lange's article Using the Third Use. I thought it was a fantastic article on the topic of the Law and sanctification, and just wanted to mention it here in case anybody's interested.

Scott reminded us that most of us need to get a patch for our computers so they can update themselves correctly this year when Daylight Savings Time is made longer than before. You can get more information on his blog.

Random Thoughts

Gas down in Rockford this morning was still over $2 when we went to church, but on our way home we saw a gas station in Wisconsin with $1.98. It's been a while since we saw that!

For years, I told myself that we needed to buy snow-fence and put it up in late fall. But year after year, I neglected to do it. Then we had to dig out the drifts. When I was little and my dad talked about "drifts," I didn't understand what he meant. Sure, I understood the concept in my mind, but I didn't understand the way that snow drifts make shoveling seem entirely futile. After a few years of drought, snow-fencing seemed pointless (even though there were several days per year of digging and re-digging out a sidewalk that had already been cleaned four times since the last snowfall). This year I'm wondering if the increased snowfall will motivate me to get snow-fencing in November. Probably not...

I had sixteen hours added to my week this past week. Didache was canceled because of Pastor's being in Fort Wayne for symposia. So was Thursday Bible class. I also skipped my weekly errand-day in the city because I'm trying to get back onto my Monday routine after having the errand-schedule goofed up by Christmas and New Years. Those three things alone put sixteen extra hours into my week. Did I cross a lot of projects off my to-do list? Did I catch up on chores? No. Granted, I spent a little more time on the computer than I should've, and I spent a few hours answering phone calls from desperate parents investigating the possibility of homeschooling. But most of those extra hours got used up in homeschooling. No wonder I always feel like I'm behind.

I was a good girl last week and did schoolwork with the kids instead of listening to symposium lectures live-streamed on the computer. Boy, that took some self-denial!

When we were driving into town the other day, Andrew saw a sign that I hadn't noticed. He asked, "What does evangelical mean?" I asked whether he meant the real meaning of the word, or the way it is commonly used today. He asked for the real meaning first. So I told him it means "gospel" or "gospel-ish." The sign he saw was for the Evangelical Free church in town. He wanted to know why any denomination would call itself something like "Gospel-Free Church."

Constitutional Oath

Normally, public officials must take an oath of office in which they swear to uphold the Constitution. That's changing in Wisconsin, though.

In last fall's elections, Wisconsinites approved a ban on gay "marriage." In Madison, however, local results were strongly against the ban. Many public officials are scandalized by this constitutional amendment and are now unwilling to swear to uphold the state constitution. The Madison city council voted this week to allow elected and appointed officials to make their oath without swearing to uphold the constitution we actually have. They are given the option of making a statement (either verbally or in writing) that declares they are taking the oath of office "under protest" and will work to change the state constitution where they disagree with it.

I can understand a desire to go into politics to work for your cause, even if (maybe "especially if") you don't agree with the status quo. I can see that someone might say he can't support everything in the constitution. Theoretically, this exemption should be allowed for conservatives and liberals alike. It also seems that a candidate's desire for one of these exemptions should be known by the voters prior to the election.

But even if I try really hard to see their side of it, there's still one thing I can't get over. With that kind of disclaimer, one wonders, "What's the point of taking the oath at all?"

You can read the AP story here.

Thesis XXIII

Yesterday, I was remembering a discussion with my father-confessor and his father-confessor, regarding one of "grandpa-confessor's" sermons. Because of recent discussions, I wanted to take a peek at which one of Walther's Law/Gospel theses fit the situation. So I quickly skimmed the first couple of pages of the book, and Thesis 23 caught my eye. I got distracted from my initial quest. Upon exploration, I noticed the following quotes.


From Walther's Law and Gospel:

The Word of God is not rightly divided ... when an endeavor is made, by means of the commands of the Law rather than by the admonitions of the Gospel, to urge the regenerate to do good.


And some quotes from the lecture in support of the thesis:

Page 381: The attempt to make men godly by means of the Law and to induce even those who are already believers in Christ to do good by holding up the Law and issuing commands to them, is a very gross confounding of Law and Gospel.

Page 382: Concerning the new covenant, ... [God] is not going to issue any commandments, but is going to write the Law directly into their mind and give them a new and pure heart, so that they shall not need to be plagued with the Law, with enforcements and urgings: Thou shalt do this! Thou shalt do that! because that will not help matters at all.

Page 384: This is an experience which you may have had personally. After a long season of sluggishness and lukewarmness, during which you began to hate yourself because you saw no way to change your condition, you happen to hear a real Gospel sermon, and you leave the church a changed man and rejoice in the fact that you may believe and are a child of God. You suddenly become aware of the fact that it is not difficult to walk in the way of God's commandments; you seem to walk in it of your own accord. [Almost sounds like Walther is saying that walking in the way of God's commands happens on spiritual auto-pilot.]

Page 386: To make people godly, [the rationalists] preach ethics with great earnestness.... [The papists] preach ethics continually ....

Page 387-8: This confounding of Law and Gospel occurs ... also in the orthodox Church... when ministers become aware that all their Gospel-preaching is useless because gross sins of the flesh still occur among their hearers.... The preacher may come to the conclusion that he has preached too much Gospel.... But he is mistaken.... The reason why congregations are corrupt is invariably this, that its ministers have not sufficiently preached the Gospel to the people.


I suppose it might not be helpful to toss quotes out there. After all, quotes "sound" different when they're taken out of context, and when the terms within the quotes are understood differently by different hearers. I've had conversations with homeschool friends where we can toss Bible verses back and forth at each other, and have not come to agreement. I've had theological debates with friends where Church-Father quotes are tossed around, or where we quote the Confessions back and forth at each other. I've seen "quote wars" where Luther appears to be contradicting himself. So I'm quite skeptical as to the benefit of putting quotes out there. Nevertheless, I thought these were rather interesting in light of recent conversations.

Care for a Snooty Title?

I saw this on Melynda's blog, and it just looked like fun!! ... even if it did pick "discombobulated" for me. LOL!

My Peculiar Aristocratic Title is: Imperial Majesty Susan the Discombobulated of Kesslington under Ox Get your Peculiar Aristocratic Title

Vanilla Beans, Anyone?

I recently received my order from an herb wholesaler. With the price I was paying at the grocery store, I figured two packets of spices and herbs from the grocery store would be about equivalent to the price I'd pay for a whole pound from this wholesaler. So even if some of the spices got old and went to waste, I'd still be ahead financially.

I go through a lot of dried parsley. The minimum order for most items is a pound. I figured I'd go with two pounds instead of one because we use so much parsley. So I open up the box.... Do you know how much a pound of parsley is? It's like a gallon! Turns out that those huge jars of parsley I was buying at the store are only an ounce. Well, I won't need to buy parsley in 2007 any more. Maybe not in 2008 either.

I also bought a few pounds of dried apples. When we tasted them, they were a little bland. My guess is that the dried apples from the grocery store are spiked with sugar or corn syrup. I know they douse the dried pineapple and dried bananas with all sorts of sugar. These unsweetened apples may not entice the kids into snacking on them as I'd anticipated, but they'll be good for putting in oatmeal or cookies.

Now to the point of the post. Is there anybody we see in Real Life who needs a vanilla bean or two or three? Vanilla prices have gone up. Last time I started a batch of extract, the cost of one vanilla bean was $6, and two of them were $10. Shoot -- I liked paying $2 per bean at the health food store. (I can't imagine what they cost now at the grocery store. The grocery store used to charge three times as much as the health food store. I bet the price-difference between the two has narrowed.) So from this wholesaler, I ordered the minimum allowable amount of vanilla beans: 1/4 pound. I figured if I got four beans, I was already saving money; anything more would be a bonus. Turns out that I got 29 vanilla beans. 29! So Laura, Anthea, Leila, Katie, Mom, Wolfs? Anybody have a use for a couple of beans? I'd planned to start some more vanilla extract going, but this is a lot of beans for that. If nobody wants beans, we're going to grind some up in ice cream and have reeeeeally delicious vanilly ice cream. Yummmmmmm!

Pizza Lentils

Another one of my frequently used recipes came from Jennifer T. It too fulfills all five requirements for being an ideal recipe. If you're scared of lentils and legumes, I gotta tell you that many an avowed lentil-hater has loved this recipe.

Here is the "serves 8" version
(which really only serves 3-4 here).
In other words, this makes a 13x9.

Simmer together for 30 minutes:
2 cups dry lentils
4 cups water
1 tsp salt

While simmering,
brown 1-2# pork sausage
with a chopped onion.
Stir in 1/2 cup flour
and 1/2 tsp dried garlic.
Mix in 1 quart canned tomatoes.

Mix together lentils and sausage.
Pour into 13x9.
Sprinkle with mozarella.
Bake at 350 for about 25-35 minutes.


My family-sized version (two 13x9's):

1# bag of lentils
7 cups water
2 tsp salt

2# sausage
2 onions
several cloves garlic
1.25 cups flour
1 quart canned tomatoes

1-2# grated mozarella (or less)

Snow

Children were ecstatic when they went to bed last night, anticipating the snowfall they'd find in the morning. Our last snow was December 1. Our topmost snow-lover "couldn't" go out and play in it because he'd seriously outgrown his snowpants. Having received snowpants as a Christmas gift, he's been itchin' to break 'em in. Another little snow-lover was told by her cardiologist that "playing in the snow" for a few weeks must be confined to throwing snowballs at trees or other targets: no snowball fights, no sliding or sledding, no making angels, and definitely no snowmen! So she's been itchin' to get out in a real snowfall too.

So why have they no incentive to go outdoors this afternoon? Was shoveling the walks this morning enough snow-time? Maybe they're getting old and grown-up and boring like me.

I gotta admit, though, I am so glad I'm not trying to make my way to Fort Wayne today on these messy, slippery roads. But we sure are hoping all our loved ones and buddies make it there safely.

Is Sanctification Synergistic?

Probably every Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist homeschooler has had the experience of being told that he isn't really saved. Many of our friends in the homeschool group believe that converion is a synergistic activity: it's something that God and I do together. If my children and I have not made a decision for Jesus, prayed the Believer's Prayer, and invited Him into our lives, we obviously have no use for conversion. We obviously are not saved. We haven't "done" the thing we need to do to participate in our conversion.

We know that's wrong, though. Even though we reject that we are participating in our conversion, we are still nevertheless converted. We cherish what God has done for us in our conversion. Our conversion is immensely important to us.

Some Lutherans believe sanctification and good works are "synergistic" activities: that is, I cooperate with God. Other Lutherans believe that sanctification and good works are monergistic activities: something God works in us though His sacraments, through the call to repentance (that is, real and smiting law), and through the forgiveness of sin (that is, the bestowal of the Gospel).

If a Lutheran believes that sanctification is a monergistic activity, he may be told that he has no use for sanctification. But it isn't true. He still values sanctification. He is still being sanctified. He may disagree with another Lutheran about how that sanctification is being wrought in his life. But that doesn't mean he's averse to sanctification.

Homeschooling a Doctorate?

My husband was interested in doing further study at the seminary. However, it costs a lot, and we don't have the money. It would take a lot of time in Indiana, and he doesn't have that either. And it would involve a lot of driving around the south end of Lake Michigan -- enough to drive a person insane. He didn't want the degree for prestige reasons: who's really gonna care whether he has letters behind his name? Another degree certainly wouldn't make any difference in his salary. So the only purpose of the study is LEARNING. (How's that for a homeschooler's viewpoint? Studying only for the sake of learning something?? Who'da thunk it possible?)

So he dove into teaching himself Latin. He and our friend Tim May got together every other Friday for a year, wading into the Wheelocks Latin textbook. (Mommies and kiddoes sure liked the excuse for play-dates twice a month!) Then Gary was ready to dive into translating, essentially teaching himself Latin through his translating efforts. (Reminds me of Nat Bowditch in one of our favorite books, Carry On, Mr Bowditch.)

A few weeks ago, he finished translating his book: Peter Zorn's The History of the Communion of Infants: Illustrated from the Ancient Times of the Church: First from the West then of the East, after a series of ten centuries and [after] manifold variations. It took a huge amount of work, translating not only Latin, but also some Greek, French, German, Hebrew, Italian, and Spanish. There were 1300 bibliographical references, and that was no small job to find the translations of all those personal names and place names. Coral and I each got copies of the book for Christmas. (Pretty thrilling until we found out he was looking for proofreaders. LOL!)

I want to brag on him and do the husband-version of the Genius-Child Dance. But somehow, "Genius-Husband Dance" just doesn't have the same ring to it...

Jane's Cowboy Soup

A couple of months ago, I declared Polly's recipe one of the ideal ones.
1) It is quick and easy to make.
2) It is inexpensive.
3) It is nutritious.
4) It uses whole-food ingredients that are often on hand or easily stored.
5) Most importantly, it tastes great!

Another recipe that meets those requirements is Jane's

Cowboy Soup.

Brown 1# ground beef
with 1 small onion, chopped.

Add (liquid and all)
1# can of pinto beans
1# can of black beans
1# can of kidney beans
1# can of navy beans (or great northerns)
1# can of tomatoes
4-oz can of green chilies (optional)
10-16 oz of frozen corn.

When heated, add seasonings.
Jane's recipe says to mix:
1 pkg Hidden Valley Ranch dry dressing mix
1 pkg taco seasoning mix
2 cups water,
and add to soup.
Simmer for 15-20 minutes or more.

I cringe at the price of those little packages, so instead of the seasoning packages, I add:
1 Tbsp dried parsley flakes
1 Tbsp cumin
1 Tbsp chili powder
1 tsp salt (or more)
1 tsp dillweed
1/2 tsp ground black pepper
a few cloves minced garlic (or 1 tsp dried garlic powder).
Simmer 15-20 minutes or more.
Shortly before serving, remove from heat and add
1 cup buttermilk.

This soup is excellent when it's naked in your bowl; it's even better when dressed up with cheddar, asiago, or monterey jack, sour cream, and/or Fritos.

In this house, that recipe serves 3. I suspect (for most households) it would serve 8.

Movie about Vivien Thomas

Thursday night we watched Something the Lord Made, a 2004 HBO movie. For anyone who's asked about what's wrong with Maggie's heart, for anyone who would like to know more about her surgeries, this movie tells a lot.

Maggie's first surgery was a Blalock-Taussig Shunt. When I saw an Alan Rickman movie at the library, I nabbed it just for the opportunity to revel in a couple of hours swooning over Alan Rickman's voice. (Turned out that didn't work so well. Alan Rickman with a Southern accent just isn't the same as regular Alan Rickman!) When I looked at the description of the plot on the DVD cover, it was describing Dr Blalock and Mr Thomas's work on saving blue babies born with Tetralogy of Fallot. Dr Taussig shows up a little later in the movie. Mom and Katie, I think you guys are going to want to see this movie! I don't know if other people will get as much out of it as we did; we've been steeped in that particular medical vocabulary and what it's like to have a little baby who's blue.

But even beyond the medical advancements shown in the movie, there are two other aspects of the show that I loved. One is the depiction of the racism during the 1900s, and how Mr Thomas's work basically spit in the eye of racism. Sadly though, Mr Thomas was not given credit until late in his life. Even more honorable (in my opinion) than Mr Thomas's medical achievements was his selflessness in doing the work without the recognition, honor, and pay that he should've received.

The other thing I loved about the movie was the high esteem shown for thinking outside the box, in spite of the naysaying by the people surrounding Mr Thomas and Dr Blalock. Heart surgeries were begun because of a talented high-school graduate who was self-taught in the medical field, was a good problem-solver, and was also talented with his hands and tools. The men's theology may have been wanting, and Maggie says it should've been rated R for foul language, but none of that could stop tears of thankfulness from flowing as we watched the historical events that led up to that little cyanotic girl who turned pink during the first heart surgery!

Trying to Be Good

Within the "confessional camp" in our synod, there seem to be two viewpoints on what sanctification is and how it's accomplished. This became starkly apparent to me at the symposium at the Ft Wayne seminary in January 2005.

I have been told repeatedly that of course we don't believe that our good works will earn us heaven, but nevertheless we'd better try to do good works. If we don't try, if we don't work at it, some say, we're taking our salvation for granted. (This trying to be good is not presented as if it were "merely" the drowning of the sinful nature -- the struggle against sin -- but rather is presented as attempting to pump up and energize the new man of faith.)

It seems to me, though, that when I try, the "trying" is good for neither me nor my neighbor. For me, the trying sends me into navel-gazing. For me, the trying leads me to focus on my piety, and to find my comfort in my piety. (In other words, to make a god of my piety, my goodness.) This is definitely not good for me.

As for my neighbor, my trying is not good for him either. My bottom-line is NOT how I'm doing on good works. But if someone's bottom-line were the good works emanating from the Christian, then where would those good works come from? I have been amazed to see more good works ooze outta my life if'n I'm not "trying." I have found that repeatedly being convicted of sin, confessing it, being absolved, and pretty much giving up on the trrrying is more "effective" in bringing about a right attitude and good works in my life.



There are loads of Bible passages telling us what we should do. That is good; I love those passages. But I have found that I can look at those passages in only two ways:
1) Jesus did it right, and
2) I don't do it right; Lord, have mercy on me.

Some people want me to add a third:
3) Try to do it and be right. Or at least be better.

But I can't. I just can't. If I add that, I change Hebrews 12:2 to "Come, let me fix my eyes on myself, the perfector of the faith which was authored by Jesus." Now, I'm not saying that this is the way everybody responds; I'm saying this is how I respond. I don't know about other people. But I know it's dangerous for me; I am much more inclined to sin by being a pharisee than I am tempted to sin by being a hedonist.

Some pastors preach the law to smash self-righteousness, and then forgive the wretched sinners who have despaired of their own goodness. Other pastors say that's not enough, that Christians must be encouraged to try to be better people. They say that not teaching people to try is the same thing as saying that it's okay to continue in sin, the same as actually being opposed to sanctification.

But it's not the same thing.

Raspberries and blackberries don't try to grow fruit. Assuming that the gardener is pruning and watering and fertilizing, the plants do indeed bear fruit on auto-pilot.

Adult "Children" Living at Home

In typical middle-class American society, it is not considered okay for young adults to live at home with their parents. I recognize that some kids just don't grow up and will continue to sponge off their parents. But it doesn't have to be that way. Through much of history, young adults would live with their parents until such time as they left to make a new home with husband or wife. And even then, sometimes they didn't leave too far, continuing to live on the farm or nearby for running the family business.

My husband and I used to think that it was a pretty good idea for adult children to live at home for a number of reasons. It's certainly not necessary for every kid to stay at home until the wedding day, but it is a concept worthy of serious consideration. It allows kids to save up a nest-egg for a downpayment on a home or college debt or other large expenses. Because of the expense of housing, few young adults live on their own; they must have a roommate. As long as the parents and adult-child can work through issues of freedom and responsibility, it seems far better for the child to be living with "roommates" (i.e., their parents and possibly siblings) who share their beliefs and values and general lifestyle. It's got all the benefits of a commune with none of the drawbacks.

But in the last year, we've discovered an even better reason for kids to continue living at home. My eldest daughter was recently engaged to a very nice young man. Nearly every week for the last year, the two of them have spent at least an evening each week at our house. We've gotten to know Matt. He's gotten to know us. He's grown to be part of the family. Rachel is not marrying somebody who's a stranger to her family. Those Friday evenings have not been the kind of exciting dates most people consider to be part of courtship, but they're a much more realistic type of togetherness. Our son-in-law was a dear family friend before he ever fell in love with my middle daughter, so we knew him and loved him prior to the kids' "interest" in each other. But Matt didn't start out as part of that close family circle. If Rachel had not been living at home, he would not now already be part of that close family circle; we'd be trying to get to know this fellow who was going to be spending his life as part of our family. And, to me, that in itself is of such great value that it is definitely worth any of the struggles that come with the change in relationships when parents are living with their adult children.

Men Are from Mars??

For a good laugh, check out Pastor Petersens' blog that includes an old Dave Barry column.

Published

Oh boy oh boy oh boy! Today's mail brought the Winter 2006 issue of Higher Things magazine, and I have an article in it. I've had lots of letters published in newspapers and magazines, and a few brief articles in magazines, and a picture of my photogenic son Paul in Home Education Magazine, and oodles of newsletter articles, but never a whole real article in a snazzy slick magazine. This is so exciting!