The dress I bought for the wedding could use some slight alterations. When I sat down to tackle that, it didn't work out as planned. And I couldn't put the dress back as it had been before, because the sewing-machine needle had put some snags in the fabric. Wasted money; wasted time.
Twice last week I tried renting a tiller. It didn't work. The first time I didn't even get it home and had to change plans for the day. The second time, I brought it home, tilled about 6', and then it stopped and refused to restart. Therefore, everything that's been done in the garden has been done with a hand spade. Suffice it to say, the work is not yet done. And there was lots of unnecessary running back and forth to town.
Very little of what I've planted in the garden has germinated. One batch of greens and herbs was planted 10 days ago, the other batch four weeks ago. Several heads of romaine have gotten to be 2" tall. That's it. Nothing else. Wasted time.
Maggie and I spent hours on the phone and filling out paperwork to apply for SSI for her so that she would have health insurance. The money wasn't important, but the insurance is. Her claim was denied. Now we have to figure out some other avenue of taking care of her special needs. Wasted time; loss of money; need for lawyers to help with guardianship issues and dependency.
In the space of 24 hours, there were three whammies, saying, "Why do you even bother to TRY?"
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Friday, May 24, 2013
The Wedding Rings
Wedding rings. For some reason I always thought my ring was a reminder of my promises at the wedding.
But what I've heard from my pastor is different. My wedding ring was given to me. And it was given with a promise to me. The ring isn't a reminder of what I said I'd do. Rather, it's the reminder of what my husband promised. My wedding ring is not the symbol of my duties; it is the symbol of a promise given freely that he will love me and be faithful to me. That's gospel, not law.
But what I've heard from my pastor is different. My wedding ring was given to me. And it was given with a promise to me. The ring isn't a reminder of what I said I'd do. Rather, it's the reminder of what my husband promised. My wedding ring is not the symbol of my duties; it is the symbol of a promise given freely that he will love me and be faithful to me. That's gospel, not law.
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Huh? What Are YOU Talking About?
We were both baffled.
Expectations and assumptions -- they sure do affect communication.
A very sweet Methodist co-worker (a mom of soldiers) cheerily asked today if our church service on Sunday would be in celebration of soldiers.
I can't imagine how confused my face must have looked. "Sunday?? Soldiers?? Uh, we'll be celebrating the Feast of the Holy Trinity."
Then it was her turn to be confused. It's Memorial Day weekend. Why wouldn't we be honoring the soldiers? She wasn't negative, she certainly didn't accuse or anything, but she seemed bewildered by my answer.
"Last Sunday was Pentecost. This Sunday is Trinity. It's a high feast of the Church." My statements sounded more like questions because I thought these things went without saying.
And then a customer arrived and the conversation was cut short, as so often happens.
I'm such a misfit.
Expectations and assumptions -- they sure do affect communication.
A very sweet Methodist co-worker (a mom of soldiers) cheerily asked today if our church service on Sunday would be in celebration of soldiers.
I can't imagine how confused my face must have looked. "Sunday?? Soldiers?? Uh, we'll be celebrating the Feast of the Holy Trinity."
Then it was her turn to be confused. It's Memorial Day weekend. Why wouldn't we be honoring the soldiers? She wasn't negative, she certainly didn't accuse or anything, but she seemed bewildered by my answer.
"Last Sunday was Pentecost. This Sunday is Trinity. It's a high feast of the Church." My statements sounded more like questions because I thought these things went without saying.
And then a customer arrived and the conversation was cut short, as so often happens.
I'm such a misfit.
Monday, May 20, 2013
Swishy Skirt
Last week, on the day of dance class, I had to work. Work means wearing a dress. That day I wore something with a rather full, round skirt.
Oh my goodness! It is SO much more fun to dance in a full skirt than in jeans. The skirt flows and swishes.
I thought I was being silly about it. But when I mentioned to Gary how pretty the skirt looked, he said he'd noticed too. He said that was why he was spinning me in turns more than normal. Hee hee hee -- fun stuff!
Oh my goodness! It is SO much more fun to dance in a full skirt than in jeans. The skirt flows and swishes.
I thought I was being silly about it. But when I mentioned to Gary how pretty the skirt looked, he said he'd noticed too. He said that was why he was spinning me in turns more than normal. Hee hee hee -- fun stuff!
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Wedding Prep
Menu plans for the rehearsal dinner are in place: baked-potato bar and salad bar, with all the details excruciatingly listed on paper, anticipating my forgetfulness. Paul and Mandy said pop wasn't necessary, and the church doesn't allow alcohol, so the drinks will be coffee, iced tea, lemonade, and water. Fruit, brownies, and caramel bars for dessert. Nothing fancy.
I bought 20# of bacon on Monday. So far I've cooked-&-crumbled 11# of it. Smells good in here.
I'm trying very hard to give myself speeches that it will indeed be okay to buy lettuce already washed and cut and bagged. Right now I'm telling myself what all I'm going to do to prep dinner-for-40, but I think there may have to be some cheating (i.e., buying packages of food that merely need to be opened instead of prepared entirely from scratch).
Still need to slightly alter the dress I bought at Goodwill. Seams are ripped but not tucked to size and put back aright.
Bought the paper goods today. Again I prove that I "don't do pretty." I bought blue, square, plastic, disposable plates. Red cups. Napkins with brightly colored balloons. I doubt there will be decorations of any sort. I'm better at cooking than at beautifying. (Maybe I'll dazzle them with food so that they don't notice the lack of streamers and flowers and tablecloths??)
Still have garden and a word-processing project on which to make headway in the next few weeks.
I bought 20# of bacon on Monday. So far I've cooked-&-crumbled 11# of it. Smells good in here.
I'm trying very hard to give myself speeches that it will indeed be okay to buy lettuce already washed and cut and bagged. Right now I'm telling myself what all I'm going to do to prep dinner-for-40, but I think there may have to be some cheating (i.e., buying packages of food that merely need to be opened instead of prepared entirely from scratch).
Still need to slightly alter the dress I bought at Goodwill. Seams are ripped but not tucked to size and put back aright.
Bought the paper goods today. Again I prove that I "don't do pretty." I bought blue, square, plastic, disposable plates. Red cups. Napkins with brightly colored balloons. I doubt there will be decorations of any sort. I'm better at cooking than at beautifying. (Maybe I'll dazzle them with food so that they don't notice the lack of streamers and flowers and tablecloths??)
Still have garden and a word-processing project on which to make headway in the next few weeks.
Friday, May 17, 2013
The German Homeschool Family Seeking Asylum in U.S.
Some of you have heard about the German family who came to the United States because it's illegal to homeschool in Germany and they were opposed to enrolling their children in a public school which teaches contrary to the family's beliefs. The family overstayed their visa. It was time to go home. They didn't leave America, claiming religious persecution awaited them in Germany.
Not surprisingly, the Home School Legal Defense Association is involved.
The Inappropriate Homeschooler posted information on the case. Is this case really about the US government trying to destroy homeschoolering? Or might it be yet another case of HSLDA "helping" homeschoolers in a way that will benefit their organization, increasing membership, increasing our need to be "protected," and thus increasing their own power?
Not surprisingly, the Home School Legal Defense Association is involved.
The Inappropriate Homeschooler posted information on the case. Is this case really about the US government trying to destroy homeschoolering? Or might it be yet another case of HSLDA "helping" homeschoolers in a way that will benefit their organization, increasing membership, increasing our need to be "protected," and thus increasing their own power?
Thursday, May 16, 2013
What Loopers Means to Me
My homeschool email list brought me friends. I used to be able to leave my locale and visit them two or more times annually. Now I cannot. I miss that and continue to grieve over it even though there are wonderful friends right here close.
But there are things in life that shape you. And my in-real-life friends (the ones with whom I usually interact via our onlines discussions) have been a huge part of my life. And Lora describes it SO well.
But there are things in life that shape you. And my in-real-life friends (the ones with whom I usually interact via our onlines discussions) have been a huge part of my life. And Lora describes it SO well.
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Common Core
First it was "A Nation at Risk." Then under Pres Bush it was "outcome-based education" with nation-wide curriculum goals. Then during Clinton's term, the name was "Goals 2000." Then came the younger Bush's "No Child Left Behind." The current reincarnation of national standards is "Common Core." I'm sure the proponents of these plans think each plan is different and unique and wonderful, while the Other Guy's Plan is bad bad bad.
But all I see is the feds taking control of education. Whether the nationalized goals are excellent or wretched -- it doesn't matter. Control of education should be LOCAL.
In Indiana two moms got involved in fighting the Common Core, encouraging their state to back out of the program and say "no thank you" to the wad of cash with which the feds are attempting to bribe the states to go along with the program.
Two comments:
Got that? These moms didn't even have their kids in public school. But the school voucher system (which many conservatives are FOR) was what allowed the State to dictate curriculum to the private schools.
That's critical. It's critical to decision-making in our parochial schools, our private secular schools, and our homeschools. Taking government money is setting you up for submitting to government testing and government standards.
So conservatives are concerned with lousy results from the school system. They cry for higher standards and more control. But "more control" means putting the federal government in charge. And then ... look what we get. But because people have made up their minds that they're in favor of "higher standards" and school-choice vouchers, they continue to support programs that are costly (both in terms of children's educations and in terms of tax-dollars). And thus, the liberals and the conservatives both fight for more federal regulation of what happens day-by-day and hour-by-hour in kids' schools.
Something is wrong.
But all I see is the feds taking control of education. Whether the nationalized goals are excellent or wretched -- it doesn't matter. Control of education should be LOCAL.
In Indiana two moms got involved in fighting the Common Core, encouraging their state to back out of the program and say "no thank you" to the wad of cash with which the feds are attempting to bribe the states to go along with the program.
Two comments:
Heather Crossin and Erin Tuttle did not get involved in opposing Common Core because of anything Michelle Malkin or Glenn Beck said to rile them up, but because of what they saw happening in their own children’s Catholic school. When experts or politicians said that Common Core would not lead to a surrender of local control over curriculum, Heather and Erin knew better. (Ironically, the leverage in Indiana was Tony Bennett’s school-choice program, which made state vouchers available to religious schools, but only if they adopted state tests — which were later quietly switched from ISTEP to the untried Common Core assessments.)
Got that? These moms didn't even have their kids in public school. But the school voucher system (which many conservatives are FOR) was what allowed the State to dictate curriculum to the private schools.
That's critical. It's critical to decision-making in our parochial schools, our private secular schools, and our homeschools. Taking government money is setting you up for submitting to government testing and government standards.
So why are so many good conservatives, from Jeb Bush to Rick Snyder, supporting Common Core? Many conservatives signed on to a clever strategy that asked them to endorse, not the specific standards, but the idea of high “internationally benchmarked” national standards. It is a principle of psychological persuasion that, once you act, in however small a manner, you will feel cognitively compelled to justify your action.
So conservatives are concerned with lousy results from the school system. They cry for higher standards and more control. But "more control" means putting the federal government in charge. And then ... look what we get. But because people have made up their minds that they're in favor of "higher standards" and school-choice vouchers, they continue to support programs that are costly (both in terms of children's educations and in terms of tax-dollars). And thus, the liberals and the conservatives both fight for more federal regulation of what happens day-by-day and hour-by-hour in kids' schools.
Something is wrong.
Monday, May 13, 2013
Starting the Sit-Ups Habit
When we were kids and took the Presidential Fitness Test, there were a lot of areas in which I did not excel, and some "strengths" in which I had no strength. But sit-ups? I could do sit-ups. "How many can you do?" "How long will you give me?" I did sit-ups until they told me to stop and go to my next class. No biggie.
Decades pass. The Child-of-Strong-Stomach-Muscles becomes the woman who can only do two or three (or maybe four!) sit-ups.
So when Anthea wrote about her attempt to start some new good habits, I thought about getting into shape. Being a person who does well with lists and the Awesome Wonderful Reward of checking things off, I printed out two Don't Break the Chain calendars.
Calendar 1: Sit ups. Ten per day. Oh, the agony .... But after 10 days of daily sit-ups, it was easy to do 7, and possible to do [gasp] more than 10. So the next month's goal was twelve sit-ups. The following month's goal will be 15 sit-ups daily. Hey! This is working!
Calendar 2: Going for an exercise walk. Not working so well. If I realize at bedtime that I didn't fit in a walk, I'm not going to get dressed again and go out in the dark (and the cold -- brrrrr!) to earn my check mark. (A dozen sit-ups is easier to squeeze in at the last minute. I can see why Anthea set herself a goal of reading for just five minutes.)
Right now there are a gazillion ideas I have for habit-starting calendars. But I don't have enough space to hang 'em all. Or ... enough brain-power and will-power to obey the calendars. So for now, just two, with hopes of making habits.
Decades pass. The Child-of-Strong-Stomach-Muscles becomes the woman who can only do two or three (or maybe four!) sit-ups.
So when Anthea wrote about her attempt to start some new good habits, I thought about getting into shape. Being a person who does well with lists and the Awesome Wonderful Reward of checking things off, I printed out two Don't Break the Chain calendars.
Calendar 1: Sit ups. Ten per day. Oh, the agony .... But after 10 days of daily sit-ups, it was easy to do 7, and possible to do [gasp] more than 10. So the next month's goal was twelve sit-ups. The following month's goal will be 15 sit-ups daily. Hey! This is working!
Calendar 2: Going for an exercise walk. Not working so well. If I realize at bedtime that I didn't fit in a walk, I'm not going to get dressed again and go out in the dark (and the cold -- brrrrr!) to earn my check mark. (A dozen sit-ups is easier to squeeze in at the last minute. I can see why Anthea set herself a goal of reading for just five minutes.)
Right now there are a gazillion ideas I have for habit-starting calendars. But I don't have enough space to hang 'em all. Or ... enough brain-power and will-power to obey the calendars. So for now, just two, with hopes of making habits.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Hay
Two lawnmowers. Three workers. Total of nearly five man-hours. And the lawn is a little more than half done.
[sigh]
Moral of the story: No matter how busy we are, no matter how tired and/or ill we are, no matter how cold it is next November, the lawn must be mowed One Last Time in fall.
[sigh]
Moral of the story: No matter how busy we are, no matter how tired and/or ill we are, no matter how cold it is next November, the lawn must be mowed One Last Time in fall.
Caramel without HFCS
I was recently making Glenda's Most Evil Dessert as a thank-you treat for some of my co-workers. Of course, it never crossed my mind to buy a bag or two of caramels (which is one of the main ingredients). So Maggie and I determined to mix up some caramels right-quick. That's when we discovered we had no corn syrup either (a main ingredient in the caramels).
So I substituted honey. Y'know -- real honey. Made by bees. Instead of chemists.
Guess what? Those were darn good caramels!
So I substituted honey. Y'know -- real honey. Made by bees. Instead of chemists.
Guess what? Those were darn good caramels!
Finally, A Warm Day!
That was last weekend. This weekend we're back to closed windows, jackets outdoors, and the furnace turned on.
My friend Jenny has been vindicated once again. She says you never take off the winter bedding until the peonies bloom. But we were tired of getting so HOT under that comforter. And we were a full week into May, for cryin' out loud. The peonies weren't blooming; surely Jenny had to be wrong. I swapped out the down comforter for a thin quilt.
Jenny wasn't wrong. We slept comfortably for two nights without the down comforter. Now it's cold again.
But at least it is NOT snowing! Whew!
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Murder Mystery
 |
| Jasmoor, the Arabian Princess |
Costume cobbled together from
a) the granddaughters' dress-up box
b) the tiara I bought for Anthea's International Tiara Day
c) old clothes that weren't even fit for giving to Goodwill
d) remnants from JoAnn Fabric's moving sale
Wednesday, May 08, 2013
Reading Challenge: Update
"A Little Help from My Friends"
Reading Challenge
Get a list of book suggestions from your friends. From those suggestions choose between five and ten books that you will read in 2013. Make a list of the books that you will read and a few alternates.
And the other instructions can be found on Jane's site.
My list:
Anne of Green Gables by L. M. Montgomery January 24
Anne of Avonlea (these two with Maggie) February 24
Mara, Daughter of the Nile by Eloise Jarvis McGraw
Love Divine by Alan Kornacki
Mitford's Out to Canaan by Jan Karon
Christ Have Mercy by Matt Harrison April 7
The list that someone else made for me:
Lutheran Catechesis by Bender Dec 27, 2012
Old Testament Catechesis by Bender March 1
New Testament Catechesis by Bender
Bible Stories for Daily Prayer by Fabrizius
Alternates:
Kristin Lavransdatter by Sigrid Undset
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee May 8
Luther, the Reformer by James Kittelson
The Right to Be Wrong by Seamus Hasson
On Being a Theologian of the Cross by Forde
Luther on Vocation by Wingren
Additional books (not on the original list):
A Long Way from Chicago by R Peck audio book April 16
A Year Down Yonder by Richard Peck audio book April 18
And She Was a Christian: Why Do Believers
Commit Suicide by Peter Preus May 7
Wow: the count thus far is 5 paper books, 2 audio books, and 2 for proofreading. That's more than a year's worth in normal-booktime. Even if I don't read anything else for the rest of the year, I'm going to claim (??) that I met my goal. Hey, I read five books!
Reading Challenge
Get a list of book suggestions from your friends. From those suggestions choose between five and ten books that you will read in 2013. Make a list of the books that you will read and a few alternates.
And the other instructions can be found on Jane's site.
My list:
Mara, Daughter of the Nile by Eloise Jarvis McGraw
Love Divine by Alan Kornacki
Mitford's Out to Canaan by Jan Karon
The list that someone else made for me:
New Testament Catechesis by Bender
Bible Stories for Daily Prayer by Fabrizius
Alternates:
Kristin Lavransdatter by Sigrid Undset
Luther, the Reformer by James Kittelson
The Right to Be Wrong by Seamus Hasson
On Being a Theologian of the Cross by Forde
Luther on Vocation by Wingren
Additional books (not on the original list):
Commit Suicide by Peter Preus
Wow: the count thus far is 5 paper books, 2 audio books, and 2 for proofreading. That's more than a year's worth in normal-booktime. Even if I don't read anything else for the rest of the year, I'm going to claim (??) that I met my goal. Hey, I read five books!
Saturday, May 04, 2013
But What About Eating Bacon?
It doesn't matter whether the subject is women's ordination or homosexuality or abortion. Often, when a Christian brings up, "The Bible says ..." the rejoinder will be, "But the Bible has all these dietary rules. And you eat bacon. And you eat shrimp and crab. See? You don't really care what the Bible says."
And that's supposed to be the proof that everything scriptural can be jettisoned.
Well, for just a moment, let's set aside the lengthier discussions of moral law and natural law as over against dietary law. Let's set aside the whole thing about Christ being the fulfillment of the law, and how the law shows us what love is, and why God made those rules about what the Jews were to avoid eating.
For just a moment, let's look at Acts 11, where God Himself tells Peter in a vision to eat the unclean animals. So God Himself gave the go-ahead to set aside the Old Testament's dietary laws. We're eating bacon-wrapped lobster tail not because we decided to set aside those laws, but because God said to.
Footnote 1: Yes, I realize that's not the main point of Acts 11.
Footnote 2: Wouldn't it be great to have a grocery budget that allowed for bacon-wrapped lobster tails periodically? Mmmmm.
And that's supposed to be the proof that everything scriptural can be jettisoned.
Well, for just a moment, let's set aside the lengthier discussions of moral law and natural law as over against dietary law. Let's set aside the whole thing about Christ being the fulfillment of the law, and how the law shows us what love is, and why God made those rules about what the Jews were to avoid eating.
For just a moment, let's look at Acts 11, where God Himself tells Peter in a vision to eat the unclean animals. So God Himself gave the go-ahead to set aside the Old Testament's dietary laws. We're eating bacon-wrapped lobster tail not because we decided to set aside those laws, but because God said to.
Footnote 1: Yes, I realize that's not the main point of Acts 11.
Footnote 2: Wouldn't it be great to have a grocery budget that allowed for bacon-wrapped lobster tails periodically? Mmmmm.
Friday, May 03, 2013
Measuring Cups
When all the contents of a house have to GO [due to down-sizing or moving to a nursing home or because of death] ... the stuff has to go someplace. To grandkids? To a resale shop? To the dump?
What about pictures and once-treasured possessions? What happens when the next generations don't cherish the things I cherish? What will become of those items? And should it matter?
A bunch of stuff is finding its way into our home these days. I can't cherish everything that could arrive here from grandparents, parents, and in-laws. What's odd is the things that I do enjoy.
For all my adult life, I have owned one set of measuring cups and one set of measuring spoons. For someone who cooks and bakes from scratch, that's been a little inconvenient. Now I have my mother-in-law's metal measuring cups and spoons. If my 1-cup measure is floury from baking bread, I have another cup [gasp] to measure sugar for kombucha. Whoa -- this is nice.
What about pictures and once-treasured possessions? What happens when the next generations don't cherish the things I cherish? What will become of those items? And should it matter?
A bunch of stuff is finding its way into our home these days. I can't cherish everything that could arrive here from grandparents, parents, and in-laws. What's odd is the things that I do enjoy.
For all my adult life, I have owned one set of measuring cups and one set of measuring spoons. For someone who cooks and bakes from scratch, that's been a little inconvenient. Now I have my mother-in-law's metal measuring cups and spoons. If my 1-cup measure is floury from baking bread, I have another cup [gasp] to measure sugar for kombucha. Whoa -- this is nice.
Thursday, May 02, 2013
The Law Is the Final Word
At least, it is according to almost everybody in the whole wide world.
Other religions teach that works are how we please the god or how we gain heaven or nirvana or whatever. Be good; get a reward. When I was having a conversation with a Jehovah's Witness about eating turkey on Thanksgiving and celebrating birthdays, that's what it came down to: "follow the rules, get a blessing from god."
Other Christian denominations too teach the same thing. Yes, they admit that the Lord (the eternal God of the promise of salvation, the God who is triune and whose nature is love) helps us be good. And yes, they admit that the Lord forgives our screw-ups for when we're not good. But the point of religion is still to Be Good. That's essentially what the Roman Catholic's purgatory and the Eastern Orthodox's theosis end up being about. (Of course, most of them would deny it.) And it's what most Protestants teach. (And I'm sure they too would deny it. And that's a good thing; it means their rational minds are conflicted against the saving faith worked in them by the Holy Spirit.)
It's even a controversy among Lutherans. While no Lutheran would disagree with the necessity for good works, and while no Lutheran would disagree with the truth that we are saved by God's grace in Christ through no merit of our own, there are still many who (somehow) come off sounding like the point of the Gospel/forgiveness is to make us able to do a better job of following the Law.
In Bible class last Sunday we were discussing Luke 5. The Pharisees and teachers of the law had come from all over the place, from Galilee, but also from way down in Judea and from Jerusalem. They wanted to check out this Jesus dude and the stories they'd been hearing. And when he forgave the sins of the paralyzed man, they were hacked off. "Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
Pastor had other points to make, but for the most part, I got lost, thinking and thinking about why the legalists were there and why they were perturbed. We live in a [ahem] diverse society today. Everybody thinks they should be able to do whatever they want. Everybody should be able to think whatever they want. Children grow up and reject what was imparted to them.
SO ... what does it hurt anybody for Christians to believe in grace?
Why do people fuss about it?
Okay, okay, IF we purportedly believe in grace and then live in sin that hurts other people, then I can understand people saying, "Whoa, hold up! Your so-called freedom in the Gospel is damaging me." And that would be valid. But if the law is being preached rightly, and the gospel is forgiving sinners, then licentiousness can result only through rejection of true doctrine.
So why the objection to people trusting in grace?
Atheists object. People of other religions object. And even Christians want to convert other Christians to a belief that they have to Do SOMEthing to be real Christians.
If you don't want to trust only in God's grace in Jesus' blood shed to save you, if you want to depend to some extent on your own works, I can't change your heart. But what skin is it off your nose if I believe that?
I don't understand.
Other religions teach that works are how we please the god or how we gain heaven or nirvana or whatever. Be good; get a reward. When I was having a conversation with a Jehovah's Witness about eating turkey on Thanksgiving and celebrating birthdays, that's what it came down to: "follow the rules, get a blessing from god."
Other Christian denominations too teach the same thing. Yes, they admit that the Lord (the eternal God of the promise of salvation, the God who is triune and whose nature is love) helps us be good. And yes, they admit that the Lord forgives our screw-ups for when we're not good. But the point of religion is still to Be Good. That's essentially what the Roman Catholic's purgatory and the Eastern Orthodox's theosis end up being about. (Of course, most of them would deny it.) And it's what most Protestants teach. (And I'm sure they too would deny it. And that's a good thing; it means their rational minds are conflicted against the saving faith worked in them by the Holy Spirit.)
It's even a controversy among Lutherans. While no Lutheran would disagree with the necessity for good works, and while no Lutheran would disagree with the truth that we are saved by God's grace in Christ through no merit of our own, there are still many who (somehow) come off sounding like the point of the Gospel/forgiveness is to make us able to do a better job of following the Law.
In Bible class last Sunday we were discussing Luke 5. The Pharisees and teachers of the law had come from all over the place, from Galilee, but also from way down in Judea and from Jerusalem. They wanted to check out this Jesus dude and the stories they'd been hearing. And when he forgave the sins of the paralyzed man, they were hacked off. "Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
Pastor had other points to make, but for the most part, I got lost, thinking and thinking about why the legalists were there and why they were perturbed. We live in a [ahem] diverse society today. Everybody thinks they should be able to do whatever they want. Everybody should be able to think whatever they want. Children grow up and reject what was imparted to them.
SO ... what does it hurt anybody for Christians to believe in grace?
Why do people fuss about it?
Okay, okay, IF we purportedly believe in grace and then live in sin that hurts other people, then I can understand people saying, "Whoa, hold up! Your so-called freedom in the Gospel is damaging me." And that would be valid. But if the law is being preached rightly, and the gospel is forgiving sinners, then licentiousness can result only through rejection of true doctrine.
So why the objection to people trusting in grace?
Atheists object. People of other religions object. And even Christians want to convert other Christians to a belief that they have to Do SOMEthing to be real Christians.
If you don't want to trust only in God's grace in Jesus' blood shed to save you, if you want to depend to some extent on your own works, I can't change your heart. But what skin is it off your nose if I believe that?
I don't understand.
Who's Hiding in the Closet?
So a gay basketball player comes out of the closet and is lauded for it. In the wake of the announcement, a sports analyst mentions that the Bible says homosexuality is a sin as is any sexual activity outside of marriage. Oh my goodness -- the horrors of what he said! The station apologizes. The sports analyst is forced to apologize.
And then the news release about how the government is looking into enforcing anti-proselytizing regulations, thus forbidding soldiers from telling others about their faith, even to the point of being able to court-martial them.
Wow.
And then the news release about how the government is looking into enforcing anti-proselytizing regulations, thus forbidding soldiers from telling others about their faith, even to the point of being able to court-martial them.
Wow.
Wednesday, May 01, 2013
Do Your Sins Pile Up?
Some Christians think that we commit sins, and then we go to confession or go to church or go to the Lord's Supper, and [zap] Jesus wipes away our sins. And then we go about life, oops, here-a-sin, there-a-sin, everywhere-a-sin-sin. So we're dirtied up, and we have to go to church to be cleaned up again, ... and the cycle repeats itself.
Pastor often tells us, "NO, that's not what it is." If it were, that would mean our confessing was the thing meriting God's forgiveness. Also it would be denying original sin, as if there were days (or hours) (or moments) when we could be spiffied-up and sin-free. Also it would mean we could have no certainty about our salvation because we could never know whether we'd [oops] sin and then die before having a chance to Get It Fixed At Church (or at least in our personal verbal prayers). Pastor likes to use an example from a M*A*S*H episode, where Frank Burns is jumping back and forth across the threshold of the tent's door, chanting, "I'm in. I'm out. I'm in. I'm out." Being in God's grace is not like that; it's not like we're covered by His forgiveness, and then are out, and then are back in after the absolution in the Divine Service, and then back out again next time we lose our temper.
Hearing "I forgive you all your sins" does not mean a pile of sins is erased, brought down to zero-level, before we start piling up sins again. No. Because of Jesus' blood shed on the cross, God sees utter perfection, holiness, righteousness, purity. Going to confession or going to the Lord's Supper doesn't change our status in God's eyes. What absolution does is to reorient our blind eyes from our navel-gazing, and open our eyes to see ourselves as God sees us, as He declares us to be.
Pastor often tells us, "NO, that's not what it is." If it were, that would mean our confessing was the thing meriting God's forgiveness. Also it would be denying original sin, as if there were days (or hours) (or moments) when we could be spiffied-up and sin-free. Also it would mean we could have no certainty about our salvation because we could never know whether we'd [oops] sin and then die before having a chance to Get It Fixed At Church (or at least in our personal verbal prayers). Pastor likes to use an example from a M*A*S*H episode, where Frank Burns is jumping back and forth across the threshold of the tent's door, chanting, "I'm in. I'm out. I'm in. I'm out." Being in God's grace is not like that; it's not like we're covered by His forgiveness, and then are out, and then are back in after the absolution in the Divine Service, and then back out again next time we lose our temper.
Hearing "I forgive you all your sins" does not mean a pile of sins is erased, brought down to zero-level, before we start piling up sins again. No. Because of Jesus' blood shed on the cross, God sees utter perfection, holiness, righteousness, purity. Going to confession or going to the Lord's Supper doesn't change our status in God's eyes. What absolution does is to reorient our blind eyes from our navel-gazing, and open our eyes to see ourselves as God sees us, as He declares us to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
