Bow Down Before God

We have trouble with God. What shall we make of his invisibility, eternality, and the vast reaches of his power (1 Timothy 6:16)? His nature is hard to fathom. And we have so little experience of him – our range of perception is dominated by things and human quirks with nothing divine to speak of (John 12:29). And then there is all the destruction attributed to him (Luke 13:3) – that Flood for starters (Genesis 7:23), along with wars, famines, and diseases (Ezekiel 14:21). Why does he allow for all of this misery to afflict us? Finally, we even stumble over his love, which while wonderful, is distributed so unevenly throughout the world (1 John 4:16, Mark 1:39). Why does he heal just some cancer patients?  

In Martin Luther’s greatest book, The Bondage of the Will (1525), he tried to put an end to our questioning. Stop imagining “the Living God,” he wrote, “to be nothing but a kind of shallow and ignorant ranter declaiming from some platform, whose words you can if you wish interpret in any direction you like” (Luther’s Works 33:60). Bow down before him instead (Psalm 99:5, Ephesians 3:14). That’s how your questions will fade away. And that’s how the church will begin its reformation on Sunday, October 25 – by bowing down before God.  —Pastor Marshall

PRESIDENT'S REPORT.... by Cary Natiello

Last month I reported that we continued on solid financial footing.  Our year-to-date envelope giving through July was about $156,000 against a budget target of about $135,600 (a $21,000 surplus).  We were exceeding our budgeted weekly envelope giving target by about $700 week.

     However, in August our envelope giving dropped.  In August, our envelope giving was a total of $16,500 against a budget of $22,600.  In August our envelope giving was an average of only $3,300 week (note: there were 5 Sundays in August). 

     Unfortunately, at the time of writing this report, September giving continued the downward trend.  The average giving for the first two weeks in September was also about $3,300 week (adjusted).

     If this lower level of average weekly giving were to continue throughout the remaining Sundays in this calendar year, we would end the year slightly below our envelope giving target for the full year.  Through August we were about $14,500 ahead of target, but with the last seven Sundays averaging well below our average weekly giving through July, David King, our treasurer, projects that if this recent pattern of giving continues through the end of year we'd run about $19,000 below our target giving for the last 15 weeks of the year, ending the year slightly below our giving target for the full year.  If this scenario were to occur, we could be looking at potential cuts to the 2021 budget in light of the changed giving pattern.

     During these unprecedented times it may be difficult to continue to support our church at our usual giving level.  So much uncertainty, chaos, and dismay is turning our world upside down.  It seems like things are not getting better, but instead, only worse.  I share the information above with the intent of keeping our congregation informed.  I know we all are doing our part to maintain our church for when we can open our doors again.  Thank you for your continued support of our staff and maintaining our beautiful church.

     At the last council meeting we discussed our five criteria for resuming in-person worship services.  The consensus of the council was that there continues to be too much uncertainty if COVID-19 is coming under control, especially with so many (especially students) ignoring safety protocols.  We do feel that the CDC and local health officials are coming to consensus on what precautionary measures need to be taken for when we resume in-person worship services so the council will resume work on establishing and refining our reopening guidelines.

     Please remember to return your pledge cards by NOVEMBER 6, 2020.  The church council will begin looking at our 2021 budget soon.  Our 2020 giving will play a large part of setting that budget.  Also, our congregations’ pledge card giving tally will be helpful in setting our 2021 budget.

Living for Others

“As you, Lord, have lived for others, so may we for others live.  Freely have your gifts been granted; freely may your servants give.  Yours the gold and yours the silver, yours the wealth of land and sea; we but stewards of your bounty held in solemn trust will be.” –Verse 2, Son of God, Eternal Savior, LBW 364

The hymn Son of God, Eternal Savior is always both simultaneously challenging and inspiring.  The third stanza, “Yours the gold and yours the silver, yours the wealth of land and sea” is a challenging reminder that while we think we are in control of, owners of, and creators of our own wealth, that thinking is wrong – God is the creator of our wealth, which He freely gives to us.  This is particularly challenging in our current time in the midst of the COVID-19 global pandemic.  Not only have we been vividly reminded that we are not in control of our own health, we’re also reminded that we’re not in control of our own ability to generate an income and create wealth.  Admitting our own lack of control is not an easy task, but we are called in the hymn to do just that, which is further echoed in Psalm 24: “The earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it, the world and those who live in it; for he has founded it on the seas, and established it on the rivers.” –Psalm 24:1-2, NRSV

The final stanza of the hymn further instructs us what we are to do with the wealth that God has blessed us with, and what our role is with regard to our money and property – “we but stewards of your bounty held in solemn trust will be.”  God gives us money and wealth as his bounty, that we would be stewards over it, and that we would hold and use it in trust for God’s purposes in the world.

As you think about your giving to the church and to extended ministries and other charities, think about the words of this wonderful hymn that both challenges us and our conception of where our wealth comes from and who creates it, and tells us that as stewards of the gifts God gives us, we should use those gifts to glorify Him, further His purposes on earth, and not waste the freely given gifts of God on things not worthy of the great gift He daily gives to us.

      ‒David King, Church Council

The Body

“I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”

(Psalm 139:14)

“You don’t know how the body is formed in the mother’s womb.”

(Ecclesiastes 11:5)

The Tongue

“The tongue is a muscle, but quite unlike any other. For one thing, it is exquisitely sensitive – think how adroitly you pick out something in your food that shouldn’t be there, like a tiny piece of eggshell or grain of sand – and intimately involved in vital activities like speech articulation and tasting food. When you eat, the tongue darts about like a nervous host at a cocktail party, checking the taste and shape of every morel in preparation for dispatching it onwards to the gullet…. [The taste buds on the tongue] are among the most regenerative of all cells in the body and are replaced every ten days…. We have about ten thousand taste buds, most distributed around the tongue, except in the very middle, where there are none at all…. Taste receptors have also been found in the heart, the lungs, and even the testicles. No one knows quite what they are doing there…. It is generally supposed that taste receptors… help us find energy-rich foods (like sweet, ripe fruits) and to avoid dangerous ones. But it must also be said that they don’t always fulfill either role terribly well…. We have about ten thousand taste receptors, but we actually have more pain and other somatosensory receptors than taste receptors in our mouths. Because they exist side by side on the tongue, we sometimes mix them up…. Incidentally, we have pain detectors not only in the mouth but also in the eyes, anus, and vagina, which is why spicy foods can cause discomfort there…. It is nearly always wrong to talk about how food tastes, though of course we all do. What we appreciate when we eat is flavor, which is taste plus smell. Smell is said to account for at least 70 percent of flavor, and maybe even as much as 90 percent.”

[Bill Bryson, The Body: A Guide to Occupants (2019) pp. 101, 102, 103, 105, 106.]

Luther on Samson

By Pastor Marshall

The blinded and defeated Samson is punished by his enemies, the Philistines, to grind at the millstone in prison (Judge 16.21). Luther calls this punishment “slavery” (Luther’s Works 17:147). This servile low point is required before Samson is able to serve God once again with great glory and might. But for now it is startling – “overnight a man with the highest conceivable calling, the divinely commissioned agent of deliverance for Israel, is cast down to the lowest position imaginable: grinding flour for others in prison” (Trent C. Butler, Judges, 2009, p. 352). Against this devastation Luther admonishes – “rouse yourself. Do not give in to evil, but go forth more boldly against them. Hold on. Do not be disheartened either by contempt or ingratitude within or by agitation and raging without…. We should not be discouraged when we look at present circumstances that disturb us, but we should much rather look at [God’s] promises…. He is the kind of king who will have success, steadfastness, and victory – if not in this place and time, then at another time and place” (LW 12:220–21). And so the Christian alone is able to say – “I am a reproach to all; I am not. I am poor; I am not” (LW 16:307).  How about that?

The Identity Crisis in

Lutheran Higher Education

by Jane L. Harty

Lutheran Higher Education (LHE) is going through a “KFC phase.” What used to be Kentucky Fried Chicken (and was really good southern-fried chicken decades ago!) had to have its name legally changed to “KFC” because the chicken had been too genetically altered to call it “chicken” anymore (credit to the Rev. Philip Nesvig for this apt metaphor). This is based on my observation of the Lutheran church, which has become increasingly balkanized into various synods and off-shoots. Those divisions have trickled down into Lutheran universities and colleges including Pacific Lutheran University (PLU) where I served as faculty for over 40 years. Faculty there are widely divergent in their visions of LHE. I would not say that LHE has completely lost its identity, rather that its identity has been marginalized by the Lutheran church and the church affiliated universities themselves.

       I asked the question “where’s the chicken? “at a PLU faculty seminar a few months before I was terminated in 2019. It was made clear at our seminar that study of the Bible, as Luther himself held up, as well as the Lutheran Confessions, was indeed being taught at PLU, in addition to the long-treasured fields of study that mark a strong liberal arts education. What was not clear was how Lutheran doctrine from the 16th century continues to be taught—is it only critically evaluated, or is it also supportive of our Lutheran theological heritage? If the teaching is only critical of Lutheranism, that would reflect the deep malaise in the Lutheran church today. If its identity as a Lutheran university holds up the highly valued principle of academic freedom, then it must at least offer (not necessarily require) the full range and history of Lutheran teachings without bias. In my own field of Music, a biased parallel would be offering the study of the music of Bach, but only in order to criticize it in comparison to new music of the modern era. It was not clear to me from our seminar that we, as a faculty, honor that Lutheran heritage, and indeed there were even questions about what it actually is. However, there did seem to be curiosity about it!

Our faculty seminar left me with the understanding that PLU faculty were not willing to include both the Lutheran canon (from the 16th century) as well as new interpretations of Lutheranism, allowing students to learn the full history and range of the tradition and find for themselves what is meaningful to them. For me the Lutheran canon would include exploration of the historical documents: the Lutheran Confessions, the historical heresies determined by the larger Church and also condemned by Luther, as well as the controversial writings by Luther, whom Lutherans have recognized as “our most eminent teacher” (The Book of Concord, ed. Tappert, 1959, p. 576). (For new views of Lutheranism, see Stand Boldly: Lutheran Theology Faces the Postmodern World, ed. Eric Trozzo, 2009; and Engaging Luther: A (New) Theological Assessment, ed. Olli-Pekka Vainio, 2010.)

In the faculty seminar we touched on Luther’s criticism of Judaism (was it anti-Semitic or anti-Judaism?); the Peasant’s Rebellion (was it authoritarian or critical only of armed insurrection?); and his writings on women, marriage and family (was he opposed to or supportive of the leadership of women, both inside and outside of the home?). What I observed was resistance to examining these controversies, and a quick jump to dismissal of 16th century thought as being irrelevant, patriarchal, and racist. What it said to me was that faculty in Lutheran higher education may well be afraid of our history, only including it to the extent that students have limited exposure to it, denying them the training of their own critical learning skills. It is fraught with the problem of academic repression. 

Sydney Ahlstrom’s essay, “What’s Lutheran about Higher Education? – A Critique” (What’s Lutheran About High Education? ed. Robert L. Anderson, 1974), has been most helpful to me, and I thank the faculty seminar leaders for including it. The focus of our discussion was on Luther’s “remarkable openness to the investigative spirit” (Ahlstrom) and his emphasis on Critical Thinking. This was brought up in the shocking context of Luther’s own disdain for the universities because they did not teach Christian doctrine (Luther’s Works 44:207), and the widespread consensus that he would never be hired in a modern university because his hierarchical approach was too Catholic (Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil, 1989, pp. 313–14). Ahlstrom’s essay begins with a discussion of the three major currents in LHE, the third being Critical Thinking. We did not discuss the first two: the Scholastic or Orthodox current, and the Pietistic. The faculty seminar leaders were not interested – which questions the genuineness of their intellectual curiosity.

The Scholastic or Orthodox tradition arose in the confessional debates of the 16th century and rested on a return to and confidence in two sources: the Biblical text and Aristotelian metaphysics. What is deeply significant here is Luther’s return to primary sources in order to both clarify doctrine and to translate those sources so that people could understand them (LW 40:241, 43:281). This was his life’s work as an academic, and that scholarship has rarely been matched in human history. It is one of the reasons why he was considered at the dawn of the 3rd millennium as one of the five greatest thinkers (and only theologian) over the last thousand years. That huge body of academic work cannot be overlooked or simply moved into storage in a very large library archive, especially at our Lutheran colleges and universities!

The Pietistic tradition – the other strain left out in the seminar I attended –  emphasized the inner life of the Christian soul, and was not focused on doing good works (LW 22:197, 30:159, 245, 268, 79:233). Since it is necessarily subjective, this current of Lutheranism has been in a continual battle with rationalism and the Enlightenment in which Luther himself was embroiled. His emphasis on the individual soul’s life with God stands at the center of his thought and his deep and abiding care for humanity, in spite of his sometimes rude and outspoken character.

I was grateful for the opportunity to participate in this LHE faculty seminar at PLU and to interface with colleagues from other areas of study about the significance of Lutheran higher education. It was clear that we had different points-of-view about what that meant. The Lutheran value of critical inquiry, as well as the widely held principle of academic freedom was at stake here. I hope that our students will finally be allowed into, and encouraged to take up, this debate, rather than being confined to only a 21st century “fake chicken” point-of-view of Lutheranism.

Dr. Harty joined First Lutheran Church of West Seattle in 1979. She sings in the choir and currently serves on the Church Council and as an Assisting Minister. She and Pastor Marshall celebrated their forty-eighth wedding anniversary on August 1, 2020.

Reformation Sunday

Sunday, October 25, 2020

Online worship  -  www.flcws.org

HOME COMMUNION:  Are you interested in distributing Holy Communion in your home?  If so, please call 206-935-6530 or email Pastor Marshall deogloria@foxinternet.com to make arrangements.  If you make the arrangements you can pick your communion packet up from church on Saturday’s from 10:00 am to 2:00 pm, or Pastor Marshall can deliver communion to your home.

tHURSday Evening Bible Class is being offered 7:30-9:30 pm, via ZOOM online.  If you are interested in joining this class email Pastor Marshall at deogloria@foxinternet.com and he will send you a link. .

“WITH THE MIND” book club (A Children’s Bible: A Novel (2020) by Lydia Millet ) is planned for Sunday, October 25th, at 3:30 pm.

Philippians

The Apostle Saint Paul

“Being found in human form, Christ Jesus

humbled himself and became obedient

unto death, even death on a cross.”

(2:8)

by Pastor Marshall

According to Luther, this verse shows that Christ allowed himself to be “scourged, crucified, and killed,” in order to make it look like there was “no greatness, no power, no majesty there.” That’s because in the “realm of faith He wants to be small” (Luther’s Works 57:35, 36). But that smallness is “only a transition, the way and means through which [Christ comes] to the Father.” Then “Christ will no longer be small, but will become as great and all-powerful as [the Father] is and will rule and reign with Him eternally” (LW 77:360).

When we believe this about Jesus, then his crucifixion saves us. But, Luther goes on to say, Jesus “certainly did not do all of that because we were worthy of it or had deserved it, for who could be worthy of such service from such a person? Rather, He did all of that because He was obedient to the Father. [This] opens up heaven… and makes room for us to see the abundance of the divine majesty and to gaze on the inexpressibly gracious will and love of the Father’s heart toward us, so that we would feel that God from eternity has been pleased with what Christ… would do and now has done for us. Whose heart does not melt for joy at this?” (LW 76:422). Luther thought that in order for our hearts to melt, we should carefully consider the price Christ paid in his suffering and death, for when we do, then all of our works and merits, we would “curse, defile, spit upon, and damn.” For indeed, we cannot “placate God” with our efforts, for “He cannot be placated except by this immense, infinite price, the death and the blood of the Son of God, one drop of which is more precious than all creation” (LW 26:175–76).

But some think Luther is wrong about placating God. They argue that God “does not need to be appeased in order to be made merciful. He is already merciful…. [Therefore it is a] misguided idea that God must first satisfy his wrath before he can exercise his mercy [since it] has no basis in Holy Scripture” (George Hunsinger, Philippians, 2020, p. 186). Luther disagrees however. God’s wrath is “no joke” he argues (LW 28:264). If it isn’t settled, it will go on raging against us – as in Matthew 21:41, Luke 13:3, and Romans 2:5. Only the cross saves us from the wrath of God (Romans 5:9). God punishes Christ for the sin we’ve committed – instead of us. Only by nailing those sins to the cross are they canceled out (Colossians 2:14). For Luther “God cannot and will not look kindly on sin, but His wrath remains over sin eternally and irrevocably. For this reason, a payment must take place which would make restitution for sin, take God’s wrath upon itself, make satisfaction, and pay, and thus take away and cancel sin” (LW 57:283). “Why else did he die, except to pay for our sins and to purchase grace for us so that we might despair of ourselves and our works, placing no trust in them, so that we might, with courageous defiance, look only to Christ, and firmly believe that he is the man whom God beholds in our stead and for the sake of his sole merits forgives us our sins, deigns to look upon us with favor, and grants us eternal life. That is the Christian faith” (LW 52:253, 76:164).

     This passage “stands in the church’s Scriptures…. as a judgment upon the kind of triumphalism that abandons the path of service and obedience” (Fred Craddock, Philippians, 1985, p. 43). Thank God that it has been so heavily used “at church services over the centuries…. What the Philippians wrote to proclaim Christ in their Roman world has continued to shape preaching, hymnody, Christology, and Christian life” (John Reumann, Philippians, 2008, p. 377).

Psalm 50:12 

Monthly Home Bible Study, October 2020, Number 332

The Reverend Ronald F. Marshall

Along with our other regular study of Scripture, let us join as a congregation in this home study. We will study alone then talk informally about the assigned verses together as we have opportunity. In this way we can “gather together around the Word” even though physically we will not be getting together (Acts 13.44). (This study uses the RSV translation.)

     We need to support each other in this difficult project. In 1851 Kierkegaard wrote that the Bible is “an extremely dangerous book.... [because] it is an imperious book... – it takes the whole man and may suddenly and radically change... life on a prodigious scale” (For Self-Examination). And in 1967 Thomas Merton wrote that “we all instinctively know that it is dangerous to become involved in the Bible” (Opening the Bible). Indeed this word “kills” us (Hosea 6.5) because we are “a rebellious people” (Isaiah 30.9)! As Lutherans, however, we are still to “abide in the womb of the Word” (Luther's Works 17.93) by constantly “ruminating on the Word” (LW 30.219) so that we may “become like the Word” (LW 29.155) by thinking “in the way Scripture does” (LW 25.261). Before you study then, pray: “Blessed Lord, who caused all Holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in Our Savior Jesus Christ. Amen” (quoted in R. F. Marshall, Making A New World: How Lutherans Read the Bible, 2003, p. 12). And don’t give up, for as Luther said, we “have in Scripture enough to study for all eternity” (LW 75:422)!

Week I. Read Psalm 50.12 noting the line I would not tell you. Why is that? On this read Acts 17.25 noting the words needed, gives and everything. Do you then believe that God needs nothing from us? On this note the word almighty in Revelation 1.8 – translated as Omnipotens in the old Latin Bible. If God has enough power to do all things for himself, why would he need us for anything? Regarding this read Isaiah 43.21 noting the word praise we were made to return to God. Does God need us at least for that? Martin Luther didn’t think so (Luther’s Works 68:188, 75:197, 76:129, 79:90). According to him, we return praise to God for what he has done for us so that we do not “cling” to what we’ve received from him. It’s for us, not for him, that we sing praise to him. Remember Luke 19.40 about stones praising Christ if no one else did. Well if he doesn’t need us, does this verse mean that he needs stones? On this read Colossians 1.16 noting the phrase before all things. Because God was not deficient before anything was made, he doesn’t need stones or anything else for that matter.  

Week II. Read again Psalm 50.12 noting the same line I would not tell you. How does that make you feel? If God doesn’t need you, do you feel worthless? On this read Luke 17.10 noting the term worthless servants. Does that seem unnecessarily severe? In addition note James 4.17 and the line you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Read also Psalm 22.6 noting the line I am a worm and no man. Add in this line from Psalm 39.5 my lifetime is nothing in thy sight, and the line you are nothing and your work is nought from Isaiah 41.24. What is our value, then? On this read the line so neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything but only God who gives the growth in 1 Corinthians 3.7. Note that this lack of value doesn’t erase calling us fellow workers with God in 1 Corinthians 3.9. Do we then have something worth contributing, after all? Note the end of that verse where it says we are the field or building where God does all of the work. Note the similarity to the word temple in 1 Corinthians 6.19. But the next verse add this line so glorify God in your body. I Corinthians 6.18 says that we do this by shunning fornication with prostitutes. Is that something we can do? But on this read Romans 9.21 noting that it is God who makes us for one use or another.

Week III. Reread Psalm 50.12 noting that line I would not tell you again. Where does that leave us then? Read 1 Corinthians 1.9 noting the brief line God is faithful. Is that enough for us? Matthew 10.31 says you are of more value than many sparrows. But what can they do to build a better society – something we wished God needed us to help him with? Why aren’t we praised for building cities? On this read Genesis 11.4 noting how building and making a name for oneself go together. Note also Cain building a city in Genesis 4.17. And the cursed Canaan (Genesis 9:25–27) also spreads abroad in Genesis 10.18–19. Building cities and the wealth required to do so are corrupting activities according to Matthew 19.24. They make us enemies of God according to James 4.4. That’s because Mark 7.20–23 says that what we do and what comes out of us is defilement. Note Isaiah 59.2 on how God’s holiness doesn’t need our defiled or wicked contributions.

Week IV. Read Psalm 50.12 one last time noting the same line I would not tell you. Why doesn’t God need us? On this read John 5.26 noting that God has life in himself. Why is God like that? Note Romans 16.26 that he is the eternal God. Note also in Isaiah 55.8–9 that his ways and thoughts are so far superior to ours. Isaiah 26.4 even says God is an everlasting Rock – something never said of us. So does that settle it? If not, what’s missing?

A Treasury of Prayers

Dear Lord, teach me to stand more boldly on your side, to face the world and all my adversaries more courageously, and not to let myself be dismayed by any storm of temptation, may my eyes be steadfastly fixed on you in fearless faith; may I trust you to keep me, save me, and bring me through by your grace. In the name of Jesus I pray. Amen.

                                                  [For All the Saints I:262, altered]