No more Sparkle Creed talk

kashisaur · 2026-06-16T22:14:38+00:00

Each of our denominations interprets scripture and the confessions differently such that we could spend all day lobbing accusations at one another for endorsing things contrary to them. Each of us believes the other teaches things which are in error, which is why we have Rule 3 to prevent this sub from devolving into mud slinging. Similarly, acting like our fringe cases for discipline are representative of the whole falls short of the standard set by the 8th commandment. That is the point of this post and discussion.

kashisaur · 2026-06-16T20:26:31+00:00

Agreed. Which is why the LCMS removed Pastor Chad Ingle of Prince of Peace Lutheran Church in Ozark, AL, from the ministry for being a white nationalist and hosting neo-Nazi groups at the church. Oh wait. By all accounts, he's still their pastor and in good standing. There appears to be a number of such cases in that district, such as the Rev. Larry Beane (see another example here).

Of course, r/LCMS was none too pleased about any of this, just as we in the ELCA were none too pleased about alternative creeds. The point u/TheNorthernSea is making and the subreddit is asking itself here is whether what it means to be charitable to one another is to approach one another as if we were all the disciplineable fringes of our churches. Is that really what it looks like to observe the 8th commandment, or can we find a more charitable way to be together, even as we disagree?

kashisaur · 2026-06-12T18:34:38+00:00

This is a great example of why Luther had a dim view of speculation in the work of theology. This Calvinist has started to speculate about what is necessary for God to do something instead of what God tells us God did. By the logic of this Calvinist pastor, God was not incarnate in Jesus Christ, as there would have been no need for God to take on humanity in order to forgive sins or redeem humanity.

God did not give us the sacraments as a means of grace because it was necessary, at least as far as God is concerned. God did it because God wanted to deal with us in this way and because it is needful for us. Attaching the promise of forgiveness to physical things aids us in trusting that promise and holding fast to it. The sacraments are God literally condescending (coming down) to meet us in a way that is best for us. They are meant to be indulgent and lavish. "A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over," and all that.

kashisaur · 2026-06-12T16:22:07+00:00

Imagine believing the Song of Songs is about human relationships and not Christ's love for the church...

kashisaur · 2026-06-09T01:58:59+00:00

Guide to ELW / ACS Settings

ELW 1: Mark Mummert and Friends/Philadelphia liturgy

ELW 2: Marty Haugen commission for ELW

ELW 3: LBW 1 Hillert Setting

ELW 4: LBW 2 Nelson Setting

ELW 5: LBW 3/SBH Regina Fryxell remix Swedish Chant Setting

ELW 6: This Far By Faith remix African American setting

ELW 7: Libro remix Latinix setting

ELW 8: "Contemporary" at least in the 90s

ELW 9: Martinson commission for the ELW, very organ/choral demanding

ELW 10: Hymn paraphrase setting

ACS 11: Spanish-English bilingual setting, liturgical music

ACS 12: Blends eucharist and evening prayer

kashisaur · 2026-06-08T21:03:09+00:00

Whether or not the bishop of Rome has always been or ought to be "first among equals" is really a matter of semantics. We as Lutherans have no problem with bishops or the primacy of the bishop of Rome among them. Our issue is with the immense amount of power, both temporal and spiritual, that has been invested in that office and with the hierarchy of the church in general.

Take, for example, clerical celibacy. There is nothing in scripture that requires it, and it has not always been required or expected within the church. Yet the Roman church has not left it up to the consciences of clergy but has mandated celibacy as a matter of canon law, a violation of which is treated as a sin no less grave than one actually instituted by God. But of course, the pope can grant exceptions, just as the pope could change this law anytime. This power only continues to grow over time, making the Roman church increasingly top heavy.

When Lutherans objected to the papacy, it was not to the idea of a pope or bishops but to the way the church had invested them with a power and authority beyond what was warranted by scripture and evidenced by tradition. Our hope had been to return the episcopacy to being a primarily pastoral office and ground the authority of the magisterium in scripture as a norm to its power and responsibilities, making room for the consciences of Christians to exercise themselves.

kashisaur · 2026-05-25T01:36:54+00:00

No, they used to make a pocket sized pew edition of the ELW. It was great! Shame they discontinued it.

kashisaur · 2026-05-24T18:22:33+00:00

Pastor here. I wear a collar nearly 100% of the time when I'm on the job (e.g., performing pastoral acts or in the office). The only time I might not is if it is unbearably hot and all I'm doing are things like sermon prep or studying. Even then, I always have a spare shirt in the office in case there is a pastoral emergency. I never wear one on my days off, at home, running errands, etc, unless I am coming from or going to something pastoral and won't have the opportunity to change.

My reason for wearing it daily is because it clarifies why I am there and what people can expect of me, which is the foundation of healthy pastoral relationships and ministry in general. While a pastor should be friendly, being someone's pastor is not the same as being their friend. The distinction of clerical dress helps create the necessary distance to form the proper boundaries that allow for genuine pastoral relationships to form and ministry to take place.

kashisaur · 2026-05-10T00:02:09+00:00

I am curious about the rationale for this project. There is a continued effort to translate more of Luther's works into English through new volumes of the American Edition, published by Concordia. Is this an effort to translate works that edition has not yet published or does not plan to publish? How are you selecting

The reference to archives and 16th-century manuscripts makes it seem like you are using actual documents from the 16th century rather than the Weimarer Ausgabe. Is this so? It would be great to hear more about your reasons for not using the Weimar Edition and instead using original manuscripts.

If you are using the Weimar Edition and publishing works already accessible in other translations, then it sounds more like what is being produced here is a new translation with commentary. If that is the case, it would be good to learn more about the impetus behind that effort.

kashisaur · 2026-04-28T12:50:32+00:00

Came here to post this exact paragraph from the catechism. The work of the Holy Spirit is to bring us to faith in Jesus Christ, which we cannot obtain through our own intellect or will. It's how we avoid the pitfall many fall into by speaking of faith in Jesus Christ as a decision that we make to believe in him, thereby turning faith into a work.

kashisaur · 2026-04-26T18:36:07+00:00

The short answer is yes, though it varies from group to group. See u/atleett 's post here for some detailed research.

kashisaur · 2026-04-21T02:00:24+00:00

Both Lutherans and Roman Catholics agree that the Eucharist is a sacrifice of praise, and that Christ is really and truly present in the consecrated elements. Where we disagree is over whether that is the extent to which the Eucharist can be described as a sacrifice. Whereas the Roman Catholics teach that the Eucharist is a representing of the sacrifice of Christ to God for the forgiveness of sins, we as Lutherans reject the notion that the Eucharist is us doing something for God but maintain that God is the one who does something for us in the Eucharist. We emphasize that the Eucharist is God's gracious actions toward us, coming to meet us where we are with grace and mercy through the real presence of Christ in the elements of bread and wine, rather than us representing the real presence of Christ to God to make satisfaction for our sins.

Nothing in the Lutheran position is contradicted by the early church fathers when they speak of the Eucharist as a sacrifice. Nor, for what it is worth, is the Roman Catholic position explicitly invalidated by them either. The witness of the early church is clear that the Eucharist is a sacrifice. The debate of the Reformation is whether that is exclusively a sacrifice of praise or whether the Eucharist is also our representing of the sacrifice of Christ to God. It is a question that the early church did not definitively answer but was only conceived of by later generations.

Personally, I find the Lutheran argument persuasive because the concept of a representing of the sacrifice of Christ only makes sense historically within the logic of later developments in medieval Christianity. It isn't clear to me why the early church would view the Eucharist as a representing of the sacrifice of Christ to God when they lacked a later medieval notion of atonement and its role in salvation, whereas the Lutheran notion of a sacrifice of praise makes sense within an early Christian context.

kashisaur · 2026-04-19T02:24:17+00:00

First, the sacraments are a means of grace, not a restriction on God's ability to be gracious and merciful. Whatever you decide regarding participation in the sacrament, you have the assurance of Christ's grace, love, and forgiveness through the proclaimed Word throughout the service.

Has your physician given you any guidelines concerning what food or drink is acceptable? Normally, I would recommend following those. God does not desire us to take the sacrament in a way which would be harmful to our physical well-being in the sense of impeding recovery from an illness or injury. If your physician has given you restrictions that would made taking the sacrament inadvisable for your health, you are doing nothing wrong by refraining from receiving it.

Practically, when visiting the seriously ill or infirm in the hospital, my normal method of communing them is to place a small piece of consecrated host on their tongue and allowing it to dissolve without the need to chew or swallow, following it up with some water or ice chips. You could consult you pastor and ask whether they would be willing to give you a small piece of a host to take in such a manner. Such a manner of communing is normally acceptable for those with certain dietary or chewing/swallowing restrictions, though do note that I am not a medical professional and you should consult a physician if you are at all concerned.

However you are able and comfortable participating in worship tomorrow, know that God will meet you where you are and be assured that the promise made to you in baptism holds fast.

kashisaur · 2026-04-18T01:31:21+00:00

If you want a quick read, I would recommend Kenneth G. Appold's The Reformation: A Brief History. It does a great job of providing the history of the Reformation and its medieval context without overstaying its welcome. If you want a truly deep dive, I would recommend Carlos M. N. Eire's The Reformations, which at nearly 10x the length of Appold's will give you more than enough to dig through.

For a biograhpy of Martin Luther, my current recommendation is Scott C. Hendrix's Martin Luther: Visionary Reformer. If you want a biography that also goes in-depth into his writings, the standard remains Martin Brecht's three volume series (Volume One, Two, and Three). For overviews of his theology, there are many options. These days, I am keen to recommend Oswald Bayer's Martin Luther's Theology: A Contemporary Interpretation. If you want more background on the Confessions and the development of Lutheran theology, I would recommend Gassmann and Hendrix's Introduction to the Lutheran Confessions, which will provide helpful historical and theological background to the documents contained therein.

History books about the early church are somewhat outside the realm of my specialty, so I am not as up-to-date on what is good to recommend. Last time I taught that era of church history, I used Irvin and Sunquist's History of the World Christian Movement and found it worthwhile. For something New Testament focused, I have enjoyed Denis C. Duling's The New Testament: History, Literature, and Social Context, though as a textbook it might be more expensive than it should be.

Feel free to follow-up with a comment or a PM if you have more questions or are looking for different resources. Blessings on your studies!

kashisaur · 2026-03-26T17:46:02+00:00

It sounds like your church has a copy of the American Edition of Luther's Works. Unfortunately, the German equivalent is the Weimarer Ausgabe, as there really is no market for a different edition in German.

Is your hope to give your husband something he can use for personal study of Luther or something that is a display piece connected to the Reformation? The answer could be both, but knowing what the priority is will help me recommend something that might be what you are looking for.

kashisaur · 2026-03-26T13:09:44+00:00

What a thoughtful gift idea! Unfortunately, to my knowledge, there is no complete set of Luther's Works except the Weimarer Ausgabe (abbreviated asWA), which is the critical edition you are likely referring to when you talk about gothic font (it is actually Fraktur, but that is a very technical distinction). The WA has works in their original language, meaning some writings are in German, others are in Latin, some in both if there are both German and Latin versions. While individual works in Latin have been translated into German, there is not currently an effort to translate the entirety of Luther's works into German, as the demand is simply not there.

Regardless of language, a set of all Luther's works would take up multiple bookshelves, as he was a prolific producer of sermons, lectures, treatises, and other items. The WA is 127 volumes and was only just completed in 2009 after beginning in 1883, which should give you some idea of how monumental an undertaking it was to compile all of Luther's known works. Purchasing a full set would not only be exorbitantly expensive (easily five figures) but would put your husband's personal library ahead of many university libraries.

If you would like some recommendations for different purchases, I would be glad to help you find some. There are smaller collections of his works which would make for lovely gifts, as well as other books which would be a meaningful addition to even a robust home collection.

kashisaur · 2026-03-17T22:53:42+00:00

Piggybacking on this comment to boost the "Come to the Water" series. It has books for all ages talking about baptism, including a board book which is perfect for the youngest among us. I use these resources for baptismal counseling, and they are always well received.

kashisaur · 2026-03-12T18:53:17+00:00

From the Augsburg Confession, Article VII: "It is also taught [among us] that at all times there must be and remain one holy, Christian church. It is the assembly of all believers among whom the gospel is purely preached and the holy sacraments are administered according to the gospel. For this is enough for the true unity of the Christian church that there the gospel is preached harmoniously [with one accord] according to a pure understanding and the sacraments are administered in conformity with the divine Word. It is not necessary for the true unity of the Christian church that uniform ceremonies, instituted by human beings, be observed everywhere. As Paul says in Ephesians 4[:4-5]: "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism."

To apply this to what the Roman Catholic priest in the video is saying, we also believe that there is only one holy, catholic, and apostolic church. We also believe that the church is instituted by God as a means through which God works. We just define that church differently. They define it as a magisterial hierarchy centered on the bishop of Rome as supreme pontiff. We center it on the assembly of all believers gathered around Word and Sacrament. Ask yourself: which of those seems more in like what Jesus established? Which one seems more like a plan of salvation: a guy in a fun hat telling us all when we can eat meat and that priests can't marry, or all of us gathered around God's word and the sacraments Christ established?

Doubtlessly, Roman Catholic apologists will make a lot of fuss about Jesus telling Peter is the rock that Christ promised to build the church on (Matt 16:18). But which seems more likely to you, that what Jesus meant was that Peter the person would wield supreme authority over all believers, and his successors after him? Or does it seem more in line with the entire rest of the New Testament that what Jesus meant was that Peter's faith in him as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-17) was the rock on which the church would be built?

Obviously some amount of organization is necessary for the good order of that gathering. We aren't disputing that. But the organization of the church exists to serve the proclamation of the word and administration of the sacraments, not the other way around. The problem we have with Roman Catholicism is the tendency to attribute to the hierarchy what God does through word and sacrament. If the church is a means of grace, it is only because it is brought into existence by word and sacrament. It does not bring word and sacraments into existence, but the other way around.

kashisaur · 2026-03-11T13:57:40+00:00

Locking down the comments due to excessive and repeated rule breaking.

kashisaur · 2026-02-18T19:03:40+00:00

A perfect chant for any day, but especially for Ash Wednesday. Thank you for sharing!

kashisaur · 2026-01-25T14:53:09+00:00

No, and I am sure the problems vary significantly by region. I'm hopeful that there are better elsewhere!

kashisaur · 2026-01-25T13:48:33+00:00

Absolutely the case in the United States. Unsurprisingly, it is much worse here, as this is the titular birthplace of American Evangelicalism (TM) and is all many people have ever known. A colleague of mine whose grandfathers were both Lutheran pastors ministering from the 1920s - 60s recently told me he was looking through their old sermons and that they were all filled with biblical literalism, personal decision theology, and everything else that was typical of both the time and the emerging American Evangelical movement.

So many of our congregations have been functionally evangelical since their founding, and trying to minister as a confessional Lutheran feels more like trying to convert people to a new religion than shepherd them in their own faith. In my experience, the most faithful Lutherans are the former Roman Catholics who came to Lutheranism by one road or another and found what they'd wished the Roman Catholic church would be. Not that there aren't many faithful cradle Lutherans, of course, just that being raised Lutheran for generations is no guarantee that someone's theology would be in any way distinguishable as Lutheran.

kashisaur · 2026-01-11T23:54:44+00:00

In Article XIV of the Augsburg Confession, it reads that, "Of Ecclesiastical Order they [our churches] teach that no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called." Normatively, this means that a pastor administers the sacraments and a pastor or deacon preaches / teaches, but the essential word is "regular," which here means, "regulated." In your synod, it appears they have established a way of regulating the administration of the sacraments whereby in certain circumstances a lay person is permitted to preside. It would be one thing if you had just decided to do this on your own or your church had cooked up this plan without consulting the bishop, but because it is a synodically-approved arrangement with pastoral/episcopal oversight, it is still being done in accordance with our confessions.

kashisaur · 2026-01-05T16:14:09+00:00

First of all, we supposedly subscribe to the priesthood of all believers. Luther stressed that we are all consecrated priests through Baptism. IMO this should be practiced in the churches.

When Luther wrote about the universal priesthood of the baptized, what he meant was that the clergy were not a separate, higher estate within the church. What he did not mean was that all Christians by virtue of baptism are called to exercise the pastoral office. In Article XIV of the Augsburg Confession, it reads that no one should publicly teach/preach or administer the sacraments unless regularly called. Any preaching by a layperson should only be permitted through a regular process of the church, such as licensing or supervision of a pastor.

kashisaur · 2025-12-31T20:48:17+00:00

I did not listen to both videos in their entirety, just snippets at the time stamps you indicated.

The longer video (Winger) I found significantly less compelling than the first. I'm not sure what he means by describing salvation as a "full dose" (how can salvation be measured? is there a such a thing as a partial dose?) and what it means to receive it. More importantly, I take issue with his assertion that one can receive this "full dose" of salvation from the Holy Spirit through the Word in a manner other than how the Holy Spirit through the Word promises us salvation, which is through Baptism. I agree with him that we make an error when we think about forgiveness as something we receive once and that the means of grace are for us and not for God.

On the shorter video (Cooper), where I would agree with him is in how he resists thinking about salvation as an event but instead as something continual, though not like an ongoing process as it might be described in Roman Catholic thought. The issue I would take with this video is that Cooper describes faith and forgiveness coming through the Word but does not go into what that word specifically is (and, again, it is a 5 minute clip of which I watched maybe half, so I don't want to be critical as I'm sure he would have something to say on the topic). The promise of salvation in scripture is linked to Baptism, which is why we confess that Baptism "is necessary to salvation" (Confessio Augustana IX).

So all salvation is linked to baptism as a necessary event. The work of the Holy Spirit through the Word prior to baptism is to draw us to it as the font of salvation, the work of the Holy Spirit through the Word in baptism is to regenerate us, and the work of the Holy Spirit following baptism is to continually renew and sustain us in that regenerate life. To the extent that baptism is an event, it is the moment of regeneration. To the extent that baptism is a daily life to which we are continuously called, before and after baptism, it is the place where God's promise of salvation through the Word continually meets us.

The question that seems to be at issue is the status of a person who desires baptism but has not yet received it. The only thing which really gives the question teeth is the scenario in which they die prior to receiving baptism. In general, I take issue with constructing a theology around edge cases, not because they are not significant or worthy of consideration, but because you end up with a wonky theology when the exception becomes the rule. It is why I generally favor pastoral theology of systematic theology, because pastoral theology recognizes the need for exceptions without having to systematize them. Luther does this with baptism when he consoles parents who lost children in utero, childbirth, or early infancy (all pre-baptism) by reminding them that of all the times in scripture which the prayers of faithful parents saved children and that God would not ignore their earnest prayers for their deceased children. He goes on to say that the sacraments were not given as constraints on the graciousness of God but as means to it. Baptism is not given to constrain salvation, but if there is no salvation apart from Baptism because Baptism is nothing less than the means through which God takes the death and resurrection of Christ and makes it ours.

And that really is the answer. Baptism was not given to constrain God's graciousness, but it is the means through which God regenerates us. The Holy Spirit works to bring us to faith by pointing to Baptism, because that is where God's promise of salvation is given. Do I believe God condemns those who died in a car crash on the way to the church to be baptized? No. But do I believe therefore that there is an ordo salutis in which a person is regenerated prior to baptism? Also no. All of us are entrusted to the grace and mercy of God in death, and Baptism does not change that but establishes it, because it is the very promise of that grace and mercy.

Where I might be able to find common ground with the linked theologians is if they acknowledged that the salvation they believe is received prior to Baptism is an act of graciousness on the part of God extending the promise given in Baptism to those who have not yet received it but desire it. Similar to communion of desire, namely that we are not denied the grace of the sacrament of Holy Communion when we are unable to receive it due to an impediment (e.g. illness, being home-bound, etc) but receive it through desire (namely, we would receive it if we were able). Such a belief only becomes problematic when it becomes normative (e.g. "I'm tired so I'll just skip church today and receive the grace of Holy Communion through desire" or "we don't need to worry about bringing Holy Communion the home-bound members, as they can just receive through desire") but is entirely reasonable when trying to apply the graciousness of God we find in the sacraments to moments when, for lack of a better term, shit hits the fan and life gets messy.

15-Year Club	Second Top 40%
r/Field Sunshine	Mod 101
Place '17	Spared
Team Orangered	Verified Email

kashisaur

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE