Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Monolatry

Learned me a new term today, Monolatry.  Monolatry is the (mistaken, heretical) belief that the early chapters of Genesis testify that there are many gods recognized by the author, but only one is worshipped.  (I thought the author was God who would undoubtedly know himself!  But I digress...)  That is different from monotheism, the belief in only one God.  (Someone once described Unitarianism as the belief that there is, at most, one god.)  The theory of Monolatry is used to explain why God sometimes refers to himself in the plural in Genesis.  (Monolatrists adamantly deny that these could be references to the Trinity; one even referred to the Trinity by that shameful epithet, "Two men and a bird" in the article I was reading."  Not surprisingly, Monoaltry is being embrace by some Lutherans.  (Not LCMS, NALC, WELS or LCMC Lutherans. Hmm, whom does that leave?)

Word and Sacrament

Word and sacrament. If Lutheran Christians have a bottom line, that's it. That's what it's all about. Christ comes us to in Word and sacrament. He is present in the Word read and preached. The bread and wine of Holy Communion are his body and blood. Word and sacrament are how Jesus Christ forgives our sins, builds our faith and keeps us at one with him. We can do all sorts of other things that are good and help others and build community. But our works are not Word and sacrament. We cannot lift ourselves up to God by what we do; we could never do enough. God comes down to us in Word and sacrament; by His grace, His love, he raises us up to be with him. The Christian life is ongoing, continuous participation in Word and sacrament. We cannot say, “I got enough Word and sacrament years ago, I don't need it now.” We never outgrow our need for Word and sacrament in our spiritual life any more than our bodies outgrow their need for food and water. To exclude ourselves from hearing the Word and receiving the sacrament, no matter how important other concerns mights seem to us, is a not the Christian way. Christ is calling you unto himself and offering you his very self in Word and sacrament.

Mt. Olive Lutheran Church reads and preaches the Word and administers the sacrament of the Lord's Supper each Sunday at 8:15 and 10:45 a.m. All are welcome at our Divine Services. Our address is 2679 Darlington Road, Chippewa Township in Beaver Falls, PA.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Seminoles

Last night the Kansas City Chiefs played the New England Patriots.  Someone asked if the name Chiefs is, like Redskins, racist.  I'd rather know why if the plural of knife is knives why isn't the plural of Chief  pronounced Chieves.  And isn't the name Patriots offensive to the descendants of British Loyalists during the Revolutionary War (AKA The War of Colonial Aggression)?  When will the U.S. government apologize to the Tories and offer reparations for taking away their country, as they stole it from the Indigenous Native American Peoples formerly known as Indians

My son attended Edinoboro University of Pennsylvania for a year.  Their mascot was the Fightin' Scot.  No, I am not making that up.  It had previously been the Red Raiders.  I'm not making that up either.  Someone decided one was racist and the other was not.  It seems some groups can be offended and others have no right to take offense.  What if the Scottish Secessionist had turned to bullets rather than ballots in their recent righteous struggle to free themselves from U.K. tyranny, as certain North American patriots once did?  Would the  Fightin' Scots become the... I dunno.... Victorious Vegans... Ferocious Femisnists... Partyin' Progressives...

I knew a man who had been a student as Florida State, home of the #1 ranked Seminoles.  He was proud that the University consulted the tribe about the name, logos, etc. and received their permission/blessing on each.  But what if even one member of the Seminole Tribe was offended?  Or doesn't naming a team after a tribe, even if the tribe itself doesn't mind, set a bad precedent leading to that great atrocity, Redskins?  And can tribal leaders, ground down as they are by white colonialist oppression, be trusted to make such decisions?  Shouldn't the progressive elite among us be entrusted with such weighty matters?  I am being facetious, of course.