Robert P. George, chairman of the U.S Commission on International Religious Freedom and Katrina Lantos Swett, vice chairwoman of the committee, have written an op-ed piece in which they describe how U.S. administrations have failed to use International Religious Freedom Act which provides a variety of means by which the U.S. can prompt nations to provide greater religious freedom.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Culture news: Canada continues on the path towards religious discrimination
When we look at Canada, we see a disturbing situation that could be a preview of what lies ahead for the United States. Quebec is considering the "Quebec Charter of Values." It would:
"ban public employees from wearing religious symbols, including such things as turbans, crucifixes, hijabs, and kippas. And it’s not just for government representatives: it would apply to all public institutions, including schools and hospitals. That’s right: teachers, doctors, and nurses, among numerous other workers, would all be forbidden from wearing religious symbols on the job. Don’t like it? Find another job."
"ban public employees from wearing religious symbols, including such things as turbans, crucifixes, hijabs, and kippas. And it’s not just for government representatives: it would apply to all public institutions, including schools and hospitals. That’s right: teachers, doctors, and nurses, among numerous other workers, would all be forbidden from wearing religious symbols on the job. Don’t like it? Find another job."
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Sermon for Thirteenth Sunday after Trinity
Trinity 13
Lk
10:23-37
8/25/13
I took it for granted. I didn’t
realize what a unique stretch of time I was experiencing. You see, I was introduced to Indiana
basketball in the winter of 1979. That
summer, we had moved from Pensacola, Florida as my dad took a job teaching at
Indiana University. During the 1979-1980
season I received a full immersion into the culture of Indiana basketball, and
learned that as a Hoosier fan, I was now part of something special.
Indiana had played in the Final Four
in 1973. They had won 31 straight games
in 1975, blowing opponents away, before they lost in the regional final by two
points to a Kentucky team they had beaten soundly earlier in the year. They
lost because their best player - Scott May - had broken his arm. In 1976 Indiana had come back to go 32 and 0
as they became what is to this day the last undefeated national champion. They
had won the Big Ten championship four years in a row between 1973 and 1976.
In my first year I saw Indiana win
the Big Ten title. Then in 1981 I saw
them win the national championship – winning by what was then a record average
margin of victory. They won the Big Ten
in 1983, and then in 1987 Keith Smart’s game winning shot gave them another
national championship.
I had come to expect that every five
for six years, Indiana won the national championship. Every other year they won the Big Ten –
except for that terrible stretch when we had to wait three whole years
between 1983 and 1987. This was simply
how things were. And so with Big Ten
titles in 1989, 1991 and 1993 Indiana was obviously moving toward another
national championship that year.
Everything was going to happen right on schedule. It had been six years since the last national
championship, and so it was time. Indiana
had a loaded team filled players who came from the state of Indiana, and they
finished the regular season ranked number one in the country
But at the end of the 1993 regular
season, Alan Henderson, a key inside player injured his knee. They weren’t the same team without him and
they lost in the regional finals. And then, unfortunately, I learned the hard
way what a remarkable period the twenty years between 1973 and 1993 had been.
For in the next twenty years Indiana didn’t win any national
championships. They only won one Big Ten
title. Their coach, Bob Knight was fired
because of misconduct. Another coach,
Kelvin Sampson, broke NCAA rules. Indiana was put on probation and was heavily
penalized by the NCAA. As a result, Indiana fans endured a 8 and 46 record
between 2008 and 2011. During the last
twenty years I have come to appreciate what a truly unique stretch of time I
had enjoyed – something I took for granted when it was happening.
In the first verses of our Gospel
lesson this morning, Jesus announces to the disciples that they are living in a
unique and remarkable moment in history.
And his words don’t only apply to the disciples. They call us to
recognize that we are too, because of the death and resurrection of
Jesus Christ.
When you heard the Gospel lesson
being read this morning, you probably thought that you were going to hear a
sermon about the parable of the Good Samaritan. When you heard the text for the
sermon announced as the Gospel lesson just a few moments ago, you probably
thought your expectation had been confirmed.
So I have a surprise for you – this morning you are not going to
hear about the Good Samaritan.
Instead
we are going to focus on the first two verses of our text which say: “Then
turning to the disciples he said privately, ‘Blessed are the eyes that see what
you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you
see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.’”
Jesus’ words pick up on what has
just happened in chapter ten of Luke’s Gospel.
At the beginning of the chapter, Jesus sends out seventy or seventy two
disciples (there’s a textual question here) – to go before him to the cities and towns where Jesus is about to
go. It is important to understand Jesus’
ministry has taken a crucial turn. At
the end of chapter nine we read: “When the days drew near for him to be taken
up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem.”
Our Lord has begun his final journey to Jerusalem. He is going there to suffer and die on the
cross.
Because of the timing, there is a
sense of urgency in Jesus’ ministry. He
sends out this group of disciples – one that is larger than the twelve apostles
– as a kind of “advance team.” They are
to prepare the way by going to the towns and proclaiming, “The kingdom of God
has arrived.” They are to declare that
in the saving ministry of Jesus Christ, the reign of God had entered into the
world in order to turn back and eject the forces of Satan, sin and death.
Jesus warns them that in some places
they will meet with rejection. There will be people who don’t want to hear the
message. Our Lord says, “But whenever
you enter a town and they do not receive you, go into its streets and say,
‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet we wipe off against you.
Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has arrived.’”
Just before our text, the disciples
had returned from their work of proclaiming the kingdom of God. They returned with joy, saying,
“Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” Jesus said to them, “I
saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority
to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and
nothing shall hurt you. Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits
are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” Jesus said that in the proclamation of his
saving work, people were being saved and Satan was being cast out. But he told
the disciples not of focus on the mighty works they had been able to do. Instead they were to rejoice that their names
were written in heaven – that God had called them to faith through the Gospel.
And then right before our text, we
read, “In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, ‘I thank you,
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the
wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for
such was your gracious will. All things have been handed over to me by my
Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is
except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.’”
Our Lord expresses the unique
relationship that exists between the Father and the Son within the Holy
Trinity. And then he tells us that only
the Son can reveal the Father to us.
Sent by the Father into the world, it is the Son who makes know the
Father.
If you look around at the world –
you can see the beauty and the order and the wonder of it all. All through history this has led people to
recognize that there is someone or something behind it. But that recognition doesn’t tell you
anything about where you stand. It
doesn’t tell you anything about how this someone or something is disposed towards
you.
But
in the first century in Palestine, God the Father sent God the Son into the
world through the work of God the Holy Spirit in order to reveal his loving
heart to us. He did it in the fullness
of time – when things were just right.
He did it as the fulfillment of all that he had done with his people
Israel and all that he had spoken through his prophets.
In
our text, Jesus says to the returning disciples: “Blessed are the eyes that see
what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what
you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.” The
disciples were seeing the fulfillment of God’s saving plan. They were living in
the moment when the Messiah descended from the kings of Israel since days of
David had come into the world. They were living in the moment when the Messiah
promised by the prophets was present and at work to bring salvation.
In
fact at that very moment they were making their way to Jerusalem where
Jesus would fulfill God’s saving plan by his death on the cross and
resurrection from the dead. As Jesus
would say to the disciples on the evening of the first Easter: “These are my
words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written
about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”
Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus
it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the
dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his
name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these
things.”
Jesus
told the disciples to recognize the moment in which they lived. He told them to understand that the reign of
God had arrived in their midst. He told
them that they were blessed – that they were experiencing God’s end time
salvation because this was true.
As
we gather here this morning, it is critical that we realize that Jesus’ words are
just as true for us. Through the Sprit given witness of the Scripture,
blessed are our eyes that see. We know what God has done. We know about the fulfillment of the things
that God’s people in the Old Testament, including their prophets and kings
wished to know about. Because we live in the time when Christ’s saving death
and resurrection has occurred, we are those upon whom the end of the ages has
come. We know that we are living in the
last days.
The
question then, is whether we see things in this way. Do we understand and
believe that we live at a time when the reign of God has arrived in Jesus
Christ? Do we understand that the things
Christ reveals to us in his word and gives to us through the sacraments are the
very things prophets and kings longed to see and hear?
Our actions will go a long way towards
revealing where we really stand. If we understand the time in which we live and
what Christ is doing, then coming each Sunday to the Divine Service will be
only natural. Reading and studying God’s
word both at home and at church will be our ongoing activity so that we can
continue to see and hear about the things prophets and kings longed to know. If we understand the time in which we live
and what Christ is doing, then forgiving others and seeking to help others will
characterize our lives, because that is what Jesus Christ has done for us in
this time.
In
out text this morning Jesus says, “Blessed are the eyes that see what you see!
For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and
did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.” He says this, not just at the time when he,
the incarnate Son of God, had come into the world. He says it at the very time when he is making
his way to Jerusalem to die on the cross for our sins and rise from the dead.
This
is the saving action that prophets and kings in Israel longed to see and
hear. Blessed are you, because you live
at the time these things have been accomplished. Blessed are you, because in the work of Jesus
you have the assurance of forgiveness and eternal life. Blessed are you, “for I
tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not
see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.”
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Culture news: Planned Parenthod to help implement Obamacare; will have access to personal information
The Obama administration is giving $655,000 to hire "navigators" to help consumers who will be using health insurance exchanges. This story is disturbing on several levels. First, the fact that the Obama administration is using Planned Parenthood for this illustrates yet again how intimately the abortion agenda has been part of Obamacare itself. Second, the fact that these "navigators" will have access to our Social Security number and medical records is extremely troubling. The screening for these workers is going to be very lax. It opens up the possibility of individuals in these jobs using the information for fraud. It also raises the specter of Planned Parenthood having access to the personal information of those who oppose abortion.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Life news: Human life as disposable commodity - 3.8 million embryos to produce 122,000 births
The abuse of human life in the IVF industry continues to grow by leaps and bounds. It is staggering to realize that according to recent reports 3.8 millions embryos have been created in order to produce a mere 120,000 live births.
Culture news: Why is orientation change therapy illegal, but gender change therapy is a good thing?
New Jersey governor Chris Christie will sign into law a bill that makes orientation change therapy illegal for minors in that state. In doing so, New Jersey will join several other states, including California. But as Matthew Schmitz asks: why is orientation change therapy illegal, but gender change therapy considered to be legal and a good thing?
Monday, August 19, 2013
Cultures news: The homosexual movement's antagonism with blacks around the world
Robert Oscar Lopez has written an interesting piece describing the homosexual movement's antagonism with blacks in the United States and around the world.
He notes regarding the attempt to cast the homosexual movement as a civil rights issue parallel to that of blacks in the United States:
He notes regarding the attempt to cast the homosexual movement as a civil rights issue parallel to that of blacks in the United States:
"People who love the same sex come with many different agendas and experiences. The peculiar ideology of the LGBT lobby, however, seems fashioned perfectly to inflame the rage and resistance of African-Americans. First, the ideology is based on biological determinism. The repeated appeals to the Fourteenth Amendment depend upon the notion that homosexuals are born with their orientation in the same way black people are born with dark skin. This isn't the most inviting way to start a comparison: "Hi, I'm a guy who loves playing with other men's genitals, and that's just like you being black!"
There is an added dimension to this dangerous form of essentialism, however. The LGBT lobby is driven by the belief that people whom they classify as "born homosexuals" must engage in the actual acts of sexual gratification with the same sex, or there is something wrong with them. Within this logic, it is impossible to go from homosexual activity to non-homosexual activity. So convinced are LGBT activists of this rejection of free will and self-control that they have moved to make it illegal in California, New Jersey, and Massachusetts for counselors to help minors cease or avoid sexual activities with the same sex."
He goes on to observe about the demand of homosexuals to be parents of children:
"The LGBT lobby also demands that same-sex couples have the right to be parents. Here is where the movement becomes utterly irreconcilable with black history, regardless of how much Melissa Harris-Perry may enjoy her repartee with Thomas Roberts. For same-sex couples to become parents, they must purchase children. They won't call it that, of course. But buying sperm from a sperm-bank or renting a woman's womb both entail the exchange of money for ownership of a child. The state is then embroiled in the arrangement as an enforcer of the contract, compelling the child and third parties to respect the authority of two adults, one or both of whom are unrelated to the child, and both of whom came into possession of a dependent human being through money. (Those high incomes that Crystal Dixon pointed out among gay couples come in handy.)
How does this sound for a race of people who came out of slavery?"
Life news: When you are keeping company with China and North Korea, it's not a good sign
The United States stands with China, North Korea and Canada as the only nations in the world that allow abortion after a child is "viable" for any reason at all. When you are keeping company with China and North Korea, it's not a good sign.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Sermon for Twelfth Sunday after Trinity
Trinity 12
Mk
7:31-37
8/18/13
First time parents are pretty much
all the same. It’s the first child so
everything is new and special and exciting.
Entrusted with the care of this little life they are so concerned about
doing everything right and watching out for the child.
Amy
and I were certainly that way. When we
only had Timothy and we went somewhere, we would constantly follow him around
to make sure that he was safe. If he was
eating crackers, dropped one on the ground and went to pick it up and eat it,
we swooped in order to snatch it away and keep it out of his mouth.
How
very different things have been for us with our fourth child! While we certainly still have Michael’s
safety in mind when he is out and about, basically if there isn’t an open flame
or a swimming pool involved we aren’t all that concerned. As for food dropping on the ground, we just
haven’t been uptight about it – the five second rule definitely carries the
day.
First
time parents doesn’t recognize the things that are really no big deal. But because they are first time parents,
sometimes they also don’t recognize the things that are a big deal. I was certainly a case in point.
Timothy
was our first child and I really hadn’t been around children in the early
stages of development. I knew that when
he first began to speak he was difficult to understand – but I didn’t really
think much of it. As time went on Amy
and I became attuned to the way he spoke, but others couldn’t understand what
he was saying, and we would have to “translate” what Timothy was said.
It
was Amy who first observed that this was not the way things were supposed to be
developing. I had no clue that there was
any problem, and at first was skeptical.
But once Amy pointed it out, I soon realized that there was a
problem. I am very thankful that there
was a wonderful speech therapy program available when we lived in the Chicago
area. They helped to get Timothy’s
speech back on track and today when you interact with a smart, articulate
middle school student you would never know there had been some problems when he
was little.
Speech
therapy is something we take for granted in our world. But of course, it was not something that
existed in ancient world. There was no
help for someone who struggled with this - and certainly no help for someone
who was deaf. Yet in our Gospel lesson
today we see Jesus heal a man who suffered from both of these. We learn that in the person of Jesus Christ
the reign of God broke into our world in order to free people from sin and all
the wrong it has caused.
In
our text, Jesus is in northern Israel, in an area where many Gentiles
lived. We are told that they brought to
him a man who was deaf and had a speech impediment, and they begged him to lay
his hand on him. We aren’t told who
brought the man. Unable to hear and
unable to communicate he would have had very few opportunities in the first
century Palestinian world – he would have been living a very difficult
life.
They
brought him to Jesus and asked our Lord to lay his hand on him. People had heard about Jesus. They knew that
he was performing miracles of healing and so they brought this unfortunate man
to Jesus in the hope that his touch would bring healing.
They
wanted Jesus to lay his hand on the man. However, the man probably got more
than he expected! We are told that Jesus
took the man away from the crowd, so that it was just the two of them. Then, Jesus put his fingers into the man’s ears,
and after spitting he touched the man’s tongue.
Then Jesus groaned and said to him, “Ephphatha,” which is Armaic for,
“Be opened.” And we are told that “his ears were opened, his tongue was
released, and he spoke plainly.”
After
Jesus had healed the man he ordered them to tell no one. Our Lord does this on a number of occasions
in the Gospels, and at first it may seem puzzling. After all, doesn’t Jesus want people to know
about his saving ministry? Yet what we
see here is that Jesus wants to define his ministry. The first century Jewish world had all kinds
of hopes and expectations about the one God would send and what he would
do. Many of these dealt with power,
glory and success.
As
the miracle demonstrated, Jesus had great power. But he had not come to use that power in ways
that the world expects. He had come to
serve. He had come to bring relief to the
lowly and suffering. He was going to provide the answer to the root cause of
suffering – he was going to provide the answer to sin. However, he was going to do this by suffering
in his own person. He was going to
suffer and die on behalf of the sins of all people. As Jesus will say just later in this Gospel:
“For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his
life as a ransom for many.”
However,
the people didn’t want to do it Jesus’ way.
It was all so cool! It was all so
exciting! When you know something cool
and exciting, how can you keep it to yourself?
And besides you can be the center of attention when you have something
cool and exciting to share. And so we
learn that the more he commanded them to keep it to themselves, the more they
were proclaiming it to others. After
all, it was amazing stuff. They were
astonished beyond measure, saying, “He has done all things well. He even makes
the deaf hear and the mute speak.”
The
people didn’t listen to what Jesus told them.
They had their own idea about how things should be done – about how
things should work. Jesus wanted to do
things in his own way and his own time.
He was going to do things in the way of the cross. They wanted to do
things in the way of success and glory.
The
fact of the matter is that this describes us too – and I freely include
myself. You see, deep down, we really
don’t like what Jesus tells us to do right now. In our text this morning we
hear about a miracle. Jesus heals a man
who was deaf and couldn’t speak. We see that in Gospels Jesus heals many people
who were afflicted by many kinds of illnesses and conditions. And you know what? Most likely that is not going to
happen to you. Jesus doesn’t tell you to expect healing. He tells you to believe and trust in him for
the forgiveness of sins. He tells you to
receive his Means of Grace so that you can be sustained in that faith. He tells you to believe and trust in him as
you look for his return on the Last Day when he will transform your body so
that it will never again need healing.
And
frankly, that’s not what we want to hear.
We want results now. We
want healing now. We want freedom
from cares now. And because Jesus doesn’t do that – because Jesus
doesn’t even promise that – we get frustrated.
We doubt his word. We stop
listening to his word, and we don’t put it at the center of our life.
Jesus
tells those who witnessed the miracle not to talk about it because he was in
the process of carrying out the saving work of God. It was a work that needed
to be done in God’s way, and that was a way that would surprise many
people because it wasn’t going to happen in the way of success and glory. Instead, it was going to occur through the
cross.
Yet
make no mistake – the miracle in today’s text does say that it is God at work
bringing salvation and restoration. The
man who is healed is described as having a speech impediment. After Jesus heals the man, the astounded people
say, “He has done all things well. He
even makes the deaf hear and the mute speak.”
The
Gospel’s description of the man as having a speech impediment and the crowd’s
reaction point directly to what Isaiah chapter 35 says in the Old Testament.
There the prophet describes the future salvation that God is going to bring and
writes, “Strengthen the weak hands, and make firm the feeble knees. Say to
those who have an anxious heart, “Be strong; fear not! Behold, your God will
come with vengeance, with the recompense of God. He will come and save you.” Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and
the ears of the deaf unstopped; then shall the lame man leap like a deer, and
the tongue of the mute sing for joy.”
Mark
is telling us that in Jesus’ ministry this salvation has arrived. It’s here!
Jesus himself announced this at the beginning of his ministry when he
went into Galilee proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is
fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at arrived; repent and believe in the
gospel.”
The
end time salvation of God has arrived and is already at work. And we know this is true because Jesus
Christ rose from the dead. The source of our hope for the future is his
resurrection because it means that in Jesus the new creation has already begun.
The renewal and restoration of our bodies has already started in the
resurrection of Jesus Christ. What has happened to him will happen to us
because our bodies will be transformed to be like his. The root cause of all
this is wrong – sin – has been dealt with by our Lord’s death on the cross, and
the renewal of all things has begun in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from
the dead.
And so right now, we need to listen
to Jesus’ word. The final salvation has
started in Jesus, but its consummation and fulfillment has not yet
arrived. Sin is still here and physical
suffering is still here. Our Lord calls
us to believe and trust in him. He calls
us to live in peace, because our sins are forgiven and we are the children of
God. He calls us to live in hope, because we know what has already happened in
Jesus and what will therefore happen on the Last Day.
In order to support and sustain us
while we look for his return, Jesus Christ keeps doing the same things that we
see in our text this morning. He freed
the man with his word, “Ephaphtha!” Our
Lord continues to free us from the sin in our lives by his word – the word of
the Gospel as it comes to us in the reading and preaching of the Scriptures. He frees us with his word of Holy Absolution
as he forgives all our sins.
And in our text Jesus healed the man
with his bodily touch. Jesus continues
to do the same thing for us as he touches us in his holy Sacrament. In the Sacrament of the Altar he touches us
with his true body and blood, given and shed for us. He gives to you the very price he paid for your
salvation and in receiving it you know that this forgiveness is for you. He gives into your body his own crucified and
risen body and blood through which he nourishes the new man in you and
guarantees that your body too will be raised up and transformed on the Last
Day.
By these gifts he gives us
forgiveness, life and salvation now. And by these gifts he points us
forward to the consummation of his saving work when he returns in glory. He holds up before us the promise that he
will make all things very good once again, for that is the purpose of his
entire saving work. It was a saving work
that he carried out with the man in our text.
It is a saving work that he continues to carry out in our midst this
morning through his Means of Grace.
Sustained in the present by his astounding gifts, we can look towards
the future and exclaim in faith, truly, “He has done all things well.”
Saturday, August 17, 2013
Mark's thoughts: The weird and wacky history of Confirmation, Part 1- The western Church before Nicaea
(St. Cyprian)
In the popular imagination today, there are few things that are more “Lutheran” than the Rite of Confirmation. Generations of Lutherans have donned a white gown, and in front of a church full of family and friends they have confessed the faith and vowed faithfulness in Confirmation. Then they have received the Sacrament of the Altar for the first time.
However, upon further reflection, it is remarkable that
Confirmation exists at all – much less in the Lutheran Church. The history of Confirmation is a weird and
wacky story that twists and turns in unexpected ways. In a series of posts I am going to look at
the history of Confirmation in the western Church
up to the Reformation, and then in the Lutheran Church
up to our own day. As we think about the
status of Confirmation in our own pastoral practice, it is important to understand
how Confirmation in its present form in the Lutheran Church came into
existence. This information puts us in
a better position to evaluate Confirmation itself.
I. Anointing and laying on of hands
The story of Confirmation begins in the rites that accompanied the administration of Holy Baptism in the early Church. The Romans considered bathing to be one of the quintessential features of civilized “Roman” life. In fact, “the bathhouse was produced as a new cultural form in the cities of Italy in the second century BC and became the hallmark of Roman urbanism at locations across Italy and the western Empire until, by the second century AD, it was impossible to imagine that anyone in the Empire did not bathe in a bathhouse.”[1] Bathing was ubiquitous in the Roman world, and wherever there was bathing, people anointed themselves with olive oil. Leonel Mitchell surveys the evidence and concludes that “to a Roman or Hellenistic Greek anointing would be associated with washing as naturally as we associate soap with water. When a Roman went to the bath he took a towel and oil.”[2]
The story of Confirmation begins in the rites that accompanied the administration of Holy Baptism in the early Church. The Romans considered bathing to be one of the quintessential features of civilized “Roman” life. In fact, “the bathhouse was produced as a new cultural form in the cities of Italy in the second century BC and became the hallmark of Roman urbanism at locations across Italy and the western Empire until, by the second century AD, it was impossible to imagine that anyone in the Empire did not bathe in a bathhouse.”[1] Bathing was ubiquitous in the Roman world, and wherever there was bathing, people anointed themselves with olive oil. Leonel Mitchell surveys the evidence and concludes that “to a Roman or Hellenistic Greek anointing would be associated with washing as naturally as we associate soap with water. When a Roman went to the bath he took a towel and oil.”[2]
The New Testament says that at Jesus’ baptism (Lk
3:21-22) he was anointed with the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:18; Act 10:38). It also says that Christians have an
anointing from the Holy One (ὑμεῖς
χρῖσμα ἔχετε ἀπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου; 1 Jn 2:20)
and that they have been sealed with the Spirit (Eph 1:13; see also 2 Cor
1:22). In a letter filled with baptismal
language 1 Pet 2:9 describes Christians as a royal priesthood – a description
that calls to mind the fact that kings (1 Samuel 10:1; 16:12-13) and priests
(Leviticus 8:12, 30) were anointed. The
cultural setting and language of Scripture made it almost inevitable that
anointing with oil would be a part of the administration of Holy Baptism. We cannot say how soon this began. Regarding this first factor, Aidan Kavanagh
has observed, “One can only note that more was involved in the bathing process
then, and hence more was implied in the bathing metaphor when used by antique
authors, than is the case today.”[3] With the respect to the second he cogently
observes that we must question, “whether it took communities prepared to be
ritually literal about washing metaphors up to a century and a half to become
similarly disposed regarding unction.”[4]
Scripture teaches that the Holy Spirit works through
baptism (Jn 3:3, 5; Tit 3:5-6; 1 Cor 6:11).
However, one biblical text held the early Church’s
attention as she reflected upon baptism and the gift of the Spirit. In Acts
8:4-8 Philip goes to Samaria
and proclaims the Gospel. The chapter then
goes on to say: “Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had
received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and
prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for he had not yet
fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit”
(Acts 8:14-17 ESV). The text highlights
the unique circumstances within salvation history of the Gospel’s advance beyond
the Jews to the Samaritans (see Acts 10:44-48 where again unusual circumstances
related to baptism and the Spirit mark the Gospel’s advance to the
Gentiles). Through this action the
apostles recognized the Samaritan mission as part the apostolic Church. The laying
on of hands by those authorized by God in order to give the Spirit would
become the feature that strongly influenced the Church’s
ongoing baptismal practice.
We
lack explicit evidence about the ritual actions that accompanied the
administration of baptism in the western Church
prior to Tertullian (155- ca 220 A.D.), Cyprian (ca 200-258) and (if accepted
as genuine) the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus. However it is very likely that they arose in
the first and second centuries. In the
judicious candor that typifies his scholarship, J.D.C. Fisher concludes:
For the moment it is sufficient to observe that there is no reason to suppose that at the time of writing these further baptismal ceremonies were recent innovations. If they were established customs by the second decade of the third century, they must have had their origin back in the second century, although how far back it is difficult to prove. But the clear evidence of these ceremonies in the early third century has to be set against the failure of the second century writers to supply evidence as unmistakable of their existence in the period between the end of the end of the apostolic age and the time of Tertullian and Hippolytus.[5]
Kavanagh states the case in a
stronger, but not unwarranted fashion:
This should alert one to the probability that when the New Testament texts refer, especially in passing, to ‘baptism’ they mean something ritually larger and increasingly more sophisticated and complex than the water bath alone. If this is not presumed, then it becomes impossible to account for how rites particularly related to the Spirit and in closer ritual contact with the water bath than proclamation prior to it, suddenly appear as though from nowhere during the second and third centuries. Nor does it explain why these rites quickly become accepted as traditional in churches obsessed with fidelity to the gospel and apostolic tradition.[6]
II. Tertullian
The administration of Holy Baptism in Tertullian’s North African setting involved baptism in water, anointing (On Baptism 7), signing with the cross (On the Resurrection of the Flesh 8), and imposition of the hand (On Baptism 8).[7] Tertullian explained the anointing in relation to priesthood: “After that we come up from the washing and are anointed with the blessed unction, following that ancient practice by which, ever since Aaron was anointed by Moses, there was a custom of anointing them for priesthood with oil out of a horn” (On Baptism 7).[8] This explanation of anointing in relation to priesthood (cf. 1 Peter 2:9) will be one of the dominant ones found in the western Church.
The administration of Holy Baptism in Tertullian’s North African setting involved baptism in water, anointing (On Baptism 7), signing with the cross (On the Resurrection of the Flesh 8), and imposition of the hand (On Baptism 8).[7] Tertullian explained the anointing in relation to priesthood: “After that we come up from the washing and are anointed with the blessed unction, following that ancient practice by which, ever since Aaron was anointed by Moses, there was a custom of anointing them for priesthood with oil out of a horn” (On Baptism 7).[8] This explanation of anointing in relation to priesthood (cf. 1 Peter 2:9) will be one of the dominant ones found in the western Church.
Tertullian is very explicit that the
Spirit is given through the imposition of the hand in prayer: “Next follows the
imposition of the hand in benediction, inviting and welcoming the Holy Spirit”
(On Baptism 8).[9] In a corresponding fashion he says that the
Spirit is not given through the water: “Not that in the waters we
obtain the Holy Spirit; but in the water, under (the witness of) the angel, we
are cleansed, and prepared for the Holy Spirit” (On Baptism 6).[10] At the same time, in his writings Tertullian
can speak about how the soul is “renewed in its second birth by water and the
power from above” (Treatise on the Soul 41).[11]
Lampe has described Tertullian’s
theology as confused because it seems to deny “that the Spirit is actually
bestowed upon the believer at the moment of his regeneration.”[12] However Fisher is most likely more accurate
when he counters: “It may be freely granted that blessings which Tertullian
ascribed to baptism and to the hand laying respectively are from the
theological point of view in the last resort indivisible. But in his day both acts formed part of a
rite which was a single whole, in which baptism in water, unction, consignation
and imposition of the hand followed one another without any appreciable
interval of time between.”[13] As he goes on to say, “In short, then, the
evidence as a whole points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that in
Tertullian’s view baptism by itself by the operation of the Holy Spirit
conferred eternal salvation and remission of sins, while the subsequent
hand-laying conveyed the gift of the Holy Spirit to the initiates … To say,
however, that the convert received the Holy Spirit at the hand-laying after
baptism does not carry with it the implication that he had been untouched by
the Spirit up to that moment. The
baptism which he had received was not a mere water-baptism but a baptism of
water and the Spirit.”[14]
III. Cyprian
Cyprian’s writings demonstrate a very similar ritual structure, a little later in North Africa, as was found in Tertullian: baptism in water, anointing, imposition of the hand, and (perhaps) signing with the cross. Like Tertullian he attributed the gift of the Spirit to the imposition of the hand: “They who are baptized in the church are brought to the prelates of the church, and by our prayers and by the imposition of the hand obtain the Holy Spirit, and are perfected with the Lord’s seal [signaculo dominico]” (Letter 73 to Jubaianus, 9).[15] In this section of the letter, Cyprian is the first writer to cite Acts 8 as justification for this practice.[16]
Cyprian’s writings demonstrate a very similar ritual structure, a little later in North Africa, as was found in Tertullian: baptism in water, anointing, imposition of the hand, and (perhaps) signing with the cross. Like Tertullian he attributed the gift of the Spirit to the imposition of the hand: “They who are baptized in the church are brought to the prelates of the church, and by our prayers and by the imposition of the hand obtain the Holy Spirit, and are perfected with the Lord’s seal [signaculo dominico]” (Letter 73 to Jubaianus, 9).[15] In this section of the letter, Cyprian is the first writer to cite Acts 8 as justification for this practice.[16]
Yet also like Tertullian, Cyprian
clearly believed that the Spirit was active in the water of baptism as he gives
forgiveness of sins and spiritual birth.
For example, he writes in Letter 74.5, “Furthermore a person is not born
again through the imposition of the hand when he receives the Holy Spirit, but
in baptism so that having first been born he may receive the Spirit.”[17]
And so Fisher is justified when he says, “In conclusion, then, Cyprian’s
doctrine of initiation, virtually identical with that of Tertullian, requires a
liturgical practice where baptism, anointing, consignation and hand-laying with
prayer are seen to be an organic whole. There is no ground for disagreement as
to the spiritual blessings conferred by the whole rite; the difficulty arises
when the attempt, unavoidable in the circumstances of today in the West, is
made to distribute the blessings among the particular moments in the rite.”[18]
Tertullian knew of infant baptism but
argued that, baptism should be delayed because children were more likely to sin
after baptism, and thus require the rigors of public penance and
reconciliation to the Church (On Baptism, 18).
Cyprian, on the other hand, was a strong supporter of infant baptism
(Epistle 64). Cyprian also provides
evidence that children, and even infants, were receiving the Sacrament of the
Altar (On the Lapsed 3.9, 25) and is the first witness that they received the
Sacrament after baptism. Holeton has
commented:
Cyprian gives us what appears to be an already developed theology of the practice as well as several illustrations of infant communion. First, he bears witness to the coupling of John 3:5 (‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit …’) and John 6:53 (‘Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man…’) as a single logion in the traditio fidei, establishing what is necessary for participation in the Christian community. Infants are as capable of baptism as are adults and share equally in the divine gift given in baptism. Having thus been baptized in the Spirit the newborn drink thereon from the Lord’s cup, and are thus both ‘baptized and sanctified’ (‘baptizandum et santificandum’).[19]
From this period on, infant communion
after baptism and anointing was the standard initiation pattern in Christianity
for more than a thousand years.
IV. Apostolic Tradition
In the past, the so-called Apostolic Tradition attributed to Hippolytus (ca. 215) has been cited as evidence for baptismal practice in Rome at the beginning of the third century. There, after baptism the (21.18) the individual is anointed by the presbyter (21.19). Next the bishop lays his hand on him and according to the oldest manuscript (Latin) prays, “Lord God, who have made them worthy to receive the forgiveness of sins through the laver of regeneration of the Holy Spirit, send on them your grace, that they may serve you according to your will” (21.21).[20] The later Boharic, Arabic and Ethiopic manuscripts have “make them worthy to be filled with the/your Holy Spirit” instead of “send on them your grace.”[21] Then the bishop anoints the baptized (21.22) and signs them on the forehead (21.23). This double anointing, with the hand laying and second anointing done by the bishop, matches what will be found in Rome in a later period.
In the past, the so-called Apostolic Tradition attributed to Hippolytus (ca. 215) has been cited as evidence for baptismal practice in Rome at the beginning of the third century. There, after baptism the (21.18) the individual is anointed by the presbyter (21.19). Next the bishop lays his hand on him and according to the oldest manuscript (Latin) prays, “Lord God, who have made them worthy to receive the forgiveness of sins through the laver of regeneration of the Holy Spirit, send on them your grace, that they may serve you according to your will” (21.21).[20] The later Boharic, Arabic and Ethiopic manuscripts have “make them worthy to be filled with the/your Holy Spirit” instead of “send on them your grace.”[21] Then the bishop anoints the baptized (21.22) and signs them on the forehead (21.23). This double anointing, with the hand laying and second anointing done by the bishop, matches what will be found in Rome in a later period.
While
the Apostolic Tradition has in the past been used as evidence for pre-Nicene
baptismal practice in Rome, this now seems unlikely. The attribution to Hippolytus is based on
weak evidence and is in no way certain for a large number of reasons.[22] It seems more likely that the text is a
conflation of several different traditions from a number of periods and that
its final form reflects a fourth century setting.[23] Since the Verona (Latin and earliest)
manuscript dates to fifth century Italy, the text provides important
information for understanding later practice in Italy.
V. Observations
I would like to make four observations about this pre-Nicene evidence. The first is that we do not find the rite of Confirmation in this early period. There is not yet, as the medieval Church came to understand it, a separate action by the bishop which bestowed the Spirit in order to provide some new or additional gift for someone who is already a Christian through baptism. Instead, there is simply the single rite of Holy Baptism through which a Christian received rebirth and the gift of the Spirit. The focus is Holy Baptism – nothing more and nothing less. Confirmation was not instituted by Christ like Holy Baptism, Holy Absolution and the Sacrament of the Altar and so we do not find the early Church administering it from the beginning.
I would like to make four observations about this pre-Nicene evidence. The first is that we do not find the rite of Confirmation in this early period. There is not yet, as the medieval Church came to understand it, a separate action by the bishop which bestowed the Spirit in order to provide some new or additional gift for someone who is already a Christian through baptism. Instead, there is simply the single rite of Holy Baptism through which a Christian received rebirth and the gift of the Spirit. The focus is Holy Baptism – nothing more and nothing less. Confirmation was not instituted by Christ like Holy Baptism, Holy Absolution and the Sacrament of the Altar and so we do not find the early Church administering it from the beginning.
Second,
we see here the beginning of a trend that will run through the whole history of
the early and medieval Church. Acts 8
becomes the basis for the belief that the laying on of hands by a bishop (or
presbyter in many cases) bestows the Holy Spirit in the rite of Holy
Baptism. As we have seen in Tertullian
and Cyprian, this does not mean that the work of the Spirit giving rebirth has
been absent in the water of baptism.
Instead, it indicates that the laying on of hands is part of the
baptismal rite that bestows the Spirit in a unique way.
The
descriptive account of what happened with the apostles Peter and John in
Samaria becomes justification, authorization and prescription for those in the
Office of the Holy Ministry to do the same.
The problem is that the text contains neither command nor the promise
that this will be true for others. While
the Scriptures speak about the water of baptism and the command and promises
attached to it, they never say anything in regard to the laying on of hands in
baptism in order to give the Spirit.
Third,
it must be conceded that while the exegetical basis for the claim about the
hand laying is inadequate the idea itself of the Spirit being given more than
once, or for more than one purpose, is not contrary to Scripture. A reading of John 20 and Acts 2 demonstrates
that this is possible.
Finally, while the evidence for infant communion in the first millennium of the Church is incontrovertible, that fact does not justify the practice. While is it possible to construct a theological argument based on the nature of the Means of Grace and of faith, such an attempt founders on 1 Cor 11:27-31. We must acknowledge the unique character of the each of the Means of Grace as it is presented to us by Scripture. The apostolic instruction that it is necessary for a believer to examine himself (1 Cor 11:28; δοκιμαζέτω δὲ ἄνθρωπος ἑαυτόν) and discern the body of Christ (11:29; μὴ διακρίνων τὸ σῶμα) – to recognize what it is and what it does in the vertical and horizontal relationships created by the Sacrament (1 Cor 10:16-17) – preclude infants from receiving the Sacrament. The exegetical data permits no other answer.[24]
The Lutheran Confessions lead us to the same conclusion. Lutherans confess that we administer the Sacrament to those who know what it is and why they need it. We do not give it to those who "does not believe these words or doubt them" because in such a case they are "unworthy and unprepared, for the words ‘for you’ require all hearts to believe" (SC VI.9-10). They say that, "No one should by any means be forced or compelled to go to the Sacrament” but instead those who have faith in these words “given and shed for you for the fortgiveness of sins” (SC VI.9-10). Infants are incapable of doing this, and so they should not receive the Sacrament until they are able to do so. Holy Baptism is not the Sacrament of the Altar, and vice versa. We cannot operate as if the requirements for the two sacraments are mutually interchangeable.
While infant communion is to be rejected, this does not mean that children are to be excluded from the Sacrament. It is entirely commensurate with the Scriptures, the Confessions, and the practice of the Church – including the Lutheran Church - for children to receive the Sacrament of the Altar. I will treat this point in more detail when we arrive at the Reformation period.
Next in this series: The weird and wacky history of Confirmation, Part 2 - Rome before Confirmation
[1] Ray Laurence, Simone Esmonde Cleary
and Gareth Sears, The City in the Roman West c. 250 BC – c. AD 250 (Cambridge: Cambridge
Univ. Press, 2011),
204.
[2] Leonel L. Mitchell, Baptismal
Anointing (Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1966) , 26.
[3] Aidan Kavanagh, The Shape of
Baptism: The Rite of Christian Initiation (Collegeville, MN:
The Liturgical Press, 1991, 28.
[4] Kavanagh, The Shape of Baptism,
28.
[5] J.D.C. Fisher Christian
Initiation: Confirmation Then and Now (Chicago: HillenbrandBooks, 1978),
28.
[6] Kavanagh, The Shape of Baptism,
26 (emphasis original).
[7] Fisher, Confirmation Then and Now,
33.
[8] E.C. Whitaker, Documents of the Baptismal Liturgy (rev. and ed. Maxwell E.
Johnson; Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2003), 9 (hereafter
DBL).
[9] DBL 9.
[10] Ante-Nicene Fathers 3.692
(hereafter ANF).
[11] ANF 3.221
[12] G.W.H. Lampe, The Seal of the
Spirit: A Study in the Doctrine of Baptism and Confirmation in the New
Testament and Fathers (2d ed.; London:
SPCK), 161.
[13] Fisher, Confirmation Then and Now,
36.
[14] Fisher, Confirmation Then and Now,
38-39.
[15] DBL 13.
[16] Maxwell E. Johnson, The Rites of Christian Initiation: Their
Evolution and Interpretation (rev. and exp.; Collegeville, MN: The
Liturgical Press, 2007), 91.
[17] Fisher, Confirmation Then and Now,
41.
[18] Fisher, Confirmation Then and Now,
47.
[19] David Holeton, Infant Communion - Then
and Now (Bramcote/Nottingham: Grove Books, Ltd., 1981), 5 (cited by
Johnson, The Rites of Christian
Initiation, 93).
[20] Paul E. Bradshaw, Maxwell E. Johnson
and L. Edward Phillips, The Apostolic Tradition: A Commentary
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002), 118.
[21] Bradsahw, Johnson and Phillips, The
Apostolic Tradition, 118.
[22] Bradshaw, Johnson and Phillips, The
Apostolic Tradition, 1-6. See the summary of the weaknesses in Paul F.
Bradshaw, The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and
Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002),
81-83.
[23] Johnson, The Rites of Christian Initiation 101-110; Bradshaw, Johnson and Phillips, The Apostolic Tradition,
108-125.
[24] On the vocabulary and structure, see:
Mark P. Surburg, “Structural and Lexical Features in 1 Corinthians 11:27-32, “Concordia
Journal 26 (2000): 200-217. On the
referent of “body” in 1 Cor 11:29, see: A. Andrew Das, “1 Corinthians 11:17-34
Revisited,” Concordia Theological Quarterly 62 (1998): 187-208,
197-208. On the setting of the
Corinthian Lord’s Supper, see: Mark P. Surburg, “The Situation at the
Corinthian Lord’s Supper in Light of 1 Corinthians 11:21: A Reconsideration,” Concordia
Journal 32 (2006): 17-37. For a
helpful discussion of the issues raised by this text, see: Jeffrey A. Gibbs, “An
Exegetical Case for Close(d) Communion: 1 Corinthians 10:14-22; 11:17-34,” Concordia
Journal 21 (1995): 148-163.