Song of Zecharaiah

Also know as the Benedictus, it is right at the beginning of Luke. One of three songs (or five if you count Gabriel's messages as songs too - I do!) which open up that Gospel - talk about singing and dancing!

Since Zecharaiah was a priest there seems to me that there can be little doubt that he would recite one of the many Jewish prayers at the birth of his son. Especially after having seen a vision in the temple and struck mute for 9 months!

Wikipedia has this blessing (Shehecheyanu) which would be recited in thankgiving or commemoration of:

* The beginning of a holiday, including Passover, Shavuot, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot and Simhat Torah
* The first performance of certain mitzvot in a year, including sitting in a Sukkah, eating Matzah on at the Passover Seder, reading the megillah, or lighting the candles on Hannukah
* Eating a new fruit for the first time since Rosh Hashanah
* Seeing a friend who has not been seen in thirty days
* Buying certain new articles of clothing or utensils, such as a new suit
* The birth of a son

And this is the Shehecheyanu:

Baruch atah Adonai, elohainu melech ha-olam, sheheheyanu v’kee-y’manu v’hee-gee-anu lazman hazeh. (Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, who has given us life, sustained us and brought us to this great moment.)

It has been recorded for about 2000 years, which means it certainly existed around the time of Jesus (and John).

Just about every Jewish blessing starts with Baruch atah Adonai, elohainu melech ha-olam. The first words of the Benedictus are: "Blessed be the Lord the God of Israel who has come to His people and set them free."

It seems logical to me that what Zechariah probably said was the Shehecheyanu.

As I do not know enough about the very deep and broad list of Jewish blessings I am guessing at this point that some of the rest of the Benedictus also has Jewish counterparts. I am also not familiar with whether Jews do a little 'ad-libbing' with their prayers or not, thus starting with a formula and then improvising around familiar themes.

It would be very interesting to piece them all together.

Silence and actions

"To act with others is always good; to talk with others for the sake of talking, complaining, and recriminating, is one of the greatest scourges on earth" (Emile-Auguste "Alain" Chartier, 1868-1951).

And then this:

Monastics ought to be zealous for silence at all times,
but especially during the hours of the night. (RB 42)

Benedict goes on many times about the ills of "murmuring":

Above all things do we give this admonition,
that they abstain from murmuring. (RB 40 - and many other places)

It is interesting how the ideas connect. Why is it that I can spend a lot of time working with someone, and be successful, but I will get into a fight with less than 5 minutes conversation?

this reminds me of an incident a few years back. I was in my backyard doing some yardwork. My neighbor's teen son was out shooting hoops with two or three of his buddies. And apart from the occasional cheer or jeer and some trash talk, there was little conversation. I in fact did not really notice them. But then up drive two girls, I am assuming girlfriends, and all of the sudden the afternoon became crowded with chatter. The girls were talking to each other and on their cell phones (I could see). It was constant chat. The boys had been out there for well over an hour with very little conversation, and certainly no self-disclosure. The women were a whirlwind of chatter.

I think I can avoid sexism here by pointing out that this is truly a male-female trait. Women have a greater propensity to self-disclosure, and in fact look for such things. Men seem to be more comfortable with activity-sharing (read the entry on Maverick Philosopher's site linked above).

In terms of creating a healthy community how can this be done? Clearly our monastic forefathers (and mothers!) were distrustful of chatter. But why? Doubtlessly because the Bible says so (James, especially). But why does the Bible and James say so? What does silence, in this case the hard work of literally keeping your opinions to yourself, why is that such a negative?

Mostly because we do not know HOW to speak. As absurd as it sounds, we have no clue how to speak. We say the wrong thing, at the wrong time, to the wrong person. For example, I may complain to my wife about my boss or co-worker. Benedict would call that murmuring. This is an example of what I call "misplaced speech". If I have an issue with my co-worker the correct person to talk to is the co-worker. Generally I talk to my wife to elicit sympathy. Or worse to judge others.

The only possible correct use of speech in this case, i.e. talking to my wife, would if I sought her advice in preparation to talking to my co-worker. But that is generally NOT how conversations go. I am not seeking advice, I am rather wanting to gossip, murmur, bicker, complain, and generally I am looking for someone to prop up my poor bruised ego.

Is there a time/place/person with whom I can talked about my bruised ego? Yes - God. This is what the psalms teach me. Go to God first and often. Talk openly about this. "Murmur to God" as it were. That is legitimate. But also listen to God. Have a dialog, not a monologue.

When talking to others there is also a Biblical pattern: "Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing." (1 Thess. 5)

God, let me words be few, and let them all be encouraging.

Prayer - why bother?

I have come to understand my prayer as having more do to with my faithfulness, my constancy, my determination (I mean it in the sense of prioritizing, not of will-power, though some is required to put prayer first).

Probably, from God's perspective, there is no 'point' in my petitions - He already knows what I am praying for, why, and much more besides, including why He can/cannot honor my prayers as I ask them, but can instead offer me something else much better in the Big Scheme (which may feel a lot less or worse in my small schemes).

But prayer is not about God being changed. It is about me. It is my way of being open(ed). When I pray I change. It is that simple. And if I need to pray about one issue over and over, then I am being changed through that one issue, at ever deeper levels.

There are three changes which are wrought by prayer:

1) the development of my capacity to be reliable - praying daily teaches me to be constant in a world of inconstancy, there is something about the drip-by-drip approach to Heaven. There is no discernible, dramatic, life-altering, apocalyptic change. Just a voice in a corner of a room, in the corner of a street, in the corner of a neighborhood, in the corner of a town, in a corner of the world reciting a psalm very slowly;
2) prayer teaches me to develop patience - in a world of urgency I am reciting my prayers slowly and methodically and, well, prayerfully (lectio, reciting the psalms, etc). There is just no way out of this. You cannot rush through lectio, or it ceases to be lectio. You can say the psalms faster than one of those cattle auctioning guys, but it is no longer a recitation. Furthermore, and the psalms are the primary vehicle for this, the listening again and again to a limited series of problems (David feels cheated or betrayed, the nation of Israel is misbehaving again, God is wonderful and very very scary - did I cover them all?) has developed in me a greater capacity to listen to other people. The sad and sobering truth is that we tend to live our lives playing just one or two notes over and over again. It is a very hard thing to be able to "sing a new song";
3) the tree of constant & patient prayer gives the most succulent fruit of trust - I surrender more and more of my cares to God, and this means that my practice has a causal relationship to how calm, serene, peaceful and joyous I am even in the midst of tribulation. The ceaseless praying of every one of my needs and concerns and fears and pains and angers and lusts and desires and pettinesses and greeds as they happen, even as I am committing them....this raising up the common elements of my life, my bread and wine, so they become His Body and Blood.

It is better to understand the value of the repetitiveness of prayer by doing your own lectio on Luke 18:1-8. It will no doubt open up to you much better and practical and personal insights than the stuff I wrote above.

Stoicism and the secret of the heart

I have always loved the Stoics. They make so much sense to me. And they offer a clear and simple path: use reason to deal with the stuff which I can control, and ignore the rest. Of course by "the rest" it frequently ends up meaning other people, the environment, the planet....and by "things which I can control" this frequently gets smaller and smaller, so that all I am left with are my opinions (i.e. default reactions to phenomena)....I can control those...mostly.

If taken the the extreme, this program leads one into insufferable, boorish, opinionated arrogance and a disregard for the value (and validity) of others opinions, motives, etc.

One possible way to combat it is to develop faultless logic - hmmm but who is capable of that? Another possible way is to develop perfect discernment so I can accurately identify what is (or isn't) under my control. But that too is impossible.

I could claim that regardless of control issues, I should still be able to keep myself, that is my reactions, under control. You can shout at me, but I can choose not to be troubled. You can love me, but I can choose not to. In other words, it seems feasible to expect an adult to have their own responses, especially emotional ones, under control.

But is it true? Even that is questionable. I have hardly any control over the initial flush of anger or excitement. I cannot avoid being momentarily angry or sad or happy. These things arise like sweat - autonomously.

How about my actions? Surely I can control that. I can be angry at you (for having shouted at me) but I also can stop myself from lashing out or hitting you. I can be very glad to see you, but I can stop myself from running down the platform and sweeping you in a long protracted kiss.

Most of our social interactions expect this sort of restraint. Isn't restraint one of the meanings of 'society'? Rules for propriety and decorum, not to speak of taboo, are all ways of controlling behavior, actual, external, visible actions.

Thus when I look at the 10 Commandments it is clear how much they are concerned with controlling behaviors for the sake of society. It is not very good thinking to say that God commands us not to commit adultery because God wants us to have monogamous heterosexual marriages. The rule regarding adultery is not that for a moral reason like that, but rather to ensure peace and tranquility in the tribe, since God clearly had no issues with polygamy. And on and on.

But what to make of the Sermon on the Mount? In Matthew 5:17-48 Jesus takes a different different tack, or seems to ascribe responsibility to parts of myself which I feel are out of my control. For example he talks about murder, and takes it one step further saying that even being angry with another is equivalent to murder. Same with adultery - it is not a case of physical intimacy, but rather of looking at another with lust.

The sensible approach which I outlined above falls very short of the expectations set by God. Maybe this is another case where Stoicism fails. My reason tells me that I cannot be held accountable for the very natural desire for another woman, after all this is part of my genetic makeup, the very lust which led my ancestors to copulate and eventually beget me!

But Jesus says that being lustful, that looking at another lustfully is the same as adultery...to the heart.

And perhaps here is the piece of true logic which is impossible for me to attain without revelation. Jesus speaks from Reality, while I am always speaking contextually from historical appearance.

These two positions are not the same....one (mine) is focused on the information which can be sifted by my ego, and it uses both nature, that is my current self-apprehension, and nurture, that is the social rules I have learned, in interpreting phenomena and choosing the one which is most beneficial to its own goals. The other one (Jesus) says that there is an alternative processing center - the heart - which is capable of taking in both nature, nurture and one more thing to respond to phenomena.

What is this other thing? What is the secret of the heart?

New 95 Theses

Those crazy Lutherans....But there is plenty here to chew on.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, the public bulletin board of his day. In like manner, we, Athanasius and Chrysostom, post these 95 theses on the door of the internet. Like the original theses, these are debatable, for we believe that it is through vigorous debate that the spirits are tested and truth is revealed.

In publishing these theses, we do not intend to foment division, but to expose those who are creating division within the body of Christ. We are not addressing any particular church body or person, but invite all who love the Gospel of Jesus Christ to engage in this debate. We do so in the spirit of the great Reformer, Martin Luther, as we implore the mercies of God upon His Church, for the sake of Jesus Christ, the Lord of the Church and Bishop of our souls.

1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said “Repent,” He willed that the whole life of believers should be one of repentance.

2. To “repent” means to be contrite for one’s sins and to trust Jesus Christ and solely in His completed work for one’s forgiveness, life, and salvation.

3. Those who describe the Christian life as purpose-driven deny true repentance, confuse the Law and the Gospel, and obscure the merits of Christ.

4. Impious and wicked are the methods of those who substitute self-help and pop-psychology for the Gospel in the name of relevance.

5. This impious disregard for the Gospel wickedly transforms sacred Scripture into a guidebook for living, a pharisaic sourcebook of principles, and sows tares among the wheat.

6. Relevance, self-help and pop-psychology have no power to work true contrition over sins and faith in Jesus Christ.

7. Like clouds without rain, purpose-driven preachers withhold the proclamation of the forgiveness of sins won by Christ on the cross and enslave men’s consciences to the law which they cleverly disguise as so-called 'Biblical Principles'.

8. By teaching tips for attaining perfect health, debt-free wealth, and better sex in marriage, the purveyors of relevance undermine true fear, love and trust in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

9. They are enemies of Christ, who distort the Word of God by tearing verses from their original context in order to use them as proof texts for their self-help, pop-psychology agendas.

10. Injury is done the Word of God when it is used as a source book for practical, relevant “life applications.”

11. In the name of relevance, our Lord Jesus Christ is reduced to a life-coach whose “gospel” assists and motivates people to achieve the objectives of their self-centered delusions of grandeur.

12. Apart from the Holy Spirit, the seeker cannot understand the things of God for these are “spiritually discerned” (1 Cor 2:14).

13. The natural man does not naturally seek the Gospel. “I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me” (Is. 65:1)

14. The true Seeker of men’s souls is our Lord Jesus Christ who came to seek and to save the lost by His death on the cross (Luke 19:10).

15. The truly “seeker-sensitive” church proclaims God’s wrath against our sin and His mercy for Jesus’ sake.

16. The preaching of Christ crucified is a stumbling block to purpose-driven pragmatists and foolishness to church growth consultants.

17. The true gold of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

18. But this treasure is a stench in the nostrils of fallen and sinful men because it exposes man’s complete lack of ability to save himself by his own religious efforts.

19. On the other hand, the fool’s gold of self-help is preferred by sinful men, for it creates the illusion of moral progress and a life that is pleasing to God apart from repentance.

20. The gold of the Gospel is the net by which Christ would make us fishers of men.

21. The fool’s gold of self-help is a snare by which purpose-driven purveyors of relevance attempt to capture the riches and approval of men.

22. The church is holy sheep who hear the voice of their Shepherd.

23. How can sheep hear the voice of their Shepherd when false shepherds preach self-help and pop-psychology?

24. Purveyors of purpose-driven relevance are not shepherds of men’s souls but wolves in sheep’s clothing.

25. Purveyors of relevance claim that self-help, life-applications and biblical principles are the means to reach the unchurched because they meet people’s felt needs.

26. Yet a person’s greatest need is one he does not by nature feel, namely the need for the righteousness that comes from God through faith in Jesus Christ.

27. The true means by which fallen sinners are reached is the preaching of Christ and His sacraments. (Romans 10:17)

28. The true need that mankind is seeking but does not know is justification by grace through faith for Christ’s sake.

29. Since justification is through faith and not through works, natural man neither seeks it nor desires it.

30. Therefore, the teaching of justification by grace through faith is neither seeker-sensitive nor relevant to a world that naturally seeks self-justification.

31. To be in the church is to be union with Christ through faith.

32. Regardless of the number of people in attendance, the church does not grow unless men are granted repentance and faith by God through the action of His Word.

33. Scripture clearly teaches that the means by which God grants faith are the the hearing of the Word of Christ (the Gospel) and the water of Holy Baptism.

34.Therefore, even if a congregation, through their own marketing methods and business prowess were able to draw 100,000 people every Sunday, if the Gospel is not heard and the sacraments are not administered according to the Gospel there is no church and the true Church of Jesus Christ has not grown by a single soul.

35. If numerical growth is a measure of God’s approval, then we must conclude that God approves of Islam and the Mormons.

36. If financial success is a measure of God’s approval, then we must conclude that God approves of pornography and gambling.

37. Cancer and crabgrass both grow rapidly, as does the church that obscures the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

38. The purveying of purpose-driven relevance is the theology of glory; the preaching of Christ crucified for sinners is the theology of the cross.

39. The theologian of glory says that the kingdom of God is visible now in buildings, people, and dollars; the theologian of the cross says that the kingdom of God is an article of faith.

40. The theologian of glory asks “How much?” and “How many?”; the theologian of the cross preaches Christ regardless of how much or how many.

41. The theologian of glory prepares people to receive health, wealth, and happiness; the theologian of the cross prepares people to suffer and die in faith.

42. The theologian of glory preaches that God wants to grant you favors; the theologian of the cross preaches the favor of God for the sake of Christ crucified.

43. The theologian of glory proclaims 40 days of purpose; the theologian of the cross preaches daily dying and rising in Jesus.

44. God established the Church to be a “mouth house” of forgiveness not a madhouse of activity.

45. Christ wills that His voice be heard in His Church and not the voice of man when He says, “He who hears you, hears me.” (Luke 10:16)

46. Purveyors of purpose-driven relevance obscure the voice of Christ and so draw the sheep away from the Good Shepherd.

47. Christ saves from sin and death not through the motivation of the sinner to do good, but through baptismal death and resurrection.

48. The mission of the church is not to transform the world but to disciple the nations by baptizing and teaching (Matt 28:19-20).

49. Anyone who preaches a vision and demands allegiance to it sets up a new papacy among the churches.

50. A synod or church body is a human institution that exists by the will and consent of its member congregations and pastors.

51. A synod or church body is not merely an affiliation of churches that agree on a common purpose.

52. A synod or church body is not the Church, properly speaking, but a fellowship of churches sharing a common confession of faith and practice.

53. Synods are not of the church’s essence (esse) but for her well being (bene esse).

54. Synodical leaders are not lords over the churches, but servants of the churches and stewards of their common possessions.

55. Synodical leaders are not called to promulgate visions but to execute the collective will of the synod’s churches.

56. The old papacy arrogated the Church’s treasury of merits; the new papacy arrogates the Church’s treasury.

57. The old papacy said, “As the coin in the coffer clings, so the soul from purgatory springs.”

58. The new papacy says, “As the coin in the church coffer clings, so another program out of debt springs.”

59. The old papacy counted plenary indulgences; the new papacy counts money and people.

60. The old papacy suppressed the Gospel through canon law; the new papacy suppresses the Gospel through constitutions and by-laws.

61. The old papacy was a friend of Caesar; the new papacy is a friend of Mammon.

62. The old papacy bound a man’s conscience for the sake his wallet; the new papacy binds a man’s wallet for the sake of his conscience.

63. The old papacy promulgated infallible dogma; the new papacy promulgates undebatable visions.

64. The old papacy claims to sit on the seat of Peter; the new papacy claims to sit on the mandate of the majority.

65. The old papacy reserved the right to judge doctrine and practice; the new papacy judges doctrine and practice by commissions and committees.

66. The old papacy issued “bulls;” the new papacy issues task force reports.

67. The old papacy had a college of cardinals; the new papacy has high-priced consultants.

68. Just as popes and councils have erred in the past, so synodical leaders and synodical conventions err in the present.

69. A synod that is concerned for the true unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace does not excuse unionism and syncretism.

70. Unity in doctrine and practice means discernible interchangeability in teaching, preaching, and practice.

71. Unity in doctrine and practice does not consist in signing confessional statements, but in word and deed.

72. Worship is doctrine put into practice.

73. As one worships, so one believes.

74. As one believes, so one worships.

75. Christian worship consists in God’s service to us through His giving and our receiving in faith the gifts of Christ’s Word, Body, and Blood, and our service to God by our prayer, praise, and thanksgiving.

76. Worship that is focused principles for Christian living obscures the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His gifts and is detrimental to faith and salvation.

77. While Christian liberty allows that worship forms need not be altogether the same in every time and place, unity in faith and practice requires that worship forms must not be altogether different in every time and place.

78. Worship forms serve as identifying banners in the confessional field of battle.

79. Peculiar and novel worship forms obscure the unity of the churches and extol the creativity of the worship leaders.

80. In matters neither commanded nor forbidden in the Word of God (adiaphora), the churches of God are free to change ceremonies according to circumstances, as may be most beneficial and edifying to the churches of God. (Epitome, Art X.4)

81. Such changes must avoid all frivolity and offenses, particularly with regard to those who are weak in faith (Epitome, Art X.5).

82. Where the Gospel is at stake, concessions in ceremony must not be made so as to suggest unity with those who deny the Gospel (Epitome, Art X.6)

83. Therefore, it is contrary to the doctrine of adiaphora to hide the substance of Lutheran doctrine behind a non-Lutheran style of worship.

84. To create and sustain saving faith, God established the office of the holy ministry in the church to preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments according to our Lord’s institution.

85. No one may publicly preach, teach, or administer the sacraments in the churches without his being called and ordained.

86. Those who introduce novelties into the church are the true agents of division.

87. The ordination of women is a novelty that has caused great division in the church.

88. The introduction of worship forms not held in common by the churches is a cause of division and a stumbling block.

89. The church belongs to no man but to Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, and Lord of the church.

90. Woe to the false prophets who cry, “Unity, unity” when there is no unity.

91. Again, woe to those who say, “Peace, peace,” when there is no peace.

92. Again, woe to those who say, “Gospel, gospel,” when there is no Gospel.

93. Blessed are those who say, “Cross, cross,” when there is no cross.

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through all suffering, death, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many trials and tribulations, rather than through the assurance of outward peace, unity, and happiness.

"Our tendency to see data that confirm our prejudices more vividly than data that contradict them; our tendency to overvalue recent events when anticipating future possibilities; our tendency to spin concurring facts into a single causal narrative; our tendency to applaud our own supposed skill in circumstances when we’ve actually benefited from dumb luck." (from NY Times)

Perhaps the most critical component of monastic training is the development of simple seeing, simple hearing.

It is also one of the more difficult skills to develop and teach. Actually, that is not totally true - it is remarkably easy to teach, "just listen", "just look". But somehow such instructions are not as easy to follow as they are to give.

But why do we make it difficult?

At first I sought the 'fireworks' - you the the type of experiences which are overwhelming, something like the Holy Ghost 2x4 hitting you in the face. unmissable. And they do come! And it is amazing. And I walked around googly-eyed, mumbling and bumbling. There is a reason that the Church sent the recently converted Paul off to the Arabian deserts for a while (around 3 years). He needed time to work through some of the fireworks.

Later, as I cooled off, I spent time looking for the fireworks. Experiences which were unmissable. The irony, of course, is that I was missing out on experiences. All of them. Looking for something else. Looking perhaps for cosmic visions, and all the while missing out on Immanuel.

I have come to see that the "it" I am looking for is as subtle as a whisper. It is right here in conversations over the dinner table. Right here waiting at the traffic light. Right here in a cup of tea in the morning before the kids get up. Right here in the sunset this afternoon. Or in the memory of some event in primary school, the kind words of a teacher.

Immanuel. God with us.