The Burr in the Burgh

Every once in a while I talk to someone who thinks that reading fiction is a waste of time. Such a person might enjoy reading but only things that - as he might say - are real and true as opposed to fictional. This person sees no practical use for fiction. And of all the different genres of fiction, fantasy and fairy tale may appear to be the least practical of them all. After addressing a conference of librarians, C.S. Lewis was asked what practical use fantasy books such as his Chronicles of Narnia could possibly have for a child. Lewis responded that non-fiction is certainly a superb way to transfer information, such as how to build a boat. Fantasy might not help a boy to build a boat, but it would be immensely helpful should he ever find himself on a sinking boat.

The point is that the human imagination is important. And like all human faculties, our imagination is given to us by the Creator and can be used for good or ill. And it needs to be properly nurtured and exercised just like the intellect or the muscles of the body in order for it to be healthy.

What good is the imagination? It is the means whereby we can envision truths and possibilities that go beyond what may be perceived by the five senses. Those who see no use for fiction are in danger of being materialists. They become slaves to nature and have difficulty interacting with anything that stands above or outside of nature.

It comes down to the question of Pontius Pilate: "What is truth?" Is reading a book of science an encounter with the truth? Is reading a great novel or short story or poem a means of evading the truth? No, of course not. Scientific exposition can be filled with lies and falsehood as we find out every time "discoveries" are made which contradict previous assumptions. And poetry can convey enough beauty and truth to destroy worlds and transform lives.

I am often amazed and delighted at the unlikely places I find ingredients of truth. Even in fallen man, there are residues of understanding, vestiges of truth. So we should not be surprised to behold startling insights even in the artistic efforts of the godless. Chalk it up to natural revelation or imago Dei. Or to the dissipating fumes of Christendom. Sometimes the writers stumble onto truth accidentally. Sometimes they speak the truth unintentionally. Many times they do not even realize the full import of what they write. And other times, sensitive Christians are able to create portraits of human life by means of fiction or poetry that communicate reality more powerfully than other so-called more realistic types of writing.

Sphere: Related Content

In my summer Siberian lectures on Christian ethics, I identified three outlooks that challenge a Christian ethos: Pragmatism, Relativism, and Individualism. Pastor Petersen made me think of this when he asked the interesting question: What controversy will define this time in the life of the church?

What do you think are the hottest issues facing the Church today?

Sphere: Related Content

I understand and support the increased security measure airports have undertaken for our safety. I get it. But as one who will be travelling a good deal in coming months and years, I dread the hours of stress going through the hoops.

So in light of the need for security and for the sake of making everyone's life simpler, I'd like to make a suggestion. I think all ticketholders should be required to fly naked and tranquilized. The airlines can issue nice fuzzy terry clothe bathrobes for the sake of modesty and comfort. Then a good strong dose of nitrous-oxide to every passenger with the amount precisely calibrated to keep everyone happy and "flighty" for the exact length of the flight. Not only would flying be completely safe, people would enjoy it more.

Sphere: Related Content

Who said this and what movie is it from?

You know, I've always liked that word..."gargantuan"... so rarely have an opportunity to use it in a sentence.

Sphere: Related Content

Sphere: Related Content

I saw this over at Incarnatus Est. It's hilarious.

A guy named Roger is attracted to a woman named Elaine. He asks her out to a movie; she accepts. They have a pretty good time. A few nights later, he asks her out to dinner, and again they enjoy themselves. They continue to see each other regularly, and after a while neither one of them is seeing anybody else.

And then, one evening when they're driving home, a thought occurs to Elaine and, without really thinking, she says it aloud: "Do you realize that, as of tonight, we've been seeing each other for exactly six months?"

And then there is silence in the car. To Elaine, it seems like a very loud silence. She thinks to herself: Gosh, I wonder if it bothers him that I said that. Maybe he's been feeling confined by our relationship. Maybe he thinks I'm trying to push him into some kind of obligation that he doesn't want, or isn't sure of.

And Roger is thinking: Wow, six months.

And Elaine is thinking: But hey, I'm not so sure I want this kind of relationship either. Sometimes I wish I had a little more space, so I'd have time to think about whether I really want us to keep going the way we are, moving steadily toward.... I mean, where are we going? Are we just going to keep seeing each other at this level of intimacy? Are we heading toward marriage? Toward children? Toward a lifetime together? Am I ready for that level of commitment? Do I really even know this person?

And Roger is thinking: So that means it was ... let's see ... February when we started going out, which was right after I had the car at the dealer's, which means ... lemme check the odometer ... Whoa! I am way overdue for an oil change here!

And Elaine is thinking: He's upset. I can see it on his face. Maybe I'm reading this completely wrong. Maybe he wants more from our relationship, more intimacy, more commitment. Maybe he has sensed -- even before I sensed it -- that I was feeling some reservations. Yes, I bet that's it. That's why he's so reluctant to say anything about his own feelings. He's afraid of being rejected.

And Roger is thinking: And I'm gonna have them look at the transmission again. I don't care what those morons say, it's still not shifting right. And they'd better not try to blame it on the cold weather this time. What cold weather? It's 87 degrees out, and this thing is shifting like a crummy garbage truck, and I paid those incompetent thieves $600!

And Elaine is thinking: He's angry. And I don't blame him. I'd be angry, too. Oh, I feel so guilty, putting him through this, but I can't help the way I feel. I'm just not sure.

And Roger is thinking: They'll probably say it's only a 90-day warranty. That's exactly what they're gonna say, the scumballs!

And Elaine is thinking: Maybe I'm just too idealistic, waiting for a knight to come riding up on his white horse, when I'm sitting right next to a perfectly good person, a person I enjoy being with, a person I truly do care about, a person who seems to care about me, a person who is in pain because of my self-centered, schoolgirl, romantic fantasy.

And Roger is thinking: Warranty? They want a warranty? I'll give them a warranty! I'll take their warranty and stick it....

"Roger," Elaine says aloud.

"What?" says Roger, startled.

"Please don't torture yourself like this," she says, her eyes beginning to brim with tears. "Maybe I should never have said ... Oh, I feel so...." She breaks down sobbing.

"What?" says Roger.

"I'm such a fool," Elaine sobs. "I mean, I know there's no knight; I really know that. It's silly. There's no knight and there's no horse."

"There's no horse?" says Roger.

"You think I'm a fool, don't you?" Elaine asks.

"No!" says Roger. He's glad he finally knows the correct answer.

"It's just that ... that ... I need some more time," Elaine says.

There is a long pause while Roger, thinking as fast as he can, tries to come up with a safe response. Finally, he comes up with one that he thinks might work.

"Yes," he says.

Elaine, deeply moved, touches his hand. "Oh Roger, do you really feel that way?" she asks.

"What way?" asks Roger.

"That way, about time," says Elaine.

"Oh," says Roger. "Yes."

Elaine turns to face him and gazes deeply into his eyes, causing him to become very nervous about what she might say next, especially if it involves a horse. At last she speaks.

"Thank you, Roger," she says.

"Thank you," says Roger.

Then he takes her home, and she lies on her bed, a conflicted, tortured soul, and weeps until dawn. Roger, in the meantime, gets back to his place, opens a bag of Doritos, turns on the TV, and immediately becomes deeply involved in a rerun of a tennis match between two Czechoslovakians he never heard of. A tiny voice in the far recesses of his mind tells him that something major was going on back there in the car, but he is pretty sure that there is no way he would ever understand what, and so he figures it's better if he doesn't think about it. (This is also Roger's policy regarding world hunger.)

The next day, Elaine will call her closest friend, or perhaps two of them, and they will talk about this situation for six straight hours. In painstaking detail, they will analyze everything she said and everything he said, going over it time and time again, exploring every word, expression, and gesture for nuances of meaning, considering every possible ramification. They will continue to discuss this subject, off and on, for weeks, maybe months, never reaching any definite conclusions, but never getting bored with it, either.

Meanwhile, Roger, while playing squash one day with Elaine's brother, will pause just before serving, frown, and say: "Bill, did Elaine ever own a horse?"

Sphere: Related Content

"Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints." (Psalm 116:15)

A dear teacher and father in the faith, Kurt Marquart, has gone on to the church triumphant. The victory is ours through Christ our Lord.

What I always appreciated about Prof. Marquart was his clarity. He was able to speak about profound matters in ways that the careful listener could comprehend. Being his student was great joy. His unique sense of humor, his dignified manner, and his impressive intellect will be long remembered by Lutheran pastors and laity in America, Australia, Russia, and Haiti (among other places) where he frequently taught.

See here for more.

Sphere: Related Content

Real Sex: The Naked Truth about Chastity. That's the name of the latest book by Lauren Winner who also wrote the memoir entitled: Girl Meets God: A Memoir. Ms. Winner was the first plenary speaker for our conference on love and marriage. I have to admit that I was quite impressed. I have not read any of her works, but I figured she would be very articulate. I was impressed by her analysis of the currents of our culture.

The title of her paper was "Allowing Sex to Be Ordinary." She observed that the sexual revolution has not only impacted our views on non-marital sex but also on marital sex. She challenged us to answer "what is good sex?"

Those who engage in non-marital sexual relations refer to it as exciting. It is a thrill precisely because it is illicit and unpredictable. In other words, the excitement is derived from its inherent instability.

On the other hand, married sex is often decried as dull and ordinary. Ms. Winner states that the difference btwn marital and non-marital sex is . . . excitement. And she argues that we Christians capitulate to the currents of our world when we believe that marital sex is only good when it more closely resembles non-marital sex. So all sorts of advice is given to "spice up" our bedrooms, going from embarrasing to bizarre.

But allowing sex to be ordinary is the more counter-cultural approach. Marital sex is good because it is comforting, familiar, clumsy and a natural part of domestic life.

Anyhoo, I thought she made some provocative points and now intend to read her book.

Sphere: Related Content

Sphere: Related Content

I'm currently reading A Man in Full by Tom Wolfe and enjoying it very much. In one spot, the observation is made that some people are planners and others are doers. Life can be compared to a shooting match.

In a shooting match, your motto ought to be: Ready, Aim, Fire.

For many of us, it ends up being either: Ready, Fire, Aim or Ready, Aim, Aim, Aim, Aim...

Are you the type of person who acts without thinking? You shoot before you aim? Or are the type of person who thinks and considers, then re-thinks and re-considers, and then thinks some more before making a move, possibly never even getting around the "fire" stage?

Sphere: Related Content

There is now hard scientific evidence that celebrities are narcissistic. Really?! See here. I think I also read about a new controversial study which has discovered that water is wet and another one that heat is hot.

An interesting sub-point of this study reveals that professional musicians - arguably the most highly skilled category of celebrities - are the least self-absorbed. And women from reality shows - the least talented - are the most self-absorbed.

"I was sort of amazed by this study," said narcissism expert W. Keith Campbell, associate professor of psychology at the University of Georgia.

Really?! I'm not a "narcissism expert" but I found nothing amazing about this at all.

Interestingly, the experts make a distinction between narcissism and egotism. Narcissists, they say, actually hate themselves and they are compensating. Egotists genuinely do believe they're the best since sliced bread.

Martin Luther identified man's problem as being "curved in on himself." One modern theologian said man is radically self-centered. How does that jibe with the report that so many suffer from self-loathing? That's easy to answer. The opposite of pride is not self-hatred. The opposite of egotism is not narcissism. In fact, self-hatred is really just another form of self-worship because it all centers on the self.

Sinful pride is when one loves oneself above all things. And everyone is guilty of that, even if they loathe everything about themselves. Humility, on the other hand, is not self-deprecation. Humility means to not think of oneself at all.

Sphere: Related Content

When I departed from my con-
gregation in Pittsburgh, people said they hoped I'd still have occasion to preach. I will, but for now I am enjoying hearing good preaching for myself.

I have often thought about what are the necessary ingredients for good and effective preaching. Most fundamental, of course, is that the message remain Christ-centered; properly distinguishing law and gospel; highlighting the cross, forgiveness and justification; sacramental; ecclesial; and eschatological.

That having been said, the most orthodox preaching in the world helps no one if it is not heard. And hearing means more than simply that the sound waves vibrate the eardrums. Hearing includes understanding. Or as Jesus would say, you can have ears and still not hear or eyes and still not see.

In the post below, I mention two outstanding sermons that I heard today. What made them outstanding? A number of things. But one thing that stands out is that they were clear. It seems to me that what taints much of the Lutheran preaching I have heard is that it lacks clarity.

To me, this is the most difficult part of sermon preparation. I can write textual and orthodox sermons. That is relatively easy. What is less easy - at least to me - is to compose text for the ear instead of for the eye. Writing for the ear is a different skill than writing for the eye. When you are reading a page, you can go at your own pace. You can pause to think. You can re-read complicated sentences. But when you listen to oral exposition, you do not have those luxuries. We preachers need to keep that in mind. Preachers can have quite varying styles and still remain effective communicators. But however you do it, people need to be able to leave the building and know what they've just heard. It troubles me when a person listens, truly sits and listens to a sermon, but can't tell you much about it one hour later.

Part of the responsibility falls to the person in the pew, of course. Get enough sleep on Saturday night. Don't come to church expecting to be entertained. Pray for the ability to receive and understand God's Word. And be an active listener. Take notes, if it helps. I often do.

But preachers can't content themselves with writing orthodox manuscripts, though that is certainly essential. I'm not advocating that we water down the message. I'm not saying you have to dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator. I am saying that people today have more difficulty following oral presentation than they did a hundred years ago and so we generally perform a dis-service from the pulpit when we write like Victorians. Oh, that's not always the case. Congregations differ widely. And what you may be able to pull off quite well, may flop for me. And vice-versa.

I have heard and read sermons that used humor effectively and others that belittled the gospel with flippancy. No man should enter a pulpit unless he does so with fear and trembling. Sometimes illustrations do help to make a point. Other times, the preacher merely uses the biblical text as a pretext. The tail wags the dog. And the illustration becomes a point of its own. Cliche and trite expressions deaden the mind. Avoid them like the plague (wink).

A sermon that speaks should have meaty content, but should resonate with the average person. Don't be a clown, but watch out for the dreaded "pulpit tone." Be dignified but not hifalutin.

Sphere: Related Content

I heard two outstanding sermons today from two different preachers.

• This morning at Redeemer, Pastor Petersen offered a homily on Luke 10:25ff. Jesus said to love our neighbors as ourselves and the man asked, "who is my neighbor?" Pr. Petersen reminded us that everyone is our neighbor. No loopholes and no exceptions. Everyone is Jesus' neighbor and He loves us as He loves Himself.

• Then later today, President Wenthe preached at the opening service at which I was also installed. In his sermon, he talked about having perspective. Depending on one's perspective, a thing can be either a blessing or a disappointment. Then he emphasized that a Christian gets his perspective from God's house. What is the lens through which to correctly view God, ourselves and the world? Preaching and Sacrament.

Sphere: Related Content

16 year old Keisha Castle-Hughes (Whale Rider) plays the mother of God in the upcoming film due out in December 06. It's called The Nativity Story. Originally the title was going to just be Nativity. I wonder why the name change.

Readers of this blog know that I am a fan of the Anne Rice novel, Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt. Variety is reporting that Ms. Rice has sold the movie rights to her book. See here.

Sphere: Related Content

When I was a pastor in Pittsburgh, lots of people in the community called me "father." Pittsburgh is a heavily Roman Catholic area. I never stopped anyone or "corrected" them for this. Although addressing a Lutheran pastor as "father" is uncommon in the US, there is nothing wrong with it.

If someone asked me how I wish to be referred to, I'd say, "Call me Pastor or Pastor Stiegemeyer. Just don't call me late for supper."

When I introduce myself, I always just give my name and position. "Hi. I'm Scott Stiegemeyer, the pastor at such-and-so" or "I'm Scott Stiegemeyer, the Director of Admissions." I seldom use the word reverend of myself. Though I always refer to other clergy that way.

Sometimes, people would call me "Pastor Scott." Again, I think that's simply because of it being common in Roman Catholicism.

Occasionally people skip the titles altogether and just called me by my first name. I really never had this happen much. It seems to me that a pastor should not insist on respect or the use of honorifics for himself. Jesus never told anyone, "That's Reverend Jesus to you."

I consider myself fairly traditional. I am generally unhappy with the decline of manners in our society. And I certainly believe the pastoral office should be honored. But while I will make a fuss over respecting my fellow clergy, it is unseemly for a pastor to demand respect for himself.

Sphere: Related Content

So here is a case in England of a woman who has been diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state, similar to Terri Schiavo. New tests now show that this british patient has more mental awareness than her doctors had thought. The article states:

Lead researcher Dr Adrian Owen said: "These are startling results. They confirm that, despite the diagnosis of a vegetative state, this patient retained the ability to understand spoken commands and to respond to them through her brain activity."

I can't say how or if these findings relate to the Schiavo case. But it does demonstrate that doctors do not always know what they are talking about. They are constantly learning new things and daily updating and revising their findings. Which is why so many of us who believe that all human life is to be valued wanted to protect Mrs. Schiavo from her husband's desire to starve her to death.

Sphere: Related Content

At a meeting on Tuesday, President Wenthe led a devotion on Psalm 1. The english translates v.2 this way:

But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.

The word for "law" there, of course, is torah. The point Dr. Wenthe made is that the Hebrew word torah, though usually rendered as "law," can also refer to gospel.

What do I mean by law and gospel? Both are God's word but they do different things to me. The law kills and the gospel gives life. The law accuses and the gospel pardons. It is impossible for my sinful heart to delight in being accused and killed by the law. But the new me in Christ can delight in the law as the necessary prelude to the gospel which justifies me and regenerates me.

But I want to shine the spotlight on the word "delights." The message of Christ is delightful. Being a child of God is delightful. It is a delight to follow Christ. It is a delight to hear his words. It is a delight to reside in his church. And it is a delight to serve others in his name.

Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm all for gloom, despair and agony. They're actually my personal specialty. Left alone, I'd be the sourest, meanest, angriest, most self-pitying, most introverted cuss in the world. But "delight?" That has to come from outside myself.

Organic pathologies aside, it just seems to me that the more we get the idea that we are clean in Christ and in God's good favor, the delight would bust our seams.

Sphere: Related Content

Are you the next Jackson Pollock? Find out by going here. Change colors by clicking your mouse and hit refresh for a clean slate.

Sphere: Related Content

So is Bob Dylan recovering his Jewish identity? Looks like a hasidic hat.

Sphere: Related Content

In the previous blog post, a reader commented that the seminary should not call the qualified but qualify the called. Initially, I think his point was that we should remember that pastors (and pastors-to-be) are sinners too. I'm a pastor, and I am all too dreadfully aware of my own inadequacies and wickedness.

But if I may, I would like to address what I believe to be a common misunderstanding. It has to do with the notion of being called by God. I would disagree with my reader. The seminary recruitment office does not go looking for men who are called whom we will then train. Instead, we look for men who have certain qualities and aptitudes who will then receive a call. My reader is putting the cart before the horse. The tail is wagging the dog.

Who is called by God? If you tell me that you are called by God to be a pastor, my first question is: "How do you know?" How do you know you are called by God and it's not a figment of your own mind or a deception of the devil?

There are only two ways a man could be called by God. Either directly or through means. Either the church has selected, layed hands upon and sent you or you have been selected and sent directly by God without mediation. Those are the only two possibilities. Usually, God calls men through the church. He certainly can and has called men directly. But if you have a direct call from God, you ought to be able to demonstrate this with signs and wonders.

There is no such thing as an inner call to the ministry. The scriptures never speak of such a thing. You might have an inclination to be a pastor. You might be uniquely talented for the ministry. You might have a desire to serve. And this inclination, talent and desire might come from God. But that is not a call.

So no, we do not qualify the called. We call the qualified.

Sphere: Related Content

As the new Director of Admission at CTS-FW, I've been thinking a lot lately about recruiting students to study at the seminary. I've been particularly considering the dual need for both excellent and well-qualified students AND the need to recruit a greater number of students.

It is good for the institution to increase enrollment. Putting it very crassly, larger enrollment translates to more money. No one here is getting rich but more money translates into being able to improve and expand the seminary programs. It means a growing endowment and, hopefully, an ever brighter and solid future.

More than that - and this is the real reason I think of numbers - an increase in enrollment is good for the church. It means more men trained and certified for ordination. It means more preachers to further the divine mission of the church which is to make disciples of all nations.

On the other side, however, the church is very discerning about whom it ordains for pastoral ministry. The biblical requirements are very clear. He must be above reproach, apt to teach, have a stable family life, etc. The requirements for admission to the seminary are, in some ways, more stringent than the most elite Ivy League campus. Can we afford to be so selective? We can't afford not to be.

As I was reading some articles on the Office of the Ministry, I stumbled across this quote from Joseph Stump:

It is the duty of the Church carefully to select and train men for the holy office of the ministry, and she should not set men apart for it without due consideration of their physical, mental and spiritual qualifications. She is to lay hands suddenly on no man (1 Tim. 5:22), but is to see to it that only those are admitted to the office who have the requisite natural gifts, common sense, and Christian faith and piety; and who have received the necessary academic and theological training. Ordinarily this training ought to include a full course in college or university and in a theological seminary. Few exceptions, and those only for the best of reasons, should be made. The demand for quality in the ministry to-day is very great. The Lord not only needs men for the ministry, but He needs gifted and well-trained men. (Joseph Stump)

Sphere: Related Content

One of my favorite movies of the last ten years is Memento starring Guy Pearce. Like a lot of movies that appeal to me, it is kind of depressing. I like movies the same way I like coffee, chocolate, and beer: dark and bitter. But it is very thought-provoking and brilliantly constructed.

The premise of the film is that Guy Pearce has a strange malady where he cannot form any new memories. He knows how to read and drive and so forth, but about every 15 minutes his brain resets. So if he excuses himself during lunch to go to the men's room, he'll completely forget who he was eating with and why by the time he comes back out.

He also happens to be stuck in the middle of a murder mystery. So the only way he can function and pull himself out of his mess is by writing little memos all over his body to remind him who is friend and who is foe. It's really excellent.

Yesterday, I heard President Wenthe make an interesting connection. He mentioned this film and compared it to the situation of many contemporary Christians. He said that people who have no memory, lose their identity.

One of the most important things we can do to resist the Enemy's strategems is to remain knowledgeable of our history as the people of God. It's not just that when we forget the past, we are destined to repeat it, although I think that's true enough. It's that God is unfolding the salvation of His people through space and time. We really do stand on the shoulders of giants. We can see so much farther when we stand firmly on the great fathers and doctors of the faith than when we insist on idolizing the now. Many folks today think that if it's newer, it must be truer. Once upon a time, people looked to the aged for wisdom. Now many think the aged have nothing worthwhile to offer and that the youth have the answers.

Sphere: Related Content