Friday, March 25, 2011

Expanded rubrics for LSB are coming. . .

. . . from CPH in 2013, maybe. That's the word from the LSB desk at CPH that was recently posted to a pastors' discussion forum. I, and many others, have been looking forward to the release of this volume, LSB: Liturgy Desk Edition, since publication of LSB in 2006. It's disappointing, of course, that the delay has been, and continues to be, so long - but I am happy that they are taking the time to produce a quality product.

The main frustration in not having this volume come out with LSB is best seen in the famously obscure rubric in LSB for how to deal with the consecrated elements after the Lord's Supper: one is to cover them with a veil upon the altar. Period. No other instructions. This, of course, hardly makes it possible to "say the black and do the red" and has done nothing to help clean up the myriad of poor practices in this regard that occur throughout the Synod (treating consecrated hosts like mere bread, dumping a consecrated chalice back into a jug of wine, etc. etc.).

In one sense this is not a bug, but a feature. One of the great strengths built into LSB is its flexibility - the sparse rubrics help make the book accessible to the widest possible range of our fellowship. And this has undoubtedly been a success - never has a hymnal been accepted in our midst so completely so quickly - and this at a time when fealty to Our Beloved Synod has been in general decline.

The great task set before the Liturgy Desk Edition will be to help guide pastors into better practice without merely grinding the axes of the contributors. For example, I am a strong proponent of consuming all the elements consecrated in a celebration at that celebration. I hope that the forthcoming volume will encourage that practice - but it will simply have to also include instructions for the proper reservation of the elements because some pastors are going to continue to do that. It will have to walk a fine line between encouraging better practice and alienating those with weak practice. A good example of how to walk this line is Maxwell's The Altar Guild Manual from CPH (my favorite irony about this excellent work is its CPH published, COW approved statement that the plastic individual cups should never be used - at least the Altar Guild Manual is not advertised on the actual page in the CPH catalogue where the plastic cups are sold. . . ).

In addition I desperately hope that the authors of this volume will include more helpful directions for celebrations that include assistance from more than one pastor (the use of the liturgical deacon and subdeacon).

In the meantime, you do not have to wait until 2013 for intelligent, historical, and insightful commentary on the rubrics of the Lutheran Divine Service. Contact Redeemer Press for copies of Lang's Ceremony and Celebration and the Piepkorn-McClean editon of Conduct of the Service. These volumes formed the basis for the extensive rubrics included right alongside the text of the Common Service included in Daily Divine Service Book and DDSB: Rubrics and Prayers for Celebrant and Deacon.

+HRC

Thursday, March 24, 2011

What to Do About the Seminaries?

Some time ago, Rev. Curtis asked us what we thought the seminaries should do in light of the current glut of pastors in the LC-MS and financial difficulties. Living in the shadow of Kramer Chapel, it is hard not to have a few opinions about the fate and purpose of our seminaries, even though they haven’t asked. No doubt there are things I don’t know and don’t understand. I don’t have much of a feel for CS-StL, nor do I love that school the way I love CTS-FW. But I do love CTS-FW deeply. I send them money. I pray for them. I recruit for them. I defend them. I love them. I hope that love will be understood and soften these remarks, and I apologize in advance for any ignorance I here display. We must surely all agree that changes have to be made and there needs to a plan. Here is my thinking.

CTS should reduce the wages of everyone who isn’t making minimum wage across the board by a small percentage. Everyone should share the burden equally, unless the president’s council or the deans wanted to all take an extra percent as a show of support and leadership. Even if the gesture is mainly symbolic, and is no more than .5% I think it is important. The student workers, custodians, maintenance personal, and faculty all need to know how serious this is and that there will be changes. They need to be involved and cutting their salaries gets their attention. It will save money but it will also set a tone. By sharing the burden this way, they might also save their jobs.

A meeting should be called of every employee, even student employees, where the situation is explained. The goal is to protect the jobs and livelihoods of the employees and to continue to serve the synod. CTS has a sacred mission. They aren’t just working for a paycheck. If they are, they are in the wrong place. The goal is to work together to save the institution for the sake of the Church. Time should be given to discussing and brain-storming cost-saving measures. Are there ways that the institution could save electricity or cut down on paper? Could the offices only turn on half the lights or could the offices be only open 4 days a week instead of 5? Could they ban small refrigerators and microwaves? The seminary needs the support of its employees to make these cuts. It will hurt, but it needs to be done in hard times. Pennies must be pinched.

But that is the small stuff. In my mind, CTS needs to respond to the new economy within the synod. We don’t need many new pastors. CTS can’t expect a freshman class of 60-70 students these days. It can’t place that many graduates anyway and they don’t’ have enough financial aid to make it affordable. What the synod does need is continuing education and professional theologians and it would be very nice to have a flexible institution ready if the baby boomers do ever start retiring and/or dying.

The seminaries could be funded, in part, by given them the CTCR budget and duties. That, it seems to me, is unlikely. Once a kingdom (aka a budget) has been built, no matter how useless it is, men will fight to defend it, It is also the old synod economy. The seminaries have already made this shift anyway: they have to raise their own funding. The good news is that they are more independent. They should build on that. Because CTS simply can’t rely on money from the synod. We can decry that all we want, but I think it is simply part of the reality we now live in. I don’t think we can turn it back. President Harrison promised budget monies. I don’t know if he can keep the promise. Even if he does, there is no real guarantee of how long it would last. But even without synodical funding, we need the CTS faculty to do the work that has been given to the CTCR. They should “sell” themselves to donors as think tanks independent of the synodical bureaucracy. This is very appealing to the CTS constituency and it is true and necessary work. I think, maybe naively, that there are donors who would be attracted to it. I think CTS could make a direct appeal to the sons of Robert Preus to aid them in this effort and might even name an actual think tank “The Robert Preus Institute.” The Quarterly could transform. It could grow and be marketed. CTS could stop giving it way and stop addressing obscure theological subject. It could be the front man for the Institute and directly addressing, in a theological way, the issues of the Missouri-Synod. The Institute could nold more conferences, retreats, elder-hostels, youth gatherings, and do more to promote the faculty as speakers-for-hire. In fact, I would make honorariums payable to the seminary not to the men who speak. It would be part of the faculty duties to go and speak and promote the seminary and work for the Institute. It would not be a way for under-paid faculty to make extra money. I know this will be tough on the faculty, even as a cut in pay will be, but times are tough, and it could pay off by saving the seminary and posturing it well for the future.

The other thing CTS could do in the current synodical economy is beef up continuing ed. CTS could become a theological center for laity and clergy. They could offer certificates and degrees. People want to earn some recognition. R.C. Sproul was very successful in this kind of endeavor and did a great service to his church body. Issues, Etc has proven that there is a real lay desire for theological discourse and training. They are willing to pay for it. LC-MS day-school teachers are all required to get masters degrees by the State. Most of them go to local universities and obtain mainly worthless masters’ degrees in Education. Most of them love Theology, that is why they aren’t teaching in public schools, yet most of them are woefully under-trained in Theology. The seminary could tap into that market. It could offer a special program for teachers that could be complete in a few summers and on-line. They could offer similar programs for other professional church workers, including all the pastors on the roster who didn’t go through a regular seminary program. Pastors are also looking for degrees and prestige. The D-Min program is fairly accessible and practical. It could be expanded and different versions of it, for musicians or those with special interests, could be developed and offered.

There is also a continuing interest in languages that CTS is uniquely posed to offer. Pastors need refresher courses in the Biblical languages. Lay people are interested in this also and there is a constant need for research languages. Concordia Language Villages, run by Concordia College Moorhead, Minnesota, is multi-million dollar outfit. Why doesn’t CTS create an immersion German program? What about Latin, Greek, and Hebrew? Could Japanese be taught? Nearly every pastor in the United States could use Spanish!

As radical as it might sound, the other thing that CTS should do is raise their admission standards for the M-Div program and turn students away. That just can’t be the bread and butter anymore. The students who come ought to be the cream of the crop. In this vein, CTS should get out of the alternative programs. Let CS-StL specialize in lay ministry, DELTO, SMMP, and the many other quick and non-academic routes onto the LC-MS roster. CTS should focus on academic theology and music. That is where they are strong. That is what their constituency and donors want. That is what they are good at. Besides that, they need to demonstrate why there should be two seminaries. Right now there is little to distinguish one seminary from the other since they offer virtually identical programs.

Sadly, all I have are ideas. I don’t have money and I am no expert in these things. The ideas probably have some holes. But I love CTS and I pray for her, her faculty, staff, and students daily. That library needs to be finished. CTS needs to remain in our synod as an institution that trains pastors and theologians. The synod needs her. I pray she remains and I pledge my support, meager as it is.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Poll: Preaching Habits

Long before I was asked to join the editorial board of Gottesdienst, the journal had a strong influence on my preaching. There is truly no such thing as an original preacher - at least, one hopes there is not - and the marks of Eckardt, Petersen, Fabrizius, Koch, Stuckwisch, et al., are clearly to be seen in my preaching week in and week out. While the articles and commentary in the print journal are always insightful, I think that the section that contains sermons ancient and contemporary is actually the most important part of the contents each quarter. As our own Dr. Stuckwisch has commented before, if the preaching is right in a parish/church/synod, ceteris paribus, everything else will fall into place.

The topic of how exactly to preach comes up again and again at Gottesdienst gatherings. And in these discussions I witnessed one of the traits of the Gottesdienst Crowd that I most admired: among these excellent preachers, there was always exhibited a desire to get better. I can't imagine that I will ever be able to produce, week in and week out, the beautiful homilies that I read, for example, from Fr. Koch - I would be happy to do so and rest on my laurels! But these men, far from thinking they have it all figured out, will debate for hours on the homiletic task.

One of the topics perennially undertaken in this regard is whether to prepare a manuscript or not. In the corner of a carefully prepared manuscript chiefly stands Petersen - and in favor of no manuscript at all, we have Eckardt and Fabrizius.

For a long while, my practice has been to prepare a manuscript for Sunday morning, to preach off the cuff at shut-in calls and at Wednesday Low Mass, and to use an outline for Lent and Advent midweek services. For a while I was very much intrigued with Petersen's practice of arranging his manuscript in sense lines that helped to aid in delivery - but there is no doubt that, at least for me, a truly free delivery can only be attained with manuscript free preaching.

Something I've been trying lately, now that I have a handful of years through the historic lectionary, is to pull out a previous year's sermon and reedit it. Originally I did this a couple times because I was in a pinch after a busy week - but then I found that when I was preaching from one of these old, reedited sermons I suddenly felt much more free to range away from the manuscript. Perhaps this is a peculiar kink in my own brain - but it worked for me. I had the anchor of a manuscript, but felt unchained from it. Has it ever happened to you that right in the midst of preaching a sermon, you suddenly see a new insight that you should have put in the manuscript? When that would happen to me, I would just have to let it go to stay on script. Now that I am regularly practicing this preaching of reedited sermons, I find that not only can I follow that new insight while preaching, but that they come more often.

At any rate - if you don't subscribe to the print journal, the sermons are worth the price of admission. You will benefit greatly by being pushed and prodded to never grow satisfied with your own preaching - I know I have been.

+HRC

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Kansas City Recap

We had a wonderful day at Christ Lutheran Church in Platte Woods, MO, yesterday at our latest regional Gottesdienst conference! Many thanks are due to both pastors, the organist from a neighboring parish, and many others who made the day possible. Dr. Eckardt's paper exploring the distinction between the natural will, the renewed man in Christ, and how that relates to the forms of worship popular in American Evangelicalism was fascinating. In the afternoon we looked at ceremony in general - what it is, why the Confessions say we use the ceremonies we do, etc. - as well as the specific ceremonies of the Easter Vigil and how they bring the drama of Lent to its climax. And then we were off to Fr. Froiland's home where his bride graciously hosted the gathered guests with Boulevard beer (Kansas City's own) and great conversation.

You might say that the aim of these regional Gottesdienst conferences is to create the day of prayer and study that you wish your Winkel or general pastors' conference always was. More information on our next regional conference will be forthcoming soon - it's scheduled for Tuesday, May 3 in Chicago.

+HRC

Thursday, March 17, 2011

St. Patrick on Issues, Etc. today

I was invited to talk about St. Patrick today on Issues, Etc. You can listen this afternoon live or later on via podcast. And if you are in the Kansas City area - we'll see you tomorrow, Dv, at Christ Lutheran Church in Platte Woods.

Here is the Collect for St. Patrick from DDSB (which you can currently purchase with free shipping by entering the coupon code GROUND at checkout):

O God, Who didst deign to send blessed Patrick, Thy Confessor and Bishop, to announce Thy glory to the Gentiles: grant that we also may have the purity of Thy Word; through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost: ever one God, world without end.

+HRC