Confessional Lutheran Or Not?

Philosopher Daniel Dennett once stated declared, "Postmodernism, the school of 'thought' that proclaimed 'There are no truths, only interpretations'". This paradigm, which eschews all definite declarations in the name of tolerance and getting along, has not only affected non-Christian thought, but Christian thought as well.

One area where this rears its ugly, unbiblical head is the world of polemics, especially the online variety. With the advent of Facebook, Twitter, and other social media outlets, the democratization of ideas has reached its near-pinnacle. It is a great thing when people from all walks of life have almost equal access to the expression of an opinion, but it does have its interesting side-effects. One such effect is the advent of the "arm-chair theologian." He - or she, with no theological training except self-study, spots a theological error somewhere in social media, and all hell breaks loose. 1000-comment threads are not uncommon on Facebook forums and groups with a theological point the main topic. Things can - and do - get pretty ugly. Now, this is not in and of itself a bad thing: iron sharpens iron, no matter who has the knife.

These exchanges usually bring out the ubiquitous refrain equivalent to the Rodney King "can't we all get along" meme. Nothing good can come of arguing, so says the self-proclaimed peace-maker. "Agree to disagree" they cry. They are now elevated as a moral superior, causing the "mad polemic" to shrink back into the corner. Refrainers are now democratized, and anyone can be one at the click of a mouse.

This brings me to my main point: disagreements between the Reformed and the Lutheran. When I was Reformed, I heard - very often - that the Lutherans and the Reformed are "kissing cousins", and only disagree about the meaning of the word "is", in pure Clintonian fashion. So when I became Lutheran and spent more time in mother Church, I soon found out that assertion was pure poppycock: there is an eternity of difference between Reformed theology and Lutheran theology, and it all centers around the Sacraments. Those of you are theologically astute (you are if you're reading this - aren't you?) know that this controversy dates back to Luther v Zwingli in the early 16th century. Enter Melanchthon as Rodney King. But Luther would have none of it. And here we are, nearly 500 years later, at complete odds. Folks, I am here to tell you that is not a bad thing; it is a good thing. I thank God for that old, wild boar. He stood firm and risked far more than being banned from a Facebook group.

Now, if you are a confessional Lutheran, you know all this. You know what the Reformed would have us give up for the sake of "peace in our time.": the very Body and Blood of Christ. It is our food, and it is absolutely necessary. Because, without it, not only does Lutheranism die, but we die as well.

But wait.....we do need to be "Christ-like", aren't we? That is, in it self, a loaded question. Which Christ do you want to be like? The one who turned the tables over because His house was turned into peddling merchandise? Or the one who tolerated sin? The former really happened, but the latter....you won't find it anywhere but a cheesy Hollywood Jesus-flick.

This is not to say that we ought to put the best construction on what someone says, and exercise patience and humility. Those are indeed Christ's qualities. But doing so at the expense of tolerating error..... may it never be so.

You and I both know that Lutheranism is Biblical Christianity. It is evangelical catholic. It is what Jesus and the Apostles believed. So, the next time someone tells you to stop insisting on your mean, intolerant doctrine of the Real Presence.....kindly tell them that you would be glad to do so when Hell freezes over. That'll give them plenty of time to think about their error.

Carry on. Pax.