Jesus asked, “What is God’s kingdom like? To what can I compare it? It’s like a mustard seed that someone took and planted in a garden. It grew and developed into a tree and the birds in the sky nested in its branches.”

Again he said, “To what can I compare God’s kingdom? It’s like yeast, which a woman took and hid in a bushel of wheat flour until the yeast had worked its way through the whole.”

~~~

What caught your attention in this reading? What made you wonder or have a question?

When you read this (try reading it aloud to hear it differently!), what images, music, or other scenes float into your mind?

Think about your week or your day. How does this scripture connect with what is going on in your own life?

The mustard bush is an invasive species–it takes over all the space in the garden and drives out other things. People tried to avoid getting mustard seeds in their garden. Why do you think Jesus uses this example to talk about the kingdom of God?

Similarly, yeast (or “leaven”) was reserved for non-holy breads. During festivals and holy days, only unleavened bread was allowed. So the kingdom of God is like yeast that corrupts the whole bushel of flour and makes it unholy? Why this metaphor? What does this tell us about the kingdom of God?

Both the mustard seed (the smallest of the seeds) and yeast (tiny!) are small things that change everything. They’re barely visible, you can’t see them working, until suddenly the whole garden or the whole bushel of flour is changed. How is that like the kingdom of God?

What is something small that you can do that will make a big difference in your faith or life? Or how can your life be like yeast, growing the kingdom of God in the world around you?

“Sacraments are mystical symbols, or holy rites, or sacred actions, instituted by God himself, consisting of his Word, of signs and of things signified, whereby in the Church he keeps in mind and from time to time recalls the great benefits he has shown to men; whereby also he seals his promises, and outwardly represents, and, as it were, offers unto our sight those things which inwardly he performs for us, and so strengthens and increases our faith through the working of God’s Spirit in our hearts.”

Yes, that was all one sentence. It says several important things:

1. Sacraments are symbols or symbolic actions.
2. Sacraments are instituted by God.
3. Sacraments include the word of God, the symbol, and the thing to which the symbol points.
4. Sacraments remind us of God’s action.
5. Sacraments seal God’s promises.
6. Sacraments are outward signs of something God does inside us.
7. Sacraments are intended to encourage and strengthen faith.

The confession tells us that we observe only two Sacraments–baptism (which Bullinger equates with circumcision’s place in the old covenant) and the Lord’s Supper (which is equated with the passover lamb in the old covenant). These sacraments were not created by human beings, but God alone, and “as God is the author of the Sacraments, so he continually works in the Church in which they are carried out.”

Because the Sacraments come from God, the minister who celebrates them is not the point–it doesn’t matter if the minister is a sinner or perfectly learned or whatever (something we’ve discussed before in relation to the Donatist controversy). “The integrity of the Sacraments depends upon the institution of the Lord.” period. Except if the minister is a woman…“we teach that baptism should not be administered in the church by women or midwives. For Paul deprived women of ecclesiastical duties, and baptism has to do with these.” (first of all–no Paul didn’t, but someone writing with his name did. Paul’s many female colleagues would be surprised to hear it. second–this has more to do with refuting the Roman teaching that unbaptized infants who died were destined for hell (or at best purgatory), so midwives baptized babies out of habit–not as part of God’s covenant people, but as a form of magic. That is indeed something to condemn.)

Anyway, back to the points:

In baptism we are reminded of Christ’s baptism, and of his death and resurrection. We are also reminded of God’s promise to make us all children of God. We remember that Christ sent the apostles to baptize and teach. We remember that the Holy Spirit descended on many at their baptisms in the book of Acts. It’s often called a “sign of initiation for God’s people.“ The symbol for baptism is water–the symbol of birth and of cleansing. The “thing signified is regeneration and cleansing from sin.”  

There’s only one baptism–you only need to be baptized once, and the form (sprinkling, pouring, immersing) is not the point. The point is that in this ritual we are reminded of God’s promise, and our faith is built up as we participate in that promise. We live as baptized people, people of God, people called and gifted and full of grace.

One of the important things about the Sacraments is that they use common things–like water–to show and effect something holy. Because baptism with water is both common and sacred, and because it’s the only thing talked about in scripture, “we do not consider necessary to the perfection of baptism…exorcism, burning lights, oil, salt, spittle, and other such things as a multitude of ceremonies.”  In other words–all the bells and whistles and trappings that the Roman Church added on are unnecessary or even harmful, according to Bullinger. Remember that he’s writing early in the Reformation era, and distinguishing from the Roman Church was important–and Bullinger’s main issue in these kinds of cases is that the extras make the ritual seem more like magic than holy. Baptism has one purpose–“to be baptized in the name of Christ is to be enrolled, entered and received into the covenant and family, and so into the inheritance of the sons of God…to be cleansed from sin…to be granted the manifold grace of God in order to lead a new and innocent life….all these things are assured by baptism.” In other words, the ritual of baptism is the outward sign of these things that the Holy Spirit does in our hearts–and it is a sign that reminds us of God’s promise and encourages us to live in it.

The Lord’s Supper, like baptism, uses common things (food) to signify God’s promise and work in us. Bullinger takes great pains to ensure that we don’t think that bread and wine are actually turned into body and blood (they are not “changed into the things signified, or cease to be what they are in their own nature. For otherwise they would not be Sacraments–if they were only the thing signified, they would not be signs.” alrighty then.) The purpose of the Sacrament is two-fold–to “keep in fresh remembrance that greatest benefit which God showed to mortals” (giving God’s own self to and for us), and to feed us–not necessarily physically (because that would involve “infamy and savagery”), but spiritually–when we receive the bread and wine and remember all Christ’s work and life and death and resurrection and God’s promise, then the Holy Spirit “applies and bestows upon us these things…Christ lives in us and we live in him”.

Instead of transubstatiation (the turning of a substance into another substance, aka the bread literally and physically becoming the flesh of Jesus), and instead of Christ “hiding” in the bread (leading to the worship of the bread), the confession teaches that the physical body of Christ “is in heaven at the right hand of the Father, and therefore our hearts are to be lifted up on high, and not to be fixed on the bread, neither is the Lord to be worshipped in the bread. Yet the Lord is not absent from his Church when she celebrates the Supper. The sun, which is absent from us in the heavens, is nothwithstanding effectually present among us. How much more is the Sun of Righteousness, Christ, although in his body he is absent from us in heaven, present with us, not corporeally but spiritually, by his vivifying operation, and as he himself explained at his Last Supper that he would be present with us. Whence it follows that we do not have the Supper without Christ, and yet at the same time have an unbloody and mystical Supper, as it was universally called by antiquity.”

In other words–when we participate in Communion, we are lifted up to Commune with Christ–our hearts are lifted up on high. Jesus is not absent from our celebration of the Sacrament because we don’t believe the bread and wine become body and blood–instead we are drawn into Christ’s presence at the Supper.

At the end of today’s theology class, I just want to go back to the beginning of chapter 19 for a moment, where the confession talks about the number of sacraments (again refuting the Roman Catholic church)…because this is just amusing. “There are some who count seven Sacraments. Of these we acknowledge that repentance, the ordination of ministers, and matrimony are profitable ordinances but not Sacraments. Confirmation and extreme unction are human inventions which the Church can dispense with without any loss, and indeed, we do not have them in our churches, for they contain some things of which we can by no means approve.“ heehee.

What do you think of these explanations of Sacraments, and of the particulars of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? How do you experience God’s promise and presence in these symbolic actions? How does participating in the Sacraments inform your life as one of God’s covenant people?

Sabbath is a gift–at first, we see God practicing Sabbath in the creation story, where God works for 6 days and then, rather than start on a new project or make improvements to the previous day’s work, God rests and enjoys. I like to think that God played in the garden, watched that new grass grow, and enjoyed the sunset. Later in the story, we find that God tells the Israelites, newly liberated from slavery in Egypt, that the reason they are to rest for one day out of each seven is because it reminds them they are not  slaves–slaves don’t get to rest, but they do. No matter how much work there is to be done, we are not to submit again to slavery and we are not to think ourselves more important than God, who rested. “But what does it mean to keep a day holy, to refrain from work, to honor God’s creativity and imitate GOd’s rest, to experience the end of bondage?”

Good question. One people have wrestled with for millennia, which is how we ended up with blue laws and debates over what day of the week it should be.

Jews observe Shabbat from sundown to sundown, Friday-Saturday (aka, the 7th day of the week). Some in the Adventist Christian tradition do as well. We know our Muslim friends observe a similar practice on Fridays. Christians have traditionally observed Sunday, the first day of the week, because it is the day of Resurrection. Each Sunday is like a mini-Easter, a reminder of God’s re-creation (some call it “the 8th day of creation” in fact…). (aside: this is actually why Sundays are not included in Lent. Go ahead and count..you’ll find 40 days not including Sundays. interesting, eh?) On this day, we let go of the idea that we are in control, we gather together to worship, and we spend time simply letting things be. “All week long, human beings wrestle with the natural world, tilling and hammering and carrying and burning. On the Sabbath, however, we let it be. We celebrate it as it is and live in it in peace and gratitude. Humans are created too, after all.” So we literally let go and let God, in the words of the old cliche. We refrain from trying to control the world, and from all that is related to that–which may include commerce as well.

Having said all of that–who actually does that? Who stays away from restaurants and shopping, email and housework, the next week’s to-do-list, and all the other endless things that crop up on weekends? Sundays are often just as busy as every other day of the week, sometimes even more so. Gone are the days when the law promoted Christian Sabbath keeping. Now many of us barely have time to be at church for an hour, much less an hour of worship AND an hour of Sunday school. Add youth group or a family dinner and the whole day is out of control. Yes, we can limit things like meetings, and we might be able to avoid our work email another day, but how do we spend the whole day focusing on God and rest and re-creation?

And right here is where I think this chapter falls down. There is a great opportunity here for exploration of a variety of Sabbath practices, ranging from starting with a few Sabbath hours one day a week (not necessarily Sunday, either–maybe it’s Thursday afternoon or Saturday morning or Monday night). Maybe we start by not bringing work home with us on Wednesdays, and instead we gather with the church for a meal and time to learn and pray together. Insisting that we jump right into a full day with no work is unrealistic for many of us–though there may be something to be said for the sort of cold-turkey all-in approach–and makes even me, the proponent of the pajama days, want to shut the book and give up. How can we incorporate Sabbath into our way of life in small ways, working up to a whole day? In order for the practice of Sabbath to be liberating, to give us freedom, we have to also be liberated from Sabbath as a simplistic concept.

So: yes, come to worship. Gathering with a community is crucial in reminding us who we are and whose we are–we do not belong to ourselves, nor does the world belong to us. Worship is the time when we are re-oriented toward who God is and who God calls us to be, and we are reminded that the earth is the Lord’s, and if God can rest one day, so can we. We confess our pride and arrogance in thinking that the world will fall apart if we take a day off, and we hear God’s word for our lives today–21st century today, when things move quickly and strangely and we need new ways of being God’s faithful people in this world. We are reminded of the freedom God has given us and we are inspired to participate in God’s re-creation of the world each day.

Find a time when you commit to rest and play. It may be Sunday, it may not. It probably won’t involve shopping or working in any of the traditional senses, but it might involve spending time with friends, cooking a wonderful meal, watching a movie, or taking a nap. It might involve sitting in your pajamas for half a day (or a whole day, or even just an hour or two)–for some reason, that feels more restful than not-working-while-wearing-work-clothes. Try not to worry about things or think ahead–when to-do list items come up just note them and go back to enjoying the time. Maybe you read the Bible, maybe you read a novel. What’s important is to remember that God is the source of every good thing, and this gift is for you, not just for others. The work will still be there when you return to it in 2 hours or 2 days.

“Overworked people need rest, and they need to be reminded that they do not cause the grain to grow and that their greatest fulfillment does not come through the acquisition of material things. Moreover, the planet needs a rest of human plucking and burning and buying and selling. Perhaps, as Sabbath keepers, we will come to live and know these truths more fully, and thus to bring their wisdom to the common solution of humanity’s problems.”

In this Sabbath time, we can find an anchor for a way of life that embraces God’s vision for a just world with plenty for all–a way of life that makes a difference every day, not just the one day a week.

What do you think about Sabbath practice? How do you engage in a practice of rest and re-creation? What ideas do you have for beginning a Sabbath practice? If you already take a day a week, what do you do on that day? Can you imagine carving out two hours one week, three hours the next week, four after that, and so on, until you have a whole day, or at least two half-days, to rest, and to enjoy God and God’s creation? How might you do that?

Matthew 6.16-18

‘And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.  

Jesus seemed to take for granted that people would fast. Notice that he did not say “if” you fast, but “whenever” – as if fasting was something a person who followed Jesus would do regularly. Still, we don’t hear a lot about fasting in our culture – that may be because fasting is a practice that reminds us that we are not ultimately in control of everything. We have become a people very proud of our self-sufficiency and independence; but fasting helps us keep our balance in life. Jesus knew that we needed to live in the balance of life focused on God, and it’s easy to let our focus slip to things we think we need (letting our bodies control us).

What do you think about this passage? What do you hear when you hear Jesus say “and whenever you fast…”? What do you think of when you hear the word “fasting”?

Fasting helps us see ourselves as we really are – when we remove something from our life, we quickly see how much we depend on it – how much it controls us.  It can help us see that we have come to depend too much on one thing – and just as God promises, our lives become imbalanced when we become too dependent on something and we lose our focus on God.  Deciding to go without, food, or television, or our cell phone, or ipod or video games we learn how much our peace depends upon the pleasures we get as a result of these things – and how powerful & clever the body or mind are at getting its own way against our strong resolves.

Have you ever tried to go without something–fasting from TV, or food, or something else? How did that go? What did you learn during that time?

Luke 4:1-4

Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing at all during those days, and when they were over, he was famished. The devil said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread.’ Jesus answered him, ‘It is written, “One does not live by bread alone.” ‘  

Jesus went without food or the company of others for forty days to be strengthened by God – to be sure his focus was on God and not on himself or his desires.  Tempted and tested over and over again, Jesus became fully aware of the weaknesses of a human body, mind, and spirit by enduring a much longer fast than most of us could imagine.  He fasted before he began his ministry and was convinced he knew what was possible for us in a life with God here on Earth.  In human form he learned first hand about the strength provided when we trust and focus on God. Jesus taught us by doing what we can do – from what is possible not by what is impossible.  Jesus added spiritual practices to his life and taught us from what he knew would help us live as we were created to live.  He expected us to fast so that we might also become confident in our knowledge of God and ourselves.

Fasting among the Jews and then among Christians began as a spiritual practice of going without food and sometimes drink for a certain amount of time.  It was intended to be a time of re-centering themselves toward God – to allow the physical hunger to remind them that they were not created to be self-sufficient or live independent of God.

Spiritual practices exist to help us grow in our faith, our hope, our love, our gratitude – they are not a way to win the approval of others or of God.  When we fast from something we desire, it helps us become more open to the acceptance of God’s will for us and helps us to see our lives through our faith in God.

Lauren Winner learned practiced fasting as part of her Jewish faith and then came to add the practice to her life as a Christian.  She said, “Fasting is not merely a long, torturous means to a far-away end; a fast is not to be understood as a miserable experience that will sanctify you.  Nor is a fast like a back-room deal at the courthouse, the lawyer for the penitent trading three weeks of food in exchange for divine mercy.
…the fast accomplishes a repositioning.  When I am sated, it is easy to feel independent.  When I am hungry, it is possible to remember where my dependence lies.” (Mudhouse Sabbath p. 91)

What do you think? How can you let something go and learn to be more dependent on God, from whom all blessings flow? What would it mean to fast from something this week or this season, and how might it change your perspective on where God is and what God is doing?

In the Family Devotional Booklet for Lent there is a fasting practice recommended. Last week we fasted from snacking between meals. Did you try that? How did it go? This week we are fasting from text messaging and video games. How is that going? What’s easy, what’s hard, and what is helping you to see God and life differently?

Do you need a family devotional booklet for Lent, with daily scripture readings and reflection questions? Contact Teri in the church office.

God uses ministers in the building of the church. Bullinger argues that ministers have always existed for the purpose of gathering, organizing, and teaching God’s people–and by always, he means always–all the way back to Abraham. “Ministers are to be regarded, not as ministers by themselves alone, but as the ministers of God, inasmuch as God effects the salvation of men through them.” What? Our salvation comes through ministers? That sounds suspiciously like what the Reformation was against, not what it was for. And so he expounds upon this–“How are they to believe in whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?” (Romans 10:14). And then this: “Yet, on the other hand, we must beware that we do not attribute to much to ministers…”No one can come to me unless by Father draws him” (John 6:44). God moves the hearts of Men. Therefore, let us believe that God teaches us by his word, outwardly through his ministers, and inwardly moves the hearts of his elect to faith by the Holy Spirit; and therefore we ought to render all glory until God for this whole favor.” In other words, Bullinger reaffirms that faith and salvation are gifts of God, given through the Holy Spirit (as per Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12), but reminds us yet again that these gifts come through hearing and experiencing–if we never hear, if we never share the good news, how can we expect faith to grow?

What do you think about this? What does the ministry of others have to do with your own faith development?

In the New Testament, “Ministers are called by various names: apostles, prophets, evangelists, bishops, elders, pastors, and teachers.” Apostles went throughout the world sharing good news and gathering churches, and “once established, there ceased to be apostles and pastors took their place.” Prophets interpret scripture and share God’s vision for the world. Evangelists share the good news through writing and speaking. Bishops “are the overseers and watchmen of the Church, who administer the foods and needs of the life of the church.” Presbyters (elders) govern the church with “wholesome counsel.” Pastors “keep the Lord’s sheepfold and provide for its needs.” Teachers “instruct and teach the true faith and godliness.”

Therefore, since there are plenty of roles and names for ministers in the New Testament, all the “Papal Orders” are unnecessary–“for us the apostolic doctrine concerning ministers is sufficient.” And monks…well…“they are of no use to the Church of God, nay, rather, they are pernicious.” When they were hermits, earning their living and being part of the local church, they were fine. But “now”–remember it’s 1566–“the whole world sees and knows what they are like.” Remember that monastic orders were extremely wealthy, were often the major landowners keeping people in the feudal system, and were believed to live completely in opposition to their vows, living a life of leisure and wealth at the expense of the poor. Bullinger has no room for that kind of life.

Ministers are to be called and elected –ie, you can’t just start proclaiming yourself a minister, you have to have a call from both God and the people, elected by a congregation, and must be “distinguished by sufficient consecrated learning, pious eloquence, simple wisdom, by moderation and an honorable reputation.” Those elected will be “ordained by the elders with public prayer and laying on of hands.” Again, you can’t just make things up–you need to be gifted, educated, called, elected, and ordained by a community.

Why? Because ministers are not priests–separated from the community for the purpose of making sacrifices on behalf of the community, communicating with God in a way that regular people can’t. Instead we are part of the “Priesthood of all Believers” –everyone can “offer up spiritual sacrifices to God through Christ”–aka, anyone can communicate directly with God. “Therefore the priesthood and the ministry are very different from one another. For the priesthood is common to all Christians; not so is the ministry.” This seems in direct opposition to what we say often–that everyone does ministry. The issue here is language–”the ministry” is what Bullinger uses to describe pastors, people whose function in the community is to preach and teach and celebrate sacraments. Each Christian is called to the priesthood in the sense that we can all have access to God that used to be reserved only for priests, and each Christian is called to minister in various ways, but “the ministry” is a particular office and task within the community. This task is to be a “Steward of the mysteries of God.” The mysteries of God as understood by Bullinger  = the gospel and sacraments. “Therefore for this purpose are the ministers of the Church called–namely, to preach the Gospel of Christ and to administer the Sacraments.” So minsters are to be wise and faithful stewards, taking care of these mysteries and ensuring that people are able to grow through them.

What do you think about the role and purpose of the minister, as compared to the role and purpose of every Christian person?

Power: We know that the Reformation was in part a reaction to power abuses by the Roman Catholic church, its ministers, hierarchy, and various orders. So naturally we expect that the minister has power only under Christ, the head. In addition, all ministers of the church are equal in power–no one is above another, with greater power or authority.

“The duties of ministers are various…the teaching of the Gospel and the proper administration of the Sacraments…to gather together an assembly for worship…to teach and to exhort, to urge idlers and lingerers to make progress in the way of the Lord…to comfort and strengthen the fainthearted…to rebuke offenders…to recall the erring into the way…to raise the fallen…to rebuke wickedness…to preserve the faithful in a holy unity…to check schisms…to commend the needs of the poor to the Church…to visit, instruct, and keep in the way of life the sick and those afflicted…attend to public prayers in times of need, together with common fasting.”

No pressure. On the bright side, even when we fail, still Christ can work through us (in contrast to what the Donatists taught about the work of priests who had failed being ineffectual).

Last but not least, “The worker is worthy of his reward. All faithful ministers are also worthy of their reward and do not sin whtn they receive a stipend, and all things that be necessary for themselves and their family.” 

phew–a long chapter with lots of stuff in it! What do you think? What makes you wonder? What questions do you have? What sounds familiar and what sounds strange? What do you think Bullinger may have left out when considering ministers and The Ministry? What might be different about The Ministry in the 21st century?

He certainly doesn’t mince words, does he? The trouble is, at least for me, that these words hit very close to home. It’s easy to look on and say “what a beautiful piece of music” but much harder to get out my own instrument and practice. It’s easy to look at someone else’s life and say “what peace, what joy” but much harder to make time for God’s Spirit to speak in my own life. It’s easy to look at the descriptions of the way God intends the world to be and say “that’s nice isn’t it” and to go on living my usual way. This is a practice I think many of us really need, but it won’t be easy!

“Learning when and how, to what, and to whom to give our yes or our no is a lifelong project. It is learning to live not merely in dull balance or tedious moderation but in passionate, disciplined choice and action.” It sounds both awesome and terrifying! How do we get there?

“Prayer, examination of conscience, and participation in small communities are three acts that can help us in this practice.” I love when they lay out the plan so clearly.

So first, prayer: conversation with God. “real, demanding, loving, and engaged conversation.” Since each person is unique, each person’s prayer life will be too–in fact, with 7 billion people on the planet I’d be willing to bet we have 8 billion ways of praying! But there are a few things we can learn that will enrich our conversations with God–things that have been part of the prayer lives of millions of people before us. Remember, prayer is a practice–it takes work! Copeland suggests: 1. choose a time to pray each day. Put it in your calendar or appointment book if necessary. 2. Find a place where you won’t be disturbed, and where you can be at least somewhat comfortable. 3. Take several deep breaths. 4. Consciously place yourself in the divine presence. Perhaps imagine yourself resting in God’s hand, or sitting with God in the living room, or some other image that works for you. Talk to God about all kinds of things–the things you talk about in the living room! The needs of people you know, the issues of the world, things for which you are grateful, things going on in your own life. 5. When a distraction comes up in your mind, simply notice it and return to your conversation. 6. Sit in the quiet and simply listen–even if you hear nothing. Listen for “the stirrings of your heart.” 7. Give thanks and prepare to return to the day.

Second, examination. This practice comes from the Ignation practice of examen in which we look back over our day and see where we noticed God, where we felt far from God, what gave us energy and what sapped our energy. Copeland suggests we also review our “decisions, choices, actions, omissions, attitudes, and desires” and determine where we have said “yes” and “no” during the day, and whether those yeses and noes line up with who we want to be. How do the opportunities we take, and the ones we pass up,  limit growth or future opportunity? How can we use the energy and time of our lives in the way God calls us to?

Third, small groups. A group of people who can hold us accountable for our yeses and noes, for the ways in which we live our faith, and who can help us grow and nurture our relationship with God and with God’s world is a beautiful thing. These groups often meeting anywhere from once a week to once a month, and are covenanted to keep the schedule–this is not a meeting we skip on a whim or for something better, but a commitment we make to God, to ourselves, and to one another as a group. Some of these groups include Bible study, others have a time for corporate examen, others gather around a particular issue or justice activity. All include the opportunity to get to know each other on a deeper level, to share our faith and doubt, to learn and grow together, and to pray with and for one another.

What are some other ways you can engage in the practice of saying yes to abundant life and no to destruction and despair? How have you used these three ways? What questions do you have? Hopes or fears or doubts? What else do you want to learn about this practice?

*What grabbed your attention in this reading?
*What questions did it bring up for you?
*How does the Scripture connect with something that has happened in your day? your week? your life?
*What might God be saying to you through the gospel?

Remember that the word used for Peter’s mother in law getting up and serving is diakoneo –she ministered to them, like a deacon. It is the same word that is used when Jesus is in the wilderness after his baptism and “the angels ministered to him.” How does that change your reading of the story? What do you think about the fact that when it’s angels we use the word “ministered” but when it’s a mother-in-law we use the word “served”? (Think about this insight into biblical translation…)

Can you imagine being in front of the door with the whole town? What would that be like? What would you be hoping for?

Why do you think the demons recognize Jesus but people don’t? What do you make of the fact that Jesus won’t let the demons speak because they recognize him? What is that about?

What is the good news in this story? What is the challenge for us today?

So, chapter 17, “Of the Catholic and Holy Church of God, and of the One Only Head of the Church.” (you can kind of see where this is going, can’t you? Remember it’s 1566…)

This chapter has some real gems–I hope you enjoy them as much as I do.

“The church has always existed and it will always exist.” That’s quite an opening line. The confession goes on to say that “The Church is an assembly of the faithful called or gathered out of the world” which does make it possible then to suggest that in all times and places, God has had a church. The ancient Israelites may not have known themselves that way, exactly, but Bullinger says they too are part of the church, the great cloud of witnesses, because they were an assembly gathered out of the world to worship and serve the One true God. In other words–because there has always been only one God, there has always been only one mediator between that God and humanity (the one eternal Son) and therefore there has always been a church.

“Therefore we call this church Catholic because it is universal, scattered through all parts of the world, and extended unto all times, and is not limited to any times or places. Therefore, we condemn the Donatists who confined the Church to I know not what corners of Africa. Nor do we approve of the Roman clergy who have recently passed off only the Roman Church as catholic.” Alrighty then! I think the Roman church zinger is clear enough, and highlights a difficulty we still have today with the word “catholic”–which in the creeds means universal but is commonly used as shorthand to mean the Roman Catholic church. The Donatists may need a little more explanation. Donatism arose in North Africa in the 4th and 5th centuries in response to persecution. The basic idea was that anyone who, under persecution, had handed over a bible or renounced faith but then, when persecution ended, came back to the church, was a traitor. The church was to be full of “saints, not sinners” and so any sacraments performed by these traitors were invalid, any preaching done by them was inferior, etc. No amount of penance could restore these priests or bishops to their authority. The Donatists held themselves to be the only true church, against the church from Rome (even when the emperor became head of the church rather than persecutor of the church). The sect had mostly died out by the 800s.

Bullinger discusses various metaphors for the church, most of which will be familiar to us. The church is “the temple of the Living God” it is “bride and virgin of Christ” it is “a flock of sheep”  it is “the body.” He also discusses that “the church does not err” which sounds like something we would never say today. He continues that statement though–“as long as it rests upon the rock of Christ and upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles. And it is no wonder if it errs, as often as it deserts him who alone is the truth.” Well…yes. So the church does not err as long as its foundation is sure, but the foundation is often not so sure, so….no wonder things happen.

“Christ is the sole head of the church. It is the head which has the preeminence in the body, and from it the whole body receives life.”  “The Church cannot have any other head besides Christ.”  Using the body metaphor, Bullinger expounds upon what it means to be a body–and a major part is to be “under” the head, and there can be only one head. We are all under Christ, and there is no human being that can ever consider himself head of the church. Not a priest, not a politician, not an emperor, and not a pope. If we truly believe Christ is present in the church, there is no need for a substitute vicar/pope/head/pontiff. There is also to be “no primacy in the church”  which means no succession or dominion–aka no bishops or popes who can be raised through the ranks (because there shouldn’t be ranks) by the opinion of one or via any way other than the whole community’s ratification of call. And to those who insist that there must be hierarchy and primacy in order to maintain order in the church, Bullinger says “The Roman head does indeed preserve his tyranny and the corruption that has been brought into the Church…” That’s not the kind of order we want anyway, in other words.

There is a whole section, though, on the biblical model for how to handle dissension within the church. The early church we find in Paul’s letters had plenty of controversy and dissension but still managed to be the church together and to maintain enough order that the Word could be preached and Sacraments celebrated, the poor fed and the community gathered, so..it must be possible.

Speaking of Word and Sacrament–these are the signs of a true church–“the true Church is that in which the signs or marks of the true Church are to be found, especially the lawful and sincere preaching of the Word of God as it was delivered to us in the books of the prophets and the apostles, which all lead us unto Christ…and those who are such in the church have one faith and one spirit; and therefore they worship but one God….and they do not seek righteousness and life outside Christ….Moreover, joined together with all the members of Christ by an unfeigned love, they show that they are Christ’s disciples by persevering in the bond of pieace and holy unity…they participate in the Sacraments instituted by Christ and delivered unto us by his apostles, using them in no other way than as they received them from the Lord.”  That’s mostly self-explanatory, except that last bit, which is another jab at the Roman church and its expansion of the sacraments from two to seven, and their understanding of the Lord’s Supper as a sacrifice that turns bread and wine into body and blood (literally, not metaphorically)–because, as we’ll learn in the Sacraments chapters, we observe a meal as Christ did–one that brings us together with him but does not re-do his death every time.

Now we get to the good stuff. (see what I mean about breaking the section up? wow.)

“Outside the Church of God there is no salvation”  (again, the words need no explanation, though the concept is uncomfortable…but remember what he said about the church at the beginning of the chapter!) … “Nevertheless, by the signs of the true Church mentioned above, we do not so narrowly restrict the Church…For we know that God had some friends in the world outside the commonwealth of Israel…” Interesting, no? And of course we know this to be true, in Old and New Testaments as well as throughout church history. As Jesus himself said, “I have other sheep that are not of this fold.”

“We must not judge rashly or prematurely…we must be careful not to judge before the time, nor undertake to exclude, reject, or cut off those whom the Lord does not want to have excluded and rejected, and those whom we cannot eliminate without loss to the Church. On the other hand, we must be vigilant lest while the pious snore the wicked gain ground and do harm to the Church.” heehee, pious snoring. This seems contradictory on the surface–we can’t judge, but we must be vigilant. Remember that Bullinger is a pastor–he knows the ways we can behave badly even in the church, the ways we harm ourselves and community. What do you think he means by this?

Last but not least…“Unity consists not in outward rites and ceremonies, but rather in the truth and unity of the catholic faith.” In other words, the true unity of the church can sustain diversity of worship and ceremony, as long as the One is the foundation.

So, now that we’ve gone through a very long chapter, what do you think? What seems to still apply to the church as we know it today? What seems odd? What questions do you have? There’s more to this chapter so if you have a question, feel free to ask and we’ll see if Bullinger addresses it in the parts I left out, or if other parts of our theological tradition can shed more light.