May his blood be upon us and our children: a prayer

This morning, Good Friday morning, part of my devotional reading was that place in Matthew where the Jewish people, gathered before Pilate, said, "His blood shall be on us and our children." As I read that I thought of how through the centuries some have tried to see that as a curse on the Jewish people.

And yet God takes such words and uses them as prayer and prophecy. Isn't that our prayer as Christians that his blood will be upon us and our children. That we will be made clean, whole and new because of that blood he shed on the cross.

We hardly notice Pilate's statement which seems to be the opposite of the Hebrews. Pilate pleads innocent of the blood of Jesus and washes his hands. But none of us are innocent. Pilate was guilty of the death of Christ. And so are we all.

Jesus died, was resurrected and that changes sexuality?

I feel like starting this posting off with, “on the way to the resurrection I encountered a natural case of homosexual sex.” But not really! On the new blog of Voices of Sophia, Heather W. Reichgott has posted an essay about the resurrection. But it is also about how the resurrection entails changing the way people have sex. It is actually an apologia for homosexual sex. It is entitled Resurrection and natural law: a feminist perspective.

The basic point is that since God changed the laws of nature to allow for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, he undoubtedly has began a process through the resurrection of changing other natural laws, e.g. the naturalness of heterosexual sex.

Referring to Elizabeth Stuart and her article “Queering Death,” Reichgott writes, “Meditating on the resurrection account in the gospel of John, Stuart claims that the resurrection undoes the necessity of this pattern [heterosexual sex, and reproduction] , for it undoes the finality of death.”

Reichgott concludes that “the process between natural process and ethical necessity has been broken completely by the resurrection,” and goes on to state that “If God’s plan for life and death is not limited by the grave, then there is no reason to believe God’s plan for gender is limited by the natural process of heterosexual reproduction.”

One could come at this by a thousand ways. But I believe an important way is to simply say that death was never meant to be natural but entered, what C.S. Lewis called “the Silent Planet,” because of the disobedience of humanity. Jesus Christ did not come to break natural laws, but to restore what had been broken. Something large is missing here-how could the biblical understanding that Jesus came to live, die and be resurrected for sinful humanity get changed to Jesus died and was resurrected in order that one might sin with impunity.

And here is another thought. When Jesus redeems us we are united to him. It is his righteousness, his holiness, his life we share. How is it that in our union to Jesus Christ we could possibly live habitually in unrepentant sin since he is our life? The natural law of sin and death has not been broken for those who reject the utter graciousness of Christ. They will die the final death, the everlasting death. But those who belong to Jesus Christ will be abundantly fed by Jesus Christ in this life and experience the glorious life of Christ eternally.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (1 Peter 1:35)

Something for Holy Week

This is not very Presbyterian I know, but it is full of the love of Jesus Christ. And it is about Holy Week and Jesus Christ. Keith Green, when he first began to sing about Jesus, came to Ware House Ministries to hold concerts. That is the Church my husband and I, and our six children attended over twenty years ago. A lot of us are talking about missional these days; this was God's idea of missional for the very early seventies and on. A lot of broken, hippie young people, wearied of their summer's of free love, drugs and gurus, started looking for reality. God was already there reaching for them. The love of Jesus Christ met them even on the nudest beaches of Southern California and in the midst of the wilting flower children of Haight-Ashbury in San Francisco.

The new FOG and the person of Jesus Christ

In a rather relaxing manner, I copied out “The Foundations of Presbyterian Polity,” and started reading through it as a way of focusing on other writing subjects I needed to do. I thought I would just skim read before working on something else. As I read I noted here and there things I liked and those that bothered me.

But I begin to feel uneasy by the constant use of “Christ” without the addition of Jesus. Jesus is there once in a great while but generally the name is missing. It is perfectly biblical to do that, the confessions and the Scriptures also use just Christ at times but not to the constant exclusion of the name Jesus. Also, importantly, the “Word of God” is used in place of Jesus.

And then I came to this line in chapter two titled “The Church and Its Confessions,” under the subtitle, “F-2.03 The Confessions as Statements of the Faith of the Church Catholic:”

“The Confessions express the faith of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church in the recognition of canonical Scriptures and the formulation and adoption of the ecumenical creeds, notably the Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds with their definitions of the mystery of the Triune God and of the incarnation of the eternal Word of God in Jesus Christ.” (My emphasis)

While this may be just sloppy language, the constant disuse of the name Jesus amplifies a problem here. That statement could mean that the eternal Son came into a man (Jesus) anointed by the Holy Spirit. And that is heresy.

In F-2.02, the authors of the paper do refer to Jesus Christ as the Word of God, writing that the confessions are subject to him as the “Scriptures bear witness to him.” That is another problem to return to another time. But the problem here is that the mainline denominations are so full of the heresy of dividing Christ from the historical Jesus that orthodoxy in this paper needs to be strengthened. Two examples of such heretical thinking, used by mainline pastors, including Presbyterian pastors, is in the writings of John Shelby Spong and Marcus Borg.

Another example is Elizabeth A. Johnson who is often used by the more progressive pastors and theologians of the Church. In fact Johnson’s book, She Who Is, is quoted, (as helpful) in the document “Well Chosen Words,” written by what was the Women’s Ministry Area and is now called All Women in the Church.

In her book Johnson writes, “The fundamental nature of Christian identity as life in Christ makes clear that the biblical symbol Christ, the one anointed in the Spirit, cannot be restricted to the historical person Jesus nor to certain select members of the community but signifies all those who drinking of the Spirit participate in the community of disciples.” (162)

With that kind of heresy infiltrating the Church it is very important for the authors of the FOG document to be very clear with their language usage. For that reason I offer some important clarity from the Confessions.

Here are some statements about the Incarnation from the Confessions:

The Nicene:
“[We believe] in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only- begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man …”

The Scots Confession

“When the fullness of time came God sent his Son, his eternal wisdom, the substance of his own glory, into the world, who took the nature of humanity from the substance of a woman, a virgin, by means of the Holy Ghost. And so was born the ‘just seed of David,’ the ‘Angel of the great counsel of God,’ the very Messiah promised, whom we confess and acknowledge to be Emmanuel, true God and true man, two perfect natures united and joined in one person. So by our confession we condemn the damnable and pestilent heresies of Arius, Marcion, Eutyches, Nestorius, and such others as did either deny the eternity of his Godhead, or the truth of his humanity, or confounded them, or else divided them.”

The quote from the new FOG seemingly divides the natures. Added to this, the constant use of Christ without reference to Jesus simply amplifies the problem.

The Creed of Chalcedon

While the text to this creed is not found in the Presbyterian (USA) Book of Confessions, it is referenced in the index and found in “The Second Helvetic Confession.” It too is one of the ecumenical creeds of Christendom. The Second Helvetic Confession states:

“And to say many things with a few words, with a sincere heart, we believe, and freely confess with open mouth, whatever things are defined from the Holy Scriptures concerning the mystery of the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, and are summed up in the Creeds and decrees of the first four most excellent synods convened at Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon—together with the Creed of blessed Athanasius, and all similar symbols; and we condemn everything contrary to these.” (5.078)

And so Chalcedon states:

“Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.” (My emphasis)

The point here as above, Jesus Christ is the eternal Word of the Father. The eternal word is not in Jesus Christ but is Jesus Christ.

The Westminster Confession of Faith:

"The Son of God, the second Person in the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance, and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon man’s nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof; yet without sin: being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man.” (6.044)(My emphasis)

If the wording about Jesus Christ as it is stated in “The Foundations of Presbyterian Polity,” in F-2.03, is voted in, as far as I am concerned the Church will be in apostasy. Jesus Christ is the eternal word, he is not a man incarnated by the eternal word.

Jesus on the cross 2

"From its earliest era, the church has applied to Christ in his passion the words of the fourth 'Song of the Suffering Servant' from the book of Isaiah (Isa. 52:13-53:12)--thinking of them, indeed, as a direct prophecy of the passion. Here we read that 'there was no beauty in him to make us look at him, nor appearance that would attract us to him' (Isa. 53:2-3). As Barth says, 'Jesus Christ does present this aspect of Himself, and He always presents this aspect first. It is not self-evident that even--and precisely--under this aspect he has form and comeliness, that the beauty of God shines especially under this aspect. . . . We cannot know this of ourselves. It can only be given to us.' Yet to Christian faith, it is given that Christ is --precisely in the cross--the supreme revelation of God's being, God's 'form,' 'glory,' and 'beauty.' The transcendent 'beauty' and 'light' of God, then, must embrace also 'the abysmal darkness into which the Crucified plunges." (The Beauty of the Cross: The Passion of Christ in Theology and the Arts--from the Catacombs to the Eve of the Renaissance, by Richard Viladesau.)

May all of us, the Church, God's people, boast only "in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ." (a Gal 6:14)

From an earlier posting December 16, 2007 The Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ: Art, History & Truth

Michael Adee's answer about last words and following Jesus 2

"Jesus answered , 'The foremost is 'Hear O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. And the second is this 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these.'" (Mark 29-31)


In my last posting I wrote of Michael Adee’s question about the last word on what it means to be Presbyterian, a Christian and a follower of Jesus Christ. His choice was between two statements by pastors in the PC(USA). According to Adee one statement was positive the other negative.

The pastors, Ron Scates of Highland Presbyterian Church and the other Kathy Collier of First Presbyterian Church in Forney were both speaking about the passage of amendment B in Grace Presbytery in Texas.

Scates spoke of his serious concerns about the future of the Church in America. He suggested that when such an amendment passed the Presbyterian Church would fly apart. Collier felt it was time for GLBTs to be ordained in the Presbyterian Church and saw this as God’s desire. She stated “this is the God who calls us to be open, loving and welcoming to all of God's children --- and that all of us are God's children, part of God's good creation, not just some of us.” (Emphasis Adee’s)

Adee went on to demean Scates’ statement writing “In many ways, the contrast between Collier and Scates' statements may indeed reflect and reveal two profoundly different understandings of God's creation, faith, Scripture, ministry and what it means to be the Church. Frankly, I see, experience and feel "grace" in one and "law" in the other.” (Emphasis Adee’s)

Adee answered his question about which is the best picture of Presbyterians, Christians and followers of Jesus. “For me, Jesus paints the picture for all of us as recorded in the Gospel of Mark 12: 28 - 31 when he was asked what was the most important commandment. Jesus said: ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all of your mind, and with all your strength. The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” (Emphasis Adee’s)

And of course his answer is right! But he has picked the wrong person to image that picture with their words. R. Alan Cole in his commentary on Mark writes of these verses:

“In this summary, the heart of true religion is seen to lie, not in negative commands, but in a positive loving attitude to God and others. This is the Pauline ‘liberty’ of the New Testament (Gal. 5:1) This is what Augustine means by saying ‘love and do as you like,’ for such love towards God and others will do nothing to work them hurt and, if we love God, what we like and choose will be to do God’s will and pleasure (Ps. 40:8). That is why Paul can say ‘Love is the fulfilling of the law’ (Rom.13:10).”

God’s will and pleasure is to bring the sinner home, to transform the sinner, to give abundant life to repentant sons and daughters.

Sometimes Christians in their love of Christ find that doing the will of God, bending to his pleasure, means taking the lonely road. Like the prophets who loved God, and certainly loved God’s people, their words sometimes must warn with sorrow. And beyond the warning, love for God and others leads the Christian to proclaim a message of Grace. Not antinomianism, not the right to live outside the will of God, not cheap grace but the costly grace of Christ.

Grace enfolds the sinner in love, God’s love. It does not leave her to the howling wolves or the dark side of human nature. Instead it leads her to the cross of Jesus Christ. I would recommend Scates' picture of the Church to any evangelism committee working on outreach in their community, to a confirmation class or youth group. Why?

Because sometimes in order to say I love you to our brothers and sisters as well as the unbeliever, we have to say this is wrong and the Father loved you enough to allow his Son to die for you.

"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. (Gal 5:1)

Michael Adee's question about last words and following Jesus 1

Some of the last words spoken by a once vibrant Christianity in seventeenth century Japan were spoken from crosses placed far enough into the sea that at tide time the one on the cross would suffer from the sea as will as the cross.

Truly, words spoken for Jesus Christ are important to the whole Church. Although they may not always be positive about the immediate future they will always be enfolded into the faithfulness of Jesus Christ toward his Church.

An essay on the More Light Presbyterian Site demeans the words of one pastor while upholding the words of another. Michael Adee of more light has quoted Rev. Ron Scates of Highland Park Presbyterian Church and Rev. Kathy Collier of First Presbyterian of Forney about the vote on amendment B taken in the Grace Presbytery meeting.

In the article that Adee is quoting from, the reporter, Sam Hodges, writes that Collier “supported the change, saying it was past time for the denomination to accept qualified pastoral candidates regardless of their sexual orientation.

'This is a call from God for us to welcome all of God's children,' she said after the vote.”

The reporter also quotes Scates, “The P.C. (U.S.A.) is just one symptom of the greater demise of the American church, which has lost its biblical moorings."

Hodges continues, “Scates added that he's confident the language will not be changed in this national vote, but he wasn't so sure about the next time.”

‘It may pass, in which case you're going to see the P.C. (U.S.A.) fly apart,’ he said.”

Adee, demeaning the words of Scates with a statement writes, "I would not recommend Scates' picture of the Church to an evangelism committee working on outreach in their community, to a confirmation class or youth group, or frankly consider it a life-giving one for my own heart and soul."

He goes on to ask the question, “Based upon these 2 statements and their connotations which are only snapshots, of course, which picture of God, faith and the Church, essentially of Christianity, do you want to prevail? Which picture do you want to be "the last word" about what it means to be Presbyterian, to be Christian, to be a follower of Christ?”

Interesting question. Undoubtedly the most important question that can be asked now or ever of Christians. Strange, all I can think of at the moment are the words of Jesus, the Lord of the church, “Be faithful unto death and I will give you a crown of life.” (Rev. 2:10b)

So let me rephrase Jesus' words so that it will answer that question. Being Presbyterian (hopefully), Christian and a follower of Jesus Christ, means being faithful to Jesus Christ even unto death.

And to go further being faithful to Jesus Christ means that sometimes Christians will need to be faithful when everything is flying apart, when evil seems to have taken the day, when crosses are washed with sea water.

There is another part of Adee's essay I will address perhaps in the next day--about loving God.