Bloghardt's Reflector

“If now I seek the forgiveness of sins, I do not run to the cross, for I will not find it given there… But I will find in the sacrament or Gospel the word which distributes, presents, offers, and gives to me that forgiveness which was won on the Cross.” (AE 40, 214)

"Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 26th, 2005 at 3:42 am

It's been "reflected" before: In Christ, God will not hold the bad things you do against you. In Christ, God will also not hold against you the good things you do for Him.

We know the first part: God refuses to treat us as our sins deserve or harbor His anger forever. He refuses to treat us as we merit, but sets our sins aside - He sets them on His Son. That's the Gospel.

The second part is a bit more difficult! We do some great things in faith: we tend to our families, we do our homework, we go to work, we go to church, etc. We do what's given us to do by Jesus in our vocation. Some are even given to write sermons, reflections, blog, and books. If they are really blessed, they write in Higher Things magazine (smile).

All these wonderful things we do for Him. Do we honestly think that we can lift up our works as something acceptable to God? Are they something that we can take pride in?

That would be like saying, "Here's a filthy rag, Lord! Here's another one! Don't you like them, Lord?" Who would do that? (smile)

We would. We do it all the time. We think we can stand before Him. We take pride and boast before Him in what we do.

"Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. (Rom 3:27-28 NKJV)

Boast all you want, just don't do it before God. Don't set what you do - good or bad - before Him as if what you do is something that makes you acceptable or that you think you can claim as your own.

Your salvation was won by Jesus on the Cross. Why would you want to take pride in this or that (even your blogging and sermonizing)? No, Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners like you and me. If you are gonna boast, boast in that.

So, no more boasting before God in what you think you have done that is holy-a-fied because you did it for Jesus' sake. You may have or you may have not. What holds on the Last Day is what Jesus did for you on the Cross. He put His Cross into your ears in His Word, washed the Cross on you in your Baptism, and fed you His crucified Body and shed Blood at His Supper.

More Jesus, less you going on about you. No more boasting before Him. Nope, the Cross, the Cross, the Cross! He won't hold your sins against you because of the Cross. He won't hold your good works against you either because of the Cross(smile). INI. Amen.

Edited on: September 06th, 2005 11:21 pm

Comments:

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 26th, 2005 at 10:40 am by john pawlitz
holy-a-fied (not sanctified) ... ugly but it makes the point.

There is a very real problem of the second commandment here. Why is the "name of God" or even "the Confessional Lutheran understanding of God" the primary consensus in which the blog carnival "collects/gathers/congregates"...with "public" authority? It is difficult to apply terms that were not designed for the internet on the internet, but that doesn't mean they don't apply, or that the danger is less real. When was the blog carnival rightly tested and ordained...?

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 26th, 2005 at 3:15 pm by revcwirla
This pertains to the whole Carnival idea and the motives for blogging, carnivaling, even preaching. (Watch out, Cwirla's about to quote Scripture!):

"Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will. The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of partisanship, not sincerely but thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in that I rejoice." (Phil 1:15-18)

Regarding the "authority" of a blog carnival: I'd think of it as a cyber free-conference. Any collecting/gathering/congregating is strictly virtual (and therefore not actual).

My 2 cents.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 27th, 2005 at 11:25 am by Defensor
This whole protestation over the Carnival smacks of faux-humility. Come on, don't take yourself so seriously.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 27th, 2005 at 12:32 pm by Bloghardt
Defensor,

Thanks for your post.

I don't take myself seriously at all, it's the Law that takes me VERY seriously.

Maybe I have read too much of Pastor Petersen's Blog (http://www.redeemer-fortwayne.org/blog.php?msg=586#msgtop ).

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 27th, 2005 at 11:24 pm by Bob Waters
Who in the Lutheran blogosphere, I wonder, presumeds to boast of their blogging before God?

I would add, however, that the distinction between boasting before God and before men is a very useful one here.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 27th, 2005 at 11:33 pm by Bloghardt
Bob,

"Boast all you want before men, just don't do it before God." My catechism instructor once said that. I am still pondering it the truthfulness of the statement.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 28th, 2005 at 9:28 pm by FemLem1
Is not seeking the approval of man (via boasting) just as bad as boasting before God? isn't that the problem of the men in John 12:42-44? they loved the praise of men more than they loved the praise of God and did not confess teir faith. I don't think, therefore, you can really separate boasting before men and boasting before God.

(additionally, you can't be before men and not before God)

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 1:54 am by Bob Waters
Nope. Nowhere are we commanded to go out of our way to be unpopular, obnoxious, disliked or distained.

Obviously loving the praise of men more than the praise of God is a bad thing. But nobody is talking about that. The question is whether, firmly determined to prefer the praise of God, we my also regard the praise of men as worth having as long as having it is consistent with God's approval- and especially if, as in Paul's case, that means that our work on God's behalf will receive a better reception. And your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise.

Nor is it a question of whether we can *be* before men without being before God; if it were, your argument would exclude your conclusion, since then any attempt to please God would *also* be an attempt to please men (which it obviously isn't). The question is whether "putting oneself forward" before men is necessarily wrong. If it is, then Paul was wrong. And he himself made the point that self-promotion before God is always inappropriate.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 8:16 am by Schellenbach

Nope. Nowhere are we commanded to go out of our way to be unpopular, obnoxious, disliked or distained.

Simply not promoting oneself is not the same thing as going out of one's way to be disliked.

The question is whether "putting oneself forward" before men is necessarily wrong. If it is, then Paul was wrong. And he himself made the point that self-promotion before God is always inappropriate.

The key word here is "necessarily." I can grant that "putting oneself forward is not necessarily wrong, but that doesn't mean that it's not spiritually risky. The danger of pride does lurk there, and one must be careful, even though it's not "necessarily" wrong.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 3:09 pm by Bob Waters
Certainly it's theoretically possible in many areas of life not to actively promote oneself while at the same time not doing anything to make oneself "unpopular, obnoxious, disliked or distained-" though taking that route can seriously compromise one's effectiveness in many endeavors. including blogging. Those who have ever served in the pastoral ministry, for example, know all too well the importance of "public relations" within the congregation to one's effectiveness. Most vocations similarly require an affirmative attempt to keep oneself well-regarded by those who pay one's salary, or attended to (insofar as attention is necessary to one's function.

I agree that pride is a danger. However, I also think, once again, that it's critical to specify precisely what one means by pride, and to be clear as to what sinful pride is and is not. Feeling good about one's efforts and wishing to share them with others doesn't necessarily qualify, and the danger of Pietism and works righteousness is every bit as great as the danger of sinful pride.

Again, I think that before one reaches any conclusions about whether, in a given case, "putting oneself forward" is sinful, it's necessary to examine the reasons for which it is done. Being "proud-" in the non-sinful sense- of a blog entry or even of one's writing ability or cleverness may or may not be sinful. If it is, it's because of what it says about one's attitude toward God's gifts and one's fellow
creatures not because it's somehow wrong to "put oneself forward."

Is there a danger here? Of course There's a danger in any human activity. False humility, though, can be one of the deadliest and most insidious forms of pride- a point which most writers who have dealt most comprehensely and ably with that particular sin usually stress..

Once again, as Lewis put it, nowhere are we told that an intelligent man must regard himself as stupid in order to avoid sinful pride. Nowhere are we told that a thoughtful man must tell himself that he has nothing to say. And while we may not steal credit for our gifts-whatever they may be- from God, we certainly are not told that we must disparage them and regard them as worthless or ourselves as ungifted in order to avoid sin.

It isn't the putting of oneself forward which is the issue. It's the motivtion- and perhaps that's where our focus ought to be. I rather suspect that pietistic false humility is at least as great a danger to most of the people who read this blog and participate in this thread as sinful pride, and I strongly suspect that this is true of the Lutheran blogosphere generally.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 3:15 pm by Bob Waters
Obviously the poorly-edited sentence in the above post, "Being 'proud-' in the non-sinful sense- of a blog entry or even of one's writing ability or cleverness may or may not be sinful."
is gibberish. What I meant to say is that being proud of a blog entry or even of one's writing ability may or my not be what we mean by "the sin of pride." It all depends on whether one acknowledges that the Giver, rather than the receiver, deserves the glory for the gift- and whether one is content with the reflected glory of being an instrument through which the Giver works, without "thinking of oneself more highly than one ought."

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 4:20 pm by john pawlitz
Although I can appreciate the need for a "clean heart" as the psalmist says, I cannot believe that "having the right reasons" is the key to doing something right. One regularly hears a moral friend say, "But I would be doing it for the wrong reasons..." What does that mean? How does a deed change substantially depending on why we do it? (this is not just a rhetorical question, I would really like to know)

But the problem is from the start that one cannot separate the deed from the motive. If these are the deeds we do, it does not matter what our intents were. For instance, one would never talk about murder as something we could do "for the right reasons." And this hyperbole demonstrates a principle nicely, even if it doesn't apply well to the present issues. Certainly, Christ says that the motive of a commandment is important, for instance not lusting as opposed to merely not committing adultery.

On the other hand, we're all familiar withanother brand of theological thought saying, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." As Lutherans it is tempting to say that we should not seek a good conscience, because after all, what is the theological merit of a good conscience? This is simplistic. I can buy that we must do things that involve having "right" reasons or conscience. I cannot accept a rhetoric that aligns closely with "we're doing this for the right reasons."

Ultimately, we must accept that we are merely performing acts, and these acts would have no value apart from Christ. In fact, Christ is the very opposite of "deeds" in many ways, as he came "full of grace and truth." But he, like all flesh, does, not to earn salvation, but be cause flesh is a thing that does.

Hence, it is in the spirit and not in flesh that Christians worship, even though there worship consists of taking Christ's flesh.

How does any of this apply? I don't know, except to say that the blog carnival seem to be the very opposite of Christian worship. We don't gather... we partake of spirit (various blogging), instead of flesh (we just are what we are) ... and we disparately perform the common aggrandizement of thought (the "doing").

I don't pretend to make sense, but it is far too difficult to say what is logically correct and true at the same time. Try it. But if I had to focus this discussion on one singular issue, my question would be: is it possible for a blog carnival to happen "for the right reasons?" As I said above, it's not a rhetorical argument...my conscience would honestly like to learn the explanation of this phenomena of righteous reasons, if one can be made.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 5:03 pm by Bob Waters
You make several excellent points- and healthy ones, too.
I'd caution you, though, about your statement that as Lutherans we should not seek a clean conscience. If that's the case, why seek absolution? Why receive the Supper? And of course, the New Self will always and instinctively seek to do that which pleases God. He doesn't do it to win "brownie points" with God, but because that's what God's New Creation does!

The danger I see here is precisely that we may fall into the Reformed and Pietistic trap of using the Law to bludgeon the Old Self into "being good." We can't- and that's why I'm so concerned about
the entire question which began this discussion. Is avoiding self-assertiveness by not running a blogging carnival in such a way that one recommends one's own posts really that much of a spiritual plus? My hunch continues to be that it opens greater pitfalls than it seeks to warn against- and for the very reason you suggest.

Of course, none o our actions or motivations are "righteous," and you're perfecty correct in raising that objection. That such conversations end up in the place where this one has is an excellent reason for avoiding them. When we attempt to be righteous before God by either "putting ourselves forward," or by *not* "putting ourselves forward," we fall into exactly the trap you suggest.

But isn't that the trap the entire assertion which started this discussion laid for us from the outset? Can it really be the case that submitting a blog entry to a carnival is an act which one ought to either perform or refrain from out of a desire to be righteous at all?

Isn't talk of the danger of "pride-" if used as an argument against doing something, rather than as an always-appropriate warning against a potential danger- precisely an invitation to debate whether participating or refraining is the works-righteous thing to do?

Now, before anyone else says it, "all things are lawful for me- but not all things are helpful." But sometimes the unhelpful things include asking, in effect, "What Would Moses Do?"

Let's be aware of the danger- it was salutary that the warning was given- without inventing a commandment against self-assertion, and involving our Old Adams in precisely the kind of theology they delight in.

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 5:53 pm by john pawlitz
Lately, I have been mulling over words of Goethe:

Deny yourself! You must deny yourself.
That is the one eternal song.

I can't really agree or not agree. I just like it. As much as Goethe can be moving, he is just as much romantic as true (for that matter, I feel the same about Keats as an English poet).

At any rate, how does discipline (cf. Proverbs usage of "father's discipline") connect with New Testament theology of the New Man/justification/etc.?

Re: "Carnival"-ing our Blogs Before God

Posted On: August 29th, 2005 at 5:56 pm by Bob Waters
As Law does to Gospel, I think.

Denying oneself is always good, wholesome Law. No question.
But only to the extent that the Law is wholesome as well as good. The Old Adam loves the Law, after all. It's the Gospel he doesn't think he needs!