NPR did some religion reporting recently to fit the mood of a holiday season that left Jewish believers awkwardly behind in early Advent (for the liturgically gifted). One story was about the Mark Driscoll of the mainline Protestant world, Nadio Nadia Bolz-Weber, the woman who started out Church of Christ and is currently “orthodox Lutheran” by NPR’s reporter’s account:
The congregation here resembles the crowd at a downtown bookshop — hipsters and college professors, gay couples and Democratic grandmas. But even in this crowd, the congregation’s pastor, with her short, moussed hair and armloads of religious tattoos, stands out as she launches into a sermon about Jesus on the cross.
“In our win-lose way of understanding things, it would have made a lot more sense for Jesus to have come and been a superhero — kicking ass and taking names, showing everyone how strong God is by winning at our game,” she tells the congregation.
Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber is a bit of a Lutheran rock star at the moment, although the term makes her cringe. Her new book, Pastrix: The Cranky, Beautiful Faith of a Sinner & Saint, recently hit the New York Times best-seller list.
What she and her church are trying to do, she says, is simple and radical: create an authentic Christian experience without the pretension that can come with church.
“I think people’s tolerance for bullshit is at an all-time low,” she says.
I was glad to see that the story irked even one of the bloggers who writes for the CRC-RCA blog, The 12 (though challenges from readers prompted the irked one to take it back).
The story on Jane (why call her Nadia or pastor since we want to be transgressive and draw outside the lines), came the day before Christmas. The day after NPR featured a Christian musician who according to Wikipedia is part of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. He is Josh Garrells. And one of the story‘s sources said this about Garrells’ music:
“There are movements within postmodern Christianity that are saying these lines between sacred and secular are false constructs,” says Christian Piatt, a blogger and author in Portland who writes about faith and pop culture. “They don’t really exist. And, therefore, we don’t have to choose whether or not we’re going to listen to U2 or Amy Grant, or Josh Garrels or The Avett Brothers. I can have them all on the same rotation in my music and not consider myself an apostate or a heretic or anything like that.”
Amy Grant!!??
Christian Piatt needs to say hello to two-kingdom theology, which may be post-postmodern or popomo. 2k keeps the lines. The sacred is different from the secular. Nadia is different from Jane. Church is different from coffee house. Baroque is different from punk. Sunday is not Monday. Lines matter, as any wearer of tattoos should know.
Christians may and do walk on both sides of the line. But they know what is appropriate on each side. What Piatt and Bolz-Weber don’t seem to understand — along with the rest of the world dominated by boomers who still don’t want to color inside the lines — is that if you remove the lines, everything is the same and nothing is special (or set apart or sacred). Finding a place that is unique, where truth abides no matter whether Amy Grant or Bono or Vaughn Williams or Josh Garrells flourishes, is the source of real comfort and genuine liberty.
How long? How long, O Lord, will it take for the line-transgressors to see how liberating the lines are?
Old Life 
Thoughtful piece.
““I think people’s tolerance for bullshit is at an all-time low,” she says.
If only that were true.
LikeLike
“… the woman who started out Church of Christ and is currently ‘orthodox Lutheran’ …”
I don’t think so…. Especially since she’s in the ELCA. Anyone in that synod who owned copies of the Book of Concord (especially the pastors) have long since relegated them to the trash heap. The only thing “orthodox” about that bunch is when they’re watching that 2012 production by David Leon.
LikeLike
It seems Nadio had a sex change operation that turned her into Nadia, as seen in what I think is a typo in the first paragraph.
This is from before my time, but I think you older guys know of Cheers, and here is a link about a marriage between an LCMS and ELCA Lutheran. I think George will appreciate this.
LikeLike
Alberto,
Great clip.
LikeLike
Alberto, corrected and thanks. I had stopped watching Cheers when that episode aired. Was Garrison Keillor writing for them then?
LikeLike
That is a brilliant Cheers clip. One of my favorite shows, but I wasn’t sufficiently aware to recall that episode.
I doubt any sitcom writer would dare write humor so premised on theological awareness these days.
LikeLike
Thanks, Alberto. Yeah, that was indeed a great clip, though I never really got into “Cheers.” I much preferred Ted Danson as Dr. John Becker in one of my all time favorite sitcoms. In that series he portrayed a character that reminded me a lot of some of the interlopers that visit this blog now and then.
LikeLike
“Missouri Syn-odd”
LikeLike
They have hijacked our church (ELCA). But they are the devil that we know. There are still some very faith pastors and congregations still within the ELCA who have little to do with them anymore. But rock along in their ministry and faithfulness to the gospel.
Where else are we supposed to go? Are we to give up our hard won (by Christ) Christian freedom and enter into the peg and chain sort of “freedom” that the LCMS has? Hardly. Once you tasted the true freedom of the pure gospel, aside from any add-on’s such as “3rd use” of the law…or inerrant texts…or certain genitalia required to teach and proclaim God’s Word, you can never go back into those add-on’s.
LikeLike
I have no idea who wrote for Cheers. That show ended when I was a kid; I found the clip accidently while looking at some other Lutheran related videos on YouTube.
LikeLike
Alberto, it is an amazing amount of Protestant awareness for Hollywood. Thanks for “sharing.”
LikeLike
Steve Martin, do you care to parse how your view of freedom differs from Nadia’s? Do you really think Christians are free to lie? To have two wives? Paul does say we are slaves of Christ. You have to serve someone (unless you’re god).
LikeLike
Rob Long, who also wrote for National Review, was one of the writers for “Cheers”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Long
LikeLike
Steve, pardon the length, but you seem to suggest something that earns Lutherans a reputation for semi-antinomianism. How often do the Reformed have to help correct that?
In turning to the second half of our investigation, we must explore the question of whether the Lutheran commitment to sola fide is such that they make absolutely no place for the necessity of good works, in some sense, in the broader category of their soteriology. In other words, is Lutheran soteriology antinomian? There have been those in both the distant and recent past who have argued that Luther and Lutheranism only hold to two uses of the law: the political or civil, in retraining evil, and the elenctic or pedagogic, in leading people to knowledge of sin and the need of redemption. Yet, at the same time a perusal of primary sources, including Luther’s writings, Lutheran confessions, and other Lutheran theologians evidences that Luther and Lutheranism hold to the third use of the law in some form, the didactic or normative use, regulating the life of the regenerate. One may begin with Luther’s own writings, as his writings are incorporated in the confessional corpus of the Lutheran church.
While Luther certainly divided the scriptures into the categories of law and gospel, commands and promise, just because a person became a Christian did not mean that he was now suddenly free from the demands of the law. Luther, for example, writes that
“…as long as we live in a flesh that is not free of sin, so long as the Law keeps coming back and performing its function, more on one person and less in another, not to harm but to save. This discipline of the Law is the daily mortification of the flesh, the reason, an dour powers and the renewal of our mind (2 Cor 4:16)…There is still need for a custodian to discipline and torment the flesh, that powerful jackass, so that by this discipline sins may be diminished and the way prepared for Christ.”
So long as the Christian is simil iustus et peccator, there is always a need for the law in the life of the believer. Luther’s use of the law in the life of the believer is further evidenced from his catechisms.
Luther’s Small Catechism begins with an exposition of the Decalogue. At the close of the exposition of the Decalogue in Luther’s Large catechism, Luther explains the importance of the law in the life of the believer:
“Thus, we have the Ten Commandments, a compend of divine doctrine, as to what we are to do in order that our whole life may be pleasing to God, and the true fountain and channel from and in which everything must arise and flow that is to be a good work, so that outside the Ten Commandments, no work or thing can be good or pleasing to God, however great or precious it be in the yes of the world.”
Luther saw a need for good works, but was careful, like the Reformed tradition, to teach about the proper relationship between good works and justification. Luther addresses the proper place of the law as it relates to justification when he writes:
“The matter of the Law must be considered carefully, both as to what and as how we ought to think about the Law; otherwise we shall either reject it altogether, after the fashion of the fanatical spirits who prompted the peasant’s revolt a decade ago by saying that the freedom of the Gospel absolves men from all laws, or we shall attribute to the law the power to justify. Both groups sin against the Law: those on the right, who want to be justified through the Law, and those on the left, who want to be altogether free of the Law. Therefore we must travel the royal road, so that we neither reject the law altogether not attribute more to it than we should.”
Luther saw a place for the law in the life of the believer. When he was explaining the doctrine of justification he said that there was no place for works or the law. In relationship, though, to one’s sanctification and the knowledge of what is pleasing to God, the Decalogue served as guide as well as a tool in the hand of God to confront the remaining sin in the believer. This careful fencing of justification from works, yet at the same time connecting justification to sanctification, is especially evident in the Lutheran confessions.
The Augsburg Confession is the first official Lutheran confession, and was largely written by Luther’s lieutenant, Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560). The Augsburg Confession carefully explains that justification is by faith alone: “Our works can not reconcile God, or deserve remission of sins, grace, and justification at his hands, but that these we obtain by faith only, when we believe that we are received into favor for Christ’s sake, who alone is appointed the Mediator and Propitiatory, by whom the Father is reconciled.” Yet, at the same time the confession gives an apology against antinomianism: “Ours are falsely accused of forbidding good works. For their writings extant upon the Ten Commandments, and others of the like argument, do bear witness that they have to good purpose taught concerning every kind of life, and its duties; what kinds of life, and what works in every calling, do please God.”
The confession even goes so far as to say that Lutherans “teach that it is necessary to do good works,” but it specifies that “not that we may trust that we deserve grace by them, but because it is the will of God that we should do them. By faith alone is apprehended remission of sins and grace. And because the Holy Spirit is received by faith, our hearts are now renewed, and so put on new affections, so that they are able to bring forth good works” (Augsburg Conf., ¶ 20, in Schaff, Creeds, 3.24-25). So, here, in this Lutheran confession we see the emphasis upon justification by faith alone but also the need for good works, informed by the law. While this is not precisely the same nomenclature that one finds in the Westminster Standards [it] is nonetheless parallel to the Standards’ emphasis on the third use of the law (WLC qq. 95-97; WCF 19.6; cf. Belgic Conf., ¶ 25; Heidelberg Cat., q. 93). What we find in inchoate forms in the Augsburg Confessions, however, emerges quite clearly in the formula of Concord.
…It is in the Formula of Concord that the Lutherans, legendary for their insistence upon justification by faith alone, also state that “good works must certainly and without all doubt follow a true faith (provided only it be not a dead faith but a living faith), as fruits of a good tree” (Formula of Concord, ¶ 4, in Schaff, Creeds, 3.122.). It is in article six, “Of the third use of the law,” where the document makes its most pronounced statement about the importance of the law and good works: “We believe, teach, and confess that although they who truly believe in Christ, and are sincerely converted to God, are through Christ set free from the curse and constraint of the Law, they are not, nevertheless, on that account without the Law (Formula of Concord, ¶6, in Schaff, Creeds, 3.131.). The document goes on to state that “the preaching of the Law should be urged not only upon those who have not faith in Christ, and do not yet repent, but also upon those who truly believe in Christ, are truly converted to God, and regenerated and are justified by faith” (Formula of Concord, ¶6, in Schaff, Creeds, 3.132.). So, then, it appears from primary sources such as Luther, the Augsburg Confession, and the Formula [of] Concord that Luther and Lutheranism places a heavy emphasis upon justification by faith alone but not to the exclusion of the importance and necessity of good works or the third use of the law. This is not a unique conclusion.
J.V. Fesko in The Confessional Presbyterian, Volume 3, 2007, pgs. 22-24.
But speaking of Hollywood and religion, you do a nice job with providing atheists a hymnal:
LikeLike
D.G.,
Nadia’s freedom is qualified. Her freedom is bent upon ‘the self’…and what ‘we must do’ (the “right” causes, etc.)
Her freedom is not based upon the death of the old adam/eve but the ascendancy of them. Spit in God’s face (gay relationships are good!).
She lays the law down on her flock (a sort of secular “3rd use”) (I have heard enough of her sermons and read several, as well).
She gets a lot right…but it just takes a drop of ink in the water to spoil the whole glass.
Same goes for the Lutherans who fall off the other side of the horse.
“Christ is the end of the law for all those who have faith.” We believe that. We are truly free…in Him.
LikeLike
Steve, you didn’t answer. Are you “free” to lie? Are you “free” to have two wives?
LikeLike
Funky Steve, at the risk of sounding like Papa Duck, God designed the genitalia, assigned them to sexes. He also assigned sexes to different roles in the church. Outside the church — rock on. Sounds like you want freedom from certain inspired passages of the NT as much as from men (and babes).
LikeLike
D.G.,
What did St. Paul say about which things are lawful for the Christian, and which things are not?
You sound a bit like those Romans who said…”Well…then…if we are forgiven, then we should just sin, sin, sin..give God a chance to forgive us.”
The right is stuck on the religious, holiness project…and the left is stuck on their other use of the law, their worldly project and self-promotion.
Those of us in the center, rely totally on Christ and Him…alone.
Chortles,
“There is neither slave nor free, Greek nor Jew…male nor female.”
God’s Word is not dependent up proper genitalia. Contrary to popular belief. He is a real God.
And He doesn’t require perfect and inerrant texts. He actually does use “earthen vessels”.
LikeLike
When did Steve go off the reservation?
Dude, so what’s her name?
LikeLike
As much as I’d like to just trust Jesus and live like a porn star, I just don’t think Scripture allows me to…
LikeLike
Steve,
it pretty much boils down to whether the minister ministers in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost or the Mother, Daughter and Holy Spirit.
And you would of thought that Jesus could have forseen this and at least chosen Mary or Martha for a apostle.
LikeLike
It all boils down to whether the preacher is faithful to the Scriptures. That we are sinners in need of a Savior.
I have also heard a lot of crappy sermons from men, as well as women. And I have heard great sermons from the mouths of both.
I guess you guys think women should be head scarfed in church, too.
LikeLike
You (Christian), really would want to be a porn star?
I doubt it. But if you did…if you were…your sins would still be forgiven.
The 10 Commandments and all of God’s laws are applicable to His creatures (us)…and we pay a price for trying to skirt them. But for the Christian, “ALL things are lawful.”
Do you think God’s grace is so cheap and stingy that He couldn’t forgive you co-starring with Betty Big Boobs in a XXX feature?
LikeLike
We in the church are forgiven our sins…but we never ought advocate or affirm sin…of any kind…ala Nadia B. Weber.
LikeLike
Steve – …but we never ought advocate or affirm sin…of any kind
Erik – O.K., you can come back on the reservation.
LikeLike
Thank you, sir!
LikeLike
Darryl:
This is entirely off-point. Completely.
But, it’s Advent and Christmas from your Popishly-inclined brother in Christ, remembering Advent, Christmas and Epiphany. Go ahead, chide me for being Reformed in theology while adhering to Cranmer’s vision of 1552. Go on.
I wish all the Reformed Churchmen a hearty round during the Yuletide season. All those manmade things like the shingles, bricks, beams of the church, the pulpit, carpet and more. And horrors, odl Tom’s Prayer Book of 1552.
Having ribbed you Reformed chaps, my mind and soul is with you. U r the best of the best. Our Confessions and catechisms, and old Tom’s book of 1552, wisely rule the school. (The story is untold, that is, between Canterbury and Zurich, but more later.)
As for Jason and the callers, get real. We are far, far beyond Rome, like centuries ago. Go ahead, invoke the saints for us Reformed Churchmen. Go on, maybe throw in some action with St. Gabriel and St. Michael? While at it, throw in a few invocations for Jorge’s (Francis) support of Wuerl over Burke in DC. (Jorge screwed up.)
Again, Darryl, cheers for a new year of 2014. May His Sovereign Majesty, Three in One, attend and bless your labors.
LikeLike
Darryl:
Let us labor on.
We know “how well” the Devil hath sown his odious and idolatrous seeds. The poor callers are poor indeed.
We are reminded of Jerome’s point, to wit:
“That which hath not authority out of the word of God, is altogether as easily refused as proved. Which rule of religion, if the Latin Church had as well observed, as it is often given and often commended by the godly fathers, the Church of Christ had never been burdened with so many unprofitable traditions and new inventions of men.” – Jerome (347-420)
As a historian, it must be difficult for you to address the issues of the Spirit. Yet, Mt. 13 has force, to wit, that wicked one stealing HM’s Word. Callers, you r thieves. The English Reformers had your number centuries ago. We have your number now. Go ahead. Invoke the saints, including Mary, against us. Go ahead, do it.
Yet, they must be addressed. Let us labor on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsuXVzG3OuI#t=20n
Darryl, as an aside, an interesting scholar has arisen at Central Michigan University, to wit, Carrie Euler, a young lass, working on the connections between Canterbury and Zurich. Carrie along with Diarmiad MacCulloch and Alister McGrath may be re-writing historioagraphy for the late 16th century. We’ll see. Historians correcting the 16th century records (without the Tractaholic negativities),
Come, labor on.
Who dares stand idle on the harvest plain,
while all around us waves the golden grain?
And to each servant does the Master say,
“Go work today.”
Come, labor on.
The enemy is watching night and day,
to sow the tares, to snatch the seed away;
while we in sleep our duty have forgot,
he slumbered not.
Come, labor on.
Away with gloomy doubts and faithless fear!
No arm so weak but may do service here:
by feeblest agents may our God fulfill
his righteous will.
Come, labor on.
Claim the high calling angels cannot share–
to young and old the Gospel gladness bear;
redeem the time; its hours too swiftly fly.
The night draws nigh.
Come, labor on.
No time for rest, till glows the western sky,
till the long shadows o’er our pathway lie,
and a glad sound comes with the setting sun.
“Servants, well done.”
LikeLike
Or, as Zachary Ursinus noted, to wit: “If stopping by, keep the visit short….or, if staying, then pitch in and help us.”
His commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism remains a gem to those in the Catholic (=Reformed, not Romanist), Apostolic and Holy Church. http://www.seeking4truth.com/ursinus/zutblcont.htm
Looking forward to the Backwards-callers engagement with Ursinus. Invoke Mary, Gabriel and other saints against us. Go on, go ahead. Tradition gives u those rights.
From a Protestant, Catholic, Reformed and Prayer Book Anglican.
LikeLike
Steve, your thinking is as sloppy as the papists. The minister speaks to God for the congregation and to the congregation for God. And He is not the Mother, Daughter, Spirit.
IOW you are complaining to the wrong parties if you are complaining here.
But on the other hand, the papists are over here complaining too when they need to take it to Francis.
Oh well.
LikeLike
Thanks, Viking, the.
LikeLike
Bob,
“And He is not the Mother, Daughter, Spirit.”
Did I say that? I think you have me confused with someone else.
Can’t remember what it was that I was “complaining” about.
But, thanks anyway, Bob.
LikeLike
“What she and her church are trying to do, she says, is simple and radical: create an authentic Christian experience without the pretension that can come with church.”
This isn’t what Christ’s church is to do.
She’s quite a classy act and a perfect example of a false teacher aping the culture. Apparently these passages are foreign to her: Eph. 5:4, Matthew 15:11, Coloss. 3:8-10,
LikeLike
Due to popular demand we is called to connect the dots.
We accordingly then comply by replying that if the minister represents God to the congregation in at least the benediction(?) and God is the Father, Son and Spirit, the minister should be uhmm, . . . . a male. If God is the Mother, Daughter and Spirit, then the ministress should be/is a female. That’s the implications of the whole “it’ doesn’t make any difference if the preacher is a woman” paradigm, though we grant the adherents might not want to understandably go there.
Given enough time though, they’ll be able to swallow that conclusion on the basis of what that ole racist rascal Robt. Dabney said:
Nadia of course, will be both available and happy to welcome them with a coupon from her favorite tattoo parlor for newb/first timers.
[
LikeLike
Pulling a E. Charter move here to say Hand in my Pocket is nice to listen to at the end of a busy week. Purrty voice and stuff..
It’s Jase’s fault, he’s been bloggin’ about Morrisette in his reincarnated blog.
Wilderness wanderings and all…
Peace out, blogdom.
LikeLike
I would love to listen to Amy Grant but I would have to get rid of my Gaither Vocal Band and Keith Green to make room.
In College I would go out and run for an hour listening to Philp Sandifer. I was probably a much holier person then (and in much better shape):
LikeLike
Thanks , I have recently been looking for info approximately this suubject for a long time and yours iis the greatest I have found outt so far.
However, what aboyt the bottom line? Are yyou positive
about the supply?
my web blog: divorce advice for men over 50
LikeLike
Thanks, divorce advice.
LikeLike
Speaking of men over 50, in middle age you take your pleasures where you find them. My day was just brightened by going to the men’s restroom and noting that the new urinal deodorizer smells quite nice.
LikeLike
C.F.W. Walther —Are most Christians concerned about their sins? Do they seek to understand them ever more clearly? Do they battle against them? Do they despite their flesh diligently watch and pray, hear and read God’s Word, that all sins may be purged from their hearts and life and thus grow in sanctification? Not at all! Most of them think: “To be that worried about sin is enthusiasm. That is pietism and Methodism. That is false legalism.” (Gospel Sermons. St. Louis: CPH. 190.) http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2015/09/losing-luther
LikeLike