VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - Episcopal Blogger Spins Fleeing Episcopalians to Rome Via Ordinariate

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - Episcopal Blogger Spins Fleeing Episcopalians to Rome Via Ordinariate:


The drift of Episcopalians to the Roman Catholic Church via the Ordinariate is worrying some liberal Episcopal bloggers and ordinary Episcopalians who see the move getting more cyber ink and publicity than the flight deserves.

"Thus far, 100 priests and fewer than 1,400 people in 22 church communities have expressed an interest in the ordinariate. Gather them all in Washington National Cathedral, and the place isn't half full. Only six of these 22 communities have more than 70 members, which suggests that their long-term viability may be an issue. And there is no evidence to suggest that these small congregations are the thin edge of an as yet invisible wedge," writes Jim Naughton of Episcopal Café blog.

He is partly right. Most Anglo-Catholics and those in the Continuing Movement are not fleeing en masse to Rome as a safe haven for their catholicism, preferring to remain in TEC (though that group is rapidly diminishing.) or Forward in Faith, the Anglo-Catholic wing of TEC that is still very much alive and well. Forward in Faith North America defines itself as "a fellowship of Bishops, Clergy, Laity, Parishes and Religious Orders, who embrace the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who uphold the Evangelical Faith and Catholic Order which is the inheritance of the Anglican Way, and who work, pray and give for the reform and renewal of the Church with 'no compromise of truth and no limitation of love' FiF/NA members include faithful Anglicans both within and outside ECUSA."

The prominence the ordinariate has achieved in the media has unsettled some Episcopalians. "As a denomination, we are still recovering from several years worth of news stories in which the departure of some three percent of our membership for a more theologically conservative body has been variously described as a 'schism' or an 'exodus,'" writes Naughton.

"This story has appeared in major newspapers across the country, often accompanied by commentary about the Vatican's bold move against the theologically liberal Episcopal Church. I am still trying to figure out what all of the fuss is about."

Naughton goes on to cite dubious figures that the departures both to Rome and the ACNA are but a small percentage of the whole.

He features the bogus figure of some 2, 248,000 members in The Episcopal Church when referencing those who have fled. The truth is most of those have long ago left TEC for other churches or going nowhere or who are dead and have never been taken off the rolls. The real and only figure is Average Sunday Attendance (ASA). That figure is now less than 700,000. These are the true Episcopalians paying parish, diocesan and TEC bills.

Naughton claims that some 228,000 former Roman Catholics are now in the Episcopal Church. What he doesn't say is that those who left TEC for Rome did so out of spiritual conviction, whereas those fleeing Rome did so more because they divorced and remarried but could not receive Holy Communion and could not get annulments. Many view The Episcopal Church as Catholic Lite.

"According to the 2004 U. S. Congregational Life Survey, 11.7 percent of Episcopalians were formerly Roman Catholic," writes Naughton. But that is out of 700,000 not 2.2 million.

One conservative blogger, Christopher Johnson noted that Episcopalians were fleeing to Rome decades before the Ordinariate was a gleam in the papal eye. "See if the American Catholic church has any figures about the number of ex-Episcopalians in its ranks," he writes.

Naughton admits that the Episcopal Church has shrunk some in the last seven years, and now has about two million members. Membership yes, actively Episcopalian no. Most of those are not remotely active and most no longer attend an Episcopal Church. The figure is less than 700,000. Naughton's own diocese is in free fall both in membership and money with the new bishop busy suing PNC bank to get its hands on the Soper Fund to keep the diocese afloat.

The 1500 he cites leaving TEC for Rome, and other mainstream denominations might be miniscule, but it doesn't include the thousands of ordinary Episcopalians who have quietly left TEC for Rome over the years, like my attorney and his wife who do not show up on any statistics. The Ordinariate is only months old after all.

He also omitted the fact that four, yes four bishops have left TEC and gone to Rome (with one returning) indicating that the theological Tsunami is deeper than he is prepared to admit.

Then of course there are the 100,000 plus who have left TEC to form the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) through such intermediary groups as the Diocese of Pittsburgh, CANA ET AL.

"There is no reason to fear the Ordinariate. Its creation is among the most overhyped religion stories of recent years. Some people swim the Tiber. Some swim the Thames. Media coverage suggests that reporters pay little attention until the Vatican tells them it's a big story," writes Naughton.

Again this is a half-truth. TEC has little to fear from these small groups departing. The bigger picture is the flight of TEC's parishes and parishioners to the AMIA and ACNA that continue to grow almost weekly. ACNA is working toward 1,000 new parishes and more than 100,000 new souls, most, for the moment, are ex-Episcopalians with or without their properties.

When the flight of all those in dioceses like Quincy, Pittsburgh, Ft. Worth and San Joaquin is added up the departures will be significant. They will leave behind skeleton Episcopal dioceses stripped of everything except empty buildings they cannot sell which they now have to maintain and pay taxes on. The Diocese of Pittsburgh has lost two-thirds of its entire membership. What sort of future does that diocese have in the Rust Belt? The rump diocese of Quincy cannot possibly last and will be forced to juncture in the coming year.

The newly anointed Bishop Eric Menees of the Diocese of San Joaquin is on the spiritual warpath for new souls and a revived diocese with increased evangelical fervor. The maintenance attitude of dwindling TEC dioceses shows little interest in evangelism preferring the bromides of inclusion and diversity to sustain them.

Naughton says that the 100 priests who have applied to join the Ordinariate is not evidence that the Catholic Church is winning priests from the Episcopal tradition. According to the Church Pension Group, 432 living Episcopal priests have been received from the Roman Catholic Church.

Be that as it may, a former Roman Catholic priest, now a TEC Bishop in the Diocese of Long Island, Lawrence C. Provenzano is showing absolutely no ability to grow his diocese. He has bought into TEC's liberal agenda and says he will let priests in Brooklyn, Queens and on Long Island officiate at same-sex weddings. That is the kiss of death spiritually and ecclesiastically for his diocese. It will only distance himself and his diocese from the Roman Catholic mainstream on Long Island. Even the Bishop of Albany, Bill Love, an ex-Roman Catholic, who is thoroughly orthodox, is finding it difficult to bring new converts into TEC in the bleak Adirondack region. It is tough pickin's all the way round, and he IS busy promoting ALPHA and Bible reading in his diocese.

The truth is the net effect of Bishop Gene Robinson's consecration in 2003 has caused shock waves around the US and across the Anglican Communion tearing the fabric of the Communion and no amount of spin can or will change that. The consecration more recently of an openly non-celibate lesbian in Mary Glasspool only tossed gasoline on an already raging fire.

The bottom line is that the Ordinariate is one small but increasing demonstration of a widening crack in the fabric of TEC that is only expanding with time. Nothing it seems can stop it.

END


'via Blog this'

Fox Valley Jimmy Flips His Wig, Reveals His Excellent WELS Training

WELS clergy are so fierce...when they can hide their identities.
They have mouse hearts and mouse parts. 

Fox Valley Jimmy said anonymously on the anonymous blog... [GJ - Graded, D-]

Anonymous- Bear in mind that the book of Mormon is also free. The WELS leadership doesn't want to talk with you [avoid using you, which is conversational slang] about UOJ because it's a moronic debate. No one who uses the phrase "objective justification" believes in universalism- because they're [Keep pronouns consistent]  not using the word "justification" in the same way as when one talks about justification by faith. Anyone who says otherwise is a dullard. Yes, that would include Jackson. His diatribes against UOJ is [are - subject/verb agreement] just a way of getting back at the various churches that got ride  [This is not the correct usage of this word. Please consult a dictionary for the word's definition and to find the right word for this context.]  of him because he was a deeply annoying person to have as a pastor. This was the case: 1. Because he has a pathological need to inform everyone about how smart he is (this is fairly transparent for people who have read even one post on his blog). 2. He divides congregations by creating a two-tired  [This is a repeated error. Please check the rest of your paper for similar errors.]  membership. There's [there are?] his people who hang on his every word and then there's everyone else. It's like the ancient Gnostics with their distinction between true "Gnostics" and "Pististics." [new term – diabetic test?] You can observe this on his blog as well- there's the inner circle that says everything he says is brilliant and then there's  [Agreement of subject and verb problem, plural subject, singular verb] the enemies, people who apply basic logic and a basic theological knowledge that transcends  [This is a repeated error. Please check the rest of your paper for similar errors.] Lenski and other hundred-year old texts books on the Lutheran Confessions, to his moronic [overuse of moron, moronic] theological proposals, bad historical scholarship (most of which is tied up with the brain-dead task of accumulating quotations from various sources without actually analyzing them), half truths, libel, and gossip. Notice that to stay in his good graces you can't contradict a single thing he says. Look through the posts- you'll never find Meyer or the rest of them saying "Well, I disagree with you on this one point because..." [Read the 16,000+ comments again. You are wrong.]  If you begin to say something like that, you have to repent eventually or you become an enemy. There's a number of examples of this I've observed down through the years. He's an incredibly insecure person and he can't stand even a small amount of contradiction.


***


GJ - I can tell when people are waking up to the toxic waste in Fox Valley. The anonymous blog kicks into action again, anonymously.


In fact, a layman in Milwaukee has told me that the laity are waking up to the poor leadership in WELS. They appreciated all the information about Church and Change, the stealth organization funded by WELS and organized in Fox Valley.


This is probably the only Lutheran blog with almost all comments allowed. One was quite telling, so obscene that the author apologized anonymously. (I did not publish it.) I get some spam. I also copy the rants from other locations because they are entertaining and revealing.


The truly pathetic comments stopped arriving on my blog when the writers realized I was tracking the area where they came from. They only want to write when they can hide their locations and identities. They are fierce mice who hide in their smelly lairs when the lights go on.

---


Strangely, Tim actually published this:

Anonymous said...

In the Confessions and Scripture it's pretty obvious that justification is always in a subjective sense. Justification is a declaring act. At best UOJ is false on paper but in practice some don't literally think that people in hell are saints. At worse it is a slippery slope to universalism because "where there is forgiveness of sins there is also life and salvation." I think it was Luther or someone in the Confessions who said that.


I agree with how 2138 on the linked blog (I think it was Meyer or Bruce or someone who linked it in a recent comment on Ichabod) talks about justification.


UOJ is confusing and seemingly contradictory. It shouldn't require this much pastoral care and teaching to teach the distinctions between OJ and SJ. JBFA is waaaaay more simple and is still orthodox. Forgiveness won and forgiveness distributed. It's as simple as that. No need for: forgiveness distributed (objective: because the declaration of forgiven is always subjective no matter how it's put) and forgiveness distributed again (subjective). "But if someone is unrepentant! Then God takes it back!" It's just asinine to me.

In the Spirit: Our Redeemer WELS still without leader

In the Spirit: Our Redeemer still without leader:


In the spring of 2010, the pastor of Our Redeemer Lutheran Church in Madison left the ministry to take a private-sector job in the funeral-planning business.


Parishioners thought it might take a few months to replace him.


Some 575 days later, the congregation is still trying to fill the vacancy. It has issued 13 calls for pastors and received 13 rejections.




Read more: http://host.madison.com/wsj/lifestyles/faith-and-values/religion/in-the-spirit-our-redeemer-still-without-leader/article_7396fdbe-490d-11e1-9fb1-0019bb2963f4.html#ixzz1ks4XCSp3


'via Blog this'

---

bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "In the Spirit: Our Redeemer WELS still without lea...":

WELS Answer Man said that exactly how the congregations housed the pastor was a "local matter." Now, however, that the housing market is down, no one wants to take a call and move and thus take a loss upon selling his house. So the entire call system is in gridlock due in large part to the synod's shortsightedness in not advising against selling parsonages and giving pastors allowances to buy their own houses.

By the way, our previous pastor wanted the congregation to sell the parsonage and give him an allowance for buying his own house, but thank goodness our congregation didn't even consider it for a second. That was just one bit of bad advice he gave, because he had his ear to the ground channeled whatever was the latest fad at the synod).

Of course what this means is our pastor can leave more easily and it will be harder to get another pastor, but trouble like that is par of the course in the WELS. At least our congregation isn't contributing to the problem:

WELS Answer Man on Selling the Parsonage:
http://arkiv.lbk.cc/faq/site.pl@1518cutopic_topicid69cuitem_itemid10259.htm

This is a matter to be discussed and resolved on the local level. There is no right or wrong, nor is there really a better or worse approach to meeting the housing needs of all called workers in all situations. Both have potential advantages and potential disadvantages for the called workers and for the congregation.

The Displaced Parsonage
Why more pastors are choosing housing allowances rather than parsonages, posted 11/01/1999

http://www.christianitytoday.com/cbg/1999/novdec/9y6069.html

http://www.divinitylutheran.org/history/

1990 The parsonage is sold and Pastor Henke and his family purchase their own home. 


***


GJ - The easiest move is parsonage-to-parsonage. The most difficult is from a home "owned" but mortgaged, needing to get a new mortgage and buy another home. Add the difficulty of selling or renting the previous home and getting a new job for wifey, since that is now assumed.

Steadfast Lutherans Unsteady on Justification by Faith. Another Preus Stormtrooper Launched

Rev. James Schulz responded to an ambiguous Andrew Preus UOJ post:


If we are going to call ourselves Confessional Lutherans, then it seems to me we ought to speak as the Confessions do about Justification. The Confessions do not use the terms “Objective” or “Subjective” when talking about Justification. Even Walther called the terms “the language of philosophers.” The terms confuse the doctrine of the atonement with the doctrine of justification.

When read in context, the Confessions – and the Scriptures! – always link the concept of “by faith” to the doctrine of justification. The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord speaks clearly as to what is necessary for a correct definition of Justification: “…justification, in and to which belong and are necessary only the grace of God, the merit of Christ, and faith, which receives this in the promise of the Gospel, whereby the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, whence we receive and have forgiveness of sins, reconciliation with God, sonship, and heirship of eternal life” (“The Righteousness of Faith” III:25).

***

GJ -

Andrew, a member of the Lutheran Duggar family, responded by citing "Kittle." He must have meant Kittel, a giant collection of prolix opinions about individual words in the Bible. Why cite a little Kittle, when a little Norwegian would do as well. I suggest that Andrew Preus read his grandfather's book, Justfication and Rome, where UOJ is sent into the dustbin of Pietism. The Preus clan does not like to acknowledge the clear quotations of Robert Preus against Huberism, which emerged later as UOJ.

My current read on the 19th century European situation is that Protestantism was divided between the rationalists (who dominated the state churches) and the unionistic Pietists, who merged the atonement and justification. An "Old Lutheran" in that context was someone who believed in the articles of faith, as viewed by Pietism, especially Halle University's Georg Christian Knapp. I have read many examples of 19th century writers who assumed that the atonement equaled world absolution.

---

James Aall wrote to Schulz:
With all do respect, I disagree. I do not believe the two terms pit justification against itself or justification against atonement. I believe that it explains that justification is for all. One must never doubt that Christ loves him. One must also understand that justification is received by faith and by faith alone. I do believe that Christ justified the entire world on the cross. If, however, one does not want to use the terms “objective” and “subjective” and instead atonement and justification by grace, I don’t think that is a problem. I’m not sure that there is actually a disagreement though. Do you believe that a confessional Lutheran pastor in good standing in the LCMS can teach the distinction between objective and subjective justification?

***

GJ -

Aall allowed for atonement and justification by grace. Isn't that interesting? Justification by faith is now a toxic phrase among UOJ Stormtroopers, just as Merry Christmas is among the modernists. In effect, Aall is saying that the entire world is forgiven (Brief Statement, 1932; Knapp, 1831), but to avoid justification by faith, uses justification by grace to repeat the universal absolution assumption. That is how justification by faith drops out of the thinking of these Stormtroopers, obliterating the Gospel in the name of the Gospel.

---

Schulz wrote:


Re: “… Christ justified the entire world on the cross.”
Could you back that statement up with a quote from Scripture or the Confessions in context? In my reading of Scripture and the Confessions, I find that “by faith” is not very far away when the doctrine of justification is being discussed.

Whenever “objective justification” is qualified by “subjective justification” it by definition becomes “Justification by faith” effectively canceling out “objective justification.” The terms are just so foreign to the way the Scriptures, the Confessions, Luther, and Chemnitz speak. Why not just stick with the term: “Justification by faith alone?”

---

Aal, shocked:

Wait! You are actually denying that Christ justified the entire world on the cross?! I didn’t know you were actually denying objective justification! “that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.” 2 Cor. 5:19. Christ first justified the entire world and we preach that justification so that it is received by faith (Rom 10:17). “Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for ALL men.” Rom 5:18. So to answer your previous question, if you can be a confessional Lutheran pastor in good standing in this synod and deny objective justification, the answer is no.

---

Schulz:


I think you are saying I deny the Atonement, which is not the same thing as Justification, and which I do not deny.

Reconciliation is not the exact thing as Justification. Luther hints at this when translating 2 Corinthians 5;19, he inserts an “and,” which Paul did not have. “And did not impute their trespasses unto them.” So Luther understands a consequence of reconciliation is to be expressed.

Now we’re getting to the crux of the issue. We condemn someone who believes the Atonement, but not the term “Objective Justification.” Could that be because the terms cause the confusion?

***

GJ - The UOJ strikeforce will continue to pounce on the Lutherans, but readers can see that their broken weapons are being handed back to them.

Transfiguration Sunday - 2012. Matthew 17:1ff

By Norma Boeckler

Transfiguration Sunday, 2012

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/bethany-lutheran-worship

Bethany Lutheran Worship, 10 AM Central Time

The Hymn #495               From Greenland’s Icy Mountains            3:23
The Confession of Sins
The Absolution
The Introit p. 16
The Gloria Patri
The Kyrie p. 17
The Gloria in Excelsis
The Salutation and Collect p. 19
The Epistle and Gradual             2 Peter 1:16-21
The Gospel           Matthew 17:1-9
Glory be to Thee, O Lord!
Praise be to Thee, O Christ!
The Nicene Creed p. 22
The Sermon Hymn #135            Tis Good              3:81

Transfigured – God Incarnate

The Hymn #307   Draw Nigh                3:72

The Preface p. 24
The Sanctus p. 26
The Lord's Prayer p. 27
The Words of Institution
The Agnus Dei p. 28
The Nunc Dimittis p. 29
The Benediction p. 31
The Hymn #283   God’s Word                           3:90

KJV 2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

KJV Matthew 17:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. 3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. 4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. 5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. 7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. 8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only. 9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

Sixth Sunday After Epiphany

O merciful and everlasting God, heavenly Father: We thank Thee that Thou hast revealed unto us the glory of Thy Son, and let the light of Thy gospel shine upon us: We pray Thee, guide us by this light that we may walk diligently as Christians in all good works, ever be strengthened by Thy grace, and conduct our lives in all godliness; through the same, Thy beloved Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, one true God, world without end. Amen.

Transfigured – God Incarnate

The Transfiguration is universally known among Christians. More than any other event, this one showed the chosen disciples that Jesus was God in the flesh, God Incarnate, far beyond a teacher, or rabbi, a miracle-worker, or a prophet.

Peter already confessed, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This event portrayed what that confession meant. And it happened soon after.

Matthew 17:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,

Three disciples witnessed the Transfiguration. That became important later when they told the others about the Transfiguration. It was not just one or two who saw it, but three.

The resurrection was witnessed by all the apostles, and this was a fore-runner to that victory over sin, death, and the devil. The ministry of Jesus consisted of teaching and building up their faith.

It is sad to see faith disparaged by the “Lutheran” ministers who cling to the recent past, ignoring the Word of God and the Confessions.

The purpose of the Bible is to create faith. The Word alone creates that faith in God, specifically trust in the love and mercy shown to us in Jesus. Trust is slowly built and deepened, but easily dampened by our emotions, our fears.

 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

Jesus changed completely before His three disciples. His face was as brilliant as the sun, and His robes were shining brightly. That was one indication of His divinity.

This was not a slight change in appearance, but a complete change in form. With ultra-violet we can make something white glow in a supernatural way. Some rocks will glow in various colors when bathed in black light. But that is superficial compared to what the text says. This was letting the divinity of Christ shine through, to give the disciples a way to comprehend what was before them.

This glory came from the Father, for the Son always did what the Father commanded. It was not needed by Jesus but desired for the disciples. It is another instance of showing us how the divine nature of Christ was revealed at times but often not known and not fully appreciated.

We are tempted to say, “How could they not know from one example alone?” And yet we have all the examples, the complete story, from the beginning of time until the resurrection and ascension. And still we doubt and fret.

Either we doubt the divine power to help us or we doubt the personal interest of God in us. We have souls created by Him. We are baptized, owned, and redeemed by Him. Each believer has a name, and He knows us by name.

We should consider the irony of God the Father taking the time to show three disciples, citizens of a minor colony in the Roman Empire, the true nature of His Son. And yet He did and this is the Gospel. The Transfiguration goes together with the Confession of Peter, the cross, and the resurrection.

It was the power behind the apostolic preaching and teaching, as Peter wrote.

2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

What is more important than eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses?

The Apostle John expressed much of the same in his first letter.

KJV 1 John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

Just as God revealed His Son’s divine glory, so He revealed Moses and Elijah speaking with Jesus.

This reminds us of – “Before Abraham was, I AM.” Jesus is the eternal Son of God, now in flesh, active in the Old Testament – God speaking in the burning bush, the miraculous plant with two natures, burning and yet not consumed. As you recall the Angel of the Lord called Himself God.

Moses and Elijah were the most prominent in Old Testament – Moses as the giver of the Law of God, Elijah as the prophet taken into heaven. For Jesus to speak with them meant that the disciples were witnessing something impossible without God’s intervention. It gave them a view of eternity itself and God’s unlimited power.

4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

Lenski:

Peter felt as though he and his fellow-disciples were very near to heaven. Though they were filled with deep awe they felt themselves in the presence of heavenly glory, with Jesus being glorified so unspeakably in divine majesty (2 Pet. 1:16), and two dwellers of heaven also appearing in glory (Luke 9:31). Peter’s one desire is to prolong this experience; hence his foolish suggestion that, if it please Jesus, he will erect three booths, one for each of the three glorious persons. The foolishness lies in the idea that beings who are in such an exalted state would need shelter for the night like men in the ordinary state of human existence. He says nothing of a shelter for the disciples; perhaps he felt so humble that he and the other two disciples would lie out in the open.

Lenski, R. C. H.: The Interpretation of St. Matthew's Gospel. Minneapolis, MN. : Augsburg Publishing House, 1961, S. 657.

I have always connected the tabernacles or shelters with Jewish religious observance. In one of the festivals, outdoor shelters are set up. While impulsive Peter is offering a suggestion that shows his piety, it is strangely out of place for such an event. Mark, associated with Peter, wrote that the apostle did not know what to say. And who would?

5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

God the Father spoke to the disciples, and the message is especially significant. When Jesus was baptized, the Father said – “In whom I am well pleased.”

But hear He said, “Listen to Him.” Peter referred to both occasions in his letter. One is indicated by the words spoken, the other by the expression – the holy mount.

How do we know the Father sent the Son? – the initial believers asked as they were being taught. Peter, James, and John answered, “Because we heard the Father’s voice from heaven saying “This is My beloved Son.”

And so we are constantly reminded of the Trinity: the Father/Son relationship revealed by the Holy Spirit.

6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.

I recall a church member who was angered by the concept of fearing God. I suggested thinking of it as respecting the unlimited power of God. There are consequences to going against God.

That is where I conclude that most church leaders today are unbelievers. They imagine they can do and say anything they want, without consequences. They are not God-fearing. They have forgotten the Small Catechism in rejecting the Word of God itself.

Children are like that. They will play around farm animals as if horses do not kick and cows do not trample. Their lack of fear is foolishness. People, in their greed, attack large power lines, to steal the copper, because they have no respect for the amps of electrical power about to surge through their fragile bodies.

The moment I toy with the Word of God, to distort it or prove it wrong, I am doing the same thing as the men tearing out live power lines. There will be consequences.

On the positive side, the power of God’s Word is so great that it can and does achieve His will constantly. The Word of the Gospel will settle in wherever it lands, and work faith or blindness, love of Christ or anger against the Christian faith.

I really try to avoid controversy about religion on Facebook, in my normal conversations with people. I link Ichabod but seldom go beyond that. However, atheists always have their fists up for a fight against religion. I had two atheists in class once and they went silent when I said “Merry Christmas” to them.  As I mentioned recently, “Merry Christmas” made one of my classmates furious.  

The power of the Gospel means that pronouncing us forgiven in Christ through faith gives us absolute certainty. To a believer, that is comfort and peace. To an unbeliever, it is an irritation and a source for bickering about the Word. How can that be?

All the miraculous events of the Bible coalesce in showing us how such things can be true. The Holy Spirit teaches us to realize that God’s love and power make forgiveness a reality.

We have only one book in the world where God speaks directly to us. It is His Word and He guides us as we read and study it. Augustine looked down upon the Bible as too plain, compared to the classical literature he knew so well. One day he heard a child's voice say "Take and read," because of a game. He picked up the Scriptures and was converted by the Holy Spirit at work in the Word. He did not debate inspiration, inerrancy, efficacy, because he knew and experienced it.