Teacher

 Teaching both local and international students allows me to learn a lot about culture. Unlike my Aussie students who simply call me by my first name, my Asian students never do that. They also do not address me Doctor so and so, neither do they call me Mister. Rather, they prefer to call me  "Teacher". I am somewhat struck by this.

Several places in the New Testament, I read the disciples called Jesus by the same title - "Teacher". Reading the way Jesus was addressed made me reflect on the way I am addressed by my Asian students. They seem to really give more weight to this title. The title to them has a relational aspect and with it carries an implied responsibility. They are the student, I am their teacher and as such I am expected to behave and care for them in a certain way. In that relationship, there is an aspect of their lives that they are putting in my hands.

This is very humbling. You would think that when my Aussie students, in their egalitarian spirit, call me by my first name, that strips me down and humbles me but it does not. Rather I am deeply humbled whenever my Asian students call me  - "Teacher". I am humbled because they call me to a higher ideal and it does put pressure on me (in a good way) to live up to the meaning they attach to that name.

Mere shared opinions

From time to time I surf the blog world. My prof said - if you want to write, you need to read. So I read as I surf.

Then I go visit Dr. Ichabod, only to discover that what I tucked away in my mind, he has already spelled out and articulated, and articulated well. OK, I am coming out of the closet...I do read dangerous subversive material s(LOL).

Here are a few shared opinions he featured in his blog.

[click on the paragraphs to go to the linked articles]

1. There seems to be a Waltherian synodical worship present amongst 'confessors'. Do not get me wrong, I learned a lot from Walther's Law and Gospel book, but as a 'church father' he is to be treated like the rest - capable of over stating his case. I sense this was specially true when it came to synod loyalty. Enclaves, sometimes this is what comes to my mind when I think of Synods in the US.

2. I prefer uni education for honing or sharpening theological scholarship. Over here, we were taught to be a wide ( and in my case be a wild) reader. Of course it is semi-dangerous, but it is less dangerous! At uni, you know who not to take seriously and dismiss. I am not sure that is the case in seminaries, it depends. Teachers in sems can easily hide under labels and catch words.

3.I also believe that reconciliation and justification are to be distinguished though not separate. We do this already with justification and sanctification. We distinguish the two but we do not separate. Trouble happens when they are mixed and lumped. My theory is that mixing reconciliation with justification leads to some anti-nomian indifference, one of which is Roma-phelia

Self-criticism is a virtue encouraged by Scripture - it tells us to examine ourselves. It should be specially applied even to the thoughts of the teachers we respect and esteem.

1 Timothy 4:16 (English Standard Version)

16(A) Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save(B) both yourself and(C) your hearers.

Well, that is my opinion anyway, so please try not to confuse me by giving me facts (LOL).

 

The TRUTH is outside us

You're soooh mean!

You probably think this blog is about you. Sorry, not really. I don't know.

Many Evangelical as well as Calvinist folk are so offended with the closed communion practise of Lutherans. At first, in my mind, that was a concern in me too. It seems so tribal, divisive, clannish and not Christianly at all.

Over at Reformed Catholicism this is being discussed. It was started off from The Pirate with a nice help from Confessing Evangelical . These guys' contributions have been insightful.

To my Calvinist and Evangelical friends who are quite disappointed at the close communion practices of orthodox Lutherans, I have a suggestion, a sincere advice. Do not start with the question "why do they do close communion"? This is not the first question to ask. The first issue is this, "what is happening at the Lord's Supper"? Is this the body and blood of Christ? This is the first question to understand, and when it is settled, the idea of closed communion, you will find is not strange at all.

If you answer that question with a "yes", to which a Lutheran will say also "amen", then you got your answer too - you will see that it makes sense why they practice close communion and they only offer it to those who can say "yes", this is the body and blood of the Lord according to his Word.

If your answer is "no", then why blame them for being closed? This is something to be happy about, why commune at the table to which you can not agree? You should not be desiring it. Besides, this answer means there is nothing special about communion and it is no different (really, I mean no dis-respect) to eating bread for breakfast or taking a sip of wine during dinner.

So the Lutheran practise of closed communion is a very simple issue to resolve. It is not hard and you will not be offended once you know the answer to "what is on the table". Believe me, I was like that too, close communion became the least of my concerns after I got the answer to the question from Scripture (1 Cor 10:16).

Now would an RC commune in a Lutheran table? Of course they won't! I got my suspicions why they won't, I just want to know if they match their reasons.