God’s grace, peace and
mercy be with you. … My sermon is entitled Confess, Christ and Conclusion. My
focus is on Matthew (16:13-20). Let us pray. Heavenly Father, the psalmist
wrote, “I rejoiced when they said to me, ‘Let us go to the house of the Lord.’”
Now that our feet are within your gates, we rejoice to hear your Word. As we
listen, may your Spirit enlighten our minds and move our hearts to love deeply
as Jesus loved. This we pray to you, Most Holy Trinity. Amen.
I was once told that
if you’re looking for sympathy, you’ll find it in the dictionary between
symmetry and symphony. Sometimes, the dictionary is the best place to find what
we need. As I begin a sermon on the words, confess, Christ and conclusion, we
turn to the dictionary.
Confess is a verb
meaning admission of a fault, crime, sin or debt. It comes to the English
language from the French confesser and earlier from the Latin com
‘together’ and fateri ‘to admit.’ Its original religious sense
was about one who acknowledges his religion despite persecution or danger but
does not suffer martyrdom. The earliest Confessors in the Christian Church were
Paul I, a 4th century bishop of Constantinople, and Maximus the
Confessor, a 7th century Byzantine monk, theologian and scholar. We
consider both Martin Luther and Philip Melanchthon as Confessors.
Confess is the root
word for confession. Early in the Lutheran Reformation, individual confession
before Communion became predominantly an exploration to determine if the
individual had adequate knowledge for worthy reception of Holy Communion. In
the era of Pietism, individual confession fell into disuse and was replaced by
general confession.[1]
In America, the
Definite Platform (1855) held that no one should be admitted into the General
Synod who believes in private confession and absolution. But C. F. W. Walther felt
that both should be retained. In the 20th century, periodic attempts
have been made to restore individual confession in the Lutheran Church in the
spirit of the symbols. But the most common form of confession remains the public
confession and absolution. We always begin our Lord’s Supper worship with
Confession and Absolution. For us, this is a public confession of sins made by
the assembly with the pastor offering absolution in the Name of the Three
Persons of the Trinity.[2]
There is also confessionalism.
Confessionalism defines a religious body’s faith and identity by reaffirming
historical creeds and confessions of faith.[3] We ascribe to the
confessions making up the Book of Concord. Confessions and confessionalism became
important in the 18th and 19th centuries when Reformed
Churches were then challenged by liberalism and revivalism or evangelical
pietism. Some Lutheran bodies combined confessionalism and pietism; others,
like the Missouri Synod, continued to maintain conservative confessionalism. Today,
those churches focus more on the experience of Christianity than on formal
doctrines. While they would promote spirit and values, we counter that spirit
and values of any faith cannot be attained without knowing the truth in formal
dogmas.[4]
The fact that we are a
Confessing or Confessional Church means that we subscribe to the Book of
Concord because it is faithful to the Scriptures. There is no contradiction
between the Book of Concord and the Scriptures.[5]
When the Synod
accepted me as a Lutheran Pastor, I took an oath that I accept the doctrinal
content of our Lutheran Confessions, because they are in full agreement with
Scripture; and I believe in this divine truth and am determined to preach this
doctrine.[6]
All this relates to
our Gospel passage by knowing, as we will hear in next week’s passage, that
although, like Peter, I sometimes miss the true understanding of Jesus’
identity and mission because I think as men do and not as God does. We confess
who Jesus is and why he exists in both simple and clarifying statements of
truth found both in the Bible and the Book of Concord.
We move from Confess
to Christ. The word Christ, in Greek, Christos, is equivalent of the
Hebrew Messiah, meaning anointed. According to the Old Law, priests (Ex
29:29; Lev 4:3), prophets (Isa 61:1) and kings (1 Sam 10:1; 24:7) were supposed
to be anointed for their respective offices; now, the Christ or the Messiah,
combined this threefold dignity in His Person.
It is not surprising
that for centuries the Jews had referred to their expected Deliverer as ‘the
Anointed’; perhaps this designation alludes to Isaiah, where we read, “The
Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring
good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim
liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound”
(61:1). Thus, the term Christ was a title rather than a proper name. The
Evangelists recognize the same truth except for a few verses where Jesus Christ
is used.[7]
After the Resurrection
the title gradually passed into a proper name, and the expression Jesus Christ
or Christ Jesus became one designation. The gradual development into a proper
name showed that Christians identified Jesus as the promised Messiah of the
Jews. Jesus combined in His person the offices of priest, prophet and king[8], and fulfilled all the
Messianic predictions in a fuller and a higher sense than had been given them
by the teachers of the Synagogue.
But when Jesus asked
the question to his disciples, he did not use the term Christ. He used the
phrase Son of Man. Some say that the phrase was not used as a Messianic title,
and during Jesus’ lifetime, ‘Christ’ was not very widely, if at all, known as a
Messianic title. Jesus used the title Son of Man to refer in a paradoxical way
to himself as the lowly, increasingly rejected messenger who was assured
vindication in the near future.[9]
While there is no
historical person known as the Son of Man, the Prophet Ezekiel was addressed by
God as "son of man" more than ninety times, for instance, “Son of
man, stand on your feet, and I will speak with you” (2:1). This usage is
confined to Ezekiel except for one passage in Daniel, where Gabriel said: “Understand,
O son of man, that the vision is for the time of the end” (8:17). In Daniel’s
great vision after the appearance of the four beasts, we read: “I saw in
the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a
son of man” (7:13).
Son of Man is used to
designate Jesus Christ no fewer than 81 times in the Gospels — 30 times in
Matthew. It is found only in the mouth of Christ. It is never employed by the
disciples or Evangelists, nor by the early Christian writers. It is found once
only in Acts, where Stephen exclaims: “Behold, I see the heavens opened,
and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God” (7:56). We do not
find it at all in any of the epistles.
Although the disciples
have already confessed that Jesus is the Son of God (14:33), this is the first
time that anyone confessed Jesus to be ‘the Christ.’ It is interesting
to note that Matthew adds to Peter’s answer ‘the Son of the living God.’
Some have interpreted this to indicate the unique relationship between Father
and Son of which Jesus was aware. We heard this several weeks ago when Jesus
spoke, “All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one
knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and
anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him” (11:27) It also directs
us away from any military-nationalistic connotations Israel had of the Messiah.[10]
Jesus’ immediate
response to Peter shows that he articulated the Father’s own view. He received
these words from the Father himself, the only one who can reveal the truth of
his Son. Only divine revelation can impart true knowledge of the Son.[11]
Yet, this is not the
first time that the disciples confessed Jesus as God’s Son. They did so when Jesus
got into the boat after saving the drowning Peter (14:33). Here, however, apart
from any crisis or danger and in direct response to Jesus’ question, he
confesses that his Lord is ‘the Son of the living God.’ Yet, why is this
response so unique. As scholars have pointed out, twice the Father named Jesus
his Son – at the Baptism (3:17) and Transfiguration (17:5). The Sanhedrin
condemned Jesus for acknowledging his identity as God’s Son (26:63-66; 27:39-43).
The Roman centurion also confessed him at the foot of the Cross (27:54). This
relationship is made public once again in the Trinitarian baptismal formula
(28:19).[12]
First of all, what is
significant here is that Peter acknowledged that all the hopes of Israel come
true in Jesus, God’s Son, whom God the Father has anointed. Secondly, he also
acknowledged that Jesus has been put into a special office to accomplish the
will of God. Priests, prophets and kings were all anointed to do
something. Peter’s words are not only about who Jesus is, but they also signal
his understanding that if Jesus is the Anointed One, then God has a special
work for Jesus to perform. This may seem obvious until we read verses 21-28,
which we will next week, where Jesus reveals more about his mission. Given the
confession of Peter about Jesus’ identity as God’s Son and Anointed One, this marks
the moment when Jesus must show them what the Christ must do.[13]
What must the Christ
do? That takes me to my third point, conclusion. Our passage concludes with
Jesus charging the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ (16:20).
Conclusion means the end, outcome, final decision or reasoned deduction. We know
that when we see Porky Pig appear that the cartoon is over. By the way, did you
know that Mel Blanc’s grave marker reads, “That’s All Folks!”? I digress.
Conclusion also means deduction
or inference reached by reasoning. So, what are we to conclude from this
passage? Jesus’ mission was not only to reveal in human flesh and understanding
the ways of God and His Kingdom, but also to save us from Satan, sin, self and
death through the Paschal Mystery – his suffering, death and resurrection. That
he has accomplished for us. What then are we to do? We must ask not only ‘what
is our identity?’ but also ‘what is our mission?’
More than once I have
made prayer my third point. I was once asked by the member of another church to
offer something more practical. I replied, “Prayer is practical.” How do we
come to confess, as Peter did, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living
God if we are not people who pray?
When St. Paul wrote to
the Romans, he asked, “Who
has known the mind of the Lord?”
(11:34). Prayer alone will not let us know the mind of the Lord for it can lead
to all sorts of ridiculous speculations, but prayer supported by Scripture and
our Confessions will not only lead us into a deeper knowledge of Jesus Christ,
but also a renewal of our own minds. For Paul continues, “Do not be
conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by
testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable
and perfect” (12:2).
We have
all heard of the word revelation. We may not know that there is private
revelation and public revelation. Private revelation may be something that God
revealed to you or me as individuals, but rarely has meaning for others. In the
case of individuals like Francis of Assisi or Martin Luther, the revelation did
have meaning for a great number of other people in different lands and evolving
centuries. Public revelation is what has been handed down to us through
Scripture and closed with the death of the last Apostle. No one since then has
had a personal public experience with the Risen Lord. That is why we need to
rely on Scripture for prayer. That is why we turn to the Book of Concord to
help us understand more clearly our faith and Lutheran tradition, as well as
individuals like Walther and Pieper to distill Law and Gospel.
Friends,
as we close, allow me a few minutes on Luther’s prayer.[14] Luther’s
emphasized praying based on Scripture, and that one must connect Scripture with
prayer. For Luther, prayer was not something merely informed by Scripture, but
rather, Scripture is often informed by prayer as well![15]
He could
pray with great confidence, knowing that God listens to prayers. Since the
sovereign Lord of the universe hears him when he prays, he can pray with great
faith. Luther also emphasized listening in prayer.
Luther
saw prayer as so vital that he once wrote, “There is no work like prayer.
Mumbling with the mouth is easy… but with earnestness of heart to follow the
words in deep devotion, that is, with desire and faith, so that one earnestly
desires what the words say, and not to doubt that it will be heard: that is a
great deed in God’s eyes.”[16]
And for
those who prefer the practicality, Luther sought to establish a model of prayer
which is ultimately practical. For him, prayer is for the purpose of
accomplishing something, not merely for mumbling words. He tries to make this
true in his own life, as well as teaching it to others. Because he suffered
from chronic headaches and constipation, he made continual requests for prayer showing
clearly his unshakeable belief that prayer is an ultimately practical tool for
any and every problem and hindrance in the Christian’s life.
Luther
wrote A Simple Way to Pray to walk believers through all the initial
steps of how to pray, beginning with the reading of Scripture. In one place he
wrote, “When your heart has been warmed by such recitation to yourself and is
intent upon the matter, kneel or stand with your hands folded and your eyes
toward heaven and speak or think as briefly as you can.” His advice is not intended
in a legalistic manner, but simply to educate believers on how to pray
biblically in very practical ways.
Friends,
as I conclude my sermon, I do so not with the words of Philippians, but with
one of Luther’s prayers. This one is entitled Grant Us Grace to Serve You.
Lord God,
heavenly Father, you do not desire the death of a sinner, but rather that he
should turn from his evil way and live: We pray, graciously turn from us those
punishments which we have deserved by our sins, and grant us grace from now on to
serve you in holiness and pureness of living; through your Son, Jesus Christ
our Lord. Amen.
[1] http://cyclopedia.lcms.org/
[2]
Ibid.
[3]
Confessionalism, Dictionary of Christianity in America (Downers Grove IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1990), 306.
[4]
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessionalism_(religion).
[5] Other
bodies adhere to the Book of Concord insofar as it is faithful to the Scriptures,
which leaves room for the possibility that there might be a contradiction of
the Scriptures in the Book of Concord in which case a member of that church
would hold to the Scriptures against the Book of Concord.
[6]
See Walther, C.F.W. "Why Should Our Pastors, Teachers and Professors
Subscribe Unconditionally to the Symbolical Writings of Our Church."
[7] Matthew
1:1, 1:18; Mark 1:1; John 1:17; 17:3
[8]
Priest (Heb 2:17), Prophet (Jn 6:14; Mt 13:57; Lk 13:33; 24:19), King (Lk 23:2;
Acts 17:7; 1 Cor 15:24; Rev 15:3)
[9]
Meier, John P., “Jesus” in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Englewood Cliffs
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990), 1324f.
[10]
Viviano, Benedict T., “The Gospel According to Matthew” in The New Jerome
Biblical Commentary (Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990), 659.
[11]
Gibbs, Jeffrey A., Matthew 11:2-20:34 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House,
2010), 811.
[12]
Ibid, 812, fn 20.
[13]
Ibid., 813f.
[14]
See Martin Luther on Prayer by Julian Freeman, http://julianfreeman.ca/articles/martin-luther-prayer;
A Simple Way To Pray by Martin Luther; https://acollectionofprayers.com/tag/martin-luther;
[15]
Freeman.
[16]
Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment