A few Mockingbird appropriate tributes to the first of the three days that changed the world.
Sign up for the Mockingbird Newsletter
COMMENTS
30 responses to “In Pictures: Maundy Thursday”
Leave a Reply
A few Mockingbird appropriate tributes to the first of the three days that changed the world.
Excellent!
What I am learning on Mockingbird is that we can talk alot about Grace, Forgiveness, Love, Two Words, etc and all those ideas can work very, very well and be in fact truly and awesomely beautiful and full of righteousness ….. without any need at all to reference the Incarnate Christ.
I love this post. It was a great corrective to my own thinking.
Inspired post!
It's hard to tell what's tongue-in-cheek and what isn't on a blog comment page, but I've got to say: The fact of Christ (incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection) informs and gives weight to everything here. Without that, it's just a bunch of pictures and movie clips. With it, though, pictures and movie clips can be a great window into how people interact with, and are hurt by, the world around them.
Frank, I'm with Nick and not sure what you are getting at. . . a little help?
i had not seen that iphone/pad one – really clever. thanks j.
"mandatum novum …" And on this day we celebrate Jesus, the new third-use law-giver. I can feel the love already, JDK 😉
Seriously, though, how does one process "Maundy Thursday" "a new law I give unto you…" from a "law/gospel" perspective? I'm not disagreeing with that perspective, I have just never been able to integrate Maundy Thursday into it.
Michael, there is another theory on the origin of the name "Maundy Thursday". This is from Wikipedia:
"Others theorize that the English name "Maundy Thursday" arose from "maundsor" baskets, in which on that day the king of England distributed alms to certain poor at Whitehall: "maund" is connected with the Latin mendicare, and French mendier, to beg.[29][30] A source from the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church likewise states that, if the name were derived from the Latin mandatum, we would call the day Mandy Thursday, or Mandate Thursday, or even Mandatum Thursday; and that the term "Maundy" comes in fact from the Latin mendicare, Old French mendier, and English maund, which as a verb means to beg and as a noun refers to a small basket held out by maunders as they maunded. The name Maundy Thursday thus arose from a medieval custom whereby the English royalty handed out "maundy purses" of alms to the poor before attending Mass on this day."
So, we may not be talking about mandatum novum after all! (Just sayin'…)
Jeff–Thanks for that information 😉 Unfortunately, my "issues" with "Maundy" Thursday have their origin in what Jesus said, (i.e. a new law or command or mandate I give unto you…) not in the etymology of the word "Maundy". In fact, I think that "maundy" actually has its origin in a Middle English word used to describe the Queen's undergarments, which were flown from the Tower of London on that day.
Hi Michael – Jesus absolutely is a law-giver. His "new law," to love each other, is just as deadly as any OT law. Luckily, it is also just as subsumed by his (in this case, imminent) sacrifice on the cross. So, from a law-gospel persepective, Jesus gives us a new law, in effect, summing up all of the law, and then dies to account for our failure to keep it.
Absolutely, Nick!
And furthermore, the mandatum novum is to love one another as Christ first loved us. There is just no way my feeble love for anyone can compare to his inestimable love shown for me through the cross. So I fail before I even begin.
That doesn't mean I stop trying. It means that when I fail, I know to run back to the shadow of the cross…I know that it's forgiven.
Nick, Thanks for that explanation. I have heard that argument before, but it seems a bit of a stretch (perhaps brought on by the logical demands of the abstract law/gospel paradigm) to think that Jesus was trying to get his disciples more in touch with their own sinfulness at that particular point by telling them to do something that they would then be condemned for not doing. It just seems out of keeping with the mood of the moment. It may be that the "third use" view as it is expressed in the Formula of Concord,has the best approach to understanding how we should "take" the "new law" given by Jesus at the "last supper." But I'm not set in stone on that view.
I think that Jeff's comment above, which perfectly reflects the "first love of Jesus" as the source of any love I might have, coupled with my knowledge that I am already forgiven for my failure before I start, is the understanding of the "third-use" found in the Formula of Concord. I agree, Nick, that Jesus also intended these words to been seen, in retrospect, through the lens of the cross. I just don't think that Jesus meant to condemn his disciples at the last supper with this "new command."
Michael—have you been on vacation? Sick perhaps? Nice to see you back here:)
For what it's worth, during our service today, we emphasized the institution of the whole Lord's Supper, not just the "new law." But, I think your concerns are valid and can only imagine how a "Jesus is the new law," Maundy Thursday sermon might go–makes your skin crawl, really.
As for the 3rd use, well, I'm not sure I want to touch that one at this moment, and I'm not sure any of our regular readers have strong opinions about this subject (Ha!)– but I think that there are some ways of understanding the 3rd use that are not completely terrifying and soul-crushing, but by the time it gets qualified and explained, then very few people are still listening.
but, I'm sure we'll have more to say about all that as we figure it out:)
Easter Blessings to you!
Jady
Jady– Unfortunately ,I never get sick or take vacation. I have not commented because I have been practicing restraint, but, as you can see, I have failed yet again.
I hear what you are saying about trying to explain an acceptable view that could be called "third use". Probably not worth the trouble. In my view, the whole "use" thing is of very little "use" anyway, other than to cause arguments and even more confusion.(both of which can be a lot of fun in a "sin is fun" sort of way)
Welcome Happy Morning to you and yours!!!
So far as I understand it, the "new law" does not offer anything different so far as its praxis is concerned. The command to love one another seems to be a theme throughout the OT. I suppose if it's new, it is new with regard to its central reference? just a thought.
I am with Todd on this. So is article VI of the Formula of Concord on the Lutheran "third use"
It is important to know that there is a Lutheran 3rd use and a Calvinistic/Melancthonian 3rd use. Each point of article VI, Formula of Concord is the antithesis of Calvin:
1) The believer needs no law insofar as he is regenerated/sanctified. The Law has nothing at all to do with sanctification this means. A Lutheran reads "Sanctification=Gospel" rather than Calvin "Sanctification=Law+Gospel"
2) The believer still needs the law solely because of the Old Adam to mortify it. Where a calvinist reads "Law/sanctification" a Lutheran then must read "Law/Mortification".
3) Because the believer has the same Old Adam as unbelievers, the full threat of the law and it´s use is identical for the believer and pagan alike. It only kills.
4) Finally article VI concludes by observing that the difference between believer and pagan is not at all in the fruit. The difference is in the doer (ie invisible faith) and not in what is visibly done.
So what is the Lutheran 3rd use in all of this?
The Lutheran 3rd use is to inform christians that the law must be horozontally and never vertically aimed. It is "necessary" because our neighbor needs our righteousness. God does not.
What I mean JDK is that Mockingbird has sensitized me to the fact that I can easily talk AROUND Jesus without talking ABOUT him. all the pictures of the last supper with someone besides Jesus again drove this home for me.
Jesus as "high concept" or "abstraction" to intellectually disect vs: Jesus as Incarnate fleshy One to who we must be organically joined in our baptism.
Hey Frank! I was beginning to worry that maybe your computer had been stolen:)
I completely agree with you. To reduce Jesus to a concept is always a tension within theology, and we certainly can err in that direction as much as anyone. But, since most of us here are full-time pastors of some sort, we're hoping that we are staying connected to real life–with varying degrees of success, to be sure!
For what it's worth, the point of the post was simply to put up some allusions to the Last Supper from the ridiculous (Ipod) to the sublime (Southpark. . just kidding:)
Happy (almost) Easter to you:)
For what it's worth, this is from the Formula of Concord, VI, The Third Use of the Law:
" 6. Thus the Law is and remains both to the penitent and impenitent, both to regenerate and unregenerate men, one [and the same] Law, namely, the immutable will of God; and the difference, so far as concerns obedience, is alone in man, inasmuch as one who is not yet regenerate does for the Law out of constraint and unwillingly what it requires of him (as also the regenerate do according to the flesh); but the believer, so far as he is regenerate, does without constraint and with a willing spirit that which no threatenings [however severe] of the Law could ever extort from him."
I take from this that the "new Law" given by Jesus is the command to love that the Regenerate, by faith, "do without constraint and with a willing spirit that which no threatenings could extort"
Michael Cooper
"I take from this that the "new Law" given by Jesus is the command to love that the Regenerate, by faith, "do without constraint and with a willing spirit that which no threatenings could extort""
"NEW Law".. um… that would be John Calvin´s spin on a "3rd use of the law". This is the opposite of what article VI states exactly as you quoted as follows:
(art VI)" Thus the Law is and remains both to the penitent and impenitent, both to regenerate and unregenerate men, ONE AND THE SAME LAW."
No NEW Law just for christians here in the Lutheran 3rd use! Don´t read into it what simply is not there. Same ol same ol Law. You know, that Law that only kills and gives nothing but only demands.
Why is this? Pagans have an Old Adam, Believers have that SAME pagan Old Adam they had before they put on Christ in their baptism. This SAME Old Adam continues on clinging to believers after putting on Christ.
SAME Old Adam=SAME Law with death as it´s aim, mortification. Not Sanctification with a NEW Law just for christians ala John Calvin.
As you again quoted article VI, NO Law is necessary for the believer "insofar as he is regenerate/sanctified/baptised/has-put-on-christ":
(art VI):"but the believer, SO FAR AS he is regenerate, does without constraint and WITH A WILLING SPIRIT that which no threatenings [however severe] of the Law could ever extort from him."
Think this way: in your baptism you literally, not figuratively, put on christ. This indwelling christ is the new man that IS your sanctification in full. In the Blessed Incarnation only can you know what your sanctification looks like. Question: "what law schooling did the incarnate christ need?" Answer: "none". Your sanctification/regeneration looks exactly like Christ in the Blessed Incarnation.
Old Adam sins because it is his nature to do so. He needs no prompting or reminders to do so.
New Adam can only do God´s Will because it is his very nature (christ-s nature!) to just and only do that.
Now the Will of God is forced out of Old Adam using the Law, the SAME will of God flows spontaneously from New Adam. The difference is in the doer and not at all in the deeds.
This is what art VI says in a very poor translation something you did not quote in paragraphs 16 & 17. I will paraphrase it here:
Paragraphs 15, 16 & 17 paraphrase: "To avoid misundertanding special diligence must be taken to distinguish between works of the law (aka Mortification of the Old Adam) and works of the Spirit (What Christ in us does). Law vs Gospel. When we speak of good works which are in accordance with God's Law (for otherwise they are not good works), then the word Law has only one sense, namely, the immutable will of God, according to which men are to conduct themselves in their lives. Ie: Righteousness acts follow the same identical Will of God whether "Lawed" out of Old Adam or "Gospeled" out of the New Adam.
Whenever we hear words and phrases like law, try harder , encouragement, exhortation, reminder, or do something, then this is the Old Adam being addressed, and the topic is Mortification of the Flesh and has nothing at all to do with being a christian or sanctification. If we had no Old Adam, we would need no law. Our lives would look exactly like that of the Incarnate Christ.
Whenever we hear words like Christ, baptism, the forgiveness of sins, or gospel then we are talking about sanctification or christ-in-us who needs no law. for works flow from this man like light from the sun."
hope this clarifies things a little! sorry for the lack of brevity and elegance of form.
The command to love is a new commandment ok. It is given to pagan and christian alike. Your point, I think… is that this special "new" love, is something only a christian can do, and so it can be used to tell sheep from goats, wheat from weeds visibly. This is nowhere anywhere in Lutheranism. To the utter contrary. It IS in Calvin and Melancthon however.
This same jesus tell us to let the wheat and tares grow together and let him harvest. why? no way to tell the difference between wheat and weed. None. Zip. Nada. The difference is not in the visible works, it is invisible faith in the heart.
Michael a challenge: tell me just ONE visible thing you do as a christian that the old adam of pagan or christian would NEVER do. just one.
The Old Adam in you that continues from when you were a pagan keeps this law of love through promises, threats and cooercions of the Law.
The new Adam , christ-in-michael, keeps the SAME law spontaneously exactly in the same way as Christ kept this law.
Frank– Does every Lutheran need a Calvinist whipping boy, even if they have to fabricate one? Maybe it's a German-French thing?
Be that as it may, Happy Easter!!!
"calvinist whipping boy"
unfortunately, the answer is yes. Usually Lutheran doctrine gets formulated in contrast to something else. So most Lutheran doctrine needs a context, usually medeival roman catholic, or in the case of the formula calvinism to be understood in many cases.
We Luthurns are not the most original of christian sects. That prize would probably need to go to the calvinist whipping boys!
But seriously now. Most people when they think of "3rd use of the law" think of law-as-aide-to-sanctification" which is at the heart of worker bee calvinism and evangelicalism.
The Lutheran 3rd use is this probably, not sure really:
"20] So, too, this doctrine of the Law is needful for believers, in order that they may not hit upon a holiness and devotion of their own, and under the pretext of the Spirit of God set up a self-chosen worship, without God's Word and command".
oh but then that is 2nd use isn´t it? or 1st use? We Luthurns get confused too. Thank God we resolve to know only Christ Crucified. There can be no confusion that way!
A blessed Resurrection Day to you as well dear brother.
"Most people when they think of "3rd use of the law" think of law-as-aide-to-sanctification" which is at the heart of worker bee calvinism and evangelicalism."
Frank–That is absolutely brilliant and totally true. Although I consider myself a "4 1/2 Point" Calvinist (unsure about the L), I reject the typical Calivist understanding of the law as "an aid to santification". On the other hand, I do see a good deal of "exhortation" in the NT writings of Paul to the churches that I don't believe is merely "descriptive" nor do I believe is meant to be taken as "condemnation" of the old Adam in the new believers. But what tends to happen in Calvinist circles is that the law is viewed as capable of producing the righteousness it demands in the hearts of those who now have the Holy Spirit, and this view of the Law ends up rooting out the Gospel in actual practice. But there have been many Calvinists who do not go down this road, the Scot Ralph Erskin being my favoite example. I guess I am somewhere in the middle on this, so I catch hell from both sides, but then again, the old Adam in me lobs a lot of hell back to both sides as well 🙂
What article VI does with the 3rd use should prove helpful to you then dear brother:
Lutheran 3rd use removes all law talk from sanctification and being a christian, and places it wholy and soley under the heading Mortification of the Flesh/Old Adam (which both believer and pagan share in common).
Thus you place law into the mundane realm of human life that is about pagans and christians alike. Therefore: "changing diapers is as holy a work as there is" (Luther).
So all those pauline passages that talk about trying harder and pressing towards the mark are pure law exhortations, for believers to kill the old adam in them, but then in the exact same way pagans need to do the same! law law law. kill kill kill. No victory here. only cross and death. We hate that don´t we? We are tired of us and others and we want our christian faith to fix that. So we don´t surrender ourselves to the Gospel. It does not make sense. Law makes perfect sense to our Old Adam.
Fact: The Righteousness of faith is useless to anyone but God and troubled consciences. It fixes no earthly thing.
With this understanding , James makes sense: There are two kinds of God-pleasing (aka true) righteousness. These both ARE true righteousness that pleases God and that he providences. One of invisible faith (gospel/new man) and the other EVERY kind of visible righteousness, which includes whatever the body can do. (law/old adam). James is all about this second earthly or human righteousness. This second righteousness will perish with the earth along with all who seek life in that (romans 8 spirit vs flesh, aka visible righteousness). Yet for now, here on earth, it is necessary to do this earthly visible righteousness because life would be impossible without it. So God forces it out of the Old Adam with carrot and stick of law, and the same identical righteous fruit just flows out of new adam exactly as it did from the Incarnate Christ.
This same killing work on the Old Adam is the exact same thing truly righteous pagans are told to do and can do. Nothing christian about it.
The ONLY difference between a christian and pagan here then is a very passive one. One soley of invisible faith: Christians have had the "veil of Moses" removed in that they see the naked law and what it is up to, death, and con-fess, say together with God that this killing work is necessary and good even if it results in suffering.
Christians "suffer" this killing work of the Holy Spirit that is being done on the Old Adams of christian and pagan alike. The justified can endure this suffering rather than flee it because the lives of the just lies in faith in the cross.
Luther "Life is Mortification."
Michael, let´s change your phrase only slightly to make it correct:
"But what tends to happen in Calvinist circles is that the law is viewed as capable of producing the [insert here the word "visible" "outward"!] righteousness it demands [insert: of the Old Adam] [strike this:"in the hearts". Only the Gospel can produce this part. This IS the new birth.] of those who now have the Holy Spirit. This view of the Law ends up rooting out the Gospel in actual practice [yes it does. This is Gospel+Visible Works=Christian. Fact: Invisible Faith Alone=Christian] ."
This statement come so close to being true. And that is it´s problem. But is is true for pagans as well as christians, the Law is soley about the old adam, and it IS a work of God the Holy Spirit. But it is not sanctification even though the HS does it, and has nothing to do with being a christian.
This mortification, killing work , of the Old Adams of every single human on the planet irregardless of faith, is exactly how God providences the "daily bread" of the 4th petition of the Our Father. Mortification often looks like carrot (eg" get up outta bed even if you don´t want to so you can earn your money serving others and then you get to buy that 60 tv you need so badly). This is the exact force of the word "necessary" in "good works are necessary for a christian to do" in the Lutheran confessions: mortification + loving acts (aka true visible earthly righteousness) is how God providences all the good things that allow us to have a good life on earth.
Michael:
"On the other hand, I do see a good deal of "exhortation" in the NT writings of Paul to the churches that I don't believe is merely "descriptive" nor do I believe is meant to be taken as "condemnation" of the old Adam in the new believers. "
Exhortation tells you that law is being served. Therefore this is about Mortification.
"New. believers". Category error. You are conflating two things here.
There are believers. Within each believer there continues that Old Adam, and then now there is a NEW man, christ in us. It is true that both are currently part of you and me, but our identity is now with the New Man aka christ-in-us. (Note here I continually push the incarnation since the only understanding of any of this can be found only there in Christ.)
Now as to the Old Adam in is, it is about "condemnation " of the Old Adam. Think here exactly like it is a good looking building being "condemned". Complete with the red tape of the law on the door saying "not safe for habitation". It will fall down around you. The building may visibly looks sound, but now you are informed that this is not true, and so the wrecking ball is it´s only destiny.
Now the New Man. There is NO condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, for those who have been baptized and in that baptism therefore have literally, not just symbolically, put on Christ!
So you are right! Paul´s exhortations are not a condemnation of you as a believer. It is rather an invitation for you to now fearlessly take the wrecking ball. You have nothing at all to lose. You no longer live at that address even though the Old Adam still clings to you. He is not you. He is what you were even though he is a painful part of your current reality here on earth.
And so we say: "Kyrie Eleison (Have Mercy!), Come quicky Lord Jesus!
Michael: and so we embrace our death as a good thing. there can be no resurrection without a death.
Christians who seek life with the law-as-sanctification helper are denying and fleeing death.
There metaphor is church as hospital for saints: The pastor drips the iv of Gods Word and we get better.
Try the Lutheran metaphor: Church as Hospice. We are dying. Nothing can fix that.
The only thing that makes this acceptable is that our NEW life is now hidden in the wounds of Christ and because died and rose again, we can trust that this mortification we daily experience in our baptism will end up the same way as Our Lord´s death did.
And so we can rest from our works. The are no longer a question of eternal life and death.
and ,,,,we are now freed from that old energy of avoiding death by trying harder, so we can get busy in our works to serve our neighbor in a building that we know ultimately needs to be torn down because it is not a good place to live in. We visit that building by practicing self discipline that makes the building at least safe enough to serve others temporarily.
But now we only visit. Our new address is in christ.
Frank– Thanks for clearing that up for me 😉
fixituMichael Cooper said…
"mandatum novum …" And on this day we celebrate Jesus, the new third-use law-giver. I can feel the love already, JDK 😉
Seriously, though, how does one process "Maundy Thursday" "a new law I give unto you…" from a "law/gospel" perspective? I'm not disagreeing with that perspective, I have just never been able to integrate Maundy Thursday into it.
April 1, 2010 2:20 PM
Now I hope you never ever have to say that again dear brother! You can now take lessons,even from pagans you know, on how this form of outward earthly righteousness is supposed to look:
LAW: mortification/self-discipline > + acts that make other´s creaturely lives look better (aka love) = god pleasing epistle of st james.
This is the body/flesh righteousness of romans 8 that will perish with the earth, but for now is urgently needed by your neighbor!
It literally kills your Old Adam to do this love.
GOSPEL:
But now your new man is in on the joke so to speak and suffers this killing work to be done even if it is painful to you. Why: Both your old and new man hear the cry of your neighbor´s need. After all, your Old Adam still has a conscience driving him, the law written in his heart. Your New Man is further comforted in faith that God sees even your screwups as sweet incense in your Jesus.
Regeneration/Sanctification = Christ-in-you. Christ needs no law school. Meditate on the Incarnation then to see exactly how your own sanctification works. Here, only in invisible faith, you know and trust, in faith and not by sight, that God is having you spontaneously do this SAME love that pagans do, but there as though there existed no law or threat or compulsion. It is simply who you are to do this. What else would Christ in you do?