some thots on luther's small cathechism (preface)

For [I give this advice, however, because I know that] young and simple people must be taught by uniform, settled texts and forms
AnthonySEaston (3:37:28 PM): by the mere act of reading, of discussing, and bring into yr personal space, a text becomes unsettled...no text is uniform
theminorthirds (3:37:58 PM): give him credit, srsly
theminorthirds (3:38:07 PM): that is his point
AnthonySEaston (3:38:43 PM): i dont think it is
theminorthirds (3:38:46 PM): the text becomes unsettled but you then have to guide the student into thecorrect settled form,and you need a settled text to do that,ifthe original text isalready unsettled then no settling will occur

Also our blessed fathers understood this well; for they all used the same form of the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments
the Lords Prayer is given by Christ, the Creed by political committe, and the 10 commandments by YHWH, might not be a good idea to conflate these, in western tradition


Hence, choose whatever form you please, and adhere to it forever. But when you preach in the presence of learned and intelligent men, you may exhibit your skill, and may present these parts in as varied and intricate ways and give them as masterly turns as you are able. But with the young people stick to one fixed, permanent form and manner, and teach them, first of all, these parts, namely, the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, etc., according to the text, word for word, so that they, too, can repeat it in the same manner after you and commit it to memory.
he is paraphrasing milk before meat here, and i know that he is, adn there is something radical about the phrasing choose whatever form you please--a beleif that a parishoner can determine theology for him or herself, but there is something difficult in the idea that one form should last you from cradle to grave, one way of viewing the protean nature of g-d will take you thru the 70 yrs of yr life on earth. what he views as skill, as intricate, denies the organic nature of knowledge, of the slow and ardous unveiling that occurs in the intercessonary work of man/god.

But those who are unwilling to learn it should be told that they deny Christ and are no Christians, neither should they be admitted to the Sacrament, accepted as sponsors at baptism, nor exercise any part of Christian liberty, but should simply be turned back to the Pope and his officials, yea, to the devil himself. Moreover, their parents and employers should refuse them food and drink, and [they would also do well if they were to] notify them that the prince will drive such rude people from the country, etc.
this isnt christian, christ didnt say feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc so that they may learn the gospel, or that the body of christ, the communitarian ethic of church depends on the right lessons, he said that anyone who comes to me by the father--we should learn, we should grow in faith, but it should not be to the expense of food&drink... i can forgive the line of the devil and the pope, due to context--but it sort of obliterates the idea of luther not wanting to be a heretic...

For although we cannot and should not force any one to believe, yet we should insist and urge the people that they know what is right and wrong with those among whom they dwell and wish to make their living. For whoever desires to reside in a town must know and observe the town laws, the protection of which he wishes to enjoy, no matter whether he is a believer or at heart and in private a rogue or knave.
ive never been a big fan of legalism, and i think that this calls legalism into question, i think that he is saying that following the laws means that you are safe, and conflating the laws of he state with the laws of god--i need to be careful about that though, b/c "rend to cesar what si cesars an what is god gods" i tend to be in favour of one half of binary pairs, this time assuming that christs work against the state trumps his concessions to the state--and the state is THE STATE, a monolith (which isnt the case), i think that what makes me nervous about the catholics, and something i dont find in the lutheran churches, is (are) a definite attempt at not engaging in state craft, but if i wanted critics of the states, i would go to the mroe radical edges of anabaptisim, which i think im heading to...

Especially should you here urge magistrates and parents to rule well and to send their children to school, showing them why it is their duty to do this, and what a damnable sin they are committing if they do not do it...
i like this

Lastly, since the tyranny of the Pope has been abolished, people are no longer willing to go to the Sacrament and despise it [as something useless and unnecessary].
the first half of this is something im really scared of, terrified of in fact, adn the eucharist is so vital to my understandign ofthe gospels that going up to the euchurist and hating the church, being scared that i am not good enough, feeling humilated instead of humbled, and something that should be an example of the joyful, radical, inclusivity, that encompasses under the mystery of grace, is absent, and maybe a bit im feeling udner the thumb of the pope, the tyranny of the pope--though we have to keep things in proper historical persepctive

he goes on to talk fo the sacrament, as one, ie the eucharist, and im sacramental, in that i think there should be many sacraments, not one, but at least 7, and maybe everything we do, to other people or ourselves in the memory of god, the theology of the sacarements should begin with the paschal mystery, but not perhaps end there...