Word of warning: this is grisly and definitely not for the faint of heart. But as an episode of tangible forgiveness – initiated in response to sin and only sin (of the most heinous kind) rather than some outward display of repentance or even remorse (or any kind of merit) – it’s simply too powerful not to share. This is the extreme case which sheds light on the less extreme ones, like it or not, a particularly visceral example of why mercy is sometimes described as such an offensive quality. The ‘one-way’ lightning strikes around the 2 min 15 sec mark, ht CM:
[youtube=www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmOUAdLgN1A&w=600]
Sign up for the Mockingbird Newsletter
COMMENTS
27 responses to “The Green River Killer and the Bearded Old Man”
Leave a Reply
The power of imputation. Forgiveness makes his defenses fall apart. Painful to watch but it does show that human desire for "Justice" is often Vengeance.
Incredible! I love it!
Wow!
This piece made me cry. Human righteousness is beautiful to behold when it breaks through! The interesting thing is that no faith in God or Christ is needed to produce such a wonderful thing.
The awesome thing here is that this is only a very, very weak metaphor for The Forgiveness that the just live by without tangible visible evidence beyond Word, Baptism, Holy Supper and Absolution found only there.
Very touching piece!
Frank, I think it's a strong metaphor though, not a weak one, but I assume you think all metaphors are weak, including apparently this one that made you cry? Is the parable of the Prodigal Son from Luke 15 also a weak metaphor?
John, everytime I see someone forgiving and forgiven in this way it makes me cry to be honest. I am not sure why. Maybe it is because I have been forgive so very much by fact of our common faith in our Lord. I am not sure why, but I do suspect that it touches something very very deep within me.
Thanks for reminding me of the Prodigal Son. The interesting thing in that there is forgiveness in the story, but the main point actually comes at the end, and I can´t put a label on what that something is actually.
So there is a there is a twist at the very end of the story, a bait-and-switch, is there not?
Here Jesus´audience is the Pharisees which is important to note eh? These in the story are represented by the good son who minded their father´s business scrupulously. They truly were that.
Then there are those Jesus hung out with. The lost. the least. The last. The un-love-ly. They are represented by the son who rather …ahem… rudely, told his father to drop dead(execute his will) so he could dissipate his own life.
Then there is the Father, represented by Jesus, who not only dines with those dissipated sinners without even giving them a chance to blurt out much of a contrition speech, and not only that, he improbably gives these seeming untrustables, power of attorney (in baptism) over all he has.
Then the father says "let´s kill the Lamb and throw a party and feed on him!" (Crucifixion and lord´s supper and the great feast of the Revelation to come).
The story ends without being finished doesn´t it? The real question is whether the Prodigal Son (the Pharisees) will join in the mirth of those who were lost now being restored, by becoming part of the same party.
So this story then IS about forgiveness. The main point at the end seems to be about another something beyond that. I am truly at a loss to epitomize that something neatly.
I would be most interested to hear how you would do that dear brother.
I hope this is not off thread…
All metaphors, even the biblical ones, pale in comparison to the reality they point to.
I think I was inarticulate John, in trying to say that this was a very powerful metaphor.
But even as tear evoking and powerfully as it tugs on my own emotions (and it did!), it is like light of moon to light of sun compared to the forgiveness I so do not deserve in Christ.
My pastor said on ash wednesday, that when I ponder the size of my sins, I should there see the greater size of God´s forgiveness. Or something like that… it was in Portuguese….
Living in Portuguese and posting in English must be tricky.
" You are forgiven"… I dare suggest that God was in the courtroom that day.
" You are forgiven"… I dare suggest that God was in the courtroom that day.
Yes!
Forgiveness, like all other earthly visible fleshly good works are absolutely necessary aren´t they? Life would be impossible without them. "Necissary" here has that force. God doesn´t have a use for our God Works. Our neighbor urgently does! So God the Holy Spirit forces those wonderful things out of all Old Adams, christian and pagan alike with the Law.
We know it is Law at work for a simple reason: because it is forced out of us or needs to be practiced. It is not spontaneous. Therefore we can know that it is not New-adam-at-work.
So here is an excellent example of where God the HS squeezes out of our recalcitrant ass-like Old Adams the good earthly fleshly righteousness we include in the 4th petition of the Our Father: "give us this day our daily bread".
Daily Bread includes good reputations, house, home, diapers being changed, floors being swept, and yes… forgiveness.
I am saying bluntly here that forgiveness is in the category here of earthly fleshly goods we need here on earth. And it is a wonderful gift, providenced by God the Holy Spirit using the Law that is His Will and that simply therefore cannot be extolled and exhorted and taught sufficiently.
We must take great care however to not imagine this awesome fleshly goodness as part of that heavenly, invisible Righteousness where alone the Just can find eternal life.(alone here excludes everything the body can do)
See Dr Martin Luther´s Small and Large catechisms, 1st article of the Creed, and 4th petition of the our father to get a richer flavor of this.
http://www.bookofconcord.org/smallcatechism.php
This is the law at work producing the fruits of love. Love is the fulfillment (fruit) of the Law. It is a doing (fruit) of God´s Will. Love is always an act.
This is the exact same fruit God produces from our New Adams only here, since it is Christ-in-us at work, spontaneously, by nature, automatically. This is the reason we can´t see New Adam fruit: it is intrinsically identical to Old Adam fruit. Love is love is love. The difference is in the unwilling vs the willing tree that produces.
Even in this magnificent manifestation in this video clip, it is mere shadow of Incarnate Reality. Jesus, in his very flesh IS The Forgiveness, IS The Love. I am saying here that Jesus is not just an example of Love: He IS Love, meaning that without His very Incarnate Person, Love could not exist at all.
This earthly fleshly kind of love, so powerful and glorious here in the form of forgiveness will die with the earth along with all who seek life by such small-r righteousness. It is unnecessary in the Heavenly Kingdom. In eternity Law and Gospel will unnecessary distinctions. Contrasts only have meaning when there is something to contrast to.
Here too we can see that the words "love" or even "forgiveness" cannot be used as a stand-in for the word "Gospel". Context will muddle us if we try to do that.
Only Christ = Gospel. Alone. Fruit of Old or New Adam is only mere shadow of him as the Reality that IS, Incarnately and Fleshly, Love, Forgiveness, Life, Truth, Salvation.
What will endure and live forever, along with those who trust in It, is the invisible Righteousness of Faith that is use-less on earth to anyone but God and for the confort of consciences.
Imagine Todd, that split second that Jesus said on the cross "It is finished!" and hung his head and died. There was at that moment also the Cosmic Death of all Law, Gospel, Sin (on the cross Jesus BECAME Sin for us), Love, and…Forgiveness.
When our Beautiful Savior died, all these things died along with Him. They cannot exist without him. In Him these things, and we too, both Christian and Pagan, live and breath and literally have being and existence.
Christ. Alone. In Fleshly Form. = . Holy Gospel.
Holy Gospel I am saying is not a proposition or doctrine or idea or teaching then that can be argued or reasoned. Reason here is it´s enemy if not made captive by the Word of God and born from above.
The Holy Gospel, the Forgiveness of Sins, is only found in in the fleshly and human, in the Blessed Incarnation of our Lord. And so also it can alone be found in Water, Bread, Wine, and Palm-on-pate Absolution.
"Who for us men and for our salvation was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and was made man".
This is the rich truth of this statement in the Nicean Creed.
The internalization of this single Article is alone what makes a Christian and is our lifelong and most difficult task.
Far be it from me to contradict historic confessions. frank, generally speaking I agree with what you've said. But I would caution you against what seems to be a hint of gnosticism in your posts. You said, "We must take great care however to not imagine this awesome fleshly goodness as part of that heavenly, invisible Righteousness where alone the Just can find eternal life." I think I understand what you mean by this, but it may imply that the heavenly, invisible realm is uninvolved in the fleshly realm. Or it it implies that if God is involved, he is only involved in the proclamation of the Word from 10:30-11:30am Sunday morning.
"I think I understand what you mean by this, but it may imply that the heavenly, invisible realm is uninvolved in the fleshly realm. "
I am saying exactly that Todd!
There are Two Kindoms.
Each kingdom has it´s own unique and, completely, separate kind of true righteousness.
"True" here means: pleases God and is His Will and is providenced by Him.
One is is about anything visible at all the body can do and excludes faith:
"You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone" James 2:24 This simply means that in the earthly fleshly visible ("tell me your faith and I will SHOW you my works" James)kingdom ,we would never go into a courtroom seeking to be justified by faith. there lady justice is blindfolded and holding a scale. Justice means to be justified strictly by what we do and never (blindfold) by who we are.
In the heavenly kingdom this is turned on it´s head isn´t it: we are judged stricly by who we are and works are completely excluded.
The other is about invisible faith alone.
Visible righteousness will perish with the earth along with all who seek to live by it. It is like we are doing an arduous remodel of a house that we know will be destroyed shortly. why? because our neighbor needs that righteousness to be forced out of the Old Adams in all of us.
Two Kingdoms.
Visible righteousness is "counterfeit currency" in the heavenly kingdom. These are strictly for our neighbor. God does not need them. besides they are full of sin and will perish with the earth along with all who seek life in them (romans 8).
Heavenly righteousness (inner true fear, love and trust in God, an inner keeping of the 1st commandment that only the HS can produce by the new birth and the forgiveness of sins) is worthless paper in the earthly kingdom.
Heavenly Righteousness (christ) is only of value and use to God and to terrified consciences. It is useless to make the life of our neighbor better. This, I do believe, is THE point that St James the brother of Jesus is making!
Faith is, alone, what make a christian. Alone. Internalizing the forgiveness of sins is the most difficult life long task that, alone, makes a christian.
I will close by quoting my previous post my dear brother Todd:
"I am saying bluntly here that forgiveness is in the category here of earthly fleshly goods we need here on earth. And it is a wonderful gift, providenced by God the Holy Spirit using the Law that is His Will and that simply therefore cannot be extolled and exhorted and taught sufficiently.
We must take great care however to not imagine this awesome fleshly goodness as part of that heavenly, invisible Righteousness where alone the Just can find eternal life.(alone here excludes everything the body can do)"
From what I see you write Todd I see you are a dear christian brother. Feel free to disagree with the historic confessions and then wrestle with them. Also, I and others can easily misquote them or take them out of context, like we can also do with the Holy Scriptures. Then Todd I would welcome your brotherly engagement of what I say to correct me. I often need that my dear brother in Christ.
Now: Do you still think my presentation here hints at gnosticism?
Todd:
It seems to me that it is not only doctrine that is important, but also the "form of sound doctrine".
Here we follow the example of st paul strictly where he makes contrasts and maybe are well not to invent our own.
I hope you will see that the contrasts I make are those of st paul. flesh/body vs spirit in romans 8.
I, because of Luther´s insight, reject the understanding of "flesh/body" as carnal/sexual and take it to mean everything that is not spirit (invisible faith in christ). Sort of a boolean set logic " A is not non-A" if you will. "flesh/body" here therefore fully includes earthly visible fleshly true righteousness of man.
This understanding is behind why the passage "the just shall live by faith" was Luther´s wakeup call. This understanding is the context for why that was.
I'm neither a Luther scholar nor a Lutheran, so I may have this wrong, but I have read a good deal of Luther and Lutherans. It's my understanding that the "Two Kingdoms" described by Luther dealt with the divide of realms between the Kingdoms of this world (Goverments, Princes, etc. and the Heavenly Kingdom of the Church. Luther separated the two for the sake of the purity of the church's proclamation. So far as I know, Luther never used the Two Kingdoms in conjunction with his distinct on Two Kinds of Righteousness, which is what I believe you are referring two. I do not believe that Luther considered these righteousness to be complete separate, but one of cause and effect. See- http://www.mcm.edu/~eppleyd/luther.html
Nevertheless, Lutheran or not, it must be true that there is a relationship between heaven and earth that extends beyond the word as proclaimed on Sunday morning. If God is only active in the world (especially MY world) for two hours at a time, then God is an absentee god.
As far as the flesh/body : spirit/heavenly distinction. I do not believe that these are to directly apply to Luther's distinction between two kinds of righteousness. There is a similarity of language, but when Paul speaks of the Spirit, he does not always refer to imputed righteousness.
Nor do I believe that the flesh/spirit motif in Paul should be interpreted (gnostically!) as visible/invisible or unreal/real. Simply put, we, as fleshly beings have faith which is borne from God's word- a word which is simultaneously worldly and divine.
ok- "absentee god" is probably a little much, though I can't quite think of anything else to that describes what I'm trying to say…
what a nice meaty and brotherly reply Todd. Let´s see if I can respond briefly to each point:
"It's my understanding that the "Two Kingdoms" described by Luther dealt with the divide of realms between the Kingdoms of this world (Goverments, Princes, etc. and the Heavenly Kingdom of the Church. Luther separated the two for the sake of the purity of the church's proclamation."
Wrong. Yes, even alot of Lutherans make this error. Yes you got my point that this is an error in understanding of Luther´s "Two Kingdoms. Two kingdoms = exactly: Two Kinds of Righteousness. Law purpose-drive Kingdom. Gospel driven purpose-less kingdom.This is Luther´s fundamental presentation of Law/Gospel distinction.
Note I did not say "separation". Nor does Luther or the Confessions (you are right on this exact point I am saying! Try separating law and gospel when pondering what a crucifix means!)
This two kingdom business is the omnipresent Law/Gospel frame of reference or paradym in his commentary on Galatians, the smallcald articles, and especially his catechisms. All other law/gospel distinctions are deriviatives.
todd/frank part 2
TODD "So far as I know, Luther never used the Two Kingdoms in conjunction with his distinct on Two Kinds of Righteousness, which is what I believe you are referring two."
FRANK: Todd, you will never be able to make this statement again! Here is the Luther sermon on 2KR that is referenced by the Lutheran Confessions as the basis for Formula of Concord article VI "Third Use of the Law". This reference means it is "quasi-confessional" for Lutherans!:
http://www.godrules.net/library/luther/129luther_e13.htm
This is a very flawed and wooden translation. I am working on a fix. But if read carefully you get from it the points I make.
"See- http://www.mcm.edu/~eppleyd/luther.html"
This is actually a sermon on "two kinds of CHRISTIAN righteousness" yes Todd? It is therefore primarily about the righteousness of faith, and then the righteous fruit of that the Christ-in-us produces autommatically and effortlessly. Only christians have this going on. Yet the fruit produced is IDENTICAL to the fruit produced by the christian old adam that is forced out of our old adam by pure Law. This can be clearly seen in the sermon because of that word "required" and the idea of effort being applied to produce that fruit. So really this Christ-in-us fruit then is invisible. Secondarily it is about about mortification of the flesh (HS applying the Law to old adam), which precisely is where Luther talks about "christ=as=example". This part is pure law that even a Buddhist can do with no faith in Christ.
Your link is to the famous Luther sermon called "two kinds of righteousness". This, merely because of the title, is referenced as his definitive writing on 2KR only for that reason. Lazy scholarship is what this is called. Luther uses this paradym relentlessly but does not always telegraph that fact with a label.
TODD/FRANK PART 3
"Nevertheless, Lutheran or not, it must be true that there is a relationship between heaven and earth that extends beyond the word as proclaimed on Sunday morning. If God is only active in the world (especially MY world) for two hours at a time, then God is an absentee god."
Again I get to rejoice at our unanimity here! Thanks again for making a very essential and critical point. Amen.
You can readily see my agreement by what I wrote earlier on feb 27, 9am "…So here is an excellent example of where God the HS squeezes out of our recalcitrant ass-like Old Adams the good earthly fleshly righteousness we include in the 4th petition of the Our Father: "give us this day our daily bread".
Daily Bread includes good reputations, house, home, diapers being changed, floors being swept, and yes… forgiveness.
I am saying bluntly here that forgiveness is in the category here of earthly fleshly goods we need here on earth. And it is a wonderful gift, providenced by God the Holy Spirit using the Law that is His Will and that simply therefore cannot be extolled and exhorted and taught sufficiently."
God, the Holy Spirit´s fingerprints are all over earthly carnal visible righteousness from what I said right? So where do we disagree here Todd?
todd frank part 4
"As far as the flesh/body : spirit/heavenly distinction. I do not believe that these are to directly apply to Luther's distinction between two kinds of righteousness"
Read the sermon I referenced and get back to me Todd. It is not "flesh/body/material vs spirit/heavenly." That is the scholastic version. It is earthly visible righteousness (Luther "this is ANYthing that the body can do")vs heavenly righteousness (Luther "This is what alone makes a christian).
"There is a similarity of language, but when Paul speaks of the Spirit, he does not always refer to imputed righteousness."
Yes! Agreed fully Todd!. But I am not referencing everywhere Paul uses the word Spirit. Gospel, law, repentence, can have wildly different meanings in their specific context can´t they? Here Paul contrasts flesh/body vs spirit. So whatever then is included in "flesh/body" is fully excluded here from what is meant by "spirit" yes?
Put another way: this is "A versus non-A" yes? Luther says "Spirit" is far more than imputed righteousness. It is everything the Holy Gospel brings us, specifically here sanctification, which is precisely and only regeneration, aka new birth, aka Christ-in-us. Faith.in.Christ. Alone. And flesh/body" likewise is far more than just "carnal/sexual" . It includes everything that is not spirit. It fully includes as well God pleasing visible righteousness.
todd frank part 5
TODD "Nor do I believe that the flesh/spirit motif in Paul should be interpreted (gnostically!) as visible/invisible or unreal/real."
FRANK Nor do I. Amen Todd! Thanks for this comment! That would be gnostic and deny the Blessed Incarnation of our Lord would it not and therefore the very essence of what "Christian" means yes?^ Also the scholastic idea that "flesh vs spirit" means "carnal/sexual vs escape from that" takes us to the same point yes? This is reflected in the modern "monasticism" of people who only listen to christian music etc….yes?
TODD "Simply put, we, as fleshly beings have faith which is borne from God's word- a word which is simultaneously worldly and divine."
FRANK Yes!!! Amen again! Can I capitalize this to read God´s [Incarnate] Word, a Word which is simultaneously [and Incarnately] worldly,[fleshly, manifest, visible, profane, commonplace, etc, just like us, etc, etc] ? If so you have more elegantly captured an essential point I made about the Blessed Incarnation yes dear brother?
So, to summarize:
I am asserting that you are wrong on Luther and the Confessions: 2KR is nothing other than Luther´s primary law/gospel paradym. It is synonymous with "two kingdoms" exactly. Modern Lutherans talk about a "dynamic tension" between law and gospel. Luther would not see things that way at all.
I am saying we appear to be in full agreement on every single one of your other points.
Oh no, not again…
I'm pretty sure we won't sort this all out now, so my response will be brief.
The only thing I would add is that in part 5 when I said "word", I did not mean Word as in Christ, but word as in God's address to us. This "address" may take the form of proclamation in word and sacrament, or it may take the form of a bearded old man in a dingy courtroom.
Until we meet again, Frank!