Gottesdienst. It is the High German word most Germans would use to speak of their church services each week. The word translates most woodenly into English as “God’s service.†It is nearly equivalent to what we call each of our orders of service in the hymnal: “Divine Service.†Throughout the years, this one German word has been used both to refer to God’s service of his people in worship and also of their serving of him in song, prayer, and praise in worship. But it truly can have a much broader meaning. It can refer to every way God serves us, and every way we respond to his love by serving him through others.
For many years, the assigned text for Maundy Thursday evening in our church body was the account of the Lord’s Supper being instituted by Jesus. And of course, this is not surprising at all. After all, we confess that this meal where our Lord meets us in his body and blood is at the center of our faith and life. And so it is a more than proper source of meditation for us. But recently our church body offered up an alternate text for Maundy Thursday. Instead of reading the account of the Last Supper, the option is given to focus on the other story which we know occurred on the first Maundy Thursday. The alternate reading is the account of Jesus washing his disciple’s feet and then giving to them the command to do likewise, to love one another.
Either of these texts is more than appropriate for Maundy Thursday meditation, for both events happened on that Thursday of holy week. And yet the two accounts always seem separated in so many ways. We are essentially called to pick one or the other each time we walk through Holy Week. When we read in the scriptures, they seem far apart also. We find record of Jesus’ instituting the Lord’s Supper in each of Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s Gospel. But none of them mention Jesus’ washing of the feet of his disciples. In John’s gospel, we find that beautiful account of Christ’s humble service towards his disciples in washing their feet. And yet, in John entire gospel, there is no explicit mention of Jesus’ instituting the Supper that night.
No one doubts that the two events both happened on the same night and the same room, but the accounts rarely seem to come together. By considering the two events together, we learn what Gottesdienst, God’s Service, is about. We will see both the bounty of God service to his people and also reflect on the ways he has called us to serve him in response.
In the account of the foot washing and at the supper, we find Jesus again in the place of servant. He washes feet and serves the disciples with his body and blood. We see in his actions true Gottesdienst. But after seeing his service, we hear him call us to our own. Jesus told his disciples that they should love one another just as he had loved them. It would be the prime way that they would serve God. It would be their Gottesdienst.
Luther put it this way, “One is the same as the other; as Christ helps us so we in return help our neighbor, and all have enough.†Yes, while the two accounts of what happened on Maundy Thursday seemed isolated from each other in the scriptures and even have remained so in our celebration of this night, the truth is the two are quite naturally connected in the reality of the Christian’s life. Christ serves us and then we serve him by directing our love at our neighbors. God service of us makes possible our service of him. His Gottesdienst and then ours.
Yes, Gottesdienst. The Service of God. Divine Service. It is what happens to you each time you come forward to the altar. It is what happened to the disciple’s dirty feet. It what this Holy Week is all about. God giving and giving, giving literally until it hurts. Giving to you, for you. Giving his only begotten son that you would not perish, but live. And as Christ helps us so we in return help our neighbor, and all have enough. More than enough. That is just how Gottesdienst works.
Adaptation of Maundy Thursday 2011 Sermon
Phil,
I don’t mean to divert you from the main point of your post but I must take issue with one of the details.
You wrote: “Either of these texts is more than appropriate for Maundy Thursday meditation, for both events happened on that Thursday of holy week. And yet the two accounts always seem separated in so many ways. We are essentially called to pick one or the other each time we walk through Holy Week.”
Right there with the words “we are essentially called to pick one or the other” you have betrayed the problem with the modern Lutheran lectionary. If you would just use the historic one year lectionary, then this wouldn’t be an issue. But instead, with all the choices that abound, how can you not see that what has happened is that liturgical order has been supplanted for “picking and choosing” as if you were at a salad bar? The letionary is not, and I’ve said this many times to you and will say it again, to make people biblically literate. Remember that the lectionaries were created, historically, long before the canon of scripture ever came into existence. The lectionary is to teach God’s people of the great profound truths which our Lord came to proclaim for our own resurrection. If people are saddened that they only hear some parts of the Scriptures in church, they can read more at home. But what you have here (with all the choices, not just in readings, but also in liturgical rubrics, texts and settings) is just symptomatic of the liturgical chaos which has enveloped the LCMS for over 6 decades now.
Chris, you speak of THE one year lectionary. I have seen many that claim to be such. Do you have in your possession the original document?