This article is not about the primary things among us, but about something secondary: the art of music.  So, being a musical article, it is the kind of thing that is usually discussed over at the Liturgy Solutions blog, Fine Tuning. However, Pastor Rossow prevailed upon me to write this here, as he is convinced that non-musicians in the church need more education on matters musical.  Given the scope of musical decisions that are made by the whole church these days, I am persuaded that such is the case.  So here follows an example on how it is not the tools in the contemporary musical toolbox that are a problem in our churches, but how they are used.  

At the recent synodical convention, the assembly sang two hymns within the same afternoon that illustrate how technology and contemporary rhythms can be used effectively to lead 1200 people in singing and how those same tools can easily get in the way. 

First, before the assembly cast their ballots for synodical president, a praise team from one of the area churches led us in singing “Let Us Ever Walk with Jesus.”  They did an excellent job.   The singers’ microphones were set at a level which enabled their breath to be picked up, allowing the initiation of their phrases to guide the assembly.  However, the level was not so high that it overwhelmed the assembly.  They blended in with us as we sang, just as a choir would have.  The volume approximated the volume of what a good church choir would have presented in the room.  Also essential to their success is that the quartet sang homophonically–i.e., the same notes & the same rhythms, without embellishment.  Their unified sound projected the melody they were assigned to lead.  In no way did they draw attention to themselves. 

The assembly sang beautifully under their leadership, an important component of which was the piano part.  Given that organ was not used, the pianist needed to cover the elements of bass, harmony, and rhythm in order to complete the singers’ leadership of the assembly.  By using a harmonic rhythm that had a harmony changing every two or four beats rather than one or two (such as the organ would), the pianist was able to use a combination of arpeggiation and block chording to keep a vital rhythmic pulse going throughout the hymn–just as a good organist does by releasing pitches rhythmically.  In the process, the pianist used a harmonization which brought in richness to the texture and gave it a fresh sound.  Yet because the harmonization submitted itself to the harmonic logic of the progressions and remained subservient to the melody, the harmony did not draw attention to itself, but served the text.  So we had three tools often used in contemporary worship: microphones, piano (or electric keyboard), and the use of a “groove” or rhythmic accompaniment all done in a churchly and skillful way.  And the result was a beautiful rendition of the hymn that was fully embraced by the assembly.

Later, these same tools were misused along with some other tools from today’s kit thrown in for good measure.  The hymn was “Holy God, We Praise Thy Name.”  Instead of live musicians, the convention was supposed to sing along with tracks.  They were so alien to corporate singing that I thought we had borrowed these from Maranatha!  (Turns out they actually came from one of our Concordias and are being promoted by CPH for use in corporate worship.) Sure, there was some singing along with these tracks, as the hymn is very familiar to us. And some of the delegates really loved them.  But they did not support corporate singing.  Their effect was to cause some to sing along, some to move around, more people to talk, and many to leave the room. Whereas “Let Us Ever Walk with Jesus” united us, these tracks, used several times during the convention, failed to bring us together.

Why was that?  Well, certainly the sound of “Nashville meets TechnoPop” caused a visceral reaction in many. But even those who would put that aside for the sake of occasion and the text were frustrated. This is because the tools were not used according to the principles of liturgical church music performance. Everything that the first group did right, these tracks did wrong. First, the volume was way too high. People could not hear themselves or their neighbors sing, so they treated the tracks as radio/concert music. Second, the singers on the recording did not sing homophonically, but heterophonically: they freely embellished the melody with all sorts of improvisatory notes. This drew attention to their voices, rather than unifying the people’s voices. Third, putting aside the excessive numbers of sounds used (another topic), the sounds that were used did not establish a clear harmonic rhythm.  Instead there was a wash of colors that drew attention away from the melody, rather than served the melody. Finally, percussion was used in a way that “drove” the music. In other words, the drum tracks were the unifying force in the music, not the melody. 

(I want to add here as an aside that confessional Lutherans often react viscerally against percussion, much to our discredit. There is nothing unscriptural about playing drums. At Bethany-Naperville we have timpani, congas, hand drums, a djimbé, and lots of miscelleneous percussion. Psalm 150 supports this. The question is, how are they used? Are they used to support “singing skillfully” (Ps. 33) or as a means to create an atmosphere? Is the music Word-driven or beat-driven?)

Now I realize that the musicians on this recording are well-intentioned, and that many people have a taste for the style of music they play. I’m fine with someone enjoying these CDs in their car. I’m not trying to diminish anyone involved with the actual project: I simply want people to understand why such tracks are not supportive of congregational song, so that they understand that it is not the tools being used per se, but how they are used. 

We need to do better.  Given the size of our church body, we have no excuses.  We should be able to find “techies” that can use amplification appropriately for liturgical worship. We can bring in different tone colors and use new instruments while still serving the melody and leading the assembly in the text. We can use rhythms that support singing and have singers who lead us with skill rather than affect. We have great musicians in our church body. Let them do what they do best: lead corporate singing. And, while we are at it, let’s stick with the tools they know how to use. Let’s face it: electronic instruments are powerful tools. Sort of like guns. And, as the old NRA slogan used to say:  ”Guns don’t kill people.  People kill people.”

Watch the video, then read what Brian has to say below.

One comment came in from a high schooler that is interesting to read:

This is terrible. As a senior, I see this narcissistic paganism in my own “Lutheran” highschool.  Its so terrible when all kids like me need to hear is that, “yeah you have messed up. worse yet you’ve incurred God’s wrath. But Christ took bore that wrath for you in his own person. Your sins are forgiven and you are righteous. Go in peace.” The last thing sinful high schoolers need to hear is that their emotions, decisions, and “being on fire for Jesus” is what makes one right with God.

Pastor Fisk replied:

Thanks for the comment, and thank you for the honesty. I’m always amazed when I talk to youth, how many of them see through? the charade. If only we could convince the adults…..

Now, from Brian Yamabe on his blog: 

Overture to Floor Committee on Theology and Church Relations

I’ve seen enough oddball services held at various LCMS gatherings. Many people have been offended by these cooked up orders of service. Sure some are offended as a matter of personal preference, but some truly take theological issue with the services. As we all know there is no order of service commanded in Holy Scripture, but it is quite clear from them and our confessions that worship should be orderly and peaceful. To that end I am going to submit the following overture to my district and the national conventions; You know “bubbling up from the grassroots” and all. If you have any suggestions to strengthen the wording, please feel free to leave a comment. I know we’ve go a couple of years, but this kind of stuff will drift out of my mind by then if I don’t put it down now.

To Use Lutheran Service Book at Services During Official District and National Gatherings

WHEREAS, God, in His 3rd Commandment, places an expectation upon us to worship Him; and

WHEREAS, God calls us to the Divine Service such that He might distribute His gifts to us; and

WHEREAS, AC XXVIII.55 states, “… that all things be done in the churches in order, and without confusion”; and

WHEREAS, Article III.7 of the Constitution states, “Encourage congregations to strive for uniformity in church practice, but also to develop an appreciation of a variety of responsible practices and customs which are in harmony with our common profession of faith;”

WHEREAS, 1998 Resolution 2-12 commissioned a new hymnal to be produced, 2004 Resolution 2-03A approved Lutheran Service Book, and 2007 Resolution 2-03A thanked the Commission on Worship for its work on Lutheran Service Book; and

WHEREAS, Nearly 70 percent of all LCMS congregations have adopted Lutheran Service Book (2010 Convention Workbook pg. 46); therefore; be it

RESOLVED, That for the sake of “love and tranquility” (AC XXVIII.55) all services during official District and Synodical gatherings use an order of service out of and as it is outlined in Lutheran Service Book.

Be sure to follow more of Brian Yamabe’s writings here.

It’s almost enough to make me think a road trip from D.C. is in order. Anyone else interested?

When Is a Testimony Not a Testimony?

When is a testimony not a testimony? When it’s in Jim Pierce’s new book Wittenberg Confessions: Testimonies of Converts to Confessional Lutheranism.

Whenever I hear someone is going to give their “testimony,” I generally groan. Testimonies are a statement of some sort that are supposed to reflect a person’s experiences upon becoming a Christian. They’re generally a rambling saga of how God saved the person from their [fill in your worst nightmare here, such as a bad marriage or a gambling addiction], and often end up being about the person telling the story rather than about Jesus and His saving work in their life. So when I heard that my friend Jim Pierce was somehow mixed up with a book on testimonies, I naturally groaned. And even when I read in the preface to the book that these testimonies were nothing like what I just mentioned, I was still skeptical. Call me a doubting Scott, or a Lutheran, I can’t decide which. But now that I’ve read the book cover to cover, I’ve repented of my unbelief and can give this book a double thumbs-up. These “testimonies” really do correspond with Jim’s opening statement: “The tales contained herein are not testimonies but rather confessions of faith” (xi).

Certainly, it’s worth reading the book just to hear Jim’s own story. I don’t know anyone who worked so hard for so long, using so many different techniques, to not-be-a-Christian. But as Jim confesses, God continued to pursue him until the Holy Spirit convicted him of his sin and bathed him in the truth of the Gospel. Anybody that can claim to have been in the Assemblies of God, an ordained preacher in the United Pentecostal Church, a Baptist church member, a non-Christian Trinitarian apologist, a political science major with an emphasis in philosophy, a rationalist, an agnostic, an atheistic humanist, and someone who, among other things, dabbled in eastern occultism and Buddhism, has got a pretty good story to tell. Through all of that, the Holy Spirit continued to work on Jim’s heart through the crushing weight of the Law and the sweetness of the Gospel and saved him.

Each of the other contributors to this book, including Stan Palmer, Dana Palmer, Kelly Klages, Matt Zickler, Kaleb Axon, Larry Hughes, and Robert Shreckhise have stories which, though their starting places are different, end up in the same state of forgiveness and a common celebration of the means by which God grants that forgiveness – through the Word as it is spoken and combined with water, bread and wine. I rejoice with them in their humble retelling of their tales of deliverance from unbelief or of a miserable life vacillating between despair and Phariseeism. Their stories truly reflect a rescue from false doctrine and a reliance on self to a redemption trusting only in Christ’s work and merit.

One of the things I really like about this book is how each author relates their own journey through various denominations and beliefs (without being unkind or rancorous to their former belief systems), and how those beliefs failed to give them peace.

Stan and Dana Palmer both relate the experiential spiritual roller coaster of highs and lows they rode in a Pentecostal church, and the altar calls and life application sermons they endured in the Evangelical Free Church.

Kelly Klages relates her experience as a Baptist, in which the Bible-as-guidebook-for-living led to a belief that “Christians already knew all that ‘gospel stuff’ already, and focused on principles for living instead— maybe choosing to tack on a little bit about Jesus’ death for us at the end for the sake of any possible unbelievers in the crowd” (105). Kelly astutely comments:

You were frequently exhorted to look inward at your own fruits of faith (works) to determine whether you were really sincerely “Christian” enough, and not just a poser. If you did believe that you were too bad of a sinner, there was always the option of walking the aisle again…and again…and re-dedicating your life to make a fresh start. It’s a dreadful concept of “assurance.” To feel for sure that they really have faith, so many evangelical Christians must convince themselves that they truly are more moral and righteous than their non-Christian neighbors, which actually serves to prevent confession of real sins and turning to the Gospel (112).  

The work of God in the lives of His people is truly an incredible thing. As His Hand contours even the smallest details in our world, we are truly blessed to know that these details are all worked for our good. We know this, that we have a good God, a trustworthy God because He is the One who sent His Son to accomplish our salvation on a cross: He has accomplished all for our salvation from beginning to end. The work springs forth from Him, from the founding of our faith to its perfection, and we have no part in it. Instead, we have the comfort of knowing that the security of our salvation belongs firmly in the grip of His all-powerful hand (123).  

Kaleb Axon describes the Pentecostal and Charismatic prison in which he was trapped:

If I sin, I will go to Hell.
If I pray and ask forgiveness, Jesus will forgive me.
If I sin, and die before I ask forgiveness, I will not be forgiven and I will go to Hell.
I might not remember every time I sinned.
Therefore, I have no idea whether I am really saved (155).  

The doctrines in the other protestant denominations ultimately point one inwardly to be sure of conversion, and one can never rely on the sacraments, especially in the Baptist denomination. In these non-sacramental churches, Christ is not really, actually and truly given to you in any form. There is no certain “for me” at all in neither Arminian thought, which is always attempting to work faith, nor in Calvinistic thought, which is always attempting to find firm ground on “fruits of faith” before the sacraments can be used. The incarnate Christ simply never comes to man in these doctrines. Christ may be generally preached, but preached for your faith to reach up and grab. However, no one can ever know if they have actually “grabbed” Christ via this so-called “faith.” There is no absolution and no sacrament that comes to you, for you, so that the Good News is in fact GOOD NEWS for you (188). 

Even in my own life I became aware of “the law of diminishing returns” that is common in Pentecostalism. The novelty of an emotionally-charged atmosphere wears thin. It provides no reliable source of ongoing encouragement (197). 

Far be it from me to suggest that my life in the Lutheran faith has been an easy one. In many ways, it has been far more difficult than I could have thought, because becoming a Lutheran means giving up the illusion that “every day in every way I’m getting better and better.” It entails relinquishing a glorious picture of Christians being in control of this world—“the head and not the tail”—in favour of a less hip and consumer-friendly, less programs-and-frills, fewer-numbers-and-more-faithfulness, view of Christianity. It’s about living life under the cross and having a far more serious picture of your own sinfulness and inadequacy before God. But the payoff is worth it: the Gospel is also far more glorious for this reason. It’s the sort of faith that stands the test of time (120-121).

 Wittenberg Confessions taught me about other people’s faith traditions, such as Catholicism, Pentecostalism, Baptists, evangelicalism, and atheism, giving insight into how these people think, which can be very helpful when speaking with them. I’ve already purchased two more copies of Wittenberg Confessions to give away, one to a Catholic acquaintance whom I just had a conversation with, who can’t quite grasp the relationship between justification and works, and another to a college-age friend who is trapped in the vicious circle of evangelicalism’s “just try harder” response to uncertainty. For each of these people, I think this book will open their eyes by the Gospel shared through each of the authors, and lead them to a fuller understanding of what it means to be a Christian.

The book also gave me a greater appreciation for the Scriptural truths which Lutheranism offers, without which, I’d be just as uncertain as these authors were in the beginnings of their own circumstances. The promises contained in the Gospel are for you, with no strings attached – a promise which the old Adam rejects, but in which the new Adam revels unceasingly. It is my hope that you too will find that same sense of peace which each of these authors so ably reveals.

Wittenberg Confessions: Testimonies of Converts to Confessional Lutheranismis published by Blue Pomegranate Press in Naperville, Illinois, is 206 pages long, and was edited by another of my friends, Elaine Gavin. You can purchase your copy for $15.00 here. I’d highly recommend giving it a read.

Jim Pierce and his family live in the Seattle area, and he is the author of the blog Confessional’s Bytes. You can listen to Jim discussing Wittenberg Confessionsin an interview with Pastor Todd Wilken on Issues, Etc. here.

The following will appear, Dv, in the next print issue of Gottesdienst along with other analysis of the future of traditional, confessional Lutheranism in the LCMS from many of the other Gottesdienst editors.

What Harrison Can Do

by Fr. H. R. Curtis

I have often wondered at people lamenting the LCMS’ lack of bishops. The problem with the LCMS is that she has far too many bishops. A bishop, in the Lutheran understanding, is a holder of the pastoral office exercising all the duties thereof. There is only one Office of the Ministry, and it can only be passed on whole and undivided. You can’t give some men just give a piece of the Office, as in Rome’s understanding. Some men, for the sake of good order, might not exercise all of the duties thereof – but all have the same Office, all are bishops.

Therefore a bishop acting as a bishop is a shepherd of souls – he is somebody’s pastor. He’s a steward of the mysteries and as such has the authority to see to the proper administration of those mysteries: “To this we answer that it is lawful for bishops or pastors to make ordinances that things be done orderly in the Church.” (AC XXVIII.53)

Instead of a few of these sorts of bishops, exercising all the duties of their office over a few large territories, the LCMS has thousands of these bishops over small territories. Thousands of men each and every week, who are the shepherds of souls, have and exercise the authority to make ordinances about how things are done in the services of the Church. We have lots, and lots, and lots of bishops.

Galore!

The President of the LCMS does not and cannot, therefore, act as a bishop in this Lutheran sense. He is not the pastor of anybody. (At least, he hasn’t been in about half a century.) And he does not have the right to change any parish’s ceremonies and order of service. And, since he is nobody’s pastor, neither is he the pastor of the other pastors of the Synod – and thus those pastors do not owe him the obedience that “hearers owe their pastors” in these sorts of matters. Or to put it another way: the President of the Missouri Synod is not empowered to excommunicate anybody.

So, first off, curtail your expectations of the new President of the Missouri Synod. He cannot stop neo-evangelical worship and the ongoing abolishment of the Mass among us with the nod of his head. He cannot say to that Winkel colleague of yours, “Stop communing Methodists, and use the Common Service.” He is not serving as bishop. No doubt, he is by virtue of his ordination ontologically a bishop, but he is not exercising that Biblical Office over anybody; rather, he exercises an office created by the Constitution and By-Laws of the LCMS.

But here is what President Harrison can do, and what I hope he does, for the cause of confessional Lutheranism in North America and around the world.

The Rule of IV

The problems that beset us can be helpfully arranged by reference to the Augsburg Confession. And, happily enough for the mnemonically challenged, the really problematic ones these days are: IV, XIV, and XXIV. President Harrison can aid the cause of traditional, confessional Lutheranism under each article.

AC IV: Grace Alone (No, Seriously: Alone)

The outgoing leadership of the LCMS has made no bones about their focus on Missions. The Ablaze! campaign was the heart and soul of President Kieschnick’s vision for what the LCMS was to be: an evangelical powerhouse growing by way of adult conversions and critical events. He was also found of a certain rhetoric that was, frankly, Arminian in tone. It boiled down to this: Life is short, and Hell is not. Every time I snap my fingers somebody goes to Hell. Get out there and stop that from happening! If we don’t give, pray, and tell the message, people will end up in Hell to whom we could have gotten the message and saved them from such a fate.

Um, what about grace alone? What about the Election of Grace? Will God really lose one of his elect if I’m lazy and do nothing? Is the population of heaven a function of my exertion? I explored this issue in much greater detail at the Gottesdienst West conference this summer (paper here), but for now let me get right to what President Harrison can do to help turn back the tide of this Functional Arminianism and Arminian rhetoric. He can simply say something like this each time he speaks of missions: Brethren, God saves us by grace and he has promised that no one can snatch his elect from his hands. If you decide to sit around and never tell anybody about Jesus, you will not be able to take a little lamb from his hand. But how can you keep from speaking of Jesus? You are saved by God’s grace! And more grace abounds – he will use you as an instrument for speaking the word of grace so that all his elect might be gathered in from every tribe and nation. . .

AC XIV: Pastors pastor

This is the hardest theological task President Harrison will face. For twenty years now the LCMS has been, not only in practice around the edges, but officially on paper and at the center, a heterodox body. In 1989, the LCMS tossed out AC XIV and its insistence that only those placed in the Office of the Ministry shall preach, teach, and administer the Sacraments.

This is the most pressing, clear cut issue for Missouri and world Lutheranism today. If the Missouri Synod, the founder of so many confessional church bodies around the world, can simply get by without pastors in large swaths of her territory – then why shouldn’t we Russians, Haitians, South Africans, save time and money and just train laymen to do these functions as well?

This is an open scandal, a denial of Scriptural truth, and a delight to the devil, the world, and the flesh. The rejection of the Biblical mandate and need for placing men in the Office of the Ministry is firmly entrenched in many districts (not to mention many hearts and minds). But there is hope. In July 2007, the systematics faculties of the seminaries came out forcefully against the current LCMS teaching in a joint statement that was ignored by the Kieschnick administration. President Harrison could resurrect this document and use his talents as a good teacher and powerful preacher to lead us into faithfulness.

He also has the services of a First VP who has been rock solid on this issue. In fact, while he was DP in SID, now First VP Mueller not only prevented any consecrations by laity, but was even known to volunteer his time on Sunday mornings to serve areas that could not find any other vacancy pastor. Now we need these two godly men to preach and teach on this topic both publicly and at the COP table and call the Synod to repentance. This will take bravery and strength. Pray for them.

AC XXIV: Ubi missa est?

The conventions of the LCMS are notoriously hard to analyze. Why did the 2010 convention pass the bulk of President Kieschnick’s vision for the day-to-day operations of the Synod – and then hand it over to Matt Harrison to run? Verily, this is a great mystery.

But maybe it was that opening service. In 2007, when I and the greater part of the Gottesdienst editorial staff were delegates, the opening service was Divine Service, Setting 1 from LSB. During the convention proceedings some of the walking music was performed by a praise band – but it was just the walking music. Never entered the Divine Service. But on opening night of this convention, President Kieschnick’s worship planning team really let ‘er rip. Oh, it was still the DS – mostly. But there were some “fresh” lines mixed in with the Kyrie – sort of a chancel dramatic reading if not a chancel drama. And there was a “techie” TV altar. And there was a real life praise band. And there were key changes of which no one was warned. And there were. . .

This was all a first. And there were so many of these firsts. And I wonder if it wasn’t all a bit much for many of the delegates coming from nice, normal LCMS churches. How many of those 50 or so swing voters saw that worship service and thought – gosh, has it come to this? All us Lutherans in the room and we do – this?

The way forward for President Harrison here couldn’t be easier. Another local story, if you’ll indulge me. We used to have these worship wars, I am told, in the SID at pastors’ conferences. One circuit would host conference and it was all praise bandy and ex corde orders of service. Another would host and it was time to play duck the censer and keep up with the Gregorian chant tones. In other words, the corporate worship of the brethren became the time to score points. The DP (yes, this is another Herb Mueller story) finally took things in hand and encouraged the planning committee to take the worship at conferences from then on – and to just do the orders as printed in LSB.

Peace and prosperity ever since. Worship is worship again and not point scoring. When Lutherans gather, we follow Lutheran orders of service that all Lutherans know and everybody’s happy. In 2013 I’ll bet dollars to donuts that President Harrison instructs the chaplain to just do what’s in the book. And in the meantime, he can just say a few nice things here and there about the rich heritage of our Lutheran worship, how great LSB is, and how neat it is to worship just like grandpa did. That’s all he needs to do to lend a lot of support to the liturgy – the ensuing silence about “diverse forms of worship” after nine years of hearing about it will be worth more, and be more classy, than any argumentative statements he could come up with.

Of course, if President Harrison encouraged a pastor here or there to rediscover the Common Service, had a talk with the St. Louis Seminary about what’s appropriate in chapel, and wants to lead Vespers at the next Gottesdienst Octoberfest, that would be fine, too.

+HRC

I have one suggestion. Encourage honesty. Right now, nothing is more important.

The problem in the LCMS isn’t that we are divided in doctrine and practice (when hasn’t the Church been so?). The problem in the LCMS is that we won’t admit it. And, if we won’t admit that we are divided, we can’t be united. What we need most right now is honesty.

Pastor Harrison is calling for discussion of both our agreements AND our disagreements, differences and divisions. This requires the kind of honesty that the LCMS hasn’t been able to muster for almost 40 years. It’s going to be very difficult.

Today, there are pastors and laypeople in the LCMS who believe that the Lutheran Confessions are no longer applicable, that the Word and Sacraments are insufficient to grow the Church, that Luther’s Small Catechism and Law and Gospel preaching are passé, and that closed communion is impossible. They believe these things; but they won’t admit it.

Many of these pastors and laypeople frequents BOJS. So, let’s offer them the kindest brotherly encouragement to finally be honest —and let’s thank them if they are.  Before we mount our arguments and begin debate, let’s thank them for their honesty. Without it, we will get nowhere.

And this will require us to practice a virtue in which I am personally unpracticed: Patience. 40 years of distrust and dishonesty will not be reversed quickly.

If it really is time (and I think it is), then we will joyfully welcome the honest admissions of those who disagree with us. There will be plenty of time to discuss, debate and argue. Right now, we need honesty and patience. Pray for both.
space

First consider this comment from Andrew Strickland, who according to the comment below would not consider himself a “confessional.”

(Comment #46) I must say that I find encouragement in both letters. Huh? Yes I really do. In the letters and responses I see the depth of the love we have for our synod. Was I upset that President Kieschcnick lost? You bet, but I know that the Lord is in charge and President Harrison will also be a blessing to the synod.

One of my friends stated after the election, the savior of the synod is here. My first comment which I wish I had not said was a sarcastic “Oh yeah? I thought the Savior was Jesus. I could have found a better way to respond to his comment.

Just from the past week reading this site I have learned something, and it took me off my high horse. I will not always agree with the “Confessionals” but they are important to the synod. A church that is not grounded in its past is a church that is groundless and set adrift. Many denominations have lost sight of that. I also believe that the more “liberal” movements such as Jesus First has an important role in the synod as well. I pray that working together the synod will continue to move forward.

Thank you Andrew for being so straight forward and for giving us some insight into the sort of positive things that may come out of the Koinonia Project. In addition to that, I don’t blame you for responding with “Oh yeah.” No one should speak of Harrison as the savior of the synod. The synod is much bigger than the office of the presidency, although we do look forward to Harrison’s leadership.

Pastor Pittock, who has gotten a lot of grief from our readers, half way through the string, offered this comment (Comment #53)

Also, reading thought the comments, I appreciate what Rev. Todd said and also Andrew. Nicely said brothers in Jesus!

Despite the clear differences there is some healthy and constructive dialogue going on. For this we give thanks to God.

And then there is this comment by Rev. Charles St-Onge (Comment #66):

I feel like I’m in the middle of much of this discussion, and should say something. First, I’m a regular blogger on the Houston Chronicle’s religion website, “houstonbelief.com,” and remained in regular contact with the religion web editor throughout the last convention. Second, I know Pastor Pittock from our time together in the Eastern District – both of us were involved with the District’s LWML. I’m also a big fan of BJS, and of all your regular bloggers. Third, my senior pastor and colleague is now 5th Vice-President of Synod. Last, I owe the fact that I’m now in the LCMS and not the ELCA/ELCIC in part to Pastor Harrison.

I hope, in many ways, that this thread is a symptom of a turning point in the history of our denomination. For nine years we have been told that our Synod is united – except in some small, practical details. I think we are now, for the first time, being able to admit *openly* that we have a lot to talk about. Wounds cannot heal when they are ignored and hidden. The first step to real healing is honest diagnosis of the disease. Pastor Pittock has “lanced the boil” – and I for one, like Pastor Wilken, am forever grateful. Let the conversation begin, and let it be led by Christ Jesus!

Thank you Pastor St. Onge for your hopefulness and your call to let the conversation begin. I do not agree with everything that Harrison stands for, he does not agree with everything Pittock stands for, who most likely does not agree with everything Benke stands for, who doesn’t agree with everything Wilken stands for, who doesn’t agree with everything Kieschnick stands for, who doesn’t agree with everything Helen stands for, who doesn’t agree with everything Pierce stands for who doesn’t agree with everything St. Onge stands for and so on. What we all agree on is that Scripture is the only source of truth. We also all agree that the LCMS is better off united than divided. May God bless President Elect Harrison in his efforts to bring us together.

If you want to get more of the “love fest” take a look at all of the comments on the “two letters” post or stay tuned below for more of the same I am sure.

For sure, the basic principles at work in these two letters include “sour grapes” and “to the victor go the spoils” but there are also much deeper themes involved. I look forward to your reaction to these two letters.

The first is from an LCMS pastor in Texas and was submitted to the Houston Chronicle.

July 26, 2010

Dear Editor,

I normally would not do this, but I have too!  This letter is in response to the July 16 article on the “New President to lead Missouri Synod Lutherans” (section F10) 

First and foremost, please understand that the “majority” of Missouri Synod Lutherans are not happy with this outcome.  The article states that a good majority of our congregations supported Harrison for president.  The fact is this was a sad political campaign in the church where a politician, Harrison, beat out a real pastor, Rev. Kieschnick, as the spiritual leader of the second largest Lutheran body in the word!  You see, those of us in ministry to serve God, love people, and just to plain have fun in this world that God has given us, really don’t care about politics.  Sad to say, this is how Harrison became president. Maybe we need to wake up!

Yes indeed, the sadness of politics has won out in our church body: a pastor, “running” for office.  Harrison says in your article that it was not a political campaign.  But indeed it sadly was! We’ve always had a saying in our church body, if someone wants to be president of the church that bad; it has to be the wrong person.”  Please understand the sites and information you quote in your article DO NOT represent the majority of the Missouri Synod… 

…Under the leadership of Rev. Kieschnick, a native Texan, our church grew, became more loving, and started an outreach effort that truly focused on the Gospel being brought to people where they were, in their daily lives, hurts, and burdens.  He was a pastor and a missionary.  Harrison says, “This election will bring a tumultuous change for our synod.”  He is right.  This is later shown in the fact that in the article it says he looks back to Luther and history for our future?  One thing is for certain, we as Lutherans need to look more at the Bible, God’s Word, for our now and future. This constant looking back gets us nowhere. 

Yes indeed, a sad day for our synod.  Please know that this man does not represent the vast majority of our Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.  Our congregations each day are places of love, refuge, and hope.  We truly are all sinners gathering together to feed on God’s Word and Sacrament, all in the same boat.  I personally apologize now for what the next three years will bring from the “leadership” of our national church body, but as for me and the church I am blessed to serve, we will follow Jesus, love Him with all our heart, and celebrate each day the joys He gives us, carrying each other through the hard times of life, and in the end, look forward to the glorious day Jesus calls us home to Heaven!  And no matter what may be heard, we Lutheran still believe, “One Lord, one Church, One God and Father of us all!’  For united, all Christians stand, in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord!  To God be the glory!

In the shadow of the cross,

Rev. Travis Pittock, pastor

Faith Lutheran Church -Huntsville, TX

The second letter is from a group of pastors in North Wisconsin headed up by frequent BJS commenter Pastor Jody Walter.

Letter to the Editor

2010 Convention of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod

Dear Editor

This will be the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod’s finest hour. Bold new leadership is taking the reigns for a bold new direction. Rev. Matthew Harrison, age 48, director of LCMS World Relief, was elected, on the first ballot, by more than 100 votes, at the convention which met, July 10-17, in Houston, Texas. This is a historic election and represents a generational shift in the Missouri Synod. Rev. Harrison succeeds Rev. Gerald Kieschnick, age 67.

Rev. Harrison is an excellent theologian who has written numerous books and pamphlets, as well as translating many older writings. His writings include books like /“At Home in the House of My Fathers” /and /“Lord Have Mercy: How to Put Your Faith into Action” /as well as pamphlets like “/Second Thoughts About Living Together…”/ Much of this work was done to explain the role of human care ministry in the Christian Church. He reads directly from the Greek text of the New Testament when he preaches. He is also known world wide as a man of incredible compassion. He truly has a heart for those in need, particularly for those who need to hear the Gospel. He is also known for his ability to draw people together around the Word of God. He is a true unifier and bridge builder. Many of our partner churches around the world are excited at this news and look forward to working with Pastor Harrison in his expanded role.

Under Rev. Harrison’s leadership the Missouri Synod is returning to our theological and missionary roots. As Rev. Harrison has said, the world is begging for what we have. He will make certain that we provide the solid confessional leadership for which many churches around the world look to the Missouri Synod.

This is the time to be part of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod. We are a Scriptural and confessional church, teaching and practicing historic Lutheranism. The Missouri Synod has 2.5 million members in congregations all across the United States. We are boldly stepping out into the world with the proclamation of Jesus Christ, crucified for our sins – folly to the world but the power of God unto salvation for those who believe. This will be Missouri’s finest hour. Come and be part of this exciting future.

Rev. Jody Walter
Pastor Immanuel, Frederic/ Immanuel, Cedar Lake

delegate to the 2010 LCMS convention

Rev. Gerald Heineke
Pastor – Our Redeemer, Webster/Trinity, Danbury

Rev. Clinton Hoff

Pastor St. Matthew, Almena/ Silver Creek, Amena

Rev. Ronald Mueller

Pastor Salem, Barron

Rev. Lenonard Wildauer

Pastor Christ, Lampson

Rev. Bob Pfeil

Pastor Emeritus, Hayward

Rev. Mark Schoen

Pastor Shepherd of the Valley, St. Croix Falls

Rev. Burt Harger

Pastor Emeritus, Rice Lake

You can view the pdf here.