I suggested this in another forum and promptly got my face eaten off. Well here goes again:

Since the LCMS leadership wants to act like a corporation rather than church we should gather together funds to hire bean counters to show us the money. The rejection came that the books would not be turned over voluntarily. The face eating came when I suggested an audit can be forced legally.

Since it is a corporation do we really need concern with violating St Paul’s prohibition of going to law about a a fellow churchman?

I will now put on my face shield that makes me look like a horror movie star.

David,

I’m sorry others ate your face off. I don’t think you are out of line. Instead, the synodical officials who are reluctant to share what should be public documents are out of line. Those documents should be available to all members of the synod, namely pastors & congregations.

David C,

You can take down the shield at least for this comment.

Robert Prues wrote some excellent stuff (maybe 20 years ago or so) about lawsuits among Christians demonstrating that the passage from Paul is not an absolute denial of any legal action among the brethren.

I may have it tucked away in a file somewhere but doubt that I could locate it. Does anyone else out there remember this and could you help David and the rest of us with this matter?

Pastor Rossow

Todd, I know you’re busy but would you also be able to provide reasons for your various grades? At least bullet points? I get the gist of why the grade was given but it might be nice to have some elucidation. Thanks.

1. D
*Synod Inc. has been copying off of the homework of pop-evangelicals. It tolerates/promotes teachings and practices that undermine the unity of faith.

2. C+
*Synod Inc. has confused “bold witness” with a capital fund drive called “Ablaze! (TM)”

3. D
*Synod Inc. shouldn’t claim credit for the Seminaries’/Universities’ work.

4. B+
*This is really done by the congregations, but Synod Inc. helps a little.

5. D
See number 3.

6. C
*On second thought, this grade should be lowered. See number 1.

7. F
*Synod Inc. gives lipservice to uniformity, but in practice is all about the variety.

8. D *Synod Inc. only “supervises” you if your confessional.

9. C
*See number 8.

10. A
*Hey, at least we still have a health/retirement plan. It may be the only thing holding us together.

TW

Thanks, Todd. Most helpful. I quite agree on #10. At least we have that going for us.

That & institutional inertia.

Regarding the comments on 10

That is…unless you you graduated from Seminary in the last five years, which has the too-common result of placement in a congregation which cannot afford to participate in the plan without taking food off the table of your children.

I mean, the way the structure of the plan will be used to financially uphold in high-middleclass kingship a baby-boomed bubble of retiring pastors who all have equity, stocks and etc, beyond the plan, by forcing new pastors with families to live at poverty level standards in order to even serve the congregations which said retired pastors managed to slowly run into the ground over 50 years of neglect and water-down teaching and discipline…

…well…maybe me and too many of my friends from my graduating class are just utterly unique in this. But would someone please point out how this really deserves a grade of “A.”? It’s an “A” if you’re a high gen-xer or a new associate at Crosspoint in Texas. But from where us millenials are sitting, I see some rather imbalanced scales being used by the moneychangers.

Jonathan:

Good point. So, post your report card and give Synod Inc. the grade it deserves.

TW

I would like to question the goals of point 1 based on two rumors: first, that the LCMS is spending a lot of money on some sort of “fellowship” talks with the ELCA, even though the ELCA tolerates congregations in its fellowship that worship the Canaanite goddess Ashtoreth and claim that “re-imaging” God as Goddess “is very Lutheran” among other things. (http://www.herchurch.org). The second rumor is that the LCMS refuses to talk to the WELS or ELS, and refuses to even send observers to their synod conventions.

“The Synod”?

Why is it that people equate Kieschnick & Co. with “The Synod”? If a robber took over my house and kidnapped my family, I would not thereby consider my house and family to belong to the robber.

I suppose that one CAN equate “the Synod” with Kieschnick and those who share his ideas. But here is another position: The Synod is its constitution and bylaws. Those who occupy synodical offices are not the synod. The fact that they they blatantly ride rough-shod over the Confessions, Constitution and Bylaws, doesn’t make the Confessions, Constitution and Bylaws repulsive — it simple makes those men and women to be reprehensible.

The very real danger, however, comes when the Constitution and Bylaws have been changed — and that is in the process of happening.

And another danger is this: when we identify “the Synod” with the current administration and with those are permitted to act in contradiction with Confession and Constitution, then “the Synod” will take on such negative connotations for us that it would be virtually impossible for us ever to regain the sense of synod amongst those who remain faithful.

That would be a great loss because a synod where we with one voice and mind confess Christ crucified and join together in supporting missions and education is a very good thing.

Joel:

I defined Synod Inc. as “the elected leadership of synod and district, and their permanent bureaucracies.”

Synod as congregations their pastors who walk together in doctrine and practice is not under discussion here.

TW

I’ll get around to grading later. I still go back to the basic question…..If synod ceased to exist today, how would that affect the congregation that I serve? Essentially, it would have NO effect except in two areas. 1) Worker benefits. Yet, the same or better benefits could be found elsewhere, and probably cheaper. 2) Pastor supply. Currently, the only place the congregation has to go for their pastor is the District (Synod in this place). However, there are alternatives for that too. But seriously, other than that, what do we need Synod for? What do “they” do for us that we cannot do on our own or for ourselves? I can use CPH no matter who I am. Same with the other publishing houses. Do I need (or even want) the Witless, the (no)Reporter? No. Commission on Worship materials are sold through CPH, and frankly, I don’t need the “Top 100 Contemporary songs” approved by the COWboys. So why do we need Synod at all? Let’s go back to the beginning and see why it was formed…..to proved pastors (seminaries) and teachers (colleges/universities), and now Synod’s support for those institutions is next to nothing. My grade for Synod? F. for all accounts.

Rev. Brondos,

As confessional Lutherans we are minorities in the LCMS. The current synodical administration pretty well reflects the average person in the pew. Present day Lutherans, as a whole, are not faithful to the Confessions or our Constitution. We have bought into the broader church and secular cultures of the day. Synodical leadership either agrees with its membership or doesn’t want to rock the boat and upset the majority of its members. Yet, I still pray that Christ will unite us with one voice and mind in Him to be used for His mission.

Rev. Wilken,

Having been fired by the corporation, you are way too generous with your grades for objectives 8, 9 and 10.

Perhaps the corporation is more like a labor union, working out a deal with local congregations, schools, etc. in order to collect money to insure and provide a pension for its members, and everyone knows that union bosses are well taken care of.

I give the elected leadership an F, because they appear to have failed to fulfill their main mission of being good stewards of Church funds in order to train church workers and send out missionaries. These two objectives along with defending the Gospel of Christ should be prerequisite to the rest of Article III. If they aren’t faithful with these three things, they won’t be faithful to complete the other objectives either.

Grading the Synod is like asking peers to evaluate the leadership. All leaders have strong and weak points, and we can pray that God will guide the clergy who select the positions for Synod for insightful leaders.
I am the average person in the pew. I am not clergy, not a deacon or deaconess, but firmly believe in the Lutheran Confessions. I have been reading Steadfast Lutherans and Issues Etc. plus other blogs for some time.
I see the Synod as a means to reach out far and wide to bring the Word to all walks of life, such as providing guidance in educating our children and educating our Pastors, and providing resources through CPH to Lutherans worldwide.
Pastors in the community setting should be concerned with teaching the pure Word to the parishioners, developing programs which help them spiritually and temporally. It is their responsibility to keep everyone on track. There is so much to do in the “field”, I would think that having some people on top in so called “corporate” positions might be helpful in growing the Church globally. Individual pastors can only do so much outreach and may not have the time to assess the global picture.
Sometimes, I feel sad, that so much time and energy is spent in pointing out the faults and shortcomings of our leaders. Parishioners like me are now becoming confused. It’s hard to understand that with so much blogging going on about LCMS Synod that the message has not gotten through. Forming a “serious” ongoing delegation of steadfast Lutheran clergy with LCMS Synod to discuss concerns with programming, and possible solutions with resolve would seem to make more sense than just talking and talking and talking.
Right now, I am for Steadfast Lutherans. However, I can also see “some” of the Synods strategies. I recently went to a ball game. I haven’t been to a game in a very long time., I stayed away because it was so, so boring. Well, with today’s technology, and LED displays, audio visual effects, this game was actually stimulating and fun. I couldn’t believe it. Today’s age, I hate to say, has more stimulation than ever. Perhaps, reaching out with new media globally may help our cause to bring Christ to everyone. The liturgy is another thing. It should be kept “holy” and not change. We do need quiet, reflective time in Church for prayer.
That’s it for now. Thought it might be nice to have a response from “AN AVERAGE PERSON IN THE PEW”

Average Person

TW – I wasn’t taking issue with what you wrote, but I did want to make it all the more clear — especially for those who browse through these pages — that we are not grading “the Synod,” but as you put it: “the Synod, INC.” And as long as we are ordained members, we ARE the Synod, too — and we ought always make it clear for those who surf in these waters that the Synod isn’t “them” vs. “we is us” (sic; with a wink to Pogo).

Perhaps there ought to be a grade for those who have stood in opposition to the “Synod, Inc.” Do we get high marks for responding to what is being perpetrated by the synodocrats who ride rough-shod over the Confessions and Constitution? Perhaps you’d like to address in detail the thorny issue about how one maintains pure doctrine in the context of “Synod, Inc.”

Are there those who have been reluctant, too fearful of losing their worker benefit plans if they speak up? Have members been able to distinguish between hot-headed logomachy and godly sharp rebuke? Have we spent too much time complaining because we are frustrated with our apparent inability to have a desired effect? Has there been cacaphonous confusion or prideful ambition among those who would dispute with “Synod, Inc.”?

Kumm — I think that is a very cogent point especially with next year’s district conventions. We need to urge a downsizing of bureaucracy for one thing — the burgeoning of which I’d maintain is one of the leading causes of synodical decay. We’ve got all these overpaid executive paper-pushers looking for something to do which “justifies” their salaries and makes them look creative.

But at the same time, there is something else that we do need. None of us lives to himself alone — not only as individuals but also as congregations. We have a “need” to recognize those with whom we share the same confession and we have a “need” to work together as churches in areas that we cannot maintain ourselves. It is good for us to confess and to work together as the body of Christ. Too often we have even isolated ourselves from congregations in the same circuit with a kind of congregational solipsism. I don’t know if we can do without a synod even though we can do without much of the “Synod, Inc.”

The congregation I serve would probably exist for a while by itself. We MIGHT be able to support one missionary, but there are many ways in which confusion and lack of efficient stewardship could result. But, don’t we need — and want — a synod . . . or at least a conference / confederation of confessional congregations? (Alliteratively, I wasn’t trying to “con” you in that last phrase.)

Average Person,

Thank you for taking the time to write out your thoughts. They make alot of sense.

The people blogging on this and other sites are just a bunch of average people too and what they want is just a simple, average church structure that insures that pastors can do what you desribe – get God’s word and sacraments to His people that His church may thrive.

Sadly, our synod is moving away from that. I have made several trips to the international center over the last twenty years. I have several friends who serve there. I know first hand how the synod has become “corporatized.” Rather than doing what the synod was originally intended to do, (help us all work together to provide missionaries and to establish seminaries to train pastors) it has become an organization that seems to exist to 1) sustain itself, 2) promote an approach to church that is contrary to the liturgy that you rightly describe ought to be held as holy, and 3) create programs that follow the latest fads of American Evangelicalism rather than support the meat and potatoes word and sacrament ministry that our Lord established.

In addition to this programming silliness, the synod has slowly drifted away from the traditional theology drawn from the Bible. That is the biggest concern that I have. The synodical president and the district presidents just do not care about upholding true doctrine. For instance, they do not talk about nor hold congregations to the standards of closed communion that are taught in scripture. They do not talk about nor hold to the Biblical standards that forbid unionism and syncretism (worshiping with other denominations that deny teachings of the Bible and with other religions who deny Christ).

I could go on and on. I welcome other readers to add to the list with specific examples of how our synod is leaving behind the Biblical standards of doctrine and practice. We are not against the minimum organization required for congregations to join together for the sake of hte Gospel. We are against the type of organization that we have become.

Pastor Rossow

Pastor Brondos,

I agree with you that some sort of federation is pleasing to God and is good for His Gospel.

I don’t even care if it is a tight federation as long as we are being tight (uptight even) about the right thing: doctrine.

Bring on the bishops! Let’s have real bishops who actually do what a bishop is supposed to do – supervise the administration of the Gospel. A bishop is not to be feared, just as a pastor is not to be feared. The only authority a pastor or a bishop has is the authority of God’s word. As I like to say, “even a third grader armed with scrpture can rebuke a pastor” and a bishop for that matter. District presidents who actually act like the bishops that they are would be a great blessing for the church.

I realize that there is no polity that is perfect (DP’s, bishops, etc.), but no matter what polity we have, job one is putting the maintenance of pure doctrine first. I think that if we as a synod hold our district presidents to that standard it would be a good thing. I am not holding my breathe waiting for the LCMS to understand the role of the district president in such a way, but I beleive that any godly federation of churches would hold to such.

Pastor Rossow

Average Person,

By all means, if you think Synod Inc. deserves higher grades, give them higher grades.

This is an opinion poll.

TW

It sounds like that “Synod, Inc.” needs to be taken over by acquisition or merger.

1. D – unity has suffered greatly and no united defense
2. C – certain Ablaze programs have/are beneficial
3. F – Synod fails miserably in support of Seminaries
4. C – WR-HC would grade an A, but when viewed in overall context of Synod, grade drops to C
5. F – no comment necessary at this Blog site
6. No Grade Assigned – LCMS fails to provide sufficient grounds to warrent “F” grading.
7. F – No shortage in variety of practices & customs; real shortage in category of “responsible”.
8. D – Just to demonstrate I too can show mercy to Synod!
9. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
10. C – Without the retirement and health plans, we could not justify the existence of Synod based upon works righteousness.

Dennis,

I’m always interested in hearing which Ablaze! programs are beneficial. And . . . are they beneficial BECAUSE they are Ablaze! programs — OR are they programs that synod has always provided, but now they have been branded with Ablaze!

For example, here in Northern Illinois, there is an Ablaze! committee which is handing out mission grants. That sounds nice, BUT they have usurped the constitutionally-mandated district Board for Missions which has been given the responsibility to review the grants. So in effect, by giving mission grants it looks like Ablaze! is doing something good while in fact they are doing it in an illegitimate way.

Rev Brondos;
I did have in mind several outreach and mission programs run by various congregations with the assistance of Ablaze funding. However, your point regarding the proper constitutional mandate for the Board of Missions is concrete and inescapable. I, for one, would shed no tears if the entire Ablaze program was eliminated today and truely believe the programs I had in mind would continue within a Synodical framework based upon a correct application of our constitution. I guess I’m getting soft in my old age and suffered the embarrassment of trying to paint a picture of our Synod which is slightly better than what is deserved. Thankyou for your correction.
Peace

Hi.

My question is: At what point do we say enough is enough and leave to form our own Confessional Synod? I am no pastor so please correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like by simply remaining in Synod with these people (Synod, inc.) we are supporting erroneous views, or at least erroneous practice. What do you think?

Dan,
I am a layman like you and feel the same way. I would like to be able to go to any church in a given synod and be confident that its members and pastors hold to the true confessions. On the other hand, because of sin, this is probably too idealistic and not really possible. I also realize that confessional Lutheran pastors and teachers have as much invested in this Synod as anyone else. In many and various ways it would be an enormous hardship for them to leave the LCMS. I don’t want to simply hand over God’s gifts of Concordia Seminaries and Universities among other things to someone else, either. I still think they are worth defending as long as they remain faithful to the Word of God.

My question is, when will any of you become active and effective for our Lord Jesus Christ? You cannot achieve pure doctrine as you are impure men. You waste an amazing amount of time and energy pointing fingers, making accusations, calling names and belittling other Christians. A report card for the Synod…really? This is how you choose to exercise the gifts God has given you and the ministry to which you’ve been called. Meetings and blogs and protests about how other Christians are wrong and how you’re right. This witness you make is devastating to the Body of Christ (which, by the way, is far larger than Lutheran believers – but you know that). Within blocks of your churches live thousands of people who don’t even know you exist. People who are dying without benefit of knowing their Savior who you claim to represent. Here’s a clue, they’re not going to come flocking in because your doctrine and theology are exactly right according to all “Confessional Lutheran” standards. And I’d hazard a guess that nearly all of your churches are shrinking and dying as you cling to your precious pure doctrine and right theology. How many homeless did your churches house this past week? How many widows received comfort? How many naked were clothed by the people you lead? How many prisoners were visited? How many people right outside your church doors had their homes repaired, pantries filled, cars fixed or yards mowed by the faithful servants of Christ who sit in your pews in the past seven days? There’s a report card that might be worth looking at. You’ll not win me over with any comments you have to this post so continue with your high-minded and righteous conversation as it seems to be serving you well. I doubt it’s serving the Body of Christ at all.

TIm:

You’re right. Pure doctrine is a pipe dream. After all, a little error never hurt anyone, right?

A report card for Synod. What’s the use? Accountability is for chumps.

Pure doctrine and right theology? Useless! Jesus’ and Paul’s concerns about wolves in sheep’s clothing and false teachers were needless.

I’m surprised you could take valuable time out of your schedule –visiting the thousands of people who live within blocks of your church, housing the homeless, clothing the naked, visiting prisoners, repairing homes, filling pantries, fixing cars, and mowing yards– to comment here.

By the way, you seem to know a lot about how little others are doing to serve the body of Christ and how much their churches are shrinking and dying. How do you fit that into your life of high-minded and righteous good works?

TW

And Tim:

I know that you think it’s a complete waste of time, but maybe you could take just another few minutes out of your busy (and obviously very sanctified) life, to grade Synod.

I’d be interested to see how you think Synod Inc. is doing.

TW

And Tim:

You wrote: “…pointing fingers, making accusations, calling names and belittling other Christians.”

Could your comment be an example of this too? If not, how so?

TW

Todd

Guilty as charged. I fell into the trap of entering into senseless arguments. Thanks for the correction. Carry on.

Tim

Tim K.,

It is good to hear from you. Even though you disagree with most of what is written on this site thank you for taking the time to comment.

Christ Lutheran Academy is still hanging in there thanks in great part to your hard work. I know we did not always agree, but I still thank God for the great things he accomplished through you at CLA.

Based on your comment, I guess we still disagree. I know I cannot convince you of much in this one response but I hope you will give it some thought.

First of all, I hope you will confess your sin of slandering people for not having numerical growth in their churches. Can you name for me one single passage of scripture that says that the local congregation or even the body of Christ at large is to be growing numerically? If you can find even one, and you will not be able to, I can quote you at least 10 passages for each one you find that states that the church is to be known for its faithfulness to the word of Christ. Actually, as you know, the Bible makes it clear that the closer we get to the coming of Christ, the smaller the church shall be.

Secondly, how do you know what the men and women who blog on this site are doing for evangelism? Do you really know? The men and women blogging on this site are quote commited to evangelism. Let me give you a couple of examples. 1) Have you read the comments on the Issues, Etc. petition site? http://www.petitiononline.com/Issues/petition.html . Of the 7,500 signatures, hundreds of them are professions of coming to the true faith through the show or of being released from the guilt thrust upon them by the heterodox gospel of American Evangelicalism. 2) In my own church, which by the way shrunk by 20% when people discovered that they did not want to belong to a church that preached the pure Gospel that Paul speaks of in Galatians 1 and instead went to churches that practice open communion, ordain lesbians/homosexuals, have women serving as elders and serving holy communion, preach life change rather than properly distinguishing the law from the gospel, (BTW – we are now growing again but that is beside the point), we recently repeated a personal evangelism program that had most of the members of the church praying for unbelievers and as last time it resulted in many wonderful accounts of God at work through these confessional Lutherans sharing Christ with others. Just last week, I heard from one of our members that one of the people they were praying for opened up to them at a family get together and they their parents got to spend two hours sharing the Gospel with this undbeliever.

I agree with TW that your description of us as unloving people who care only about doctrine and not about evangelism and that all we are interested in is attacking people, is actually a personal attack in and of itself and based on the above, is an inaccurate attack.

I encourage you to search the scriptures and look for how much time Paul for example, spends rebuking false doctrine. I would also ask you to compare the number of times Paul encourages people to learn about Christ vs. the number of times he tells them to share Christ with others. Both are important but he stresses the former much more than the latter.

We here at the Brothers of John the Steadfast are seeking to emulate this scriptural pattern.

Your friend,

Pastor Rossow

BTW – are you still in the LCMS?

Tim,
I belong to a Church that is supporting steadfast lutherans. And we do reach out to our members, and are becoming more organized in our efforts every year I have been at this Church. Like you said, we support the Pure Word,and our methods are not as grand as the Ablaze program and unfortunately our growth is not as robust. Even though we are growing very slowly, God has blessed us with adequate financials to continue His work.
I do understand your points, and I personally want to reach out, but I want to reach and do good works for Christ, to evangelise. Walmart, Sam’s and Cosco actually post there “Good Works” on a bulletin board. All the good works that are done at this point in time, more than likely are all in the name of Christ, but as time goes on and all the hustle and bustle and number counting occurs, the “Christ” in the “good works” may get lost.I see the razzle dazzle more and more. Everyone needs to first and foremost focus on the Body of Christ not on the numbers.
Average Person

Tim,
Great to hear from you and thanks for the kind words regarding CLA. I still get the occasional e-mail and phone call from the folks who are soldiering on in that effort. Good to hear that Bethany is growing again as I love stories of churches that are effectively reaching people with the truth. Trust me, I have no qualms with keeping doctrine pure and teaching right theology. I do get frustrated with people who seem to make it their life’s work when there are, in my humble opinion, better ways to spend time. Perhaps the rancor in the church can’t be helped as there may always be the tension between those who wish to be effective and those who wish to be right. It’s my hope that often both can be accomplished. I confess that I hoped to needle a bit with my comments but didn’t in anyway wish to impugn the churches whose leaders spend time monitoring others. I’m truly interested in stories where social justice and all that Jesus spoke of in Matthew is being effectively carried out by His church. It really is a report card I’d love to see. I have no doubt those who write here are doing good ministry and, while they don’t need to report to me, it would be nice to hear that trumpeted with websites and blogs. I’ve had the chance to speak in California, Maryland and Colorado to the Externally Focused Church Conferences this year. It’s encouraging to see churches that are reaching their communities with the love of Christ simply because THEY are Christ followers. Pure doctrine and right theology is a laudable goal that, I would hope, could be accomplished without the sort of bullying I’ve seen in our church body through the years. Maybe it’s important enough to some to justify a heavy hand, name calling and the like or maybe I’m not clearly seeing the danger seriously enough to warrant the vociferous energy dedicated to combat it. I truly feel called to challenge those who claim Christ to get on with actually living out their faith in ways the revolutionize whole communities. I suppose I shouldn’t be critical of those who feel God’s call to protect his church from heresy. I personally would find that a waste of time and I repent of my judgmentalism. I pray you’re well.

Your friend,

Tim

P.S. My wife and I are enjoying volunteer ministry as members of Grace Place, a non-denominational church here in Loveland, CO.

Anonymous,

Excellent response although it is important to realize that Ablaze is not showing robust growth. The LCMS is getting smaller and we have far fewer ordained missionaries in the field than before Ablaze.

Pastor Rossow

Tim,

Thanks for the clarification.

I really commend to you a thorough reading of Paul’s epistles (and the rest of the scriptures for that matter) to see how pure doctrine really is more important for the church.

May God bless your volunteer work.

Pastor Rossow

Tim:

Thank you for clearing that up. Your recent comments do require a response.

I can’t say it any better than a dusty, toothless old Lutheran:

“Many say, ‘Instead of disputing over doctrine so much, we should much rather be concerned with souls and with leading them to Christ.’ But all who speak in this way do not really know what they are saying or what they are doing. As foolish as it would be to scold a farmer for being concerned about sowing good seed and to demand of him simply to be concerned about a good harvest, so foolish it is to scold those who are concerned first and foremost with the doctrine, and to demand of them that they should rather seek to rescue souls. For just as the farmer who wants a good crop must first of all be concerned about good seed, so the church must above all be concerned about right doctrine if it would save souls.”

Rev. C. F. W. Walther, 1st Synodical President
“Our Common Task – The Saving of Souls,” 1872

“Whether our Synod gains friends or makes enemies, wins honor or invites disgrace, grows or declines in numbers, brings peace or incites enmity, all this must be unimportant to us–just so our Synod may keep the jewel of purity of doctrine and knowledge. However, should our Synod ever grow indifferent toward purity of doctrine, through ingratitude forget this prize, or betray or barter it away to the false church, then let our church body perish and the name “Missourian” decay in disgrace.”

Rev. C. F. W. Walther, 1st Synodical President
First Sermon Delivered at the Opening of Synod, 1 Corinthians 1:4, 5

“Oh my dear friends of the Lutheran faith, confession, and conflict, do not be misled when today those are everywhere accused of lovelessness who still do not give up the battle for pure doctrine in our Church. … Oh my dear friends, let us indeed sorrow and lament over this: that false teachers constantly assail the pure doctrine in our Church and thus are at fault for the conflict and strife in the Church. However, let us never lament but rather extol and praise God that he always awakens men who fight against those false teachers, for, I repeat, this pertains to “the common salvation.” … This conflict is one commanded us by God and is therefore certainly one blessed in time and in eternity. … Oh, therefore, let us never listen to those who praise and extol the conflict of the Reformation for the pure Gospel but want to know nothing of a similar conflict in our days.”

Rev. C. F. W. Walther, 1st Synodical President
“Why Dare and Can We Never Give Up the Church’s Struggle for the Pure Doctrine” – Sermon based on Jude 3, Reformation Day, 1876

These quotes demonstrate that the attempt to pit concern for pure doctine against evangelism is nothing new.

Scholia.net has contrasted these quotes with some from our most recent synodical president. Find it here:

http://www.scholia.net/files/lcms/85%20InsertKieschnickWaltherQuotes.pdf

TW

Tim Kurth–
Creeds, not deeds. Or rather, deeds will flow from creeds.
But get the creeds wrong, and it’s not a church. It’s just a welfare organization or a food pantry.
I confess that I was foolish enough to listen to the radio program “Truth for Life” with Pastor Allistair Begg for about a year. It’s a growing non-denominational church that I’m sure does nice things out in Cleveland.
But I heard that Pastor Begg does not believe in the Real Presence of Holy Communion, and I had to stop listening to the program right away. Once you get that doctrine wrong, you are not leading people to Christ, but away from Him.
Because in my opinion, you cannot call your church Christian if you do not take Christ at His Word and believe Him when He said “this IS my body….this IS my blood….”
That is why we focus on Creeds, because when you do gain members, they will be secure in the One Foundation, which is Jesus Christ, unto life everlasting.
Pantries filled…hmm…wasn’t it Christ that said “man does not live on bread alone, but on every Word that proceedeth from the mouth of God.”?
Additionally, one does not have to join a ministry or church-sponsored outreach to do good deeds. As Luther said, even changing your child’s dirty diaper is a good deed in God’s sight, as long as it is done in faith in Christ.

Average Person–
I am laity also. I think it’s important to talk about our issues, but I agree with you that we need to take action based upon that talk.

Pastor Rossow–
Is not part of this site’s mission purpose to educate laity and encourage them? Could one of your ordained members put together an article on the Synod’s structure, so that laity become knowledgeable on what they can do to fight for the Synod? What powers do laity have other than being a delegate and voting in conventions?
How and when are Synod leaders elected? How can they be voted out?
How can Synodical by-laws be changed if they do not support our missionaries, programs, etc.?
We need to be trained how to fight for our Synod if we want to save it.

It is good to give the Synod a report card. But now that we’ve rated it–what sort of remedial steps can we take to improve these grade scores?

Heartbroken expresses it exactly: “…get the creeds wrong, and it’s not a church.”

If you do not have people–pastors and laity–who hold to the confessions at all levels, you cannot keep the unity of the faith, and you can expect troubles to arise, especially for those who want to be true to our Lord.

Tim,
Pr. Rossow and others have addressed your initial comments well. I would just like to ask, why do I have to make a blog entry of my works? Where in scripture does it say that we’re to tell the world about all the great things we’ve done “for Jesus”? Now, I’m just laity, and I’m a woman even, but I’m pretty sure that scripture verse you were using to condemn us for our desire for a truer doctrine than we’re seeing from “synod inc” these days is talking about people who had no idea they were doing “good works.” Someone correct me where I’ve got this fouled up but… isn’t Christ pointing out that our everyday actions towards our neighbor in our vocations, “as we are going” are those good works? Again, where does it say that we’re supposed to go around trumpeting to the world how great we are at helping everyone else out. I’m not going to tell you what I do. In fact I don’t know what I do. I’m a mom, a neighbor, friend, wife, daughter, sister, citizen, customer, fellow driver, and who knows what else. I live my life, God works through me for my “neighbor” whoever that person is. However, this only happens because He worked faith in me and He sustains it with regular teaching from His word, and in the regular attendance of the Divine Service he sustains me and gives me forgiveness for all my sins (like my thoughts of what I’d like to say, but won’t b/c God is training me to say things in Love) in Word and Sacrament every week.
Doesn’t Christ tell us to preach the Gospel? Is the gospel now good works and feeding the poor? I thought the Gospel was that we are sinners and Christ died for the forgiveness of those sins so that we are saints, reconciled with God and able to live for eternity in heaven with him. I am not seeing “synod inc” teaching/supporting/whatever else, that message anymore, so… as a person who is supposed to be preaching that true gospel, it is important to find the false prophets, point them out, and point out the true Gospel. Right?
It’s late and I’m no good at controlling run-on thoughts after 8pm so I’ll quit now.
In Christ
Jenn at Bull Run

Heartbroken,

That’s a great idea. Pastor Simcak down in Texas might be a good one to do that. Also, be looking in the next few days or possibly, a couple of weeks for a post by Pastor Baue where he calls us all to arms. I have seen a draft of what he is writing and it is in great part what you are asking for.

I may not get to it right away but will put it on the to do list to address this matter with a “practical” approach for laity to take to address these problems in our synod.

My own board of elders discussed at our meeting tonight, a paln for better educating our own congregation on these matters.

Pastor Rossow

Jenn and Heartbroken,

Thank you for saying what I didn’t say about programs in the church. Tim Kurth is in a segment of the church that does not properly understand the doctrine of vocation. The church growth movement has gotten away from the notion of the Divine Service as the place where we get our sins forgiven and then go out from there refreshed to serve others. Because they have dropped the forgiveness of sins as the center of God’s service to us, they have to replace it with something and Tim Kurth’s comments make it very clear what they have replaced it with: programs!

I am amazed at how sharp the readers of this website are. Of course, that’s what you get when you listen to Issues, Etc. as much as this group does.

“Thank you Lord for the gifts you have given your church in Pastor Wilken and Jeff Schwarz.”

Pastor Rossow

Mr. Kurth,

I am a layman transferring out of one of the largest churches in the LCMS. There are many wonderful Christians who are members of this congregation. Many good works are done by these people. They reach out to the community and seek to bring them to church as well as bring their children back to the Church. However, their theology is slipping down the proverbial slope. It is not uncommon to hear little mention of the name of Jesus in sermons, let alone His cross. Members who have pleaded to be fed the Gospel and to use historic liturgy have had their letters called “crap” by their pastor. Faithful old Lutherans have been told they would probably be better off somewhere else if they don’t like the way things are going. This is the kind of experience I have had with a church that wants to grow, and save as many people as possible, and not “die”. I have found my faith and that of my family dying at this church. This is why doctrine is important to me, my eternal salvation can’t afford to flirt with false doctrine.

Thank you all. I’m glad to have triggered a more substantive conversation than what the Synod’s report card conversation was doing. I agree with much more that’s been said here than you might imagine. We are saved by grace alone through faith alone not through works lest anyone should boast. We are freed and forgiven people solely through the work of Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross. Any church not boldly proclaiming the forgiveness of sins accomplished through the shedding of blood by the Lamb of God and persuaded to preach a soft social gospel should be called to account. I have no faith in programs and very little trust in organized religion but have an immense amount of faith in Jesus Christ and in His Holy Spirit to guide, direct and protect the church. I believe there is rampant Biblical illiteracy in this country and have personally combatted this as a teacher having taught a full survey course of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation fully six times during my years of ministry. I recently completed a full reading of the entire Bible again followed by an examination of Paul’s writings that I completed just two weeks ago. I confess a lack of familiarity…and not much interest…in what Walther had to say (and I know some who hold him in high esteem may be offended by that). I am not ignorant of the doctrine of vocation just not necessarily in full agreement with it. While no longer a student of the conflict in the LCMS I am more aware of the arguments on both sides than some may realize. I admit to a concern that public forums such as blogs and websites that can be seen by anyone in the world may not be the place to have this discussion. It may appear to unbelievers as combative, rancorous and disorderly. That, I believe, flies in the face of Paul’s desire that we be winsome. Are not these conversations more properly held behind closed doors? Would it not be wise for us to take every precaution not to cause another to stumble as we work out the difficult challenges of holding to true doctrine? My encouragement to tell the good things we are doing isn’t about bragging or leaning on good works. It’s much more about “being all things to all people” as believers in Christ so as to be the hands and feet of Jesus to a dying world and letting that be the charming and invitational face the world sees. All undergirded by the precious truth of God’s Word and a fierce protection of right doctrine. Shouldn’t the world know more about your churches being a place where they can find eternal salvation through the love of Jesus Christ than about what you think of the current Synod president? Perhaps I am not so disappointed in the goals of you good people as I am in the methods. Maybe I’m wrong but my faith is built on nothing less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness and it seems to me fearing the loss of your own salvation because someone in leadership errs doctrinally indicates your faith may be built on something less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness. Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura.

Tim Kurth

Tim,

What good is it to gain the whole world and loose your soul? Should the churches top priority not be to present the Gospel to those who don’t know it? Can’t we help others the most by releasing the power of the Holy Spirit through the means by which He has promised to be effective? Our world needs constant reminders of how God has promised to send His Holy Spirit. If we abandon those means, we loose the assurance we have been given in God’s Word. God has chosen the means, we are to be faithful.

A person may live in our habitat for humanity homes, eating food from the local food bank, sending their kids to free day care and have all of their physical needs met… if that person does not hear the Gospel, they are lost. If they are not encouraged to read and hear God’s Word preached correctly, their faith will not grow? If the Sacraments are ignored will their faith not die? I don’t fear the suffering and death in this life if I have the promise of eternal life through Christ. That is how I care for my neighbor the most. My fear is my synod has started to forget the primary use of the means of grace and changed its focus to ways other than what God has ordained. This needs to be addressed by every member of “the church” on earth.

With regard to caring more for our neighbors physical needs or their spiritual needs, to me the issue is not an ‘either/or’ problem, rather a ‘both/and‘ problem. We should not care for people’s physical needs at the expense of the one thing needed for eternal salvation. Neither should we ignore our brother’s and sister’s physical suffering. God desires ‘both/and’. Preach the Gospel, feed my sheep, and help your neighbor in despair, hardship and trials of every kind.

When I stand before the judgment seat of God, I have full faith that God will judge me only through the redemptive work of Christ. While on this earth, when my fellow man needs me most, I pray I will be a good steward of what God has given me to help my fellow man with whatever they need. I am confident you feel the same.

Dr. Steve Overn

Mr. Kurth

I am sure I am sinful enough that I could reject the Lord even in an Orthodox Church. I know I have too many idols in my life, beginning with me. Yet, I think my faith suffered at the church growth church because I was being fed something other than Jesus and His forgiveness. I am nothing more than a weak sinner and apart from Jesus I am dead. I may be wrong by leaving this church. Maybe I could substitute or fill in Christ at home where that church leaves Him out. When it comes to my family and our eternal salvation, would you recommend that I try that experiment and take that chance? Can my faith be built in a church that preaches and teaches something less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness?

I am a life long Lutheran, and for the first time I understand how people can get so messed up in a church where bad theology is allowed and even loved. I can see how people end up wanting nothing to do with the church. When our sin and Christ’s forgiveness are given short shrift in the message of a church, Satan rules the day and twists some of the blessings of Christ’s church into a curse.

Tim:

You wrote: “Shouldn’t the world know more about your churches being a place where they can find eternal salvation through the love of Jesus Christ than about what you think of the current Synod president?”

Give me a break.

Please give me ONE example of a church that is doing what you suggest here.

The truth is, the pastors and congregations most concerned with the current direction of the Synod are also those MOST diligent in the proclamation of the Christ crucified to every sinner, every Sunday, in every sermon.

I honestly don’t think that this can be said of the congregations following the siren song of pop-christianity, emergence or church growth. No, those congregations don’t complain about the current direction of the Synod, but they routinely give Jesus Sunday off and preach the Christian rather than the Christ.

And I CAN cite examples.

TW

The only authority a pastor or a bishop has is the authority of God’s word. As I like to say, “even a third grader armed with scrpture can rebuke a pastor” and a bishop for that matter.

And a Voters’ Assembly.

I think that’s a great ‘game’ to play with kids, btw, and I generally do so with our catechumens: “What if somebody says X?” to which their response simply starts, “But the Bible teaches…” They need to learn to speak in this way to anyone…even to me.

EJG

To get back to your poll for a moment:

8. Provide evangelical supervision, counsel, and care for pastors, teachers, and other professional church workers of the Synod in the performance of their official duties;

8. D *Synod Inc. only “supervises” you if you’re confessional.

[ F (Or did you mean "supervise" as in "get you out of there."? They are very good at that.)]

9. Provide protection for congregations, pastors, teachers, and other church workers in the performance of their official duties and the maintenance of their rights;

9. C
*See number 8.

[ F ("Protection" and "maintenance of rights" for the bureaucracy; not for the confessional pastor, from my observation.)]

10. A
*Hey, at least we still have a health/retirement plan. It may be the only thing holding us together.

TW

It seems to keep the guys over 60 pretty quiet. But will it be there in 20-30 years?

Sorry to be so pessimistic!
It comes of reading about places like Crosspoint, Jefferson Hills and that one in Michigan where the preacher thinks he’s a Wookie… or Dr. Laura…except she probably makes more sense.

Dr. Steve –
Amen

Anonymous –
It is wholly and completely your right and responsibility to discern if the congregational body you belong to is being rightly led and, if all else fails, move if it’s your opinion that the leadership is apostate. I was responding to your comment about fearing for your eternal salvation. That seems an overstatement as I doubt you would forfeit the salvation afforded you no matter how long you stayed connected to a church where the teaching was out of sync with your understanding (and in some cases maybe even wrong). And we know that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ. Nothing is a pretty definitive word. I don’t rely on the teaching of men for my faith, though I appreciate the dynamic conversation of all who claim Christ – whether I agree or disagree.

Todd -
You seem angry and combative (though we’ve never met so I don’t mean that as a judgment). Wondering how many sermons you hear each week from pop-christianity, emergent and church growth churches. Do you request CD’s from all of them to justify such a harsh and broad rebuke? That’s thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of churches and their leaders you’re dismissing. And if I had ONE example I’d share it. That’s why my heart breaks for the current state of the church as all mainline denominations die a slow, agonizing death. We are in a new age of reformation and I can’t wait to see what God is forming. Hundreds (thousands) of voices are engaged in the conversation and your’s is but one among them.

“Would it not be wise for us to take every precaution not to cause another to stumble as we work out the difficult challenges of holding to true doctrine?”

That’s just the thing. Holding true doctrine is not difficult. It’s defending it from those who don’t believe there is such a thing that’s hard.

The discerning sets his face toward wisdom, but the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth. Proverbs 17:24

Tim:

Nice try.

I’m neither angry nor combative (unless you define “combative” as me responding to your posts).

I’m simply asking you to back up your accusations and insinuations.

I routinely listen to sermons online from from pop-christianity, emergent and church growth churches in the LCMS (some of which we will be reviewing on the show soon).

My heart breaks listening to sermon after sermon with no Cross, Jesus the life-coach, tips for living and self-help.

If this is the “new age of reformation” you’re talking about, then please don’t give God the credit for it.

TW

Mr. Kurth

“No power in the sky above or in the earth below—indeed, nothing in all creation will ever be able to separate us from the love of God that is revealed in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans 8:39

This is indeed reassuring, but does it mean once saved, always saved? I understand Scripture to say that as long as you are with Jesus you are safe, but you are free to leave Him for something else anytime you want. I believe that the Gospel of Christ and His body and blood given in the Lord’s Supper create and sustain faith in Jesus. I need these things served up to me by a pastor, because so far I haven’t found anyone else who does it. If I am separated from that Gospel or separate myself from it, I am sure I could and probably would fall away.

Tim K–
You are welcome to tune in to the Issues Etc broadcasts online.
Did you happen to catch the recent review of the Joel Osteen sermon? It was very eye-opening how it never mentioned Christ as our only hope for salvation.

Anonymous–
I have chosen my psuedonym well, as I am also heartbroken for you that your congregation does not give you the true Bread of Life that you need to sustain your faith. My thoughts and prayers shall be with you as you search for a new church….

Pastor Rossow–
Do you see how members of the laity like our friend “Anonymous” are beginning to awaken to the watered down doctrine of our synod?
What saddens me and causes me to be “heartbroken” the most is that:
1) our own LCMS laity is leaving in droves, so that there are fewer and fewer that stay and fight to cleanse our own synod
2) to whom shall they go? Only Jesus has the “words of eternal life”. If there is no LCMS congregation or other church body in their geographic area that are in doctrinal fellowship with the LCMS, do they sacrifice doctrinal purity by joining ELCA? or [worse yet] attend no church at all??
Please hurry with getting that “practical approach” for laity posted!

Recently, I was perusing Heinrich Schmid’s book, The History of Pietism translated by James L. Langebertels. The following passage (p. 273) struck me as having some parallels with current responses to Dr. Kieschnick’s Ablaze! program. My comments follow . . .

Pietism is not primarily concerned . . . with doctrinal questions.

The first matter with which Pietism began was not a special false teaching that had to be opposed but with an accusation against abuses prevalent in the church and recommendations to eliminate these abuses. The goal was to attain to a more living piety. Therefore, the first, and not the least error of those opposing Pietism was to overlook the abuses in the church and to accuse the Pietists of doctrinal errors. Something new and different confronted them in Pietism, which surprised them.

The new things, they thought, had to be based on special doctrines. They then became suspicious of every statement of their opponents and branded every statement if it did not conform to the usual dogmatic way of speaking a doctrinal error.

Already in 1695 the Wittenberg faculty counted up 264 doctrinal errors of which Spener was supposed to be guilty. The opponents of Piestism followed the bad habit, which we have already seen in the syncretistic controversies, of making everything that sounded or looked peculiar into a doctrinal question. Loescher was the first to realize that there can be tendencies in theology and in ecclesiastical life from which peculiarities can arise and that one must come to the root of these tendencies. Not one of the earlier opponents of Pietism thought of that.

Accordingly, we cannot let the opponents of Pietism lead us in this book merely to count up all the individual doctrinal errors with which they have reproached the Pietists and then to investigate whether the Pietists had really been guilty of them. . . .

COMMENT: I don’t think that the Ablaze! movement is primarily a doctrinal movement — but nost of the sharp critical responses (such as my own) have been theological, based on orthodox Lutheran understanding of faith and life.

Those of us who want to respond to Ablaze! have never thought about trying to out-do them with missionary zeal, but we ought to keep in mind what we learn from historical theology regarding a truly appropriate response.

Joel:

One of the great strengths of the confessional revival in Lutheranism was its renewed missionary zeal. The LCMS would not have been founded without it.

Contrary to the lies of the present-day pietist, Confessional Lutherans today are preaching the Gospel more diligently than all the church-growthers put together.

I can walk into any confessional congregation on any given Sunday and be certain that I will hear Christ crucified in the preaching, prayer and song. I cannot say the same for congregations following the latest pietistic fads and fashions.

And which layperson is better equipped to speak the Gospel in his daily vocation: the one who hears Christ crucified every Sunday, or the one who hears soft-core moralism and self-help advice every Sunday?

What does this mean? It means that confessional Lutherans ARE already out-doing them with missionary zeal.

Of course, the present-day pietists will never admit this. Many of them don’t consider preaching the Gospel on Sunday morning to be “mission work” at all.

By the logic of present-day pietists, if you’re not following the latest innovations in worship and ministry, you’re not doing “mission work,” no matter how much you preach the Gospel. They simply consider the Word and Sacraments a failed strategy.

TW

You are absolutely right. The present day Ablaze! pietists have mistaken the zeal of the Reformed with the true Law-and-Gospel zeal of confessional Lutheranism.

Theirs is the great hand-wringing hypocrisy, flagellating themselves as if they weren’t doing enough and then going to Starbucks for an $8 mocha latte vente. They cannot themselves live up to the standards they impose on others, heaping great burdens on the consciences of Christ’s people while wresting mission dollars from Christian folk only to squander it on things which cannot satisfy.

Loescher was not able to prevail against the Pietists even though his theological expose was incisive. In the end, I suspect that we will make no more headway with the Ablaze! proponents, by the means of doctrine, than Loescher did with Pietists – but we should be satisfied with strengthening and catechizing others by “teaching them to observe” all that the Lord has taught — as you do so well with Issues, Etc.

Was Walther ever a pietist in the early years of his life? Does his missionary zeal betray anything pietistic? This Waltherian “missionary zeal” doesn’t make itself known throughout ALL his writings. Does the later Walther show less “zeal” than the early Walther? Can orthodox pastors ever be influenced unawares by the zeal of the Reformed, defaulting (if not careful) to certain phrases and habitudes of Pietist missions/evangelism when he is surrounded by it?

“Those of us who want to respond to Ablaze! have never thought about trying to out-do them with missionary zeal, but we ought to keep in mind what we learn from historical theology regarding a truly appropriate response.” –Pr. Brondos

What makes you we haven’t? I suspect the “war” between the Mission board and LHF (which cost Pr. May his “Missions” job)has its roots in the justified suspicion that confessionals are sending their support where they think it will do the most good…and that is not the district/synodical office.

CORRECTION:
What makes you ~think~ we haven’t (considered alternate ways to do missions?)

I would give the synod an “F” in all categories, especially in the area of supervising confessional pastors and congregations. Confessional pastors are routinely denied calls by DP’s and confessional congregations are routinely marginalized as “those trouble makers.”

I am reminded of the words of St.Paul, “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace” (Galatians 5:2-4 ESV).

If we accept pietism, works-righteousness, the theology of glory, Ablaze, Fan into Flame, or any other synergistic program or doctrine as a means of grace, we have fallen from grace. All such programs rob Christ of His victory over death, sin, and the devil and teach us to trust in our virtues for salvation and not His.

Pr. Toby Byrd

Helen,

It isn’t just the LHF in the “missionary” efforts, but also the Fort Wayne Seminary, for example. Those efforts were going on prior to Ablaze! — and sometimes there is a real “stumbling” over each other out in the missionary field which the inhabitants of those lands don’t know quite what to make of it.

In any case, you are quite correct in saying that there have been other missionary efforts — even “private” holding funds set up for mission work. And that does indeed show missionary zeal. And to the credit of these “parachurch” missionary organizations, they don’t toot their own horn or try to bring attention to themselves. Perhaps we ought to publicize them more and give reasons for why they are to be commended over the synodical missions programs. But to my knowledge, while I have seen theological criticisms of the Ablaze! movement, I haven’t seen anyone publically challenge them with overtures to conventions and the like.

I’m going to speak politically for a minute regarding synodical and district boards. If you were to do a study in the last 25 years in the LCMS, you might see a real vying for power regarding the synodical and district presidencies. But I’ll say that the district and synodical boards for missions and the boards of directors have been even more problemmatic than the presidencies. Even if a confessional president were to be elected, it would be extremely difficult to turn the juggernaut around without solid confessional representation on these boards and committees: the boards of directors, the boards for missions, and the nominating committees.

If you track the “ascendency” of the LCMS politburo, you might be surprized to see how many of them have various board for missions backgrounds — boards which traditionally have not held many confessional nominees or elected positions. That’s more along the line of what I was originally talking about. We ought not overlook the nominating of confessional people to boards for missions . . .

I am also aware of the MANY confessional pastors who have expressed their desire to serve as missionaries only to be axed by liberal boards for missions. I suspect that there are others on this list who can give better anecdotal information in this area than I can.

I tell my kids there are two kinds of people, them that carry pocket knives and them that don’t. There are two kinds of people that carry pocket knives, them that do something stupid with them and them that don’t.

Some folks belong to the church of ‘gotta do, gotta do, gotta do,’ and some folks belong to the church of ‘it is done.’ As one might expect there are huge differences between the two. In the church of ‘gotta do’ you have to worry about what you are doing and if you have done enough and ‘every time a bell rings, an angel gets it wings.’ It is a rather frenetic existence.

In the church of ‘it is done’ people almost act without acting, they aren’t trying to prove something. They actually can simply help someone. They often may not even look like they are even doing anything because they are less worried about parading or proving their doing. And the difference between the two begins, I think, with what someone believes, a doctrinal kind of thing. Funny thing, God told Adam and Eve not to eat of the fruit or they would die. Had they believed God, they would have behaved differently, but they ate in unbelief.

I like the church of ‘it is done.’

Adopted as God’s child, Ephesians 1:5

Redeemed and Forgiven of all my sins, Colossians 1:14

Access to the Father through the Holy Spirit, Ephesians 2:18

Complete in Christ, Colossians 2:10

TW says “I routinely listen to sermons online from from pop-christianity, emergent and church growth churches in the LCMS (some of which we will be reviewing on the show soon).

My heart breaks listening to sermon after sermon with no Cross, Jesus the life-coach, tips for living and self-help.”

Pastor,
You have a brave soul. I’ve peacefully forgotten what those messages were like. However, I can not forget how much each of those messages made me cringe in pain for the souls who were too ignorant or indifferent to know any better. Of course, it would be good to again hear specific ones (eg from Holy Cross LCMS Los Gatos, CA) to properly interact with specific people (eg folks at that place) when opportunities arise. But often, it seems too much like pleading with Lot’s wife. Still, the Hound of Heaven goes after every last child, unlike the CG’ers who quickly ignore others.

To anyone:
Is there anyway to make this forum a little easier to follow? It’s mostly the same few folks on here. Can spoonfuls be somehow available at a time so that other lay people don’t have to be completely overwhelmed? If I had an idea of how to do this, I’d happily share… Perhaps some kind of breakdown by issue rather than by blogger–divide and conquer?