Who Left Whom? CoWo Isn’t a Practice of Walking Together
One thing I don’t understand about this whole affair of CoWo at CUNE and in LC-MS congregations (please read this thread and the comments for some examples and context) is why those introducing this recent innovation into the LC-MS have done so knowing that they are changing the liturgy from practice that was common to most congregations in the LC-MS for decades? For all the talk of brotherly love coming from those demanding that the “traditionalists” stop blocking change in the LC-MS towards CoWo, where was that brotherly love when these innovators began introducing CoWo (and accompanying Church Growth theology) departing from the common practice of their synod?
One of the problems here is that the CoWo practicing brothers have stopped walking with their “traditionalist” brothers and have gone their own way for years now, pursuing and making their changes despite pleadings not to run in the direction they seem dead set upon going.
A theme carried throughout the thread I link to above, from those supporting “praise bands” and unionism, is that the so-called “traditionalists” are an unloving, intolerant, lot who can’t see the “big picture” because they are wrongly focused on teaching (aka doctrine) and “incessant wrangling” over getting the message and practice straight. But who left whom? Who departed the practice of their synod and then demanded the right to continue their practices even though they were causing divisions with their new practices?
I have read allot of talk from CoWo supporters concerning not offending our brothers and sisters in the Lord, but isn’t what the CoWo supporters are doing an offense to those who want to preserve the liturgy practiced in the LC-MS long before CoWo arrived on the scene?