The author has retracted this post.
Read 296 times
Let the caucuses begin!
I wish he would tell us what he really thinks.
Seriously, you could have hired Monty Python to do the report and it would have made more sense.
The BRTFSSG could be renamed the Ministry of Silly Walking Together.
Trouble is, it ain’t funny.
“every piece of crap idea…”
A far too diplomatic description of the Blue Ribbon Task Force proposals!
BTW, here are the BRTF people who dropped this load on the Synod:
Dr. Ralph Bohlmann, LCMS President Emeritus
Dr. Samuel H. Nafzger, Director of Church Relations, LCMS Office of the President
Rev. Jon Braunersreuther, Senior Assistant to the LCMS President
Dr. Jeff Schrank, Executive Pastor, Christ Lutheran Church, Phoenix, AZ
Dr. (hon.) David Buegler, Fifth Vice President, LCMS
Mr. Ron Schultz, Chief Administrative Officer, LCMS
Dr. (hon.) William Diekelman, First Vice President, LCMS
Mr. Tim Schwan, Vice President, Church & Community Outreach, Thrivent Financial for Lutherans
Rev. Robert Greene, Chair, Retired, Former President, Lutheran Social Services of the South
Dr. (hon.) Will Sohns, Retired, Former President, Wyoming District, LCMS Commission on
Dr. Raymond Hartwig, Secretary of the Synod
Dr. Larry Stoterau, President, Pacific Southwest District
Dr. Tom Kuchta, Vice Presidentâ€”Finance/Treasurer
Ms. Virginia Von Seggern, Retired, Past President, Lutheran Women’s Missionary League
Dr. William Moorhead, Senior Pastor, Pacific Hills Lutheran Church, Omaha, NE
Ms. Jane Wilke, Director of Communications, Lutheran Senior Services of Missouri
It’s not that they’re ignorant of how things “ought” to work. It’s that their objectives are different.
That is too good!
Bubbles – exactly! In a corporate setting this would make some sense but not for the church. The church is a family, not a business!
A more incompetent group?
The United States Congress.
In an uncharacteristic and odd showing of restraint, Iâ€™m urging that we move on from the bashing and start a serious analysis of how we can educate others on those proposals that should be voted down.
Well, I don’t know about “uncharacteristic” or “restrained” but I will grant that you are “odd.”
Seriously, good point. I have started a review beginning with the opening comments that could become the basis of an education piece. I hope to get part one out later today.
If you have time, I know the church would benefit from another piece from you similar to your emergent church and TCN booklets.
One of the first things I noticed was a proposed change in what is required of membership:
“Conditions of Membership”
4. Exclusive use of doctrinally pure agenda, hymnbooks and catechisms in church and school.
New (proposed) Wording:
“Requirements of Membership”
B.2. Use of worship and catechetical resources that are in harmony with the confessional basis of the Synod.
NOTICE WHAT’S MISSING? “Exclusive”. No longer will we require, on paper anyway, that all our resources be doctrinally sound. Instead, we must use doctrinally sound resources, but not exclusively.
The new language permits what is, admittedly, already widespread: the use of unsound, impure, and doctrinally lacking resources for church and school: Baptist church-transformational programs. Non-denominational VBS curriculum. And of course, all manner of “contemporary” music from whatever hymnal or resource is popular and “reaches people”.
This is one of the major divides in the LCMS today – between those who like to “borrow and baptize” and those who prefer to simply use the excellent resources we already have. I used to be the former, and have become a strong advocate of the latter.
There are tremendous advantages to using sound, throughly and carefully reviewed LUTHERAN materials. There are serious dangers to using resources that come from other denominations and traditions – whose contents and perspectives are unknown to us and different from us, both in what they teach and fail to teach.
So no thanks, Task Force. Let’s keep the old wording on this one. Put me down as an excluder.
Is it possible to get the e-mail/snail mail addresses of ALL the delegates and alternates for the coming Convention, or is that a “secret”? We might be able to actually make some progress, as well as “mailings” to the clergy roster. Are these lists available?
Have a question or an article that you want to submit for consideration here? Contact Us and we'll consider it. We are always looking for guest articles or items for "Good Stuff Found on the Web".
Want a picture by your comments? Click here.
Subscribe in a reader
Subscribe to Comments
Subscribe to Calendar Feed
Subscribe by Email
Comments by Email
Join our Facebook page