Just an fyi that clicking on the Butterfunk link will cause an adware pop up saying that your computer may be infected with a virus and that you should download the ad’s software to run a security check on your computer. It is best that you cancel the ad and do not install their software.

Thanks for that heads up Jim. That didn’t happen when I went to the link, but I’ll ask Norm to remove the hotlink to be safe.

Yup, Jesus is better than football . . . and broccoli, and the Internet, and sex. He’s better than everything. Duh.

This sad songwriter – who seems to think that if you repeat something enough times you will finally make your point worthwhile – misses a vital point. Jesus isn’t against football, and we don’t need to glorify Him over football. Rather, Jesus is against the devil, the world, and we human’s sinful nature. Jesus is to be glorified over every false hope, every idol. Has the songwriter written a song that drones on, “Jesus is better than Buddha”?

Sure, football stars can be idols. But, when appreciated properly (the same goes for broccoli, the Internet, and sex), football is a gift from God and part of the wonder that He built into the world for us to find, figure out, develop, and enjoy.

As for churches worshiping in separated spaces, what are they going to do, live apart in the resurrection to Paradise?

The sad reality is that if I showed this video for chapel at the Lutheran high school where I teach, most – including faculty – would think it was perfect, insightful, exactly what we need. Of course, when you use Bruce Almighty to teach prayer, Veggie Tales to fill lessons and Oswald Chambers’ My Utmost for His Highest for student devotions, it would make sense.
We are so enamored with visuals and effusive emotional experience, content matters little. Give Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death a read. It’s a secular book that provides some insight on why we prefer electronic style over substance.
On the other hand, I just handed out Veith’s The Spirituality of the Cross to students in my AP Language class. I’ve got to counter this nonsense with something useful, substantial, lasting and worthy.

@Jim Pierce #1
TO EVERYONE WHO READS THIS BLOG

DO NOT. REPEAT DO NOT!!!! DOWNLOAD THE PROGRAM THAT JIM REFERENCES HERE. ALTHO I DON’T REMEMBER CLICKING TO DOWNLOAD IT, I GOT IT ON MY LAPTOP AND WITHIN FIVE MINUTES IT HAD SO CORRUPTED MY HARD DRIVE THAT IT WAS USELESS. ROUGHLY $100 LATER AND UNTOLD HOURS OF TRYING TO FIX IT MYSELF, MY LAPTOP IS AGAIN FUNCTIONAL. THIS IS A NASTY, NASTY VIRUS. THE COMPUTER SHOP WAS ABLE TO REMOVE THE VIRUS (OVER 35 SEPARATE VIRUSES), BUT THE HARD DRIVE WAS USELESS.

IF YOU GET THAT POPUP, GET OFF THE WEB IMMEDIATELY. YOU NEED TO CHECK WITH YOUR LOCAL COMPUTER GEEK, GURU OR WONK TO SEE IF TURNING THE COMPUTER OFF IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

DO NOT CLICK ON THAT PROGRAM.

I BELIEVE THERE IS A WAY TO GET IT OFF YOUR COMPUTER BY GOING TO THE TASK BAR AND RIGHT-CLICKING, OPEN THE “TASK MANAGER” AND USING “END TASK” TO GET RID OF THE THING.

JOHANNES, OF SAD EXPERIENCE

Several things regarding ButterFunk:

I got no problem with BF, as I used the latest Firefox browser. Seriously, if you are still anything older like IE6 or IE7, you are leaving your computer wide open.

Just install Firefox, add Adblock and NoScript (read before using/downloading), and that solves most of the problem. And if any of you need a decent anti-virus, try Avast! Home.

If any of you needed help in rooting out spyware from BF, shoot me off an e-mail:

predigtamt
(at)
gmail
(dotttt)
com

Re: The article and video, I hope Rev. Sean Rippy reads this and will comment.

Phew!!

j

I would not believe it if I hadn’t seen it. Words fail. Lord have mercy!

Okay, so does anyone else see the irony (abounding) in this butter debacle? Seemingly innocent item, when when opened or linked to…, brings deadly virus to hard drives & opens you up to corruption & damage? To whom? Those who are not “armed” with the right protection or knowledge?

If you plug in “false teaching” for virus, “hearts” to hard drives, and “armed” with,
“protected by the Solas & the Armor of God”…. Quite the coincidink, I’d say. Metaphors are wonderful things are they not?

Johannes, I hope your computer feels better soon!

Dutch, the ever wary

Okay, so I can’t resist. My niece’s “I love lasagna & Jesus too” song is a masterpiece compared with this. But, it would be, she’s only 5.

Dan, you wrote, “isn’t this church emblematic of the LCMS as a whole?”?

It’s time we admit it: We are two synods, united by a health plan and a corporate headquarters. These two coexist only because our leaders have forgotten what it means to be Lutheran.

Synod A is guided by the Lutheran Confessions, synod B is guided by American pop-culture. Synod A employs the Gospel and the Sacraments, synod B employs the methods of mass marketing and revivalism. Synod A is Lutheran, synod B is generically protestant. Synod A has a future because is has a past; synod B will fade into the wallpaper of Evangelicalism.

TW

I think one could understand where comes such as this. A quick look at the web site for where the associate pastor received his DMin will show that they are an internet based school of theology. It was also interesting that when searching for this school, I was at first directed to Fuller seminary!!! Yes indeed a synod divided!

The ButterFunk link has been removed.

Here’s the video on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDj3WZUXCmw

Okay, I’m willing to look like a fool in exchange for answers. Please keep in mind I’m a fairly new Lutheran (but I’m an old cynic) so I don’t grok a whole lot.

1. For those who are here, presumably confessional and desirous of conforming to the historical doctrines and practices of the church – of what are we to repent? I’m happy to do it if I know what. Josiah presumably repented because he discovered what had been lost. We have desired to be true to the scriptural faith as exposited by the book of Concord; I don’t think we have rediscovered anything lost.

2. “It’s time we admit it: We are two synods, united by a health plan and a corporate headquarters. These two coexist only because our leaders have forgotten what it means to be Lutheran.” I’m kind of a take-my-marbles-and-go-home guy, presumably a suboptimal solution. So what do we do about it? From my experience with the Presbyterians, sans a miracle there’s no winning the rest of the synod back to historic Christian practice; what will be left is a remnant, if you will. Even if we elect a marvelous, humble, confessional pastor to the presidency of the synod, that will not likely win back those who believe Jesus is their quarterback. So what next?

My Ecclesiastical Supervisor, suggests that there are lots of things “better than football.” For instance:
Peanut butter & jelly
A ride in the country, with a stop for a cup of coffee & piece of apple pie
Divine Service (some we like better than others, but all better than football)
Quilting
Graham Crackers
Bach’s Goldberg Variations
An evening with the TV off
A good mystery
A visit to Concordia Theological Seminary,
etc., etc. (Add a few of your own…)

When listening to this song, it was hard for me/us to avoid the comparison with the book of Hebrews. This song pales in comparison to the lofty and elegantly stated theology of “Jesus, the greater one” in Hebrews! How can anyone dare to compare Jesus to the Colts, the Saints, touchdowns, or any other such earthly pursuits? Well-meaning, sincere, and devout as the author may be, it’s a sad commentary on how far we have slud.

Johannes, the comparison-challenged

P.S. @Bubbles #14
The SP has stated it quite well: “This ain’t your grandfather’s church.” He may as well have added, “Get over it.” Was it Walther who made the observation that we are surrounded by Reformed theology? Somebody help me out…

Bubbles,

Unfortunately you are correctly diagnosing the problem. Many of the “confessional” clergy of the LCMS will bemoan it, trash it, complain about it; but they are not willing to leave their good salaries, health and retirement packages for the sake of the sheep.

WWWD= What would Walther Do? Leave.

Todd Wilken :
It’s time we admit it: We are two synods, united by a health plan and a corporate headquarters. These two coexist only because our leaders have forgotten what it means to be Lutheran.

I wonder if anyone else sees the term “our leaders” as broadly as I do…

Synod A is guided by the Lutheran Confessions, synod B is guided by American pop-culture. Synod A employs the Gospel and the Sacraments, synod B employs the methods of mass marketing and revivalism. Synod A is Lutheran, synod B is generically protestant. Synod A has a future because is has a past; synod B will fade into the wallpaper of Evangelicalism.

Unfortunately, Synod A’s being organically linked to Synod B reduces the applicability of all of those terms to Synod A. Once again:

Walther’s Theses on Communion Fellowship with Those Who Believe Differently”

“Guilt by Association”

The Self-Understanding of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod with Regard to the Existence of Church Fellowship between All of Its Members

I’ve yet to see anyone prove any of these documents wrong (of the second one, a good number have tried to toss it aside by trying to link it to some other position), so I have the same question for you Synod A types that Bubbles does–”So, what next?”–because, so far, all I’ve heard is “more of the same old thing.”

EJG

So, when Jesus won the Super Bowl, was he representing the AFC or the NFC?

What next? Who knows, but God?

However, my guess is that a small percentage of Synod A types will splinter off little by little and join with fellow congregations who confess the same faith. A small percentage of Synod A types will move over to Synod B and the rest will die as frustrated members of the Misery Synod.

Sadly, I have now born witness to this type of phenomenon in our own church. Although we have been divided into two separate Divine Services for a good (?) many years now, with one being the liturgy and the other firmly ensconced in the velvety-smooth folds of the happy-clappy, we have now officially ‘jumped the shark’ by offering a third service (and that is the word being used) that features a ‘relaxed, casual atmosphere, tailored to those who have become dissatisfied or disconnected with the Church, or are still skeptical or seeking, all couched in a comfortable coffee-house-styled setting.’

Bagels and coffee with God. Terrific.

My unsatisfactorily-answered query continues to sound like this: if this is, in fact, a worship service, who is, in fact, being worshiped? If we are to worship God in Spirit and in truth, where is that to be found in a service that is admittedly deliberately light on confession and absolution?

Meanwhile, my valid and civil questions continue to go ignored, sidestepped, or even ridiculed.

Christ, have mercy.

Incidentally, if you are looking for something that’s ‘better than football,’ that’s easy:

it’s hockey

Bubbles & Eric,

First, we remain faithful.

This means remaining Lutheran in doctrine & practice (yes, there is such a thing as Lutheran practice).

This means lovingly calling synod B to repent …or at least to admit that they do believe differently, and no longer want to be Lutheran.

Then, it also means being ready to formally recognize that fellowship no longer exists, and to act accordingly.

I agree that lacking a miracle, congregations that have strayed into the errors of American Evangelicalism are not likely to return to the truth of Lutheran theology (although I meet refugees and recovering evangelicals all the time).

TW

@Wyldeirishman #18
Well said, and welcome to the club.

j

Listening to that piece leads me to believe that my tinitus is better than that song.

Jim Kruta

But what will they do with the espresso bar in the back of the south end?

If the best thing, you can come up with, to compare the Lion of Judah with, is football…
you need to get out more.

Where is the local ecclesiastical supervisor, congregation- or circuit-wise?

Johannes,
That depends, if you eat at home daily & if you travel more than 30 days per month.

If you look down at the youtube suggestions of “similar” videos, you will find “Jesus and Football” sung as an intentional lampoon in someone’s house party. It’s actually a significant step up – but my favorite “similar” video is the link to the now-classic Sonseed, “Jesus is a friend of mine.”

Keeping some great company.

Henry Bimpage :
What next? Who knows, but God?

I had only intended to quote vv. 28-32 in response to this, but, instead, here is St. Luke 14:26-33. In short, Mr. Bimpage, I was not asking for prophecy, but for a course of action other than the one I’ve heard throughout my experience with the LCMS: “We’ll get ‘em in three years!” (Of course, if the Blue Ribbon stuff passes, there will be a change to that ‘strategy’: it’ll become “in four years.”)

26 “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. 27 And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. 28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it— 29 lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, 30 saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish’? 31 Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? 32 Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace. 33 So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple.”

EJG

Todd Wilken :
This means lovingly calling synod B to repent …or at least to admit that they do believe differently, and no longer want to be Lutheran.
Then, it also means being ready to formally recognize that fellowship no longer exists, and to act accordingly.

No wonder they fired you!

When I responded to your

“We are two synods, united by a health plan and a corporate headquarters. These two coexist only because our leaders have forgotten what it means to be Lutheran.”

with

I wonder if anyone else sees the term “our leaders” as broadly as I do…

it was with the specific wondering whether anybody (other than you) would come back with the answer you have here given. I have a little saying that is in the rotation of things automatically attached to my email: “Leadership – it’s not what you think.” As with some things in my adult catechetical materials to which the answers are not obvious, almost no one asks me what that means; they think they know. Yet it is only answers like yours that show an understanding of what real leadership involves.

Thank you.

EJG

@Jim Kruta #24
Jim, were you aware that there is a direct relationship between praise songs/CW and tinnitus? I’m living proof. Had to quit the praise band because the increasing decibel level had given me early-onset tinnitus. Looking back, I’m beginning to believe that it was divine intervention. And given that comparison, I can wholeheartedly and enthusiastically (in the proper sense) support your contention that “my tinnitus is better than football,” and will put it near the top of the list, but not higher than quilting or Bach’s Goldberg. You said an earful.

johannes (huh?)

Just a personal opinion from an elder in the WELS:

I love your website, Issues, Etc. and all of the conservative pastors on both.

Why do you great confessional Lutherans put up with it? There are so many of us out there that just love Lutheranism (our confessions and our great Lutheran tradition). As Lutherans, we need to make a stand. We are sick of it. We don’t need heterodox theology. It is un-Biblical. It is un-Lutheran. Luther wouldn’t have stuck around for more than five minutes.

Why not separate from them? Why not start a new synod, for the good of all Lutherans? Really, you have much more in common with us than with them anyway (we both are confessional).

I really, really, feel your pain and frustration. I pray for you great folks every morning!

Blessings,

@Revfisk #28

Here is a parody of the Sonseed song, “Reefer is a Friend of Mine”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snLnP0ASE3U

This is not your Boomer father’s “Maranatha! Music”, it’s “Marijuana Music”

Fr. Daniel wrote, “Many of the “confessional” clergy of the LCMS will bemoan it, trash it, complain about it; but they are not willing to leave their good salaries, health and retirement packages for the sake of the sheep.”

I no longer depend on the LCMS for salary, health or retirement. But I stay for the time being.

It is precisely for the sake of the sheep that i linger in the LCMS. I don’t want to abandon them to the wolves.

TW

Hi Lloyd and welcome over from the Riddleblog! I know you’re confessional WELS from your dialogs on that blog site… so let me ask your opinion on something (I believe that you might also frequent the Heidelblog) – do you see parallels between what’s going on with confessional Lutheran groups like this one (BJS) and what Scott Clark is attempting to do with his publication, “Recovering the Reformed Confession?” [not in the sense that their confessions are the same as Lutheran, but in the sense that some of them, too, see the great loss in the proper focus in justification (Christ crucified at the center and nothing else) among the various Reformed denominations that have moved toward general ecumenism - might as well say "evangelicalism" - since the days when Gresham Machen was kicked out of the PCUSA]

But to answer YOUR question first, I don’t know why we put up with it, either. Maybe if the results of the synodical elections continue to move in things in the same direction some of our congregations will get fed up enough to finally DO something about it and move off in their own direction.

I forgot to add…

There are two things you can do right now: 1) Defund, and 2) Divest.

Congregations, defund the synodical leadership that insists on promoting non-Lutheran theology and practice.

Pastors, divest from the health and retirement program of the LCMS (it can be done, and it may also save you and your congregation money).

TW

I have been confused about this for a long time. Are pastors & teachers exempt from the vesting rules the IRS has established? If I remember correctlly, the employer had the option of vesting over five or seven years. I understand that pastors at least, may be in a special category, however it certainly seems that they would be 100% vested if they have served for ten years. I’ll let the accountants and HR experts among us answer that one. At any rate, I would not think that the vesting issue should hang heavy over your heads, pastors. At least I hope not.

johannes (fully vested, extremely retired, and still in the LCMS).

Hi George in Wheaton:

I really can’t comment on Scott Clark, because I don’t visit his website etc.

However, I take great hope and excitement in a guest that Pastor Todd Wilken had on some time ago (I forgot the name), where he stated that confessional Luthernism is ready to explode in America. The guest stated that there is an excitement among young pastors and laity unlike our fathers and even grandfathers had for the Bible and our Lutheran confessions. Young people are attracted to real substance, and Lutheranism–with its Biblical accuracy, color and tradition is the only real deal that any Christian could want.

Luthernism is so simple that a four year old can understand it, and so theologically deep that the greatest theologians adore it. Confessional Lutheranism is never, ever boring! Lutheran theology is more exciting than Disneyland! On a daily basis, there is nothing like it, this side of heaven!

If I may briefly paraphrase Pastor Todd in his above referenced post’s; A person is either a Lutheran or he is not. If he is not confessional, he is not a Lutheran. Lutherans do not believe in only the “five essentials of Christianity”, ala CRI etc., but we believe that all matters of doctrine are essential. Confessional Lutheranism is not ecumenical, nor does it seek to be so. You are either right (Biblical, confessional Lutheranism), or wrong, (everyone else).

>>Okay, so does anyone else see the irony (abounding) in this butter debacle? Seemingly innocent item, when when opened or linked to…, brings deadly virus to hard drives & opens you up to corruption & damage? To whom? Those who are not “armed” with the right protection or knowledge?
>>If you plug in “false teaching” for virus, “hearts” to hard drives, and “armed” with,
“protected by the Solas & the Armor of God”…. Quite the coincidink, I’d say. Metaphors are wonderful things are they not?

Um…I just wanted to point out here that’s not really irony, it’s just a really apt metaphor. Sorry. Just had to point out that difference. Uh…I’m a writer. Couldn’t help it.

Okay, continue.

Lloyd, you wrote, “I take great hope and excitement in a guest that Pastor Todd Wilken had on some time ago (I forgot the name)”

It was none other than Pastor Matt Harrison.

TW

Oh Man Gee Thanks for posting this. I’ve been trying to get this out of my head all day! I played this for my daughter, she had the same response as my husband at about the 30 second point. “Four minutes of this?” “sucky”

@Mary #41
Is that a liturgical term?

Four minutes isn’t so bad. Isn’t eight minutes the norm? And there’s way more words than the usual six. I didn’t count the notes, but there might have been a full octave. More or less. I wonder if it might make the synod’s praise song short list?

A pastor friend said only this, “I’m speechless.”

That says it all (pun intended)

j.

Johannes :
Are pastors & teachers exempt from the vesting rules the IRS has established? If I remember correctlly, the employer had the option of vesting over five or seven years..

Anyone in the LCMS retirement plan is vested after five years of service. After that, you can’t lose it, but if you leave it doesn’t grow and is non-transferable (except I think that there is now a portion/separate account that *is* transferable).

EJG

@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #43
Thanks, Pastor. Let me see if I understand you. Let’s say I’m a teacher, and I have worked in the system for a ten years, and there’s say, $20,000 in my account. I decide to get a job in the local Toyota factory making gas pedals, so I leave the teaching job. Are you saying the $20,000 does not grow by virtue of investments, etc? Or are you saying that, having left, I can no longer contribute to the account? In the first case, that means I retire 20 years later, and there’s still $20,000 there? I understand full well the second case, but it would seem to me that the $20,000 ought to have gained some value over the years. Otherwise, it’s like the servant putting the master’s talent in the ground!

@Johannes #5

Sorry to read that happened to your laptop Johannes.

Carol offers some good suggestions. You can also update Internet Explorer to version 8 which fixes security holes. You can also pull up “Internet Options” and under the “Security” tab set the “Internet zone” to the highest security setting. Also use popup blocker.

Windows users can also download from Microsoft “Microsoft Security Essentials” (MSE) found here. MSE is a free malware/antivirus program which is so far pretty good. If you don’t have any protection installed on your Windows computer, then definitely get it… it is better than nothing.

Finally, stay up to date on your operating system’s updates. I set my computer to update nightly while I am sleeping. Microsoft regularly provides security updates which will protect your computer from attacks.

PS—Back up your documents and other critical data and burn it to DVDs when possible, or back up to an external drive that can be disconnected from your computer. That is a good way to ensure the integrity of your data against a malware attack.

To Pastor Wilkin

Is it time to unify church A and maybe merge with WELS? Thier fellowship approach has left them fairly free from this CG gone amuck.

Imagine:

Three strong confessional Lutheran synods in the U.S.: WELS, ELS and church A, with Pastor Todd Wilken as President of synod A.

Priceless!

Johannes :
@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #43
Are you saying the $20,000 does not grow by virtue of investments, etc? Or are you saying that, having left, I can no longer contribute to the account?

The latter…though it may be the former, I’m pretty sure it’s the latter. A quick call to the Worker Benefit Plan (or whatever they call it now) people should get an answer; I’ve always found the retirement folks there good to deal with.

EJG

@Wyldeirishman #21
“Who or what is being worshipped?”

That’s easy. Starbucks and self.

I’m still back on the repentance thing. This church stood firm for a long time. It was built on the idea of constant correction – laymen correcting the clergy, clergy correcting laymen, district presidents to step in when necessary and so on. It survived seminex – it managed to bring a seminary back to orthodoxy, something I don’t think has ever been done before in the history of protestantism. And then suddenly, in a decade it seems (I haven’t been around that long, maybe it’s been going on longer), it collapses into a pool of starbucks and praise bands.

Where did we go wrong? Apparently by the time of Yankee Stadium we had lost the will to enforce orthodoxy. Did we just get tired? Was it like the presbyterians, where the liberals and politicians wormed their way into power and emasculated the church? I suppose if we were to repent one of the great things to repent of would be the laxness of our discipline.

How did we get here?

Bubbles :
This church stood firm for a long time. It was built on the idea of constant correction – laymen correcting the clergy, clergy correcting laymen, district presidents to step in when necessary and so on. It survived seminex – it managed to bring a seminary back to orthodoxy, something I don’t think has ever been done before in the history of protestantism. And then suddenly, in a decade it seems (I haven’t been around that long, maybe it’s been going on longer), it collapses into a pool of starbucks and praise bands.

See, the problem is that this glorious standing in/return to orthodoxy is largely a myth. What was returned to is a basic agreement that the Bible is (somehow) God’s Word, while treating it as if it is without the sort of power that a real Word from god has; thus the slide into a non-Lutheran way of treating the Word and, therefore, the Sacraments, and, therefore, everything having to do with worship, evangelism, polity, and what have you.

Don’t be fooled by those who claimed victory in the ’70s. A battle was won, but the resting that came after it may well have lost the war.

EJG

The church lost their ‘first love’ and worshipped the creature(CG), instead of the creator.

The LCMS governing establishment today has no faith in God’s power to be able to grow the church on HIS terms set forth in the bible. The salvation process used to be an individual renewing his mind by being justified by faith alone(on Lutheran doctrine) . Today the salvation process is now externalized as a socio political collective Utopian Dream for a community development program. The true term is Communitarianism., and that is an ideological apparatus.

The LCMS, as it is presently, has outlived its usefulness to the members. The Transformation Church Network (TCN) has compromised the term Lutheran church. We are no longer a body of ‘called out ones’ united in Christ and a common faith. The term church used by Christian writers, teachers, and thinkers now has the real meaning of Church as a religious corporation that exists to meet the needs of religious consumers under the banner of LCMS/Christianity. Sunday is just a day to assemble various conventicles and produce a service tailored for the unregenerate.

The Change came from the highest office and was forced upon the synod body in increments. Essentially the ecclesiastical and pastoral community did not submit to the change by ‘informed consent’ but were pressured to conform in the Trifecta of bad decisions.

1. Ignorance/Apathy “I didn’t know”
2. Bandwagon Logic “Everybody’s doing it, so it can’t be wrong”
3. Expert Advice “ The authority figures and experts say it is so, you should do it ”

The LCMS is in the hands of a self-perpetuating group of self-interested people. The more ordinary people put into the synod– in offerings, tithes, and time– the more those people take out for themselves and their supporters and defiantly and deliberately subvert the faith. It is very apparent to anyone doing a little digging that the Fuller Seminary, WillowBack and liberal totalitarianists are the people are in control of this denomination.

Mames@46

Wouldn’t that be nice? But before we jump too quickly ahead, I would encourage you to spend some time carefully comparing the fifth chief part of our respective catechisms, with special note to where and how the WELS catechism has been changed from the original texts of 500+years. (Note: not the explanations. Just the actual chief parts “questions and answers.”) It is a difference that strikes at the very core of the Gospel. (And in that vein, I would recommend the last Pastor Marquart’s “The Church and Her Fellowship, Ministry and Governance” in the Confessional Lutheran Dogmatics series.)

Lloyd@47

Wouldn’t that be nice? But frankly, there’s lots of folks who could do that job. I really want to keep Pastor Wilken right where he is, doing epic levels of damage to the enemy lines, (with Craig and Jeffy just like Aaron holding up Moses’ arms.)

Ariel@39 Yes. Irony is when an atheist football fan finds that video on youtube and says, “See, I always knew these Christians were insane.” Rom. 2:24

+pax Christi+

Pastor Wilken, you wrote #34, “It is precisely for the sake of the sheep”
And we are grateful for your voice with Issues Etc. You not only give the clear Confessional Lutheran truth for us who hear pure preaching from the pew. You encourage those faithful pastors whose confession is of Christ Jesus alone. I am personally thankful we not only have a unified liturgical witness, but that we also have one voice for teaching Bible class each Sunday for all adult members to hear. Our pastors alternate weeks speaking in unison the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 3) In an ironic twist, Issues Etc. is really the program that keeps forward, upward, and onward fixing our eyes always on the crucifix of our Lord Jesus Christ.

@Bubbles #50
Check out David Adams’ “Three Missouris” and “PIETISM IN MISSOURI’S MISSION:
FROM MISSION AFFIRMATIONS TO ABLAZE!”, by Klemet Preus. I believe both can be found in the LOGIA archives, and perhaps the Preus article can be accessed here. YOu can contact Adams at CSL and request his paper.

The same reluctance to “enforce orthodoxy” that you describe goes back even to the post-Seminex days. Many of the seminex grads filtered back into the synod, and nobody noticed or cared. Pr. Stefanski sees things pretty accurately.

Don’t discount the influence of so called “Christian” TV and radio, either.

j

Johannes #55 wrote: “Don’t discount the influence of so called “Christian” TV and radio, either.”

You’re right. Many people in some segments of our congregations have no problem hearing even faithful pastors preach a Law&Gospel sermon and then turn around to soak up the purpose-driven message of Focus On The Family, “Insight For Living,” et al. Believe me, I’ve been there, too. And, what a contradiction of viewpoints it was! Add to that, the American evangelical influence you mentioned on the programmatic approach many churches take to singles groups, etc. and you have quite the quagmire.

Yet, as far as media goes, along with Issues Etc., we can be thankful for all the other blossoming programs on Pirate Christian Radio et al which are doing a great job giving Christ-centered substance where the evangelicals just give a bunch of sound. That’s why we have the joy of promoting LPR and the other pod casts whose intent is to fill our listening lives with Confessional Lutheran theology. Through these efforts, Christ Jesus’ Word will continue to dwell in us richly between Sundays’ divine service of Word and Sacrament liturgy. (Col. 3:15-16)

@mames #46 wrote, “Is it time to unify church A and maybe merge with WELS? Their fellowship approach has left them fairly free from this CG gone amuck.”,

WELS has a small but vocal CG faction, no different from what the current LCMS leadership is pushing. It’s a shame.

What we need to think about is a realignment of Confessional Lutherans and Lutheran fellowship in the US. This is long overdue in my opinion.

However, true realignment (as opposed to denomination-hopping, merging or forming a new church body) must begin as a return to the 1580 Book of Concord, unqualified subscription, and conformity in both doctrine and practice to those Confessions. (In other words, precisely the things that have been abandoned in the LCMS) Nothing more, nothing less.

Back to the Confessions.

TW

From a practical standpoint, I suggest:

1. Don’t let the synod get its hands on the property you paid for.
2. Start thinking about where to put a seminary and publishing house and their refugees; if the confessionals leave, the synod will certainly have a purge of these excellent organizations to eliminate their odd beliefs.
3. On the administrative end, Pr. Wilken’s proposal seems as though it would encourage both low overhead and egoless administration (http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=243)

mames:

I just wanted to fill you in a bit on how WELS is able to control CG, pretty much. I believe, in the LCMS, if a pastor serves communion to a person that is not in fellowship with the LCMS, the synod doesn’t have the power to crack down and use disciplinary action against that pastor.

In the WELS, I guarantee this, if a pastor serves communion to a person that is not in fellowship with the WELS, that pastor is flat out fired. The synod has the power, because it is considered church, (and not just the pastor) to exercise church discipline.

There is an LCMS “Ablaze” church here locally, where I personally know of someone who takes communion at a Roman Catholic church, and the LCMS “Ablaze” pastor lets him and his wife commune at his church also. This pastor knows that they commune at a RC church, and yet nothing is done about it. In the WELS, this pastor would be fired immediately.

In the WELS, if a pastor is practicing CG, the district president and the synod have the power to call this pastor to account if he is practicing false doctrine. Why? Because the pastor is church, the called workers are church, and the synod is church.

That is the big reason that we are united in doctrine and practice. If you attend one of our conventions, you won’t see all of the in-fighting that you will find in other synods.

I live in the Phoenix area, and all of the LCMS churches that I have been to (and I am a former member of one), don’t practice closed communion and they all play Calvary Chapel contempory music. All of our WELS churches in the same area use the hymnal and the historic Lutheran liturgies, (we have about 15 WELS churches in the Phoenix area).

We are far from perfect, but we are doing all that we can to remain faithful to God’s Word and to our Lutheran confessions. If a pastor gets off a little bit, he will be quickly put under the microscope to see if he is teaching false doctrine, or going against our Lutheran confessions. Why? Because the synod is also church, and has the power to exercise church discipline.

With the WELS system, it is much easier to control; 1) church growth, 2) false doctrine, 3) a heretical pastor, 4) to remain faithful to Scripture as defined by our Lutheran confessions.

Respectively submitted,

One last thing:

I would love to see a split in the LCMS, because of the great folks on Issues, Etc. and on this website.

I just can’t, for the life of me, see where it is Biblical to continue in a synod where, perhaps, half of the pastors are not “Lutheran.” And, if they are not Lutheran, they are heterodox, and are thus false teachers.

Why not, encourage the sheep in such a way, as to warn them that you are leaving, because you are more loyal to the Savior than to the synod. Encourage the sheep to follow you to a newly created synod, which is faithful to the Scriptures, as defined in our Lutheran confessions. Do you really think that the CG pastors will do an about face and all of a sudden become “Lutheran?” I can tell you that they won’t, because they don’t like our Lutheran confessions.

We always say in the WELS: That we are loyal to the WELS, only as long as they are faithful to the Scriptures and our confessions. If they depart from that, we depart from them. The Savior is first, not the Synod!

Lloyd,

You ask, “Why not encourage the sheep in such a way as to warn them that you are leaving, because you are more loyal to the Savior than to the synod.”

What makes you think that isn’t happening?

TW

Would it maybe be fair to request that talk of Synod-splitting/”the two synods”, etc be perhaps post-poned til the BJS Conference in a few weeks? I think maybe it would be pretty well-advised to perhaps dedicate a few hours of “in person table-talk” to the whole “big picture” long-term plans, I guess.

Pastor Wilken:

I truly hope so. Just think how great this would be? WELS, ELS, and synod A? The Word of God would go out (Law-Gospel) and the proper administration of the Sacraments. We would blanket the entire U.S. in the true confession of God’s Word. Folks would be able to see what an advantage it is to think sacramentally (like Luther taught) about the assurance of salvation and the comfort that they would have in not looking to themselves, their works, or if they are perservering enough, or if they have enough, or the right kind of faith. Their babies would not be dedicated, but saved in Baptism!

They would hear about the promises in God’s Word, as they are revealed in the Sacraments. (Eph. 5:26, Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Titus 3:5, Gal. 3:27, 1 Peter 3:20 & 21, Acts: 2:38 & 39, Acts, 22:16, Matt. 28:19, etc., etc, etc.). They would be able to see how the Holy Spirit is within the Sacraments (working), not along side of them (the Reformed view). Christ and all of His benefits applied to them in the waters of Baptism, combined with God’s Word. They can hear about the excitement of living and enjoying their baptisms daily! They can hear the great news of how God creates faith, sustains faith, and washes away their sins in Baptism!

They would be able to take the bread, wine, body and blood, and hear these great words of promise, “Take and eat. This is the true body of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, given into death for all your sins. Take and drink. This is the true blood of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, shed for you for the remission of all your sins. May these, the true body and blood of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, strengthen and keep you in true faith unto life everlasting. Go now in peace, sin forgiven, Amen.”

The great Lutheran message, is not one that pastors have to change, it is effective because it is God Word, and it doesn’t come back void.

We would love to have another strong, confessional Lutheran synod to help us out! The Lutheran Reformation is almost 500 years old, and it is just beginning to pick up steam!

The U.S. needs to hear about this great message that Biblical, confessional Luthernism has to proclaim. Compel them into our churches. Give them our hymns, liturgies, Word and Sacraments–it is great stuff!

The fake CG guys don’t have this message. Only confessional Lutherans do!

Todd and Lloyd,

The one issue the CG folks are right about is our lack of growth. I have belonged to small and large LCMS congregations (400 members and 2000 members). In many ways the larger congregations are able to offer more support to thier members. There is an economy of scale to a larger church as well and I did not experience a sence of being lost in its largeness. I am confident that if we are faithful to the whole of scripture AND we teach and encourage our folks to reach out (basic Gospel sharing training and apologetics as well as Pastor lead classes on a frequent basis) we can grow. I was involed in a congregation that grew from 200-2000 members in 8 years. The core of the growth came from a terrific teaching Pastor who held 2, 16 week adult “inquiers” classes a year. The classes were confessional ( what we believe and what we DO NOT believe) as well as non confrontational and open to questions from the attendees. The attendance went from 12-30-60 at a time. Many of these folks became members then invited thier friends and family in. At the same time multiple bible classes were offered and taught by lay people who were extremely informed; specificaly chosen for thier knowledge and stand up and adult learning skill sets.

It was fantasitc. THEN when we reached a “plateau” we started offering praise worship as an effort to reach more and the “seekers”. No more growth has occured there since this approach began. They tried to polish a diamond.

So I know the basics work but there must be passionate comittment to them by Pastor and laymen alike.

BTW, I have visited several WELS congregations. To be honest they can smack of legalism at times and are married to forms that are not necessarily helpful. So they have thier issues too. I still believe there are some useful nuggets to be seived from the CG movement but most are not related to doctrine or aberrant praise woship. A thoughtful, well grounded LCMS Pastor should be able to glean some nuggets from CG but unfortuneatly most swallow hook, line and sinker.

@Todd Wilken #61
There’s a gazillion sheep out there (out here) who simply are clueless–I mean–we/they are “sheep”, after all. Lots of people who simply are unaware of the situation–the dangerous path the LCMS is embarked upon. Oh yes, many are wising up, but there’s a long way to go.

There were less than 100 at the LCA conference–most attendees were fairly well-informed on most subjects. Too bad it wasn’t 200 or 500. However, I do see a goodly number of younger persons who are pretty savvy, and that is very encouraging. Younger, by the way, is under 40. Just out of the high chair.

A split will come, sooner or later. I hope they choose a better name than “Synod A”!

To our WELS friends–don’t underestimate the power and influence of even a small number of CG enthusiasts–they may wield an influence far beyond their numbers, and they are very persistent. As the organization I call “Politics First” has demonstrated, a well-organized, well-financed, vocal smooth-talking minority can take over. It took them less than 10 years.

j

Johannes:

Our synod President at the WELS, hates, hates, hates and despises the church growth movement. He considers it a threat to the church. Rest assured, if there is any of it, he will get rid of it. He has stated that he will not forsake confessional Lutheranism in order to get numbers.

Also, our district President of California-Arizona hates CG as well. We are in good shape, as far as our leadership is concerned!

Warning to heretics: KEEP OUT!

Blessings,

@Lloyd I. Cadle #66
Your synod President is right. But, as Scott Diekmann has said someplace, CD is like kudzu. Constant vigilance, and all that. The CW-CG connection is very strong. The influence of so-called Christian radio and TV is very very pervasive.

I hate to be so “I told you so,” but many of us in the LCMS have bitter experience with CG in all its manifestations. Please accept these comments as brotherly counsel.

johannes, the Warn-monger

Johannes #65,
You are spot on, as always. I know many people, who’s mindset is: if it doesn’t effect me or my congregation, why should I worry?
Now, they think CG isn’t in their congregation, but more than likely, it is. If you can’t pay the electric bill, ya don’t go & buy/rent a bus to pick up kids for VBS. Reasoning behind that? It will bring more families into the congregation. No, it did not, but it did bring a bill & more debt.

I agree, a split will come, but what will be the catalyst, I think, still remains to be seen. The Convention, will be D-Day for many, to be sure. Each of us, eventually, must make a stand, but over what & how, that is different for everyone. We are all called according to His purposes, and those, are lovingly tailored to fit each of us.

You are right about WELS too. My hubby & I were under no guise, when we departed LCMS for WELS last year. The CG movement in WELS, is called Church & Change. It may not be prevelant in AZ, but it sure is in Wisconsin. We bypassed the WELS church 1/2mile from our front door to drive 15 minutes away. Why? Because…”Praise Contempo Services”, and we followed advice from others who attend there, and…followed links right back to Church and Change. Postmodernism is a positive thing to Church and Change. Just as it is with the factions in LCMS.

Lloyd, I am thankful & grateful, you do not have this issue, in AZ. We do in Wisconsin and it is leaking into parts elsewhere. Keep watch, & protect those in your care.

Johannes…
War-monger? No, no. A good foot soldier, in Who’s Army you serve? Oh my yes. As are we all, or should be anyway.

@Dutch #69

I think I spelled it W-A-R-N-M-O-N-G-E-R.

J

Dutch:

Thanks for the post.

If they are practicing CG, they will eventually be put under the microscope, and will get strong warning’s, and if they persist in it, the pastor will probably get the boot.

Sometimes, things take a little time. When your synod President doesn’t like CG, it is a good thing. What is really interesting, is the WELS President is trying to make the district’s smaller, in order to be able to control any false doctrine. Again, sometimes things take a little time.

My fellow confessional LCMS friends; I feel your pain, and pray for you folks every morning. We all love our Lutheran confessions, which is a good thing!

The LCMS has a lot of great pastors and top notch theologians. I would just like to see them form a new synod. What a great thing this would be for all confessional Lutherans.

We all hate the CG movement, so why put up with the stench that it is. Luther sure wouldn’t have. Call ‘em to repent. If they won’t, get away from them. To associate with false teachers gives others the impression that you agree with them and their doctrine.

Example: If you attend a pentacostal service, and you are clapping and you are participating in their service, you are giving the impression that you agree with their doctrine. Sort of like; guilty by association. You are giving the impression to an outsider or a weaker brother, that false doctrine is O.K. Which is isn’t.

If we MUST contemporize worship, I’m not coming if there’s no beer.

Or rather, wouldn’t it give people the impression that CG folks agree with OUR doctrine?
Why the CG folk would WANT to stay, and not leave of their own accord is equally baffling.
It should be them that leave.

Pr. Wilken wrote:
“This means remaining Lutheran in doctrine & practice…. lovingly calling synod B to repent …or at least to admit that they do believe differently, and no longer want to be Lutheran.

Then, it also means being ready to formally recognize that fellowship no longer exists, and to act accordingly.”

Just wanted to add that church A folk founded the LCMS, and some of us church A folk don’t feel like leaving without a fight. “Here we stand” on the Confessions and Scripture. We were here first, and rather than feeling guilty by association, we’re quite at home. We’re not scared, and we’re not running.

Not sure what the future might bring, but I agree with Pr. Wilken that true realignment is not to be found in denomination-hopping, merging, or forming a new church body–but in returning to the Confessions.

Thank you, Pr. Wilken for summarizing so nicely.
And thank you for remaining with the LCMS for the sheep.
Looking forward to meeting you at the BJS Conference.

Heartbroken:

I have always thought the same thing, why don’t the CG folks just leave? There are CG churches on every corner in America.

But, the pastors are to blame for letting the CG folks have their way. And then the synod is to blame for letting the pastors compromise and go against the Word of God.

The blame has to go where it belongs.

It is interesting, that in most cases, within Lutheranism, churches that do CG actually shrink, rather than grow. People can smell a dead fish from a mile away.

The CG people will never leave because it is too difficult to start over. They have an infrastructure in place right now that they can take control over, replete with seminaries, pension plans, and trust funds. They don’t want to lose any of that. They certainly don’t want to lose their audience which will continue to support them financially. Now before anyone thinks I am saying this is a conscience effort on their part, or some sort of organized conspiracy, I am not saying that. It is just interesting to me that I have yet to see a single denomination that starts out with CG, or a single CG group that breaks away and forms their own denomination. Maybe they have and someone can point out which denomination that is, but from what I can tell the CG movement seems to “leech” off of already established denominations and infect them.

Head down to your local LCMS church that’s a seeker-sensitive church growth type church and ask the parishioners how many of them have read authors such as Paul Borden, Bill Hybels, Peter Drucker, George Barna, Kent Hunter, David Luecke, Robb Bell, or Bill Easum, and you’re going to get a “deer in the headlights” reaction to your question. Then go into the pastor’s study and take a look at his bookshelf. You’ll find these author’s books lining the walls, heavily used and highlighted. Check the “Favorites” on the pastor’s laptop – more of the same. For the most part, it’s the pastor leading his flock down the heterodox highway, not the other way around. The pastors are commanded to protect the flock. Lord have mercy on those who do not. They are held accountable.

During the “battle for the Bible” in the LCMS, many of the laymen came forward to fight against the heresy that was being taught in the seminary. If the pastor is erring, it is the layman who must step forward and lovingly help their pastor, and guide him back to where he belongs. Often, these churches will have a Board of Elders, or a Board of Directors, who have been hand picked by the pastor to support his agenda. Whether it is one person or a dozen, it is up to you, and others like you, to speak up. We are at a crossroads in the LCMS. We can no longer afford to wait for somebody else to take action, because there is nobody else. If you want to have a confessional church to come home to, now is the time to act.

“Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” declares the LORD. Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: “You have scattered my flock and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for your evil deeds, declares the LORD.
Jeremiah 23:1-2 ESV

Thank you to all of the faithful shepherds out there who continue to guard the sheep pen so that no wolf may enter. It may not look like it, but you are still in the majority in the LCMS.

But the Lord GOD helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be put to shame. He who vindicates me is near. Who will contend with me? Let us stand up together. Who is my adversary? Let him come near to me. Behold, the Lord GOD helps me; who will declare me guilty? Behold, all of them will wear out like a garment; the moth will eat them up.
Isaiah 50:7-9 ESV

@Scott Diekmann #75

You are right. As we heard at LCA conference (perhaps indirectly), the pastoral office is under constant attack by Satan. It was so during the 50′s and 60′s as so many pastoral students were infected by H/C. The laymen did play a major role during the battle, but many faithful pastors were by their side. Lay-Warriors like Walter Dissen and the late Alvin Briel testified to that

But now, as back then, the pastors must again stand with the laymen in the battle for the Gospel, which is what this is. And it’s time for the laymen to step up, or the task will be very very difficult. After all is said and done, though, it’s through the Predigtamt–the preaching office–that meaningful reform must take place. A daunting task, given the extent to which this CG virus has infected our synod.

Johannes, the Warn-monger

@Scott Diekmann #75

Indeed, but isn’t it also the case that if we head to some confessional churches and ask laymen if they have read the BoC, anything by Chemnitz, Walther, Pieper, Sasse, Marquart, or others that they will have the same look in their eyes? I think the introduction to the Small Catechism is very fitting for today’s day and age. Lutherans on average are a wreck and aren’t being re-catechized in adult hood. This is why Confessions reading groups as we see promoted by BJS are so terribly important. Dear reader, if you are in a confessional congregation that doesn’t have a confessions reading group now is the time to ask your pastor to start one.

Scott Diekmann :
Thank you to all of the faithful shepherds out there who continue to guard the sheep pen so that no wolf may enter. It may not look like it, but you are still in the majority in the LCMS.

Prove it.

EJG

@John #4

Keep up the good fight! Be encouraged in Christ.

Rev. Eric J. Stefanski :

Scott Diekmann :Thank you to all of the faithful shepherds out there who continue to guard the sheep pen so that no wolf may enter. It may not look like it, but you are still in the majority in the LCMS.

Prove it.
EJG

Pr. Stefanski,

I think you are right. He who affirms has the burden of proof, but… what sort of proof should we be looking for? What would convince you that the majority of pastors in the LCMS are still guarding the sheep against the heterodoxy we see coming upon the Church?

@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #78
We’ll be proving it next July.

That is right Scott. There is an incredible groundswell of support for Matt Harrison. People are realizing that President Kieschnick has had his chance and the synod is less unified than when he first took office. They are looking for a churchman and a theologian and not the corporate leader President Kieschnick turned out to be.

TR

@ #75 Scott Diekmann,
Wow, that description fits my pastor perfectly.@Scott Diekmann #75

Scott Diekmann :
@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #78
We’ll be proving it next July.

A Harrison victory would not prove your contention. Anybody can vote against an incumbent who brings financial loss and dissension. To prove your contention, you would have to demonstrate that the majority of LCMS pastors were actually against the false doctrine and practice that characterizes far more then 50% of the congregations in the LCMS. As it is, you can’t even demonstrate a dozen districts that ‘get it’ to the point of having a moderately decent DP. (And, remember: every DP who has been in office for a full term has co-officiated at the Lord’s Supper with Kieschnick and Benke.)

That aside: what if you don’t ‘prove it’ in July? (Oh, wait, I know the traditional answer to that one: “We’ll get ‘em in three years!”)

EJG

Lloyd I. Cadle :
With the WELS system, it is much easier to control

Which can be as much of a curse as a blessing. Why are all of the Motley Magpie guys (formerly WELS) now in the LCMS?

If WELS gets a bad SP and bad DPs, this ‘control’ structure could cause them to slide beyond Missouri almost ‘overnight’.

As to Synod A joining WELS and ELS: ain’t gonna happen. WELS and ELS are not going to accept Synod A congregations, because they will be seen as weak on fellowship issues and because most of them have women voters. At the same time, Synod A folks will not go with WELS, because they see that WELS has a defective understanding of the Office of the Ministry (which may or may not be reflected in your own use of the word “fire” and the term “given the boot,” wrt pastors).

EJG

Pr. Stefanski,

Perhaps you missed my question at #81? So, let me ask again, what sort of proof should we be looking for? You seem to know and I am interested in what it is I should look for.

Rev. Eric J. Stefanski :

Scott Diekmann :@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #78 We’ll be proving it next July.

To prove your contention, you would have to demonstrate that the majority of LCMS pastors were actually against the false doctrine and practice that characterizes far more then 50% of the congregations in the LCMS.
EJG

Characterizes 50% of the members of the LCMS? Where are you getting your numbers? I would really like to see them.

I can’t begin to tell you how much this grieves me Pastor Stefanski. In other times I agree with what you’re saying, but right now, while I’m trying to encourage people and prepare for the battle ahead, your words are discouraging. It’s not helpful, it’s hurtful. I think it would be much better for you to try and find an encouraging, supportive word for the people in the LCMS. There’s a time and a place for your debate, but I don’t think this is it.

@Scott Diekmann #89
It is a grievesome thing to read what Pastor Stefanski has written. My “take” is that Scott’s majority is a “bare” majority, at best. When close friends who are not “church hoppers” cannot find even 10% of the congregations in their large metropolitan area that are “faithful”, the picture is not pretty. I could tell other stories, and the un-confessional character of some of our districts is well-known and documented.

I don’t like what Pr. Stefanski has said either, but we need to keep our feet on the ground, and heed the warnings of men like him. And, even the election of Matt Harrison will not change things. It will only begin a process we hope will continue–his job will be several magnitudes as difficult as Al Barry’s was.

johannes, the WARN-monger

To all those in Missouri Synod I ask; Do you have an exit strategy if things do not go your way in the next convention? If you do not, then you are exactly what Rev. Sterfanski says, “we’ll get them in three years”, or in the next three years, or the next three years. Meanwhile Missouri Synod continues down the slope to the apostacy of the ELCA. What is your criteria for leaving a failing synod? The ordination of women? Blatant Open Communion? Just where do you draw the line? Ponder where you are and ponder the direction you are headed and ask yourself these questions and be honest with your answers.

Johannes,
Sorry about the spelling error. In your post #90, I don’t believe anyone could have said it better.
Thanks bunches, & forgive me, again for the error.

Heartbroken,
Jim Pierce wrote a great piece about the questions you asked in post # 73. It was called,
“Why liberals stay”. I wish BJS would have posted it.

Scott #89 and Pastor Stefanski,

Scott has made a good point. We have a very liberal editorial policy on this blog/website and in this case it is being less than helpful.

Pastor Stefanski – as I have said before, I think your congregation has done a good thing by taking a confessional stand and leaving the LCMS. There are also good reasons for staying and fighting. Just as a parish is not defined by its pastor, so too a denomination is not defined by its president and CCM. We do not disagree with your theological critique of the LCMS but your constant slapping down of individuals who are trying to make a difference in what is historically the largest and most confessional church body in the world, is working against the cause.

Please continue to join in with us to rebuke false doctrine but try to do so in a way that supports those who are trying to make a difference in this synod.

Bill #91 – we do not have an exit strategy per se but we are actively rebuking false doctrine adn practice in the LCMS. May the time come to abandon the LCMS – certainly. In the mean time we are doing everything possible to keep that from happening. Please pray for us as Lloyd is. We would appreciate it that.

TR

@Bill Kope #91 wrote: “Do you have an exit strategy if things do not go your way in the next convention? If you do not, then you are exactly what Rev. Sterfanski says, “we’ll get them in three years””

I prefer a “faithfulness strategy.” If faithful Lutherans leave the LCMS, it won’t be because “things didn’t go our way.” It will be because faithfulness to God’s Word and the Lutheran Confessions require us to do so. But you don’t leave a burning house without trying to wake up the rest of the family and help them to safety. [Jude 17-23]

TW

Today being February 4, and Scott’s article being posted on Feb 2, and that we’re up to 96 postings on this thread ought to tell us a few things. Let me try:
1. Contemporary worship is an extremely “hot button” issue. It almost invariably elicits spirited responses here, and lots of them. You could look it up.
2. Not only is CW a hot button issue, but it’s very very important. Discussions such as this one expose the deep divide that exists among us in the LCMS, and that extends even into WELS, among others.
3. This divide goes beyond worship to our core doctrines and practice. When Pastor Sean Rippy reports that an LCMS leader has said that Word and Sacrament is a failed strategy, you can bet that, to quote our current SP, there is indeed “trouble in river city.” Worship is symptomatic of the root causes for the divide.
4. The direction this particular thread has taken ought to give us pause. The implications of the current discussion compared to the gosh-awful song that began this thread are downright frightening, any way you see it. Kyrie Eleison!

I’m sure there are more, but I have to do my taxes. Enough already. Someone else can continue–I just got the ball rolling.

Johannes, the CW-challenged.

Thank you, Scott, for your exceptionally well-written blog. I agree: “This isn’t a time for either “side” to sit smugly and point fingers at the other.” I hope I do not do so here.

I would to apologize to any brothers or sisters offended by my song or slideshow. (Recognizing the predominant interpretation of one of those images, I altered the slideshow recently.) I have also repeatedly prayed for God’s guidance on this topic and have offered the Lord my sincerest repentance for anything I have done to demean His precious and Holy name. (After reading each of these posts, I remain unconvinced that this video is blasphemous in any way.) As C.S. Lewis said, “A man can no more diminish God’s glory than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.”

Of course, Jesus is better than football. He is better than any earthly thing. The song is meant to be absurd — shining a stark light on our society’s over-glorification of sports, and other pop culture in general. While we who know this well already would look at the phrase “Jesus is better than football” with a “DUH!” there are many who need to have this basic reality put before them. I am dumbfounded that so many learned and devout shepherds of God’s flock could so intensely disdain an attempt to put the basic truths of the faith in terms someone outside the chruch might actually get. The purpose, though I know this is disdained by many of you more orthodox folks, for lack of a better term, is to bring those folks a step further toward the truth so that they may be open to receiving the Holy Spirit through His Word. As we know, faith comes by hearing. My prayer is that the video draws in a Colts or Saints fan, and the the Holy Scriptures printed therein will do what God has promised they will do.

As for a church divided at St. John in Kendallville, Scott, I hope you have been here for a period of time and have based that statement on first-hand knowledge, not supposition or heresay. While the contemporary/traditional worship issue has endured growing pains, I would describe our church as quite united in the things that matter: preaching that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ, and reaching out to the lost through our school and other means. Divided churches rot from within and wither away, they don’t celebrate 150 years as a unified church body (as we are doing this year), operate a 200-strong school for over 140 years, and worship together 400-500 sheep each week, as we do.

In Luther’s explanation of the 8th commandment, he exhorts us to “put the best construction on everything.” I have seen very little of that in yoru blog or in these responses. Instead, I have seen the opposite, couched in stereotypes and calls for an official rift in our church body. I am saddened by this. “But now in Christ Jesus you who have once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. For He himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.” Ephesians 2:13-14

As a lifelong member of the LCMS, a graduate of three LCMS schools, and a churchworker of 14 years, every day I grow more and more disillusioned with the stark difference between what I read in the Bible and what these “true believers” say is the ONLY way to honor our Lord. Quite frankly, if God expected us to adhere to Lutheran doctrine as if it is on par with Scripture, he would have inspired its writers to write those words, not the ones they did. Over and over and over, in Jesus’s own words, it is VERY clear what we must focus on: That HE is the only way to salvation and that LOVE is the greatest gifts/action/command. Where is the love in this blog?

Some years back, the late Dr. Preus said to a local pastor, who was concerned about immature Christians going into and coming out of the Seminary unprepared: “When they come out of Seminary they are DEAD orthodox.” The juxtaposition of those words is stark, is it not. I pray that it’s not true. I pray that our current and future pastors are NOT dead and orthodox. I pray that they lead their parishioners to closer walk with Christ through Scripture and its proper interpretation. I will NOT stereotype or assume anything about individuals without hearing and seeing their approach to the ministry personally.

In the same why, I would exhort each person involved in this dialogue to refrain from condemning contemporary worship on its face and from painting all worship not framed by the Divine Service as heterodox. This past Sunday, Pastor Paul Griebel delivered an excellent, Scripture-based, Spirit-led sermon on how unfathomably greater than this football obsession our Lord and Savior is. As I have done about 30 times before, I wrote a song to dovetail with that message and its Scriptural basis. Our service opened with a song called Majestic, essentially a prayer using the words of Psalm 8. It was followed by the Invocation and Confession of Sins from the LSB. It was followed by Absolution and a song called Children of the Living God, inviting His people to extol His greatness, and praising God for humbling Himself for the sake of our salvation. We then professed our faith through the Apostles Creed and sang Knowing You, a song that reinforced the theme of the service, that nothing on earth compares to the greatness of God. We then sang an original song based on District President Dan May’s sermon on the calling of the disciple Nathaneal, called “Shine Above.” We then prayed a number of petitions, including the Lord’s Prayer, then read the Lectionary Readings for the week. This was followed by the message and the song, Jesus is Better than Football. This was followed by Holy Communion, during which we sang How He Loves Us and Enough, again emphasizing the idea that nothing we embrace in this life compares to God’s amazing grace, love and majesty. This was followed by the benediction and the song Our Great God, in which we called on God — as He has commanded — to protect us from the power of of the devil.

Is there a shred of this that is heterodox or heretical?

I stand WITH you in rebuking false doctrine. I stand WITH you in fighting against the movement to water down pure doctrine with convenient, comfortable, current-culture garbage. BUT I BEG you NOT to lump all contemporary worship as being guilty of these things. It’s simply NOT true.

Now “To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy — to the only God, our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ, our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.”

Pardon my mistyping: faith comes BY hearing.

Rev. Wilkin#95
I do contiuously pray for those confessionals in LCMS and I also talk to those who remain about what goes on in the synod. I do not press any to leave, but I do admonish them to be aware of what could happen to them when they least expect it. I take the careful approach to be wary of those in power. They tend to stab in the back with little warning. Been there, received that. It is still best to have an exit plan that includes a way to get out with most of the faithful.

Pastors, what will you do if you are told you are no longer rostered or you are suspended? The reason for this action is immaterial. What would you do? You no longer have a congregation and you cannot bring the faithful out with you. Now, what will you do? This is coming down the road if Missouri contiues in its current trajectory.

@Bill Kope #91
Who isn’t pondering, Pastor Kope? Isn’t this discussion part of the pondering process? A large part of me says we don’t need to ponder, because we should have already left. I have no desire to break bread with people who contrast football with Jesus Christ, which should be obvious from my original post. I guess since all of us in the LCMS don’t have a cast-in-concrete ready-to-go doomsday exit strategy, all of us in the LCMS are doomed to the apostasy of the ELCA? These things take time. They don’t happen over night. There are many pastors in the LCMS (strike the word “many” – I don’t want to get jumped for being overly optimistic) – there are pastors in the LCMS that are the intellectual, theological, and confessional equal of Pastor Stefanski who don’t come to the same conclusions he comes to. That doesn’t make any of them right or wrong. There isn’t a clear cut answer. If there were, all of us would have already acted. I admire Pastor Stefanski. He’s a solid confessional guy who speaks his conscience and is a great shepherd. At the same time, what was right for him and his congregation at that point in time may not be right for everybody else. Allow each pastor, each congregation, and each layman a little breathing room. Otherwise it’ll be like the Titanic. A few of us will get off the ship in mostly empty life boats, and then we’ll sit and watch quietly as the ship goes down with thousands of people who could have been rescued, if only someone had been a little more patient in the lowering of the lifeboats, a little more discerning in their exit strategy. I’m not saying we should delay the exit for some pie-in-the-sky valhalla that’s just over the horizon. If you were to be a reader of my blog, you’d find just the opposite. There’s over two million of us in the LCMS. I think it’s going to take a bit of time to get things organized. In the mean time, in order to get as many people into the lifeboats as possible, I hope as many people as possible will be properly catechized, so that they’ll recognize when it’s time to jump ship, if that time comes.

Your eternal debtor in Christ,
Scott Diekmann

@Bill Kope #97
I beg your pardon. I see you addressed some of my comments, which I didn’t see when I made my last comment.

@Scott Diekmann #89

Scott,

Could you explain what words Rev. Stefanski has used that you find to be discouraging and hurtful, and why? I find wisdom in his statement regarding the supposed “proof” surrounding the possible election of Rev. Harrison this summer, specifically his words on an incumbent not being re-elected due to, among other issues, financial reasons.

Sometimes I read comments on this site about Harrison’s possible election that in ways remind me of the 2008 election and how a great number of people thought if Obama was elected he would solve every problem in America and the world. It just doesn’t work that way, in American politics or in the LCMS!

Rev. Stefanski’s words on the possible joining between “Synod A” and the WELS and ELS seemed helpful to me also. To me, it looked like he was pointing to some of the realistic struggles that would likely come up if this were to be attempted.

@Pastor Tim Rossow #94

Pastor Rossow,

This appears to be another time for me to voice my concern about the “very liberal editorial policy” on this website. I feel that comments made from behind anonymity or a pseudonym should be heavily dissuaded or even not allowed, rather than welcomed. Also, I feel that comments posted without a valid e-mail address should not be published.

It’s hard to take some views seriously when people won’t even put their own name to them. When calling for repentance, which appropriately happens here at BJS from time to time, anonymity should not be an option. I am thankful that many serious issues are discussed here, but as a result it seems to be a context in which anonymity is not at all appropriate.

Thanks for allowing me to voice my opinion on this subject again.

Bill,

Thanks for your prayers.

I serve a large suburban congregation (2,000 members in the Chicago suburbs) and I am quite certain that my congregation would be quite irritated if the synod suspended me. I can’t tell you exactly what the congregation would do because the issue has never come up in the voters assembly or elders meetings, but my intuition is that the best thing that could happen for the confessional cause in the LCMS would be for the synod to suspend me or someone in a similar situation which would force my congregation and others around us to realize how serious the problems are in the LCMS.

TR

A slightly exaggerated [perhaps by a nanometer] description of “contemporary worship” is given by Rev. Peters’ Pastoral Meanderings article, “I Want Jesus on My Worship Team”.

After that you’ll probably be in the mood to listen to (or recommend for your CW team) that classic contemporary worship song, Yodel with My Friend Jesus”. Go to 1:04 into the Youtube video and listen; the song is dubbed from a record, so you don’t actually have to watch the video part, which would be painful.

Carl, where did you find that, song? I didn’t think it got worse than the Football thing, but I stand corrected. Yodel with my Friend Jesus, is the worst, most horrid, cheesiest thing I have heard to date. I never say “ever” anymore, someone always comes up with something…like …yodel with my friend Jesus.

@Rev. Jack Gilbert #100

Yes, Pastor Gilbert, I can explain what words Rev. Stefanski has used that I find to be discouraging and hurtful, and why. I said “We can no longer afford to wait for somebody else to take action, because there is nobody else. If you want to have a confessional church to come home to, now is the time to act. …Thank you to all of the faithful shepherds out there who continue to guard the sheep pen so that no wolf may enter. It may not look like it, but you are still in the majority in the LCMS.” Isn’t it obvious that I already agree with Pastor Stefanski’s position? Who could blame him for warning against all the problems the LCMS has? I doubt there’s anybody on the planet that is dumb enough to think all of the LCMS problems are magically going to disappear just because we miraculously elect a confessional President, yet I keep seeing comments and blog posts that seem to think just that. My comment is in response to his “Prove it” comment. Does he really need to go there? It’s not what he says, but the way he says it that I find objectionable. There is no room in his world for an opinion other than his own. Even though I generally agree with what he says, I feel like he’s attacking pastors in the LCMS who don’t think exactly like he does. And it is more irksome because he’s not in the LCMS. Of course, it isn’t about just this post. You can find similar comments from Pastor Stefanski on other posts, and on other websites. If I get out of the LCMS, I’m not going to spend the rest of my days commenting on the LCMS and its pastors and laymen on my blog and everywhere else who didn’t do exactly as I did. I would continue to warn people, but not in a way that would continuously target a synod that I was no longer a part of. There’s plenty of heresy to go around, even outside of the LCMS. I spend a lot of energy trying to catechize people to the magnitude of the serious problems that confront us. The whole point of the post was that the LCMS is divided and we need to do something about it. Now maybe we could actually move on to the doing part, in a positive way.

I doubt I’m the only one that finds Pastor Stefanski’s comments to go beyond the line of helpful suggestions, I just happen to be the only one who is willing to take the first step in pointing it out. If I’m wrong, and it’s just me, then I hope everyone reading this will tell me I’m wrong and I’ll know it’s just me and speak accordingly. If you agree with me, it would be helpful if you would speak up too. Do I think either will happen? No, not really. My apologies to you Pastor Stefanski. This isn’t meant at all as an attack. I am grateful for pastors like you who are willing to speak up in the defense of the Gospel.

Crux sola est nostra theologia.

Scott Diekmann

@Carl Vehse #102
AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

Unbelievable. I got to the two minute mark and, well, you know the rest….

johannes, the almost-speechless

Dear BJS bloggers,

There are some very important topics being considered here, and some extremely intelligent discussion. Thanks to Pastor Rossow and Norm for making this all possible!

In Matt Harrison’s new book, “At Home in the House of My Fathers,” there are two essays by CFW Walther dealing with the issue of when it is proper to flee a corrupt church. Those are pages 176-182. It was an issue that Walther had to deal with personally, since he later regretted having left Saxony for America and believed that he had committed, with others, the “odious sin of schism” (Walther’s term). It is one of the reasons that the LCMS constitution has one of its first objectives “provide a united defense against schism . . .”

I am not passing judgment on anyone who has left the ELCA, LCMS, or other Lutheran synods. Individual circumstances sometime dictate that someone has to leave. But just because individual circumstances sometime dictate that some have to leave, does not thereby mean that all “faithful” have to leave. That is a “non sequitur” logically, if nothing else.

Walther’s criteria for when a congregation should leave is when its church-body refuses “to call or install a particular preacher who would administer the office according to conscience in accord with the Confession of our Church in doctrine and practice.” (Walther, in Harrison, p. 177). This is based on Walther’s, and the LCMS (Constitution Article VII), firm conviction that each congregation has an inalienable right to decide who its pastor shall be.

Former President Bohlmann lost his office when he supported the Fort Wayne seminary administration’s attempt to prevent 32 perfectly qualified candidates from entering the ministry in 1992, because they were supporters of the LCMS traditional position. I saw the reaction to that action in my district, the Northern Illinois District. Non-political pastors and moderately liberal pastors said “they can’t do that” and “that’s schismatic,” referring to the action of the seminary administration and Bohlmann.

Walther’s point is that if you leave just because you don’t like the way things are going, YOU are schismatic. If they kick you out of the church, because you are a critic or calling for reform, then THEY are schismatic (being demoted or moved to another position does not count here). If they refuse to let an orthodox candidate be installed in a church that wants him, then THEY are schismatic.

These are objective criteria and help us determine who is committing the sin of schism.

Yours in Christ, Martin R. Noland

I heard that song on radio over a decade ago and occasionally googled for it whenever someone brought up “contemporary worship.” This time I hit paydirt… so to speak. It’s actually so bad, it’s funny to listen to, like watching some of those old Star Trek episodes.

Here is another Youtube video that just has the song dubbed in. I did an online conversion to MP3 and downloaded the audio file so I can play it in the car when I’m stuck in rush hour traffic (at full volume with the windows down).

@Carl Vehse #107

Carl, I beg to differ. It is bad. It’s not funny.

Why do I say that? Because the Jesus of these ditties is in no way the Jesus of Scripture, the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world, who takes away the sin of the world. This Jesus is a characture (sic) of the Biblical Jesus–a dumbed down beer-drinkin’ buddy. It’s OK with me if you think it’s funny–I just can’t laugh. Sorry.

Johannes, President of the Curmudgeons.

@Bill Kope #97 wrote: “Pastors, what will you do if you are told you are no longer rostered or you are suspended? The reason for this action is immaterial. What would you do? You no longer have a congregation and you cannot bring the faithful out with you. Now, what will you do?”

First, what you suggest is a real possibility if President Kiescnick is reelected and his restructuring plan passes. Those of us who refuse to subscribe unconditionally to the new constitution would be targets for presidential discipline.

Second, if I were removed from the roster, I would continue to serve the congregation that called me. It is their Call that makes me their pastor; not my status on the LCMS roster.

TW

Lloyd wrote:
“It is interesting, that in most cases, within Lutheranism, churches that do CG actually shrink, rather than grow. People can smell a dead fish from a mile away.”

Be careful with the dead fish analogy–Pr. Wilken likes anchovies on his pizza.

Given the Association of Religion Data Archives graphs of LCMS clergy, churches, and congregational members, maybe the purple palace bean counters see a reduction-in-clergy-force as a good thing pension-plan-wise, as long as the membership doesn’t decrease any more appreciably than it currently is.

Just a few things on some of the above post’s:

Scott Diekmann: Right on, when you stated to check the “favorites” on the pastors laptop. If the pastor is not reading the Bible, Luther (he’ll soon have 89 books to choose from in his “works”, and the many great Lutheran theologians, our Lutheran confessions; his sheep will really suffer. Pounding the Word of God and good Lutheran theology in one’s head is a must for the pastor and his sheep. It will keep him from false doctrine (anything not Lutheran).

Rev. Stefanski: You state “Synod A folks will not go to WELS, because they see that WELS has a defective understanding of the office of the ministry (which may or may not be reflected in your own use of the word “fire” and the term “given the the boot.”

First of all, the WELS president was on Issues, Etc., and he and Pastor Todd Wilken both confessed at how much both of them enjoyed a common ground. Let me tell you this much; our synod president has a lot of respect for Pastor Wilken, and he speaks very highly of him. And, Pastor Wilken has spoken very highly of our synod president. Why would this be? Because both of these gentlemen are true, faithful confessional Lutherans. Their attitude on the program wasn’t, “my synod versus your synod”, it was a realization of how much both of them loved the Savior, God’s Word, and our Lutheran confessions.

Both of these gentlemen demonstrated the attitued that all confessional Lutherans must have. I personally have much, much, much more in common with a confessional LCMS Lutheran than I would have with a Reformed or a Baptist Christian. Why? Because we both go by God’s Word and our Lutheran confessions, and HATE FALSE DOCTRINE.

So, to say that “Synod A folks will not go to WELS, because they see the WELS has a defective understanding of the office of the ministry (which may or may not be reflected in your own use of the word “fire” and the term “given the boot.)”

I think that you are wrong to flat out sate, “Synod A folks will not go to WELS…….”, because there are many confessional Lutherans out there (in all synods) that realize that we are brothers held together by the Savior, God’s Word and our Lutheran confessions.

I’m sorry that you don’t like the terms “fired”, or “given the boot.” I am not speaking for the WELS when I use those terms. But, as an Elder, I will not tolerate church growth, Calvary Chapel music, communion practices where anyone can partake (against the by-laws of a synod; whichever one that may be). I will not tolerate false (heterodox) doctrine.

If a pastor goes this route, and will not change, I will strongly warn him. If he still doesn’t repent, yes I will seek to get the heretic “fired.” Why should said pastor pollute the sheep, and the rest of the synod? I don’t think that you would want me as your Elder! How can you feel that word’s like “fired”, and “given the boot”, are too strong, when many Lutherans died for what they believed in?

Wouldn’t it be good to have five or six strong, confessional Lutheran synod’s preaching and administering the Sacraments, rather than wasting all of this time fighting false teachers within a particular synod? A synod needs to have a form of supervision in place, in order to make this happen. Not a system that allows a bunch of false teachers to “have it their way.”

Pastor Bill Kope #91, Right on.

Pastor Tim Rossow: Thanks for the kind words!

Blessings,

“Pr. Wilken likes anchovies on his pizza.”

Acquired from when and where? Shakey’s Pizza Parlor on Big Bend just south of the St. Louis seminary campus was gone well before Rev. Wilken went there. Even Santoro’s (up by Forsyth) was probably closed by then.

Correction: Should read gentlemen not gentleman, in post #112.

Lloyd #112 and others
I am not a Pastor. I don’t know where that idea came from, but I apologize If I gave anyone the idea I was ordained. I am just a simple layman that is concerned for Pastors that will be blindsided by evangelicalism.

Pastor Stefanski-remember when I once said, “what kind of sister in Christ would I be if I didn’t tell you….” this would be one of those moments. How you said, what you did, in engaging Scott, was abrasive & I believe you owe him a “brother’s apology”. No proof is necassary, it is a reason BJS is here. You fought your battle, let Scott fight his. We’re all different, so are the battles we fight.

Scott- You were not wrong. I am hoping though, when you referred to those who have left the LCMS & their comments, you weren’t referring to those of us who post here, like me, who left because we lost the battle against CW, in our congregations. Are there those who come to encite discord? Yep. But, some don’t or at least, don’t intend to. I was welcomed to attend the upcoming BJS event, it was you who did, per a past post.

Let’s all just try to remember, these are brothers & sisters you are talking to here. If you wouldn’t like it said to you OR stated that way to you, don’t say it or post it. We need to make sure, that hurt, anger or frustration is not doing the typing for us. We speak in love always, even when it’s hard to, right?

Scott Diekmann @ #104 wrote:

I doubt I’m the only one that finds Pastor Stefanski’s comments to go beyond the line of helpful suggestions, I just happen to be the only one who is willing to take the first step in pointing it out. If I’m wrong, and it’s just me, then I hope everyone reading this will tell me I’m wrong and I’ll know it’s just me and speak accordingly. If you agree with me, it would be helpful if you would speak up too. Do I think either will happen? No, not really. My apologies to you Pastor Stefanski. This isn’t meant at all as an attack. I am grateful for pastors like you who are willing to speak up in the defense of the Gospel.

You’re not wrong, Scott. In a previous thread Pr. Stefanski told me I should not remain a pastor in the LCMS. We did not reach agreement on that point.

I don’t know the particular circumstances under which Pr. Stefanski left, so I don’t pass judgment on him for departing from the LCMS. Since he does not know the particular circumstances of my remaining, Christian charity might suggest similar restraint on his part.

Pr. Noland’s citation of Walther (@ #106) is helpful, and expresses my understanding and intention. May the Lord preserve me from becoming schismatic and may he also keep me faithful to the truth.

Adding to what Prs. Rossow and Wilken wrote (@ #101 and 109), it is by no means far-fetched to believe that pastors may begin to be expelled from the LCMS if the BRTFSSG proposals are adopted. Already in the final report of the Blue Ribbon Task Force for Funding the Mission an explicit invitation to leave the LCMS was given to those who find it is not possible for them to support the synod and its priorities. The proposed addition of Article VII.B to the synodical constitution, taken in conjunction with the proposed revisions to Article VI.B.1 and existing Article XIII put teeth in the invitation of the Funding the Mission report.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if the proposed changes to the constitution are adopted, there will be an additional basis for expelling a pastor from the LCMS. Besides persistent adherence to false doctrine, scandalous life, willful neglect of the duties of office, or the inability to perform those duties will be added unwillingness to “abide by, honor, and uphold the collective will of the Synod as expressed in its Constitution, Bylaws, and convention resolutions” as well as unwillingness to “pledge their active involvement and support of the Synod’s efforts to carry out its mission and purpose” (quoted from proposed Article VII.B.2-3 of Synodical Constitution, BRTFSSG Final Report, appendix 1, p. 1.6).

Furthermore, and this goes to the second point in Pr. Wilken’s post above, under Article XIII, if a pastor is expelled the congregation MUST depose him. If they persist in refusing to do so they forfeit their membership in Synod. That’s the case even if his only “sin” was publicly questioning what is happening under the banner of Ablaze!(TM) or Fan into Flame(TM)! And if a congregation has decided not send any funds to support District and Synod budgets, the hammer can fall on them as well.

Welcome to the Brave New Synod if the BRTFSSG recommendations are adopted.

@Scott Diekmann #106

Yes, Scott, I agree with your assessment of how Pr. Stefanski comes across when the LCMS is the topic. I find it discouraging to read that those of us in the LCMS should basically “cut and run” and leave the synod to the liberals. Now isn’t the time to give up, but to stand and point to the truth of God’s word.

On the other hand, I truly appreciate Pr. Stefanski’s fortitude. I really wish he wouldn’t have left the LCMS. We need more people like him who will unwaveringly stand up for our Lutheran confession of faith. I am thankful that he continues to preach and teach the gospel in its purity.

Finally, and I know you aren’t doing this or asking for this Scott, I would not want to pile on Pr. Stefanski. Like you, I agree with most everything he says and I wouldn’t mind someday sitting down with him over his favorite beverage along as it is beer.

@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #86
There’s a person right in this comment stream that left the LCMS to go to WELS.

@Dutch #118
Dutch said:
“I am hoping though, when you referred to those who have left the LCMS & their comments, you weren’t referring to those of us who post here, like me, who left because we lost the battle against CW, in our congregations. Are there those who come to encite discord? Yep. But, some don’t or at least, don’t intend to. I was welcomed to attend the upcoming BJS event, it was you who did, per a past post.”
Nope Dutch. I’m not referring to you. I’d gripe about an LCMS person that insisted a WELS person abandon WELS too. And the point needs to be reinforced that BJS isn’t an LCMS organization, it’s a confessional Lutheran organization. Synodical affiliation is immaterial if you confess the same confession. And I hope you’re coming to the Conference. And I hope Pr. Stefanski is coming as well!

@Martin R. Noland #108
Thanks for pointing out the Walther quotes Dr. Noland. For those of you who don’t have Pastor Harrison’s book, here are a few quotes for your edification:

p. 177 The basis of this, my counsel is that in God’s Word, orthodox Christians are not commanded to forsake the corrupt church, for example, in Corinth or Galatia. Instead, they are to reform it. They are to seek absolutely everything possible to this end and only to separate when the corrupt church is revealed to be an irreformable sect, such that practicing fellowship with it is inseparable from participation in its errors and sins.

…He [Luther] wrote that year in a letter of consolation to the forsaken Leipzigers: “It is my joyous consolation, and indeed not the least, that I did not leave papaldom. For I held fast by the red whore and acted in all service and humility over against the murderess. But she would not suffer me and banned and threw me out of her pack. Thanks is due them that they helped me out of their murderous pit with their wrath, and freed my conscience form all their horror, murder, and blasphemy.”

p. 180-181 As true as it is that the mere legal status of the pure doctrine does not render an ecclesiastical body orthodox, so is there indeed without doubt a great difference between that and a fellowship that is completely false, “enlightened,” [i.e., rationalistic and unionistic] and gathered about false doctrine or doctrinal confusion. There is no doubt that those who come to the knowledge of the truth in the Roman Catholic or Reformed or Union Church, without discussing the matter with flesh and blood [Galatians 1:16], must forsake these fellowships if they do not desire to deny the truth. It is something else in the case of a church that originally was orthodox, but in which all sorts of abuses in doctrine and practice have more and more forced their way in. There on should not immediately grab his walking stick, but first seek in every way to determine whether or not a renewal is possible with the help of God. It appeared so terrible in the congregations of Corinth and in Galatia, but still Paul did not give the upright Christians the counsel to separate themselves. he rather castigated the entire fellowship, for the sake of the correct course, to make an attempt at reformation.

…Regarding a disintegrated though formerly orthodox fellowship, I can only counsel separation when it has become notoriously “obstinate.” That is completely evident only after every attempt to return it to its former state has been futile. Calling upon my good legal right in such a fellowship, I will not leave it before someone throws me out or indirectly necessitates it by putting me into a situation where I must either do or yield something against conscience. Would to God that some thirty odd years ago I would have had this understanding! If I had, I would probably still be in America, but not as one who fled the office [Amt], but as an exile.

@Neil Grepke #97
For those of you who missed it, Mr. Grepke, who is the author of the “Jesus is Better than Football” video, which, if you’ll recall, was part of the original post topic, responded to the original post with a comment. It’s comment #97. I wanted to make sure that his response didn’t get lost in the rather voluminous number of comments, and I’m glad he provided us with his feedback. Here is Mr. Grepke’s comment:

Neil Grepke :Thank you, Scott, for your exceptionally well-written blog. I agree: “This isn’t a time for either “side” to sit smugly and point fingers at the other.” I hope I do not do so here.
I would to apologize to any brothers or sisters offended by my song or slideshow. (Recognizing the predominant interpretation of one of those images, I altered the slideshow recently.) I have also repeatedly prayed for God’s guidance on this topic and have offered the Lord my sincerest repentance for anything I have done to demean His precious and Holy name. (After reading each of these posts, I remain unconvinced that this video is blasphemous in any way.) As C.S. Lewis said, “A man can no more diminish God’s glory than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.”
Of course, Jesus is better than football. He is better than any earthly thing. The song is meant to be absurd — shining a stark light on our society’s over-glorification of sports, and other pop culture in general. While we who know this well already would look at the phrase “Jesus is better than football” with a “DUH!” there are many who need to have this basic reality put before them. I am dumbfounded that so many learned and devout shepherds of God’s flock could so intensely disdain an attempt to put the basic truths of the faith in terms someone outside the chruch might actually get. The purpose, though I know this is disdained by many of you more orthodox folks, for lack of a better term, is to bring those folks a step further toward the truth so that they may be open to receiving the Holy Spirit through His Word. As we know, faith comes back hearing. My prayer is that the video draws in a Colts or Saints fan, and the the Holy Scriptures printed therein will do what God has promised they will do.
As for a church divided at St. John in Kendallville, Scott, I hope you have been here for a period of time and have based that statement on first-hand knowledge, not supposition or heresay. While the contemporary/traditional worship issue has endured growing pains, I would describe our church as quite united in the things that matter: preaching that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ, and reaching out to the lost through our school and other means. Divided churches rot from within and wither away, they don’t celebrate 150 years as a unified church body (as we are doing this year), operate a 200-strong school for over 140 years, and worship together 400-500 sheep each week, as we do.
In Luther’s explanation of the 8th commandment, he exhorts us to “put the best construction on everything.” I have seen very little of that in yoru blog or in these responses. Instead, I have seen the opposite, couched in stereotypes and calls for an official rift in our church body. I am saddened by this. “But now in Christ Jesus you who have once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. For He himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.” Ephesians 2:13-14
As a lifelong member of the LCMS, a graduate of three LCMS schools, and a churchworker of 14 years, every day I grow more and more disillusioned with the stark difference between what I read in the Bible and what these “true believers” say is the ONLY way to honor our Lord. Quite frankly, if God expected us to adhere to Lutheran doctrine as if it is on par with Scripture, he would have inspired its writers to write those words, not the ones they did. Over and over and over, in Jesus’s own words, it is VERY clear what we must focus on: That HE is the only way to salvation and that LOVE is the greatest gifts/action/command. Where is the love in this blog?
Some years back, the late Dr. Preus said to a local pastor, who was concerned about immature Christians going into and coming out of the Seminary unprepared: “When they come out of Seminary they are DEAD orthodox.” The juxtaposition of those words is stark, is it not. I pray that it’s not true. I pray that our current and future pastors are NOT dead and orthodox. I pray that they lead their parishioners to closer walk with Christ through Scripture and its proper interpretation. I will NOT stereotype or assume anything about individuals without hearing and seeing their approach to the ministry personally.
In the same why, I would exhort each person involved in this dialogue to refrain from condemning contemporary worship on its face and from painting all worship not framed by the Divine Service as heterodox. This past Sunday, Pastor Paul Griebel delivered an excellent, Scripture-based, Spirit-led sermon on how unfathomably greater than this football obsession our Lord and Savior is. As I have done about 30 times before, I wrote a song to dovetail with that message and its Scriptural basis. Our service opened with a song called Majestic, essentially a prayer using the words of Psalm 8. It was followed by the Invocation and Confession of Sins from the LSB. It was followed by Absolution and a song called Children of the Living God, inviting His people to extol His greatness, and praising God for humbling Himself for the sake of our salvation. We then professed our faith through the Apostles Creed and sang Knowing You, a song that reinforced the theme of the service, that nothing on earth compares to the greatness of God. We then sang an original song based on District President Dan May’s sermon on the calling of the disciple Nathaneal, called “Shine Above.” We then prayed a number of petitions, including the Lord’s Prayer, then read the Lectionary Readings for the week. This was followed by the message and the song, Jesus is Better than Football. This was followed by Holy Communion, during which we sang How He Loves Us and Enough, again emphasizing the idea that nothing we embrace in this life compares to God’s amazing grace, love and majesty. This was followed by the benediction and the song Our Great God, in which we called on God — as He has commanded — to protect us from the power of of the devil.
Is there a shred of this that is heterodox or heretical?
I stand WITH you in rebuking false doctrine. I stand WITH you in fighting against the movement to water down pure doctrine with convenient, comfortable, current-culture garbage. BUT I BEG you NOT to lump all contemporary worship as being guilty of these things. It’s simply NOT true.
Now “To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy — to the only God, our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ, our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.”

Scott Diekmann:

Great to hear that this is a website for confessional Lutherans. It sure as heck beats watching Love boat reruns on T.V.!

Scott,
I knew what you meant. I just thought it would be best, to clarify for posting purposes. I misunderstand postings from time to time, but never yours. (Add smiley face here)

Scott,
What is your take on the reply in #124? I can’t say, for myself anyway, the reply is unexpected. The fact the Sacrament of the Altar followed after said “Football” was though.

I’m very happy in the WELS, but I have a question for any LCMS pastor who might feel free to respond, just for my own information:

When you leave the LCMS with your church, do you usually join another synod? Or, do you just go independent, while adhering to God’s Word and the Lutheran confessions? Is the plan to eventually start a new synod? What options does a pastor and his congregation have in this case? Just curious on how this all works.

Thanks.

@Scott Diekmann #124

I read Mr. Grepke’s comments, and offer a few comments of my own. It is not apparent from the video that the song “Jesus is Better Than Football” is meant to be absurd, as Mr. Grepke claims. Granting that purpose, I still wonder if it’s truly appropriate for a worship service of any stripe. Do we really need to sing absurd songs in church, to show up the absurdities of football, for instance? I also wonder if this song glorifies and elevates Christ.

As far as the other songs in the worship service, I looked them all up, and altho most of them are fairly biblical, they present some issues. I suggest others do the same, and we’ll discuss them, perhaps in a future blog. I have to say that they are very interesting.

Johannes, the Perplexed

@Dutch #126
Dutch said: “What is your take on the reply in #124? I can’t say, for myself anyway, the reply is unexpected. The fact the Sacrament of the Altar followed after said ‘Football’ was though.”

Dutch, Here is my short reply to #124, which is Mr. Grepke’s (the author of the video) response to the original blog post. I won’t spend a lot of time on my response, in deference to what everyone else wants to say, since you already know how I feel about it.

1) Your comment about Communion immediately following the video pretty much sums it up Dutch (although the song preceded Communion). That the video was shown at all in a church service that began in the name of the Triune God is embarrassing. That is came between the means of grace in the sermon and the Lord’s Supper is disgusting.
2) Mr. Grepke, the Principal of an LCMS school, holds to a quaetenus subscription of our Confession – he agrees that it accurately reflects God’s Word except where he says it doesn’t. How do I know this? Here is what he said: “Quite frankly, if God expected us to adhere to Lutheran doctrine as if it is on par with Scripture, he would have inspired its writers to write those words, not the ones they did.” Contrast that to what the signers of the Formula of Concord said: “In the sight of God and of all Christendom, we want to testify to those now living and those who will come after us. This declaration presented here about all the controverted articles mentioned and explained above—and no other—is our faith, doctrine, and confession. By God’s grace, with intrepid hearts, we are willing to appear before the judgment seat of Christ with this Confession and give an account of it. We will not speak or write anything contrary to this Confession, either publicly or privately. By the strength of God’s grace we intend to abide by it (FC, SD, XII, 40). The theology of Mr. Grepke and Dr. Preus don’t seem to get along. A more elegant way to explain Mr. Grepke’s quaetenus subscription is to quote Dr. Preus, who said “A Lutheran’s attitude toward the confessions will indicate his attitude toward the Gospel itself.”
3) Mr. Grepke continues on by saying “Over and over and over, in Jesus’s own words, it is VERY clear what we must focus on: That HE is the only way to salvation and that LOVE is the greatest gifts/action/command. Where is the love in this blog?” Consider Dr. Martin Luther’s words: “No, my dear man, do not recommend to me peace and unity when thereby God’s Word is lost, for then eternal life and everything else would be lost. This matter there can be no yielding nor giving way, no, not for love of you or any other person, but everything must yield to the Word, whether it be friend or foe. The Word was given unto us for eternal life and not to further outward peace and unity. The Word and doctrine will create Christian unity or fellowship. Where they reign all else will follow. Where they are not no concord will ever abide. Therefore do not talk to me about love and friendship, if that means breaking with the Word, or the faith, for the Gospel does not say love brings eternal life, God’s grace, and all heavenly treasures, but the Word…”
4) Playing the 8th Commandment card only works where the 8th Commandment is broken. Mr. Grepke is truthful when he states that “…the contemporary/traditional worship issue has endured growing pains.” The continuation of the statement “I would describe our church as quite united in the things that matter” indicates that the church isn’t united, though he attempts to paint the opposite picture.
5) This post used Holy Trinity as an illustration. The post’s goal was to point out the division within the Synod using the video as an illustration and the church as a metaphor. The response of the readers certainly reflects that they understood my intent, since the majority of the comments are comments about the Synod, not the video or the church. Had the goal of the post been to denigrate that particular church or Mr. Grepke, it would have been a much different blog post.

@Scott Diekmann #124

After digesting this response from the make of the video, I can’t help but to notice some misunderstandings on the part of the video maker. One cannot separate Lutheran Doctrine from Scripture as it IS from scripture. The comment about a “closer walk” with Jesus has its implications in work righteousness as does the video itself. Can a quarterback win a game all by himself? No, it takes teamwork and cooperation. So to suggest that Jesus is the quarterback is saying that with Jesus’ help, we can win. This is the theology of the reformed, not orthodox Lutheranism, which is orthodox Christianity.

Kiley Campbell

@Kiley Campbell #131

I noticed that too, Kiley. Our confession of faith is from the scriptures. I also noticed something else he wrote which concerns me,

“The purpose, though I know this is disdained by many of you more orthodox folks, for lack of a better term, is to bring those folks a step further toward the truth so that they may be open to receiving the Holy Spirit through His Word. “

More orthodox? Is that like being a little pregnant? One is either orthodox in their faith or they are not. I also find it alarming that Mr. Grepke is under the impression that we bring people a step further to the truth so that “they may be open to receiving the Holy Spirit through His Word”. The wording suggests that human reason is free to take steps closer to truth. The fact is that being dead in sin means the person is not taking any steps to truth. It is the Holy Spirit who gives us faith through the proclamation of the gospel in its purity. I don’t think Mr. Grepke’s football video fits the bill of such a proclamation.

Mr. Grepke is right in saying that we can’t diminish God’s glory, but the point Lewis is, making in the quote he provided, is on objective one. Namely, that our puny works don’t change God or His word objectively, but that doesn’t mean we can’t corrupt pure doctrine through our practice shown to others. Obviously we can. God is not changed, but people are lost due to false teachings.

“That HE is the only way to salvation and that LOVE is the greatest gifts/action/command. Where is the love in this blog?”

The answer to that question is the very existence of the blog itself is born out of love. Born out of a concern for preserving the truth of the Holy Scriptures and in ensuring that people have a chance to read that truth. It is loving to warn brothers and sisters about doctrinal error.

““When they come out of Seminary they are DEAD orthodox.” The juxtaposition of those words is stark, is it not. I pray that it’s not true. I pray that our current and future pastors are NOT dead and orthodox. “

This too concerns me. This is the sort of dichotomy taken up by those practicing pentecostal forms of worship. There are “dead” Christians and those who are “vibrant” and “alive” in the “spirit”. Those who practice the conservative liturgy are “dead”, they do not practice worship forms that enrich a person’s spiritual life, according to this pentecostalist type thinking. It is a pietistic trap which eventually leads to despair, since the worship service is not about Christ, but about our works and what we can get out of God in some sort of emotional blessing. When the service becomes “old hat” and nobody is getting their existential highs any longer, then the worship form will need to change and become more radical to create a new high. This type of worship leaves people empty and insecure about their standing with God because it is all about a feeling one gets or an experience, and not about Christ coming to us with His forgiveness of sins objectively through the means of grace.

“In the same why, I would exhort each person involved in this dialogue to refrain from condemning contemporary worship on its face and from painting all worship not framed by the Divine Service as heterodox. “

I beg to differ. I grew up in pentecostal churches who were doing what you might think is cutting edge contemporary worship, back in the late 70s. I have very good reason to condemn contemporary worship at face value. I have seen how destructive CW can be, first hand.

Mr. Grepke, obviously a member of “Synod B,” totally misses the point. He wants us to look at the order of service he described, and the “songs” included therein, and try to find some heterodoxy. What he fails to understand is that the WHOLE thing is heterodox, since it flows out of an unorthodox theology of worship, contrary to what we Lutherans believe, teach, and confess. He sees nothing wrong with “abolishing the Mass (i.e. Divine Service)” (AC, AP XXIV), and believes it is perfectly acceptable to use forms and “songs” that originate from heterodox groups, which our Confessions condemn. Scott is right in pointing out that he holds a quaetenus subscription, which I would argue is standard among those who belong to “Synod B.”

What is the goal of his congregation’s contemporary worship service? It is to present the basic truths of the Gospel to those who don’t know them. How is that accomplished? By comparing Jesus to football and by employing “feel-good songs” where the basic truths of the Gospel are decidedly absent. Yeah, that makes sense.

Those like Mr. Grepke, who argue that we need to employ contemporary worship forms and “songs,” undo themselves, and they don’t even realize it. Let’s say that their cause is a worthy one, that the worship service should focus on reaching the lost (it’s not, of course, but let’s just play along). If this is true, then one would think that they would want to employ “songs” that ACTUALLY proclaim the Gospel, rather than the types of generic “praisy-daisy songs” he lists for us here. What are the lost gonna learn from these “songs”? NOT the Gospel. As Johannes invites, go and check these songs out for yourselves and see whether or not the Gospel is proclaimed in them.

If “Synod B” really wanted to present the basic truths of the Gospel to “seekers” and “unchurched” people, they would steer clear of contemporary Christian “praise songs” and employ solid, doctrinally sound hymns – you know, “sung confessions of the faith,” where the Gospel is trumpeted forth loud and clear. But, they are more interested in appealing to the emotions of people and entertaining them.

With Jim, I know this from years of personal experience. I’ve been on the “worship team” in an LCMS congregation that went full-blown contemporary after the pastor went and got himself a degree in “church growth” from Fuller. I can assure you that our goal was NOT to present the basic truths of the pure Gospel to people. We may have paid lip service to that, but our real goal was showing people a good time, so that they’d keep coming. We most definitely abolished the Mass in order to give people what we thought they’d enjoy.

Oh, and by the way, “dead orthodoxy” is an oxymoron – and you really should not have to belong to “Synod A” to realize that!

Martin R. Noland :
Walther’s criteria for when a congregation should leave is when its church-body refuses “to call or install a particular preacher who would administer the office according to conscience in accord with the Confession of our Church in doctrine and practice.” (Walther, in Harrison, p. 177). This is based on Walther’s, and the LCMS (Constitution Article VII), firm conviction that each congregation has an inalienable right to decide who its pastor shall be.

Okay, so does that apply to the refusal to admit herman Otten back in the ’50s, even though he won his case against the sem?

Former President Bohlmann lost his office when he supported the Fort Wayne seminary administration’s attempt to prevent 32 perfectly qualified candidates from entering the ministry in 1992, because they were supporters of the LCMS traditional position. I saw the reaction to that action in my district, the Northern Illinois District. Non-political pastors and moderately liberal pastors said “they can’t do that” and “that’s schismatic,” referring to the action of the seminary administration and Bohlmann.

Bohlmann lost his political office politically; would not Walther’s criterion require, rather, that he actually be disciplined? Since he was not (even after using synod funds to send out a ‘sour grapes’ letter after Barry was elected), there is still the question of whether what he did is tolerated or encouraged in the synod. Is there anyone we know who is qualified, but not being placed/ordained now? Are there pastors who have no place to serve because meagerly-trained laymen are acting as if they were pastors all over the place?

Walther’s point is that if you leave just because you don’t like the way things are going, YOU are schismatic. If they kick you out of the church, because you are a critic or calling for reform, then THEY are schismatic (being demoted or moved to another position does not count here). If they refuse to let an orthodox candidate be installed in a church that wants him, then THEY are schismatic.

I know that you don’t intend to pass “judgment on anyone who has left the ELCA, LCMS, or other Lutheran synods,” but that is, in fact, what you have done. But, here, let me prove to you that I don’t belong in the LCMS anyway: Walther was dead wrong. It’s sad that he became filled with regret for having done the right thing, but reducing those things for which one ought to “mark and avoid” down to this single thing is absolutely wrong. I’ll stick with Walther’s 1870 theses, where he did a good job with God’s Word.

At any rate, your summary–completely against your intention–casts those who have left the LCMS or ELCA because they could not remain in fellowship with unbridled false teaching as schismatics. When a summary and an intent contradict, one or the other would seem to need adjustment.

EJG

Scott Diekmann :
My comment is in response to his “Prove it” comment. Does he really need to go there? It’s not what he says, but the way he says it that I find objectionable. There is no room in his world for an opinion other than his own.

Lovely. The best way to fight against objective truth is to label it as someone’s opinion.

You claim to be trying to encourage people, yet in doing so, you don’t wish to admit that you are in the minority. That’s not ‘encouraging’, that’s ‘suckering’. If you tell someone, “We’re in the minority, but we have to fight,” they’ll give their all and won’t be overwhelmed when it doesn’t go as they wish; when you tell them that they’re really the majority, it’ll kill them when they find out you’re wrong.

Even though I generally agree with what he says, I feel like he’s attacking pastors in the LCMS who don’t think exactly like he does.

No, I’m attacking those LCMS pastors who are trying to keep others from seeing what God’s Word says and acting in accord with it–those who simply reject out of hand the idea that a separation may well be the only answer, and that there is a time to recognize that fellowship no longer exists.

And it is more irksome because he’s not in the LCMS. Of course, it isn’t about just this post. You can find similar comments from Pastor Stefanski on other posts, and on other websites. If I get out of the LCMS, I’m not going to spend the rest of my days commenting on the LCMS and its pastors and laymen on my blog and everywhere else who didn’t do exactly as I did. I would continue to warn people, but not in a way that would continuously target a synod that I was no longer a part of. There’s plenty of heresy to go around, even outside of the LCMS.

Again, since you can’t argue the substance, you attack the person. Yes, the editorial policy of this site stinks: ad hominem rules the day.

Unlike, apparently, you, I’m not new to the battles of the LCMS. I comment on what I know. I comment on what affects my family. (Strangely enough, when you leave the LCMS, your extended family doesn’t automatically come with you.) A large part of what I know from my time in the LCMS has to do with intellectual dishonesty and anachronism among the ‘confessional leadership’.

Again, with the thought that there will be a split (or, really, many splinters), it behooves one who is outside of the LCMS to continue work on the issues in the midst of LCMSers, for the sake of giving clarity to the split(s) and seeing whether there are any who will honestly work on something new, or whether things will simply go to some sort of supposed ‘Old Missouri’/'New Synodical Conference’ association.

I doubt I’m the only one that finds Pastor Stefanski’s comments to go beyond the line of helpful suggestions, I just happen to be the only one who is willing to take the first step in pointing it out. If I’m wrong, and it’s just me, then I hope everyone reading this will tell me I’m wrong and I’ll know it’s just me and speak accordingly. If you agree with me, it would be helpful if you would speak up too. Do I think either will happen? No, not really. My apologies to you Pastor Stefanski. This isn’t meant at all as an attack. I am grateful for pastors like you who are willing to speak up in the defense of the Gospel.

Strangely, I’m not certain at all how your sentiments accord with bearing false witness.

And, no, everyone will not tell you you’re wrong; if I irritate you, I likely irritate them, as well, and irritated people usually don’t do too well with objective truth and material facts.

The fact is, I know the things of which I speak. I was there when ‘the movement’ was riding high, and I was there when it came ‘crashing down’. A large part of what killed the momentum was a lack of truthfulness about what the situation in the synod really is, and the unwillingness of ‘leadership’ to take any defining steps without a massive lag that kills all cohesiveness.

BJS is nothing new; it’s simply the latest thing. Nonetheless, I hope that it succeeds and that it outlasts what came before it. That requires realism. It requires the sort of boldness in the face of certain defeat that has been true of so many heroic secular warriors of the past, but that is even more fitting for the Christian, as he knows that any victory will be by grace alone. It requires the dropping of the things that killed previous attempts, organizations, and so on…like the constant cries to ‘get along’ in private, when the best thing for getting along in public is the honest discussion of the issues in private…and like the calling upon those who failed in the past due to their own compromises as if they had anything meaningful to contribute.

I’ve been quite clear where I stand on those who remain in the LCMS: if you’re going to be there, fight, because if you stay without fighting, you’re sinning. I’ve said it over and over–and not just since I’ve been out of the LCMS, but for a good many years before.

Nonetheless, it gets tiring having to repeat that last paragraph, so, yeah, I’ll re-evaluate whether I should hang out here.

EJG

Lloyd I. Cadle :
Rev. Stefanski: You state “Synod A folks will not go to WELS, because they see that WELS has a defective understanding of the office of the ministry (which may or may not be reflected in your own use of the word “fire” and the term “given the the boot.”
First of all, the WELS president was on Issues, Etc., and he and Pastor Todd Wilken both confessed at how much both of them enjoyed a common ground. Let me tell you this much; our synod president has a lot of respect for Pastor Wilken, and he speaks very highly of him. And, Pastor Wilken has spoken very highly of our synod president. Why would this be? Because both of these gentlemen are true, faithful confessional Lutherans. Their attitude on the program wasn’t, “my synod versus your synod”, it was a realization of how much both of them loved the Savior, God’s Word, and our Lutheran confessions.

If they value the Confessions (and I believe they both do), they know that LCMS folks and WELS folks cannot recognize fellowship with one another unless some things are cleared up first. Anything less than that is NOT a Confessional attitude. Ask your pastor, and he’ll tell you I’m right. WELS will expect a lot out of Missourians before any new group from Synod A would be in fellowship with WELS…and the very folks who make up Synod A believe that WELS is wrong on the doctrine of Church and Ministry.

That’s just fact.

I’m sorry that you don’t like the terms “fired”, or “given the boot.” I am not speaking for the WELS when I use those terms. But, as an Elder, I will not tolerate church growth, Calvary Chapel music, communion practices where anyone can partake (against the by-laws of a synod; whichever one that may be). I will not tolerate false (heterodox) doctrine.
If a pastor goes this route, and will not change, I will strongly warn him. If he still doesn’t repent, yes I will seek to get the heretic “fired.” Why should said pastor pollute the sheep, and the rest of the synod? I don’t think that you would want me as your Elder! How can you feel that word’s like “fired”, and “given the boot”, are too strong, when many Lutherans died for what they believed in?

I don’t believe those words are “too strong”; I believe they are false doctrine. You can’t “fire” somebody you didn’t “hire.” Pastors aren’t hired. If a pastor teaches false doctrine, then either God will bring him to repentance through His Church (both the members of the local parish and, one would hope, the members of his church body), or He will remove him from Office through His Church. Use the right words; words mean things.

EJG

John :
You’re not wrong, Scott. In a previous thread Pr. Stefanski told me I should not remain a pastor in the LCMS. We did not reach agreement on that point.

It would be good to name the thread and post. If you did that, we could either see that I was correct or that I should apologize. Instead, by doing what you have done, we simply have an accusation against me that is obviously correct, since there’s no way to show that it’s not.

So, where was it?

EJG

Jim Pierce :
@Scott Diekmann #106
Yes, Scott, I agree with your assessment of how Pr. Stefanski comes across when the LCMS is the topic. I find it discouraging to read that those of us in the LCMS should basically “cut and run” and leave the synod to the liberals. Now isn’t the time to give up, but to stand and point to the truth of God’s word.

Please point out to me any instance in which I have said that you should “cut and run.” As far as I know, I’ve never suggested such a thing. By all means, fire on the enemy…or, if not, weigh anchor…but there’s no reason act in a cowardly manner, and I don’t see where it is at all proper to say that I have suggested that you do so.

On the other hand, I truly appreciate Pr. Stefanski’s fortitude. I really wish he wouldn’t have left the LCMS.

Scott quoted Walther as saying, “Calling upon my good legal right in such a fellowship, I will not leave it before someone throws me out or indirectly necessitates it by putting me into a situation where I must either do or yield something against conscience.” The only way for me to stay in the LCMS was to yield something against conscience–to be willing to commune those that I cannot commune. For me, this ‘reconciliation’ with my ‘brothers’ was mandated…but the rest of the LCMS pastors live within it every day without a mandate. I’m not sure how that is not seen as problematic and calling for definitive action.

I wouldn’t mind someday sitting down with him over his favorite beverage along as it is beer.

Unfortunately, beer isn’t as good for the blood sugar as whisky, so my beer intake has been reduced. If there’s Lion Stout around, though, I’d be likely to drink it. Some day, I hope to drink enough of it while watching Sri Lankan television to the end that I understand cricket (both the rules, and why anyone would actually want to watch it).

EJG

Scott Diekmann :
@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #86
There’s a person right in this comment stream that left the LCMS to go to WELS.

I’ll clarify:

“Synod A” as a whole would not affiliate with WELS or be in fellowship with it because they hold WELS to insist on a doctrine of Church and Ministry that is incorrect. They would, instead, be more likely to form one or more bodies that held a different understanding. Some would be of the view of Jack Cascione or Dr. Vehse of Texas; others (fewer) would probably move to some form of episcopacy.

At the same time, I’ve never seen any evidence that Synod A is monolithic, anyway, but that you have Synod A(1), Synod A(2), Synod A(3), Synod A(4)…Synod A(X), as well as either a Synod C or Synod A.5, which are those who want to be in fellowship with WELS (or somebody) because they don’t understand the issues involved there or don’t see them as all that important.

Some people, however, will see the local WELS church as the only viable alternative at some particular point, such as the person to whom you refer.

EJG

I’m going to go watch TV now. I’m going to make a helpful suggestion: instead of discussing how evil I am to be concerned about you and how ‘unbrotherly’ it is to demand that someone prove a patently false assertion, giving more attention to Mr. Grepke’s post may be a good idea; even better, though, would be giving more attention to what Pr. Wilken said in

@Todd Wilken #22

and

@Todd Wilken #36

and

@Todd Wilken #57

I’ll leave you alone now. Perhaps after a day or two I’ll see that making such permanent would be a good thing.

EJG

Pastor Tim Rossow :
We do not disagree with your theological critique of the LCMS but your constant slapping down of individuals who are trying to make a difference in what is historically the largest and most confessional church body in the world, is working against the cause.

One more thing: “constant slapping down of individuals who are trying to make a difference.”

That’s an interesting charge. It’s false, but that really doesn’t seem to matter. That is what is wrong with your editorial policy. What’s wrong with your institutional policy is another thing altogether: legitimizing unholy associations for the sake external unity. But, I guess having that sort of a standard is more slapping down of these great Confessional heroes.

I’m seeing less need to sleep on a decision.

EJG

Rev. Eric J. Stefanski :

Please point out to me any instance in which I have said that you should “cut and run.” As far as I know, I’ve never suggested such a thing. By all means, fire on the enemy…or, if not, weigh anchor…but there’s no reason act in a cowardly manner, and I don’t see where it is at all proper to say that I have suggested that you do so.

Pr. Stefanski, please notice that I wasn’t quoting “cut and run” as if you have written it. I thought I had clearly wrote that is how I believe you “come across”. As is evident in this thread I am not alone in that perception of you as pushing the idea that we faithful confessionals should be leaving the LCMS due to issues over fellowship. Where would I have gotten such an impression? Or anyone else for that matter? Perhaps this is all just a misunderstanding and you aren’t calling for confessional Lutherans in the LCMS to break fellowship and leave the LCMS. If that is the case, and my impression of you is wrong, then I will publicly apologize to you.

Scott quoted Walther as saying, “Calling upon my good legal right in such a fellowship, I will not leave it before someone throws me out or indirectly necessitates it by putting me into a situation where I must either do or yield something against conscience.” The only way for me to stay in the LCMS was to yield something against conscience–to be willing to commune those that I cannot commune. For me, this ‘reconciliation’ with my ‘brothers’ was mandated…but the rest of the LCMS pastors live within it every day without a mandate. I’m not sure how that is not seen as problematic and calling for definitive action.

Are you here saying that LCMS pastors should leave the LCMS? What type of “definitive action” should be taken?

Unfortunately, beer isn’t as good for the blood sugar as whisky, so my beer intake has been reduced. If there’s Lion Stout around, though, I’d be likely to drink it. Some day, I hope to drink enough of it while watching Sri Lankan television to the end that I understand cricket (both the rules, and why anyone would actually want to watch it).

I’m not picky. Lion Stout will work.

Yesterday, I went to the Army Surplus store and bought a flak jacket to wear when following this thread.

Whew!

Johannes, the flak-protected-kind-of

As I stated back sometime in 2003 at an ACTS meeting, the problems in Missouri Synod are not political, they are theological. You all are tilting at windmills thinking a political change will correct doctrinal problems. At best a political change will modify the doctrinal problems, but never correct them. We are talking about the kindom of the left and the Kingdom of the Right. The two overlap, but never become one. I see those who claim to be confessional fight amongst each other while the liberal/heterodox laugh as they take over synod inc. This thread is a prime example of that action. Rev. Stefanski is not in Missouri Synod, therefore his observations carry no weight or are wrong. I am also no longer in Missouri because I could not stomach the fighting and backstabbing that went on among the “conservative” side. I appears to me to be nothing more then a power struggle over who will become the next “conservative” leader. I suggest you begin to work together and put away your own paticular desires and work for orthodoxy. Exercise “In Statu Confessionus” and give the heterodox a “correct or else” mandate the way Trinity, Herrin, IL and Rev. Henson did. Synod does not want to loose congregations, only conservative/ confessional Pastors. Educate your congregations and prepare them for what will be forced either upon them or, more likely, on those Pastors that are taking up the fight. Quit killing each other and join together. Leave personalities out of the fight and look for ways to obtain unity rather then belittle those who see Missouri as a lost cause. What is the synod anyway? It certainly is not the church, it is of the left hand. What will you loose if you leave? Of what kingdom are those things you would loose? By the same token, what do you gain by staying? Is what you gain from Christ or from man?

Bill,

Actually the conservatives are incredibly united this year in the LCMS. It is too bad you did not stick around to see it.

This string is a prime example of my point. The only disunity of purpose is coming from Pastor Stefanski and he is not a member of the LCMS. I respect your decision to leave as I respect Pastor Stefanski’s decision to leave. I have made an effort to get to know the ELDONA to which he belongs and it is a fine group.

To your main point, we have stated over and over again on this blog that electing Matt Harrison does not solve the problems of the LCMS but it would be a great help toward solving them. The reason it will help is for the same reasons you give in defense of WELS polity – the first duty of the LCMS president is to oversee the doctrine and practice of the synod.

TR

Johannes,
You are too funny!!! You either make me think or smile, thanks bunches!!!!

@Bill Kope #144
There’s an old story about a politician (a senator, I believe), who in the middle of a very acrimonious debate, stood up and said, “I’d rather be right than be President.” Whereupon, one of the other Senators turned to the man next to him and said, “He will be neither.”

Bill, you said, “It appears to me to be nothing more then a power struggle over who will become the next “conservative” leader.” I don’t believe the arguments here are from the perspective of power. Altho it seems many of us believe that the election of Matthew Harrison will tend to solve some of the problems in Synod, Inc., most confessionals/conservatives are not power-hungry. Reading and “listening” to what’s being written and said here, it ought to be obvious that it’s all about being “right.” Mr. Gepke used the term “more orthodox” in his post, and some of us took issue with that term. But isn’t that what much of this is about–who is “more orthodox” or “the most orthodox” among us? Rev. Stefanski is not the only one who keeps repeating, “You are wrong.” In Sweden, there are several “confesisonal” groups that oppose the policies of the state church (women’s and homosexual ordination, etc.). But, as William Tighe has observed (“Swedes Adrfit,” Touchstone, March 2003), they continue to indulge themselves tirelessly with in-fighting over who is “right,” or “more right.” Now I’m not a big fan of “effectiveness” as used by the CG folks, but their fragmentation has made them extremely ineffective and voiceless to all intents and purposes. (The election for president in the 2001 Convention is a case in point.) That’s a danger I see here as I read the calls to leave the synod. We’re so busy being “right”, that we will end up being “left”–out of the debate, that is, and marginalized, by our own doing. I think that’s what I Scott Diekmann might be implying.

Fire away– I’ve got my new flak jacket on.

johannes, right sometimes-but-not-always

Jim Pierce :
Pr. Stefanski, please notice that I wasn’t quoting “cut and run” as if you have written it.

I quoted you; if I had been quoting you quoting me, I would have written, “‘cut and run’.” The point is that the only way I “come across” that way is if you read any single statement isolated from the rest of what I have consistently written over the past twenty-or-so years, all of which has been echoed on this site, so that it is by no means unknown. Not being alone in a misperception doesn’t make the perception correct; it merely means that those in a similar state often misunderstand things in a similar way. (As a cheap example, consider Ross Perot’s use of “you people” for every group he’d address, and how loaded that term was taken by black folks. Unlike Jesse Jackson’s “Hymietown,” nothing evil was meant by Perot, yet he was immediately jumped on as insensitive and a closet racist, etc.)

Perhaps this is all just a misunderstanding and you aren’t calling for confessional Lutherans in the LCMS to break fellowship and leave the LCMS. If that is the case, and my impression of you is wrong, then I will publicly apologize to you.

Once again:

Rev. Eric J. Stefanski :
I’ve been quite clear where I stand on those who remain in the LCMS: if you’re going to be there, fight, because if you stay without fighting, you’re sinning. I’ve said it over and over–and not just since I’ve been out of the LCMS, but for a good many years before.

Scott quoted Walther as saying, “Calling upon my good legal right in such a fellowship, I will not leave it before someone throws me out or indirectly necessitates it by putting me into a situation where I must either do or yield something against conscience.” The only way for me to stay in the LCMS was to yield something against conscience–to be willing to commune those that I cannot commune. For me, this ‘reconciliation’ with my ‘brothers’ was mandated…but the rest of the LCMS pastors live within it every day without a mandate. I’m not sure how that is not seen as problematic and calling for definitive action.

Are you here saying that LCMS pastors should leave the LCMS? What type of “definitive action” should be taken?

I’m saying that you should re-read Pr. Wilken’s comment #11. That’s what I’ve said, it’s what I’m saying now, and it’s what I’m likely to continue to say…though probably not here, since it’s apparently unwelcome (unless said in soundbite fashion instead of with any listing of the whys or the hows).

EJG

A quote within a quote within a quote within a comment. Eric, you have set a record!

You are my brother even if we are divided by the fiction of LCMS unity. I know we both pray for the real thing. It will come.

You are pricking consciences, mine included. Don’t give up, but give us some time.

TW

Pastor Tim Rossow :
This string is a prime example of my point. The only disunity of purpose is coming from Pastor Stefanski and he is not a member of the LCMS.

Pr. Rossow, this is just ridiculous. If you wish to be consistent, you’d have to say that Pr. Wilken and I are both creating disunity of purpose, as I have advocated nothing more than he advocates in Comment #11. I realize that it is difficult for some people to tell the difference between urgency and stridency, so let me be clear: what Pr. Wilken advocates in #11 was supposed to be being done in 2004-2005…and those ‘doing it’ dropped the ball. Then, it was promised in 2006-2007…and those promising ended up doing nothing.

Now, something new is afoot (beyond BJS), and those who will be involved need to be urged onward, so that they do not also lose focus and let things drop in post-convention malaise, etc. Every successive convention will find those who are more tortured in their conscience due to being ‘in fellowship with’ those with whom they are not in doctrinal agreement, and many of them will either leave Missouri or simply ‘drop out’ of synodical politics. (For instance, I think that you will find that the number of nominations from Confessional folk for offices other than SP and VPs will be way down this cycle; this is a symptom of what I am talking about.) Urging on in such a battle cannot be done through what is false or debatable (“we’re in the majority”), and it cannot be of the manner in which ‘church discipline’ is so often ‘applied’ in congregations (“we’ll keep calling them to repentance until they and we are dead, but we’ll keep communing them until then”). Again, I’ve seen it done in all of the wrong ways–and I was not only there for the meetings, but for the meetings behind the meetings behind the meetings. It’s so easy to fix; but it’s always easier to shoot the messenger.

But, anyway, yes, if your purpose is not to call the LCMS to repentance, with the realization that if it does not repent a separation must take place, then we are not of the same purpose. Personally, I hope that your church body repents and that it ends up in fellowship with us at some point (though I would never rejoin it, simply because its structure, imo, invites the very abuse that has plagued it).

Again, I’ve said nothing in the above other than what I have always said, nothing that you should not already have known.

EJG

Todd Wilken :
A quote within a quote within a quote within a comment. Eric, you have set a record!
You are my brother even if we are divided by the fiction of LCMS unity. I know we both pray for the real thing. It will come.
You are pricking consciences, mine included. Don’t give up, but give us some time.
TW

Oops…I missed a close-blockquote tag in there someplace. Maybe Mr. Fisher will find it and fix it for me.

Thank you for understanding what I’m saying. I think if folks will get beyond reactions to substance, we might find out we’re in agreement…and they might even be willing to admit that there are substantive issues that divide Missouri from WELS, and that they are not all errors on Missouri’s part.

EJG

Bill Kope :
As I stated back sometime in 2003 at an ACTS meeting

I think that was Autumn of 2004, Bill, if you’re talking about the meeting at the German restaurant in Versailles (though my memory now fails me as to whether this was before or after the Melrose Park conference…though I think it was before).

Exercise “In Statu Confessionus” and give the heterodox a “correct or else” mandate the way Trinity, Herrin, IL and Rev. Henson did.

This, really, is the issue: whether ‘the united conservatives’ are all united in such an idea. The thing that you and I have to wait for is what happens after this convention, as there is no way of telling this now, but there will be then. Either we will see a force rise up in Missouri to confess, or we will see them recede into the woodwork again. I truly think (and pray) that to some extent we will see the former, but not out of those of whom such a thing would be expected (i.e., if Harrison isn’t elected, the non-elected leadership will have a massive change).

And now, I’ll go and do other things.

EJG

Nutz…typed another defective end blockquote tag! Y’know what’d be cool, Norm? Having a little ‘tag palette’ above the text entry box…

Eric,

I concur wholeheartedly with Wilken and very much appreciate your voice in this forum. I know that your participation here is motivated by your love for us still entangled in the web of Missouri’s mess. I also know that you have been fighting the good fight for years, and that past disappointments from brothers who were supposed to be fighting by your side have left you understandably skeptical toward those of us who remain in this synod. Please, keep praying for us, as I know you do, that we might be given the strength to act upon our convictions and follow the correct path, whatever that turns out to be.

Your sadly-not-in-full-fellowship, but still brother in Christ,
Tom

Rev. Rossow#145
Where do I support the W/ELS polity? Synod is in the left hand kingdom, it is not the Church. It is made up of congregations that are the visible Church, but the synod itself is not Church and it most certainly is not required for one to be a member of the true Church. Everyone here seems to be hung up on Missouri Synod being the one true Church. It is not. The true Church is beyond Missouri, W/ELS, ELCA ELDoNA, ACLC or any other body. This is the point I have been trying to make and which everyone attacks.

Johannes#147
Unless you have something to challange the status quo or the downhill trend, there is nothing you can “win”. The majority congregations and Ministers in Missouri Synod do not really know what has happened to you synod and most do not really care. They just want to do their own thing with the least attention from the district or synod. There was once upon a time when I could go to a Missouri Synod congregation and I would have no doubt of following the liturgy of page 5 or page 15. I would have no qualms of communing at that place. That changed in the 80′s and it became more and more difficult to find a congregation that used the liturgy. I was a member of a Missouri Synod from 1950 until 2005. Mainly there was no other truely orthodox option. The congregations appeared to be orthodox on the outside, but inside they were really corrupt. Rotting from the inside out. Doctrine had changed and the Lutheran Symbols were either ignored, overlooked or thrown out. I have seen this in the past, back in the 60′s when the old ALC moved away from Scripture and joined TALC and later ELCA.

A question to you all; When will your synod have gone too far and you must leave? Will it be the ordination of women, of homosexuals, laymen with little or not training as Ministers? I do not advote leaving without the proper preparation and educating the sheep as to the siuation, but will you draw a line in the sand or will you continue with the same old same old?

@Bill Kope #155
“Johannes#147
Unless you have something to challange the status quo or the downhill trend, there is nothing you can “win”. The majority congregations and Ministers in Missouri Synod do not really know what has happened to you synod and most do not really care.”

You are right, of course–I agree with everything you said. Perhaps I did not explain myself. I was not talking about “winning” as in win-lose, so much as being effective in getting the message out–the message that Scott Diekmann has stated here. I was talking about making as many people and congregations (and Pastors, too) aware of what is going on. You are spot-on re: those who “do not really know…”, and I have posted on that issue (#65 above). It’s not politics I’m concerned about.

Thanks for the clarification.

j

@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #148

Pr. Stefanski, please accept my apology. I have misjudged your words regarding the LCMS and you in the process.

Bill,

I was not clear. I meant my reference to your support for WELS polity as a good thing. The WELS polity has DP’s and the SP guarding doctrine and practice and the LCMS does that too, at least in the handbook where it lists the SP’s duties.

TR

Rev Stefanski:

I am not speaking for the WELS, I am just an Elder. So here is my personal take on our discussions at hand. Personally, at least at this time, I don’t see WELS/ELS in fellowship with the LCMS, especially with the unfortunate mess that the LCMS is in. Many in our synod are grieved beyond words at what has happened to the LCMS.

I only see a fellowship possibility with a split LCMS, such as a synod A. Many of us hope and pray that the LCMS doesn’t go the way of ELCA.

You mention what proper church and ministry is, but the example of your definition is a disaster. How can you say that the LCMS way of church and ministry is better, when the house is burning down?

WELS, (by God’s grace) hasn’t had these problems. The reason is this; we are united in doctrine and practice. Please go to one of our conventions and see this for yourself. Why? Because the pastors are church, the called workers are church, and so is the synod. This allows the false doctrine pastors to be properly disciplined by the district presidents, etc.

Your example is like a fat lady (400 pounds or so) driving around with a bumper sticker on her car that says, “ask me how to lose weight?” If you want to lose weight, certainly you wouldn’t want ask her how. If you want to look at church and ministry, your model has big problems.

In the WELS/ELS, there is a consistancy of the type of churches that we have. If you go to roughly 15 churches in a given area, probably at least 14 are doing historical, liturgical Lutheran worship. I can assure you this much, the one’s that are not, are not feeling very comfortable, because they are being watched very closely, and they are being warned.

Many in our synod do not want to grow, because we are fearful of controlling false doctrine. That is a far cry from the “ablaze movement.”

I am exremely confident, that with our synod president and our district presidents, these particular churches will eventually either repent or asked to leave our synod.

Again, we are not perfect, we are sinful. But we are concerned and frightful of the poison of the CG movement. And, while not perfect, I believe that our system of church and ministry has proved Biblical, and much more succesful in dealing with false teachers.

I will be in daily prayer for the LCMS, and especially pastors like yourself that have had the courage to take a stand on this issue.

Blessings,

Pastor Rossow:

You are a great leader, with a lot of common sense.

There are lots of fine things being debated here but many of us are off track from the original post. This is too bad because Principal Grepke wrote a provacative response to Scott’s original post and we have for the most part ignored that and gotten far afield.

I am normally open to whatever direction post comments take but in this case we are over-looking some very important stuff.

Please limit future comments on this string to the original post and Grepke’s response.

TR

Tim:

I think that Principal Grepke has made it abundantly clear that he doesn’t consider the Lutheran Confessions binding on him or his congregation’s worship practice.

With statements like, “Quite frankly, if God expected us to adhere to Lutheran doctrine as if it is on par with Scripture, he would have inspired its writers to write those words, not the ones they did,” he obviously considers the Lutheran Confessions in conflict with the teachings of the Bible.

The only question remaining is, why is he attending a Lutheran Church?

TW

Todd,

Good point. There still may be some fruitful discussion of the reply for the sake of our readers.

TR

Rev. Wilkins#162
This reminds me of the Mid-South District convention in 2003. I sat next to a Vicar and a DCE. A discussion was going on about something that was brought before the convention, I believe it had to do with the district layminister program. I had my Book of Concord out and was referring to the sections of Augsburg that applied to the Office of Holy Ministry, the call and ordination. The vicar next to me asked the DCE what book I was looking at and the DCE said it was the Book of Concord, but he didn’t need to be concerned. He had a copy somewhere and did look at it at some point in time. Two things disturbed me about this discussion. First was a Vicar that was a voting delegate and second a DCE from the same congregation that was a voting delegate and not concerned about adhering to the BOC. It was at that time that I fully realized that our synod members had no idea about Lutheran theology. I see finally after so many years, studies of the Book of Concord are beginning to take place. Bible Studies are great, but knowledge of the Book of Concord sheds Lutheran light on Scripture rather then what I think Scripture says.

Todd & Scott, your questions in posts 162 & 164 scare me. This truly scares me. If we don’t understand how or why, where do we go from here? How do we fight something we can’t see or understand?

Equally frightening, this man is a principal in an LCMS school, what are those kids being taught?

@Dutch #166

This kind of stuff is all over the place–like Kudzu, as Scott has said.

j

Lloyd,

Your zealousness for the faith is to be commended. But several times you have identified yourself as an “elder”. Just some food for thought- the lay office of elder is a calvinistic intrusion into the Lutheran Church. In Holy Scripture Elder/Presbyter refers ONLY to what English speaking Lutherans call Pastor. How many good pastors out there in both WELS and the LCMS have had to “be fired”, tormented or bullied by an unscriptural “Board Elders”. Sure some of you have avoided this for various reasons, but this trojan horse is one of the reasons why this very thread exists; the “Board of Elders” approved of such and such worship service.

Find a church body that truly has its doctine of the ministry correct- only Ordained Presbsters are elders; only Presbyters are Presidents of congregations as well. For the Priest/Presbyters presides over the congregations as a representative of Christ (of course under a Bishop in an episcopal situation). Whatever realignment is envisioned for the future by you God fearing folks, please do away with layministry altogether and restore the offices of Deacon, Subdeacon, Reader, etc.

Johannes,
I know this parasite is in every denom. That isn’t really what I meant. I meant that, we see the falseness & danger, but those who believe CG/Emergent theology are blind to the false teaching & danger of it. They seem to have scales on their eyes in this.

This seems to be an example of the Wheat & Tare parable, our Lord taught
(Matthew 13: 13-24, 36-43).
Or, am I looking at this whole incorrectly?

@Neil Grepke #97

Mr. Grepke,
You wrote, “While we who know this well already would look at the phrase “Jesus is better than football” with a “DUH!” there are many who need to have this basic reality put before them. I am dumbfounded that so many learned and devout shepherds of God’s flock could so intensely disdain an attempt to put the basic truths of the faith in terms someone outside the chruch might actually get.”

Can we put the basic truths of the faith in terms someone outside the church might actually get? Can we make the mysteries of God “getable” or understandable to anyone? Does “getting it” equate with faith? Do we “get” (read understand) the basic truths in order for the Holy Spirit to bring us to faith in Christ or are we given the basic Truth in the clear proclamation of God’s word and in His Holy Sacraments?

@Pastor Tim Rossow #161

OK, Pastor, Rossow, let me try. Here goes:

I offer an edited quote from a friend, who has “followed” this thread somewhat vicariously, including the original post, and Mr. Grepke’s response, and a few others.

“What Mr. Grepke misses is that the whole CW phenomenon is built on the foundation of worship as human work. To tell God how great He is is not the complete picture of biblical worship. To recite His magnificent works, yes; to revel in His magnificent grace, yes; but to compare Jesus and football with Jesus coming out on top is to miss the point entirely. AC IV vanishes like the Cheshire cat in all of this mischief.

What all these approaches have in common is to equate the exhilaration of praise with genuine worship. Remember Peter on the Mount of Transfiguration. He spoke truthfully saying “Lord, it is good that we are here.” But then the voice from the shekinah cloud said, in effect, “Shut up – This is my beloved Son: listen to Him.” Thus the Lambs and Sheep need to hear the Shepherd’s voice, not bleat all over the place about how wonderful He is.

The crowd dynamic of American Football and ‘praise worship’ is of one piece. Both provide big doses of adrenaline that lend a sense of exhilaration to the experience.”

Using Scott’s metaphorical approach then, we can discern a continuity between CW and what is going on in Synod. Good intentions notwithstanding, Synod, like CW, is dangerously close to “Transforming” itself from Justification-centered (what God has done), to Great Commission-centered (what we are doing.) And although Synod’s mission statement stops short of “make disciples”, saying only to “vigorously make known…,” the leadership has, in effect, gone the step beyond, to “Jesus saved you, so get to work.” And so, as my friend has observed above, AC IV, like the cat, has become, (quoting Alice), only “a grin without a cat”: The substance (Justification) has disappeared , and only style (God talk) remains.

johannes, the Not-grinning

@Dutch #169

I’m not so sure about the wheat and the tares. If that were the case, it’s not our job to sort them, parabolically speaking.

I think you see it correctly–it’s the whole point of Scott’s piece, and you understand it. Pr. Wilken and others see it clearly, too. Perhaps my friend’s observations, and my conclusion above (#171) may help. It’s pretty obvious that we’ve identified the issue, but aren’t quite ready to take the next step, whatever that step is. Gospel reductionism, enthusiasm, evangelicalsim, and Reformed theology and pracice, to mention just a few, will ever haunt us. We are part of the Church Militant, after all. The exhortations to the Seven Churches ought to be required reading.

j

Pastor Tim Rossow :
Please limit future comments on this string to the original post and Grepke’s response.

(Since all y’all are preparing for a convention…) Mr. Chairman, point of Gospel privilege?

(Assuming that you have granted me the floor…)

Jim Pierce :
@Rev. Eric J. Stefanski #148
Pr. Stefanski, please accept my apology. I have misjudged your words regarding the LCMS and you in the process.

Jim, Baptized son of God, I certainly forgive you. With Christ, in whom your forgiveness is forever assured, I say to you and the others in Missouri: “Go fight in His strength; and if the principalities and powers against whom you fight end up having such control over the flesh and blood with whom you are in fellowship, we will have a home waiting for you…and if they do not, remember when Christ glorifies Himself in your victory over them that such glory ought to redound through your seeking to be in fellowship with those orthodox Lutherans outside of Missouri, as well (even if that means speaking to or of them the way that Walther & Co. would have to wrt the Buffalo or Iowa synods, etc.”

In keeping with Pr. Rossow’s desire, I will not reply to Mr. Cadle’s post, other than to say that rigidity is always a way to maintain the status quo, but it is no proof of orthodoxy, and that Fr. Daniel Hackney’s statement wrt ‘elder’ is correct (and the genesis of ‘hire’ and ‘fire’).

EJG

RE: Mr. Diekmann in #130…. I probably should read through all of these responses first, but let me clarify a thing or two.

1. Mr. Diekmann, you did not address the question of whether or not you have ever actually visited our church in order to make the numerous negative claims about us.

2. This video was NOT shown in church. And the Sacrament of Holy Communion was properly prefaced, explained and prayed over.

3. I am passionate about my Lutheran perspective — a concept that to me means honoring God’s word above all calls to “works.” I continue to be confused that a group of folks who would die to fight against the concept of “works righteousness” could so intensely advocated for a Roman Catholic-like adherence to rites and traditions.

I truly hope to come to a better understanding as I read further posts.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, Mr. Diekmann, for re-posting my response.

Johannes, I would very much appreciate being informed and enlightened about any songs we used in that service that are not keeping with Lutheran doctrine. Please feel free to contact me at ngrepke@sjlc.net.

Fr. Daniel:

The main reason that I say that I am an Elder, is so people will not think that I am a pastor:

Here is our Manuel of Duties, for the Board of Elders:

Section 1: God-given Privileges and Responsibilities:

A. They shall adorn their office with an honest conduct and be good examples to the congregation (1 Timothy 3:8-12).

B. They shall aid the Pastor(s) in the spiritual affairs of the church and hold to the Bible as the inerrant Word which guides doctrine and practice.

C. They shall be responsible for good order in the services.

D. They shall particularly care in love for the poor, the sick, the widows, and orphans (Galatians 6:9-10).

Section 2: Duties and Obligations:

A. Assist the Pastor(s) in counseling with difficult cases and in finding peaceful and God-pleasing solutions to personnel problems in the congregation.

B. Engage in continual review of communion and church attendance of all members and make calls on delinquents.

C. Encourage truly spiritual programs on the part of all the organizations in the congregation.

D. Periodically review, under the leadership of the Pastor(s), the nature, purpose and conduct of God-pleasing public worship.

E. Provide recommendations to the Council on new forms of worship, liturgies, and hymns for use in public worship and report other necessary information to the council.

F. Coordinate and oversee the ushers.

We also serve communion to the Pastors.

Our WELS pastors have to go to school for eight years, and are required to be able to read fluently, Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic & Latin. Once a month (in the Phoenix area) many will get together and do an O.T. Bible study in Hebrew and Aramiac. And on the other months, they get together and do their N.T. Bible studies in the Greek. I kid you not, the pastors will occasionally do our adult Bible classes right from the original languages.

Quite obviously, they are trained in the ministry far above and beyond the Elders.

As Dirty Harry once said, “A man has got to know his limitations.”

Henry in #170 Terrific, useful questions. You bring up one of the important dichotomies of the faith. On one hand, God is vast, mysterious, unfathomable. Simultaneously, He has revealed himself to us through His Holy Word.

Can we ever truly get it? Nope. We cannot by our own understanding “get it.” The Holy Spirit works faith in our hearts. However, I believe Scripture is quite clear in its commands for us to take the Word to the people. Using Christ’s own example, he went to the most egregious sinners he found and sat down with them, meeting with them on their terms. He did NOT hold up in a building preaching, “PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! Get it or die!”

The irony here is that while I would think most of these respondants would agree with you that God is beyond our understanding, how is it that these same folks are insisting that ONLY THEIR understanding of God is valid?

Mr. Grepke,

While Scott is certainly capable of speaking for himself, why must he, or anyone else, actually visit your church to draw conclusions about your doctrine and practice? Does your actual doctrine and practice differ from what is presented publicly on your congregation’s website, or from your own testimony and description within this thread?

How does your doctrine and practice uphold what you, as a professed Lutheran, claim to confess in AC XXIV and APXXIV? If you don’t like what our Confessions have to say about worship, and have no desire to put into practice what they confess, why are you a Lutheran?

Johannes in #171 quotes a friend: “What Mr. Grepke misses is that the whole CW phenomenon is built on the foundation of worship as human work. To tell God how great He is is not the complete picture of biblical worship. To recite His magnificent works, yes; to revel in His magnificent grace, yes; but to compare Jesus and football with Jesus coming out on top is to miss the point entirely. AC IV vanishes like the Cheshire cat in all of this mischief.

What all these approaches have in common is to equate the exhilaration of praise with genuine worship.”

On the contrary, I am not blind to this concept at all. CW, as it is stereotyped, and, in fact, exists in some places, IS in fact faulty in that it elevates the importance of man and, as one previous commentor said, “Emphasizes the Christian, not Christ.” NOT ALL CW does this and that is a FUNDAMENTAL mistake being made by those who feel this US/THEM mentality in our synod. It is as fundamentally wrong and absurd as the comment made by one YouTube observer that “rock-n-roll is slang for sex.” If you start with a damning presupposition, you will naturally draw the yes-man responses that lead to a mob of people calling for a rift in the Synod. I am saddened beyond belief.

Fr. Daniel:

One last thought: The easy part of the Manuel of Duties is: Section 2:E. The new form of Worship is our new Christian Worship Supplement, right out of the Hymnal.

Thank God that it is not “Calvary Chapel music.” All of our worship is done right out of the hymnal!

@Neil Grepke #174
Hi Mr. Grepke.

You didn’t ask about whether or not I’d visited, so I didn’t answer. No, I have not visited St. John’s; to characterize my research as supposition or hearsay though, would be innacurate. One doesn’t need to make a trip to Washington D.C. to ascertain the politcal views of this or that person – examining their practice suffices. In this case, just taking your own words and reading them reveals a lack of understanding of Lutheran theology and the Confessions.

My apologies for saying in my comment that the video was shown in church, when it wasn’t. I misunderstood what you said.

You’re welcome. I’m glad you’re taking the opportunity to comment.

Regarding your statement above in comment #177, ” He [Jesus] did NOT hold up in a building preaching, “PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE!,” I don’t think Jesus was in a building when he uttered the words we now call “the Great Commission,” but He said precisely what you say He didn’t say: “…teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” This “teaching” is doctrine. You’re creating a false dichotomy between doctrine and practice.

Rev. Messer (#178) and others who have questioned my desire to remain Lutheran or why my church would continue to have me or, far worse than all, have implied that I am misleading the children of our school…

I have been very blessed by this dialogue in many ways and welcome more direction and feedback. Like many of you, I am saddened by the conflicts that have arisen between brothers, but I recognize these things are sometimes necessary. In fact, when I earlier questioned “where is the love,” I did not mean to imply that we should, for the sake of love and harmony, set aside a firm stance on Biblical principles.

If you read what I have actually written, I have not denied or defamed the Lutheran Confessions. Nor have I, to my understanding, done anything to reject them. I will state again, however, what seems obvious to me: that the documents of our Lutheran church are not in and of themselves Scripture. If you tell me that the only acceptable way to worship our Lord and Savior is in the Divine Service, I will stand confidently and passionately on God’s word to say that you are completely wrong. NOTE that I am not saying that the Divine service is not an exceptional way for God to feed His people. It IS. It’s just not the only way.

I see the value in Lutherans sharing basic worship tenents. One of the main things we teach the children of our school — after the basics of being saved by grace through faith — is that worship is not something we DO FOR God. God feeds us in worship. I could NOT AGREE MORE that CW must take care to avoid limiting itself to merely stating how great God is. Worship must instruct and admonish, which every service on the “evil” south end of our building (down the long, dark hallway) does do.

Pardon me for being obtuse, but I still cannot see after all this dialogue why my Lutheranism is being questioned. In fact, the only things I have read the border on heretical are ones that deny the primacy of Scripture in favor of the words and opinions of men.

As for why Mr. Diekmann must actually experience services here to make the accusations he did (which interestingly were almost exact quotes from a mutual friend who is both a member here and is receiving money from this congregation to attend the seminary), is that his descriptions are flatly false and inflammatory. They imply that we are heterodox and that we are not truly Lutheran. I deny these claims and I take issue with the fact that our efforts to “reach out” are slammed and twisted. Worship in and of itself is NOT outreach, but what we do at St. John is SIGNIFICANTLY more like the outreach of Christ than that of must LCMS churches of which I have been a member, where “outreach” is sending a few bucks to a third world country and “evangalism” is making sure the doctrine is pure in case someone actually walks through the old wooden doors.

May God bless every one of you and your churches. May He use us for His divine purposes!

Neil Grepke : Using Christ’s own example, he went to the most egregious sinners he found and sat down with them, meeting with them on their terms. He did NOT hold up in a building preaching, “PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! Get it or die!”
The irony here is that while I would think most of these respondants would agree with you that God is beyond our understanding, how is it that these same folks are insisting that ONLY THEIR understanding of God is valid?

Mr. Grepke, you should seriously examine and reconsider your words. Why do we insist that only our understanding of God is valid? Do you really wish to imply that there are many valid understandings of God that are valid? You seem to me to be speaking what I call “pomoese” or the language of the postmodernist on this point.

And, once again, I am concerned about your apparent anti-doctrine stance. The position you are taking is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Jesus, the Apostles, and our Lutheran fathers. PURE DOCTRINE is extremely important, or didn’t you know that teachers who purport to speak for God and get the truth wrong will have to answer to God for false teachings? Indeed, “For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope” (Rom. 15:4). When you minimize teaching PURE DOCTRINE you are actually removing hope from people that can only be found through God’s means of Grace, His Word, baptism, and the Lord’s Supper. Sound words, sound doctrine are terribly important (2 Tim. 1:13; Titus 1:9; 2 Tim. 2:2). Yes, scriptures are given for DOCTRINE (2 Tim. 3:16) and we are exhorted in the Holy Scriptures to let the Word of Christ “dwell in us richly” (Col. 3:16) and to stand fast in the doctrinal traditions that that we have been taught in the scriptures (2 Thess. 2:15). This is precisely the attitude of the early church who followed their Lord’s command to “teach and baptize” for we read that they continued steadfastly in the Apostle’s doctrine (Acts 2:42).

@Neil Grepke #177

Jesus did not hold up in one building during His ministry, but he did spend a lot of time in His Father’s house reading Scripture and teaching pure doctrine. He revealed how prophecy was fulfilled in Him. He was among the people of that day saving them just as He is among us today in Word and Sacrament ministry.

Can more than one understanding of God be valid?

Neil #197

“Using Christ’s own example, he went to the most egregious sinners he found and sat down with them, meeting with them on their terms. He did NOT hold up in a building preaching, “PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! PURE DOCTRINE! Get it or die!” ”

Your example involves Jesus’ daily life, not how worship was conducted. Should we reach out and show mercy to those in need and despised by society, absolutely! I know how many sins God has forgiven me, how much more so then has he forgiven the few public sins of someone else. Paul also went to people where they were. Jesus never marginalized his message nor compromised doctrine to win converts. Paul also never promoted anything other than a pure understanding of scripture. I have yet to find an example in scripture where worship is changed to better reflect the tastes of the culture. If you have found such a passage I would appreciate the reference. Even something from an early church father or the Book of Concord would work.

I think outreach and worship have often become intertwined, likely due to the influence of American Evangelicalism that surrounds us, and a proper understanding of vocation is not taught enough. Worship is not the place to showcase our faith for others to decide if it meets their tastes and too often people attend church one day a week and live like the unchurched the other 6 days. These problems are not limited to churches with CW, but can be addressed in any church by better adult catechesis.

“…[T]heology is not made up of the variable notions and opinions of men, but is the immutable divine truth or God’s own doctrine (doctrina divina). It has this quality because of the source from which it is drawn. Acoording to the witness of Christ and His Apostles and its own self-attestation in the hearts of the Christians, Holy Scripture is God’s infallible Word, and therefore the doctrine taken from the Scripture is not ‘after the tradition of men’ (Col. 2:8), not man’s doctrine, but God’s own doctrine, ‘the doctrine of God our Savior’ (Titus 2:10). And in God’s Church nothing but God’s own doctrine may be preached and heard. The door of the Church is closed to all doctrines devised by men.” —Francis Pieper, “Christian Dogmatics”, Vol.1 p. 52.

Mr. Grepke,
I stand by what I said about my fears for the children in that school. Since it was shown in Church, I must assume some of them saw it. What exactly does it teach them?

Our sons are being taught to “fear” God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit.
In Luther’s meanings of the Commandments, he uses the words “to fear and love God so that we may…”. That “fear” is to give reverence to. Webster’s definition of reverence is:

Reverence: profound adoring awed respect

Where is that reverence/fear in this? As a parent of boys in Lutheran school, I should be concerned. I am held to account for what I allow my sons to be taught & exposed to.
I don’t want them learning anything like this. Again, I stand by what I said.

Dutch,

As a correction Neil stated in #174 that the video was not shown in church. Scott acknowledged in #181 that the had misunderstood.

@Alex #188
Here is Mr. Grepke’s comment, from his original post, #97:

“We then prayed a number of petitions, including the Lord’s Prayer, then read the Lectionary Readings for the week. This was followed by the message and the song, Jesus is Better than Football. This was followed by Holy Communion, during which we sang How He Loves Us and Enough, again emphasizing the idea that nothing we embrace in this life compares to God’s amazing grace, love and majesty. “

Fr. Daniel:

You state: “Find a church body that truly has its doctrine of ministry correct.”

Your church body (LCMS) has churches in the Phoenix area that have elders that are not pastors. So, using your own advice, maybe you should find a church body that is consistant with your own terms for ministry.

Again, your system of “church and ministry”, has lead to inconsistencies and heresies all over the place.

Every church does it’s own thing, with the district presidents just standing there and letting pastors break their own by-laws as they see fit. This “correct system of church and ministry” is adiaphora anarchy. Poor practice of doctrine, leads to false doctrine.

I just don’t understand how the conservatives and confessional pastors can put up with a system of church and ministry that doesn’t work. Look at the disunity at your conventions. No one is united in doctrine and practice. Anything goes, I/N/O “adiaphora.”

If the conservatives do split off from the LCMS and use the same system of “church and ministry” that they now have in place, you will have a repeat of adiaphora anarchy, and be thus forced to split off again. Folks that don’t learn from their mistakes, will just keep repeating them.

Time is much better spent on preaching the Gospel in Word and Sacrament, then spending all this time in trying to correct a screwed up system.

Sorry to be so blunt.

Scott,

So I guess it sounds like it was sung, but the video was not shown. Neil, is this correct?

johannes :
@Bubbles #50
Check out David Adams’ “Three Missouris” and “PIETISM IN MISSOURI’S MISSION:
FROM MISSION AFFIRMATIONS TO ABLAZE!”, by Klemet Preus. I believe both can be found in the LOGIA archives, and perhaps the Preus article can be accessed here. YOu can contact Adams at CSL and request his paper.
The same reluctance to “enforce orthodoxy” that you describe goes back even to the post-Seminex days. Many of the seminex grads filtered back into the synod, and nobody noticed or cared. Pr. Stefanski sees things pretty accurately.
Don’t discount the influence of so called “Christian” TV and radio, either.
j

I once saw a quote that mentioned that the pastors that are retiring are donating their libraries to the LCMS Historical Society. It was mentioned that a lot of the publications were of reformed content and theologically contradictory to Lutheran teachings (BoC, Luther, Walther). Someone mentioned on another site that there wasn’t much available the last 50 years that were good solid, confessional books. I don’t go along with that excuse. There is always a way to get good solid writings from the church fathers.

.

Lloyd,

Actually if memory serves me correctly Fr Daniel has found a church body that is consistent with his terms for ministry. I believe he is in the Orthodox Church and not LCMS, though I don’t think that has come up yet in this thread.

@Neil Grepke #179
Mr. Grepke—

I’m willing to concede that you understand the issue (problem) with much of CW. I have played the keyboard in a praise band, and have more than a passing acquaintance with CW. Your characterization of CW critics as “starting with a damning proposition” is unfortunate, as is the description “mob mentality calling for a rift in the Synod.” The rift already exists—and has for a long time. The question is, what should we do? Leaving the Synod is, to most of us, a last resort, I believe, and saddens not only you, but all of us. Reading the posts here ought to make that clear. However, let’s deal with the immediate issue, CW, which is symptomatic of a larger one. Let’s just look at four of the songs in the worship service you have outlined for us, using as our template the quotation that CW & praise songs “Emphasize the Christian, not Christ.” I Googled the titles as you gave them, and reproduce the lyrics, at least in part, and sometimes condensed. As we read these songs, let us ask ourselves these two questions: (1) Where is Christ (or the Gospel)?, and (2) Is the Christian emphasized? I add an important third question: (3) What do these songs teach us about Christianity? Rather than press the argument, I’ll simply let the readers, and you, I hope, ask (and answer) the above three questions.

“Majestic” (Lincoln Brewster)

Oh Lord, Our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth (repeat)
The heavens declare Your greatness
The oceans cry out to You
The mountains, they bow down before You
So I’ll join with the earth and I’ll sing…
The heavens declare Your greatness
The oceans cry out to You
The mountains, they bow down before You
So I’ll join with the earth and I’ll give my praise to You
Ooohhhh…
And I will worship You, I will worship You
I will worship You (I will worship You, Oh God)
I will worship You, We will worship You (We will worship You, Oh God)
We will worship You

“Children of the living God” (Feranando Ortega)

Come and sing sing out loud children of the living God– Sing to the Living God

Verse 2: Sing of the wonders he has made bird in flight falling rain
Sing of the wonders he has made sing to the living God
Chorus:
How he loves us with great love he who sits enthroned above for our lives he spilled his blood sent his spirit like a flood Children of the Living God sing to the living God

Verse 3: Sing of his gentle healing hands how they found the lowliest man sing of his gentle healing hands sing to the living God (Chorus)

Verse 4: Sing of the mercy that he gives though we sin he forgives sing of the mercy that he gives sing to the living God (Chorus)

“How He Loves Us” (David Crowder?)

He is jealous for me,
Loves like a hurricane, I am a tree,
Bending beneath the weight of his wind and mercy.
When all of a sudden,
I am unaware of these afflictions eclipsed by glory,
And I realise just how beautiful You are,
And how great Your affections are for me.

And oh, how He loves us so, Oh how He loves us, How He loves us all
Yeah, He loves us, Oh! how He loves us, Oh! how He loves us, Oh! how He loves.

We are His portion and He is our prize,
Drawn to redemption by the grace in His eyes,
If grace is an ocean, we’re all sinking.
And Heaven meets earth like an unforseen kiss,
And my heart turns violently inside of my chest,
I don’t have time to maintain these regrets,
When I think about, the way…
He loves us, Whoa! how He loves us, Whoa! how He loves us,
Oh how He loves. Yeah, He loves us, Whoa! how He loves us.

“Enough” (ChrisTomlin)

All of You is more than enough for all of me
For every thirst and every need
You satisfy me with Your love
And all I have in You is more than enough
You are my supply, My breath of life
And still more awesome than I know
You are my reward, worth living for
And still more awesome than I know
All of You is more than enough for all of me
For every thirst and every need
You satisfy me with Your love
And all I have in You is more than enough
You’re my sacrifice, Of greatest price
And still more awesome than I know
You’re the coming King, You are everything
And still more awesome than I know
More than all I want, More than all I need
You are more than enough for me
More than all I know, More than all I can say
You are more than enough for me.

I hope that I have made my difficulty with CW clear, especially with songs such as these. You have shown great courage in entering this discussion, and taking a lot of flak, some of which I delivered, and which, in retrospect was offensive. Please forgive me.

Rather than escalating the discussion, however, I would commend to you Rev. Sean Rippy’s “In Defense of Historical Worship” which may be found here.

Johannes, Curmudgeon

Pr. Eric,
Pleease don’t even consider leaving this site. Your insights are greatly appreciated.

Noticed there are a lot of words like I, ME, and MY in the lyrics.

MN Grandma #196: The same can be said of the Apostles Creed and the standard confession of sins.

Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

I have been honored to be a part of this conversation and I pray that God uses it to strengthen and teach me. I am, though, having some trouble keeping up, so I just want to thank you all. Perhaps with some rest and a mental break from the work week, I can return. I really would like to continue the thread on the lyrics posted by (I think) Johannes. I read (and sing) those lyrics and I come away with something that is almost exclusively Christ-centered… and very instructive about his undeserved love and his sacrifice. Again, they are no more human-centered than the Creed or the confession of sins, or even the Lord’s prayer, for that matter.

But I also realize that each of us comes to the table with different perspectives and I think I understand why someone reading them, especially if they have a predisposition against CW, would see them as just “a lot of I, ME, MY,” so I can respect that view.

I would be interested in sharing the lyrics from my upcoming CD with any colleagues who are not automatically opposed to the very notion of CCM. I believe, perhaps naively, that some of you would find them quite worthy of Lutheran worship. But then again, I see Majestic, and songs like it (Better is One Day, for example) as being the best possible music for worship — the singing of God’s word virtually verbatim, working in tandem with the other elements through which God feeds us.

Thank you for allowing me into the conversation. I value this sort of “debate” and I am always looking to learn ways in which I can better serve God and His children.

Blessings to all!

Neil,

For when you have time to read this, the Apostle’s Creed and Confession of Sins are necessarily about about we believe, what we have done and what we deserve. I think the Hymn of Praise would be a better element to compare.

I think besides comparing the words that songs have in common with the parts of the service you mention it is also worth noting some words that do occur in the Apostle’s Creed and Confession on Sins but not in the lyrics posted above. Some of these words are Jesus, Christ, crucified, hell, dead, Father, Holy, judge, saints, resurrection, unclean and punishment. Verse 4 of “Children of the Living God” does mention both forgive and sin, though it is the only place for each word. That song does also have “spilled his blood” which is similar to crucified. I think any focus on Christ or His sacrifice and our being utterly undeserving of it would have to be inferred by someone with that understanding of Scripture since the songs themselves do not seem to supply it. They seem to reflect more of a Theology of Glory than a Theology of the Cross.

Being brought up a Lutheran I can see how you might read in Lutheran theology, but for those who were not, such as those you try to reach out to with such music, I don’t see how they can come away from those songs “with something that is almost exclusively Christ-centered… and very instructive about his undeserved love and his sacrifice”. I can see them hearing about God’s love for us, “love” is mentioned 19 times in the above lyrics, however the only possible allusion to it being undeserved is “though we sin” but even that could be easily understood as “yeah, I’ve messed up some, but I try hard and love God”. Such an understanding does not reflect our complete inability to deserve any mercy, let alone complete forgiveness. Someone who has always been a Lutheran can sing “though we sin” and recall all the teachings about our complete depravity, but those who are just visiting won’t have that same understanding. It’s not just a matter of a different perspective of someone who is against CW, which sometimes it may be, but how the lyrics stand on their own. I believe finding a Lutheran interpretation of the lyrics would have to be done by a Lutheran trying to find Lutheran teachings in them. Such is not the case with the Divine Service.

I hope you will be able to return and post some of the lyrics from your upcoming CD. I also hope you will consider my comments and find them helpful. I am still not convinced that contemporary music works well in worship but perhaps your songs will at least be able to better convey the rich understanding of Scripture that Lutherans have.

Neil,

I am glad that your church uses the Creeds and the Confession of Sins from the LSB. They are clear and instructive. I noticed that earlier you said “Majestic, essentially a prayer using the words of Psalm 8″. Since scripture is the best source for lyrics in worship I thought it would be good to compare the psalm with “Majestic”. It seems to be more of an expansion of words in the first and last verses than the whole psalm. Verse 4 has “what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?” The verses following go on the relate the many things with which God has blessed us and it ends with “how majestic is your name in all the earth!”

The song “Majesty” focuses, of course, on God’s majesty but it leaves out the parts of Psalm 8 that indicate the many blessings He has given us, vv. 5-8 “You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet: all flocks and herds, and the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, all that swim the paths of the seas.” as well as our unworthiness “what is man that you are mindful of him”.

“Majestic” also indicates that heaven and earth declare God’s greatness and bow down to Him so we too should join them in praise. We should certainly praise God, but not because the heavens and the earth praise Him. We should praise Him because the amazing and majestic God whom even the heavens and earth praise loves us so much that He became man, was voluntarily tortured and killed all so that we worthless sinners could be with Him. It wasn’t when we worship Him and think we live a good life that Jesus died for us but “While we were still sinners” (Romans 5:8). When we fall we do not need to worry about losing His grace since it was in that state that it was given to us.

If someone came to me and paid off all my current debts and any debts I will ever have that would be so amazing that I can not imagine someone in my position not wanting to thank that person and tell others how great that person is, to declare their greatness. How much more so than for God who has paid off an infinitely greater debt, and not just for me but for everyone. And the way the debt was paid is so amazing, an infinite, everlasting God being contained in a single person and dying. When the Devil enticed Adam to sin and separated Man from God I don’t think he saw that coming. Praise in response to that would focus more on the cross rather than on God’s glory.

I look forward to your feedback and any corrections for misunderstandings I may have.

To be fair, the lyrics to “Amazing Grace” are marginally better. Jesus is nowhere to be found, and “Lord” occurs once in six verses. “Grace” is capitalized, but that’s about as far as it goes. As with the songs above, this song needs a Christian context.

That being said, with due respect to all the bloggers of whatever persuasion, I rest my case.

Johannes, the CW-challenged

Neil,

Perhaps you could submit your cd to the songwriter’s seminar being held at St John’s Ellisville this spring. You can get info at the LCMS website. LCMS.org/songwriter. The seminar is beint put on by the CoW.

Grepke ET AL: 25 years ago when the CW was gearing up to full steam I belonged to an LCMS congregation that was incorporating CW into the congregation. All 3 of my sons were involved and I lead the youth group in theater and singing with the Gaithers as the focal/vocal point (among other CM artists). We had the praise bands and the seminars, the prayer and praise services, mixed liturgy with contemporary music. etc.etc.

My kids were invited to attend Charismatic, non-denom and AoG functions with kids from other families. That included not only services but Christian recording artists of CM. My kids getting the idea that since I let them go to these “functions” that I was condoning them. They saw that since our church format was alot like the other denoms that we al