I know of one district that uses the very same type music at their conventions. Why should there be a problem with using that type music at NYG? If the delegates to the district conventions would note here what type music their conventions have. I think we could surmise where this comes from and why it will never change.
Tonto2

Col 3:16-17 (cf. Eph 5:15-21):
“16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God. 17And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”

It seems like St. Paul certainly made the connection between doctrine and practice as he clearly advocates the benefits of didactic singing (with orthodox content since he mentions the Psalms). In the Ephesians corollary he adds it is one of the ways of knowing the will of the Lord and being filled with the Spirit contra to walking as the unwise.

Pastor Rossow:

I just read your commentary listed above. Then a ran out and took my two 14 year olds to school. This gave me an opportunity to discuss this issue with my teens.

Last summer my two 14 year old’s went to a WELS youth camp out in Pinetop Arizona for all of the teens in the Arizona, California areas. It was for 6 days and five nights. We discussed the music and what type of teaching they got.

Here is what they told me: In the morning, when the teens woke up, the pastor’s would let them listen to the likes of Taylor Swift, Hip Hop (I think that is what they call it), Rock ‘N Roll, cranked up pretty loud. The kid’s, of course, dug it.

But, when it was time to Worship, the kids sang the Hymns right out of our Hymnal, (which they also love), our pastor (a young pastor-maybe 30 years old) would play his guitar as the music for the hymns.

The pastor’s involved at the camp kept the secular music (which was permitted), and the worship music separate. They did not try to mix the two and thus confuse the teens.

My son told me this morning, that the pastor’s taught the teens right out of Luther’s Catechism and the Word of God. The kids had a great time. They’ll be going to a WELS youth rally this year also.

Now, both my kids are normal teens, they listen to Rock and Hip Hop (I think that is what they call that crap), but they both said that when they are in church, they want and love the Lutheran hymns. They both stated that they think CW is wierd and they are uncomfortable hearing it in the church.

Yes, you can’t separate doctrine and practice. They go hand in hand. Poor doctrine, will lead to poor practice. Poor, unconfessional leadership will lead to ruin the members in a Lutheran church.

In the case of the LCMS and their camp, if they want CW at a youth camp, I woud recommend a confessional Lutheran worship committee, going over the words used in the songs, and taking out the false doctrine (Calvary Chapel type stuff) and putting in words that are Biblical and confessional. That would be fine, in my opinion.

Just one more quick thing:

Luther believed that music was a great teaching tool. Nuff said.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your[d] works, and I will show you my faith by my[e] works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?[f] 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[g]And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

James 2

A spoonful of sugar makes the heresy go down.

Sorry Pastor Rossow for misspelling your name in #4. Too much of a hurry!

(( editor: misspelling corrected ))

Pr. Rossow,

I think that was what James was getting at.

In answer to the question posed in the title, someone–Walther, I think–stated that worship is doctrine put into practice. It’s a matter of their doctrine. This whole ordeal is these folks practicing their doctrine.

Spoonful of sugar indeed! Sugar won’t help heresy.
In Walther’s sermon & study, “The Sheep will Judge the Shepherd”, I rather doubt, the “what ever worked” principle will suffice.

I believe, the book of Jude, in it’s entirety, does apply in this & many others. As well, does Walther’s message, “The Sheep Will Judge the Shepherd”. As Miles posted, on a different article at BJS. Faith/Works, Word/Faith, Mystical Prayer Practice, Prosperity gospel, Sanctification by works, it is a pick your poison, all are active in LCMS & it’s Synod.
So much is tied up, in what is being peddled by Synod & congregations…how powerless & futile does it seem, this fight among & by mere pew sitters.

We are sheep, we depend on those placed in seats of position, to guard what we see & hear. When they choose not to, what a fearful position, that sheep has placed in.

If you take the sermon by Walther & the Book of Jude, they run in tandem, as well they should. Other than shake the dust off our feet, what is it, we can have an effect to do?

Robert D. Preus, “Luther: Word, Doctrine, and Confession,” Concordia Theological Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 3, July 1996: http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/preusrdlutherworddoctrineconfession.pdf

“If we wish to be faithful to Luther’s theology, we should probably distinguish practice from life by identifying practice as the carrying out of the means of grace, which is to say preaching the Word, administering the sacraments, and applying the keys of binding and loosing; whereas good works are simply anything that a Christian does as a child of God and in obedience to God’s will and according to his own individual calling. Here, then, we shall work with this understanding of doctrine, practice, and good works.

According to this definition of terms, doctrine and practice cannot really be separated. Doctrine must result in practice. This, as we shall see, is really the function of confession and preaching. Good works, on the other hand, result from faith or may be called, more
strictly speaking, the fruits of the Spirit.

…So doctrine and practice are totally intertwined according to the theology of Luther. Practice is the doing and application of the gospel, or the doctrine. The moment that doctrine is taught or articulated in any way, practice is taking place.”

Kudos, thanks & well spoken Scott! Oh…that we did.

@Lloyd I. Cadle #4

I have criticized my own church body’s LSB, so I hope you will understand that I’m not picking on the WELS when I criticize its hymnals.

A few years ago, when my brother and his family were on vacation, I dogsat for them at their home in Yorba Linda. Normally, I would have gone to Immanuel in Orange, an LCMS church I can recommend without reservation. On this particular Sunday, I decided to attend the local WELS church to see what it was like. As far as I can tell the pastor is a fine Lutheran pastor.

But I do have a criticism of the hymnals. The main WELS hymnal has the emasculated version of the Nicene Creed.

The closing hymn was a revivalist hymn (I forget which one. It wasn’t necessarily heretical, but it was definitely NOT Christ-centered) that was in a different WELS hymnal that I was told was mainly for camps. I asked the pastor about this hymn and he said that when he first came to this church he had the congregation write down what their favorite hymns were and this was one of them. He agreed that it wasn’t a very good hymn.

My point is that all Lutheran hymnals I have seen have some less than salutary things in them and so the choices about what to use from them. (Maybe the ELH from the ELS doesn’t have these kinds of problems, but I don’t own a copy and am less familiar with it.)

@Dutch #12

> We are sheep, we depend on those placed in seats of position, to guard what we see & hear. When they choose not to, what a fearful position, that sheep has placed in.

We are in that position. We have been trained by faithful pastors, books and hymns.

Just as in the political realm, many of the people are asleep, but not all.

Just as in the early church, they can’t kill us all, and when the killing happens, whether literal or not, the Word will spread even more.

@Brian Thomas #2
March 7th, 2010 at 19:24 | #48

From the previous thread.

Reply | Quote

@PPPadre #32
My quote of C.S. Lewis referred to the noise that was made ‘of’ the hymn, but not specifically too the hymn itself. The rendition of it makes the hymn much less than the Holy Spirit intended just by the music united to it.

The music must bow before Christ and be a servant to Him and not the other way round.

The music can and does determine Doctrinal Content if used the wrong way, as this concept of music is not about worship in the Lutheran Sense of bringing out the meaning of the text, the Holy Word of God in Christ’s Person,Nature and Work, but rather to appeal to a Theology of Glory in man’s continued attempt to be Justified by his own ’self chosen’ works and methods.

This paradigm of music,wedded to the Hymns, as illustrated, does not come from Him who thus inspired the text of the Hymn, as it was taken from the true interpretation of His Word.

Consider if Christ would use a tune from one of the many Cultic Temples of foreign gods that existed in the Hellenic world both Greek and Asian ( Persian ) and tried to wed it to one of the Hymns He used at the Institution of the Lord’s Supper, in this case one of the Psalms, and consider further that that tune was used in that temple to propagate a practice of using temple prostitutes to celebrate and bring about the Fertility of the Earth.

Would not that music appeal to the lasciviousness of Human Nature to help the Temple Worshipers to get in the mood to copulate and express all of the services meaning and outcome?

We are not dealing here in what about’s and if’s and maybe so’s, we are here dealing with Eternal Souls in a Soteriological War and there will be casualties. But we should be hopping Bloody Mad with the Anger of God, and a God Damned Anger at that, if these pervaers, not necessarily the Band, as ignorance is upon many, but these so called Ministers of the Gospel ,should lead many on the easy way to the wide gate.

Church Militant, Warriors of the Cross indeed. March 7th, 2010 at 19:24 | #48
Reply | Quote

@PPPadre #32
My quote of C.S. Lewis referred to the noise that was made ‘of’ the hymn, but not specifically too the hymn itself. The rendition of it makes the hymn much less than the Holy Spirit intended just by the music united to it.

The music must bow before Christ and be a servant to Him and not the other way round.

The music can and does determine Doctrinal Content if used the wrong way, as this concept of music is not about worship in the Lutheran Sense of bringing out the meaning of the text, the Holy Word of God in Christ’s Person,Nature and Work, but rather to appeal to a Theology of Glory in man’s continued attempt to be Justified by his own ’self chosen’ works and methods.

This paradigm of music,wedded to the Hymns, as illustrated, does not come from Him who thus inspired the text of the Hymn, as it was taken from the true interpretation of His Word.

Consider if Christ would use a tune from one of the many Cultic Temples of foreign gods that existed in the Hellenic world both Greek and Asian ( Persian ) and tried to wed it to one of the Hymns He used at the Institution of the Lord’s Supper, in this case one of the Psalms, and consider further that that tune was used in that temple to propagate a practice of using temple prostitutes to celebrate and bring about the Fertility of the Earth.

Would not that music appeal to the lasciviousness of Human Nature to help the Temple Worshipers to get in the mood to copulate and express all of the services meaning and outcome?

We are not dealing here in what about’s and if’s and maybe so’s, we are here dealing with Eternal Souls in a Soteriological War and there will be casualties. But we should be hopping Bloody Mad with the Anger of God, and a God Damned Anger at that, if these pervaers, not necessarily the Band, as ignorance is upon many, but these so called Ministers of the Gospel ,should lead many on the easy way to the wide gate.

Church Militant, Warriors of the Cross indeed.

Stan Slonkosky:

Yes, I think I know what you are talking about. There is a hynmal that some of the high schooler’s might use. The WELS committee on worship actually has went through the songs in it and changed the words, so that they would not be heretical.

So, probably what happened is the pastor asked his congregation for their favorite hymns, and like you said, probably one of them was out of this hymnal.

The wording in our hymnals is still NIV. They have said on our WELS Q & A, that when the new revision comes out for the NIV, they are going to look at the ESV, which WELS says is a good option to the NIV.

Without a doubt, the LCMS has a great hymnal, they just need to use it more!

One of our pastor’s told me that he would like to see more liturgies in our hymnal’s. We have just come out with a new hymnal supplement, which is real good.

WELS has always been concerned with using a Bible translation that is accurate and very easy to read. They want to remain liturgical, but they want everyone to understand the Word’s.

I really believe that WELS is open to have any good confessional Lutheran liturgies or hymns added, just so that the doctrine is confessional. In other word’s, (just my opinion) we are not “old wineskins.”

Blessings,

Stan Slonkosky # 15:

You are correct, that hymnal you are referring to is not a Sunday hymnal, but it’s intent is for camp-out’s etc. Some of the high schooler’s might use it at retreat’s etc. But the word’s in it have been changed to take out the false doctrine. One of the pastor’s told me that a while back.

The key here, in all synod’s, is to have a confessional Lutheran worship committee on worship going over and approving the word’s that the High Schooler’s, etc. are using. The Worship committee should be made up with confessional Lutheran pastor’s, not praise music leader’s. Most praise musicians don’t know anything about Lutheran theology.

“Is Promoting Bands with Heterodox Music Doctrine or Practice?”

It is both. Promoting these bands comes from a doctrine which believes different confessions between Christians don’t really matter that much. The effectiveness of what Christians say and do is what matters. The practices which flow from this doctrine boil down to doing whatever “works” to be effective.

Another doctrine espoused here is the belief in the all important good feeling which is obtained through leisure and entertainment. The practice which flows from this doctrine leads to our watching a moving Christian concert or performance and responding in some charismatic way in order to really feel good in our worship experience.

In this case I think the organizers know using these bands is also a matter of doctrine or they would not feel the need for the disclaimer. They know these bands will share non-Lutheran doctrine, but it doesn’t matter because all that matters is that the music works to make our kids feel good.

I have a slightly different take on the whole “praise band” concept in general. Here’s how I view the use of “praise bands” -vs- specifically, an organ. To summarize, I think that even the selection of instruments teaches something and that the PRACTICE of using a “praise band” teaches contrary to the Lutheran understanding of the Church and the purposes of the Divine Service.

Let’s first look at “praise bands”. As a very generalized conceptualization, it is the purpose of the praise band to “make a joyful noise unto the Lord.” The various instruments through their individual characteristics as well as the use of harmonies work together as individuals to create a joint expression of praise. (cxref the use of “cymbals” and the listings of musical instruments in aggregate II Sam 6, I Chron. 13, I Chron 15, I Chron 16, I Chron 25:3 “…to give thanks and to praise the Lord…”, 2 Chron 5, 2 Chron 29:25ff, Ezra 3:10, Neh 12:27, Psalm 150:3). Notice the direction of activity in these instances in Scripture as well as the use of a praise band – the direction is from man to God. The main image I’d like you to keep in mind is that with CW and “praise bands,” the emphasis is on a collection of discrete individuals (whether individual instruments or individual vocalists) using their individual characteristics working together to create something that praises and honors God.

Contrast this with the use of an organ. I’m going to specifically use the pipe-organ because it highlights the image I’m trying to paint.

In the case of the organ, there is a single source to the sound – the bellows or blowers. To add a bit of hyperbole to the imagery, it’s as if there is a single breath – the breath of God – behind the individual notes that sound at the direction of the organists fingers according to the plan of the composer. The force of the instrument imposes itself on the worshipers and brings them into conformity so that all involved are accomplishing the singular will of the composer.

So that it’s not missed, this neatly parallels the purposes of God in redeeming us. According to the plan of the Father (the composer), The Son (who ascended to the ‘right hand of God’) accomplished our salvation and sent out the Holy Spirit (the “breath” of God) to work in us and bring us into conformity with God’s plan and work.

This work of the triune God is accomplished most immediately in the context of the Divine Service – where through the reading and preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments — done at the direction of the Father who made His will known through the Son — the work of the Son in redeeming us, which was accomplished according to the plan of the Father, is applied to individuals almost like the work of an organist applied to the ranks of the organ according to the plan of the composer. Through these (the Word preached and read, and the Sacraments), as through means, the Holy Spirit works to “conform us to the image of the Son” so that the glory and majesty of God is exhibited in the world like an organ’s music fills the space compelling those in that place to conform themselves to the plan of the composer.

In this way, the PRACTICE of using an organ in worship supports and promotes the DOCTRINE of the Church and the Divine Service. Likewise, the PRACTICE of using a “praise band” uproots and works against the DOCTRINE of the church — teaching that church and “worship” is individuals working together standing before God to offer something to Him rather than receiving from Him and coming into conformity with His will.

Anyway — that’s my personal thinking on the subject.

Miles,
I/we know full well the position, those who do not “sleep” are in. We are sheep. But there are many, who sit in a position, of Office. I know what Walther said, but that was his worst case scenario.
I wonder, what do those, who sit in that dear Divine Office now, say to those outside their protection? We know many do, and those who do, do not post. What would we say to them?
We know sheep will judge shepherds, but, we must concede, it was not meant to be so. Sheep are rather thick, and it is an awkward position, when they are placed in that seat.
What guidance, what word, should & would be given, to those who find themselves, in such a vile seat.
I so do wish, those who accepted the Office, had done what they accepted to be true & their duty. But many have not or departed from it, so…
what should a pew sitter, a stump dumb sheep do, in the face, of such apostasy?

@Dutch #22

“What should a pew sitter, a stump dumb sheep do, in the face, of such apostasy?”

Perhaps they should insist on their youth attending a Higher Things conference, while simultaneously making certain that the reasons for this are known to both pastor and congregation.

1) Join LCMS Youth Ministry on Facebook and be a positive influence speaking the truth in love instead of just fretting around BJS. http://www.facebook.com/LCMSYouthMinistry

2) At future synodical and district conventions nominate or be elected to the Board for Parish Services which supervises such things as youth ministry. Don’t renew the 5-year contract of the directors when they come up. Promote Lutheran materials and music. If you want to be a positive influence for congregations and youth, these would be important boards and could produce worthwhile things.

3) Higher Things is now an RSO. As such, Synod and Districts can officially promote it. Do so.

4) Does Psalm 150:3-6 or Psalm 47:1 make you feel uncomfortable? It isn’t just about instruments or music. It’s music and instruments which are an appropriate setting for the Word.

I daresay that organs can be used just as inappropriately as “praise bands.” And theoretically, it’s possible that guitars and drums and synthesizers COULD musically support the holy Word of God, it’s just that I’ve never heard it done. And it isn’t likely because most the way most instrumentalists use them tend to draw attention to themselves rather than to the Word of God.

Furthermore, the musical genres generally associated with such instruments are inappropriate setting for the Word of God. [insert discussion of Jazz Mass, Taize, Chicago Folk Mass, etc. here.)

(But I do kind of have a soft spot in my heart for the Missa Luba, Latin Divine Service in Congolese setting.)

To what extent and degree might praise band players be frustrated American Idol wannabes which results in “Karaoke Christianity”? (I’d offer to be the Simon Cowell of the LCMS but I look horrid in a t-shirt.)

Someone skilled with Law and Gospel might be able to lead them from their frustrated desires into something more satisfying, like Lutheran liturgy and hymnody. I’ve seen it happen. The way to part Linus with his blanket is not brute force, legislation-by-overtures, or manipulative diatribes. Law and Gospel. Law and Gospel. Law and Gospel.

Okay, this is a little creepy in light of a brief off-hand comment that I made above.

I just found out that in the February 2010 issue of Mojo magazine, Jimmy Paige (Led Zeppelin) credits that the Missa Luba as being one of the records which “helped shape Led Zeppelin’s sonic environment.”

Go figure.

And a 9-year-old Keith Richards was a choirboy singing at Queen Elizabeth’s coronation. Am I undermining my argument here?

(If you check out the Missa Luba, make sure you get a decent recording of it, like the Kyrie of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEsLnPYg8Bk&feature=related)

Here come the “Fire and the Staff” quotes for the week:

(1) “The two [doctrine and practice] are so intimately woven together that when you change one, you will inevitably change the other, sometimes without realizing what has happened.”

(2) “Someone may say, ‘But hymns should praise God too. You just can’t teach; you have to praise God.’ The greatest way to praise God is to tell everyone what HE HAS DONE.” (emph. added)

(3) “The backbeat always dominates…Is percussion bad? No. Are guitars, in and of themselves, wrong? Of course not. It’s the beat that takes away from the message…Enjoy the [other] music. But keep it out of church.”

@Rev. John A. Frahm #7

Why, John, that’s just “superpresbypietistibapticostolicious!”

@Rev. Joel A. Brondos #24

I agree with much of what you say, Joel. Indeed, as a musician I applaud your understanding that organs can get in the way of the Word and synthesizers can support them.

I’m curious as to your dismissal of the music of Taizé, though. Sure, some of it doesn’t work well for Lutheran worship. But much of it does. Certainly the Brothers of John the Steadfast didn’t object to it at either of our two conferecens. Indeed, Pastor Rossow and I received many positive reports that specifically mentioned some of the Taizé music we used.

Go about 52 minutes into BJS Vespers and see what you think:

http://cdn2.libsyn.com/bethanylcs/BJS_2010_-_Vespers.mp3?nvb=20100309044126&nva=20100310045126&t=00fe8801c35bc716c470a

Ok, let’s say that Pr. Harrison wins ….. I don’t see this changing even with him as president. He may admonish leaders of these groups that this is not the way to go (heterodox music for the youth at synodical youth gatherings), but my thought is that people will walk because of it. I don’t think that it is a bad thing, btw.
I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the problems of modern Lutheranism are not the leadership, but is rather the laity. The leadership is just a reflection of what the rank and file believes.
Jon

Phil @ #28: My dream: Kantor Magness in charge of music and worship for the NYG!

@Jon Townsend #29

Mr. Townsend,

“I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the problems of modern Lutheranism are not the leadership, but is rather the laity. The leadership is just a reflection of what the rank and file believes.”

This is a very good insight. However, our Lord describes us as sheep. If pastors (servants of the Word) would lead us patiently the sheep will eventually follow. Some sheep will wander away to the American evangelicals, but the sheep hear the Shepherd’s voice. If we follow the hireling model of American business the leaders will appeal to the whims and desires of the confused laity instead of patiently and lovingly teaching them.

A few things that I think about regarding the election of Pr. Harrison:

1. After hearing him on Issues, Etc. and reading some of his stuff, I would agree that he is comparable to the WELS SP in that he is a theologian and a pastor. A very solid leader.

2. Can Pr. Harrison, or the WELS SP for that matter, be able to work in a synod, where the synod and DP’s and other church leaders are not considered ministry?

3. Does the current concept in the LCMS of church and ministry lead to many taking position’s of leadership that are not confessional, but are more Pentacostal, Baptist or Methodist?

4. Does the current concept (I’m not sure if concept is the right word to use), allow a situation where if a pastor is practicing false doctrine, for the Eder’s to enact Matt. 18, and sit down with the pastor, and in love, show him where he is teaching false doctrine? If the pastor still refuses to repent of the false doctrine, does the current LCMS system allow the Council to sit down with the pastor and ask him to repent of false doctrine? If the pastor still refuses to repent of false doctrine, does the LCMS concept of church and ministry allow the council to then go to the Circuit pastor, and have the circuit pastor lovingly enact Matt. 18? At this point, if the pastor still refuses to repent, does the current LCMS system allow for the DP or the synod to ask the congregation to terminate the call of the pastor? If the congregation refuses to terminate the call of the heretical pastor, does the synod have the authority to terminate the call of the congregation, in order to maintain sound doctrine and practice in the synod?

5. Does the current LCMS doctrine of church and ministry not only allow the false teacher’s an opinion, but to even flourish in positions of leadership, thus ruining a once great synod?

I am certainly not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but these are question’s that I have. I am in prayer for Pr. Harrison to get elected, and for God to give my confessional brother’s and sister’s in the LCMS wisdom in this most difficult situation.

Jon Townsend:

The leadership leads the laity. If both are blind, they both fall into a ditch. The leadership should be instructing, and protecting the laity from false doctrine. The leadership should be teaching the Word of God to the laity, as defined in our Lutheran confessions, so the sheep hear the voice of the Savior and not a false prophet.

Just one more quick thing:

In the WELS/ELS doctrine of church and ministry, the SP and DP’s are all pastor’s.

@Lloyd I. Cadle #32

Sir,
I am no expert, and have no call beyond laity, but will assert that the traditional MO congregation is very strong and totally up to the challenges you describe. Both the pastor and the congregation have duties that could be described as absolute or supreme (subject of course to the norms). In the case of unrepentant false doctrine or inability to carry out duties it is the congregation itself that is necessary and sufficient for the job of releasing the called pastor from his call. The congregation traditionally exercised its Scriptural duties through an authoritative voter assembly. While, as stated, if the pastor preached or taught falsely, the voters had to deal with it; if the voters did something un-Scriptural it was the pastor’s duty to correct them authoritatively from God’s Word. Note that there is nothing that pragmatically resolves these absolutes — all relies on the Word being efficacious.

“To change rulers and improve rulers are two things as far apart as heaven and earth; changing may be easy, improving is doubtful and risky. Why? Because it is not in our will or power but only in the will and the hand of God. The mad mob, however, does not ask so much how things can become better, but only that things may be changed; then if things are worse, they will want something still different.”

Miles Whitener:

I agree. It is up to the congregation. In the WELS/ELS doctrine of church and ministry, the synod and or DP’s will hold the congregation’s responsible for allowing the false doctrine in that particular congregation. And, of course after all of the Matt. 18 has been used, you have the voter’s assembly and the channels that you mention to go through.

My big question remains; after all of these scenarios have played out and no repentance has taken place, do the DP’s and or synod have the authority to terminate or ask the congregation to leave the synod? If not, a synod with perhaps, 1200 confessional churches will grow to about 2,000, with 800 of them being permitted to teach false doctrine.

Whenever I decide that I do not like God’s Law, I, in my imagined cleverness, look for ways around it. I look for loopholes in the Word of God just as I have been taught to look for loopholes in the IRS’s laws. When I think that I have found such a loophole, I congratulate myself on my cleverness. But, in truth, it ends up making me look quite petty and even foolish.

Disclaimers are modern day “loopholes.” They accomplish nothing except to lead people astray and to show forth the folly of those who cleverly think they have found them. I am beyond chagrined by this nonsense. If we cannot have orthodox Lutheran theology at a Lutheran gathering, then what makes it Lutheran?

Kyrie eleison.

Of course, Lutheran congregation’s are supposed to be guided by the Word of God as defined in our Lutheran confessions. When Lutheran congregation’s are not doing this, and teaching false doctrine, is that as far as it goes? Oh well, stuff happens! Let’s just hope that if ten new mission churches start in a Lutheran synod, maybe six of them will be confessional!

It is pretty obvious, that the synod and the DP’s have to have the authority to hold those congregation’s accountable, or your synod (any Lutheran synod, for that matter) will be ruined with false doctrine.

Ahhhh, adiaphora. Chemnitz used the term to bring unity in practice and doctrine among confessional Lutheran’s. The liberal’s use adiaphora to bring disunity and Methodist, Pentacostal and Baptist theology into the Lutheran church! They use the term in order to open a pandorda’s box.

And, it makes sense, for a powerless synod to just shrug their shoulder’s and have the authority to do absolutely nothing about it? I don’t think Luther would so passive in dealing with such a situation.

@Lloyd I. Cadle #37

I wonder the same thing. I think the synod is a human institution. MO synod has been incorporated under MO associations law since at least 1894. The directors of an association/corporation, via their hired officers, can remove members per the association’s own charter/articles and bylaws, subject to the law (in this case most specifically MO chapter 355 + court decisions), which among other things empowers members in certain ways not subject to articles nor bylaws (e.g. special meetings).

If a synod/association/corporation is no longer the most faithful one visible, the members are free to, and should, seek or start a better one. So it works two ways. If a synod won’t discipline unfaithful members, failthful members can and should look elsewhere.

There is also the possibility of going independent. I don’t know very much about that but it entails its own set of risks. The same political forces that make it hard for associations to clean themselves up also help prevent them from acting too impulsively.

@Lloyd I. Cadle #39
Let’s just hope that if ten new mission churches start in a Lutheran synod, maybe six of them will be confessional!

Look elsewhere than Texas, then. The district plans NO mission starts that are not “praise” oriented coffeehouse types.
The confessionals have started a few; the district’s response is to take credit (though they invest not a dime) and then attempt to separate the missions from their confessional sponsors.

Mr. Whitener:

I also don’t know much about going indepedent. I came out of the LCMS, and I am a happy elder in the WELS.

The thing to do, is to pray for pastor Harrison to get in, and hope that the LCMS system will not hand cuff him to the point where a great leader will not be able to make the changes necessary to lead the synod back to being confessional.

I would like to see the conservatives in the LCMS break off, and start maybe two more confessional Lutheran synod’s (for the good of all Lutheran’s, by the way), and be in fellowship with WELS, ELS.

Because we are all so very sinful, and full of pride, four strong Lutheran synod’s would hold each other accountable in matters of doctrine and practice. Then watch out. Biblical, confessional Lutheran theology would blanket the United States, with the great truth’s of the Lutheran Reformation.

It can hapen. And if it is the Will of God, by His grace it might happen!

@Lloyd I. Cadle #42

Pastor Harrison is very faithful in being willing to take on the task of teaching and unifying MO. I do pray that somehow beyond most appearances this can be done. A clean split, or any split, would be far preferable to a drawn out, increasingly lukewarm dissolution. And it would not take a huge % of split-off ELCAns to add up to more than 2.3 or 2.6 million, but I’m told they will never accept a male-only pastorate. I hope those numbers are not too tempting to faithful Missourians. And as you say what would be wrong with a few smaller synods.

From today’s winkel one of those present–a district official–felt that President K would be reelected–not by much but re-elected!

Wow! So many good comments that generate even more questions. Yeah, off topic again.

(1) One very confessional LCMS pastor told me a few years ago that there is really no such thing as an “orthodox” visible Church on earth, because She is comprised of sinners. This doesn’t mean that we don’t try, by God’s Grace, to rid the church of false doctrine and practice; but this “Church Militant” battle is a lifelong deal.

(2) Is the LCMS too big to be anything other than (left) corporate? I don’t know. Perhaps the physically smaller size of WELS makes discipline easier. No church body on earth is exempt from Satan’s attacks, but a smaller synod that is less “top-heavy” should by nature make it easier to “nip these problems in the bud.” How does WELS polity differ from that of LCMS, other than physical size?

(3) Why are LCMS DP’s no longer serving as parish pastors? I don’t wish to make a false blanket statement without knowing all the facts, as some perhaps are serving in parishes, but this seems to be rare today from my understanding.

(4) Are pastors’ retirement plans with Concordia 100% vested at some point? What happens if a parish votes to withdraw from synod?

(5) Are there any CLC or ELDoNA folks here on BJS?

(6) We also are praying for Pastor Harrison (and for our current leadership’s repentance), but if things do not go well in July, how much longer can we in good conscience stay? When we put the money that God has entrusted us with in the plate, we a basically saying that what is going on at LCMS Corp. is okay. Is this good stewardship? Is the money our parish gave to WR/HC’s Haitian effort going to get there in timely fashion, or is LCMS Corp. going to “borrow” from it to pay debts? Is costly Ablaze! “saving” people? Does bragging on the computer regarding how many people I told about Jesus today bring them to repentance and get them to instruction and to the font? My Bible says this is the work of the Holy Spirit. If He subjectively justifies someone, in part by using sinful me as His instrument to proclaim the Gospel (Christ crucified and risen, not Jesus as example), to whom does the Glory go?

@ Phillip Magness #28

I’m not certain why any confessional Lutheran would knowingly want to identify its worship with a community which maintains the adoration of icons (gathering around a cross icon to unburden one’s self) and emphasizes the “Eucharist” as primarily an act of “community” and “thanksgiving” rather than being for “the remission of sins” (read their literature)?

Why would confessional Lutherans want in any way to adopt the songs and liturgies of a well-known “worship” community which commends repetitive prayer after the tradition of the rosary or emphasizes a “unity” which ignores doctrinal differences?

Perhaps a deeper examination of what Taize is and what it commends is in order: http://www.taize.fr/en

You can see what the ELCA thinks about Taize: http://tinyurl.com/yagdcrk

I don’t doubt that participants in Taize settings find it appealing, even at BJS conferences. The human nature sometimes exhibits an innate tendency toward such meditative repetitions or reflections, especially in beautiful musical settings. Now, I don’t say that everything in Taize is to be condemned. But precisely because they blend inferior things with what is good, right and salutary, I personally want to have NO PART in introducing people to Taize any more than I would publicly endorse a contemporary worship singer-songwriter.

I don’t want to be responsible for leading people to get an appetite for Taize and then on their own they are drawn into the meditative community of Taize the way some Lutherans have become enamored with the “spirituality” of Eastern Orthodoxy (which also has appealing characteristics but in the end it leads into dangerous territory).

I realize that I’m peculiar in this way. I know that there are Lutheran worship “experts” who will introduce people to the parts of Taize which have an appeal, and they will show them certain teachings of Taize which seem in accord with our incarnational theology, but they don’t show the full picture of Taize. People who have been given an appetite for Taize, however, may soon find themselves swallowing more than they ought.

This is how we also get strange amalgams in the hymnal menagerie called the LSB. In the Taize hymn “Eat This Bread” (LSB 638), we read st. 4 “Anyone who eats this bread will live forever.” Is the statement, in fact, true? And are there any common folk who will take from this a denial of the manducatio indignorum? Would a visitor to one of our congregations using this hymn think that they should approach the altar for the “Eucharist” — and be offended that we turn them away, thinking to themselves, “Why would this pastor turn me away from eating this bread and having eternal life? Don’t they want me to have eternal life?”

In the Taize hymn “O Lord, Hear My Prayer,” (LSB 780) do we not have an example of the Taize commendation of meditation through repetition in a hymn which doesn’t really communicate anything substantial? (Sure, I’m aware of Ps. 39:12; 102:1; 143:1. The Psalms, however, contain and convey much greater substance than just repeating a verse over and over. You can be sure that the Taize community doesn’t just sing this through twice and stop.)

So, I have given my explanation, such as it is. I am not interested in getting into a long debate about Taize or LSB and this wouldn’t be the proper arena for that anyway. I know there are plenty of folks, perhaps the majority and probably you yourself, who do not agree with my assessments of Taize or LSB or CW or Eastern Orthodoxy, etc. That’s okay. You don’t have to throw down any gauntlets. I’m happy to recede back into my corner, having grown accustomed to my self-induced hymnological ostracization.

@boogie #45

> there is really no such thing as an “orthodox” visible Church on earth,

As I understand this, we know and BELIEVE there CAN BE no errors in Scripture. Scripture tells us all we know of our Savior. Scripture declares itself inerrant and infallible. An error will never be found. If some lying wonder asserts an error in Scripture, we oppose the error with Scripture in faith.
We assert that our Confessions correctly refute error, are a correct explication of Scripture and that our Confessions don’t contain any doctrinal error. If an error were found, it would be corrected.
So, the Scriptures and Confessions define the orthodox church.

Boogie #45,
I love that name (too cute).
Those are brilliant questions (!), and I don’t have answer for one of them.
The only thing I can say, is I don’t think the issue you mention, w/WELS has to do with size of denomination. (Being an LCMS refugee, in WELS)

That, I think, is a shepherding/leadership issue. Laity, follow a lack or lead. That is just how it works. If you are lacking, they seek to fill it, should you have lacking in leadership, someone must lead, & laity chooses it’s way. Oi vey, what a conundrum. In the end, how is held to account? Those who are in & hold “office”. Sheep need a shepherd, it is why we sheep are warned to “beware”.

It is ‘quantity vs quality principle’. You can pack ‘em in, but that does not a Loving/Faithful sheep make. Nor does ordination of man, a Pastor/Shepherd make. It just makes full the pews/chairs or full/occupied pulpits, warm for a bit, once or twice a week. And….that is just for a bit. When the entertainment falters, or the external input waver, they leave for bigger & better shows & more engaging entertainment, or bigger “big tops”. It was never meant to be so, however, weren’t we warned, this would be? (In Scripture)

The only thing that I can say I see (& that ain’t much) is a complete lack & if not abject abhorrence, of “HUMILITY”. The one thing Christ held as example, and which we are to emulate, is His humility. Maundy Thursday principle. The blest attribute of humility, is decried, from every corner of the left kingdom, which is why we are to be thus.

Humility, in all, humility with all, and humility to all. Not to quote Shakespeare, but…
“I charge the Cromwell, fling away from thee, ambition , for by that sin the angels fell.”
At this point in time, I highly doubt, many would be able to accurately define the word, in St Louis, if not, in many a District.

Truely a shame, as submission, obedience, and humility in Christ our Lord, is quite a virtue, indeed.

@boogie #45
Re: your questions:
3. Some LCMS DP’s do serve as parish pastors. I believe Pr. Benke in NYC does (Atlantic District), as does Pr. Bueltmann in Central Illinois, and now-VP Diekelman did when he was DP of Oklahoma District. There’s 10% (3/35) for you anyways. There are probably others.

4. Yes, pastors’ retirement plans do become fully vested–but I don’t know the rules, as they are considered “self-employed” as I understand it. I’m sure there’s some pastors out there that can shed light on this one. If they leave the synod, I think their account is “frozen”–but I could be wrong about that. Obviously, they can no longer contribute to their account.

6. This one could be the subject of a whole thread all by itself. You have hit on so many of the fallacies of Ablaze (sorry no “!”), that it would take several paragraphs to sort out.

Johannes

@Pastor Tim Rossow #48
Dear Pastor Rossow: If that is so (God’s will be done), then let us also please pray that he is not saddled with a confusing new “structure” which would be a huge distraction from the real work to be done.

@Miles Whitener #47
Thanks for your input on this matter, and I am certainly guilty of carelessly confusing “orthodox” vs. “orthodoxy.” We all agree here on BJS (I hope) that Holy Scripture is the inspired and inerrant Word of God. We also all agree that our Lutheran Confessions are the proper exposition of Scripture.

The point I was trying to make, however poorly (as I concede), was that the avenue of loving church discipline and correction has to be provided for. The historic Lutheran Church is the “orthodox” church in belief, and proper belief only comes from our Triune God. “Orthodoxy” in practice is another matter, since we are all sinful, prideful, and prone to error. Errors will creep into the Church from time to time (Satan already has the heterodox church bodies, so he will go after us), and our prayer is that God will correct us. We are not like Rome and Constantinople, saying that anything coming from our leadership is inspired and inerrant without first confirming it with Scripture and our confessions.

The only analogy I can come up with at this time is Luther’s concept of “just and sinner.” Although God judges us as perfect because we are in Christ, we are still sinful beings. So as the Church may be proper in doctrine, it may be far from it in practice.

The history of the Lutheran Church is replete with the correction of errors. From unionism, pietism, and rationalism in Europe to the desire to “blend in” with Reformed Christendom here in the States, we are struggling as the “Church Militant.” Any teaching that promotes salvation from anything less than Christ’s perfectly sinless life, cross, and empty tomb is errant (1 John 4:1-3).

My apologies for being unclear. The ultimate problem is that heterodox practice uncorrected will eventually drag down the doctrine.

Boogie:

WELS/ELS is able to discipline heterodox churches, because once the channels have been exhausted that I mention in my blog #45, question #4, the synod (SP & DP’s), because they are also ministry have the authority to terminate the call of the congregation of the church that persist’s in not being in compliance with our Lutheran confessions.

And again, I am formerely an LCMS member as well. But it seems that once an LCMS church refuses to be confessional, it get’s bogged down at the congregational level, because the SP and DP’s (because of the by-laws in the LCMS) are unable to do anything about it.

Another question you have is about the size of synod’s being smaller might make it easier to control false doctrine. I personally have had a couple of our pastor’s tell me that they don’t want the synod to get much larger because it is harder to control false doctrine. I know, there has been talk of our SP wanting smaller district’s in order to be able to control false doctrine more easily.

But, it should be noted just becuase synod’s are small, doesn’t mean that they will remain confessional–unless you have the right system in place regarding church and ministry.

What I would like to see, is for the LCMS conservatives to split off into maybe three or four more confessional synod’s, let’s say in size of each having about 1200 congregations. Then you would have WELS/ELS and these three or four other synods being confessional and thus each synod holding each other accountable in matter’s of doctrine and practice.

Let’s say you have five or six strong Lutheran synod’s in the U.S., and if one or two go bad, you would still have the other strong confessional synod’s remaining.

Now, I am getting way ahead of myself here hypothetically, but lets say that you have the three new confessional synod’s made up of former LCMS conservates. If they are now in fellowship with WELS/ELS, and the Concordia Seminary has become so liberal, that instead of training new pastor’s in confessional Lutheran theology, they are destroying them with false teaching, perhaps an agreement could be reached for the new synod’s to do their ministry training at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary.

What about book stores? The conservatives at Concordia book store can create a confessional Lutheran bookstore, and these new synod’s can get their book’s from Northwestern Publishing and the new confessional Concordia bookstore.

These are probably far fetched idea’s, and great confessional pastor’s in the WELS/ELS and the LCMS might be laughing at this, but maybe some of it might make sense!

Thanks to all for the input and thoughtful answers. This is much “food for thought.”

@Lloyd I. Cadle #53
What I would like to see, is for the LCMS conservatives to split off into maybe three or four more confessional synod’s, let’s say in size of each having about 1200 congregations.

It would take three or four: e.g. one with women in Voters’; one without (the ones without would probably not allow altar & pulpit fellowship with the ones “with”)
One allied with Jack’s supreme voters’ assembly; one taking the Office of the Holy Ministry seriously as the called representation of Christ to the flock.

[PoliticsFirst have a point...this is all easier if you don't care about "doctrine"!]

Our youth are yearning for structure and permanence and we give them pop music and relativism. I am so glad we kept our son from these gatherings and so sad that we had to.

@mike ames #56
Mike,
Encourage the youth of your congregation to attend Higher Things
instead of the circus of un Lutheran offerings that is NYG!

THE ANSWER IS ONLY A TWITTER AWAY

The LCMS has a duty to sponsor activities,beyond reproach
The LCMS also has a duty to manage and support its extended budget,and one way to do both is to support chorus , band and music at places like Seward ,St Olaf,Valparaiso,Concordia by having them perform appropriate music at national events.
As youths,my friends and I couldnt afford to go to summer camp,much less national gatherings We formed our secular interests listening to the radio,and our spiritual interests
listening and learning in Church.They are still distinct in my mind.
Now we see congregations trying to blend both,with the result that some drift so far from the Liturgy/Hymnal as to question if they are Lutheran,much less LCMS Lutherans.
Why is it that we need a blog to catch these many deviations ?
Could it be that locales drive to music that furthers their economic or cultural interests?
Could it be that the youth are taught to be entertained instead of going to worship ?
Could it be District Presidents don’t review Service content ,or are rebuffed if they do?
Could it be the Synod is powerless to stop the rampant individualism occuring in America?
Do we need a benevolent dictator to run the LCMS? We could call him/her Pope. Whoops,thats already copy righted or prior art.
How about just using the hymnal and patrotic music at a national religoius event ?
If you want and can afford entertainment,hire Vince Gill
Better yet ,simply ask the kids you are trying to reach what they want to hear
They are only a twitter away,their answers(if left unbaised by their parents) would tell us a lot of what The Synod needs to do to capture future growth while staying true to LCMS beliefs!It would be far less money and much better spent than the Bue Ribbon Task Force