Give Us More Offensive Conduct Please President Kieschnick, by Pr. Rossow

President Kieschnick inserts a glossy two-page, full color flier into each Reporter that he calls “Leadership News.”  In the most recent edition of this Leadership News (September, 2009) he asserts that the LCMS is “exceptionally united in what we believe, teach and confess.”

Before getting to that consider the very title of the insert, “Leadership News.” As I asserted the other day in another post “leadership” is used in the church today as a code word for re-making our grandfather’s church. It has been borrowed from the business world by President Kieschnick and other proponents of the church growth movement. Scripture says precious little about leadership. President kieschnick did not get this empahsis on leadership from Scripture but from the countless church growth gurus who see teh church as a business and not as the forgiveness administering body of Christ and so they pedal the latest buzz words from the corporate world. The business world  latched on to “leadership”  in recent years (actually it is now a passing fad and as usual when the church tries to mimic the world we are always behind the times and look foolish) in order to encourage brave and courageous thinking in the face of a rapidly changing globalized business environment. In the business world a leader is described as an agent of change. The church needs to be brave and courageous as well but not in terms of change. We need to bravely entrench ourselves in the teaching that Christ passed on to us and courageously battle our enemy Satan.

That leads to the point to be made here. After listing several things we agree on  President Kieschnick says this about what we still disagree on

At the same time, there are matters about which we in the LCMS are not in agreement, most notably:

 

·        The administration of the Sacrament of Holy Communion, mainly the question of who should be invited or allowed to commune at the altar of our Lord in LCMS congregations.

·        The service of women, mainly the question of in what roles and capacities Scripture allows or commends the participation and involvement of women in the church.

·        Questions about proper forms of worship, mainly how much uniformity is necessary in the worship life of LCMS congregations, how much and what kind of diversity in forms of worship is acceptable.

·        Inter-Christian relationships, mainly the question of how to remain a biblical, confessional, evangelical, Christian, Lutheran church body boldly confessing the truth in love, relating to other Christians and Christian churches while honoring our covenants of love to avoid unionism and syncretism.

 

In the years ahead our Synod will need to continue to work under Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions to achieve similar solidarity in these matters. Where Scripture speaks plainly and clearly to the question at hand, the matter is resolved. Where Scripture does not speak plainly, clearly, or at all to the question at hand, it behooves us as a group of rational, reasonable, Christian people to come to a godly and common sense conclusion regarding how to proceed with mutual respect and non-offensive conduct.

In the last line above President Kieschnick asks us to proceed with non-offensive conduct in regards to these things we disagree about. That is a good point. We should only speak the truth in love. However, we do need to speak the truth and even if we do so in love, it will still offend those who are embracing falsehoods. We would like to see the president address assertively those who hold to false teachings and practices in our synod and this will most likely offend them and those who defend them. Give us some more offensive conduct please President Kieschnick.

I would say that the main beef confessional Lutherans have with President Kieschnick is that we differ on the very points that he addresses above and that we do not see these as adiaphora (things neither commanded nor forbidden). The administration of holy communion is clear in Scripture and has always been clear in the LCMS until people like President Kieschnick started practicing open communion and then asserting that we are not united. The service of women is clear in Scripture and always been clear in the LCMS until people like President Kieschnick pushed to allow women elders and congregational chairs and then asserted that we are not united. (For sure there are clear differences of practice among confessional Lutherans in the LCMS concerning women’s suffrage but I have talked to many pastors on both sides of the issue on this, and most do not see this as a church-dividing issue but nearly all of them are united against women elders and congregation chairs.) The worship style question is clear in Scripture and has always been clear in LCMS practice until people like President Kieschnick started experimenting with “contemporary worship” and then asserting that we are not united.  Inter-Christian relations are becoming much clearer now that the ELCA has become apostate. Indeed President Kieschnick delivered a firm address to the ELCA but he is the one who is confused on this matter because he has proposed absolutely no change in practice with the ELCA to back up his strong words.

I hope you can see what President Kieschnick is up to here. He is downplaying issues that are a matter of heart and soul to Confessional Lutherans all for the sake of trying to extol his own “genius” leadership that he thinks has kept the LCMS basically united during the years of his presidency.  How can he say that when each time he has been elected  by barely more that  a simple majority. Nearly 50% of the synod has voted against him each time. Yes, nearly 50% of the synod voted against President Barry in his first election but he did not go around claiming that we were unified with just a few minor differences on style.

Does President Kieschnick realize that he is the one speaking offensively to the Confessional Lutherans when he talks this way? Has that thought crossed his mind?

 Delegates to the 2010 LCMS convention and all Lutherans ought not to be  not be deceived by this recasting of the argument. These are serious doctrinal differences that are resulting in LCMS churches falsely communing those who do not discern the body and blood of Christ, bringing women into the office the Holy Ministry through congregation headship and communion distribution, dupe Lutherans into worship practices that are man-centered, and bring shame on the Gospel by cooperating with those who deny Christ. As an exampel of how President Kieschnick recasts the arguemnts notice that he does not understand the worship issue. In the quote above from his “Leadership News” he sees it as a matter of uniformity. Confessional Lutherans have been shouting from the rooftops for an entire generation that it is not a matter of unity of style. It is a matter of Lutheran substance exemplified by traditional worship vs. methobapticostal substance exemplified by contemporary worship.

Rather than re-casting serious theological differences as differences of opinion on which we should not offend each other in our discussion  we wish that President Kieschnick would get offensive and deal with what are, even in his watered-down version of our differences, offenses to Scriptural teaching.

In Renton, Washington there is a music director who is a gay activist. In the twin cities there is a church (The Alley) that practices post-modern worship and recommends a steady diet of non-Lutheran books to its parishioners. Right in the backyard of the synodical office building, a few miles to the south, there is a church (Jefferson Hills) that has used filthy language on public billboards, has radical sermons that wander outside the bounds of law/gospel homiletics and have lay elders hosting the Lord’s Supper for small groups in homes.

If President Kieschnick wants to admit these are acceptable practices then let him do so (he already is by his inaction) and then the delegates to the convention can realize that it is time to elect new leadership that doesn’t try to recast our differneces in some sort of Clintonesque waffling way. (It is quite significant that in “It’s Time” Matt Harrison actually proposes a structure by which we will come together as a synod and face these differences directly and resolve them.) Do we want a synod in which these things are allowed and all the president can say is let’s discuss “open questions” without offending each other. It is an offense to the Gospel that these practices are allowed. We have spoken directly to President Kieschnick’s office on these matters and his response is that he does not want to interfere with the district president’s work. Take a look at the  how the Synod Handbook describes the work of the president and you decide if

B. Duties of the President

1. The President has the supervision regarding the doctrine and the administration of

a. All officers of the Synod;

b. All such as are employed by the Synod;

c. The individual districts of the Synod;

d. All district presidents.

2. It is the President’s duty to see to it that all the aforementioned act in accordance with the Synod’s Constitution, to admonish all who in any way depart from it, and, if such admonition is not heeded, to report such cases to the Synod.

3. The President has and always shall have the power to advise, admonish, and reprove. He shall conscientiously use all means at his command to promote and maintain unity of doctrine and practice in all the districts of the Synod.

4. The President shall see to it that the resolutions of the Synod are carried out.

5. When the Synod meets in convention the President shall give a report of his administration. He shall conduct the sessions of the convention so that all things are done in a Christian manner and in accord with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.

6. It is the duty of the President, or an officer of the Synod appointed by the President, to be present at the meetings of the districts, to advise them, and to report at the next session of the Synod.

7. The President shall perform all additional duties assigned to him by the Bylaws or by special resolution of the Synod in convention.

8. When matters arise between meetings of the Synod in convention which are of such a nature that action thereon cannot be delayed until the next convention, the President is authorized to submit them to a written vote of the member congregations of the Synod only after full and complete information regarding the matter has been sent to member congregations by presidential letter and has been published in an official periodical of the Synod. If such matters are related to the business affairs of the Synod, such a vote shall be conducted only after the President has consulted with the synodical Board of Directors. In all cases at least one-fourth of the member congregations must register their vote.

Note well that his primary duty is to supervise doctrine and practice in the synod. We do not ask our president to “lead” us. We ask him to enforce the resolutions of synod which are to be in keeping with Scripture.  His only other duty is to run a convention. Rather than publishing a nice glossy insert on leadership, we wish he would spend his time dealing with the countless cases of open communion, women sacristans, coffee-shop church, and so forth. He is a president which means that he presides and what he presides over is a convention. But presiding over a convention is just one week out of every three years. The other 155 weeks is to be presiding over doctrine and practice.  He is an overseer and supervisor of doctrine and practice according to the policies  we have established as a synod, not a purveyor of warmed over “corporate speak” on leadership. The church is a family, not a business. We do not need corporate leaders. We need church leaders who are fathers and who practice headship, not leadership.

About Pastor Tim Rossow

Rev. Dr. Timothy Rossow is the Director of Development for Lutherans in Africa. He served Bethany Lutheran Church in Naperville, IL as the Sr. Pastor for 22 years (1994-2016) and was Sr. Pastor of Emmanuel Lutheran in Dearborn, MI prior to that. He is the founder of Brothers of John the Steadfast but handed off the Sr. Editor position to Rev. Joshua Scheer in 2015. He currently resides in Ocean Shores WA with his wife Phyllis. He regularly teaches in Africa. He also paints watercolors, reads philosophy and golfs. He is currently represented in two art galleries in the Pacific Northwest. His M Div is from Concordia, St. Louis and he has an MA in philosophy from St. Louis University and a D Min from Concordia, Fort Wayne.

Comments

Give Us More Offensive Conduct Please President Kieschnick, by Pr. Rossow — 62 Comments

  1. Mark L,

    President Kieschnick does not have an earned doctorate. He has an honorary doctorate.

    On the other topic, is doctrinal supervision an issue for you at all when it comes to the presidency of the LCMS? It is the chief duty of the president according to the LCMS Handbook.

    If not, why not? If so, why does it not bother you that President Kieschnick has ignored this responsibility in the issues you listed above?

    TR

  2. Dear Pastor Louderback,

    President Kieschnick holds an honorary doctorate only:

    “The recipient of an honorary doctorate may use the degree in the same manner as a substantive degree, except under certain circumstances where the formal academic background is required. The recipient typically will not begin using the prenominal title of doctor, though there is no rule against it. Honorary doctorate recipients Benjamin Franklin, Maya Angelou, and Billy Graham, amongst others, have used the title pre- or postnominally. Many universities that award honorary degrees will refer to their recipients as “doctor.” Whether the title is used prenominally or postnominally, honaris causa or h.c. should be parenthetically added after the degree title.” (source: http://www.wisegeek.com/who-is-billy-graham.htm)

    Pastor Messer quoted AC XXIV:

    “The Mass is held among us and celebrated with the highest reverence. Nearly all the usual ceremonies are also preserved . . . we do not abolish the Mass, but religiously keep and defend it. Masses are celebrated among us every Lord’s Day and on the other festivals . . . And the usual public ceremonies are observed, the series of lessons, of prayers, vestments, and other such things.”

    You said:

    “That is my position as well. I have a traditional service where all that is done.“

    I have yet to see you defend the mass. I have, however, seen you defend “CoWo,” as you call it. I’ve seen you defend it on multiple online communities and on multiple blogs. You are the “CoWo“ king, the acolyte for “CoWo.” There is where your heart is. I was taught that “actions speak louder than words.” Actions speak louder than words.

    I didn’t answer your previous question because I didn’t know what it was you were referring to about the BJS home page. Now that you’ve delineated what you mean, I can answer. The issues on the home page are the tip of the iceberg. It doesn’t matter to me what label someone assigns to President Kieschnick. I don’t vote based on labels, but rather on track record. I suspect you don’t see any problem with the issues brought up here at BJS because you don’t want to – you have a different way of looking at things. If you wanted to talk about issues, we could talk about Yankee Stadium, or “stuffing ballot boxes,” or assigning “CoWo” and CGM devotees to boards and committees and radio shows far and wide. On and on the list goes.

    You take exception to what Pastor Wilken said. I think what he said was right on. Have you never considered that just because someone says something, that doesn’t mean that’s what they really believe. It’s easy for President Kieschnick to state certain positions, but what has he done about them? I haven’t noticed our President taking action against those who militate against our Confession. The main thing I’ve seen is the age of “CoWo,” CGM, and Emergent church in full bloom, being given its own honorary doctorate right here in our own Synod. Along with the doctorate comes all the false theology that BJS seeks to fight against. Actions speak louder than words (or in this case, inaction).

    You dodged my question on who you would vote for and why, President Kieschnick or Pastor Harrison. It seems like a relevant question to me. I think it speaks volumes that you didn’t answer. I think it’s disingenuous on your part. Call a thing what it is.

    You appear to believe the topics that are brought forth here by Pastor Rossow and others (who incidentally, holds an earned doctorate, though he generally goes by Pastor, not Rev. Dr., as does at least one other person I know on this web site) have no bearing on the Presidential election. My question to you is this, what are you doing here? I know you enjoy sparring with people, which is fine. But it’s not fine when you twist issues and make people look like something they aren’t. You said to me: “I just wonder exactly what you think is a legitimate function of a pastor. Can I visit the sick, those in nursing homes, those in prison, or should I just have God visit them? Why ought I not to reach out to the lost then?” That is misrepresentation on your part. You know I do not think that, yet you say it anyway, to gain an unfair advantage in a debate. I see you do this often to others as well. It is unbecoming for a Servant of the Word to behave in such a fashion.

    My suggestion for you would be to avoid misrepresenting people and/or putting words in their mouth, being a little more gentle, (me too), and avoid rubbing salt in wounds. Most people on this website are here because they are confessional and seek refuge from the LCMS hurricane that rages all around them. They are here for mutual consolation of the brothers. They aren’t here to be tossed to and fro by wave and wind, or to be battered by those of a different persuasion.

    Your brother in Christ,

    Scott Diekmann

  3. Tim,

    President Kieschnick does not have an earned doctorate. He has an honorary doctorate.

    How ought he be addressed then?

    On the other topic, is doctrinal supervision an issue for you at all when it comes to the presidency of the LCMS? It is the chief duty of the president according to the LCMS Handbook.

    (Chuckle) Sure. My problem is, you are pulling out things happening at a congregational level that are not the direct responsiblity of Pres K. And nor is there any evidence that nothing is done.

    I mean that with like the personal issues, like the prof signing on to support Aires. The Blue Ribbon and the like are simple differences in opinion on the structure of the Synod. I think honest people can disagree on that.

    But yeah, I think trying to pain Pres K as soft on homosexuality is invalid, is playing games, and is conduct unbecoming.

    But that’s just my opinion.

  4. Scott,

    President Kieschnick holds an honorary doctorate only.

    Then refer to him as Dr Kieschnick, or Pres Kieschnick. But he is not “Dr” Kieschnick. The quotes are inappropriate.

    I have yet to see you defend the mass.

    Okay, once again, I don’t defend the mass, because the english word mass refers to the corrupted service of good works that the Roman Catholic church performs.

    But, I am glad you asked the question. I think this is an important part of these discussions on the internet: do amplify and explain our various positions.

    So, yeah, I think the divine service as we practice it in the Western liturgy–with various Lutheran modifications like not having a Eucharistic prayer–although that is not a deal breaker with me–are a wonderful gift from God.

    I have no problem–absolutely no problem at all–if a pastor comes to me and says “Look, I just don’t like Cowo and I don’t want to have it at my church. We just do traditional worship.” I’m fine with that.

    We have plenty of younger people who come to my traditional service–it is not just my older members, but younger families, with children and babies who love the repetition and the consistency of the liturgy. I love it. I grew up on page 5 & 15, TLH. I sang in Sem choir. I have a chasuble I use during Easter and I’m looking to get another as well. I have my own parament used solely for Maundy Thursday–and I’m getting another one for Christ the King.

    When I go to nursing homes and I give communion, it is nice to see people speak along to the confession that they learned growing up. I even say Thee and Thou with them. That is a distinct problem I see with CoWo services, that people won’t have that.

    I love the liturgy. Don’t think that I don’t.

    But I also love CoWo. I love the songs, I love the informality–I missed communing a member in my cowo service (an elderly man who does not come forward). So, after I did the blessing I looked and realized my error and was able to say to the congregation “Hey, I didn’t commune Bob! Let’s do that right now.”

    I love using video in my sermons. So many people are visual learners and that is a great way to proclaim the Word.

    And the issue is, Scott, that I am perfectly willing to let people use only the liturgy. But many of these people want to prevent me from using Cowo. They want to try and convince me that the confessions forbid it, or Scripture forbids it, or whatever. They make up stuff about it and call it names and make claims about it being X or Y or whatever.

    This is why you see me defending it. This is why you see me engaged in it. Because some want to forbid it.

    All I want to do is proclaim the Gospel message of Jesus.

    Some people hear it best in a liturgical situation. Some hear it best in a Contemporary worship situation.

    There you go.

    I didn’t answer your previous question because I didn’t know what it was you were referring to about the BJS home page. Now that you’ve delineated what you mean, I can answer.

    In the future, if you don’t know what I mean, you can just ask me. That makes things easier, you know?

    Look, I’m sorry something has come up and I gotta run. But I appreciate your answers. But lastly let me say this:

    My suggestion for you would be to avoid misrepresenting people and/or putting words in their mouth, being a little more gentle, (me too), and avoid rubbing salt in wounds.

    I think that old John the Steadfast needs to heed this exact advice as well. In spades.

  5. Mark L,

    How do you understand this quote from the LCMS handbook on the responsibility that you and I have given to the President of the synod? (p. 15)

    1. The President has the supervision regarding the doctrine and the
    administration of
    a. All officers of the Synod;
    b. All such as are employed by the Synod;
    c. The individual districts of the Synod;
    d. All district presidents.

    I have asked the DP of the NWD to address this situation and he did not. After asking two times and getting no results I asked the SP to handle it and his office told me that they do not get involved in District matters.

    Please tell me where I am wrong in stating that the SP has acted improperly.

    TR

  6. Tim I’m afraid I don understand: what issue did you speak to the DP about? I need a little more context to answer.

  7. Scott,

    The issues on the home page are the tip of the iceberg.

    Yeah…I don’t buy it.

    I mean, if you want to disagree with Pres K, and the direction that he is leading the Synod and you’d rather have a Synod that didn’t have any CoWo, that didn’t do Ablaze, that returned to the style of President Barry–then lay that down and make the arguments on that.

    I find these accusations to be over the top and just drawn for some maximum political effect.

    Why can’t we just say “Look, I disagree with the vision that he has for our Synod.”

    That is why I support Pres K over Pr Harrison. I agree with the direction that the one is leading us (to an extent) and I have concerned about the direction that Pr Harrison would take us.

    But the fact is, I could live with either and be happy as a clam. As much as people bemoan our Synodical Presidents–no matter what side they are–the fact of the matter is that we are a conservative synod, we’re getting more conservative as the years go on, not less, and we are shrinking and nobody really cares about what we believe and confess.

    I think the claims being made are just overplayed.

    or assigning “CoWo” and CGM devotees to boards and committees and radio shows far and wide

    When Pres Barry was in office, who did he appoint? If Pr Harrison is elected, would you expect him to appoint a mix of CoWo and traditional supporters to his committees?

    Seriously: this is an illegitimate criticism.

    You take exception to what Pastor Wilken said. I think what he said was right on. Have you never considered that just because someone says something, that doesn’t mean that’s what they really believe.

    So, Todd Wilken might actually be in favor of women’s ordination? Tim Rossow might be in favor of homosexual clergy?

    Let them deny it all they want–I mean, that doesn’t really, really mean they hold to it.

    The position of extreme skepticism is simply another political weapon used to to try and gain votes. It is a power play, pure and simple.

    Let’s face it: women’s ordination used to be THE dividing line between conservative and liberal church denominations. So, in our Synod, casting anyone as a supported of women’s ordination puts them right out of step with our Synod.

    Now, since the argument of “We don’t like the vision that Pres K has for the Synod” isn’t sexy enough, it just seems to me that peopel are trying to tar Pres K for something he is not.

    Because Scott, everyone knows that no one is pushing women’s ordination in our church. When Pres K speaks about differences on the role of women, he’s not talking about women’s ordination. He’s talking about the real differences that we have in our Synod.

    But once again, that is not a sexy enough accusation. That’s not going to make political hay. So, better hype up the accusation to something that is not true, but will stick better.

    This is running the election along the lines of “Do what it takes to win.”

  8. Arrgh. Sorry about that post.

    Do you understand my point Scott? Pr Harrison has been supported by Pastor Herman Otten. This does not mean that he is a holocaust denier. But that would be some great political hay to make, wouldn’t it? “Pres Harrison doesn’t disassociate himself from a denier of the holocaust…what does that mean about him own position?”

    Stuff like that is not right.

    I know that people don’t like Pres K. What tires me is treating him as if he were evil incarnate. And that one is simply unable to take him at his word.

    But no one is going to listen to me on this. Politics in the church is what it is–and dirty fighting (on both sides, I’m sure) is par for the course.

    You dodged my question on who you would vote for and why, President Kieschnick or Pastor Harrison.

    Well, you dodged my question on the home page of the website. I usually take my cue in responding from what people say to me.

    You appear to believe the topics that are brought forth here by Pastor Rossow and others (who incidentally, holds an earned doctorate, though he generally goes by Pastor, not Rev. Dr., as does at least one other person I know on this web site) have no bearing on the Presidential election.

    I don’t think they have anything to do with anything whatsoever.

    I don’t think that anything listed has anything to do with anything that Tim objects to concerning Pres K.

    Seriously. Does anyone question whether Pres K exhibits proper ecclesiastical supervision? Is that really an issue? Really? Do we think that a Pres Harrison would act differently? That was Pres Barry’s downfall with certain elements, wasn’t it? He wasn’t kicking butt and taking names like so many wanted him to do…being Pres is quite different from many of us want to make it.

    My question to you is this, what are you doing here?

    (chuckle) I have a laser focus, truthfully, Scott when it comes to issues on websites like this one.

    And one of them is Women’s ordination.

    One of the reasons I left the Synod back in the day for the WELS was that I listened to the hype about women’s ordination in our Synod. It was a lie.

    This is why I originated the Louderbackian bet on Luthequest: name ten active pastors supporting women’s ordination. No was able to.

    That is why I am here, commenting about this. Todd Wilkens made a challenge on Pres K’s position on women’s ordination and I think he is being obtuse, being misleading, or I misunderstood what he was asking.

    That is why I am here.

    Along the way, people ask me questions and I respond.

    That is misrepresentation on your part. You know I do not think that, yet you say it anyway, to gain an unfair advantage in a debate.

    I grow weary of people having the attitude that since salvation is by grace, pastors and laypeople alike really don’t do evangelism. We can’t do anything to spread the Gospel. When you say “I would ask “Who is it that is doing the doing?”” I have a knee-jerk reaction.

    Because you are being unfair to my position. I mean, let’s be honest Scott. I don’t see you taking Helen to task in her refusal to call me pastor. Why is that? I don’t see you taking my statements in the context they are meant — my desire to speak the Gospel in a contextual way to the people of my community. So you think I am twisting your words? Maybe. But I’m only following your own example.

    I mean, Scott, you know that I personally worked on trying to explain my position to you. You are not convinced–I understand that. But to come at me with this “Oh, whose doing the doing?” Baah.

    But you are right. I ought not to lash out at you. I do grow tired of the games, the posing, the jabs, the desire to score points rather than engage in honest discussion about the issues. It gets old.

    But look at me all melancholy and chatty. Let me leave it at this: no one should doubt Pres K’s position on Women’s ordination. If you disagree with him that women can be president of a congregation or distribute communion, disagree with him on that. Not a fake issue.

  9. Pastor Louderback,

    You said:

    “I grow weary of people having the attitude that since salvation is by grace, pastors and laypeople alike really don’t do evangelism. We can’t do anything to spread the Gospel. When you say “I would ask ‘Who is it that is doing the doing?’” I have a knee-jerk reaction.”

    When I asked “Who is it that is doing the doing,” that meant the same thing as what Pastor Wilken often says, “Who is driving the verbs.” What I meant was your statement made it sound like it is you who is doing the converting, not the Holy Spirit. I am sensitive to that appearance because I see it fairly often and don’t like it. We are God’s instruments. I’m not sure if you meant in your comment that people don’t do evangelism, or don’t need to do evangelism, but I don’t agree with either position. I’ve got a whole stack of papers written by confessional Lutherans that point out that Lutheranism and evangelism are both/and kinds of things, not either/or.

  10. Pastor Louderback,

    My statement, “Have you never considered that just because someone says something, that doesn’t mean that’s what they really believe,” was in reference to President Kieschnick, not Pastor Wilken.

    A person could just say they disagree with the way the current President is leading the Synod, and leave it at that, but somebody somewhere might want to know why. Something like the Issues, Etc. trademark issue, or inadequate ecclesiastical supervision, which have been discussed on the BJS site, would be examples of the “why.”

    You said “Does anyone question whether Pres K exhibits proper ecclesiastical supervision? Is that really an issue? Really?” Yes. Really. Yankee Stadium is an example.

    I’m not going to pick on Helen for not calling you “Pastor.” That’s up to her.

    Sorry, but I can’t continue the conversation any longer. I’ve got yearly training coming up, and I need to be devoting my free time to it. It takes a lot of preparation, and this is taking up a lot of time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.