NEWS – Possible New Lutheran Hour Speaker…

It came to my attention not long ago that The Lutheran Hour has extended a call to Rev. Dr. Dean Nadasdy, the Senior Pastor of Woodbury Lutheran Church to be the next speaker (see here for proof). Dr. Nadasdy taught at CSL from 1997-2000.  He served on the Board for Communication Services from 2001-2003.  In 2004 he was elected 3rd VP of the Synod.  In 2007 he was elected 4th VP of the Synod.

The website for Woodbury has audio samples of Dr. Nadasdy’s sermons for those who would like a preview of what The Lutheran Hour may sound like if he accepts the call.  http://www.woodburylutheran.org/media/

For Dr. Nadasdy’s professional profile, see the LCMS Church Worker site here.

For various resources that he has written for CPH, see here.  He was also a contributor to The Lutheran Study Bible.

Keep Dr. Nadasdy in your prayers as he considers this call to be the next speaker of The Lutheran Hour.

Edit – Some added information:

Dr. Nadasdy has been a guest speaker on The Lutheran Hour before, here are the two sermons he preached there:

http://www.lutheranhour.org/sermon.asp?articleid=665

http://www.lutheranhour.org/sermon.asp?articleid=666

About Pastor Joshua Scheer

Pastor Joshua Scheer is the Senior Pastor of Our Savior Lutheran Church in Cheyenne, Wyoming. He is also the Editor-in-chief of Brothers of John the Steadfast. He oversees all of the work done by Steadfast Lutherans. He is a regular host of Concord Matters on KFUO. Pastor Scheer and his lovely wife Holly (who writes and manages the Katie Luther Sisters) have four children and enjoy living in Wyoming.

Comments

NEWS – Possible New Lutheran Hour Speaker… — 98 Comments

  1. @Jason #49

    @Jason #46
    Jason,
    Pretty sure he got that memo. Even IF Pastor Nadasdy disagrees with President Harrison on issues involving the synod, how would that be any different than those who disagreed with what President Kieschnick did which was pretty much everything. If what President Harrison has proposed in “It’s Time” is to succeed, people like Pastor Nadasdy will be needed in the discussion along with his opposites and those in between.

  2. Andrew,
    There is much more that needs to be, if “It’s Time” is to succeed. Those whom are under President Harrison, need to believe, choose & act as if “It’s Time”.
    Andrew, please do try, to remember, these men & boards are elected. They were chosen, and one man cannot do everything, let alone everything, all at once. A almost decade, is a long time, and the opposite of the choices, is going to take time, and sometimes, it won’t end with what most were looking for or agreed to.
    This will take time, it has in WELS, and a few there, are unhappy w/even the direction they elected. I pray LCMS, learns from others & doesn’t repeat, what hasn’t, nor rarely does work.

  3. @Dutch #52
    Dutch,
    That is not what I am saying. It has to go both ways, there were those who were vehemently opposed to the past nine years and there will be those who will be vehemently opposed to President Harrison. That’s all I am saying.

  4. Andrew S #53,
    I know that isn’t what ya meant. You’re right, it does go both ways.
    Here’s the thing though, partisianship, has no place in worldly politics, less so in Denominational Governance. One if of the will of the people, one is for the Spiritual health, welfare & safety of souls.
    If the Solas & Doctrines stand firm, it will not nor should it matter who holds a seat.
    It’s Time, & has been for a while, but it takes time for Him our Lord, to turn a tide.

  5. I don’t know if I should or not, but I’m going to err on the side of openness and clarity and jump into this conversation. I am the Executive Director at Lutheran Hour Ministries. In 40 years of working in the church, I’ve learned to be every bit as careful about what I oppose as I am about what I support. I always want to make sure that I’m not opposing God and His work. Consider the following:
    • Rev. Sterle, I need some clarification. In post #14 you say about LHM, “they establish parish renewal programs…” I’m the Executive Director and I have no idea what you are talking about. Could you please be more specific? It’s hard to imagine that we are doing a “parish renewal program” and I don’t know about it.
    • We select the person to call to the speaker position asking for God’s guidance and committed to calling the person who can best and most clearly articulate the saving Gospel message to a dying world. Rev. Nadasdy does a wonderful job of that and, should he be led to accept the call, will continue his excellent track record of clearly pointing people to Jesus. Who he supported for president is totally irrelevant. We didn’t rule out any of the 47% of the synod that voted for Rev. Kieschnick; neither did we rule out any of the 53% of the synod that voted for Rev. Harrison. In fact, we didn’t even ask that question. It is my commitment to work closely with whoever the church chooses to have occupy the president’s office a few miles south of us at the IC. I was on good terms with President Kieschnick and am on good terms with President Harrison. My staff works well with their counterparts at the IC.
    • Lutheran Hour Ministries, now maybe more than ever before, has a singular purpose—to tell people about Jesus and to help those in whom the Spirit has worked or is working faith to find a local congregation where that faith can be nourished. To that end, here in the US and through our 33 offices around the world, we work very closely with local congregations—that’s where people get fed daily.
    • God is very much at work through this ministry—of that there is not one doubt in my mind. According to Arbitron (the Nielson-type ratings system for radio), The Lutheran Hour has more than 820,000 listeners every Sunday morning. That’s more than all of the LCMS Lutherans that sit in our pews on an average Sunday. Our own research indicates that, of those listeners, 10% or 82,000 have no church home. We also know from the mail, phone calls and e-mail that we receive that The Lutheran Hour goes where our churches can’t, won’t or don’t go. We know we talk to many people in nursing homes—the ones you visit regularly but also the ones that no one visits. But Jesus visits them every Sunday as Pastor Klaus speaks God’s Word to them on the radio. We know we talk to truck drivers who are going cross country. They hear about their Savior’s love for them on the XM dial right there in their truck cabs. And we talk to people you and I probably wouldn’t want to spend much time with here on this earth—prisoners who have done some of the most heinous crimes. Because they met Jesus on the radio waves through the Lutheran Hour, you and I will spend eternity with some of them. And we talk to a whole lot of people like you and me, as well–ordinary sinners who need to hear the Gospel.
    • In the US, over 3400 LCMS churches—well over half—are making use of the Men’s NetWork materials produced by LHM. More than 30,000 lay people have been through our Equipping To Share (now Mission U) program designed to help them share their faith with their friends and neighbors.
    • And world-wide, during our last fiscal year (June 2009 to May 2010) 47,107 formerly non-Christian people contacted one of our offices, went through our Bible Correspondence Course, indicated that they now knew Jesus as their Savior and asked us to help them become part of a local worshipping congregation. And ask me sometime about the chance I had to talk about Jesus in a Vietnamese high school in the Mekong Delta.
    I am always open to your helpful suggestions and constructive criticism. We always want to do a better job of communicating that saving Gospel message and I’m open to listening to your ideas. My office phone number is 314-317-4101. Focused suggestions and specific criticism helps us do our job better—sarcastic comments and generalizations don’t. Help us serve you better.

  6. Bruce,
    I most sincerely commend your bravery, in posting this. It could not have been easy in the least. Most don’t venture to do it, you did, in the most honest of ways.

    Service is what it is there for, always was. Kudos for posting, it isn’t for the faint of heart.

  7. @Jason #43

    Jason, please ask someone you know and trust well to read through what you have written in regard to the Lutherans for Life survey, political affiliation, and signing the Pres. Kieschnick endorsement letter. I am with Andrew in missing the relevancy. Your logic is, well, lacking.

    That said, I think I know the point you are trying to make. In a way it relates to Andrew’s comment in #51. Both of you are working from the assumption that there is a political battle being waged for synodical control and supremacy. Here is what I have gleaned so far. Please do correct me, gentlemen, if I have missed the mark as I do not want to mischaracterize what you have written, or presume to read you mind or intent.

    Your assumption, Jason, leads you to decide what is right or beneficial for fellowship under the name and banner of the LCMS based upon one’s relationship with Pres. Kieschnick. Andrew’s assumption is that those of Dr. Nadasdy’s opinion, along with all of those within the LCMS who might have a variety of ideas as to what it means to be Lutheran and how the LCMS should go about the practice and mission of being Lutheran, all have equally valid opinions that need to be heard and synthesized (i.e. blended) into a common understanding of our fellowship.

    The problem with these assumptions is that our fellowship (koinonia) is not determined by the agreement of men with each other but by a common participation in what God has clearly revealed and delivered to us in Holy Writ. It is supposed to be one that is predetermined by the Word of God properly understood, preached, taught, heard, prayed, practiced, conversed, and broadcast (each an essential component of a church’s confession of the faith) in all its truth and purity.

    It is for the purpose of just such a fellowship in confession of the one true faith that the prophets and apostles delivered the faith to us in the first place. It is for the purpose of just such a fellowship in confession of the one true faith that the early catholic church fathers developed the ecumenical creeds. It is for the purpose of just such a fellowship in confession of the one true faith that the Lutheran reformers authored the Book of Concord. It is for the purpose of just such a fellowship in confession of the one true faith that the Saxon Lutherans emigrated from Germany and constituted the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.

    And each of these purposed by the Holy Spirit to be bold and unflinching in the face of persecution by the world and the false prophets outside their fellowship, as well as against the false teachings and factions that would inevitably arise within their midst.

    This is the battle we face. It is the battle of the church militant. Not one of political sides vying for supremacy or dialoging for diplomacy. But one of “contend[ing] for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” [Jude v. 3]

  8. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #55

    Bruce,

    Thank you for joining the conversation about The Lutheran Hour and the Rev. Nadasdy. I, for one, appreciate the thought and effort the folks at The Lutheran Hour have put into the process. You recognize that we are a presently a Synod with a multiplicity of disagreements on a number of issues and, as you say, you are committed with working with all LCMS pastors. Thank you for maintaining positive working relationships.

    Since I have the opportunity to address the Executive Director of the Lutheran Hour, please allow me to offer a few pithy thoughts.

    (1) Please notice that a number of posters are still hurt because of the Benke-Schultz-LHM events. The events of September 11th and subsequent Prayer for America was a terribly difficult time for our Synod. I bring this up not to challenge your position on the Schutlz matter, but rather to point out that the relationship between LHM and a number of local pastors has been strained because of these matters. Please notice the hurt and pray concerning how reconciliation might occur.

    (2) By way of brotherly encouragement: should The Rev. Nadasdy decline the call, may I suggest that you place a stronger emphasis on the candidates’ academic pedigree when working toward extending the next call. I am not an advocate of credentialism, but it seems to me that an RSO that serves all of Synod, this nation, and countries around the world would do well to choose a man as Speaker who has the universal respect of Synod and the world outside our church body. A man with an earned doctorate (Ph.D. preferred) and demonstrated ability to clearly articulate Law and Gospel is in an excellent position to hold the respect of a large segment of Synod and the also of unbelievers. The right candidate with the right pedigree as Speaker, I argue, would serve LHM and Church well.

    (3) An anecdote: I performed my sister’s wedding in Negril, Jamaica. As a US citizen (and not a citizen of Jamaica), I couldn’t sign any official docutments. Therefore, a local clergyman witnessed the ceremony and signed the appropriate documents. He told me that he had never met an actual Lutheran before, but had been listening to The Lutheran Hour for years. He was genuinely star-struck when I told him that I had met Wally Schultz and that Dale Meyer had been one of my homelitics professors. He went on and on about how much The Lutheran Hour had aided his understanding of the Gospel and influenced his own preaching. He also kept asking me to tell him Dale Meyer stories, but those are other stories for other times. My point is that LHM appears to have a strong presence and respect in areas not known for hotbeds of Lutheranism; I thank you for that.

    Again, thank you for your comments and clarification. Blessings to you.

  9. Dutch,
    Thanks for the encouragement.

    Matthew,
    I do understand. However, I wasn’t on staff here at LHM nearly 9 years ago when those events took place and I, therefore, am not privy to the details of the interaction here in the building at the time. And only one of my current senior leadership team was on staff then and he wasn’t privy to the details either. In any case, as you probably know, state and federal labor guidelines as well as our own policies prohibit me from commenting at all–good, bad or indifferent–on any past employees. Those guidelines are in place to protect the former employee. I think Dr. Schultz has moved on and is now an effective evangelist for Lutheran Heritage Foundation. I know we have moved on and are committed to doing His work as effectively as we can–in fact, we do work closely with LHF in some areas, notably Thailand. And it certainly appears that God has moved on and is blessing both agencies and using both of us to be a blessing to others. Maybe we ought to move on, as well.

    Thanks for your encouragement on the selection process. Communication skills will always outweigh academic credentials for this position, but it’s nice when both come in one package.

    And I’m always glad to hear those stories about how God is touching people’s lives as His Word is proclaimed–loved the Jamaica story! Thanks for telling me about that incident. And speaking of being in areas “not known for hotbeds of Lutheranism”, our office in Lebanon is broadcasting the Gospel in Arabic on some high wattage stations and the Gospel is going into places like Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia–places where Christians can’t go to proclaim the Gospel, but God can get it done through radio waves. I get excited about the amazing ways in which God works to draw people to himself. Thanks for giving me an opening to share that excitement.

  10. @Rev. Kurt Hering #58
    Pastor Hering,
    Thank you for the excellent comments. I do not mean to assume, but find it interesting especially in that signed letter referenced above that Pres. Kieschnick is referred to as a confessional guy, which brings my thinking to koinonia. How can one side say they are confessional and reject the other side who say they are confessional as well. I do not think that there are all that many of the so called liberals and moderates are opposed to the confessions. It seems to me that the agreement of men is the problem like you point out. As in what do the confessions really say about this or that issue. I believe that this struggle will be especially cathartic for the LCMS because in the end, especially if President Harrison- actually the LCMS is successful with the Koionia project we will have a greater grasp of the Lutheran Confessions and how they apply to our current and future situation, because they do have much bearing on all that we do. I think that the LCMS is digging into the confessions in a way that has not happened in many many years and while there will be difficult struggles along the way there will be a rock solid end result- with the Grace of Jesus.

  11. Mr. Wurdeman,

    Surely those involved in the decision making process were aware that Pr. Nadasdy represents a certain faction in the synod, as well as a certain theological position. It’s going to be hard for those who think that Pr. Nadasdy doesn’t represent the doctrinal tradition of the Missouri Synod to be happy about this choice.

    If you want help doing your job better, my suggestion would be this. I offer this honestly with no snark intended, also realizing how painful it is to have your work criticized.

    Read 2 sermons every week for each Sunday in the church year. The first one by Martin Luther, the second by CFW Walther. Then at the end of the year, evaluate how well the Lutheran Hour is carrying on the legacy of those two preachers.

    It’s fantastic to hear that the Lutheran Hour is being heard in Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. Bringing the Gospel to parts of the world where Christianity is illegal is a cause close to my heart.

    I just wish that what the Lutheran Hour broadcast breathed the same air as the confessional Lutheran preachers I mentioned above, instead of dismissing men who do preach that way and threatening to call men who imitate megachurches.

    God give you and your coworkers His Spirit to guide you.

  12. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #55
    Is the following not definition enough of ‘parish renewal.’
    • In the US, over 3400 LCMS churches—well over half—are making use of the Men’s NetWork materials produced by LHM. More than 30,000 lay people have been through our Equipping To Share (now Mission U) program designed to help them share their faith with their friends and neighbors.

  13. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #60
    Communication skills will always outweigh academic credentials for this position, but it’s nice when both come in one package.

    I know a man who quite probably exceeds your requirements.
    However, he might not meet the approval of “us1st”.

    I wonder which qualification is more important to LLL.

  14. Luther is a little lengthy for LHM but it would be good background reading.
    You might also read Walter Maier I (and Wally Schultz). 🙂

  15. Mr. Wurdeman.

    My recommendation to you would be to hire some of the best and brightest pastors who have regular programs on Pirate Christian Radio.

  16. Dear Mr. Wurdeman,
    You have a unique opportunity to choose a public voice for the Lutheran church. You have a wonderful vocation–facilitating ‘bringing Christ to the nations’. I encourage you to find a speaker who represents the best of what it means to be Christian and what it means to be Lutheran. Ideally this should be someone who is eloquent, who preaches the clear Word of God, who knows and loves the catholic Christian heritage of Lutheranism, who can relate to a variety of types of people while ‘translating’ the Gospel into their vernacular(s), and who is comfortable with the range of communication styles that are available today.

    I have a candidate for your consideration. It is Pastor Fisk, founder of Worldview Everlasting and pastor of a church in Pennsylvania. He is very solid theologically, a good speaker and preacher, and is both comfortable with traditional Lutheran worship and with internet based communication cross culturally. Should you feel that he lacks sufficient experience for the job of Lutheran Hour speaker, I encourage you to at least try to hire him on a consulting basis to broaden your appeal on the internet and to young people, while seeking, perhaps, a seminary professor to be your main speaker. Certainly to choose a pastor who does not appear to value being Lutheran specifically, such as Pastor Nadasty, does not represent you or us well.

    Whomever you choose, I encourage you to revel in being Lutheran, personally and as an organization. We are blessed to be LUTHERAN Christians. Let’s enjoy it, celebrate it, and be who we are. And let us be represented on the radio and in other communications by a pastor who does the same.

  17. @Old Time St. John’s #69

    I have had the priviledge of meeting Pr. Fisk, and have heard him preach a couple of itmes. I have watch a couple of his youtube videos and read his interview in the one gaming magazine. I heartly second Old Time’s recommendation.

    revfisk is incredibly intelligent but also relatable. He can inform and teach so well without being snobby or elitist. Having seen him lead a congregation, he tells you what he plans to do, explain why beautifully and conducts himself with integrity. I believe him to be a man of great character. I see him as a great futrue leader in our synod. Heck, his a pretty good leader right now.

  18. Rev. Sterle,
    No. That wouldn’t be my definition of “parish renewal” at all.

    Mr. Hess, Rev. Sterle and Helen:
    You couldn’t have illustrated my point better if I had paid you to do it! Vague generalizations don’t really help at all. Apparently you don’t think the Lutheran Hour sermons are adequately Lutheran. I’m assuming then, that you listen to them. Please point out for me a sermon that is in error. The Lutheran Hour Speaker (or a guest speaker when we use one) writes his own sermon. Those sermons, like everything published out of our US office, go through Synodical doctrinal review. If something is amiss theologically in any of those sermons, we have a problem with both the writer and the reviewer(s) synod has assigned us. If you need your memory refreshed to be specific, you’ll find today’s sermon at http://www.lutheranhour.org/ and a substantial archive of more than 500 past sermons at http://www.lutheranhour.org/archives.asp

    Helen, James, Old Time St. John’s & Jason:
    Did you submit those names when the nomination period was open from January to April of this year? If not, why not? A call for nominations was well published for several months in the Witness, Reporter and Layman. Anyone could have submitted a name. Right now I’m assuming we don’t need more names. But if we do, watch for the announcement.

  19. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #71
    Speaking for myself, Mr. Wurdeman, I don’t think I read the Witness from Jan-April this past year and I don’t get the other two.
    [I was told off rather smartly. If I should venture to hope that your organization has changed its tune since, your call to the Rev. N. discourages that notion!]

    If he should turn you down, let us know. I don’t expect it.

  20. Mr. Wurdeman,

    Thanks for taking the time to join in the dicussion here. It is an honor to have you commenting. Your point about doctrinal review is important for our readers to know. Thank you for sharing that.

    I will say this though about doctrinal review. As I understand it, the reviewers are appointed by the synodical president. President Kieschnick appointed the reviewers for the last three triennia. I have know way of knowing if the reviewer(s) you refer to was appointed by President K or not since it is rightly a highly secretive process. It is likely though that the reviewer was appointed by President Kieschnick. It is my opinion that President Kieschnick would have no problem with the church started by Pastor Nadasdy’s congregation under his tutelage (The Alley).

    We have stated on this site many problems with the practices of The Alley, most recently, replacing the Sunday Divine Service with a humanitarian aid project. That is at the very least, an exercise in a false dichotomy. (For more articles about the Alley use the search button on the right hand side.)

    Let me conclude then with my point. Citing doctrinal review is certainly a strong hand to play but when it highly problable that those reviewers were appointed by someone who does not see the un-Lutheran nature of a church like The Alley, you can see why we would still have a problem with the selection of Pastor Nadasdy.

    There is certainly much more that could be said about this matter. I don’t to mean to oversimplify it. Thank you again for contributing to the discussion. I hope you can at least see why folks commenting on this site are concerned. I hope we can continue learning from each other.

    The Reverend Dr. Timothy A. Rossow
    Director, The Brothers of John the Steadfast

  21. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #60
    > Those guidelines are in place to protect the former employee. I think Dr. Schultz has moved on and is now an effective evangelist for Lutheran Heritage Foundation. I know we have moved on . . . <

    Rev. Schultz moving on is testimony against LHM, whose moving on sans repentance is no virtue. It is pretty much a shaking off sandals and heaping of coals.

    This is not simply a matter of personal offense against Rev. Scultz, though it is that. Nor is it simply about posters here being hurt. It is about an offense against the Word of God, His church, and the office of the ministry. In discharging Rev. Schultz w/o biblical cause, in fact firing him for faithfully exercising his office and the right confession of the faith against error, LHM has hurt itself and those it is supposed to serve.

  22. @Andrew Strickland #61
    > How can one side say they are confessional and reject the other side who say they are confessional as well. I do not think that there are all that many of the so called liberals and moderates are opposed to the confessions. It seems to me that the agreement of men is the problem like you point out. As in what do the confessions really say about this or that issue. <

    You have missed my point entirely, Mr. Strickland. As well as the express purpose of the Confessions–namely that there are things our churches say and do to confess the faith once delivered to us by the prophets and apostles, and there are other things that our churches do not say or do–in fact they are rejected and condemned. They are anything but unclear in what they "really say."

  23. @Andrew Strickland #61
    > How can one side say they are confessional and reject the other side who say they are confessional as well. I do not think that there are all that many of the so called liberals and moderates are opposed to the confessions. <

    Then why are there so many in the who think it better to preach, teach, and practice things other than what they confess?

    Oops! I just gave away the answer to my riddle.

  24. Sorry, for some reason my riddle was cut off. Here it is.

    @Andrew Strickland #61

    > How can one side say they are confessional and reject the other side who say they are confessional as well. <

    There is a word our Lord uses for those who say they are something, while doing something else.

    Here is a little riddle for you. When is a "confessional" not a confessional?

  25. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #71

    First, thank you very much for commenting here. Your insight from your position is most valued. You help descibe what is going on from a konwledgable position, therefore educating us on the happenings at LHM. I think for the most part tempers have been calm, in no small part to your patient and mannered respnses.

    You are right, in that I personally do not know enough. I am not aware of all the anouncements, but I usually know where to find them. My particiular challenge is being in a congregation that acts like it couldn’t care less about being involved in the LCMS. Somehow I manage to get a Lutheran Witness at home. But the congregation, I have noticed how lackadaisical their witness it put out. (sometimes the new one is tossed and the old one left out for viewing) The Reporter has been canceled because it costs money, and the Christian News is put into recycling the instant it arrives. I haven’t seen the LLL newpaper in a while. Corresponce is uknown from around the district. I was lucky to be accepted late as a delegate to the district convention, and just missed out at the synodical convention. (our circuit had only one name, so we had a delegate, but no alternate) Sadly, communication is a black hole here. Our leadership (pastor included) do not make an effort to teach or inform members of the larger LCMS world. Therefore I must figure out how to teach myself, and look for resources by myself.

    Understand, putting an announcement in the paper does not mean a wide swath of people hear about it. Some here struggle to get their concerns heard. Synod retructured and the TCN process both have by implied design an all powerful CEO. The rare weak opportunity laity have is during an election. And if it’s a divine call, the result is indefinite, no set term. And too often we are told to trust the leader, shut up and fall in line. So if we only get one chance, it is huge for us to get it right. Hence the angst.

    Again, thank you for your participation. This dialogue will help, and I appreciate your conversation.

  26. Does anyone know anything about the present makeup of the Lutheran Hour board. Are there members of the board who fired Rev. Dr. Schultz still on the board?

  27. @Rev. Kurt Hering #76

    @Rev. Kurt Hering #78

    Pastor Hering,

    Right now there is a picking and choosing of what the confessions mean and what they have to say.
    I believe my end point here; “I think that the LCMS is digging into the confessions in a way that has not happened in many many years and while there will be difficult struggles along the way there will be a rock solid end result- with the Grace of Jesus.” answers the riddle nicely. Right now pastors across the LCMS call themselves confessional, with the process in place the question of who is a confessional and who is not will be finally answered in the LCMS. Despite the struggles, it will be a good end result.

    “Here is a little riddle for you. When is a “confessional” not a confessional?”
    answer a confessional is not a confessional when they are not confessional.

  28. @Pastor Tim Rossow #73

    Pr. Rossow,

    Interestingly enough, and concerning doctrinal review, a couple years back, I had an email exchange with an individual (I am forgetting his name right now) who asked if I would be interested in submitting my “testimony” to use at the LHM Men’s Network. I emailed a condensed version of my story as it appears in my book Wittenberg Confessions which you have not only read, but you publish through your print on demand publishing house. What is fascinating is the response I received from this person. I was told my “testimony” would not pass doctrinal review. Is that astounding or what? Even more interesting is that I had an email exchange with this person over their support of the Ablaze!™ color coded witnessing tool. Witnessing to others using a Baptist influenced tool was OK (apparently passed doctrinal review), but my story was not.

    What’s wrong with this picture?

  29. That is an incredible story Jim. Hopefully over the next few years doctrinal review will get an overhaul.

    I suppose your support of the liturgy and all things Lutheran is what got it spat out of doctrinal review, but we may never know.

    If you still have the address of the guy you might ask him for specifics as to why your conversion story did not make the cut.

    TR

  30. @Andrew Strickland #81

    Precisely.

    The end result is always good for those who confess Christ Jesus in every article of the faith, and believe that confession is about His work rather than man’s in every article.

    As for the end result in and for the LCMS? God grant that “Christ alone” once again becomes our definition of “faith alone.”

  31. Dear Mr. Wurdeman (comment #60),

    You and I have not met, so I don’t know your “take” on any of these things. I simply have to take your word, as you comment here.

    You say: “I wasn’t on staff here at LHM nearly 9 years ago when those events took place and I, therefore, am not privy to the details of the interaction here in the building at the time. And only one of my current senior leadership team was on staff then and he wasn’t privy to the details either. In any case, as you probably know, state and federal labor guidelines as well as our own policies prohibit me from commenting at all–good, bad or indifferent–on any past employees. Those guidelines are in place to protect the former employee.”

    You are correct that you cannot comment on past employees. Exit interviews in corporations like yours have a standard letter that is used for all future employers; and you can’t say anything more than that about employees.

    This is NOT an employee issue. I have talked to a few of your leaders about needing to apologize to the MISSOURI SYNOD for what the LHM did to one of the LCMS highest officers serving in the line of duty. This is NOT an employee issue. I have encouraged them to do this, because it would help restore relations between LCMS and LHM. But I was told you can’t do that: “Boards never apologize.” That is not true. Boards of Directors apologize all the time in the business world.

    I don’t know the real reason why LHM cannot apologize to the MISSOURI SYNOD for firing a Vice-President of the LCMS, who was serving as an Appellate Judge at the highest level in a church-court case, when he upheld the synodical constitution, Article VI.2. It looks to most of us like the LHM is opposed to the synod’s adjudicatory process, its judges, and/or its constitution. It looks to most of us like the LHM would like its political influence to extend to the decisions of our church courts. If you can’t apologize, LHM at least needs to do something to reassure congregations and pastors that it supports the synodical constitution without demurral, and that you especially support Article VI.2, since that was at issue.

    Obviously this is a problem not of your doing, so you personally have my sympathies. You have inherited a problem hatched by one of your predecessors. Looking at your current board, I think it would be difficult to get an apology past some of them. So don’t put your own job in jeopardy by pushing this issue with your board. It is just not worth it, unless they are all concerned about their relationship with the LCMS and the apology is initiated by your board.

    I have, by the way, for the last nine years, told pastors who wanted to close down the League chapters in their congregations NOT to do that, because the LLL is the only MENS organizations in the synod. Even when it makes mistakes, it needs our support. What else does the LCMS have to offer our men? So the League and LHM has my moral support and prayers, in spite of its error and poor decisions.

    I also have to say that you have some really wonderful staff members at your national office and out in the field. They are a credit to our church and the Lutheran faith! May our Lord continue to bless all of your efforts in evangelism, ministry, and mission!

    Yours in Christ, Martin R. Noland

  32. @Rev. Kurt Hering #74

    I have been informed in a personal and fraternal phone conversation that the firing of the Rev. Dr. Wallace Schulz (please forgive my previous misspelling) from an non-call position with LHM was strictly a business decision and had nothing to do with the Word of God, His church, or the office of the ministry as I have written above. Based upon this phone call, I agreed to re-examine my comment #74 here regarding the dismissal of the Rev. Dr. Wallace Schulz as speaker for the Lutheran Hour.

    In doing so, I did some research to refresh my memory as to exactly what took place back in 2002. Here is what has been written about the matter from three different perspectives–the Rev. David Buegler at “Jesus First,” the Rev. Jack Cascione at “Reclaiming Walther,” and Wikipedia. Please note that the article posted by the Rev. Cascione following his comments is the ILLL’s own news release.

    “His supervisors at the Lutheran Hour Ministries ‘urged’ him to recuse himself [NB: as arbiter of the disciplinary hearing re. the Rev. Dr. David Benke, kh] because of a ‘conflict of interest’ policy under which he was called by LHM not to participate in any activity that would bring harm to the ministry of the Lutheran Hour.” [http://www.jesusfirst.net/challenges.htm]

    > The Rev. Dr. Wallace Schulz Will Not Return to Lutheran Hour Ministries

    By: Rev. Jack Cascione

    The following News Release was sent out by the International Lutheran Layman’s League. The League believes that Second Vice President Wally Schulz’s duties in the LCMS placed him in conflict with the goals of the LLL. The LLL no longer supports the LCMS Constitution. This is why the LCMS Board of Directors questions the LLL’s right to Recognized Service Organization status in the LCMS. The polarization that Luther caused in Europe would also make him ineligible to be an LLL speaker.

    ————————————————————-

    The Rev. Dr. Wallace Schulz Will Not Return to Lutheran Hour Ministries

    St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 18, 2002–The Rev. Dr. Wallace Schulz will not return to his duties as Lutheran Hour Radio Speaker, according to Rodger Hebermehl, executive director of Lutheran Hour Ministries (LHM).

    “Dr. Schulz would not agree to stipulations deemed necessary for his return to service,” Hebermehl said. “Our desire was to reach an agreement that would restore him to his duties. We regret that this could not be achieved. We appreciate Dr. Schulz’s long years of service to “The Lutheran Hour” and to the International Lutheran Laymen’s League, and we pray for God’s continued blessings on him and his ministry.”

    Dr. Schulz was relieved temporarily of his duties with pay on July 12. On July 21, the LHM board of governors declared unanimously that Dr. Schulz violated the organization’s code of ethics and its conflict of interest policy. At the same time, the board indicated its desire to bring Dr. Schulz back into the LHM team ministry. It also affirmed the authority of the executive director to develop stipulations and to obtain Dr. Schulz’s agreement before he could be restored to service. Dr. Schulz declined to agree to the stipulations.

    LHM experienced turmoil and polarization after Dr. Schulz, in his role as second vice president of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, chose to rule in a case involving the church body’s Atlantic District president, who participated in a post-Sept. 11, 2001, prayer service at New York’s Yankee Stadium. LHM leaders have consistently taken no position on the matter or on Dr. Schulz’s ruling. They anticipated, however, that any involvement could bring potential controversy and harm the organization’s mission of “Bringing Christ to the Nations-and the Nations to the Church.” In February, LHM asked Dr. Schulz to recuse himself from the matter, but he did not do so.

    His action polarized Lutheran Hour Ministries and negatively affected the organization’s ministry, Hebermehl said. In seeking the stipulations, LHM’s intent was to be constructive and to ensure that Dr. Schulz clearly understood what was required of him to be reinstated into the team ministry, Hebermehl said.

    Lutheran Hour Ministries, with headquarters in St. Louis, Mo., is a service of the International Lutheran Laymen’s League (Int’l LLL) a volunteer organization of 130,000 members. The Int’l LLL is an auxiliary of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and Lutheran Church-Canada.

    A Web site version of this news release is located at: http://www.lhm.org/enews.htm

    For further information, please contact: Jim Telle at 1-800-944-3450, sta. 4171 [email protected]

    September 18, 2002 “2002 Removal of speaker Wallace Schulz”
    In July 2002, just weeks after his promotion from associate speaker to main speaker, Dr. Wallace Schulz was involved in an LCMS controversy that resulted in his removal from the show. Acting in his capacity as LCMS Second Vice President, Schulz suspended LCMS Atlantic District president David Benke, ruling that Benke, by taking part in an inter-faith prayer event at Yankee Stadium to commemorate the victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, had engaged in syncretism and unionism, practices prohibited by the LCMS. (Benke’s suspension was later overturned on appeal.) The show’s board of governors, shortly following Schulz’s elevation to main speaker, had requested that he recuse himself from the Benke adjudication to avoid “a conflict of interest” in his duties to the International Lutheran Laymen’s League, which operates Lutheran Hour Ministries and had not taken an official position on the Benke case in order to avoid alienating members holding differing views on the issue. When Schulz nevertheless accepted the Benke case, the board relieved him of his duties while keeping him on the payroll, explaining that the radio program had been “compromised” by Schulz’s participation in church politics,[1][2] and that it might serve to “polarize” the International Lutheran Laymen’s League.[3] The League soon offered Schulz a return to the show under condition that he accept certain stipulations for future conduct, but Schulz refused to accept these restrictions and thus did not return to the show. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lutheran_Hour#cite_note-1] <

    So, in order that I might repent as necessary, where have I erred in my statement as found in #74 above?

  33. Why do congregations need LLL to learn theology and play dartball? It should go the way of the Walther league.

    I’ve also heard Pr. Nadasdy preach a few times. Not much Gospel, mostly law. Pure ablaze theology, the methobapticostal kind: People are dying, you need to tell them about Jesus, example from Scripture, get going; Amen. Hopefully those were exceptions. If anybody wanted to take the time to listen, his sermons are online. I think this was one I heard, that had no Gospel: http://www.woodburylutheran.org/media/9cf8d722/Sanc800-20100207-001a.mp3

    He said the church is measured by “how many of us have the vision of casting a net” to catch new Christians. (!!!!!). I remember being rather appalled.

    Sounds like Lutheran Hour will continue to be irrelevant to me. Oh well. Pr. Fisk keeps me educated.

  34. @boaz #91

    Okay, this is back in 2001-2002…. When I went with my friend, adn he was involved with the congregation, one time I caught a weird service. The “sermon” was short, maybe 10 minutes. That was because they had a local business guy chat for a bit. I do not remember the speech. Something about living life as a Christian in the world. When I asked what’s up, my frind said during the school year, Woodburry Lutheran would every month bring in someone like that. (9 times during the year) Apparently I was told that the congregation was big time into leadership. Inovative in having contemprary services, now the Alley (after my time living there), one of their DCE’s was on a national youth borad/commission, was beginnign to start up their very own elementary school…. I have head Nadasdy preach. It was okay, but I can’t say super spectacular. He did not leave me with the impression he was one of the great LCMS preachers. (yes, I have a few I will always remeber)

    So the cultrue I experienced back then agrees with what boaz is saying now. I was so greatful my fieldwork was not there, and I knew I would never join that congregation. And that was before my mroe mature discerning heart now. I got the impression of a “worldly” type church, proud of the outreach they were doing, maybe not so much care into the purity of the message, as in proper distinction between Law and Gospel.

  35. One final post and then I’ll not be posting here any longer–this thread is almost at the bottom of the list anyway, so I’m assuming it isn’t getting read much anymore and I need to get back to looking toward the future and the doors God is opening for this ministry.

    Rev. Noland,
    Thanks for the very kind words. We have an excellent staff here in St. Louis–110 people dedicated to getting the Gospel message out to a dying world and I’m glad you recognize that fact. And the leadership team I have to work with–5 division directors and Rev. Klaus–are all experts in their fields; I think they are the best in Synod. And our 200 staff members overseas–all indigineous to the country they are serving–are great folks doing God’s work often in incredibly difficult situations.

    You have asked me to do something that isn’t hard at all–to tell the folks who still might be reading this list that I and Lutheran Hour Ministries are in support of the Constitution of the LCMS. I signed that document when I became a member of Synod in 1971 at a Southern Illinois District Convention and I haven’t changed my mind. I love this church body and I would have to compromise my integrity to stay in the LCMS and be at the helm of one of her two auxiliaries if I were not supportive of the constitution. So, yes, I and we are supportive of the LCMS and her constitution and, especially, her Christ-centered theology. And that support includes Article VI.

    Rev. Hering,
    Thanks for posting those document–especially the news release from LHM 9 years ago. I’m sure I read that at the time, but, not being on staff here at the time, it didn’t stick in my memory. I’m embarrassed that I didn’t go back and find that myself. It is incredibly enlightening. The news release makes it clear that the bone of contention wasn’t the decision that Rev. Schulz made, but the fact that he wouldn’t recuse himself from making a decision and allow that decision to be made by the next VP in line.

    To all,
    I just viewed the rough cut on a new TV special that we hope to syndicate this spring and have available for use in churches shortly thereafter. It’s an apologetic work in documentary format called “The Bible on Trial”. We’ve not tried syndicating a documentary before, so we’ll see how this goes. The documentary takes a look at the physical and textual evidence for the reliability of Scripture. The beauty of it for me–and the thing that may make it a challenge to get it syndicated–is the fact that the last section focuses on the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus–and especiallly on what that Gospel message means for sinners. I know that your churches will value greatly the DVD and discussion guide when it becomes available. It should help your people answer some the questions and challenges they hear in the workplace or at the soccer field. I’ll be praying that we can syndicate it around the US. Watch the normal LCMS news sources for more information as it becomes available.

    Finally, you are always welcome to call me and discuss any of your concerns with me. Again, my direct dial to my office is 314-317-4101. If you are in town, please stop by and see us–I’d love to introduce you to some of our excellent staff members. We are all beggars telling other beggars where to find food!

  36. @Bruce E. Wurdeman #93

    Why should a man recuse himself from performing a duty he was elected to perform in accordance with the Word of God by the call our Lord has placed upon him *BEFORE* he was apointed as speaker of the Word of God for the Lutheran Hour *MINISTRIES*? And why would ILLL/LHM want him too? Are they above both the Word of God *AND* the Synod they supposedly serve?

    Business, read $$$, before ministry?

  37. IMHO, I sense that LHM is yet another tired ABLAZE! project at odds with It’s Time and Pirate Christian Radio.

    This question deserves a separate thread: What role will Lutheran Hour Ministries play in Pastor Harrison’s Koinonia Project.

  38. @James #95

    Until we get a seperate thread… I am going to say, “not much.” By LHM’s own treatment of Wally Schulz, they indicate that their Speaker cannot get involved in LC-MS politics, or whatever actions. So depending on how they define that (boundries they set), the Speaker would be barred form taking a promotinal side, and maybe even from discussing the topic. Or maybe, considering the perception, the Speaker should anly speak about one side, or show a favoritism. Pr. Wurdeman spoke about how thing have moved on at LHM. Maybe they have….

    And then there is the issue of Pr. Nadasdy. Because of his involement in the last adminisration, signing the letter in favor of Kieshnick, supporting The Alley, we have a public record of action that strongly hints at an approach to ministry. It is an approach that I do not feel confident is supportive or receptive to the Koinonia Project. So what kind of linguistics gymnastics will be performed?

    I am just uncomfotabble with the situation, and I do not see it making great strides towards improvement. Maybe small strides, but we will have to see how things work out.

  39. @James #95
    James-The Lutheran Hour is celebrating its 80th year of broadcasting the Gospel. Ablaze aint’ that old. The Lutheran Hour isn’t tired either. Listen once in a while. I get the Daily Devotions and the Sunday sermons via on-line/on-demand just like Issues, etc. but I could pick it up on the radio in Denver which I can’t with Issues or Pirate.

  40. Many will have seen the email today from LHM informing us that the new Lutheran Hour speaker is NOT Dr. Nadasdy, but the Rev. Greg Seltz. I have a favorable opinion of him. He has down pulpit supply at least once at our congregation. For the past few years, he has served as the liturgist and preacher at St. John’s in Orange when they have a Bach Cantata Evening Prayer service (St. John’s is still calling it “Bach Cantata Vespers,” even though they switched to Evening Prayer when Pr. Seltz started doing it instead of Pr. Klinkenberg).

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.