Mission Vision MNS: Supporting past and current actions of the MNS District

There is a political group in the Minnesota South District looking to continue the same policies and procedures that currently have one of their own congregations under an eviction notice.  The group is called Mission Vision MNS.

Here is their Facebook page

Here is their Webpage

If you look at the URL for the webpage you will see that it looks like it may be being hosted through CLC (Campus Lutheran Chapel)which happens to be the second campus ministry in the MNS District, also slated to be sold off like ULC.  UPDATE:  If you look at comment #1 by Rev. M. Dent, you can see that this CLC connection “may” be true, but may not be as well.

This group existed at the last convention, which by their high praise of the Board of Directors and President Sietz means that they have been approving of the behaviors of the District in relation to ULC, one of its congregations.  CLC Mankato also supported their old webpage.

Here is some information by them about them:

We are positive about the many ministries of our district, supportive of the variety of forms these ministries take, and supportive of the district leaders who are providing encouragement and direction for these ministries.  The Old and New Testaments both teach a variety of approaches to God’s work of reaching his world that allow for adjusting to contextual situations of time, place, culture, age group, and temperament.  We ourselves have a variety of approaches in our own ministries—many quite traditional—but are supportive of the innovation of others used by God to reach people different from the ones we personally are serving.

That’s three “variety’s” in one “positive” paragraph.  Reaching people who are different from the ones we personally are serving – aren’t we all seeking to serve sinners?  This is the same divisive speech that you see in political campaigns.  Also, the word “innovation” in church history does not have a very good record.

   We are convinced that our district leadership and administration are leading us in a God-pleasing and effective direction which should be continued by electing and re-electing those who will serve us in continuing to encourage God’s work in our district.

So eviction, executive sessions, and so forth are “God-pleasing”?  Why don’t they at least acknowledge some shame?  If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us (1 John 1:8).  Effective at what?  Disenfranchising an entire congregation and also dividing up your district even more?  Now, I have  been an ardent supporter of ULC since the start of this whole shameful mess, but even a “neutral” party can see that this brings division to the District and Synod.  That division is hardly God pleasing and effective.  Re-electing those who so callously and secretly acted to eventually evict a congregation and drive a hard wedge into a district already hurting would not be using sound judgment at all.

  We accept as fact the truth that God’s Word never changes while the strategies used by the Church to present that Word, to God’s world, are constantly evolving.  This evolution of strategies happens at varying rates in various communities and should be neither pushed nor retarded by people outside of the local church.  We are supportive of our district’s present administration and leadership in the way they understand and apply these facts.

Evolution within the church?  The Church being the body of Christ, the one who never changes.  We are children of the Reformation, which was God’s work of re-forming us back to what the Church was, not evolving the church into something new.  I wonder if the actions taken against ULC would be considered being “pushed… by people outside of the local church.”  Seems like a congregation and its faithful (and growing) ministry were run under roughshod for a new “evolution”.  Since they are supportive of the way things are being done currently in regards to ULC, they must mean something different by “this evolution of strategies…should be neither pushed nor retarded by people outside the local church” than “this evolution of strategies… should be neither pushed nor retarded by people outside the local church.”  ULC is the local church, MNS Board of Directors and the DP are “people outside the local church.”

They also have an interesting “libertine” look at Acts 15:

We accept the fact that unity and conformity are not synonymous.  To us it seems clear from Acts 15 that the traditional Hebrew based congregations of Jerusalem and the innovative Gentile based congregations of the Mediterranean mission activity were in unity with one another without conforming their practice or strategies in all matters.  We also accept the fact that Paul chastised Peter for missing this very point.

The selection of the word “conformity” is interesting.  Traditionally the Synod has talked about “uniformity” in relation to unity. Conformity has to do with the Scriptures and Confessions (which have a lot to say about worship and mission practices).  Their interpretation of Acts 15 forgets that Paul willingly submitted to the rules that they agreed to, as a Church body.  The Synod has agreed to do certain things, and not others (see our Constitution about the requirement to use hymnals, agendas, and catechisms), also the Syond-wide creation of Lutheran Service Book says something about our Synod-wide agreement to conform.  Paul did not walk into Jerusalem saying “my rights, my rights, my freedom”.  He went in and used his freedom to submit to the greater Church (the actual Christian use of freedom).  The ultimate point of Paul and Peter was not conformity and so forth, but instead the role of the old Jewish law in relation to Christianity, and especially in relation to salvation by grace through faith.  If anyone was requiring the “traditional” as necessary for salvation, confessionals would be the first ones to stand up and condemn that teaching (in fact, we have already in the Book of Concord in all those passages that libertines love to quote to bring in any “innovation” their itching ears want to hear).

One of the most amazing things in the whole ULC affair is the arrogance of never admitting wrong, never sitting down to talk about it, never trying to communicate and come to a reasonable solution (in fact, the legal documents in ULC’s case against the District note a $3.8million offer for the property which would have included space for ULC, $300,000 more than the offer the District accepted which has yellow ribbons around trees to be cut down, a beautiful building ready to be razed, and a congregation unwillingly homeless).  This whole affair, and this group’s endorsement of it are shameful.

For those who have a vote at the coming MNS District Convention, please consider the statements of this group in light of how the MNS District has acted towards one of its own congregations, University Lutheran Chapel.  If you think all of the fighting and divisions are a good thing, then vote for re-election.  If you don’t like how things have gone (even if you don’t agree with ULC), consider voting all incumbents out, and also voting against whoever this group recommends.  They have shown their approval of these actions (secrecy, eviction, no communication) and have endorsed them.  Mission Vision indeed has a different vision which should not be allowed to run the show in the MNS District anymore.

To close, only Matthew 20:25-26a will do:

  But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you.



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.


Mission Vision MNS: Supporting past and current actions of the MNS District — 48 Comments

  1. Be careful of the dubious connection with CLC Mankato. It’s an easy mistake to make, but your evidence doesn’t support the statement,”If you look at the URL for the webpage you will see that it is hosted through CLC (Campus Lutheran Chapel)”

    It is true that “clcmankato” shows up in the URL, but the pages aren’t at all “hosted through CLC”. In a web address, only the portion after the 2nd slash and before the 3rd slash is the hosting site. For example:

    The person who runs the system at “this-is-the-host.com” can create anything they want after the next slash – and it doesn’t take any approval or request from anyone. In some cases, like this one (facebook would be another example), sites allow the public to register for accounts and that account name shows up in the “this.is.some.location.on.a.host” section. But in most cases, there is little if any policing in place to assure that the person registering is authorized to represent a person or group that “owns” that name.

    In this case, the web pages are hosted through Apple’s “me.com” domain (http://web.me.com). Anyone can create an account with any name they wish (or could, when they were registering new accounts). The emails from the 2012 page go to a GMail account, and the emails from the previous page to a Comcast account.

    I don’t know the history behind the clcmankato account with Apple’s “Me” service, but its existence does not imply any actual connection with CLC Mankato. Whether they or their pastor do or do not agree with what is on this site, I do not know. I’m just attempting to explain the technical aspects to clarify that the chain of evidence provided doesn’t support the proposition that CLC Mankato is any way related to these pages.

  2. I AM a neutral party and I believe that this whole mess doesn’t present the LC-MS in the best light. Both sides of this issue are an embarrassment to Christ’s Church.

    Is it not true that the ULC was given the opportunity by the district to buy the building for ONE DOLLAR? How can the slashing comments posted here and through out the web site be at all God pleasing?

    With that being said, I was greatly disappointed to see an eviction notice from the MNS District to the congregation of the ULC. What does that say to the outside world when lawsuits start flying around within a Lutheran denomination?

    If we want to see a “Lutheran” church implode, we can all get a beer and comfortable chair and watch the ELCA sink. Seriously.

    Please for Christ’s sake, speak the truth in love. However, I don’t believe being brutally honest with intent to wound falls under such a command.

  3. @Pr. Cary Larson #3
    No, it is not true that ULC was given the opportunity to buy the building for one dollar. The concept was floated a long time ago (15-20 years ago or so) but not actually offered, and the proposed strings attached to it were ‘no more subsidies, ever’, which is pretty rough for a campus ministry focussed on (presumably cash-poor) university students. To imply that the sale is their fault because they did not accept an offer that was actually never even made is unfair to them, and based on factual errors. (Not that you did that, but I have seen others do so.)

    Also, although some of ULC’s supporters have been a bit over the top in their comments at times, I have never seen an actual ULC member be intemperate in any way in expressing their views of the situation or in describing the facts of the situation. This is an impressive, Godly record that speaks very well of them and demonstrates speaking the truth in love to an extraordinary extent.

  4. The Lord forgive me for this!

    Rev. Kind and ULC will survive.

    The fires of hell are stoked.

    12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

    13 “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
    14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

    15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
    16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
    17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit.
    18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.
    19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
    20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.

    21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
    22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’
    23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

  5. So I lived in the Twin Cities for a few years. I was a member of two congregations during that time. Both of my pastors have signed on to the list of supporters. I am more than a little disappointed. I guess not 100% surprised, but I have lost a lot of respect for them. Shame…

  6. Let no one think that these events are just a recent movement in the MN South District. They are not. I was a lay delegate to the MN South Convention in 1991 (when Pres. Seitz was first elected), and the same attempts to give fiat control over these campus ministry properties (Minneapolis, Mankato, and Winona) to the district Mission Administration Committee was going on. It is not about economics or some such thing. It is about a theology of mission going on that is something of a hybrid between ELCA sort of thinking and generic American protestantism, the sort that was prominent at Fuller Seminary in California and that is promoted in the PLI type of situations we see today. Having also for a short time served on the board of elders at ULC prior to seminary, it is clear to me that these moves are related to the differing theologies at work here and the long orthodox Lutheran influence that ULC has been in the area and in the synod at large since John Pless’ arrival and continuing with Pastor Kind.

    If this sale cannot be forestalled until the convention, then I hope that the convention will give ULC congregation substantially more money (1 million I’d suggest) without strings to buy a new place very close to the U of M campus in Minneapolis and give them an official apology and confession of sin.

  7. That sophistry, trying to disassociate Mission Vision from CLC Mankato, is asinine.

    Here is the quoted URL:

    Erase everything after clcmankato to look like this:

    And you get this:

    There are two competing ideologies, two theological systems, two religions, two spirits. The party in charge in on the warpath. C’est la vie…

    Amen, come Lord Jesus.

  8. @Pr. John A. Frahm #7

    Respectfully, $1 million won’t do anything to buy property close to the U of M. How about $3.2 million? Even that will not begin to replace the current facility. This is all so incredibly unnecessary.

  9. @Pr. Cary Larson #3

    @Carol Broome #4

    Pr. Larson,

    A proposal from the District in about 2000 was to convey record title to the ULC property to the congregation for a nominal fee of about $2. There were conditions attached to the offer, but more importantly, ULC was not in a financial position, at the time, to take on the responsibility for up keep of the property.

    Now, over subsequent years, arriving at today, ULC has been blessed and has grown in attendance (both full members and students) and in its financial position. ULC is by no means wealthy, but by the grace of God, and with the support of friends, ULC could manage to cover the expenses associated with the property. Sadly, the Minnesota South District is not inclined to allow us to do so.

    Pr. Larson, I would encourage you to read the documents posted on the Save ULC webpage (http://www.ulcmn.org/Files/Pages/SaveULC.html)

    We at ULC are deeply humbled by the passionate support that has been shown to us , and continues to be shown. We are extremely grateful for all who speak in support of our congregation and our mission to the students of the University of MN, and beyond. We do not intend to turn our back on our mission to serve this community.

    We trust fully in the grace of our Lord and look to Him for all things.

    In Christ,

    Oliver Young
    Elder, ULC-Minneapolis

  10. The Mission Vision web page lists the pastors of MNS who support
    MV. This is not a rag-tag group of malcontents. There are some
    pastors who have spent the majority of their ministry in MNS.
    There are also some pastors who would be considered LCMS
    royalty. The problem of dealing with ULC will not disappear with
    the retirement of President Lane Seitz. Hopefully, the District
    Convention will bring a God-pleasing resolution to this situation.

  11. @Jason Harris #9

    You are correct. CLC’s website is at http://web.me.com/clcmankato/Campus_Lutheran_Chapel/Welcome.html. The username is clcmankato. The owner of clcmankato administers all websites located in child folders. The same administrator of Campus Lutheran Chapel administers Mission Vision MN.

    By the way, did you know the District has a newsletter called Mission Vision News?

    @Oliver Young #11

    The proposal was written in February 1999 by Rev. Daniel Decker who was the Mission Executive at the time. In addition to losing its subsidy (which at the time they could not do), there were some other contingencies which were subjective or difficult to accept. If ULC could have accepted the proposal, that proposal still would have had to clear both the Mission Committee and the Board of Directors. I’m not certain that it would have passed.

  12. @Rev. Brian J. Thorson #13
    @Jason Harris #9

    Just to clarify – there was no attempt to dissociate the two.

    With the additional evidence provided by pastor Thorson, the case is much more strongly made that there indeed seems to be an association. This is still not absolutely proven, since the http://clcmankato.com web address that displays the same content as http://web.me.com/clcmankato/Campus_Lutheran_Chapel/Welcome.html is privacy shielded by the domain provider – so we don’t know who the actual owner is (it may be a former or current student/member just doing it out of the goodness of his heart). What we can say for certain, however, is that whoever administers the http://clcmankato.com website clearly has some sort of relationship with Mission Vision folks.

    In any event, the only reason for my previous post was to make sure that there was actual evidence supporting the assertion of a relationship between CLC and Mission Vision. Otherwise, this site and its contributors leave themselves open to allegations of libel or slander (which carry legal penalties and ramifications).

    We have already seen the tactics employed by The Enemy in this situation. Just see how he has deluded those who should know better into thinking it is right to use the legal system to effectively silence a God pleasing Word and Sacrament ministry.

    My only purpose was simply to urge extreme caution at making unsubstantiated assertions lest the contributors, editors and owners of this site find themselves served with legal papers that would mean further distraction from their work in their respective ministries as well as their continued efforts at fending off the attacks of the Evil One and defending the truth through the work they do here on this website.

    Matthew 10:16 – “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.”

  13. @Dave Likeness #12
    I agree, there are some experienced men on that list. It is sad to see them tie their name to the ongoing actions against ULC through supporting and praising the actions and decisions of the current DP and BOD as well as call for re-election.

    I have to ask – what are LCMS royalty?

  14. Pastor Scheer, Synodical royalty would be those who are
    related by marriage to former Synodical Presidents.

  15. This is a common liberal tactic – recite the pedigree! You can’t be wrong if you’re related to someone from a long time ago who was right.

  16. The true church will thrive, “If they persecuted me…If they called the master of the house beelzebub…what will they do to those of His household…but not even the gates of hell will prevail against it.

    The false church will perish, “If they do not honor the Son they do not honor the Father…they will do these things because they have known neither me nor my Father.”

  17. I have examined the list of pastors, and one of the names on the list (Rev. Alan Braun) was (and still is) the pastor at King of Kings Lutheran Church in Roseville, MN.

    I was a member of that congregation when Pastor Braun distributed a document right after services years ago from a former District President (not of the MNS District) who declared that Confessional Lutherans were an evil influence that needed to be eliminated from synod. I wish I could find the exact document to link to here, but I remember the wording exactly. The arguments were along the lines of those presented here:

    After Pastor Braun declared in front of the congregation that he agreed with the content of the document he handed out, the rest of the congregation started talking, and I heard ULC’s name mentioned several times with a “let’s get them” attitude. I realized at that moment that I could no longer be a member of that congregation and left the building, never to return except to walk into Pastor Braun’s office to formally request the transfer to my current congregation. I had tolerated a LOT of practices at that congregation for years, but I could no longer be a member of it after people I knew and cared for were called evil.

    Maybe Pastor Carey Larsen might have been referring to people like me in post #3 when he said “How can the slashing comments posted here and through out the web site be at all God pleasing? ” I can only say that the “slashing comments” I have seen have flown for years before I even heard of this web site, and I have bitten my tongue for years in the name of “turning the other cheek”. My cheeks are now too red to tolerate many more slaps, and I feel a need to bear personal witness to what I see happening in the name of “mission”…….

  18. Isn’t Hosanna planning on purchasing Campus Lutheran Chapel? Bet they won’t have to pay $3.5M for that facility.

  19. @Carol Broome #4
    “Also, although some of ULC’s supporters have been a bit over the top in their comments at times, I have never seen an actual ULC member be intemperate in any way in expressing their views of the situation or in describing the facts of the situation. This is an impressive, Godly record that speaks very well of them and demonstrates speaking the truth in love to an extraordinary extent.”

    Yes, Mrs. Broome, you have every reason to hold your heads high. This is only temporary; God will not be mocked forever.

    “For over twenty years now, I have noticed that in LCMS church conflicts, people urge the person who is on the “losing end” to “give him your cloak also,” but then still regard the person taking the cloak as a “good person,” as a “leader,” and continue to hold them in the highest regard. Jesus, however, puts the “cloak-taker” in the category of an “evil person.”(Matthew 5:39)”

  20. @Pastor Ted Crandall #23
    I’m not a member of ULC; merely a distant admirer.
    And yes, they have every reason to hold their heads high.
    And we have every reason to support them. We believe in the Communion of Saints, after all.

  21. @Rev. Brian J. Thorson #13,

    Rev. Thorson,

    Don’t frequent this site as much as I’d like, but from prior memory, hasn’t the pastor of that CLC-Mankato, Rev. Monte Meyer, posted here on this very site before? Or perhaps I just read postings by him over at the ALPB site? Can’t remember.

    Whatever the case, if such a string of connections is verifiably true, namely, CLC Mankato + this political Mission Vision MN group of pastors + Mission Vision News Ablaze (put out by the MN South District Admin itself!), then it might be quite disconcerting to some earnest laypeople/congregations in that District to continue submitting even a portion of their offerings for mission money directly to that District, if they knew that even a slight portion of it would end up being spent in support political ends of the current District Admin in power (and current sycophants who will assume the reigns in the future), rather than all of it to ends which are truly about missions (e.g., ULC!). I know this would be the case in my district at least amongst many laypeople/congregations. It sort of would be akin to the whole dispute over ‘public’ unions (i.e., tax-payer funded), like recently in Wisconsin, where the public teacher’s union ends up using some of those taxdollars to support one and only one particular political party, whose elected officials return the favor in only introducing/supporting legislation and budget allotments in terms of salary/entitlements which are favorable to the perpetuation of that public union….again, all on the backs of the private sector tax-payer.

    As Scripture has stated and history has demonstrated time and time again, sometimes the ends (e.g., “missional”) are so apparently glorious that the means (e.g., “political”) are thereby deemed justifiable, like calling it a “necessary evil” since it appears to support what appears to be a good end.

    Again, while it must be stated that such a string of connections may not be true, or at least not verifiably true, or just coincidental, it does smell fishy.

  22. @George H. #26

    I participate here, and read LQ and ALPB. have read just about every post. (it’s a sickness… )

    Yes, Pr. Monte Meyer has posted here. He has also posted on ALPB. Not much and it has been a little while. I do not remember him on LQ.

    His posts are always to defend himself and CLC, and that sometimes indirectly will defend the MNS Board. Whether his position is defensible…..

  23. Not Peace, but a Sword

    “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

    For I have come to set a man against his father,
    A daughter against her mother,
    A daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

    A person’s enemies will be those of his own household.

    Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me,

    Whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

    Whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

    Whoever finds his life will lose it,

    Whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

    (Matthew 10:34-39 ESV)

  24. Most of the comments on the Mission Vision FB page have now been purged by the MV moderator. Instead of answering questions and countering evidence he chooses to just erase the  remarks.  This is his idea of transparency.

  25. Assoc. Editor’s note. I just removed three comments, two by Helen and one by me. The comments did not reflect the best construction towards an individual who is not regularly on this blog. Helen gave me permission to do so. Thank you Helen for your Christian witness.

  26. @John Rixe #33
    I checked the facebook page, and it appears that their choice for Diststrict President of tne MNSD is Rev Dean Nadasdy, currently serving as a VP of Synod. For a refresher of who Rev. Nadasdy is, I suggest you see the following link from when he was considered for Lutheran Hour Speaker after Wallace Schultz was let go:


    He is a lead mover and shaker behind The Alley, considered the frontrunner for the financial grants coming from the sale of ULC. And that is just the start of it…..

  27. @Rahn Hasbargen #32

    Another correction: Rev. Dr. Nadasdy is not a VP of Synod. While he was on the ballot, he was not reelected at the 2010 Convention.

    I’m also not sure how he could be considered a frontrunner for the financial grants. Any church near a campus will be eligible for a $5000 grant.

  28. @Rev. Brian J. Thorson #34
    Regarding the grant question, answer this yourself: Who makes the decisions on who gets the grants, and, (considering the leanings of who the decision makers are now, and baring a dramatic change in the MNSD leadership) where would their inclinations lie? Remember, despite the money coming in from the ULC sale, there is not enough money for every church in the U of M area that applies to get a grant. After all, the stated purpose of the “mission redirection”/ ULC sale was to spread the money to more University areas besides around the U of M area.

    I appreciate the other clarificatrions.

  29. @Rev. Brian J. Thorson #34
    @Rahn Hasbargen #35

    Ah, remember the Alley was first started by Woodbury Lutheran, Nadasdy’s congregation. While first in Cottage Grove, the Alley is linking with Jehovah Lutheran in Midway. Maybe Jehovah will become part of the Alley? But somehow the idea is that this will become the second site. And for those who don’t know geography, the Midway section of St. Paul is on its west end. Jehovah is a handful of blocks north of Conordia University, easily making it within range and by far the closest LC-MS site to CSP. Don’t know if those ideas are still in the works. If true, in an indirect fashion Nadasdy has a connection to the grants. (I know Jehovah from being a CSP student)

  30. Everyone should post at least daily on the Mission Vision MNS Facebook page. Let’s at least keep them busy hitting the delete button. 🙂

  31. @Jason #36
    That is a very big IF.

    For the sake of making good arguments we should stay away from the assumptions on this, especially in regards to the motivations of Rev. Dr. Nadasdy. He has let his name stand for the election of the DP and is the supported candidate of this group. He is also the pastor of the church that founded The Alley, itself a congregation that has caused much debate and division in the MNS District. His credentials are listed in the posting about him being the possible new Lutheran Hour Speaker.

    I would also state this: for all those who want pure greed or want of gain to be the motivation for this horrible mess known as the eviction of ULC, the facts presented in the lawsuit by ULC against the MNS leadership says that a higher priced offer was rejected for the lower offer from Doran. I think this speaks against the motivation of money for this sale.

    Mission Vision MNS has been actively deleting comments on their Facebook page and banning people from commenting there. They apparently have not set up their Facebook page to have discussions about what they stand for.

  32. @Pastor Joshua Scheer #38
    Let me be clear: I do NOT think “pure greed or want of gain” is behind Rev Nasdady’s DP run, the sale of ULC, or anything else going on in the MNSD. One only has to read the “Mission Vision” material to know that there are philosophical reasons, as well.

    However, one way to show a district’s philosophical priorites is by how they spend their checkbook, especially in what they see as tough financial times. The decision to redirect campus ministry dollars from supporting physical buildings to grants also shows a district’s priorities. The money issue is NOT the central issue here, but it IS a part of the discussion. Even the MNSD leadership itself declares that money is a reason for their actions (Misplaced priorites in physical buildings, a desire to have more money for ministries on more campuses, etc).

    The ULC lawsuit filing (if I remember the reading right) said the “better offer” was around $3.8 million, versus $3.5 million from the offer that was accepted. Was $300K in less money worth it to the BOD of the MNSD to deal a blow to a congregation (ULC) that the board told President Harrison directly when he attended their meeting that they did not hold in as high of a regard as President Harrison (and a number of posters on this board) did? (I get this from the BOD minutes I read on the meeting President Harrison attended, although those board notes may have changed since I last read them). No, money is not and was not a sole determinant of the actions here. But to ignore the money angle is to ignore evidence of actions and issues.

  33. @Rahn Hasbargen #39

    I would agree with you 100%. “pure greed or want of gain” Your comment shows just how much careful thought and factual information you have carefully obtained and thought over before pasting. I know you are indeed correct and your argument is irrefutable!

    “One only has to read the “Mission Vision” material to know that there are philosophical reasons, as well.” “The money issue is NOT the central issue here…”

    And finally you drive your point home! “No, money is not and was not a sole determinant of the actions here. But to ignore the money angle is to ignore evidence of actions and issues.”


    So what do we have left?

    I will attempt to be more civil and try to be a good God fearing man…. Just what is left?

    I will temper myself and posit we have a different spirit from any that is worshiped in the Church in the proper sense, according to its essence, is invisible, hidden, and consists entirely of faith alone in Christ alone.

    This spirit I am describing has been given a label by the above church, as well as those who bow down before this well defined spirit.

    The label for the spirit and its followers:



    Thank you for your insightful post.

  34. @Mark Huntemann #40
    I have read your post at least a dozen times trying to understand it. Forgive me, but I am not sure if I am labeled Anathema or someone else is in it. My comprehension of your post leaves a lot to be desired, to be sure.

    What do I have left?? I will let the words of two hymns speak for me. First, LSB #797, verse 2:

    Trust not in rulers; they are but mortal;
    Earth-born they are and soon decay.
    Vain are their counsels at life’s last portal,
    When the dark grave doth claim its prey.
    Since mortals can no help afford,
    Place all your trust in Christ, our Lord.
    Allelujah, allelujah!

    I also have the wods of LSB #656, versus 3 and 4:

    Though devils all the world should fill, all eager to devour us.
    We tremble not, we fear no ill, they shall not overpower us.
    This world’s prince may still scowl fierce as he will,
    He can harm us none, he’s judged; the deed is done;
    One little word can fell him.

    The Word they still shall let remain nor any thanks have for it;
    He’s by our side upon the plain with His good gifts and Spirit.
    And take they our life, goods, fame, child and wife,
    Let these all be gone, they yet have nothing won;
    The Kingdom ours remaineth.

  35. Forgive me.

    The post has nothing to do with you. you were just a launching pad.

    The Anathema comment was directed at those Individuals who support the destruction of the Lords Flock at ULC.

    Again I am sorry.

    I did not think you would misunderstand the post.

    Blessings In Christ

    John Mark IXOYC

    [Book Four]

    [From Everlasting to Everlasting]


    Lord, you have been our dwelling place
    in all generations.
    Before the mountains were brought forth,
    or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
    from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

    You return man to dust
    and say, “Return, O children of man!”

    For a thousand years in your sight
    are but as yesterday when it is past,
    or as a watch in the night.

    You sweep them away as with a flood; they are like a dream,
    like grass that is renewed in the morning:
    in the morning it flourishes and is renewed;
    in the evening it fades and withers.
    For we are brought to an end by your anger;
    by your wrath we are dismayed.
    You have set our iniquities before you,
    our secret sins in the light of your presence.

    For all our days pass away under your wrath;
    we bring our years to an end like a sigh.

    The years of our life are seventy,
    or even by reason of strength eighty;
    yet their span is but toil and trouble;
    they are soon gone, and we fly away.

    Who considers the power of your anger,
    and your wrath according to the fear of you?
    So teach us to number our days
    that we may get a heart of wisdom.

    Return, O LORD! How long?
    Have pity on your servants!
    Satisfy us in the morning with your steadfast love,
    that we may rejoice and be glad all our days.
    Make us glad for as many days as you have afflicted us,
    and for as many years as we have seen evil.
    Let your work be shown to your servants,
    and your glorious power to their children.
    Let the favor of the Lord our God be upon us,
    and establish the work of our hands upon us;

    yes, establish the work of our hands!

    (Psalm 90 ESV)

    @Rahn Hasbargen #41

  36. “And some brute standing near by, feeling himself the humiliation of the high priest at such an uncompromising response,
    struck Our Blessed Lord across the face with a mailed fist, drawing out of Him two things:

    blood, and a soft answer:

    “If I have spoken evil bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou Me?”

    And that soldier in the court-room of Annas has gone down in history as the representative of that great group that bears a hatred against Divinity, the group that never clothes that hatred in any intellectual language, but rather in violence alone.”

    “Not the type of service you expect from a District – MNS serves eviction papers to ULC.”

    Violence against Rev.Kind and His Flock

    violence alone

    “Minnesota South District Votes to Sell ULC Property and Allow the Lord’s Place to be Demolished”

    Violence against Rev Kind and His Flock

    violence alone

    Forget about groups of men. Each individual person who was active in this violence against Rev. Kind and his flock are no better than the soldier. In fact they are worse than the soldier because they know better!

    A little Christian Child with a couple of Sundays in a Church knows better.

    The question of good and evil comes to mind when issues like this are discussed. I would posit that when Our Lord at the Judgement seat looks at such as this and those responsible; I can’t help but think he will think along these lines:

    There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil.
    (Job 1:1 ESV)

    If these individual people responsible do not actively repent and turn from their evil actions before the final destruction comes to pass I see my Lord saying to each Person:

    ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

    Our Lord Loves His Lambs. Our lord loves his Lambs this much:

    “See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? And if he finds it, truly, I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. So it is not the will of my Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.

    “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

    (Matthew 18:10-20 ESV)

    The scriptures cry out against each of you. Each of you are Personally responsible.

    “If I have spoken evil bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou Me?”

  37. Carol Broome :
    @Pr. Cary Larson #3

    Also, although some of ULC’s supporters have been a bit over the top in their comments at times, I have never seen an actual ULC member be intemperate in any way in expressing their views of the situation or in describing the facts of the situation. This is an impressive, Godly record that speaks very well of them and demonstrates speaking the truth in love to an extraordinary extent.

    You are very probably correct, but to those of us outside the MNS district, it appears as if the ULC and these “over the top” supporters are on the same page.

    I have my questions on the wisdom of the direction the MNS district seems to be going, but I also have no doubt that they are going that direction as an attempt to build a “more effective” campus ministry. They too are brothers and sisters in Christ, and I find it disturbing that so many seemingly refuse to see that fact.

  38. David,

    There are, no doubt, many in the district who have a sincere, well intended preference for moving in a new direction.  What is shocking to most of us is the arrogant, deceptive, hidden tactics of the district board of directors.  Please see


    beginning at page 6 for documentation.  Expansion of campus ministry does not have to involve the demolition of the ULCMN student center.  Funding for expansion could come from a special appeal or rearranging of priorities.

  39. @ David Hartung, #44

    “I have my questions on the wisdom of the direction the MNS district seems to be going, but I also have no doubt that they are going that direction as an attempt to build a “more effective” campus ministry. They too are brothers and sisters in Christ, and I find it disturbing that so many seemingly refuse to see that fact.”


    Although it wasn’t your intent, I thank you for bringing up a very important point in bystanders/outsiders like ourselves trying to assess the character behind the actors/actions of ULC Pastor/Congregation vs. MN South DP/Board of Directors.

    It can be too easily assumed by those on both sides of the whole matter that the “other side” has nothing but malicious intent over/against Christian faith and mission with regard to the position they are holding and actions they have carried out. We are all, including myself, so often tempted by satan to think this way–to curse our enemies rather than pray for them and yes, even bless them (while never blessing their evil works.) Only God can fully see what is in the heart of man, and on that note, we know what He has said proceedeth out of the hearts of all us sinful men…that there is no ‘perfect’ intents/motives in heart due to our sinful nature anymore than there are any good works which are completely perfect/free of sin due to them being performed through a sinful nature/filter. (See Luther’s Heidelburg Disp.)

    No doubt, I would guess though that heterodox heretics like Arius were very earnest and sincere in their intentions regarding what they said and did contrary to orthodox Christian faith and practice, or perhaps more correctly, I would hazard to guess that the “different spirit” within them led them to believe so, as Luther himself finally concluded in dialogues over/against Rome, or Zwingli as a better example, where Luther finally had to leave the table concluding it ultimately was due to a different spirit, and there’s simply nothing one can do about it no matter what one says. Most if not all of the heretics wouldn’t have achieved recognizable status over the course of history were it not for that “enthusiasm” by which they were inspired to push their heresies. Enthusiasm simply can’t be argued away by us, no matter how clear, succinct, and correct our arguments are over/against their errors. You’re dealing with the devil, a form of spiritual possession—of a conflict between one hopefully possessed by God and one possibly being possessed by the devil. Nothing you can do finally but suffer it where it must be suffered, and/or flee it/break with it when it is possible to do so (in the case of the LCMS, this is not so easily done for pastors without forsaking the sheep they were called to serve, thus in trying to avoid heterodoxy thereby risking the sin of schism/abandonment of the flock.) We risk a theology of glory when we assume any synod including our own should ever be free of constant crosses, which, after all, God works for good in the end, and as St. Paul points out, also serves as litmus tests for those who confess the truth for their contentions for the faith once delivered to the saints, and those who do not. It’s one of the reasons I get annoyed by smaller Lutheran synods who pick on the LCMS for all its problems, as if evil ever left pure good alone, rather than constantly seeking to pervert it as the sole purpose of its existence.

    It is not by the inner thoughts/emotions/motives that we shall know then (something only God can ultimately see), but by their fruits that we shall know them. That is, not the mere presence of fruits, but the kind/quality of the fruit produced in terms of what is actually said and done relative to the benefit or detriment of the birds/squirrels (one’s neighbor) those fruits exist for.

    So I don’t think it is helpful or wise to try to see what is impossible for anyone but God and the devil to see, namely, the earnestness/sincerity of anyone’s intent on either side of this issue. All one can do is consider the resultant ‘fruit’ produced. So David, you need to focus the fruits which you can actually see, and ask yourself it this if a good or bad fruit: To liquidate a current, viable mission post, one that was gradually thriving more and more no less, for the sake of hypothetical new mission starts down the road (in ever new, ‘creative’ ways of doing mission in their minds). Is that a good fruit? Or does that stated “end” (starting new mission ventures), justify the “means” (i.e., liquidating a current mission, especially when it is not the will of the pastor/missionary and people to be liquidated)? That’s the issue. To me is not the kind of fruit I would call “good” in terms of love, charity. And given their “end”, i.e., the types of new mission ventures they’ll concoct, I also question the fidelity to what Christ has set down/given us to do in terms of the means/way of missions (ala Matthew 28), and as reflected in Article V of the Augustana (the mission = the ministry of Word and Sacrament which, as Robert Preus once brilliantly stressed, concerns God the Holy Spirit and His Means, not the person of any male minister or whatever new creative mission models a District Beaurocracy can come up with next to justify their existence/relevancy. I see this in my district too btw.) But given they won’t have a fixed shelter/place for an altar and pulpit for doing W&S ministry, I guess seeing such missional-minded pastors riding around campuses pumping the pedals on miniature ice-cream trucks filled with bread and wine is what likely is their idea, or like the fitness center/ministry center idea I heard floating around. Typically worldly-bait…but not sure how well the switch can go without losing the holy things of God in the process. But I digress..

    Due to such important teachings as “felicitious inconsistency”, not to mention leaving judgment regarding to eternity up to God, I dare not condemn the workers on either side to hell. But equally so, we are compelled to judge the works–to either commend or condemn them as either good or evil, regardless of whether they were done from earnest motives or malicious ones. So let your yeah be yeah and your nea be nea. Worst place to be is in the lukewarm middle. (i.e., “I don’t like what Arius is saying our Lord Jesus not being fully God, but boy, he is such a nice guy! He is so passionate, sincere, and loving in how he speaks and acts.”)

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.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.