Have you...

seen The Video?

The buttons were going like hotcakes at the Institute on Liturgy, Preaching and Church Music last week.  Even if you can't get your hands on one of our buttons, you can click, watch...and share The Video!

Sacramental Order

By Larry Beane

I recently drove a festive couple of Uber passengers who were trying to remember the mnemonic for Beverage Order: Was it "beer before liquor" or "liquor before beer"?  There are different opinions on this matter, but there is indeed an old adage concerning this order that has apparently been debunked as a myth.

Unless I'm quite mistaken, it's a universal practice in the Christian Church across denominational lines that Holy Baptism precedes the Holy Eucharist, that disciples are made by the former rather than by the latter, and that only the disciples are to participate in the Lord's Supper.  

Of course, admittance to the table is a thorny and contentious issue in our Synod, which has historically - with some limited pastoral exceptions - endorsed Eucharistic fellowship only with members of LCMS congregations and of those church bodies in altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS.  This practice is sometimes called "closed" or "close" or "close(d)" communion - although I find these distinctions hard to understand.  Actual admission practice varies widely, as any visitor to other LCMS parishes will conclude just by looking at various communion statements.

In the above Facebook post, a non-baptized visitor has taken part in the Eucharist on Good Friday at an LCMS congregation.  He is now ready to take the "next" step by being "signed up" for the next "baptism."

Of course, keeping track of communicant visitors from other LCMS congregations is difficult at times (and this is exacerbated during festival services), and certainly any pastor who has served for any amount of time in the parish has, no doubt, accidentally and inadvertently communed people whom he mistook for someone else, or mistakenly believed should have been communed.  The best construction is that this is the case here.

However, this post does raise an interesting question: are we bound by the traditional Sacramental Order: "Baptism before Supper is proper, Supper before Baptism is schism"?  Or is this just a New Wives' Tale that Snopes and Mythbusters will denounce as Fake Sacramentology?  Is there good reason to retain the traditional Sacramental Order?  What would the ramifications be of communing people prior to Holy Baptism?

By the way, the old saying goes:

Liquor before beer, you're in the clear.

Beer before liquor, never been sicker.

To my knowledge, Gottesdienst has never taken an official position on Beverage Order, nor have the Scriptures, the Confessions, the COP, the CTCR, nor the CCM... though it is quite possible, if not probable, that the issue has been taken up in conventions.

Why did Jesus have to die?

The Current Status of Valparaiso University

A Guest Essay by Wesley Tetsuji Kan

I am sending these photographs to you on the assumption that you may not be aware of the current doctrinal status of Valparaiso University.  

In my opinion, that institution attempts to be "all things to all people," putting on a confessional, orthodox front when soliciting students from LCMS parishes.  It sent me a request for the names of students graduating from high school within the past year, and you have probably received the same if you are currently an active parish pastor.  

In reality, Valparaiso is no longer Lutheran, as these photos clearly demonstrate.  They were taken at the University's Institute of Liturgical Studies this year.  Based on the vestments, the majority of the officiants were women.  

This means Valparaiso is functionally the same as any ELCA owned institution.

Father Kan is pastor of Redemption Lutheran Church in Panama City, Florida.

What’s This? Genuflecting in Worship?

If you open up your Bible and pray the Psalms you might come across this line, “Oh come let us worship and bow down; let us kneel before the LORD our maker”  (Psalm 95:6).  Missouri Synod Lutherans are Bible believers and what the Bible says, they desire to put into practice.  Our Lord and God does not mandate that we bow down or kneel at any particular time or place in the service but as the Scriptures themselves commend bowing and kneeling as a salutary practice, Lutherans do it.  Many of our church buildings have kneelers in the pews and most have an altar rail so that communicants can kneel to receive the very Body and Blood of Jesus Christ under the bread and wine for the forgiveness of sins.  Kneeling is part and parcel of Lutheran worship and while this is confirmed in furniture, one might take a look at our current hymnal and agenda to see where there is instruction to kneel.  Lutherans may kneel to confess their sins (LSB 151,167,184, 203, 213, 291, 292), pray (LSB 227, 233, 241,249, 253) get confirmed (LSB 273) and get married (LSB 276).   If the Lutheran is to be a pastor, he kneels to be ordained (LSB Agenda p. 166),  installed (LSB Agenda, p. 181) and he may kneel if he is leaving for another field of service (LSB Agenda, 195), or retiring (LSB Agenda, p. 198).  If a son or daughter of a congregation is beginning study for service in the church they may kneel (LSB Agenda, p. 207).  If a Lutheran is a candidate for commissioning in service to the church, they are instructed to kneel (LSB Agenda, p. 212).  Dig through Lutheran Hymnals and Agendas past and present and you will find kneeling all over the place.  Genuflecting is kneeling, just with one knee.  It is this one-knee kneeling that has the Rev. Chris Wicher, President of the Eastern District of the LCMS, well, upset.  His full report of the recent Synod Convention is found here, but his comments on the worship practices of the Convention are of particular interest to us.  President Wicher writes,

“WHAT’S THIS? GENUFLECTING IN WORSHIP? Finally, a word about my worship experience at the convention. Worship was definitely of high church style, complete with liturgies “out of the book” and chanting throughout on top of full liturgical garb, chasubles and the like. This is my second convention which was run and organized by our current administration. The same style at this convention held true at our last convention, which is also true when I attend chapel at the International Center in St. Louis. The message to me is plain. High church is the preferred worship style given to the churches of the LC--MS. I get it, I can even do high church liturgy if I wish but which I don’t. But what is completely foreign to me and a bit unsettling, being a life-long LC—MS Lutheran, is what appears to be genuflecting going on in the chancel. This is something I hope will not continue (if genuflecting is what indeed is taking place) which in some strange way is reverencing the host as if the pastor, because he is a pastor, has some magical power and has instantly before our eyes magically changed the substance of the bread into the body of Christ. Really?”

Yes, President Wicher, genuflecting was really taking place! Pastors were kneeling! Many of the editors were present at the convention and saw it with our own eyes!  But what is the problem?  Kneeling is a true adiaphoron, but like all ceremonies or liturgical actions, it may teach something.  The pastors in the chancel did not kneel in some strange way reverencing the host as if the pastor has some magical power and magically changed the substance of the bread into the body of Christ, but because those pastors actually believe that under the bread is the true Body of Jesus Christ and under the wine is the very Blood of Christ according to Christ’s own clear Word.  It is this LORD, our maker, the one through whom all things were made who was born of the Blessed Virgin Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate and raised on the third day who is really present, under the bread and wine for us Christians to eat and to drink.  Don’t you believe that?   We pray you do.  Have you ever knelt to receive the Sacrament of the Altar?  Did you at that time believe in some magic that the pastor did, or were you receiving the Body and Blood of your Lord and God in humility for the forgiveness of your sins and worshiping him in true faith?   Genuflecting is a true adiaphoron, believing that Christ is present in the Sacrament according to His Word is not. The fact that He is present might cause fellow Christians to kneel in reverence.  They are free to do so.  So are you.  Really.

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. -  Philippians 2:9-11

Holy Father, Holy Son, Holy Spirit, three we name Thee;

Though in essence only one, Undivided God we claim Thee

And, adoring bend the knee, While we own the mystery.  LSB 940:5

- The Editors


Two side notes.  We commend to our readers the following; the first regarding the Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament, the second, Blessed Martin Luther on the genuflection during the recitation of Nicene Creed in the Divine Service as a confession of the Incarnation of the Son of God  -

1. "Now, here we are not saying that one should not worship our dear Lord Jesus Christ in this Sacrament, being present, of that one should not hold this Sacrament with all honor and reverence. On the contrary, since these divine, almighty, true words are believed, all of this follows of itself, and not only in external gestures but also both externally and, first and foremost, in the heart, spirit, and truth. On account of this, such adoration of Christ is not thereby cancelled, but much rather, confirmed. For where the Word is rightly seen, considered and believed, the adoration of the Sacrament will happen of itself. For whoever believes that Christ's body and blood are there (as there is plenty of evidence so to believe, and it is necessary so to believe), he cannot, to be sure, deny his reverence to the body and blood of Christ without sin. For I must confess that Christ is there when His body and blood are there. His words do not lie to me, and He is not separate from His body and blood." - George von Anhalt, The Treasury of Daily Prayer, February 3, pp. 1179-80

2. Although the Antichrist in Rome and the devil frightfully mutilated and perverted all that is divine in the church, God nevertheless miraculously preserved Holy Scripture – even though it was darkened and dimmed under the pope’s accursed rule – and passed it down to our day.  Thus God also preserved these words of the Gospel, which were read from the pulpit every Sunday, although without the proper understanding.  Also the words of the Decalog, the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer, as well as Baptism and one kind in the Sacrament have survived under the devilish regime.  Although the Gospel was obscured and the proper understanding of it hidden, God still kept it for the salvation of His own.  These words too, “And the Word became flesh,” were held in reverence.  They were sung daily in every Mass in a slow tempo and were set to a special melody, different from that for the other words.  And when the congregation came to the words, “from the Virgin Mary and was made man,” every one genuflected and removed his hat.   It would still be proper and appropriate to kneel at the words “and was made man,” to sing them with long notes as formerly, to listen with happy hearts to the message the Divine Majesty abased Himself and became like us poor bags of worms, and to thank God for the ineffable mercy and compassion reflected in the incarnation of the Deity. But who can ever do justice to that theme?...The following tale is told about a course and brutal lout.  While the words, “And was made man” were being sung in church, he remained standing, neither genuflecting nor removing his hat. He showed no reverence, but just stood there like a clod.  All the others dropped to their knees when the Nicene Creed was prayed and chanted devoutly.  Then the devil stepped up to him and hit him so hard it made his head spin.  He cursed him gruesomely and said:  “May hell consume you, you boorish ass!  If God had become an angel like me and the congregation sang: ‘God was made an angel,’ I would bend not only my knees but my whole body to the ground!  Yes, I would crawl ten ells down into the ground.  And you vile human creature, you stand there like a stick or a stone.  You hear that God did not become an angel but a man like you, and you just stand there like a stick of wood!”  Whether this story is true or not, it is nevertheless in accordance with the faith (Rom. 12:6).  With this illustrative story the holy fathers wished to admonish the youth to revere the indescribably great miracle of the incarnation; they wanted us to open our eyes wide and ponder these words as well.
 - Luther’s Works Vol. 22, pp.102-103, 105-106.

Unintended Consequences

By Larry Beane

I don't know if this article from the Twin Cities Pioneer Press ("Concordia student loses ministry post over lesbian relationship") is true or not.

I've learned to be skeptical of the press, having had many friends misquoted and misrepresented by the mainstream media over the years.  So, I hope that what this article says concerning the campus pastor and university president is untrue.  And that truly is the best construction.

It seems that a Concordia University - St. Paul student, Nikki Hagan - according to her own website - was asked to resign from the "908 Chapel Board", a "student group on campus that leads worship service on Wednesday nights" because she "was dating a female."

According to the Pioneer Press piece, the campus pastor, the Rev. Tom Gundermann (LCMS) "advised the 908 president to take a wait-and-see response and to take no action" and that "he did not want her removed."  Also according to the article, the university president, the Rev. Dr. Thomas Ries (LCMS) "said she should not have had to leave her position."

Per Miss Hagan's website:

"We asked for a public apology and clarification and received nothing. We asked for policy changes, and it was brushed to the side. We asked for an LGBT group on campus, a group for queer students and allies to feel comfortable and converse. The President suggested that instead we start a group that is open to everyone and that we should have an advisor who is 'for same sex relationships' and an advisor who is 'against same sex relationships.' We were not too happy about that response."

Again, I hope this is a misunderstanding, and that Dr. Ries never said anything of the sort.  I am very skeptical, as this just doesn't sound like something an LCMS clergyman would recommend: an advisor to counsel students who favors what Holy Scripture deems sinful - under the auspices of an institution of the Church.  

The Pioneer Press adds: 

"Hagan wants sexual preference included in the university's nondiscrimination policy.... Ries said he supports the idea, but he's uncertain about the legal implications of such a move and said it would require input from the church.... Ries said he wants to establish a student support group for LGBT people and their allies."

I would imagine Dr. Ries is about to get some "input from the Church."

Miss Hagan writes:

"We are now at the point that we are taking it into our own hands. With the help of many students, faculty, and staff at CSP we are ready to start taking the steps to gain positive change in the University."

If her characterization of Dr. Ries's response is in fact correct, this will not likely end well for him, even as the lukewarm University of Missouri president was hoist by his own petard in trying to appease the increasingly strident, intolerant, and outrageous demands of politically-correct students. President Ries and the administration will have to choose whether to stand with Christ and the Church, or stand with what is popular in the eyes of the world.

Once again, I am skeptical of Miss Hagan's report (perhaps she is honestly mistaken), because LCMS pastors are bound by their ordination vows to scripture and to the Lutheran confessions - neither of which support the currently-popular secular ethics concerning human sexuality.

In fact, the best construction placed upon this entire episode is the Law of Unintended Consequences.  I don't believe that the Reverends Gundermann and Ries have decided to turn their backs on Christ, the scriptures, and their ordination vows. I pray there is a reasonable explanation that will vindicate them, because the implications of this report being accurate are disturbing.  However, the fact that students are involved in planning and/or leading worship services (a common practice in LCMS universities and high schools) is something that has now come back to bite them.

Jesus established the vocation of pastor to (among other things) lead public worship. Article 14 of the Augsburg Confession is very clear about the role of the ordained clergy in worship.  Just as God has provided specialized vocations in many human endeavors, such as administration, medical care, security, and teaching, He has given us men to lead worship, to preach, teach, and administer sacraments. Does President Ries cede his important administrative duties to undergraduates on certain days of the week?  Does the CSP Board of Directors allow students to write critical policies and set budgets?  Are students allowed to perform urgent medical procedures on some occasions?  Represent the university in delicate court cases?  Police the campus?  Chair the English Department?  But it seems that schools are ever eager to recruit students to ply the pastor's vocation (the one and only one office established by our Lord Himself, a vocation with eternal ramifications) by conducting worship services.

And in the current climate on college campuses that opposes Christianity and seeks to overturn the authority of scripture, is allowing students to oversee ceremonies - the chief purpose of which is to "teach the people" (AC 24:3) - wise?  Is it prudent or responsible to allow a teenager to carry out this vocation by managing worship - especially given that her understanding sexuality is admittedly at odds from that which taught and confessed by the Church and the Synod?  If the article is correct, the majority of lay people in our synod's churches also hold a different opinion than the Bible and the Confessions in matters of sexuality:

"Synod members are divided on sexuality issues. According to surveys by the Pew Research Center last year, 56 percent said homosexuality should be accepted, while 31 percent said it should be discouraged. Forty-five percent said they support same-sex marriage, while 48 percent said they oppose it."

If this is indeed the case, why would pastors hand over responsibility for worship to the laity, let alone to students who are barely out of high school, who are the demographic most opposed to the Church's confession by virtue of the popular culture?  Our blessed Lord exhorts us to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves, not vice versa.

For who is more equipped to proclaim Law and Gospel to a lost generation?  Who better to call all of us poor, miserable sinners to repentance, and to forgive us when we do in response to the rightly-divided Word of God?  Who better to stand as steadfast catechists and loving heralds of a More Excellent Way than the men whom the Holy Spirit has explicitly called to do just that - especially in these confused and confusing postmodern times?  If nothing else, shouldn't an institution of higher learning at least acknowledge the pastors' Master's degrees and seminary training to be of value in the endeavor of spiritual care and theology?

Just what exactly is wrong with the pastor leading chapel services?

If it is simply too much work, why not have ordained staff rotate the worship responsibilities?  Do the ordained clergy on campus show spiritual leadership by wearing the uniform of their holy office as a confession of their faith and testimony to their calling, or do they just try to blend in comfortably with everyone else?

Why have ordained clergy in these roles at all if they are not going to be shepherds?

Why have we shot ourselves in the foot this way, squandering the Holy Spirit's gifts?  Is it possible that there is value in holding to tradition, that "democracy of the dead", even when we think our radical new ideas are better?  Are we that afraid to stand in contrast to the world?  How will our schools and institutions fare when they are forced to choose between being institutions of the world, with all its benefits, prestige, and money, versus being institutions of the Church, while being scorned, marginalized, and hated?

In our tragic human sojourn in this fallen world, have we not yet learned the unintended consequences of asking "Did God actually say...?"

Christianity is taken seriously in the LCMS

Since some of the drama surrounding the curious case of Rev. Dr. Matthew Becker has played out upon this website (see A Useful Discussion), I commend the following analysis of the ensuing drama over the dismissal of Rev. Dr. Becker, which was made public by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Monday, July 20.

The analysis comes from Mr. Aaron Wolf, a lay member of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and managing editor for Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture, in a blog post on the Chronicles blog (read the entire article linked here).

The conclusion of the piece says it all: “Meanwhile, I’d like to thank the Post-Dispatch for reporting on this little bit of inside baseball.  It’s far from an embarrassing exposé.  If anything, it says that Christianity is taken seriously in the LCMS.” 

Indeed, we do take it seriously. And that is the point really. Despite the fact that some may consider this bad press, it is just the opposite. It is evidence that the Spirit is still at work among us to lead us into all the truth (John 16:13). 

Viability?

Viability study needed?

By Larry Beane

We live in a culture that measures success in terms of numbers.  And so, very often the first question pastors hear when people find out that we are clergy is: "How big is your church?"  Even pastors are often heard asking each other a question that is revealing in its linguistic construction: "How many do you worship on Sunday?"  That's because the sinful flesh revels in the theology of glory.  Bigger is better.  Richer is better.  And when it comes to local parishes, the more "ministries" a church has going (meaning various activities and programs) the more it is perceived as being successful.

But of course, the kingdom of God operates differently than the corrupted world.

The distinction between the Theology of Glory and the Theology of the Cross is part of our Lutheran DNA.  Of all people, we ought to resist this sin of treating God's Word like the stock market and treating human beings like means to one's own enrichment.  Biblical Christianity is antithetical to the Prosperity Gospel and the scandalous behavior those who abuse the name of our Lord by its practice.

I recently received Newsletter #238 from the Siberian Evangelical Lutheran Church (SELC), which relates the ongoing work in finding small pockets of Lutheran Christians in the world's largest country in order to travel to them, teach them the Bible, and to administer sacraments at Divine Services.  The SELC is both the largest Lutheran church body in the world, and one of the smallest.  It is large in geography and small in numbers.  Her parishes are for the most part very small, are served by worker-priests, and do not have the luxury of activities and programs.  It is a great blessing for Russian Lutherans to attend Bible classes and Divine Services.

As a result of their small numbers in terms of members and clergy, combined with the vast numbers of kilometers to cover in tedious and arduous travel (often in brutal conditions) in bringing Bible classes and Divine Services to tiny groups of people, the SELC has unique challenges.

Here is the newsletter article:

Peace to you, dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

  

On April, 22, pastor Andrei Lipnitsky has visited the village Oravka in Chany district of Novosibirsk region. This village was founded by colonists from Estonia in 1894.  It had even a church building, but at Soviet time it was confiscated and reconstructed to use as a school.  Thus religious life was extinguished.

  

About 40 people came to meet the Lutheran pastor.  They asked a lot of questions.  At the end of the talk Pastor Lipnitsky gave Small Catechisms to everybody.

To search and to visit such villages where there are people, whose ancestors confessed the Lutheran faith -- this is continuing ministry of our Church. We do it all the time.

The very first time, pastor Vsevolod Lytkin and deacon Daniel Burlakov visited such a village nearly 20 years ago. You may remember this story from our very old newsletters.

That time, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Roman-Catholic priests started to travel over Siberia to look for villages where Roman-Catholics survived.  And accidentally they found a village where people said they are Lutherans.  They spoke Russian with a strong western accent. Their ancestors came to Siberia from Poland.

Catholic priests phoned us and invited to come to this village. It was a long travel.  First, from Novosibirsk to Irkutsk, then for 8 hours by different vehicles through the taiga.  Finally we arrived to our destination, and spent a week there, communicating with the habitants.

The first settlers came to that place in the late 19th century, then many families moved from Poland (that time it was part of the Russian Empire) into deep Siberia.

Their life was very hard; they rooted out trees and arranged fields. Then they lived there and grown.  Pastor from Irkutsk visited the village once a year. He baptized, confirmed, gave the Holy Communion, conducted weddings. Last time a Pastor was there in 1935.

And then Rev. Vsevolod Lytkin became the first pastor who visited this village for over 60 years.  Many old people talked him about the faith of their ancestors, and what terrible persecutions they gone through because of their faith.  Half of the villagers died in the concentration camps during 30s and 40s (at the time of Joseph Stalin’s regime).  People were arrested if a Bible or prayer book has found in their homes.

But older people still remember what parents taught them. For example, a woman who was asked by Pastor Lytkin if she knew what the Holy Communion is, said that she never in her life took the Communion, but she remembers what her mother taught. And then she quoted by heart about Holy Communion from the Luther’s small Catechism.

Then she said: now my eyes have seen a Lutheran pastor, now I can die. And it sounded as in Luke 2: 29-30, it was very touchable. 

“That was so long ago, Bishop Vsevolod Lytkin said. But since then we have found many other villages where people have kept the faith, or even the memory of what their ancestors were Lutherans.  The Volga Germans, Poles, Finns, Latvians, Estonians...  We owe to these people, because they have brought Lutheranism to Siberia.  For many years we are searching for such villages and we try to do something to help their habitants.  To comfort the elderly.  And talk about Lord Jesus Christ and His Church to the younger.

Sadly, we do not have many resources to do this work. After all, we are a very small Church, and we are poor.  And distances in Siberia are huge.  But we try, because it is our responsibility before God.” 

  

Please pray for a safe travels of the pastors in Siberia, and that they find more villages, whose inhabitants have been and will be Lutherans.

These tiny pockets of Christians are not ignored by the bishop and the priests of our sister church body in favor of "ministries" and programs and a great chase for numbers.  They are cherished as souls whom the pastors have been called to serve with the Word and the Sacraments - even if it is costly in terms of financial resources and time to reach them.  If there is one thing our Russian brethren understand by experience, it is the Theology of the Cross.

Our Lord said, "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them" (Matt 18:20).  He did not say anything about throwing such small numbers of people out of the church body, nor pressuring them to become involved in revitalization programs, or compelling them into mergers or closures.  The Lord commissioned His pastors to "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age" (Matt 28:19-20).  He sent them out to teach and to administer sacraments, for that is how disciples are made.  He didn't say anything about mergers, closures, or revitalization.  There was no mention of viability studies.  He says nothing about the need for a certain minimum number of parishioners or programs.

By contrast, a circuit of pastors in my district has an interesting take on small congregations and how they ought to be treated - as articulated in their proposed memorial:

MEMORIAL # 1 – 04 RE: TO ADOPT A DISTRICT PARISH MINISTRY VIABILITY TASK FORCE 

WHEREAS, the 65th Synodical Convention adopted Resolution 7-04 that addresses the establishment of general principles for the evaluation of the viability of a district, and 

WHEREAS, congregations have input into the final process of the district viability evaluation, and 

WHEREAS, a number of congregations are faithfully administering the Word and Sacraments of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, while also experiencing other extreme ministry crises that are impeding the level of positive and effective outreach ministry and community involvement as related to the “Great Commission” (Matthew 28:19-20), and 

WHEREAS, the overall community outreach programs or other ministry services of a number of congregations are non-existent, and 

WHEREAS, the overall ministry of a number of congregations is basically a Sunday morning Bible study and worship, and 

WHEREAS, the records of baptism and confirmations of a number of congregations have experienced an extreme dramatic decrease, hitting rock bottom, and 

WHEREAS, the doors of a number of congregations remain open only because of a few number of remaining dedicated families having deep roots in the historical foundation of the church, and 

WHEREAS, the Task Force indicated in the 1969 Resolution 4-03 adopted “General Principles for the Formation of the Realignment of Districts,” offering adequate parish services was one very important principle; therefore, be it 

RESOLVED, THAT the Southern District establish a Parish Ministry Viability Evaluation Task Force; and, be it further 

RESOLVED, THAT the District President and the Board of Directors, establish and empower the Task Force consisting of the VP Regional Representative, the Circuit Visitor, the Mission Executive and one member of the Mission Committee, the Pastor and President of the congregation being evaluated, meet to develop the general principles of evaluating the viability of the parish as identified by the Circuit Visitor and District President; and, be it further 

RESOLVED, THAT the Task Force forward its recommendation to the President for his disclosure to the Board of directors, and the respective congregation. Such a recommendation could include a possible merger, entering into an official revitalization process, and redesign of the parish ministry to better meet the needs of the community, or final dissolution of the ministry; and, be it finally 

RESOLVED, THAT the President of the District issue an official letter of recommendation to the evaluated congregation, indicating a triennium time frame to reach an acceptable improved level of viability. Included in the letter of recommendation are suggested available resources and suggestions for the ministry. The President’s final letter of recommendation may include a recommended merger, dissolution of the congregation or a removal from the LCMS Roster. 

Submitted by: Circuit Forum 1 

By the way, this same circuit has invested the time and energy to memorialize the synod to ban the word "Easter" in all its publications (Memorial 1-05).  

I guess this is one of the differences between first- and third-world Christianity.  We American Lutherans have not been decimated by a Lenin or a Stalin.  We have not lived through a time when Bible Studies and Divine Services were yearned-for luxuries, and the thought of having a pastor come to give the Lord's Supper was the answer to six decades of fervent prayer.

However, we are moving toward a time of hostility toward - if not outright persecution of - orthodox Christianity in this country.  We may be approaching the days when "Sunday morning Bible study and worship" are actually appreciated by all circuits within our districts as the very center of parochial and ecclesiastical life, something important, urgent, and life-giving, instead of the mark of ecclesiastical failure to be bureaucratically remedied.  

Maybe viability (from Latin: vita meaning "life") in the Lord's kingdom is not really about numbers at all.  Maybe big, comfortable, numbers-driven American Christianity is the one with the viability issues.  

Kyrie eleison!

Now, that's more like it!

Quid Est Veritas?

Pilate asks: "What is truth?"

By Larry Beane

I just read a statement by a professor on the LCMS clergy roster who favors the 'ordination' of women. He made a curious reference to passages of Scripture perhaps being "outdated."

Part of his argument includes the fact that the Book of Concord (to which Lutherans have agreed to be bound as a correct explication of Scripture) makes no explicit reference to women's 'ordination'.

Of course, the sixteenth century Book of Concord likewise makes no explicit references to partial birth abortion, apartheid, euthanasia, eugenics, or cruelty to animals. And yet it does not follow that such practices are theologically acceptable or bear the seal of approval of Lutherans based on this argument from silence.

Those who advocate for the 'ordination' of women are at odds with not only Scripture, but with the ecumenical creeds that confess the divinity of Jesus.

Advocates of women's 'ordination' believe they are correcting an injustice. But if excluding women from the pastoral office is unjust today, it was also unjust ten years ago, twenty years ago, fifty years ago, and a hundred years ago. It would have been unjust in 1847 AD when the synod was established, in 1530 AD when the Augsburg Confession was written, in 325 AD when the Council of Nicea met, in 50 AD when the apostles met at the Council of Jerusalem, and in 30 AD when Jesus ordained and commissioned 11 men, thus establishing the catholic practice of male-only ordination.

Jesus was never afraid to break with Jewish tradition, including regarding matters pertaining to the role of women in society. Jesus had many shining examples of female disciples that he could have ordained had it been His will to establish such a practice. The odds of this exclusion of 50% of the population (including the population of disciples) just being by chance is (if my math is correct) 1 in 2 to the 11th power (1 in 2048) - or 5 hundredths of one percent. Today's advocates of affirmative action would never conclude that Jesus, as an employer, just happened to have 11 qualified men and no qualified women among his pool of candidates. He would probably be sued and charged with discrimination under the 1964 Civil Rights Act had He been born in twentieth century America instead of first century Judea.

Moreover, the early church rapidly shifted from Jewish to Gentile in its majority culture, and in the Greco-Roman world, priestesses and female oracles were not unusual in the least.

So if women's 'ordination' is a matter of justice, then the apostles were sinning in only ordaining men, as was our Lord Himself who established the apostolic and catholic practice. If so, Jesus was either a duplicitous coward, a cunning hypocrite, or a hateful misogynist.

In whatever case, such a man is not God.

To put the best construction on it, it is in a sense commendable that some people are so committed to justice as to seek to correct even the errors of Jesus Himself. They do have a sense of righteousness to which even the Son of God must give account.

However, in order to advocate for women's 'ordination', one must necessarily throw the doctrines of the two natures of Christ and the Trinity under the bus. And those two doctrines - protestations of Unitarians and various cults notwithstanding - are established Christian doctrines and ought not be matters for synodical debate, unless we are willing to consider amending the ecumenical creeds through bureaucratic machinations.

Here we are once again at the trial of Jesus, this time with His holy bride standing with Him in the dock, and the question is being posed to her: "What is truth?"

One Purpose

By Larry Beane

I don't know if other LCMS churches and pastors were targeted or not (though I suspect so), but I recently received a journal in the mail unbidden, called: "One Image, One Purpose, One Baptism" from an organization called CBE International (Christians for Biblical Equality).  I had never heard of this organization before, but given that "equality" is a buzzword of late - in particular with regard to matters of sex roles in church and society - I decided against pitching it with the other usual complement of uninvited postal material that one inevitably receives as a church pastor.

Upon scanning it, it turns out to be a collection of six essays with the usual tired and hackneyed exegetical arguments for women's "ordination."  It is an apologetic of sorts for the philosophy of radical egalitarianism.  The authors include a layman whose position and current religious affiliation are unstated, a professor (Ph.D.) from Loyola (New Orleans), a former president of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, a professor from North Park Theological Seminary (on the clergy roster of the Evangelical Covenant Church), a professor (Th.D.) from Dallas Theological Seminary, as well as a guest professor (Ph.D.) from Gordon-Conwell, who appears to be a Baptist.

Lacking any LCMS theological credentials or Lutheran academic positions among the authors, I was rather surprised to find the LCMS mentioned 5 times on the very first page following the table of contents (not to mention references as well to CPH, the CTCR, the word "Lutheran," and Luther's "What does this mean?" from the Small Catechism).  Interesting.  The opening one-page introduction was written by a former member of an LCMS congregation.  There was a blurb consisting of a third of the page written by a currently-rostered LCMS pastor, who finds "the resources provided by Christians for Biblical Equality" to be "quite helpful," and for this reason, he says, "I recommend to you, my brother pastors, the material attached."

Why my congregation and I had received this was starting to make more sense.

The first full essay keeps the Missouri Synod ball in the air by referencing the LCMS, the CTCR, and its document, "The Creator's Tapestry," (including three citations).  The author is also an LCMS pastor's wife.  The gist of her essay is that there is the LCMS-endorsed (but wrong) complementarian view of man and woman, and the (correct) egalitarian view.  Her essay argues for egalitarianism because of the biblical "pattern whereby God lifts up the lowly (those deemed as the lesser ones in society) and brings down the mighty (those deemed by the world to be greater in terms of status and power)."  She cites examples of God's favor upon the "younger," "women," and "the poor."

This emphasis on egalitarianism as a way of overturning the troika of ageism, sexism, and classism supports the purpose of the Christians for Biblical Equality organization:

Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) is a nonprofit organization of Christian men and women who believe that the Bible, properly interpreted, teaches the fundamental equality of men and women of all ethnic groups, all economic classes, and all age groups, based on the teachings of Scriptures such as Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (NIV 2011). (emphasis added).

The mission statement of CBE is as follows:


CBE exists to promote biblical justice and community by educating Christians that the Bible calls women and men to share authority equally in service and leadership in the home, church, and world.



The idea that the biblical equality expressed in Gal 3:28 is extended from the immediate context of justification (v. 24) so as to include egalitarian authority structures falls by its own weight.  For though CBE uses Gal 3:28 to argue that "women and men" are to "share authority" in "home, church, and world," they do not take their premise to the logical conclusion of the aforementioned troika and include children in that biblical authority-sharing.  They don't argue for a model of governance of "home, church, and world" that gives voice to children, who are by nature the weakest of the weak in "home, church, and world."  Where are the calls for children's ordination?  Where are the denunciations of ageistic hierarchicalism that elevates adults over infants in matters of authority in "home, church, and world"?

A quick scan of CBE's mission statement, core values, and envisioned future on the inside back cover of the journal basically demonstrates that this organization - its lip service against ageism, racism, and classism notwithstanding - is a one-trick pony.  It's all about the goal of "ordaining" women in those church bodies that do not presently do so.  That seems to be the "One Purpose" lurking in the middle line of the title.

So again, why send this to an LCMS pastor and church?  Why front-load the journal with references to Lutheranism and the LCMS when none of its authors are LCMS members or scholars, nor are any of her institutions of higher learning given a voice or opportunity for balance?  Well, that's apparently how they roll in promoting their agenda.  

The fact of the matter is that the majority element (by about a 2:1 ratio) of those calling themselves "Lutheran" in the United States and in the world already "ordain" women.  The ELCA already accepts all of the exegesis and philosophical premises of egalitarianism espoused by the CBE, and does so unambiguously and vigorously.  If Lutherans are looking for a church body that is dedicated to these principles, they can certainly find one that is bigger, more diverse, and has a larger number of seminaries and congregations already.  Mathematically speaking, ELCA congregations are on the whole easier to find than LCMS churches. Lutherans who sympathize with CBE can already go to the ELCA and be comfortable, without fighting, without the frustration of the supposed neanderthal patriarchy that one finds in the LCMS.  In fact, the ELCA embraces equality to the point of placing goddess worship on an equal plane with God-worship, and is in full altar-and-pulpit fellowship with the ECUSA, in which one need not even believe in the resurrection of Jesus to be consecrated as a bishop.  Lutherans who do not "ordain" women are a remnant, and in Scandinavia in particular, they are persecuted.

But that's not enough.  As long as one church body, one bishop, one congregation, one pastor, or one layman does not agree with them, their heroic campaign of uninvited postal material must soldier on!

Interestingly, CBE's sexual egalitarianism breaks down in deviation from their own principles in their endorsement of exclusive, traditional, heterosexually-restricted marriage:


God’s design for relationships includes faithful marriage between a man and a woman, celibate singleness and mutual submission in Christian community. 


This desire to commingle a Leave It To Beaver hetero-hegemonic (if not heterosexualist) view of marriage with a Vicar of Dibley free-spirited egalitarian view of ordination is not only logically inconsistent, but is clearly refuted by history itself.  In every major denomination around the world that has accepted women's "ordination," there has been a subsequent or parallel redefinition of "marriage" to accommodate same-sex unions.  If Gal 3:28 applies to the rite of holy orders, why not also to the rite of holy matrimony?  If a lady can take a congregation, why can't she take a wife?  The same exclusive exegesis, denounced by CBE, that defines the roles of men and women differently in "home, church, and world" in refusing holy orders to women is also what prohibits same-sex marriage among Christians who don't count the blessing of homosexual unions to be a Biblical expression of Equality.

But once again, how interesting to have an overwhelmingly non-Lutheran publication laden with LCMS and Lutheran references in the first two essays, along with an LCMS recommendation from an LCMS clergyman on the same page, sent to an LCMS pastor care of an LCMS church.  Why not rejoice in the majority of Lutheran "churches" that agree with them rather than target the minority of churches that disagree with them?

Again, it's not enough.

I think the "One Purpose" of this organization and its uninvited postal material is quite clear.  What is also clear is that Satan is still asking, tempting, and taunting the daughters of Eve: "Did God actually say...?" (Gen 3:1).  Whether he is speaking by the mouth of the LCMS in denying ordination to women, or by the mouth of the CBE in promoting it, I will leave to the reader to discern.

Who Cut the Cheese?

By Larry Beane

This is a video released by Pastor Mark Junkans (LCMS) who serves a call at Lutheran Inter-City Coalition in Houston, Texas (Texas District).

Pr. Junkans uses the word "communion" - but it sounds more like a house party to me.  Although I would prefer meat hors d'oeuvres or cocktail weenies, since I don't eat bread (Holy Communion excepted) - I would never attempt to bind consciences regarding the proper finger foods to go with Lutheran beverages.  To each his own!  Though (and I realize I am on shaky 8th Commandment and Matthew 18 ground here), I do think some research is in order to determine the propriety of omitting cheese in such contexts.  Is this an adiaphoron?  That question is certainly above my pay grade.

Passing around a bottle sounds like a great time (not that Lutheran pastors know anything about that...) - and is certainly of the order of First Article gifts.  But I don't know if Pr. Junkans is trying to say this communion is a simply bunch of parishioners quaffing at a cocktail party, or rather if this is supposed to be the Holy Communion, the Sacrament of the Altar, the Holy Eucharist, the Mass, the body and blood of Christ?

At any rate, what about the cheese?  Can we at least have consensus on that?

Maybe Pr. Junkans will clarify the matter.  Maybe the Texas District President could help.  I would be interested to know what President Harrison thinks, not to mention President Rast, as Pr. Junkans is a graduate of Fort Wayne's DELTO program.  Reverend Presidents, we need direction on this caseous casuistry matter!  Silence is not an option!

I am not being critical of Pr. Junkans.  I know the rules of the synod.  I'm not an ecclesiastical supervisor.  Nor am I going to invest the time and money to try to meet my brother face to face to confront him about omitting cheese at an otherwise perfectly good cocktail party - as scandalous a matter as that might be - especially to our brethren in Wisconsin.  Love covers a multitude of Sbrinz.

But I would like to know what those charged with ecclesiastical supervision do have to say about this.  I mean, if we can't agree on something so basic, what does it mean to walk together?

A Tale of Two Conferences

By Larry Beane

The LCMS is quite a diverse church body when it comes to things like conferences.

By way of example, here are descriptions of two upcoming conferences that will be happening shortly, less than one month apart, both of which will include speakers and worship services.

The first example is one of the official district conferences to be held this month (September).

Three of the four main scheduled speakers are pastors.  One of the three is a Lutheran, and his presentation is first.  His topic will be: "Toward Effective Ministry in Transitional Times" and is described as follows:

"Living and serving in God's grace in these changing times involves balance, clarity of purpose and values as well as personal and organizational health.  This time will be interactive, informative, and hopefully a time of introducing you to introspection and possible life ministry changes during this conference."

The two remaining ordained speakers come from outside the Lutheran tradition.  The first is a senior pastor of a Baptist congregation in Virginia.  He is the author of Bod4God: Four Keys to Weight Loss and Get off the Couch.  He is also the creator of the Losing to Live Weight Loss Competition....  The media has labeled him 'The Anti-Fat Pastor.'"  One has to wonder if he'll be attending the "Taco/Nacho/Chicken Wing Buffet (enough to call it dinner)" that includes "free beer, margaritas and sangria/wine."

Next up will be a pastor representing Cornerstone Fellowship, who is going to speak on "rediscovering a New Small Church filled with hope, passion, and innovative spark of the Holy Spirit."

The "opening worship" is not described other than that it will be held at a local parish, while the "closing worship" will be held at the resort where the conference will take place.

***

Less than a month later, another conference will take place, not a district function, but rather an annual congregational event.

The keynote speaker will be a Lutheran seminary professor with degrees from Oxford, Cambridge, and Durham.  He is the "author of volumes 12 (Lord's Supper) and 13 (Eschatology) of the series Confessional Lutheran Dogmatics.  His topic will be "The Blessed Sacrament in the Theology of Wilhelm Loehe."  There will also be a discussion on "the rubrics and significance of the Mass from the Preface to the Nunc Dimittis."

Like the other conference, there will be food, including a banquet featuring "brats and beer" and an "after the party party" at the pastor's home.

This conference will likewise include worship services, and will open with "choral vespers" and will include "mass" on the next day, as well as a "low mass" and "vespers" on the final day of the conference - all held in the sanctuary of the parish.

If it is true that diversity is our strength, the LCMS must be one of the mightiest church bodies on the planet.

The Lutheran Church is Massional!

The Rev. Mark Surburg has written a helpful overview of celebrating the sacrament of the altar every Sunday: viewed in light of scripture, tradition, the Lutheran confessions, and contemporary American Lutheran practice.

You can read it here.

Father Weedon and Time Warping

If you would like to see the space/time continuum warp and bend, watch this presentation by Father William Weedon.  He makes two hours seem like a mere ten minutes.  His presentation, "Why You Should Stay Lutheran" given at Redeemer Lutheran Church in Fort Wayne, Indiana on January 20, 2014 is simply captivating!

Part One:



Part Two:

Once Again, the Anglicans Do it Better

By Larry Beane

English speaking Lutheranism, including the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, has an interesting relationship with Anglicanism.

Much of our English liturgy is rooted in the translations from the Book of Common Prayer.  The publishing house affiliated with the LCMS, CPH, owns the copyright to many of Healy Willan's musical arrangements.  The familiar Common Service (LSB DS3) tune for the Gloria in Excelsis is a Scottish chant shared with historical Anglicanism.  Along with historic Anglicanism, traditional Lutheranism shares a Western Catholic liturgical tradition while being heirs of the Reformation - thus having a tradition of Evangelical theology seated comfortably alongside a Catholic view of liturgy and church history.  Historically speaking, Lutherans and Anglicans are "one step from Rome."

Traditional Anglicans generally conduct the Mass with reverence and dignity, even if perhaps an aristocratic British stiff-upper-lip fussiness that might be a little over the top for many democratically-minded Americans.  And perhaps in a nod to 007 (who, after all, is in the service of the head of the Anglican Communion that includes most Anglicans), we may well give homage to our Anglican cousins with a round of Nobody Does it Better.  And I would be shocked (shocked!) if no LCMS congregations have used this theme as some kind of "worship song."

But even in matters of heresy, it seems like the Anglicans do it better.

They do the whole Montanist thing with an elan and showmanship that puts our own pathetic-by-comparison tiny remnant of elderly RIM tongue-speakers to shame.  Our Anglican cousins also go whole hog in the Wiccan-goddess thing with priestesses in full fig, by far exceeding the almost staid-by-comparison LCMS's forays into women in ministry with albs and stoles.  And when it comes to turning the Divine Service into farcical and frivolous entertainment, why, the above Big Dance Show beats the LCMS's amateurish twiddling around with flutes and snare drums and and acoustic guitars and "Shine, Jesus Shine" - hands down.

Or should I say, "hands up"?

You have to say this for the Anglicans: they swing for the fence - whether they are highly traditionalist bodies like the ACC that believe in liturgical dignity and catholic tradition; or worshipers of the false gods of feminism, homosexuality, and postmodernism like the ECUSA; or enthusiasts of the charismatic River Dance style, like this group above: the ACNA - with whom the LCMS has been in dialogue.

In fact, "The ACNA is the first non-Lutheran denomination to enter into any sort of dialogue with LCMS."

Why would the LCMS be in dialogue with this body?  Well, they oppose gay "marriage."  Coming out against "teh ghey" covers a multitude of sins, it seems, and this issue appears to have become the gold standard of ecumenical cooperation and dialogue, and for many denominations, the single issue by which the church stands or falls, shares or breaks communion.  All else is treated as adiaphora.

Whether good, bad, or ugly, the Anglicans don't seem to go for halfway measures.  They seem even capable of extremism in their moderation - as evidenced by the militantly middling "neither high church, nor low church" wing!  But then again, so as not to be perceived as throwing stones, you can see some genuinely outrageous things masquerading as Lutheranism as well.  The LCMS is not exempt.  You can find rock music, dancing girls, cup holders, clown eucharists, and pastors running around in street clothes with little microphones stuck to their heads within driving distance from just about everyone wishing to attend such things in LCMS congregations.

I guess the one saving grace is that we in the LCMS are typically pretty lame in our attempts to be hipsters.  Hopefully this dialogue with the ACNA isn't going to help us do their things better!

Come quickly, Lord Jesus!