Congregational “Viability”

I recently read an article titled Revitalization: Abiding as the Declining Church on the LCMS Leader Blog webpage. Most of it was very well written and a good reminder to the Church at large. However, the following sentences troubled me:

Our natural tendency in revitalization is to focus on preserving the institution of the church. This shows itself in a congregation’s stubborn refusal to close its doors long after it has passed the point of viability. It shows all the more clearly when the surviving members are willing to exhaust the resources that could be used for a new ministry in order to prolong one that has effectively ended.

Is it possible for a congregation to be “stubborn”? Of course it is. Congregations are made up exclusively of sinners. That being said, stubbornness can be found in both small and large congregations, in both poor and rich congregations, in both declining rural or inner city and thriving suburban congregations.

My questions are these: How does the institution define “the point of viability” for a congregation? Why does the institution assume that “a new ministry” is better than an existing one? How can the institution say that an existing ministry “has effectively ended” if God’s Word continues to be preached faithfully and His Sacraments continue to be administered according to the Gospel in that place for the benefit of God’s saints?

Jesus promised, “Where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I among them” (Matthew 18:20). Is a small congregation of 2 or 3 (even 20 or 30) less viable than a congregation where 2000 or 3000 are gathered in His name?

It seems the real issue at hand is “the resources that could be used” elsewhere—resources that the institution thinks it is better prepared to spend than the local saints who gave and are still giving of their firstfruits.

Perhaps it’s not stubbornness.

Perhaps it’s simply the desire to receive Christ’s gracious gifts from the font, pulpit, and altar consecrated for those very purposes by their forefathers.

Synodical Leadership

Recently a group within the LCMS released a list of candidates it is promoting for the convention next week. It is titled “Our Future.” Below is the choice to be made as this group sees it:

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod [sic] is at a deciding moment in history. Will Synod faithfully choose leaders who are passionate about the Gospel in reaching the lost or will Synod choose leaders who are inwardly focused and who are living in the past. [sic]

Who are the leaders “who are passionate about the Gospel in reaching the lost”? And who are the leaders “who are are inwardly focused and who are living in the past”? How does one identify them? What is the criteria? Who is the judge?

Coming from a group that claims to be all about the Gospel, why this harsh judgment? What evidence can they provide that some leaders are inwardly focused? What evidence can they provide that some are living in the past (whatever that means)? What evidence can they provide that some are not passionate about the Gospel? What evidence can they provide that some do not want to reach the lost?

If the type of leadership you are looking for in the LCMS involves vague statements, a false dichotomy, and straw man accusations, then by all means follow the “Our Future” list.

I’m looking for leaders who mourn their sin and rejoice in Christ’s full and free forgiveness. Who hold up God’s holy Word and blessed Sacraments as the life of the Church. Who believe, teach, and confess the Lutheran Confessions because they are a faithful exposition of Holy Scripture. Who love the truth (doctrine) and love the sheep (evangelism and missions). I pray you are looking for the same type of leadership in the LCMS!

President Harrison Re-Elected

It is with great joy that I post the following email from the Secretary of the LCMS...

LCMS President-Elect Announced
July 6, 2013

The convention delegates of the 2010 Convention adopted a new process for the election of the President of the Synod. Over the last several months, this process has been put into place by the Office of the Secretary of Synod.

The nomination process for the position of President began last year with the mailing of nominations ballots to all congregations of the Synod around October 1st. All nominations were required to be submitted by February 20, 2013, or 5 months prior to the start of convention, when the ballots, received by an outside auditor, were tallied and delivered to the Secretary of the Synod. The candidates for the office of President were the three ordained ministers who received the highest number of votes in the nominations process and who consented to serve if elected. The three nominees for President of Synod were the Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, the Rev. Dr. David P.E. Maier and the Rev. Dr. Herbert C. Mueller.

Four weeks prior to the convention, on June 22, the Secretary’s Office provided, through Election-America, a secure method and opportunity for two voting delegates from each congregation, to participate in the vote via electronic balloting services provided by Election-America. The voters in the President’s election were the congregations’ delegates in attendance at the 2012 district conventions.

The results of the ballot, conducted four weeks prior to the 2013 convention, were tallied and reported to the Secretary of the Synod by Election-America as follows:

Matthew C. Harrison: 4,262 votes (66.26%)
David P. E. Maier: 1,906 votes (29.63%)
Herbert C. Mueller, Jr.: 264 votes (4.10%)

Total Ballots: 6,432

Total Electorate: 8,201

Percentage Voted: 78.43%

The Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, having received a majority of the votes cast, is declared elected as President-elect of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.

Upholding Marriage: God’s Gift and Plan

A statement by the Rev. Bart Day, executive director, Office of National Mission

June 26, 2013

Today the Supreme Court issued its ruling, striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), allowing for federal benefits for legally married gay couples and potentially allowing for gay marriage in all of California with regard to Proposition 8.

As Christians, we believe and confess that God Himself instituted marriage as the life-long union of one man and one woman. Same-sex unions are contrary to God’s will, and gay marriage is, in the eyes of God, no marriage at all. As Christians, we proclaim this truth, no matter what the courts or legislatures may say. We are called not to popularity but to truth. Therefore, we call on our fellow Christians to be faithful first to God’s Word, knowing that another court is ultimately supreme.

Marriage is a fundamental building block of society, binding parents to their offspring. Every child benefits from the nurture of a mother and the leadership of a father. While having one mother is a blessing, having two mothers or two fathers is confusing for the child and detrimental to her well-being. The divorce culture has done great harm to the institution of marriage as well, and The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) has and will continue to respond to that heartache with Christ’s comfort while simultaneously working to restore a culture where marriage is upheld.

While this occasion reminds us that Scripture calls homosexuality sinful (see Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27), the Bible also says plainly that those who “hunger and thirst for righteousness,” that is to say, those who repent and show genuine sorrow over their sin, are forgiven and loved by Christ.

And so as Christ’s Church, we forgive and love too, following His lead with compassion and humility. We forgive and love because we are all sinners in need of His grace and mercy; because no matter the sin, we have all rebelled against our Creator and fallen prey to unbelief; because He has justified us by grace through faith, freely given and joyfully received (Rom. 3:23–24); because Christ has reconciled us to the Father; because He has declared us righteous and we are.

In love, we will continue to teach marriage according to God’s plan and gift. We will continue to proclaim marriage as a picture of Christ’s love for His bride, the church. And we will continue to be a place of forgiveness, mercy and healing for all people, even as we will continue to proclaim God’s truth in love. As we move forward, we offer up our prayers for the nation and particularly for marriage, family and children.

Rev. Bart Day, executive director
LCMS Office of National Mission

Harrison: Marriage and the Church

Marriage and the Church

Friday, May 10, 2013

Someone quipped, “The world is moving so fast these days that the one who says it can’t be done is generally interrupted by someone doing it.” I thought rather cynically about this quote as I listened to the Supreme Court argue over the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Just a decade and a half ago, this legislation was signed into law, defining marriage for federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman. DOMA came as a safeguard against individual states redefining marriage and forcing the federal government (the whole nation!) to treat same-sex marriage as legitimate.

Two sources tell us what marriage is. First, the Bible tells us that man and woman were created by God as the perfect match, and that marriage is to be a sacred, lifelong union of one man and one woman. The Bible universally rejects sex outside of this man/woman marriage. Second, we know from so-called natural knowledge, which is part of all human existence, and which has been codified by custom and law through the millennia, that marriage is for one man and one woman. It is God’s perfectly designed institution for the creation of new human life and for the nurture of civilized individuals. As Luther famously noted in his Large Catechism, If he won’t obey his parent, he’ll obey the hangman!

What has come with lightening speed is merely the summation of a long process of the devaluation of marriage in Western culture. In 1970, only one state had no-fault divorce. By 1980, 49 had it. Coterminously, marriage has increasingly come to be defined as an emotional bond with a significant other rather than a fundamental building block of all society, religion and culture, based upon the fact that a man and a woman choose to enter a solemn life-long contract and bring new life into this world.

The Supreme Court will likely rule on the two cases (DOMA and Proposition 8) in late June. Like Roe v. Wade, which found a (fictional) right to abortion in the U.S. Constitution, the court could rule that the traditional definition of marriage of one man and one woman is unconstitutional. No matter how the court rules, the fight has just begun. Many in our own fellowship think, What’s the big deal? Isn’t it just about widening the tent of tolerance a bit more? If that were it, it would a major relief. But it’s not. What’s at stake is our First Amendment right to the free exercise of our religious conviction in the way we act in society. As the same-sex marriage train gains steam, we find ourselves increasingly under attack, our social ministry agencies are forced to either capitulate to the state or lose funding and even licenses. All opposed to same-sex marriage for conscience grounds are and will increasingly be labeled bigots in line with slave-holders and those who were opposed to ending of legalized racism in this country. And know this: As traditional Christians are driven out of the public square, the door is also closed for the Gospel.

The task before us is monumental. We are called to repent of our lack of appreciation for marriage and family. We are called to confess Christ to all and call all to repentance. We must elevate marriage among us and educate, educate, educate. Even as we seek specific ways to care for those challenged by same-sex attraction, we must resist conforming to the culture.

We know whose we are. We know what is in store for us. We know we will be severely tested in these last days, but this testing will abound in faithfulness and praise (1 Peter 1).

Pastor Matthew Harrison
President, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

“Let’s go!” Mark 1:38

2012 Statistical Report

Each year the congregations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) complete a statistical report for the Synod. Divine Shepherd just finished its report. Below are some of these statistics and demographics for 2012.

Baptized Membership

• Total: 236
• Average Age: 40

Confirmed Membership

• Total: 199
• Average Age: 46

Weekly Church Attendance

• Sundays: 100

Vacation Bible School

• Members: 10
• Non-Members: 31

Congregational Demographics

• Age 0-14: 19% 
• Age 15-18: 8% 
• Age 19-34: 18% 
• Age 35-49: 18% 
• Age 50-64: 17% 
• Age 65+: 20%

A Word of Encouragement

A word of encouragement from Prof. Kurt Marquart, one of my favorite professors from Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, now at rest in Christ. Written more than nine years ago, it still speaks to our Synod’s present struggles. It is reprinted here from Pastor Riley’s blog.

A Word of Encouragement

from

+ Kurt Marquart +

Having been asked by friends to address the plight of those who are so deeply discouraged by the turn of events in our Missouri Synod that they are tempted simply to leave, I humbly offer a few thoughts:

It is quite natural to become discouraged when things go wrong. To see our Synod—once known throughout the world for its firm, unyielding, and united stand for the pure Gospel of Christ—now awash in confusion and contradiction, even about such clear and basic issues as joint services with official representatives of paganism, that is of course profoundly and painfully sad.

And while the Lord founded His Church so solidly on Himself that the very gates of hell shall not prevail against her [Matthew 16:18], it is true that no visible church of a particular town, region, nation, or continent has the guarantee of remaining faithful to the truth forever. Indeed, history teaches us that even great and strong churches can ultimately abandon the truth. Think only Jerusalem, Rome, Wittenberg!

But now is not the time to abandon our Synod. It is not a false, heterodox church, but an orthodox church with serious troubles. For confessionally sound pastors and people to leave the Synod now, is simply to hand it over to those who hate its strict, confessional stand. Besides, we didn’t get into this mess in a hurry, and we’re not going to get out of it quickly either. But, to put it colloquially, “the old girl is worth fighting for”! Think of all the generations of devout souls who prayed and sacrificed for this Synod—and of those many who still do!

Our Dr. Walther himself wrote to a confessional student in Erlangen, who wanted to leave the Bavarian Lutheran state church:

“I can advise separation from a degenerated communion which formerly had taken the right stand, only when it is notorious that it has ‘hardened’ (verstockt) itself; and that is notorious only when everything has been tried to lead it back, but in vain... Would to God that I had this understanding thirty-some years ago, then I would likely still be in America, yet not as one who had abandoned his office, but as an exile.” [Briefe von C.F.W. Walter, Concordia, 1916, pp. 196-197, my translation]

And to another pastor in Germany he wrote:

“From a heretical or schismatic communion one must exit without consulting flesh and blood, also from a syncretistically constituted one; it is not so with a church which originally took the right stand, and in which false faith and unbelief still fight for the right to exist. Here it is a matter of leaving the sinking ship, not the one that has sprung a leak.” [p. 194]

It seems that most of our troubles in doctrine began as loose practice: open communion, neo-Pentecostalism, joint services with official representatives of false doctrine, and so forth. Then there came the pragmatic urge to adjust our formerly strong theology to our weak practice. The basic problem, it seems to me, is an organizational, bureaucratic approach to theology and church life. People want to justify any status quo that has become customary, and habitual—“like petty public officials [who] quietly approved the errors of their superiors, without understanding them.” [Apology XII, 69, Tappert, p. 192]

The problem is not new: The Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM) “now has well-nigh total and absolute power to turn any issue involving the practical application of the Confession into a constitutional one,” and then to issue a “binding” decision! “The real question is the wisdom of such total concentration of virtually unchallengeable power in a small body of administrative appointees. Should someone be thinking of theological, churchly remedies?” [Church Polity and Politics, John Fehrman and Daniel Preus, eds, Luther Academy and Association of Confessional Lutherans, 1997, pp. 199-200]

The cat is fully out of the bag in the new CCM ruling that one can’t be charged for actions for which one had prior approval from one’s ecclesiastical supervisor! The practical import is that bureaucratic standing may now override Holy Scripture and the Confessions! For details see the argument in the attached resolution. You are free to use this resolution, or any part or aspect of it you find helpful, as you see fit.

Of course only God can help us. Relying on Him alone let us do what we can to encourage good outcomes at the 2004 Convention, and the one after that, and the one after that, etc. That will mean sharing relevant factual and doctrinal information, also at District conventions, sending in appropriate resolutions, nominating and electing confessionally responsible people, and defeating the dishonest emotional propaganda which seeks to exploit the sacred urgencies of Mission to sweep inconvenient doctrinal issues under the carpet.

Finally, the battle for the sacred truth of the Gospel must be fought with kindness and love. We must not demonize human opponents, but realize, as St. Paul teaches us, that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” [Ephesians 6:12, NIV] The Lord of the Church bless us with zeal and courage and joy in Him Whose mercies are new to us every morning!

Fraternally yours,
Kurt Marquart
Fort Wayne, IN

8 May 2003

HT: The First Premise (Rev. Donavon Riley)

Scriptural Duties of an Evangelical Lutheran Congregation

C.F.W. Walther, the first president of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, describes the following Scriptural duties of a congregation in his treatise on The Proper Form of an Evangelical Lutheran Congregation:

1. To see to it that the Word of God may richly dwell and have full and free scope in its midst.
2. To care for the purity of doctrine and life in its midst and to exercise church discipline in these matters.
3. To concern itself also with the temporal welfare of all its members that they may not suffer want of the necessaries of life nor be forsaken in any need.
4. To see that in its midst “all things be done decently and in order” and to “provide for honest things, not only in the sight of the Lord but also in the sight of men.”
5. To be diligent “to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” also with all parts of the orthodox Church.
6. To do its part in building up and promoting the welfare of the Church at large.

In the near future we will take a closer look at each of these Scriptural duties.

Illogical Logic

The congregational nonimations for President of The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod (LCMS) have been counted and posted. And the numbers overwhelmingly reveal that the congregations want a change in leadership.

Rev. Matthew Harrison, executive director of LCMS World Relief and Human Care, received 1,332 nominations. Dr. Gerald Kieschnick, incumbent LCMS president, received 755 nominations. To put those numbers in perspective, consider the following facts:

• Harrison’s 1,332 nominations is the most ever for a non-incumbent.
• Kieschnick’s 755 nominations is the least ever for an incumbent.
• Kieschnick’s 755 nominations is 28% fewer than the 1,055 he received in 2007.

And yet, despite the facts, President Kieschnick offered this explanation in a recent newspaper article:

“I’ve been a part of this church long enough to know that if someone in office is doing a very poor job, we’d have more than 30 percent of them weighing in. ... Call it apathy or satisfaction, but they see no need to make a change.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 4/24/2010]

This was quickly followed up by a group of Kieschnick supporters, who made the same claim:

The main news from the nominations result is that only about one third of the eligible 6,000 congregations participated in the process. One interpretation is that by far most congregations are satisfied with the present leadership and thus did not participate. Their non-participation says nothing about how their delegates will cast their vote. Along that same line of reasoning, congregations that took the effort to make nominations are more likely to want change. There is website evidence this year that groups of dissatisfied pastors made a strong effort to organize to have their candidate(s) nominated. Thus one could conclude that a nomination total of 1,300 for a non-incumbent means only a quarter of the congregations are dissatisfied and want to change leadership. [Jesus First, Issue 62, April 2010: Putting Convention Nominations into Perspective]

Low numbers = high approval. How’s that for illogical logic!

LCMS, if you want to continue with this type of illogical leadership, your decision flies in the face of the majority of the congregations who cared enough to send in their nominations. There is a better leader in Rev. Matthew Harrison. May our gracious Lord bless the LCMS through the faithful leadership of President Harrison beginning this summer!

It's Time

The names of nominees for Synod president (and vice-presidents) who will be on the ballots for election at this summer's Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod convention were announced via LCMS News (No. 33) on 8 April 2010.

The Rev. Matthew C. Harrison, 48, executive director of LCMS World Relief and Human Care, led the way by receiving 1,332 nominations, nearly 600 more than the current president of Synod.

Pastor Harrison has written an excellent paper on the main problem our Synod faces and some common sense solutions that are Christ-centered and Scripture-based.  You will find this paper -- It's Time: LCMS Unity and Mission (The Real Problem We Face and How to Solve It) -- in both print and audio form by clicking here.

I pray the convention delegates will elect this faithful pastor to lead our Synod and unite our practice around our doctrine and confession.