In a statement dated
The members of NICL had been repeatedly requesting a meeting with President Kieschnick for almost five years before one was finally arranged by the new district president Rev. Dan Gilbert. In the meeting President Kieschnick offered his apology for his offensive statement and also apologized for taking almost five years to agree to a meeting. Part of the joint statement offered from the meeting says:
"Upon this realization, along with hearing the assurances of the NICL pastors that their document was meant only for discussion and not for an expression of and requirement for fellowship, President Kieschnick expressed his regret that he did not meet or talk personally with the authors of the document prior to his May 30, 2003 memo. He also noted that doing so could possibly have spared everyone a lot of grief. Then he said simply, "I apologize for that." Immediately one of the NICL pastors replied, "We appreciate that, and we forgive you," and the other NICL pastors expressed their agreement with this statement of forgiveness."
The joint statement goes on to assert two points of agreement:
1. Specifically, in light of the explanation articulated in this joint statement, President Kieschnick communicates to the Synod his understanding that the act of signing TTMBO did not in and of itself render a signer "divisive and schismatic," and regrets the misunderstanding that resulted from his memo of
2. Also in light of the explanation articulated in this joint report, NICL reiterates to the Synod its understanding that members of the Synod need not sign TTMBO in order to continue to be in fellowship with those who did, and regrets the confusion resulting from the wording in the document that some interpreted to mean otherwise.
We rejoice in the fact that President Kieschnick has retracted and apologized for his earlier condemnations of the signers of TTMBO and that he has been offered and received forgiveness for his statement. We also agree with him that had he spoke to authors in the first place that it “could possibly have spared everyone a lot of grief.”
This past summer Rev. James Rogers, a leader in “Jesus First” sent out a letter to all the convention delegates listing the names of 19 individuals who were running for office that had signed TTMBO and repeating the false ‘divisive and schismatic” charge against them. He used this as the basis of encouraging delegates not to vote for the signers. We hope Rev. Rogers will follow the lead of President Kieschnick and publicly repent of his actions against these fine people that were libeled by his actions.
Finally, all we can do is say “Amen” to the joint statement’s closing paragraph:
"We the undersigned give thanks to God for the true unity of the Church, which comes from Him alone through the Word and not from our own efforts. We also encourage all within this Synod we love to continue to discuss with each other, fraternally and collegially, on the basis of Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, matters of doctrine and practice and not to do so only in printed documents but also in face to face discussions.
Psalm 133:1 says, "Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity!" To God alone be the glory!"
9 comments:
As one of the original signers of TTMBO in abstentia who has been libelled by my Synodical leaders, I am truly heartened by The LC-MS President's recent show of humility in actually conceding to meet and apologizing for his false accusations. Does this now mean that my own District President is no longer under orders to punitively punish me as well? I hope so.
For some these actions have come too late. Many good congregations, ministers & lay people have already left our Synod because of the perpetual oppressive behavior of our leaders concerning the faith of our heritage and their permissive (non-loving) attitudes toward those who truly and repeatedly do err.
Perhaps this may be the mark of a renewed day in our Synod where we can begin once again to discuss, contend and even heatedly argue for the one true Faith without immediately wanting "to personally hurt" those who are not on "one's" particular side. We will all be better Christians if we can work toward this goal.
Thank you President Kieschnick for your apology and act of Christian leadership on June 6 in the year of our LORD 2008! That's how our Synod's Grandfather's responded in Christ when they realized they had done wrong. Maybe it can be our Grandfather's Synod once again - at least in the most crucial of ways.
President Kieschnick has yet to grapple with the actual theology of That They May Be One.
It is interesting that when these sorts of things come up that the usual instinct is to run to the CTCR or CCM. It certainly gives one the impression that our praesidium needs someone to do their theology for them. On what basis are these men elected to their positions? Imagine if parish pastors did the same thing every time something came up.
President Kieschnick's apology for his hasty remarks is ideed welcomed and accepted. But it is time for him to retire and I pray that he does not allow his name to stand for synodical president next time around.
Is our synod better off now than 3 triennium ago? Financially, theologically, in practice, liturgically, in terms of missions?
I'll save my celebrating for the day when apologies are made for the division caused by that which precipitated TTMBO in the first place; namely, the approving and defending of official LCMS involvement in the stadium's syncretistic service. An unfortunate misrepresentation of the nature of TTMBO has been admitted. Glad about it? Who's going to argue with the angels of heaven rejoicing over confessing sinners? But, sadly, the offending ISSUE addressed by TTMBO remains unresolved and any further discussion of it is deemed by all too many to be divisive. Not much to be celebrating in that.
Too true.
While I am not granting this point, even if it were true that Pres. Benke's act was "technically" tolerable, he still acted in a manner that was divisive and schismatic and this was officially approved by President Kieschnick.
Furthermore the refusal to consider many resolutions submitted by districts for the last synodical convention was divisive and schismatic. The tolerance or even promotion of self-devised worship forms from non-Lutheran sources is also devisive and schismatic. The allowance of his wife to preach during his sermon at a National Youth Gathering was divisive and schismatic. The allowance of Wallace Schulz, Todd Wilken, and Jeff Schwarz to be fired unjustly or not renewed is divisive. The inexplicable refusal to let Paul McCain's name stand for president/CEO of CPH was divisive.
The continuing influence of PLI is divisive and schismatic. The allowance of 3-08a is divisive and schismatic. 8-01a is divisive and schismatic. So much for the cheerleaders at Geez, Us First declaring, "Let the healing begin." We've had nothing but 3 terms of division, tolerance of un-Lutheran theology, schism, and the like.
Why won't President Kieschnick start taking questions from the floor (live) at conferences? What parish pastor could get away with that? And how often do we hear that they are legal officers of synod (but do they forget their ordained office - since when does the human authority trump the divine?).
The authority exercised in the capacity of these synodical offices is de jure humano. Within their office, parish pastors have authority de jure divino.
Let us not become complacent or weary.
Sounds like you folks are just too deep into it all and are worried about too mny things. Put some of this energy and time in reaching out through your congregation's walls with the Gospel... instead of thinking so much on these things. ~keepin' it simple
Luther put it so simply, Simply Put: "A teacher who is silent against error and still professes to be a true teacher, is worse than an open fanatic, doing more harm."
Nice... I certainly don't argue that. But Luther would have probably gotten together over a beer and discussed it... :) Too bad we can’t do that here... eh?
But seriously, again, it's just the time and resources that have gone into all of this. All I'm saying is that if those very resources and time had been focused by people reaching out through the walls of their local congregation, it would be time better spent. And you just can't argue that (but I bet you will).
I do have my own opinions on the event in NYC but really, now 7 years later do we really need to keep all this going? At what point will it stop? What is the satisfied endgame so to speak? We certainly have God's people with differing opinions on this (who will not change) so why can't we agree to disagree? Yes, even in the church. We'll not know the "real" right answer to all of this till we're in His awesome presence. And then I honestly wont be caring about all this stuff. I'll be too busy praising Him! But for now, my focus is on trying to get others there rather than focusing strongly with those I disagree with.
So according to Luther's quote and I apply that to myself, and if I choose not to argue this whole point (or be silent on this now overly debated topic) than consider me more an “open fanatic”… for spreading the Gospel. I'm satisfied and happy with that. This is where I choose to put my focus. When we get to heaven, there won't be a tally of debates I won, but I can't wait to see the folks that God brought into His fold by working His Spirit through me (and you too!).
I have no Luther quote but I keep thinking of God's words (my favorite source to quote) in 2 Timothy... "Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen... Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. Their teaching will spread like gangrene... Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth...
Sure I know you can read different things into that scripture and I used just portions to prove my point, but to me this applies here so much.
God's blessings to you all as you talk, debate, disagree and hopefully even more... share the Gospel with those who need it... Take care my brothers and sisters in Christ.
Simply Put: Simply pitting doctrine against mission/evangelism --which you have done-- is not the Lutheran way or the Gospel way.
The apostle you quote as referring to "godless chatter" is the same apostle who spent a good deal of time confronting another apostle about the confusion his doctrinal error and its practice were creating in the church. The same apostle who said, shortly after the words you quoted, " I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus.... preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine... and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry."
Doctrine and evangelism...side by side. Not one or the other, but both simultaneously.
We're capable of multi-tasking and the minimization of genuine, love-motivated concern about the unresolved doctrinal issues of the church is, simply put, patronizing, as is the notion that those of us who are concerned about them are 'engaged in stupid arguments.'
Walther put it this way: "Many say, 'Instead of disputing over doctrine so much, we should much rather be concerned with souls and with leading them to Christ.' But all who speak in this way do not really know what they are saying or what they are doing. As foolish as it would be to scold a farmer for being concerned about sowing good seed and to demand of him simply to be concerned about a good harvest, so foolish it is to scold those who are concerned first and foremost with the doctrine, and to demand of them that they should rather seek to rescue souls. For just as the farmer who wants a good crop must first of all be concerned about good seed, so the church must above all be concerned about right doctrine if it would save souls."
Believe me, I share your concern for reaching out beyond church walls. I sincerely hope you share mine for doing it without compromising Christ as was done at the New York stadium. Regretfully, that compromise has never been resolved, so, simply put, it can't be simply forgotten.
Pitting no, balancing, yes. However, respectfully, I can understand why you would see it that way from your point of view and your line of thinking. Doctrine and evangelism do need to go hand in hand… with proper balance. You cannot truly evangelize without proper doctrine. That is fundamental. It is possible to not have a good balance between the two. However, proper balance is my whole point which you have not seemed to pick up on. I have asked you a simple question as to what you see the end being for this situation and you have chosen not to answer it. Or… perhaps don’t want to… or perhaps can not... or don’t know how. What ever the reason, my perception in this conversation is that your priority is to defend and debate what you are doing, not discuss the end when having been asked. This above all shows me that your priority is to defend, and not work toward an end. This is what the outside world views of this situation. You no doubt will take this to your grave as you see no resolve.
I do thank you for the work you have done in making sure there is proper doctrine… and as well as all the giants of faith. This is of great importance and I see that. It is also not my area of expertise which is why I rely on folks like you and Pastors to keep sound doctrine. And perhaps I do not know you personally or what you do in reaching outside of your church walls. All I know is what this looks like from an outside perspective… which is very unbalanced between doctrine and evangelism as well as very dividing. The perception is that lost souls have not been the focus. That is only perception, not necessarily reality. However to people in general, perception is reality.
My laymen’s perspective of what happened in NY was the Triune God was there, was acknowledged and was asked for help. He was also given a great testimony by that prayer. I’m told that where two or three are gathered, He is there too. I’m guessing there were more than one God fearing and believing person there (and viewing). And the fact that there were other gods called upon and prayed to, has no relevance to me. In fact, that even makes it better! I’m reminded of other situations where our God was called on in the midst of other false gods. Like Elijah and the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18. I absolutely love that situation. It really gave God the opportunity to show His power and might. Would it not be a shame to not have our God represented and called upon in a time of national tragedy? What an opportunity it was! I must be missing something. What if Elijah decided not to call on God in that time of need? That is how I connect the dots for the situation in NYC. I do not have the education, “Lutheran” quotes or experience you do… as a matter of fact neither does most of the rest of humanity. That’s what I liked about Jesus… he was a commoner (a very special one albeit). I bet if Jesus was there that day in NY, He would have gotten up and prayed to His Father.
In closing, I take my example from Jesus. How do you see the balance of His ministry? I know He debated with the Pharisees and religious leaders, and through His words explained and taught with the very questions they pursued Him with. However, He never sought them out to debate them. And He knew they were missing the whole point… it was not about law but about relationship. And when He sent his disciples out to “fulfill” their ministry with yes… proper doctrine, He instructed them to brush the dust off their feet if not welcomed or listened to. That tells me there IS balance. To move on… to search out new possibilities for ministry… to save more souls. And so that is what I will do here… shake the dust and move on. And I don’t mean or say that negatively. Again, God’s blessings to you as you pursue what you feel God calling you to do and I will continue to pray for God‘s will to be done and souls to be saved. ~Having faith like a child, the feed dusted and keeping it simple…
Post a Comment