Only one thing surprised Dan Kimball about the Axis reorganization: it took 10 years. Kimball, who teaches and oversees the Sunday gatherings for Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California, has tracked many young adult ministries over the years. He estimates that 90 percent of worship services targeting a younger generation run into serious trouble after three years. One factor is the way these age-specific ministries isolate young people from the rest of the church.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Statement on the Obama Health-Care Plan
From
Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick, President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
The LCMS supports the protection and nurture of human life from conception through death. We would not endorse any component of a plan that includes funding for abortion. Currently, federal money cannot fund abortions (Hyde Amendment, 1976), and there appears to be nothing in the health-care reform plan at this time that would change that. However, some versions do propose a sliding scale of health-care premiums based on income, with government money making up for the lower premiums of poorer people. As pro-life advocates, we would want to prohibit any government money from being used, even indirectly, for insurance that covers abortion.
Read the entire article here.
Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick, President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
The LCMS supports the protection and nurture of human life from conception through death. We would not endorse any component of a plan that includes funding for abortion. Currently, federal money cannot fund abortions (Hyde Amendment, 1976), and there appears to be nothing in the health-care reform plan at this time that would change that. However, some versions do propose a sliding scale of health-care premiums based on income, with government money making up for the lower premiums of poorer people. As pro-life advocates, we would want to prohibit any government money from being used, even indirectly, for insurance that covers abortion.
Read the entire article here.
Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick, President LCMS
Statement of the president of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod in response to certain actions of the 2009 Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
August 24, 2009
Says in part:
Doctrinal decisions adopted already in 2001 led the LCMS, in sincere humility and love, to declare that we could no longer consider the ELCA "to be an orthodox Lutheran church body" (2001 Res 3-21A). Sadly, the decisions of this past week to ignore biblical teaching on human sexuality have reinforced that conclusion. We respect the desire to follow conscience in moral decision making, but conscience may not overrule the Word of God.
We recognize that many brothers and sisters within the ELCA, both clergy and lay, are committed to remaining faithful to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, are committed to the authority of Holy Scripture, and strongly oppose these actions. To them we offer our assurance of loving encouragement together with our willingness to provide appropriate support in their efforts to remain faithful to the Word of God and the historic teachings of the Lutheran church and all other Christian churches for the past 2,000 years.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Address to ELCA Churchwide Assembly
Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick, President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Address to ELCA Churchwide Assembly, August 22, 2009
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Address to ELCA Churchwide Assembly, August 22, 2009
Here is a portion of his address:
I speak these next words in deep humility, with a heavy heart and no desire whatsoever to offend. The decisions by this assembly to grant non-celibate homosexual ministers the privilege of serving as rostered leaders in the ELCA and the affirmation of same gender unions as pleasing to God will undoubtedly cause additional stress and disharmony within the ELCA. It will also negatively affect the relationships between our two church bodies. The current division between our churches threatens to become a chasm. This grieves my heart and the hearts of all in the ELCA, the LCMS, and other Christian church bodies throughout the world who do not see these decisions as compatible with the Word of God, or in agreement with the consensus of 2000 years of Christian theological affirmation regarding what Scripture teaches about human sexuality. Simply stated, this matter is fundamentally related to significant differences in how we understand the authority of Holy Scripture and the interpretation of God’s revealed and infallible Word.
Read the entire address here: Address to ELCA Churchwide Assembly, August 22, 2009
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Silliness
Here's a headline I just read:
The article by Jeanna Bryner begins:
If you think you're generally good at resisting temptation, you're probably wrong, scientists now say.
"People are not good at anticipating the power of their urges, and those who are the most confident about their self-control are the most likely to give into temptation," said Loran Nordgren, senior lecturer of management and organizations at the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, in Illinois.
Read the rest of the article here.
Temptation Harder to Resist Than You Think, Study Suggests
Christians have long known that we do not struggle against flesh and blood. Our constant battle with the temptations of the World, the Devil, and our own sinful self can only be overcome with divine help!The article by Jeanna Bryner begins:
If you think you're generally good at resisting temptation, you're probably wrong, scientists now say.
"People are not good at anticipating the power of their urges, and those who are the most confident about their self-control are the most likely to give into temptation," said Loran Nordgren, senior lecturer of management and organizations at the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, in Illinois.
Read the rest of the article here.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
The Best Stuff
I only put the best stuff here. It turns out that the best stuff comes overwhelmingly from Dr. Scott Murry. Here is part of today's devotion:
There is a great deal of pressure on theologians to reduce that implication or to soft pedal it. A pastor friend of mine recounted calling members of his parish who had been absent for quite some time. At first, they declined to speak of their reasons for being absent. Finally, however, the husband simply said, "Every sermon is about sin and grace, and we are sick of hearing it. So we won't be back." The pastor quietly admitted that every sermon was about sin and grace, "That is unlikely to change." Of course, every sermon is about sin and grace! That is what the Christian religion is "about." There is no greater problem in the world and no better solution.
Read the rest at: Memorial Moment
There is a great deal of pressure on theologians to reduce that implication or to soft pedal it. A pastor friend of mine recounted calling members of his parish who had been absent for quite some time. At first, they declined to speak of their reasons for being absent. Finally, however, the husband simply said, "Every sermon is about sin and grace, and we are sick of hearing it. So we won't be back." The pastor quietly admitted that every sermon was about sin and grace, "That is unlikely to change." Of course, every sermon is about sin and grace! That is what the Christian religion is "about." There is no greater problem in the world and no better solution.
Read the rest at: Memorial Moment
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Lifted Hands?
Should we lift our hands in prayer and praise? It turns out this question is older than I thought. Tertullian (who lived from A. D. 160-220) already considered this question. It seems that in his day as well as ours some Christians were making a big show of lifting their hands over their heads in prayer. Here's what this Church Father has to say:
"But we more commend our prayers to God when we pray with modesty and humility, with not even our hands too loftily elevated, but elevated temperately and becomingly; and not even our countenance over-boldly uplifted. For that publican who prayed with humility and dejection not merely in his supplication, but in his countenance too, went his way 'more justified' than the shameless Pharisee. The sounds of our voice, likewise, should be subdued; else, if we are to be heard for our noise, how large windpipes should we need! But God is the hearer not of the voice, but of the heart, just as He is its inspector."
On Prayer
Chapter XVII. ----Of Elevated Hands.
"But we more commend our prayers to God when we pray with modesty and humility, with not even our hands too loftily elevated, but elevated temperately and becomingly; and not even our countenance over-boldly uplifted. For that publican who prayed with humility and dejection not merely in his supplication, but in his countenance too, went his way 'more justified' than the shameless Pharisee. The sounds of our voice, likewise, should be subdued; else, if we are to be heard for our noise, how large windpipes should we need! But God is the hearer not of the voice, but of the heart, just as He is its inspector."
On Prayer
Chapter XVII. ----Of Elevated Hands.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Earned Gace is Never Grace
Infants are the test case for grace. Infants become believers, and thus part of the church, through the gift of grace bestowed on them by baptism. Grace is the divine act of compassion given to those who are weak and unable to find God by their own efforts or works. What would better describe a newborn infant than that he or she is weak and incapacitated? Yet, exactly such as these are the ones whom the God of all grace has determined to save through the work of His only begotten Son. Sometimes moderns think that adults are the paradigmatic case for grace. This presupposition arises not from an understanding of grace as a gratuitous gift from God, but from the presupposition that humans need to provide God some sign of their inclination toward Him, that they are seeking Him, that they are worthy of grace, or that have opened their hearts to Him. Such views are prevalent in American evangelicalism, and yet have more in common with classic doctrines of prevenient grace as taught by the Roman Catholic Church. Prevenient grace is the grace which disposes the person toward God. Prevenient grace is a contradiction of grace. Earned grace is never grace (Rm 4:4).
This is an excerpt from Dr. Scott Murray's devotion for July 20, 2009. Read the entire devotion here.
This is an excerpt from Dr. Scott Murray's devotion for July 20, 2009. Read the entire devotion here.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
There is but one touchstone of truth in the Church: Holy Scripture.
Dr. Scott Murray has another one of his insightful devotions today. This one is titled " Deceiving and Being Deceived." One of his paragraphs reads:
The Word of God has an independent authority. It is self-authenticating and does what it says. This is why it is incapable of "being deceived" in Augustine's pattern of thought. It must be that way, because, although God's Word can neither lie nor deceive, we ourselves are more than capable of lying and deceiving; our depravity is always sticking out from under the wig of our piety. God must correct our bent views, not merely for the sake of being right, which He always is, but for the sake of our salvation. Without this divine self-revelation we would never have the capacity to conceive of the divinely worked way of salvation in Christ, the atonement for our sins, and indeed for the sins of the world. What no one could conceive, God conceived in His living Word. All men are sinners and therefore are deceivers and the deceived. Only Holy Scripture is true. The truth of Scripture gives to us Him who is True.
Read the entire devotion here: Memorial Moments
The Word of God has an independent authority. It is self-authenticating and does what it says. This is why it is incapable of "being deceived" in Augustine's pattern of thought. It must be that way, because, although God's Word can neither lie nor deceive, we ourselves are more than capable of lying and deceiving; our depravity is always sticking out from under the wig of our piety. God must correct our bent views, not merely for the sake of being right, which He always is, but for the sake of our salvation. Without this divine self-revelation we would never have the capacity to conceive of the divinely worked way of salvation in Christ, the atonement for our sins, and indeed for the sins of the world. What no one could conceive, God conceived in His living Word. All men are sinners and therefore are deceivers and the deceived. Only Holy Scripture is true. The truth of Scripture gives to us Him who is True.
Read the entire devotion here: Memorial Moments
Friday, July 10, 2009
COMPLAINING
Rev. Dr. R. Reed Lessing presented the Bible study at the Michigan District convention in June. He has put together a very interesting study of Philippians. It is available for download at the Michigan District website:
I found the section on complaining to be very helpful:
Philippians 2:12-13
“Therefore, my dear friends, as you have
always obeyed-- not only in my presence,
but now much more in my absence–
continue to work out your (plural) soteria
with fear and trembling, for it is God who
works in you to will and to act according
to his good purpose.”
Philippians 2:14-15
“Do everything without goggusmon or
arguing, so that you may become
blameless and pure, children of God
without fault in a crooked and depraved
generation, in which you shine like stars
in the universe.”
Which One are You?
Focus:
Philippians 2:16-18
“… as you hold out the word of life-- in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing. But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and have chara with all of you. So you too should have chara and chara with me.”
All Thy works with joy surround Thee, Earth and heav’n reflect Thy rays.
Stars and angels sing around Thee, Center of unbroken praise.
Field and forest, vale and mountain, Flow’ry meadow, flashing sea.
Chanting bird, and flowing fountain, Call us to rejoice in Thee!
I found the section on complaining to be very helpful:
Philippians 2:12-13
“Therefore, my dear friends, as you have
always obeyed-- not only in my presence,
but now much more in my absence–
continue to work out your (plural) soteria
with fear and trembling, for it is God who
works in you to will and to act according
to his good purpose.”
Philippians 2:14-15
“Do everything without goggusmon or
arguing, so that you may become
blameless and pure, children of God
without fault in a crooked and depraved
generation, in which you shine like stars
in the universe.”
THE FOUR COMMON TYPES OF COMPLAINERS
- The Whiner - “It’s Not Fair!”
- The Martyr - “No One Appreciates Me!”
- The Cynic - “Nothing Will Ever Change!”
- The Perfectionist - “Is That Your Best?”
Which One are You?
- The Whiner
- The Martyr
- The Cynic
- The Perfectionist
- All of the Above
- None of the Above
HOW TO CONQUER COMPLAINING
Focus:
- Not On Where We’ve Been
- Not On Where We Are
- On Where We’re Going
Philippians 2:16-18
“… as you hold out the word of life-- in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing. But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and have chara with all of you. So you too should have chara and chara with me.”
All Thy works with joy surround Thee, Earth and heav’n reflect Thy rays.
Stars and angels sing around Thee, Center of unbroken praise.
Field and forest, vale and mountain, Flow’ry meadow, flashing sea.
Chanting bird, and flowing fountain, Call us to rejoice in Thee!
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Infant Limbo
Today's devotion by Dr. Scott Murray is a must read:
Infant Limbo
The subject of infant baptism generates a great deal of heat and very little light when discussed among American Christians today. American Christians, under the influence of the baptistic tradition, are unique among Christians in denying not only baptism to infants, but also faith and regeneration. Of course, this has more to do with the imposition of dogmatic theories about the concurrence of the will in faith and the possibility of belief in Christ among infants. These theories arise from the American presupposition that action is superior to repose; in other words, our firmly held doctrine that faith that does not demonstrate action is not faith at all. To rest comfortably in the arms of Christ is inferior to demonstrating the power of faith through personal confession or action. However, Christianity is not about purely external demonstrations of power. Christian faith is often hidden under contrary signs: life under the signs of death (1Co 15:36), heaven under the signs of hell, the righteousness of God under the signs of human guilt (Ps 32). In the Man dying there is the greatest power unto life for the world. In the midst of great suffering there is the gift of heaven. Where sin is admitted and accepted there God declares all guilt taken away and all transgression covered. Christianity at bottom is about receiving something, not doing anything. Doing is God's. Receiving is ours. This describes infant faith given and confirmed in the sacrament of holy baptism.
The Bible is shockingly clear that only those who have faith in Christ go to heaven. This point baffles those who presume that faith is our action or is only real when it can be demonstrated by action. Because if infants can't demonstrate their faith, therefore they can't believe; and only those who believe are saved, then what happens to infants? They are left in an un-biblical Limbo created on the basis of a faulty dogma about what faith is and who is working in baptism. Sometimes it is argued that the innocent infant who has not yet reached the ability (as though it is a human ability, rather than a divine gift!) to believe are guiltless in the presence of God. But this runs smack up against the divine Word's condition that only those who believe will be saved. Even if they are "innocent and without guilt" the Bible never attributes salvation to anything but faith in Christ.
Even apart from all this, how would such innocence and guiltlessness be demonstrated by the infant? If only a demonstrated or proven faith is accepted as legitimate, why would we merely be able to presume that infants are innocent? What basis would we have for this? What actual action proves the innocence of infants? As I have pointed out previously, this is an opinion that could only be held by people who have never cared for an infant. If we depended on what God actually says about all persons; that is, that they are sinners, guilty before God, and dead in their trespasses and sins apart from Christ and faith in Him, we could conclude the infants have faith (as Scripture specifically declares), because infants are saved. So you can't see or hear about their faith from them? Uh-huh. Well, maybe you should listen to the divine witness instead of believing your own dogmas. How gracious the good Shepherd is, that He takes up in his arms the little ones and blesses them with the new life in Him and the faith to trust Him.
Read the entire devotion here also you may subscribe to these excellent daily devotions.
Infant Limbo
The subject of infant baptism generates a great deal of heat and very little light when discussed among American Christians today. American Christians, under the influence of the baptistic tradition, are unique among Christians in denying not only baptism to infants, but also faith and regeneration. Of course, this has more to do with the imposition of dogmatic theories about the concurrence of the will in faith and the possibility of belief in Christ among infants. These theories arise from the American presupposition that action is superior to repose; in other words, our firmly held doctrine that faith that does not demonstrate action is not faith at all. To rest comfortably in the arms of Christ is inferior to demonstrating the power of faith through personal confession or action. However, Christianity is not about purely external demonstrations of power. Christian faith is often hidden under contrary signs: life under the signs of death (1Co 15:36), heaven under the signs of hell, the righteousness of God under the signs of human guilt (Ps 32). In the Man dying there is the greatest power unto life for the world. In the midst of great suffering there is the gift of heaven. Where sin is admitted and accepted there God declares all guilt taken away and all transgression covered. Christianity at bottom is about receiving something, not doing anything. Doing is God's. Receiving is ours. This describes infant faith given and confirmed in the sacrament of holy baptism.
The Bible is shockingly clear that only those who have faith in Christ go to heaven. This point baffles those who presume that faith is our action or is only real when it can be demonstrated by action. Because if infants can't demonstrate their faith, therefore they can't believe; and only those who believe are saved, then what happens to infants? They are left in an un-biblical Limbo created on the basis of a faulty dogma about what faith is and who is working in baptism. Sometimes it is argued that the innocent infant who has not yet reached the ability (as though it is a human ability, rather than a divine gift!) to believe are guiltless in the presence of God. But this runs smack up against the divine Word's condition that only those who believe will be saved. Even if they are "innocent and without guilt" the Bible never attributes salvation to anything but faith in Christ.
Even apart from all this, how would such innocence and guiltlessness be demonstrated by the infant? If only a demonstrated or proven faith is accepted as legitimate, why would we merely be able to presume that infants are innocent? What basis would we have for this? What actual action proves the innocence of infants? As I have pointed out previously, this is an opinion that could only be held by people who have never cared for an infant. If we depended on what God actually says about all persons; that is, that they are sinners, guilty before God, and dead in their trespasses and sins apart from Christ and faith in Him, we could conclude the infants have faith (as Scripture specifically declares), because infants are saved. So you can't see or hear about their faith from them? Uh-huh. Well, maybe you should listen to the divine witness instead of believing your own dogmas. How gracious the good Shepherd is, that He takes up in his arms the little ones and blesses them with the new life in Him and the faith to trust Him.
Read the entire devotion here also you may subscribe to these excellent daily devotions.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Jesus' Ignorance
If you haven't yet subscribed to Dr. Scott Murray's Memorial Moments (daily devotions) you are missing one of the most well written, thoughtful and inspiring devotions available. Today's devotion discusses Jesus' Ignorance and deals with a question that is repeatedly asked in Bible classes. Here is a portion of his comments:
Jesus' "ignorance" can be properly understood in several different ways. First, according to His human nature, Jesus, like us, would have had no knowledge of the hidden mysteries of that day and hour. Jesus did not fully use his divine power of omniscience keeping it in decorous and humble control in service to His mission to save us poor sinners. He did not lust to look into those things closed to us humans, even though He had access by right of His full divinity to know what we must not. His omniscience was quiescent, kept within the bounds set by our need. So it is that His indestructible life is offered unto death. He does not put into action His immortality upon the cross but truly dies in the mystery of the cross. So Jesus out of love for us does not know what He knows.
Second, the Father has intentionally hidden this from us, not only to keep us ignorant like a blind man is ignorant of the color of the sunset, but also that we should not concern ourselves about this time or fret unnecessarily about this last epiphany of our Lord when He comes in fearsome judgment. We are to be prepared every day through watchful faith. We are not to dabble in empty speculation about the precise date of "that day." So Jesus, not only refuses to look into this knowledge in His earthly ministry, but upon His resurrection declines to inform the disciples about His knowledge as He in His resurrected glory is now exercising His divine power and authority. The disciples, upon His resurrection see greater glimpses of His refulgent glory now shining forth which leads them now to ask about the days and seasons. It is then that He refuses to tell them what they need not know. He however, does not now indicate that He is unaware of the Father's plan, for He knows it full well, but just declines to tell them. And that should be enough for us.
Read the rest here: MemorialMoments.org
While you are at the site, why not subscribe?
Jesus' "ignorance" can be properly understood in several different ways. First, according to His human nature, Jesus, like us, would have had no knowledge of the hidden mysteries of that day and hour. Jesus did not fully use his divine power of omniscience keeping it in decorous and humble control in service to His mission to save us poor sinners. He did not lust to look into those things closed to us humans, even though He had access by right of His full divinity to know what we must not. His omniscience was quiescent, kept within the bounds set by our need. So it is that His indestructible life is offered unto death. He does not put into action His immortality upon the cross but truly dies in the mystery of the cross. So Jesus out of love for us does not know what He knows.
Second, the Father has intentionally hidden this from us, not only to keep us ignorant like a blind man is ignorant of the color of the sunset, but also that we should not concern ourselves about this time or fret unnecessarily about this last epiphany of our Lord when He comes in fearsome judgment. We are to be prepared every day through watchful faith. We are not to dabble in empty speculation about the precise date of "that day." So Jesus, not only refuses to look into this knowledge in His earthly ministry, but upon His resurrection declines to inform the disciples about His knowledge as He in His resurrected glory is now exercising His divine power and authority. The disciples, upon His resurrection see greater glimpses of His refulgent glory now shining forth which leads them now to ask about the days and seasons. It is then that He refuses to tell them what they need not know. He however, does not now indicate that He is unaware of the Father's plan, for He knows it full well, but just declines to tell them. And that should be enough for us.
Read the rest here: MemorialMoments.org
While you are at the site, why not subscribe?
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Making Torture safe, Legal and Rare
I hesitate to post this but it's too good not to pass on!
Making Torture safe, Legal and Rare
http://www.osvdailytake.com/2009/05/making-torture-safe-legal-and-rare.html
Making Torture safe, Legal and Rare
http://www.osvdailytake.com/2009/05/making-torture-safe-legal-and-rare.html
Friday, April 17, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Susan Boyle
Of course you've seen Susan Boyle on Britain's Got Talent, but if you haven't
click here. It will make your day!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY
click here. It will make your day!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY
Saturday, April 04, 2009
So why, then, do English-speaking Christians call their holiday "Easter"?
So why, then, do English-speaking Christians call their holiday "Easter"?
One theory for the origin of the name is that the Latin phrase in albis ("in white"), which Christians used in reference to Easter week, found its way into Old High German as eostarum, or "dawn." There is some evidence of early Germanic borrowing of Latin despite that fact that the Germanic peoples lived outside the Roman Empire—though the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes were far very removed from it. This theory presumes that the word only became current after the introduction of either Roman influence or the Christian faith, which is uncertain. But if accurate, it would demonstrate that the festival is not named after a pagan goddess.
Alternatively, as Hutton suggests, Eosturmonath simply meant "the month of opening," which is comparable to the meaning of "April" in Latin. The names of both the Saxon and Latin months (which are calendrically similar) were related to spring, the season when the buds open.
So Christians in ancient Anglo-Saxon and Germanic areas called their Passover holiday what they did—doubtless colloquially at first—simply because it occurred around the time of Eosturmonath/Ostarmanoth. A contemporary analogy can be found in the way Americans sometimes refer to the December period as "the holidays" in connection with Christmas and Hanukkah, or the way people sometimes speak about something happening "around Christmas," usually referring to the time at the turn of the year. The Christian title "Easter," then, essentially reflects its general date in the calendar, rather than the Paschal festival having been re-named in honor of a supposed pagan deity.
Of course, the Christian commemoration of the Paschal festival rests not on the title of the celebration but on its content—namely, the remembrance of Christ's death and resurrection. It is Christ's conquest of sin, death, and Satan that gives us the right to wish everyone "Happy Easter!"
From an article titled:
The historical evidence contradicts this popular notion.
by Anthony McRoy
at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/bytopic/holidays/easterborrowedholiday.html
by Anthony McRoy
at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/bytopic/holidays/easterborrowedholiday.html
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Mark Steiner in Madagascar
The current REPORTER Online of the LCMS has an article titled, "Sem students see Lutheran mercy in Madagascar." You can see a picture of our former vicar, Mark Steiner and read about his trip to Madagascar. Click here http://www.lcms.org/pages/rpage.asp?NavID=14961
Friday, March 27, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Charles Colson analysis of Evangelicalism
Many Christians confuse emotionalism with faith and personal feelings with spirituality. Charles Colson has written an insightful critique of Evangelicalism in which he states, "The greatest challenge for serious Christians today is not re-inventing Christianity, but rediscovering its core teachings." You can read the entire article here:
Evangelicals need to brush up on basic Christian teachings.
Charles Colson with Anne Morse | posted 3/24/2009 10:16AM
Charles Colson with Anne Morse | posted 3/24/2009 10:16AM
Monday, February 23, 2009
Response to ELCA Report
MEMORANDUM
To: The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod
From: Gerald B. Kieschnick, President
Subject: Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Document
"Report and Recommendations on Ministry Policies"
Date: February 22, 2009
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
Grace and peace be with you, from God our Father and from our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ!
It is with great disappointment and deep sadness that I share with The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod these brief comments on the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's Task Force on Sexuality document "Gift and Trust" and the "Report and Recommendations on Ministry Policies." The "Report and Recommendations" document recommends that the ELCA undertake a process that would result in the incorporation of "structured flexibility in decision making to allow, in appropriate situations, people in publicly accountable, monogamous, lifelong, same-gendered relationships to be approved for the rosters of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America." The two documents were released February 19 by an ELCA task force and are expected to be considered by the ELCA Churchwide Assembly in August.
If this recommendation should be adopted by the Churchwide Assembly, it would constitute a change in the ELCA's present position, which precludes "practicing homosexuals" from being included on its rosters. More importantly, it would constitute a radical departure from the 2,000-year-long teaching of the Christian tradition that homosexual activity, whether inside or outside of a committed relationship, is contrary to Holy Scripture.
As the ELCA Task Force Report itself states, "This church [the ELCA] does not have biblical and theological consensus on this matter." It therefore concludes that the ELCA "must seek a common way to live and serve in the midst of disagreements" such as "the understanding of the nature of sin," "the interpretation of the Bible," "how the Bible guides our lives," and "the level of disagreement the ELCA can bear."
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod has repeatedly affirmed the biblical truth and historical understanding of the Christian church that the Bible condemns homosexual behavior as "intrinsically sinful" and is therefore contrary to the will of the Creator and constitutes sin against the commandments of God (Lev. 18:22, 24,20:13; 1 Cor. 6:9-20; 1 Tim 1:9-10; and Rom. 1:26, 27).
Our prayer in the LCMS is that our gracious God will penetrate the lives and hearts of the leaders and members of the ELCA in the coming months as they discuss, debate, and determine the outcome of the task force report and its recommendations.
In the meantime, it behooves us in the LCMS, in a spirit of sincere humility, love, care, and concern, to continue to endeavor faithfully to honor Resolution 3-21A of the 2001 Convention of our Synod that while "we cannot consider [the ELCA] to be an orthodox Lutheran church body . we of the LCMS recognize that many of our brothers and sisters of the ELCA remain faithful to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ and we resolve to reach out to them in love and support ."
God's grace, mercy, and peace be with us all.
Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick, President
The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod
"Transforming lives through Christ's love ... in time ... for eternity ..." John 3:16-17
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)