• What are the contradictions that a pastor faces every day?
• What are the contradictions his people face every day?  How are they the same or different?
• What does it mean to “Shepherd Through” them?

Those are just a few of my initial questions.  What are yours?

Districts are cutting campus ministries left and right.  Frankly, districts are cutting ministries left and right.  Certainly this is because of financial deficits, and I am acutely aware of how important and how difficult such decisions are.

I can remember vividly the smell of my grandmother Ardis Peperkorn’s basement in Julesburg, Colorado.  It was musty and strange.  As I dug around the farthest corners, I found toys left from the 40s, tools I had never seen before, treasures under every box.  Yes, I was snoopy.  But that place spelled HOME and FAMILY for me in a way which nothing else could ever do.  I’m all in favor of vacations to far away places, but in terms of developing long term memory and connection, there is simply nothing quite like the 80 year old home.  It is irreplaceable.

The Church is rooted in the Incarnation.  God comes in real time and space for us men and for our salvation, to quote the Creed.  There is an ordinariness and sacredness  to churches that transcends square feet, bricks and mortar.  For the high school graduate who is away from home for the first time in a strange place, it is hard to overestimate the importance of having a physical place to go to in order to receive God’s gifts.  For the five year old, it becomes a new home with a bigger family.  That list can go on and on.

Abandoning buildings in the middle of huge campuses across the country in favor of endowment funds for the latest missional fad is absurd.  It’s as absurd as abandoning seminary education on campuses to deployed distance learning and “mentoring” programs with little or no theological grounding.  We would never consider doing that.

Wait.

Just.

One.

Minute….

So let’s get to the point.  I am going to make a couple presumptions here from my reading of the ACELC, its documents and stated goals.  If I have misunderstood or misrepresented those goals, I will gladly receive correction.

As I read the stated intents of the ACELC, it is to fraternally point out and exhort the LCMS and its leadership to A) recognize the errors in doctrine and practice in our midst and B) to correct these errors.

The presumption that the ACELC then makes is that the divisions in theology and practice may be addressed using our current structure.  The problem as they have structured it is A) ignorance of what the errors are, hence the evidence of errors and the teaching materials; B) Disagreement over what actually are errors (hence the ACELC fraternal admonition and other supporting documents); or C) We don’t have elected officials who will follow through with questions of discipline over either pastors/church workers or congregations.

The way that Lutherans in the twentieth century sought reform (at least in the Missouri Synod) is two-fold.  The first is more or less what the ACELC seeks to do.  That is, draw a line in the sand, demonstrate the errors, condemn false doctrine, and set oneself up more or less against the institutional status quo.  We can see this in The Confessional Lutheran, the formation of the Orthodox Lutheran Conference (and similar groups after it), in Christian News, in Affirm, Consensus, and many other groups big or small.

The second way basically has been to seek to elect godly and faithful men (and women) to various offices in the church, the goal being that if the right people are elected, then the right things will start to happen.  We saw this leading up to the election of JAO Preus II, the election of A.L. Barry, and most recently with the election of Matthew Harrison.  It has also happened on a much smaller scale at the district or even the circuit level.

Certainly to a certain degree I recognize and agree with both of these approaches.  We should recognize the wea

knesses and errors in our midst, repent of them, receive absolution and move forward as a church body.  We should also seek to elect godly and faithful people to work.  I have no qualms whatsoever with anyone in the LCMS who wants to agitate to elect this or that candidate.  This is our structure, and if that doesn’t happen, then we are simply agreeing with the status quo.

But this is the heart of the problem.  Our structure and system is broken.  Maybe it never really worked in the first place.

This is why.

As long as we elect district president, synodical president, and various other positions of leadership in the church, and most importantly, reelect them on a regular cycle, it is impossible for our church body to exercise church discipline of any sort.

The reason is very simple.  A district president (or synodical president) is always 3 years away from another election.  He is elected and reelected by the very people whom he has been called to exercise discipline over.  That is what we might call “biting the hand that feeds you.”  This approach can’t work, for the very same reason that Walther and others have rejected temporary calls.  If I as a pastor have to constantly worry about whether my pastoral care and discipline of my sheep is going to be up for review/renewal, and that my ability to remain as the pastor is dependent upon my sheep either liking me or even agreeing with me, then my ability to serve them is compromised.  I don’t see how I can reject the temporary call of pastors and at the same time assent to the temporary call (election, whatever term you want to use) of district presidents that are then expected to exercise pastoral discipline.

If we as a church body want to act like a church and receive discipline, then we must have pastors who are able to exercise that discipline.  Yes, I am talking about bishops.  But if we as a church are unwilling to accept that authority, then I don’t see how we can accept our “leaders” to exercise that authority.

I am not trying to be a hyper-Euro-Lutheran, or suggest that the way of bishops is without its dangers.  I fully recognize that as long as we are dealing with fallible men as pastors/bishops, abuse will happen.  But the way we are currently structured in my opinion makes it pretty much impossible for any kind of discipline to actually happen at either the pastoral, congregational, or district level.

I am happy to be convinced otherwise here.  Please do so.  But after looking at our own history for some time, I don’t see any other conclusion.

In Christ,

Pastor Todd A. Peperkorn

Messiah Lutheran Church (LCMS)

Kenosha, Wisconsin

It seems as though there are a couple of basic objections to this line of thinking.  Let’s see if I can list them off here.

• This is not an “outside group,” but members of the LCMS calling it to repentance.
• There are plenty of “outside groups” that have a very positive influence on the LCMS.  Higher Things, LLL, LWML, etc.
• How will we discuss and correct the problems in our church without such entities?  Doing nothing is not an option.
• The synod is not a church, but simply an external organization.  As such, it is good and reasonable that congregations join together to serve as a positive influence on the LCMS as a whole.

I’m sure there are other objections to my first post.  That is my distilling of the arguments as I’ve seen them.  Here are my responses:

This is not an “outside group,” but members of the LCMS calling it to repentance.

In one sense this is true, in another obvious sense it is not.  The ACELC (as well as Higher Things, LLL, etc.) are by definition an outside organizations.  They are incorporated, with officers, a constitution, finances, and so forth.  While the individual members of a given organization may be LCMS, the organization itself is not.  I as an individual member of synod (rostered) may interact, cajole, influence, and speak.  So can congregations.  I would contend, however, that when a group of pastors and/or congregations start speaking together ad hoc, and outside of our agreed upon structure, it creates a conflict that I do not believe is helpful.

Please note, I’m not saying it’s wrong, sinful, or anything to that effect.  I am saying it is not helpful.  I don’t believe that it will help the confession of the faith in the LCMS.

The reason I do not believe it is helpful is because once that ad hoc entity is created and begins to espouse a particular position, the underlying question is now “what is the point of this group?” and NOT “what are they trying to say?”  That is one of the many things I learned during my time working with Consensus.

There are plenty of “outside groups” that have a very positive influence on the LCMS.  Higher Things, LLL, LWML, etc.

Very true.  The way that these various entities have served as a positive influence has been by what I would call vocation.  Higher Things works with youth to teach and pass on the faith.  LLL (primarily) works and teaches men.  LCMS works and teaches women.  Bethesda, all of the various Lutheran schools, the groups that are the most helpful are the ones that have a laser tight focus on how they may serve the furtherance of the Gospel in our midst.

None of them have as their stated purpose to change the doctrine and practice of the LCMS (either in a good way or a bad way).  They simply do what they do, and the results speak for themselves.

I would commend that the places where confessional Lutheranism has been the most vibrant are the places where there is a need and it is filled by like minded people who recognize the need and act upon it.

I suppose one could look at a group like the ACELC and say that is exactly what they are doing.  As I look at the stated goals, that’s not what I see.  (I will address where this conversation should take place in my next post.)

How will we discuss and correct the problems in our church without such entities?  Doing nothing is not an option.

I believe conservatives are people of conviction.  People of conviction want to speak what they believe, see things in pretty clear black and white categories, and want to have all of the lines cleanly drawn.  I resonate with that.  It is who I am as well.

But publicizing a list of all of the “tolerated errors” in the LCMS, what that does and will do is create fissures, cracks, broken relationships, side taking, antagonism, and anger.  The laity will remain ignorant of the whole picture, or they will only be catechized about one “side” of an issue.  Where does it end?  Is this really the best we can do in the LCMS?

The synod is not a church, but simply an external organization.  As such, it is good and reasonable that congregations join together to serve as a positive influence on the LCMS as a whole.

This is a big one.  It is big enough that it shapes much of our common discourse together.  I’m going to deal with this in another post, because I don’t want this to get lost in a bullet.

So what is coming next is an answer to this last bullet, and a proposal for a more positive and helpful way to approach the challenges facing the LCMS.  I welcome your thoughts.

Pr. Todd A. Peperkorn, STM

Messiah Lutheran Church (LCMS)

Kenosha, Wisconsin

I do not believe that groups like the ACELC are helpful to the cause of faithful Lutheranism in our midst.

While this is not an exhaustive examination, it is a start of my thoughts on the process.  I would welcome your thoughts and insights along the way.

The Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations (ACELC) was formed this past summer for the following purpose:

The ACELC is forming as an association of congregations within the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod.  It is our purpose to seek a return to faithful doctrine and practice within our church body by identifying and documenting the errors of the LCMS which are being promoted or tolerated among us.  Then, with united voice, to lovingly and firmly call our Synod to repentance.  It is toward that end that we have formulated a clearly stated ACELC theological position respecting the issues of contention within the LCMS, and have drawn together documentation of those errors.  We pray that God will bless our efforts to retain our Lutheran doctrine, practice and heritage within the LCMS.

The way the ACELC intends to accomplish this purpose is by being an association of congregations, by documenting the errors in our church body, and by then seeking unity around the ACELC theological position as articulated in its Fraternal Admonition, its proposed constitution, and its definition of confessional Lutheranism.  You may find all of them HERE.

One of the things that conservatives do well (or at least do a lot of) is make statements.  Even a cursory peek at the history of the LCMS would indicate a few things: 1. We have tons of statements on everything under the sun; 2. Most of them we agree to and never hear about ever again; and 3. Statements made by outside groups trying to have a positive influence on the synod are pretty much always divisive, not unifying around the Word of God.

Let me unpack each of those a little bit.

1. We have tons of statements on everything under the sun.

I remember reading some years back about a project at the St. Louis Seminary to categorize and catalog all of the doctrinal statements, encouragements, opinions and the like that 165+ years of the LCMS conventions have passed.  It is bewildering, and I like this stuff!  We don’t even know or understand what standing most of these documents/statements have in our church body.  One of the most vivid moments at this past summer’s synodical convention for me was when Dr. Sam Nafzger was asked to come to the mic and explain the different types of documents.  It was the most confusing thing I’ve ever heard in my life.

The multiplication of confessions and documents in our midst is more a sign of our disunity than it is our unity.  Now don’t get me wrong.  People and churches of conviction can and must confess the truth and deny the error.  However, I am not at all convinced that making statements is the answer on how we should do it.

2. Most of them we agree to and never hear about ever again.

The Predestinarian Controversy.  The Iowa Theses.  The Minneapolis Theses.  The Thiensville Theses.  The Brief Statement (ok, we’ve heard of that one…).  The Common Confession, parts I and II, The 1973 Statement (heard of that one too).  Those are just a handful.  For the most part, they come for a while, maybe draw some heat on this or that topic, and then they are gone.  I’m not trying to be cynical here.  But the reality is that most of the matters that appear REALLY REALLY IMPORTANT at the time are but a grain of sand in the life of Christ’s Church.

3. Statements made by outside groups trying to have a positive influence on the synod are pretty much always divisive, not unifying around the Word of God.

There have been and are today lots of groups on both the “right” and the “left” of our church body that have made statements, agitated for various candidates and positions, and have worked to change the direction of the synod.  I’ve been involved in some of these groups over the years, and many of my friends continue to be involved in them.  Personally, I think they can serve a good and legitimate purpose in an elective body like the LCMS.  I have no problems whatsoever with people advocating for what they believe is right, and whom they believe should be elected.

What gets messy is when those same groups start issuing statements.  The Statement of the Forty-Four.  The State of the Church Conferences.  Consensus.  When these external groups start making theological statements and positions, they by definition are setting themselves up as a sub-church.  The ACELC (as our most recent example) has a constitution, with congregational membership, and the like.  How is that not the precursor or antidote to a new church body?

Caveat and Conclusion

I put these thoughts forward for your consideration.  I know four out of the five steering committee members, and would consider them all friends.  I don’t really have any disagreement with the content of anything per se, but I am simply not convinced that this approach is going to be helpful in our common walk together in Christ.

In Christ,

Pr. Todd Peperkorn

Messiah Lutheran Church

Kenosha, Wisconsin

Because of this, it struck me today, upon my arrival in Houston, how different my perspective is now than it was six years ago when I was a delegate.  Six years ago I was all about fixing what is wrong, making the synod safe for democracy, something like that.  My theological views haven’t really changed much in six years, but my self-understanding as a pastor has changed dramatically.  I’m no longer interested in the politics, the personalities, and all of the juicy gossip that every human institution inevitably breeds.  At this point I am really asking the question, where is Christ?  Where is the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins?  Where is the healing for the brokenhearted, the balm of Gilead that can only come from the divine Word?

I know this is a little rambling.  It’s late, but I wanted to get something written for the day.  There are many friends here, old and new.  It’s great to see them all.  There are people I have been in conflict with in various was here as well.  I pray for reconciliation.  There will be lots of back room deals and shenanigans.  There always are.  But in the midst of it all, God can and is still at work.  Sometimes it happens through us.  Sometimes it happens in spite of us.  Sometimes both at the same time.  It is my prayer this week that the decisions and elections that take place here in Houston will further His Kingdom, and that the old hymn will remain true, “Lord, help us ever to retain, the catechisms doctrine plain, as Luther taught the word of truth, in simple words to tender youth!”

-Pastor Todd Peperkorn

Circuit 26 Pastoral Delegate (South Wisconsin District)

Kenosha, Wisconsin

PS CARDS WIN!  8-0 over the Astros.  Go Cards!

Houston Report #1

-Peperkorn

Anyway, one of the benefits of my little corner of the world is that I have a wicked awesome coper/scanner thing, which allows me to scan big files into PDF format easily.  I have done so with this book.

So my question is, are any of you interested in having this book run through OCR so that it would be searchable?  Let me know.  Either way, I will be posting it shortly.

-LL

[From the October 2009 Messiah's Messenger]

It should come as no surprise to anyone that I love books. Step into my office and you might as well be stepping into a library. But there is no doubt that some books are more important than others. The chief of these is God’s Word, the Bible. And we are blessed to have a new study bible available for us through Concordia Publishing House. The Lutheran Study Bible is hot off the presses and promises to be an incredible resource for Christian’s who desire to learn more about God and HIs mercy toward us in Christ Jesus.

But do we need another bible? Isn’t the one that I’ve used since I was confirmed good enough? At one level, of course it is good enough. It isn’t a competition, and God’s Word is powerful and effective, regardless of the context or print edition or whatever other format it may be found in. For many of us, we grew up with the King James Version of the bible. I still have my KJV bible I received at my confirmation. In the LCMS, the Concordia Self-Study Bible (NIV translation) has been a popular addition for twenty-five years. Many of you probably have a copy of this study bible, and it includes lots of wonderful resources. Here at Messiah we have largely used the New King James Version (NKJV) for the past ten years or so. This is also a good and faithful translation that has much to commend it.

But this bible is different in several important ways. Here are a few of them that come to mind:

1. The translation it uses is the English Standard Version (ESV). This is the translation that our church body has unofficially adopted as the norm. It is used in Lutheran Service Book, our hymnal. It is the translation we use in worship on Sunday mornings. It is the translation we now use at Christ Lutheran Academy. Martin Luther wrote this about consistency of texts in the Catechism, and it certainly holds true for God’s Word as well:

In the first place, let the preacher above all be careful to avoid many versions or various texts and forms of the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer, the Creed, the Sacraments, and such. He should choose one form to which he holds and teaches all the time, year after year. For young and simple people must be taught by uniform, settled texts and forms. Otherwise they become confused easily when the teacher today teaches them one way, and in a year some other way, as if he wished to make improvements. For then all effort and labor ‹that has been spent in teaching› is lost.

My hope and plan is that the ESV will be the last translation that I regularly use in my ministry. I expect it to be the norm in the LCMS for a generation or more.

2. The introductions and study notes are thoroughly Lutheran. Concordia Publishing House spent years preparing the introductions, notes, and review process for TLSB. The editors come from nearly every conservative Lutheran church body in the world, including the Wisconsin Synod, the Lutheran Church – Canada, Europe, Africa, and more. The majority of the editors are LCMS, and it went through a thorough doctrinal review process before coming to us. These study notes and introductions incorporate the Small Catechism, writings of Luther and other theologians, and a wealth of information historical and theology for the student of the Scriptures.

3. It includes many of the resources we often use in prayer and worship and catechesis. These include especially the Small Catechism, but also many prayers, an emphasis on Law & Gospel, and generally holding up the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins above all else.

4. It is available in lots of different formats. From the $35 standard hardback edition, larger print editions, various kinds of leather and bonded leather editions, there are more than enough options to go around.

5. It has artwork! These include scenes drawn by Julius Schnoff von Carlsfeld, and were originally available in the 1860 Luther bible published in Leipzig.

6. It includes the lectionaries (reading cycles) in use in our churches. This is very helpful for preparation to go to church. You can always lookup and find what the readings for the upcoming Sunday are and work through them in preparation.

7. Over a hundred charts and over thirty maps. It is tremendously helpful to to be able to put flesh and blood on the stories of the bible. Maps helpful to realize that these are actual events that took place here on earth. They give context to the world of the bible. In the same way, there are many aspects of God’s Word that are hard for us to grasp and understand without some teaching. While a study bible is not a replacement for the Ministry of the Word in the Christian congregation, it can serve as a helpful basis for the student of God’s Word.

These are just a few of the great things about The Lutheran Study Bible. I’m sure that as I use it for study and prayer over the weeks and months and years to come, that many more will become known. I look forward to learning more of God’s Word with you, as we study what He has given us in His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.