“HERE I STAND”
The 50th Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod Gathered at Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School Waco, Nebraska June 6-8, 2016
- 2 -
2016 Nebraska District Convention Proceedings
Table of Contents Nebraska District Convention Roster ...... 5 Report of the Nebraska District President ...... 9 Statistical Report of the Nebraska District President ...... 12 Report of the Synodical Council ...... 18 Report of the Board for Home Missions – Colorado Mission District ...... 23 Report of the Board for Home Missions - Nebraska Mission District ...... 30 Report of the Board for World Missions ...... 37 Report of the Ministry of Christian Giving ...... 41 WELS Ministry of Christian Giving (MCG) Director’s Report ...... 46 Report of the Commission on Evangelism ...... 52 Report of the Nebraska District Worship Committee ...... 53 WELS Hymnal Project Update ...... 55 Report of the Commission on Youth and Family Ministry...... 58 Report of the Commission on Lutheran Schools (CLS) ...... 59 Report of the Commission on Adult Discipleship ...... 61 Report of the Commission on Special Ministries ...... 63 Report of the District Constitution Committee ...... 65 Report – Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School (NELHS) ...... 66 Report – Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School (RMLHS) ...... 68 Report of the Technology Committee ...... 70 Report of the Synodical Compensation Review Committee ...... 74 Proposal – The Nebraska District Fund ...... 79 Floor Committee #1 Report – District President’s Report ...... 83 Floor Committee #2 Report – Nebraska District Work ...... 88 Floor Committee #3 Report – Synod President / Conference of Presidents / Synodical Council ...... 93 Floor Committee #4 Report – Ministerial Education ...... 95 Floor Committee #5 Report – Home Missions / World Missions / Joint Mission Council ...... 97 Floor Committee #6 Report – Congregation and Ministry Support Group ...... 100 Floor Committee #7 Report – WELS Subsidiaries and Affiliate ...... 101 Floor Committee #8 Report – Finances ...... 102 Floor Committee #9 Report – Next District Convention Planning ...... 104 Floor Committee #10 Report – Elections ...... 106 Floor Committee #12 Report – Compensation Review ...... 108 Floor Committee #13 Report – Delegate Report ...... 111 Non-Reporting Committee Assignments and Convention Guest ...... 113 Minutes of the 50th Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District ...... 114 Opening Sermon – Joshua 4:1-7; 21-24 – Remember! What God Has Done. What God Will Do...... 119 Closing Sermon – 1 Corinthians 15:57-58 – “We’ve Already Won!” ...... 123 Lutheranism’s First Identity Crisis: The Struggle to Preserve Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel and Lessons for Today ...... 127
- 3 -
- 4 -
Nebraska District Convention Roster Home Congregation City State Salutation Last Name First Name Delegate Type Christ Our Redeemer Aurora CO Rev. Voss Mark Pastor Peace Boulder CO Rev. Stern Jesse Pastor Eternal Rock Castle Rock CO Rev. Oldenburg Jared Pastor Fount of Life Colorado Springs CO Mr. Dettmann Matt Lay Delegate Fount of Life Colorado Springs CO Vicar Chartrand Ross Vicar RMLHS Commerce City CO Mr. Brucker Eric Teacher RMLHS Commerce City CO Mr. Lohmiller Rick Teacher RMLHS Commerce City CO Mr. Schaefer Mike Teacher Christ Denver CO Rev. Biedenbender Paul Pastor Zion Denver CO Mr. Tesch Mark Lay Delegate Zion Denver CO Rev. Krause Brett Pastor Zion Denver CO Mr. Adickes Phil Teacher Mountain Valley Eagle CO Rev. Merten Brent Pastor Carbon Valley Firestone CO Rev. Spiegelberg Timothy Pastor St. Peter Fort Collins CO Rev. Spaude Joel Pastor Shepherd of the Plains Fort Morgan CO Rev. Jacobs Troy Pastor St. Paul Grand Junction CO Mr. Grafe Robert Lay Delegate St. Paul Grand Junction CO Rev. Strong Dennis Pastor Shepherd of the Hills Greeley CO Rev. Holtz Matt Pastor Abiding Word Highlands Ranch CO Mr. Schoenbeck Daniel Lay Delegate Abiding Word Highlands Ranch CO Rev. Westendorf Timothy Pastor Living Savior Littleton CO Rev. Koelpin David Pastor Our Savior's Longmount CO Rev. Traudt Michael Pastor Abiding Love Loveland CO Rev. Klug Kevin Pastor Living Word Montrose CO Rev. Frey Matthew Pastor St. John Platteville CO Mr. Smith Richard Lay Delegate St. John Platteville CO Rev. Haberkorn David Pastor Crown of Life Pueblo West CO Rev. Wietzke David Pastor Lord of Life Thornton CO Mr. Schmidt Robert Lay Delegate Lord of Life Thornton CO Rev. Sievert Phillip Pastor Lord of Life Thornton CO Mr. Fax Kyle Teacher Lord of Life Thornton CO Mr. Glowicki Josh Teacher Lord of Life Thornton CO Vicar Zuberbier Luther Vicar Shepherd of the Valley Westminster CO Mr. Wilking Rick Lay Delegate Shepherd of the Valley Westminster CO Rev. Kieselhorst Philip Pastor Shepherd of the Valley Westminster CO Rev. Falck Dan Pastor Emeritus Shepherd of the Valley Westminster CO Vicar Shandor Joshua Vicar Grace Sioux City IA Rev. Allard Tony Pastor Hope Manhattan KS Mr. Waker Paul Lay Delegate Hope Manhattan KS Rev. Hirsch Philip Pastor Hope Manhattan KS Rev. Kronebusch Kerry Pastor Emeritus Redeemer Norton KS Mr. Masske Alton Lay Delegate Redeemer Norton KS Rev. Meyer Timm Pastor Mt. Olive Overland Park KS Mr. Thibaudeau Jon Lay Delegate
- 5 -
Home Congregation City State Salutation Last Name First Name Delegate Type Mt. Olive Overland Park KS Rev. Krause Shane Pastor Mt. Olive Overland Park KS Rev. Schroeder Joel Pastor Faith Pittsburg KS Rev. Schumann Aaron Pastor St. Mark Salina KS Rev. Laitinen Jeremy Pastor Beautiful Savior Topeka KS Mr. Karst Martin Lay Delegate Beautiful Savior Topeka KS Rev. Esmay Chris Pastor Messiah Wichita KS Mr. Appel Harry Lay Delegate Messiah Wichita KS Rev. Rockhoff Jonathan Pastor Our Savior Harrisonville MO Rev. Stelter John Pastor Rock of Ages Kansas City MO Mr. Tobeck Timothy Lay Delegate Rock of Ages Kansas City MO Rev. Tauscher James Pastor Gethsemane Lee's Summit MO Rev. Frey Dan Pastor First Aurora NE Rev. Oblender Wayne Pastor Christ Beatrice NE Mr. Zimmerman Wayne Lay Delegate Christ Beatrice NE Rev. Hillmann Josh Pastor St. Paul Broken Bow NE Mr. Larson Phil Lay Delegate Zion Clatonia NE Mr. Bergmeier Rodney Lay Delegate Zion Clatonia NE Rev. Kahrs Steven Pastor St. John Cortland NE Mr. Krueger Darin Lay Delegate Grace Geneva NE Mr. Rabenberg Ted Lay Delegate Grace Geneva NE Rev. Kruschel Steve Pastor Grace Geneva NE Mr. Danell Josh Teacher Trinity Grafton NE Mr. Oberlander James Lay Delegate Christ Grand Island NE Mr. Bauer Bill Lay Delegate Christ Grand Island NE Rev. Schneider Thomas Pastor Christ Grand Island NE Rev. Schneider Thomas Pastor Immanuel Hadar NE Rev. Winkel Nathaniel Pastor Immanuel Hadar NE Mr. Gumm Joe Teacher Redeemer Hastings NE Mr. Myron Hinrikus Lay Delegate Redeemer Hastings NE Rev. Smith Robert Pastor Trinity Hoskins NE Mr. Heberer Dave Lay Delegate Trinity Hoskins NE Rev. Rixe Rodney Pastor Trinity Hoskins NE Mr. Obry Ryan Teacher Good Shepherd Kearney NE Mr. Kahle Randy Lay Delegate Good Shepherd Kearney NE Rev. Seelow Nathanael Pastor Mt. Olive Lincoln NE Mr. Schleusener Mark Lay Delegate Mt. Olive Lincoln NE Rev. Kemnitz Timothy Pastor Mt. Olive Lincoln NE Mr. Boggs Greg Tech Committee Mt. Olive Lincoln NE Mr. Niemann Don Tech Committee St. Mark Lincoln NE Mr. Gartzke Detlef Lay Delegate St. Mark Lincoln NE Rev. Vogel Joel Pastor St. Mark Lincoln NE Mr. Drews Jeremiah Teacher Shepherd of Peace Norfolk NE Mr. Pohlman Dale Lay Delegate Shepherd of Peace Norfolk NE Rev. Cook Kendall Pastor St. Paul's Norfolk NE Mr. Kraemer Ron Lay Delegate St. Paul's Norfolk NE Rev. Reichert Mark Pastor - 6 -
Home Congregation City State Salutation Last Name First Name Delegate Type St. Paul's Norfolk NE Rev. Schliewe Richard Pastor Emeritus St. Paul's Norfolk NE Mr. Brown Scott Teacher St. Paul North Platte NE Rev. Wilke Nathan Pastor Gethsemane Omaha NE Mr. Korell Jeremy Lay Delegate Gethsemane Omaha NE Rev. Helwig Steve Pastor Gethsemane Omaha NE Rev. Koester John Pastor Gethsemane Omaha NE Mr. Zimmermann Jacob Teacher Good Shepherd Omaha NE Mr. Green Greg Lay Delegate Good Shepherd Omaha NE Rev. Ewart Michael Pastor Good Shepherd Omaha NE Rev. Schell Norman Pastor Emeritus Good Shepherd Omaha NE Mr. Lauber Joel Teacher Good Shepherd Omaha NE Mr. Leibl Ben Teacher Living Hope Omaha NE Mr. Ebach Duane Lay Delegate Living Hope Omaha NE Rev. Jeske Tom Pastor Living Hope Omaha NE Mr. Kenneth Mayer Tech Committee Beautiful Savior O'Neill NE Mr. Mosel Caleb Lay Delegate St. Paul's Plymouth NE Mr. Scheele Brian Lay Delegate St. Paul's Plymouth NE Mr. Schroeder Wes Lay Delegate St. Paul's Plymouth NE Rev. Berger Fred Pastor St. Paul's Plymouth NE Mr. Danner Andrew Teacher Faith Rising City NE Rev. Schultz David Pastor Grace Seward NE Mr. Mayer Jonathan Lay Delegate Grace Seward NE Rev. Haefner Mark Pastor St. John's Stanton NE Mr. Marotz Michael Lay Delegate St. John's Stanton NE Rev. Peil Tyler Pastor St. Mark's Sutton NE Mr. Nunnenkamp Ardean Lay Delegate St. Mark's Sutton NE Rev. Oblender Wayne Pastor Zion Valentine NE Mr. Shelbourn Jerry Lay Delegate Zion Valentine NE Rev. Flitter Thadeus Pastor Zion Valentine NE Mr. Jensen Brad Teacher NELHS Waco NE Rev. Haakenson Seth Pastor NELHS Waco NE Mr. Mielke Alex Teacher NELHS Waco NE Mr. Otte Mark Teacher NELHS Waco NE Mr. Ring Dave Teacher NELHS Waco NE Mr. Springborn Steven Teacher NELHS Waco NE Mr. Wells Benjy Teacher NELHS Waco NE Mr. Ziel Jake Teacher Bethel York NE Mr. Richert Robert Lay Delegate Bethel York NE Mr. Stern Phil Teacher Christ the Rock Farmington NM Rev. Enderle Jeff Pastor Zion Bonesteel SD Mr. Moor John Lay Delegate Zion Bonesteel SD Rev. Buchner Nathaniel Pastor Grace Burke SD Rev. Schmidt David Pastor Zion Colome SD Mr. Pochop Roger Lay Delegate Zion Colome SD Rev. Windsperger Donald Pastor Our Redeemer's Martin SD Rev. Pappenfuss Samuel Pastor - 7 -
Home Congregation City State Salutation Last Name First Name Delegate Type Zion Mission SD Rev. Wolff Michael Pastor Trinity Winner SD Rev. William Harley Pastor St. John Witten SD Rev. Wolff Michael Pastor Light of the Valley Layton UT Mr. Emery Allan Lay Delegate Light of the Valley Layton UT Rev. Klein Jonathan Pastor Prince of Peace Salt Lake City UT Mr. Brandt David Lay Delegate Prince of Peace Salt Lake City UT Rev. Bater Noah Pastor Prince of Peace Salt Lake City UT Rev. Micheel Jon Pastor Prince of Peace Salt Lake City UT Mr. Sell Jeff Teacher Lord of Lords Casper WY Mr. Knoll Mark Lay Delegate Lord of Lords Casper WY Rev. Schurman Fred Pastor Good Shepherd Cheyenne WY Rev. Heitsch Jeff Pastor Living Shepherd Laramie WY Mr. Russow Craig Lay Delegate Living Shepherd Laramie WY Rev. Zaferos Pete Pastor Living Shepherd Laramie WY Vicar Saatkamp Steven Vicar Guest to our District Rev. Dietz Michael Pastor Guest to our District Rev. Johnston Daniel Pastor Guest to our District Prof. Johnston Wade Pastor Guest to our District Rev. Prahl Steven Pastor Guest to our District Rev. Scharf Matthew Pastor Guest to our District Rev. Schroeder Daniel Pastor Guest to our District Pres. Schroeder Mark Pastor Guest to our District Prof. Treptow Earle Pastor
- 8 -
Report of the Nebraska District President Here I Stand 50th Biennial Convention June 6-8, 2016 at Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School
Why We Are Here It’s one of the basic questions. In America right now, it is supposed to be one with an endless variety of equally valid answers. To be successful. To help others. To be kind. To take care of Mother Earth who takes care of us. To be.
But you know that you live, move and have your being in God. And you know that “God” can be defined definitively because He has revealed Himself in the face of Jesus Christ, the one faithfully witnessed in the Scriptures. You know that God is your Father, the Almighty One. You know the Son Redeemed you. You know the Holy Spirit--because you know you cannot by your own thinking or choosing trust in Jesus Christ as Lord or come to him—has called you by the (not a) gospel. You know this is certainly true. This kind of certainty is a miracle of grace. The gift of God. And it is not to be surrendered—not in the least; certainly not to those who would rob the human of certainty by adding “ifs, ands, or buts” to the promises of God to us in Christ. Luther said that to teach uncertainty is a worse and more dangerous falsehood than an obvious lie.
And so we stand on the Scriptures alone, by grace alone, by faith alone and, above all, in Christ alone. Such a rock of a foundation emboldens timid hearts and loosens stuttering speech. “Here I stand,” isn’t only a fun Luther quote. It is your certain and sure statement in Christ. And it is our mission to be those who listen to the voice of the Good Shepherd Jesus and to tell others where to stand, to tell others who the Good Shepherd is, who is the Lord of the Church, and who is the one who woos His bride so foolishly and yet so winsomely—it is Jesus, the Christ, the Lord of the Church. And there is no other. This is most certainly true. Here I stand.
But Why Are We Here? The preaching of the Christ has gone out through the lips of humans. It has winged its way into your heart. You have been found in the congregation of the faithful, gathered around this marvelous proclamation in Word and Sacrament. You have been so moved, you said, “I believe,” in front of a publicly assembled group of humans. There always will be humans who gather around such foolish proclamation; this is the promise of God.
We gather around Christ Present in Word and Sacrament most of the time in local congregations. And our local congregations are found to be in unity with other congregations who proclaim such an unconditional gospel. While never judging another’s heart, we are to judge the teaching of any who claim to speak in God’s name. Is that teaching really faithful to what God has revealed of Himself? Is it really in the name of God? Is it really proclaiming Christ, or is it—no doubt sincerely and with good intentions—proclaiming a fake Christ?
Our district’s constitution says: “The district shall supervise doctrine (teaching) and practice in the district, receive new congregations into the district, receive pastors and male teachers into the district, conduct elections in the district, review and provide reaction to the reports of the synod president on the activities of the synod on behalf of the membership, and conduct discipline and hear appeals within the district” (Article III, Purpose of the NE District).
- 9 -
So, we’re here at this place and at this time to accomplish much of what that last paragraph states. There will be some very nice solid doctrinal (teaching) work going on as we’re led through Lutheranism’s First Identity Crisis: The Struggle to Preserve Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel and Lessons for Today by Dr. Wade Johnston of Wisconsin Lutheran College, formerly a parish pastor in Saginaw, MI. We’ll approve a new congregation’s constitution. We’ll accept new pastors and male teachers into the district, thereby quietly and lovingly underlining a timeless truth—that the Lord’s Church is to be served and led and taught by men of the Spirit. We’ll conduct elections in the district, without the kind of politics that emphasizes me first, but in a “let the Call seek the man” kind of spirit. Those who will serve will know—and so will the rest of us—that they are serving in the Lord’s name and in the Church’s name in good order.
And—how strange and rare is this?—we will “review and provide reactions to the reports of the synod president (that’s what the RTTD is) on the activities of the synod on behalf of the membership.” Completely contrary to what we’re told is the spirit of our times, where no one cares anymore about the institution of the Church at large, each of our congregations has someone here to care about the work of the Lord’s Church that is done through our synod. And our synod’s president, Rev. Mark Schroeder, is actually here to shake your hand and to address at least one of our committees. And—how crazy is this?—to actually still serve us as a pastor serves his beloved flock—he preached Christ into our ears last night. We’re thankful that the work of our synod still continues to have the feel of the work of the Church. Messy? Yes. More manure wagon than glorious institution filled with completely happy people with completely perfect marriages served by perfect pastors and teachers and all of whom have completely perfect kids? Yes! We Lutherans proclaim with certainty that it is the Lord of the Church that is our perfect hope and righteousness. We are the sinners for whom He came; we confess that week after week. And He came not for us alone.
So that’s why we’re here. To do some kingdom work. To talk about kingdom work done in our name that we think is actually in the Lord, Jesus’ name.
One among us today is here to find out where the Lord of the Church would have him serve. Rev. Matt Scharf has served three years at Martin Luther College and was just assigned to serve Word & Sacrament in the congregation of our district’s president, whom we’ll elect later this morning. He is here with his Rachel, his bride on this Sunday. We welcome him.
Specifics Our 49th convention gathered in the Rockies with Rev. Earle Treptow as the district’s president. The Lord of the Church saw fit to Call him to serve at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary where we pray for his gospel ministry both among candidates for the pastoral ministry at WLS and among those of us who aren’t candidates anymore, but are serving in the harvest fields. We thank the Lord of the Church for Pastor Treptow’s servant/leadership among us in our district. And we’re thankful for his presence among us for this convention; he’ll present later this morning in his role as Chair of the Compensation Review Committee of our synod’s Synodical Council. And he’ll preside at the closing service tomorrow at the installation of our district’s officers and circuit pastors.
We’ll continue a newly established tradition in the election of our circuit pastors this afternoon: each of our circuits will elect its circuit pastor by writing first nominations, then the name of the circuit pastor on paper. The circuit pastor’s role matters; the election of those men should not be too quick or hasty. - 10 -
We’ll hear reports from some of our synodical or district servants. Our specific committees will make use of those men by asking them specific questions in committee meetings. Each committee will give us its take on the specific area of the synod’s work and we’ll each get a chance to react to each committee’s work.
We’ll hear a report telling us that our district’s presidium wants us to try what they (and others) think is a simple and streamlined way to handle finances in our district. We will hear the suggestion that we try this fund for two years and then carefully critique it in two years at the 51st biennial convention of our district.
We’re still adjusting to a much more streamlined format for the convention itself. We’re grateful for Mr. Mark Otte and the entire staff of Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School—that they have welcomed us into their part of the kingdom and have already done much to make us feel welcome. God bless them as hosts and us as guests on the beautiful NELHS campus. We are grateful for the organization of the Activities committee so that you can rub elbows with other brothers for our short time together here.
Calling Activity Ib Meyer, CRM, of Greeley, CO, was called to Beautiful Savior, Corvallis, OR. Brett Krause, of Zion, Denver, was called to St. Paul’s, Livonia, MI. Noah Bater, of Prince of Peace of Salt Lake City, was called to Hope, West Palm Beach, FL. Sarah Carter, of Good Shepherd, Omaha, was called to Beautiful Savior, Cincinnati, OH. Fount of Life in Colorado Springs called Joel Russow, of Faith, Tallahassee, FL to be their pastor. Living Hope of Commerce City, CO, called Ross Stelljes, of MLC to be their pastor.
We’re Here; let’s be here How often do you have the chance to be with brothers in the faith? How often do you have a chance to encourage a brother in his multiple duties—as man, as husband, as father, as servant/leader in a congregation, as minister of the gospel? Our heavenly home is sweet; our time here is short. Brothers come and brothers go; ministers come and ministers go, also in the Church. The Lord Jesus remains the Lord, forever. Our privilege is to be faithful while the Lord has us here. It’s a good tradition that we sing (CW 551), thinking of the saints and, in particular, of ministers who have gone:
For all the saints who from their labors rest, All who their faith before the world confessed, Your name, O Jesus, be forever blest. Alleluia! Alleluia!
You were their rock, their fortress, and their might; You, Lord, their captain in the well-fought fight And in the darkness drear their one true light. Alleluia! Alleluia!
And when the fight is fierce, the warfare long, Steals on the ear the distant triumph song, And hearts are brave again and arms are strong. Alleluia! Alleluia!
The golden evening brightens in the west; Soon, soon, to faithful warriors comes their rest. Sweet is the calm of paradise the blest. Alleluia! Alleluia!
In Christ, Phil Hirsch - 11 -
Statistical Report of the Nebraska District President
I respectfully ask that the following be ratified by the convention through Floor Committee #1. Where information is incomplete or if additions need to be made, please provide the necessary data to Floor Committee #1 or to me. Rev. Philip C. Hirsch
Statistics from June 4, 2014 to June 1, 2016
The following were received into membership at the 2015 convention of our Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod assembled at Michigan Lutheran Seminary, Saginaw, Michigan, on July 28-July 30, 2015.
1. Teacher candidate Jacob Ziel, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, from MLC. 2. Pastor candidate Kendall Cook, Shepherd of Peace, Norfolk, Nebraska, from WLS. 3. Pastor candidate Thaddeus Flitter, Zion, Valentine, Nebraska, from WLS.
New applications for membership
1. Teacher candidate Jason Dutcher, to be commissioned and installed at Mt. Olive, Overland Park, KS on July 17, 2016. 2. Teacher candidate Benjamin Hansen, to be commissioned and installed by Rev. Nathaniel Winkel at Immanuel, Hadar, NE. 3. Teacher candidate Michael Paulsen, to be commissioned and installed June 26, 2016 by Rev. Mark Reichert at St. Paul’s, Norfolk, NE. 4. Teacher candidate Thomas Stob, to be commissioned and installed by Rev. Brett Krause at Zion, Denver on August 21, 2016. 5. Teacher Phil Scriver, to be installed by Rev. Mark Voss at Christ Our Redeemer, Aurora, CO on August 28, 2016.
Pastoral ordinations and installations
1. Pastor candidate Samuel Pappenfuss, Our Redeemer’s, Martin, South Dakota, and Rock of Ages, Gordon, Nebraska, on July 13, 2014, by Rev. Matthew Krenke. 2. Pastor candidate Nathaniel Buchner, St. Paul’s, Naper, Nebraska, and Zion, Bonesteel, South Dakota, on July 20, 2014, by Rev. Matthew Krenke. 3. Missionary candidate Neil Birkholz, Graduate Mission Associate for East Asia, on August 3, 2014, by Rev. Daniel Koelpin. 4. Missionary candidate Peter Bur, Coordinator for South Sudanese Ministry, on June 28, 2015, by Rev. Michael Ewart. 5. Pastor candidate Kendall Cook, Shepherd of Peace, Norfolk, Nebraska, on July 12, 2015, by Rev. Tyler Peil. 6. Pastor candidate Thaddeus Flitter, Zion, Valentine, Nebraska, on July 12, 2015, by Rev. Don Windsperger.
- 12 -
Pastoral installations
1. Pastor Michael Wolff, Zion, Mission, South Dakota, and St. John’s, Witten, South Dakota, on June 29, 2014, by Rev. Don Windsperger. 2. Pastor Jon Klein, Light of the Valley, Layton, Utah, on August 3, 2014, by Rev. Jonathan Micheel. 3. Pastor Nathanael Seelow, Good Shepherd, Kearney, Nebraska, on August 3, 2014, by Rev. Earle Treptow. 4. Pastor David Schmidt, Grace, Burke, South Dakota, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Earle Treptow. 5. Pastor David Haberkorn, St. John, Platteville, Colorado, on September 7, 2014, by Rev. Earle Treptow. 6. Pastor John Koester, Gethsemane, Omaha, Nebraska, on January 11, 2015, by Rev. Stephen Helwig. 7. Pastor Frederic Berger, St. Paul’s, Plymouth, Nebraska, on January 25, 2015, by Rev. Steven Kahrs. 8. Pastor Dennis Strong, St. Paul, Grand Junction, Colorado, on March 29, 2015, by Rev. Earle Treptow. 9. Pastor Joel Vogel, St. Mark, Lincoln, Nebraska, on June 14, 2015, by Rev. Timothy Kemnitz. 10. Pastor Daniel Johnston, Mission Explorer, Blair, Nebraska, on July 26, 2015, by Rev. Stephen Helwig. 11. Pastor David Wietzke, Crown of Life, Pueblo West, Colorado, on September 13, 2015, by Rev. Earle Treptow. 12. Pastor Steven Prahl, Mission Explorer, Colorado Springs, Colorado, on September 27, 2015, by Rev. Wayne Uhlhorn. 13. Pastor Jeffrey Enderle, Christ the Rock, Farmington, New Mexico, on October 11, 2015, by Rev. Brent Merten. 14. Missionary Martin Valleskey, Costa Maya Ministries, Costa Maya, Mexico, on October 11, 2015, by Rev. Timothy Otto. 15. Missionary Joel Sutton, Latin America Missions, on November 26, 2015, by Rev. Paul Schossow. 16. Pastor Tom Schneider, Christ, Grand Island, Nebraska, on January 17, 2016, by Rev. Robert Smith.
Male teacher commissionings and installations
1. Mr. Kyle Fax, Lord of Life, Thornton, Colorado, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Phillip Sievert. 2. Mr. Alexander Mielke, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, on August 24, 2014, by Rev. Wayne Oblender.
Male teacher installations
1. Mr. Philip Adickes, Zion, Denver, Colorado, on July 27, 2014, by Rev. Brett Krause. 2. Mr. Jacob Zimmerman, Gethsemane, Omaha, Nebraska, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Stephen Helwig. 3. Mr. Joshua Danell, Grace, Geneva, Nebraska, on June 28, 2015, by Rev. Stephen Kruschel. 4. Mr. Andrew Danner, St. Paul’s, Plymouth, Nebraska, on July 22, 2015, by Rev. Frederic Berger. 5. Mr. Steve Ricke, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, Kansas, on July 19, 2015, by Rev. Joel Schroeder. 6. Mr. Steven Springborn, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, on August 16, 2015, by Rev. Stephen Kruschel. 7. Mr. David Ring, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, NE, on August 16, 2016, by Rev. Stephen Kruschel. 8. Mr. Dan Douglas, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, KS, on July 17, 2016.
- 13 -
Female teacher installations
1. Miss Emily Eckley, Grace, Geneva, Nebraska, on July 6, 2014, by Rev. Stephen Kruschel. 2. Miss Pat Bodi, St. Paul, Plymouth, Nebraska, on August 10, 2014, by Rev. Steven Kahrs. 3. Mrs. Laura Kolander, Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, Colorado, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Philip Kieselhorst. 4. Mrs. Rebekah Finchem, Gethsemane, Omaha, Nebraska, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Stephen Helwig. 5. Miss Laura Dietrich, Prince of Peace, Salt Lake City, Utah, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Jonathan Micheel. 6. Mrs. Rachel Reichert, St. Paul’s, Norfolk, Nebraska, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Mark Reichert. 7. Mrs. Shannon Spreeman, St. Paul’s, Norfolk, Nebraska, on August 17, 2014, by Rev. Mark Reichert. 8. Mrs. Tiffany Winkel, St. Paul’s, Norfolk, Nebraska, on August 17, 2104, by Rev. Mark Reichert. 9. Mrs. Katelynn Dorn, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, on August 24, 2014, by Rev. Wayne Oblender. 10. Miss Andrea Biedenbender, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, on August 24, 2014, by Rev. Wayne Oblender. 11. Miss Margaret Rasmussen, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, on August 24, 2014, by Rev. Wayne Oblender. 12. Mrs. Kelly Danell, Grace, Geneva, Nebraska, on June 28, 2015, by Rev. Stephen Kruschel. 13. Miss Emily Waldek, Trinity, Hoskins, Nebraska, on July 5, 2015, by Rev. Rodney Rixe. 14. Mrs. Karen Stromquist, Trinity Tiny Tots, Hoskins, Nebraska, on August 23, 2015, by Rev. Rodney Rixe. 15. Mrs. Tracie Hueske, St. Paul, Plymouth, Nebraska, on July 22, 2015, by Rev. Frederic Berger. 16. Miss Rebecca Hagglund, Good Shepherd, Omaha, Nebraska, on July 19, 2015, by Rev. Michael Ewart. 17. Mrs. Nicole Krause, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, Kansas, on July 19, 2015, by Rev. Joel Schroeder. 18. Miss Brittany Rue, Zion, Valentine, Nebraska, on July 19, 2015, by Rev. Thaddeus Flitter. 19. Mrs. Kerri Esmay, Beautiful Savior, Topeka, Kansas, on April 17, 2016, by Rev. Christopher Esmay. 20. Miss Rachel Veith, Gethsemane, Omaha, Nebraska, on August 9, 2015, by Rev. Stephen Helwig. 21. Mrs. Karena Falck, Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, Colorado, on August 16, 2015, by Rev. Philip Kieselhorst. 22. Miss Kayte Gut, Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, Colorado, on August 16, 2015, by Rev. Philip Kieselhorst. 23. Mrs. Kathryn Felgenhauer, Hope Early Learning Center, Manhattan, Kansas, on August 16, 2015, by Rev. Earle Treptow. 24. Mrs. Rosemary Leerssen, Salem, Colorado Springs, Colorado, on August 16, 2015, by Rev. James Seiltz. 25. Mrs. Amber Jannusch-Holmes, Messiah, Wichita, KS, on December 7, 2014, by Rev. Jon Rockhoff. 26. Teacher candidate McKinzie Paulsen, to be installed June 26, 2016 by Rev. Mark Reichert at St. Paul’s, Norfolk, NE. 27. Teacher candidate Hannah Rothe, to be installed by Rev. Mark Voss at Christ Our Redeemer, Aurora, CO on August 28, 2016. 28. Mrs. Rebecca Briney, to be installed by Rev. Fred Berger at St. Paul’s, Plymouth, NE, on July 31, 2016. 29. Mrs. Stephanie Peitsmeyer, to be installed by Rev. Joel Vogel at St. Mark, Lincoln, NE
- 14 -
Transfers into the Nebraska District
1. Rev. David Schmidt from the Dakota-Montana District. 2. Rev. emeritus Daniel Falck from the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 3. Rev. Daniel Johnston from the Western Wisconsin District. 4. Rev. John Koester from the South Central District. 5. Rev. Frederic Berger from the Dakota-Montana District. 6. Rev. Dennis Strong from the Minnesota District. 7. Rev. Joel Vogel from the Michigan District. 8. Teacher Joshua Danell from the Minnesota District. 9. Teacher Jacob Unke from the Arizona-California District. 10. Teacher Steven Springborn from the Arizona-California District. 11. Rev. Steven Prahl from the South Atlantic District. 12. Rev. emeritus Kerry Kronebusch from the Arizona-California District. 13. Rev. Jeffrey Enderle from the Arizona-California District. 14. Rev. Thomas Schneider from the Michigan District.
Transfers to other districts
1. Rev. Matthew Krenke to the Western Wisconsin District. 2. Rev. Stephen Raddatz to the Michigan District. 3. Rev. emeritus Gary Schult to the Michigan District. 4. Rev. Matthew Kiecker to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 5. Teacher Seth Fitzsimmons to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 6. Teacher Joshua Johnson to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 7. Rev. James Fleming to the Northern Wisconsin District. 8. Rev. Chad Walta to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 9. Rev. Earle Treptow to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 10. Rev. Wayne Uhlhorn to the Arizona-California District.
Retirements
1. Rev. David Haberkorn – August 31, 2014. 2. Rev. Gary Schult – October 26, 2014. 3. Teacher Dean Johnson – June 15, 2016.
Pastor Resignations
1. Rev. Benjamin Schmeling, Crown of Life, Pueblo West, Colorado, September 28, 2014.
Teacher Resignations
1. Mrs. Suzanne Krenke, Zion, Valentine, Nebraska, July 31, 2014. 2. Mrs. Deb Rockhoff, Loving Arms Childcare Center, Wichita, Kansas, October 12, 2014. 3. Mrs. Katie Schlomer, Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, Colorado, March 1, 2015. 4. Mrs. Heidi Leibl, Good Shepherd, Omaha, Nebraska, June 30, 2015. 5. Mrs. Beth Plitzuweit, St. Paul’s, Plymouth, Nebraska, June 30, 2015. 6. Mrs. Amanda Stellick, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, Kansas, June 30, 2015. 7. Mrs. Linda Eldred, Little Lambs Child Development Center, Cheyenne, Wyoming, August 15, 2015. - 15 -
8. Mr. Dale Rundgren, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, Kansas, June 30, 2016. 9. Mrs. Kim Bollmeier, Shepherd of the Hills, Greeley, Colorado, June 30, 2016. 10. Miss Meagan Naumann, Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, Colorado, June 30, 2016. 11. Mr. Jacob Unke, St. Paul’s, Norfolk, Nebraska, June 15, 2016.
Resignations
1. Rev. Tyler Peil as member of the Nebraska District Mission Board. 2. Rev. Stephen Raddatz as chairman for the Ministry of Christian Giving Commission. 3. Rev. Matthew Krenke as circuit pastor for the Rosebud Circuit. 4. Rev. John Stelter as coordinator of the Commission on Evangelism. 5. Teacher Tom Plitzuweit as District Schools Coordinator. 6. Rev. David Wietzke as circuit pastor for Platte Circuit. 7. Rev. Earle Treptow as district president. 8. Rev. Wayne Uhlhorn as member of the Colorado District Mission Board. 9. Teacher Dale Rundgren as member of the Commission on Lutheran Schools.
School closing
1. Salem, Colorado Springs, Colorado, on November 1, 2015.
Church closing
1. Grace, Yampa, Colorado, on March 1, 2015.
Appointments
1. Rev. John Stelter as member of the Nebraska District Mission Board. 2. Rev. Jesse Stern as coordinator for Commission on Evangelism. 3. Rev. Don Windsperger as circuit pastor for the Rosebud Circuit. 4. Rev. Jon Rockhoff as chairman for the Ministry of Christian Giving Commission. 5. Rev. Tim Westendorf as member of the Ministry of Christian Giving Commission. 6. Rev. Phillip Sievert as assistant to the circuit pastor of the Northern Circuit. 7. Rev. Jeremy Laitinen as member of the Eastern Conference Continuing Education Committee. 8. Teacher Josh Glowicki as District Schools Coordinator. 9. Rev. Wayne Oblender as circuit pastor for the Platte Circuit. 10. Mrs. Julianne Hardinger to the Commission on Worship. 11. Teacher Claire Natsis to the Commission on Worship. 12. Rev. Nathanael Seelow to the Commission on Worship. 13. Rev. Stephen Kruschel as member of the Constitution Committee. 14. Rev. Will Harley as member of the Constitution Committee. 15. Rev. Jesse Stern as member of the Colorado District Mission Board. 16. Rev. Thomas Jeske as 2nd Vice President of the Nebraska District.
- 16 -
Anniversaries
1. Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, Colorado, fortieth anniversary, August 10, 2014. 2. St. Mark, Salina, Kansas, fortieth anniversary, October 26, 2014. 3. Living Word, Montrose, Colorado, seventy-fifth anniversary, February 8, 2015. 4. Mt. Olive, Overland Park, Kansas, fiftieth anniversary, February 22, 2015. 5. Zion, Denver, Colorado, fiftieth anniversary, April 26, 2015. 6. Christ our Redeemer, Aurora, Colorado, fiftieth anniversary, June 14, 2015. 7. Zion, Mission, South Dakota, hundredth anniversary, June 21, 2015.
Dedications
1. Christ, Denver, Colorado, church and remodeled building, on July 27, 2014. 2. Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School, school building, on October 11, 2015.
In memory of those who served at one time in the Nebraska District and are now at rest
1. Pastor emeritus Marvin Doelger – July 6, 2014. 2. Pastor emeritus Harry Hagedorn – April 17, 2015. 3. Teacher emeritus Laverna Everts – August 5, 2015. 4. Pastor emeritus Don Laude—May 22, 2016.
- 17 -
Report of the Synodical Council
Nebraska District – Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod June 2016 One in Christ
Synodical Council Members
• Synod President as chairman • First and second vice presidents • 12 lay members (one from each district) • 2 pastors-at-large, 1 teacher-at-large • Chairmen of 3 areas of ministry • 3 Conference of Presidents members • 10 advisory members
Synodical Council Structure
• Three primary committees: Administration, Ministry, and Finance • One standing committee under the Administration Committee: Compensation • Two special groups report to the SC: Accounting Oversight Committee (p.89) and the Compensation Review Committee
Synodical Council Duties
• “The Synodical Council is responsible for the implementation of all decisions and resolutions made by the synod in convention and for overseeing all activities of the synod in pursuit of its mission (other than those that are the specific responsibility of the Conference of Presidents” (pp.56-90) • Monitors compliance of all convention resolutions – See final report (pp.68-69) • Subsidiaries-Northwestern Publishing House, WELS Church Extension Fund, WELS Foundation, and WELS Investment Funds • Affiliates – WELS VEBA and Retirement Programs
Synodical Council Long-Range Plan
• “In Christ Alone” adopted in 2011, looking toward 2017 (pp. 63-67) • The SC receives regular progress reports from the areas of ministry and departments • The SC uses the “In Christ Alone” long-range ministry plan as a guide in allocating funds to ministry programs and services • Limited progress has been made toward the long-range goals and you will hear some of these reports later during this meeting from the areas of ministry or you can read their reports in the RTTD. • Draft of new Long-Range Plan 2018-25 “Our Great Heritage” (pp.70-73)
- 18 -
• We are looking for your feedback to the new long-range plan called “Our Great Heritage” that will guide us from 2018 to 2025. A draft begins on page 70.
Synodical Council Financial Update
• For more than 10 years the Synodical Council has worked to restore confidence in the synod’s financial reports, support forecasts and planning practices. We give thanks, praise and honor to the Lord for blessing these efforts and making the synod financially sound. • The synod operates on a fiscal year that runs from July 1 to June 30 and is required by its bylaws to have a balanced ministry financial plan (a.k.a. budget). The Synodical Council presented and the 2105 convention approved a balanced plan for the 2015-16 and 2016-17 fiscal years. While there have been ups and downs in various funding sources, the plan for each year is balanced. • Congregation mission offerings or CMO continue to be the cornerstone source of financial support and we thank you, the congregations and others for the financial support you have provided for the ministry the synod carries out on your behalf. • While the synod remains financially sound there is a steady, managed draw down of general and restricted reserves of the synod, ministries and schools to fund ongoing ministries and ministry opportunities.
One in Christ – FY2015-16 Assumptions
The ministry financial plan or budget for FY16 was developed based on assumptions. Those assumptions included:
• CMO based on 2015 subscriptions, a 1.8% decrease, and a 1% increase in 2016 • Flat gifts, grants bequests and other source of synod operating support • FY16 would be the last year the operating support of $1.6 million would be needed to amortize the synod’s debt as the debt would be paid off by the One in Christ debt elimination synod-wide appeal • The allocation of synod support for areas of ministry programs and services would be flat • The Financial Stabilization Fund would be drawn down by $3 million
One in Christ – FY2015-16 Projection
As is many times the case, our plans are not God’s plan. Accordingly, the projection for FY16 is different than the plan: • 2015 CMO was up 1.1% over 2014 receipts or 2.9% more than the 1.8% subscription decrease • But subscriptions for 2016 again dropped by 1.8% • The net effect is a CMO for FY16 that is $350,000 more than planned • Also, grants are up due to the sale of an investment property • It appears that unrestricted bequests will be about $300,000 less than planned and at their lowest point in at least the last 10 years Another positive is expenses are down. Efforts to manage expenses are expected to result in $200,000 savings from Ministry Support and Congregational & District Ministries
- 19 -
The end result, based on information now available, is a financial stabilization fund drawn down of $2 million or $1 million less than planned.
One in Christ – FY2016-17 Assumptions
Like for FY16, the ministry financial plan or budget for FY17 was developed based on assumptions. Those assumptions included: • CMO based on 2015 subscriptions, a 1.8% decrease, and a 1% increase in both 2016 and 2017 • Flat gifts, bequests and other source of synod operating support • Investment termination that results in a one-time grant of $2.9 million • No debt service payment • The allocation of synod support for areas of ministry programs and services would be flat
The Financial Stabilization Fund would be built up by $2 million
One in Christ – FY2016-17 Projection
Just like in FY16, our plans are not God’s plan, so the current projection for FY17 is different than the plan: • 2015 CMO was up 1.1% over 2014 receipts or 2.9% more than the 1.8% subscription decrease, but subscriptions for 2016 again dropped by 1.8%; however, the projection still assumes that CMO subscriptions for 2017 will increase 1.0% • The net effect is a CMO for FY16 that is essentially the same as the approved plan • Grants are down $800,000 due to the investment property sale that occurred in FY16, a year earlier than planned • It doesn’t appear that the One in Christ debt elimination offerings will be sufficient to retire the remaining debt, so operating expenditures will continue to be made to retire the debt by the end of FY17
The projection does not assume that expenses will be less than Plan but cost savings opportunities will continue to be pursued. The end result of the new information is a Financial Stabilization Fund balance of $12.8 million or $530,000 less than Plan.
One in Christ – FY2017-2019 Biennium
My comments so far have focused on the current biennium, which includes FY16 and FY17. While the start of FY17 is still about a month in the future, work on the plan for the 2017 -2019 biennium or FY18 and FY19 has begun. CMO is continuing to be planned as the cornerstone of financial support and for preliminary planning purposes is assumed to grow by its five year average, 0.5%, annually.
The assumptions also include retirement of the debt in FY17 through the use of gifts and unrestricted funds.
With CMO increasing only slightly, the preliminary synod support allocations for the biennium will remain at their FY17 level. Which will again put pressure on ministries to identify other sources of funding for ongoing ministry or cut expenses, which are expected to grow about 3.5% annually. - 20 -
One in Christ – Compensation Review Committee (CRC)
The 2015 Synod Convention, in response to a recommendation by Ad Hoc Commission 2 directed the Compensation Review Committee, a standing committee that reports to the Synodical Council to work on a revision of the Compensation Guidelines. • The AHC2 asked the CRC to consider the following compensation guideline issues: – Salaries that do not reflect sufficiently the called workers’ duties or responsibilities – The lack of calls to older pastors and teachers – The difficulty the synod is having in filling principal vacancies – The lack of any mention of early childhood ministry positions in the present guidelines
The Committee is seeking feedback on a number of proposals aimed at addressing concerns raised by AdHoc2. What you find on pages 73-76 of the RTTD is nothing more than a preliminary proposal meant to stimulate discussion and solicit input from the districts.
The Compensation Review Committee plans to meet this summer to review the comments received from the districts and to revise the guidelines accordingly, with the goal of helping the Synodical Council present a final proposal to the 2017 Synod Convention.
One in Christ – Compensation Guidelines Proposal (pp. 73-76)
• The CRC adopted the following goals for the revision of the compensation guidelines, on the basis of the recommendations made by AHC2: – reflect the Scriptural principle that those who serve in the public ministry are worthy of double honor (1 Timothy 5:17); – recommend appropriate compensation so that gospel servants may devote themselves to the work of the ministry (1 Corinthians 9:1-14); – encourage equity in compensation, so that two called workers doing the same work receive the same compensation; – recognize the value of experience, but place a greater emphasis on responsibilities assigned to the individual worker; – make the guidelines easy for calling bodies to utilize in putting together a compensation package for their called workers; and – will be relatively cost-neutral to the work we do together as a synod as they are implemented
• Recommendations for which feedback is requested 1. Calling bodies set aside $1,000 a year for each of their called workers to reimburse costs associated with professional growth 2. Principals be compensated in the same range of columns in the matrix as pastors and missionaries - 21 -
3. The salary matrix provide for increases on the basis of experience from 0-22 years, rather than 0-32 as it is now (not as a way to reduce overall compensation for called workers, but to encourage calling bodies to base compensation more on duties and responsibilities than experience) 4. The salary matrix be broadened by the addition of two columns to the left of column A in the current matrix (to provide for non-degreed called workers) and by the addition of one column to the right of column H in the current matrix (to provide for compensation based more on duties and responsibilities than experience) 5. The range of columns for most ministry positions be increased by one column, resulting in a range of four columns for each (to provide flexibility for calling bodies as they seek to honor the gospel servants in their midst) 6. A web-based, user-friendly form be produced to assist calling bodies in determining compensation for their workers 7. The CRC work with WELS Human Resources Office to prepare materials for circuit pastors and district presidents to use in helping calling bodies understand and apply the compensation guidelines 8. The Human Resources Office, in conjunction with the district presidents, contact calling bodies annually with materials intended to assist them in determining appropriate compensation packages
One in Christ – Preserving WELS History
My final item to report to you today is the construction that is underway for a new WELS archives and visitor center in the lower level of the WELS Center for Mission and Ministry. For the first time, historical WELS documents, books, and artifacts will be stored in purpose-built space, designed to preserve and organize the synod’s history. The visitor center will feature artifacts and information about WELS history and our current mission fields and ministries. To set up, organize, and manage the archives in its new home, WELS has hired a full-time archivist, Susan Willems, who currently manages archives processing at the University of Denver. A 2006 graduate of Wisconsin Lutheran College, Milwaukee, Wis., Willems received her Master of Library and Information Science from the University of Denver in 2013.
The archives currently reside at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, Mequon, Wis., but the collection has outgrown the space and the facility does not have the proper climate controls for preservation. Willems’ first job will be to sort and move archive materials from the seminary. Then she will organize and maintain the archives at the CMM.
Thank you for allowing me time to present my report.
Mr. Dale Pohlman NE District Synodical Council Representative
- 22 -
Report of the Board for Home Missions – Colorado Mission District
CO DMB Report to the Nebraska District Convention 6/6-8/16 Waco, NE
“Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.” - Acts 8:4
After the stoning of Stephen, the followers of the Way were forced out of Jerusalem. But wherever they went they carried with them the very gospel that was trying to be snuffed out. The Lord used that unfortunate situation to spread his saving Message to the world.
Most of us in this country will not be physically forced out of our congregations and cities by those who oppose the Way and the Truth and the Life. Instead we willingly go beyond the walls of our congregations and across the borders of our towns with that same gospel. And the Lord wants to use us just as he did those early disciples to share his love with everyone we meet.
Your district mission boards are here to help you do that in every possible way.
For Board for Home Missions news, cf. Pastor Helwig’s Nebraska DMB report.
Subsidized Mission Congregations
Colorado
CHRIST - DENVER, CO Pastor Paul Biedenbender
Christ Lutheran in Denver with Pastor Paul Biedenbender at the helm continues to thrive. They have successfully handled cross-cultural ministry in a way that blends two cultures together into one congregation. They have also been ahead of the curve when it comes to inner city ministry as well. Although downtown Denver is changing rapidly, they have adjusted accordingly and plan to change their
- 23 - approach again in the near future as Denver continues to be transformed by revived neighborhoods, renovated buildings, brand new construction, and exponentially higher rents.
They have recently overhauled their worship facility and have experienced an increase in first time visitors because of it, their membership continues to grow as prospects are fed the Word of God in BIC, and they have just received their first “vicar in a mission setting” (ViMS), Scott Henrich, who will arrive late this summer.
CARBON VALLEY – FIRESTONE, CO Pastor Tim Spiegelberg
Carbon Valley Lutheran and Pastor Tim Spiegelberg have proved the wisdom of a patient and measured approach in garnering support for a new mission start. His careful planning, continued work with the core group to get them on board, and constant contact with the community proved beneficial by the time they opened their doors and officially “launched” in September of 2015. They have averaged 63 per Sunday since that time with a high of 115.
Tim has successfully integrated into the community through city government by his appointment to the Arts and Cultural Committee, through sports as a basketball coach, and through education by his election to the Imagine Charter School’s board. These contacts have been a beneficial bridge for him to develop relationships with many different people and have given him countless opportunities to invite them to Carbon Valley Lutheran.
They are eyeing a prime piece of property in Firestone near the busiest intersection in town right now, working with the owner and the CEF in hopes of buying it in the near future.
ETERNAL ROCK – CASTLE ROCK, CO Pastor Jared Oldenburg
Eternal Rock in Castle Rock, CO was the one big mission start a few years ago. With a solid core group from neighboring congregations and a growing community in which to work, the potential for this mission was high. It has not disappointed.
Although the entire core group has either moved out of the area or moved on, the congregation has continued to grow with 40 new adult confirmations in the last 4 years. Despite the turnover, there has been very little wane in the momentum of the congregation over the years as they reach out to those around them with the Word of God.
Pastor Jared Oldenburg and his flock are now looking to move out of their rented middle school facility and onto a property of their own. As Castle Rock continues to grow, build, and expand, there are a number of
- 24 - properties and buildings on the market. It is their hope to nail down a piece of land soon so that they can establish a more permanent fixture in the community.
FOUNDATION – COLORADO SPRINGS, CO Pastor Steve Prahl
Our new mission start from last year is manned by Pastor Steve Prahl. After ten years serving in Florida, he accepted the Call to reach out to the lost in north Colorado Springs. Recently a number of exciting developments have taken place for Pastor Prahl and his core group: a name was chosen (Foundation Lutheran), a logo was designed, a worship space was secured, they became incorporated, and they settled on a proposal from Church in a Box– a company that specializes in providing everything a congregation needs for a worship space that they have to set up and take down every week.
This summer and fall will be a busy time for Foundation. Soft launch services are scheduled for July 24th, August 21st, and September 18th. Their official grand opening or Launch Service is set for October 2nd with plans to meet every Sunday thereafter. Lord willing, many people in the area will be served by the Word and sacraments not only in these next few months, but for many years to come.
LIVING HOPE – COMMERCE CITY, CO vacant
Living Hope is set to take off. They have officially relocated to a new part of Northeast Denver (from Brighton to Commerce City), they have moved into a new facility in combination with Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School, and they are currently awaiting a new pastor. Pastor Ross Stelljes is holding the Call to serve the saints there at the moment and we pray that he comes back to Colorado to lead the way.
This congregation is a “restart” in many ways. They have a chance to start fresh in a new place with a new façade and a new shepherd. There are a number of opportunities to reach souls in the area – both through the high school as well as within the community itself. A man who takes the Call to Living Hope will have endless prospects with which to work as he gathers the saints around the Word.
LIVING WORD – MONTROSE, CO Pastor Matthew Frey
Living Word is in the waning stages of financial support from the synod. With two years left of subsidy, they are working their way to self-supporting status in the near future. They are currently undergoing a building expansion project through the help of Builders for Christ, putting up a 1900 square foot addition to their building in order to house the preschool and to give them more room for bigger events.
- 25 -
Wyoming
LIVING SHEPHERD – LARAMIE, WY Pastor Peter Zaferos
Pastor Peter Zaferos and Living Shepherd are aggressive, hard-working, and always looking for the next big thing. The next big thing on the horizon is land and a building. They have maxed out their capacity in the original building purchased by their mother congregation, Good Shepherd in Cheyenne, and have been constantly searching for the place where they need to move in the near future.
In these last few weeks the congregation unanimously decided to sell the building they are currently in, unanimously decided to rent out the community center that they had Bible camp in for the past three years, and unanimously decided to do so starting July 10th. The community center is cheaper, four times larger, newly renovated, and provides them with a better location within town. They will conduct ministry out of this building while they look for something more permanent, Theyy have been working with the CEF and have been in contact with Builders for Christ in the hopes of buying the piece of land by this summer and building during the summer of 2017.
New Mexico CHRIST THE ROCK - FARMINGTON, NM Pastor Jeffrey Enderle
This past year Christ the Rock experienced their first “real” vacancy in their existence. Thankfully the Lord saw to it that it was short-lived as Pastor Jeff Enderle received the first Call and accepted it. He has been extremely patient in the first few months of service and has been developing a long range plan with his leaders/congregation to move forward in new and exciting ways. The congregation is turning the corner as they look forward to a new phase in their ministry. Although there is still a lot of work to do, the future looks bright for our mission work in northern New Mexico.
- 26 -
Utah
NEW MISSION START – LEHI, UT vacant
There are countless opportunities in Lehi, UT, and more opening up every day. Filled with Mormons and ex-Mormons, this section of Utah County might very well be the most non-Christian county in the country. If that isn’t a reason in and of itself to dive into this mission field with everything we’ve got, I don’t know what is. If that’s not enough, this area is booming in terms of businesses, jobs, and housing. The numbers alone have prompted us to get our foot in the door and get someone on the ground to work the field.
Prince of Peace in Salt Lake City has seen this opportunity and has hoped to capitalize on it for years. They have formed and trained a solid core group and now they are waiting for a missionary to lead the way. The Colorado DMB will have a Call meeting soon to issue the first Call from the field for this exciting new mission start.
REDEMPTION – ST. GEORGE, UT Pastor Mike Quandt
Redemption is coming together as a congregation through the tutelage of Pastor Mike Quandt. In the southwest corner of the state – only 1 ½ hours from Las Vegas – Pastor Quandt as tirelessly worked the community person by person, former a strong core group in a sea of LDS. Through the use of various Bible studies in different formats, he has gathered together a group of interested people comprised of seasoned Christians and those brand new to the faith. Since Easter Sunday of this year they have been worshiping regularly on Sunday mornings along with several midweek study opportunities.
Redemption operates out of a rented facility in a modern strip mall, connecting with people that drop in, with people that visit the other businesses in the building, and with the business owners themselves. It is certainly a unique field of ministry that is going well as the Holy Spirit continues to move hearts with the power of the gospel.
- 27 -
Unsubsidized Mission Congregations
This category describes those congregations that no longer receive direct financial support from the BHM, but still have a working relationship with their local DMB by sending in monthly reports and working with the board in various ways.
CROWN OF LIFE – PUEBLO WEST, CO Pastor David Wietzke
Crown of Life is enjoying the leadership of Pastor David Wietzke as he brings a solid knowledge of Scripture to the table coupled with a zeal for the lost. In a city that is in desperate need of the truth, this congregation is a beacon of light to those who are lost in darkness.
LIGHT OF THE VALLEY – LAYTON, UT Pastor Jon Klein
Even after structural damage to their facility due to high winds a few weeks ago, Light of the Valley and Pastor Jon Klein are continuing to ride the wave of their zeal for souls in the area north of Salt Lake City. With multiple people in BIC and service opportunities for the congregation, their name is becoming known in the community for all the right reasons.
PEACE – BOULDER, CO Pastor Jesse Stern
The newest member of the Colorado DMB is also service a serving one of the most recent congregations to gain self-supporting status. Pastor Jesse Stern and the saints at Peace in Boulder are working hard to not only reach out to those in the city itself, but also to other communities around them in some exciting new second and third site Bible studies. We are excited to see where they go from here.
Upcoming New Starts
2ND SITE FOR SHEPHERD OF THE VALLEY – WESTMINSTER, CO Pastor Phil Kieselhorst
Along with our request for a new mission start in Lehi, UT, we also asked for a 2nd site to be funded for Shepherd of the Valley in Westminster, CO. Although the Executive Committee of the BHM didn’t set aside - 28 - funds for it this spring, we will continue to work on tightening up the request and narrowing down the field so that “Shepherd of the Valley West” can take off with a pastor Called to that specialized field.
Vicar in Mission Settings
Three congregations in our mission district were granted a vicar in a mission setting (ViMS) this year.
Scott Henrich to Christ in Denver, CO under the supervision of Pastor Paul Biedenbender Cale Mead to Lord of Life in Thornton, CO under the supervision of Pastor Phil Sievert Aaron Schrimpf to Shepherd of the Valley in Westminster, CO under the supervision of Pastor Phil Kieselhorst
School of Outreach
The next School of Outreach program will be presented at:
Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School Commerce City, CO
Session 1 September 10, 2016
Registration deadline: August 5, 2016
The School of Outreach is a ministry provided by the WELS Commission on Evangelism and your District Evangelism Commission. The program serves congregations of the WELS with planning, assistance, and resources for congregational evangelism programming and implementation of outreach strategies. There are two one-day workshops that are scheduled several months apart. Pastors who have been trained in the School of Outreach program make the presentations. There are breakout sessions at each workshop during which the presenters work with individual congregations to advise them regarding outreach plans and strategies. In the months following each of the workshops, these advisors offer follow-up assistance specific to the needs of congregations.
Respectfully submitted,
Pastor Matthew Frey Chairman, Colorado District Mission Board
- 29 -
Report of the Board for Home Missions - Nebraska Mission District
Serving Nebraska, Kansas, and parts of Iowa, Missouri, and South Dakota
Nebraska District Convention June 6-8 – 2016 Waco, NE
FROM THE HOME MISSIONS FRONT . . . Home Missions Mission Starts The Board for Home Missions met on April 14-15, 2016. One of the items of business was to prioritize new mission starts for the coming fiscal year. Eight new starts were authorized to receive funding starting July 1, 2016. After some of the locations, the general vicinity of the community is identified. 1. Lehi, Utah (south of Salt Lake City) 2. Fredericksburg Virginia (south of Washington DC) 3. Coeur d’Alene Idaho, St Matthew (east of Spokane WA) 4. Meridian Idaho, Cross of Christ (south-west of Boise ID) 5. Atlanta Georgia (inner city mission) 6. Rockwall Texas, Divine Peace (east of Dallas) 7. Victoria Texas, Redeemer (south-east of San Antonio) 8. Stevens Point Wisconsin, The Word (central WI)
Five of the eight new missions are multi-site missions (#3, #4, #6, #7, and #8). This means the mission is connected with an existing church. For example, the mission starting in Coeur d’Alene ID is connected with St. Matthew in Spokane WA. While there are going to be two locations where worship and ministry take place and one site – Coeur d’Alene is a new site, overall there is one leadership team with one budget. Also, with each multi-site location, members from the existing church are either going to be full-time members at the new site or will help for one to two years in getting the second site going. Later in this report you will find an invitation to a WELS National Multi-Site Conference coming up in November. In addition to the eight mission starts, the Board for Home Missions approved three enhancements and one relocation. Enhancements are typically 2-4 year subsidy agreements to assist a congregation with expanding or cross-cultural ministry. The four ministries are: 1. Centennial Lutheran in Milwaukee WI; three years of support to Call a Hispanic pastor 2. Risen Savior Lutheran in Lakewood Ranch FL; subsidy to assist the congregation to Call a pastor 3. Abiding Grace in Covington GA and Henry County GA (multi-site) to support existing ministry 4. Peace Lutheran in Holiday FL to relocate to Trinity FL Overall, the Board for Home Missions received twenty-four requests. The total funding for the twelve requests which received authorization (means funding starts July 1, 2016) is $983,000. In being able to take
- 30 - the above steps, Home Missions says “thank you” to our church body for its mission offerings and synod members for the many individual gifts which make it possible for Home Missions to do what it does. While not a part of the funding which supported the above twelve ministries, Home Missions also wants to say “thank you” to the Church Extension Fund (CEF) for its unrestricted net asset policy distribution. Established in February of 2015 to aid Home Missions, the distribution in FY 15 of $832,000 and the projected $800,000 distribution for FY 16 allowed Home Missions to authorize two missions in the spring of 2015. Without these distributions, in 2015 our church body would have opened two less missions. Home Mission truly appreciates this “over and above” support from our CEF partner.
Church Extension Fund Church Extension Fund (CEF) is a valuable Home Mission partner. Through the ministry of CEF, loans are made to mission churches to purchase land and help build/buy the first worship facility. Not only does CEF give loans, through its grant programs mission churches receive additional financial support which allows them the opportunity to afford buying land and building a worship facility. Since 1993 when the grant program has begun, over $26M in grants have been given. In the recent past, CEF also has given two special grants ($1M in Feb. of 2011 and$1.3M in Sept. of 2013). There are twelve churches which have received portions of those two grants to help those churches purchase land / put money toward building costs. Home Missions continues to track how those mission ministries are doing with the special grant blessing.
WELS National Multi-Site Conference What is it all about? The multi-site movement is all about reaching more people, and bringing mission work to many more congregations, by helping to start new churches in new locations. The potential for this relatively new strategy among WELS congregations is tremendous. While multi-site churches may have many practical benefits such as shared resources, efficient organization, cost-effective programs, and more; the greatest blessing possible is that God would use it to reach more people with the gospel. Why attend? Some congregations are already multi-site churches. Others could benefit from considering multi-site ministry, or learning from those who have multi-site church experience. For these reasons, the national multi-site conference for WELS churches has been organized and attendance is open to everyone. There will be beneficial information for churches that are already doing multi-site ministry as well as churches that are considering multi-site ministry as a way to reach more people with the gospel. Host: Grace Lutheran Church in Tucson, Vail, Sahuarita, and Benson, Arizona. Activities: The conference will include nearly a dozen speakers from some of the most experienced WELS Multi-site churches and pastors. Their experience will be valuable for all participants – pastors,
- 31 -
congregational leaders, and interested lay people – regardless of their level of multi-site church experience
Vicar in Mission Settings For many years Home Missions has supported a program called Vicar in Missions (VIMs). Some of the Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary class assigned to be vicars are assigned into mission or mission-minded congregations. The past six years Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary has joined Home Missions in this venture. Before this partnership 8-12 students were assigned into a VIM setting. Now with this partnership up to 21- 22 students have been assigned as a VIM. During the Home Mission meeting, the Home Mission Executive Committee and two representatives from WLS considered thirty-four requests for a VIM. Based on available funding from Home Missions, WLS, and the participating congregations, up to twenty VIMs will be assigned. At the time of this writing there are twenty-six second year students at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary who are eligible to be assigned as a vicar.
Ministry of Christian Giving On Oct. 15, 2015 the Conference of Presidents approved an “Individual Campaign” for Home and World Missions for FY 16-17; July 1, 2016-June 30, 2017. Over the past years the Ministry of Christian Giving has been assisting our synod or different ministries with special campaigns. An “Individual Campaign” means that while individuals will be approached to consider making a special gift to Missions, promotional materials and invitations to each WELS congregation won’t be a part of the campaign. While WELS churches won’t be directly invited to participate, congregations are welcome to do so if they so choose. Missions (Home and World) have been working with the Ministry of Christian Giving Director, Pastor Kurt Lueneburg and his staff in preparation for the campaign. During the fall months of 2016, Planned Giving Counselors (PGC) will make visits to donors. Joining the PGCs on many of their visits will be Mission representatives; mission pastors in both home and world settings, administrative committee members as well as district mission board members and other Mission personnel as well. The gifts to Missions will be going to new initiatives in both Home and World mission efforts. The distributions of the gifts will be 40% to Home, 40% to World and 20% to the Joint Mission Council.
Joint Mission Council The Joint Mission Council (JMC) is made up of the two mission administrators; Pastor Keith Free - Home, Pastor Larry Schlomer - World, the two mission chairmen; Pastor Howie Mohlke – World, Pastor Chuck Westra – Home, Mr. Sean Young, Director of Mission Operations (Chair) and a layman from the World Mission Board – Dr. Bob Anderson, and a layman from the Home Mission Board – Mr. Jude Peck. The JMC works on mission issues which impact both Home and World Missions. Serving under the JMC are the Global Ministry Committee (GMC) and the Global Hmong Committee (GHC). The GMC assists WELS congregations in reaching out to immigrant people groups here in the United States and in their country of origin. The assistance can be connecting people together who have interest and - 32 - ability to move the ministry forward, planning, encouraging, and recommending ministry plans to the JMC for funding. Serving on the GMC are Pastor Nathan Seiltz (Chair), Professor Tom Hunter, Pastor John Vogt, Mr. Bill Meier, Mr. Juan Garcia, Pastor Paul Prange and Mr. Sean Young. Since July 1, 2015, the GHC has been looking at Hmong ministry both in the United States (US) and Asia determine what are good ways to coordinate Hmong ministry as well as what are the best ways to utilize and allocate the funds designated for Hmong ministry? Two Hmong pastors; Bounkeo Lor and Pheng Moua and two Anglo pastors; Keith Free (chair) and Robb Raasch serve on the GHC. A US Hmong Convention takes place July 8-10 in St. Paul MN. On October 5 & 6, an Asian Conference takes place at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. Through gifts and endowment earnings, the JMC uses these resources to help support US ministry which is also reaching back to the country of origin where its members are from. Two examples of this are: 1) Chapel of the Improvement Lutheran Church in Las Vegas NV – this ministry has Liberian spiritual leaders. In March and April of this year, Isaac David and Anglo mentor Matt Vogt were in Liberia for two weeks training spiritual leaders to share God’s Word where they live. Funding has been approved for two fiscal years. 2) Jerusalem Lutheran Church and School in Morton Grove, IL serves a number of Koreans through its school. Morton Grove itself is close to 30% Korean. The JMC is financially helping Jerusalem Lutheran so that a Korean MLC graduate might be assigned in this school. If the assignment takes place, in additional to classroom duties, the Korean teacher would look to start an after school Academy. The prayer is that more Korean students will participate and through more Korean contacts, we may learn of more contacts in South Korea with whom we can share God’s Word.
Subsidized Missions / Unsubsidized Missions At the April 2016 Board for Home Mission (BHM) meeting, the BHM approved changing designations for mission congregations. Over the years there have been various designations. Starting on July 1, 2016, there will either be subsidized missions or unsubsidized missions. A subsidized mission receives financial support from the BHM. An unsubsidized mission is truly a mission but does not receive financial support from the BHM (both subsidized and unsubsidized missions are eligible for special project funds on a per request basis). In both the subsidized and unsubsidized missions, before receiving its specific designation, required documentation is submitted and the BHM determines whether or not to grant authorization of the mission request. Over the past 10 years there have been a number of churches which have been under the unsubsidized classification. In Home Missions we are thankful to work with all the mission congregations in order to reach more souls with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Summer Student Assistants
- 33 -
Similar to the vicar program, Home Missions and Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary (WLS) work together on the Summer Student Assistant (SSA) program. This program places first or second year WLS students into mission or mission-minded congregations over the summer for a 10 week period. The students can lead worship and also preach. They participate in outreach events as well as do canvassing and witnessing. These students receive a mini-vicar training experience during the summer. For the coming summer (2016) Home Missions is supporting three SSAs in mission congregations. Four self-supporting congregations also are sponsoring a SSA.
Campus Ministry The WELS Campus Ministry Committee (CMC) is an eight-member committee of laymen and pastors who serve under the Board for Home Missions. Pastor Charlie Vannieuwenhoven serves as the chairman. The CMC exists to assist congregations in ministering to college students and other young adults with the means of grace so that they may grow in faith and be trained for service in Christ’s kingdom. These congregations reach out to about 6,500 students. Please consider finding someone in your congregation to gather each college-age student’s educational plans and share it with the CMC. To sign up and learn more about submitting information, visit wels.net/campus-ministry. At its November 5 & 6, 2015 meeting, one of the action items of the CMC was to grant to Divine Word Lutheran in Plover, WI $50,000 from its special project funds to assist this congregation in the purchase of a building which is a mile from the University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point. The building will serve two functions. Starting in the fall of 2016 it will serve as a campus center for the active campus ministry Divine Word has. The building will also serve as a second worship site as Divine Word has chosen to take the multi-site approach (see above). The Stevens Point location is called “The Word.” Thus, while there will be one congregation (Divine Word and The Word), there are going to be two locations where this congregation offers worship services as well as having a “home” for campus ministry. As it does every two years the CMC is looking to encourage and enhance campus ministries by hosting a Campus Ministry Conference in Waukesha on May 15 & 16, 2017. More information will be coming on this Conference.
Home Mission Personnel Continuing to serve as Mission Counselors are Pastor Mark Birkholz, Pastor Peter Kruschel and Pastor Ed Schuppe. Pastor Tim Flunker serves as the Hispanic Outreach Consultant. We thank these men for the many ways in which they serve Home Missions. We also thank Dr. Keith Eldred, Pastor Nate Strutz and Pastor Wayne Uhlhorn. For the past years they have served on the Board for Home Mission’s Executive Committee (BHM EC). Their terms are done. Replacing them on the BHM EC are Pastor Mark Gabb, Mr. Mark Hartman and Pastor Matt Vogt. We thank them for their willingness to serve. Also on the BHM EC are Pastor Chuck Westra (also BHM Chairman) and Mr. Steve Wolf.
- 34 -
THE NEBRASKA MISSION DISTRICT AT A GLANCE . . .
LIVING SAVIOR, BLAIR, NE (Pastor Dan Johnston) After ten months of living in Blair, NE, Pastor Daniel Johnston has a good understanding of the mindset of this small community and its people. One thing has become readily apparent to him about the city of Blair. “They won't invest in Living Savior until Living Savior invests in them.” That is to say that Living Savior will have to show the community that it is "all in" and here to stay. Pastor Johnston had been checking out some office spaces in downtown Blair. Originally he was only looking for space for his office and for a couple of classrooms/meeting room for his various Bible studies. What he found, though, ended up being a lot more than he had hoped for! Two adjacent office suites in the heart of downtown Blair right on Washington Street will not only serve Living Savior's needs for Bible study, meetings, and office space, but it will also provide a larger, open space for worship. Adding to the appeal of this lease space is its prime location. There couldn’t be better advertisement along Washington Street. Nearly everybody driving through town will pass Living Savior Lutheran Church and see their signage. Directly adjacent to this building is also the only large parking lot along Main Street. Almost everywhere else there is only street parking. With the amount of foot-traffic along the street when the weather is nice, this location will also give Pastor Johnston an excellent opportunity to engage people in conversation and to offer them a free cup of coffee in a Living Savior mug. Pastor Johnston and the Nebraska District Mission Board, with approval from the WELS Board for Home Missions, has secured a lease, arranged for the necessary improvements and modifications, and will be purchasing the necessary furniture, classroom fixtures, and technology equipment in the near future. While classes have already been held in the new building, Living Savior officially took possession of both sides of the suite in May. Monthly services are being planned for this summer with regular weekly worship and Sunday school slated to begin in September. Be sure to watch for an open house once things are buttoned up and furnished! Please keep Living Savior, its members, its pastor, its ministry in your prayers!
GRACE HMONG, KANSAS CITY, KS (Pastor Boun Lor) While we know that the Lord of the Church would have most certainly blessed Pastor Lor had he taken the Divine Call to serve as the WELS Asian Ministry Coordinator, we are thankful that Pastor Lor has returned this Call and that he will be staying at Grace Hmong in Kansas City. With the renovation work nearly done and the necessary repairs completed, Grace Hmong is poised and ready to take full advantage of their new building, their committed pastor, and their updated budget to develop and carry out a ministry plan that will continue to serve the members of their congregation – both young and old – but that will also do even more in the area of outreach as more and more Hmong continue to move into the neighborhood around church.
GOOD SHEPHERD (SUDANESE), OMAHA, NE (Pastor Peter Bur) Pastor Peter Bur continues to serve the Sudanese members at Good Shepherd in Omaha while also serving as the Sudanese Ministry Coordinator – coordinating the many Sudanese ministries right here in the United - 35 -
States as well as the outreach efforts and world mission work being planned in South Sudan and Ethiopia. The Sudanese membership at Good Shepherd stands at 44. Weekly worship at the Nuer service averages 28. Three Sudanese boys are attending Nebraska Lutheran High School. More would attend if additional tuition assistance were available. Four Sudanese children attend Good Shepherd Lutheran School. Again, more would attend if additional tuition assistance were available.
NEW LOCATIONS The Mission Board continues to look at other locations where we could plant new home mission congregations. Certainly we continue to consider the larger metropolitan areas in our district like Kansas City and Omaha and their surrounding suburbs and communities. But, having said that, and while continuing to do that, we certainly don’t want to get away from looking at the more rural areas of our district and towns with smaller populations that would be well served by a WELS Home Missionary and Mission.
LINCOLN, NE We have received word that St. Mark and Mt. Olive in Lincoln have once again begun to discuss the possibility of a third site in the capital city. The NE DMB stands ready to assist in whatever way it can. Please keep these discussions and this effort in your prayers and ask the Lord of the Church to continue to bless the proclamation of his Gospel wherever it is heard.
THANK YOU It has been my privilege to serve on the NE DMB for the past 13 years (a one year appointment plus two full terms) and as its chairman for the last six of those years. During that time I also had the privilege of serving on the WELS Board for Home Missions. This work has brought me great joy. It has been an amazing experience to work alongside so many gifted and knowledgeable and spiritually mature lay people and pastors within both our district and our synod. It has been a wonderful blessing to see the Gospel spread and the Spirit work. And yet there still is much work to do! The fields are ripe and the harvest is waiting! Pastor John Stelter will be taking over as the chairman of the NE DMB at the end of this month. We ask that God would bless him and the other four men of our Mission Board.
Respectfully Submitted, Pastor Stephen Helwig NE DMB Chairman
- 36 -
Report of the Board for World Missions
District Conventions 2016 Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod WELS WORLD MISSIONS
WELS MISSIONS REACHES 23 COUNTRIES AND BEYOND
- There is a huge sea of people that share this planet with us. The vast majority of our 7,000,000,000 neighbors do not enjoy the peace of the Gospel that has reached our hearts. Some of the huge population centers in the world like China and India are mostly pagan cultures with very little contact with the Gospel we are privileged to know. That is why WELS is determined to go to take the Good News to a world that will be lost without it.
- Our World missions have visiting or resident missionary serving 23 different countries.
- In addition Mission materials and contacts are reaching many more areas of the world where missionaries are not allowed or the contacts are just beginning.
THROUGH MISSIONARY PRESENCE
- Our still carry the means of grace with the power of God to change lives now and for eternity. As they do this work they are mindful of the model and training needed so that their local partners can carry on this work.
THROUGH SISTER CHURCH BODIES EXPANDING
- Thousands of men and women in many parts of the world are now equipped to continue sharing the good news that they now know. Wars, droughts, floods, earthquakes are clear examples to many that this world offers little hope. Our brothers and sisters now know something much better waits. Often the Spirit led excitement of new believers who live in desperate conditions in our world brings an eagerness to share the free gift they have received that brings God sent peace to troubled hearts is an encouragement to us all who are ready to help.
THROUGH OPPORTUNITIES FOR FELLOWSHIP
- European and North American Christianity in many ways have lost the compass of God’s word. Large church bodies are abandoning basic moral teachings about homosexuality and marriage and even have lost basic Christian doctrines like the resurrection and Jesus being the only path to heaven. These recent changes in large worldwide church bodies have sent many Christian groups searching for partners that still hold the Bible and its teachings in high regard. Requests from churches in Kenya, Ethiopia, Liberia, Vietnam, Philippines, Venezuela, Guatemala and others is opening doors that WELS is eager to explore.
THROUGH ONLINE CHRISTIAN MATERIALS
- The tools available for us to carry the Gospel to the world are amazing. Hundreds of thousands of people are now watching, listening, reading and reacting to WELS efforts to reach out online. Face
- 37 -
to face communication with live cameras on home computers and especially smart phones has made our world a much smaller place. WELS is stepping through this open door.
THROUGH FORMALIZED PASTORAL TRAINING
- A key part of our world mission work is to train the cultural experts and insiders in the context in which the live to carry the Good News forward. WELS gains much from the partnership we share with this growing band of church leaders. The insight they bring to the ministry in their countries is an invaluable resource as we organize our efforts.
THROUGH BAPTISM 74,834 BAPTIZED MEMBERS
- There are 75,000 souls who are members of our mission churches worldwide. This does not include the thousands who are connecting through online classes, correspondence courses or broadcast ministries.
- And, yes, all world mission work looks just like this picture.
THROUGH SUPPORTING 41 MISSIONARIES, 9 TEACHERS, 60+ LAY WORKERS
- The WELS team that is at work in our mission fields is a immensely talented group. The unique challenge of learning a new language and culture are experiences that add a wonderful flavor to their service to the Lord.
- Right now we have over 40 missionaries, several teachers and dozens of lay members assisting in this work. If you would like to learn more about how you can help, don’t hesitate to ask.
- With this capable, but small band of missionaries it is quickly apparent that a key task for our missions is to train local leaders to be the public ministers of the means of grace.
TRAINING NEW LEADERS AT WISCONSIN LUTHERAN SEMINARY
- That is why we focus much of our missionary time and efforts on giving sound doctrinal training to the cultural insiders that our first mission contacts the Lord has gathered through our missionaries.
- In very unique situations some of that training can be done at our seminary in Mequon, WI.
TRAINING NEW LEADERS IN THEIR NATIVE COUNTRIES
- But most of that training is done overseas. There are hundreds being trained in leadership roles. Look at this picture of one class at our seminary in India and you begin to understand the Gospel impact a small number of missionaries, focused on training others can have.
170 MEN IN PASTORAL TRAINING TO SERVE IN NATIONAL CHURCHES
- We train leaders at many levels and are amazed that the Lord has allowed us to train 170 men who are currently enrolled in pastoral training. As the Lord allows many of those men will be added to the growing army of over 400 national leaders that are currently serving in pastoral roles in our mission partner churches. Compare that number of pastors – more than 500 once the current students are done – with the clergy numbers of our WELS north America roster of around 1200 and you can see the impact your work in the world has had. - 38 -
- But there is much more that can be done in this area. Around 300 men who are serving as leaders of congregations in countries where we still do not have a seminary program set up are asking us to train them as Lutheran pastors. WELS missions was not content to tell them there was nothing we could do.
PASTORAL STUDIES INSTITUTE INITIATIVES
- WELS missions began conversations with our WELS Board for Ministerial Education to see what could be done to meet this growing need. A brand new team has been formed to expand the efforts of our Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary’s Pastoral Studies Institute and the World Missions Seminary professor. Professors Sorum and Wordell will be joined by
- Missionary Jon Bare to explore and coordinate possible and needed training as these new requests continue to roll in. This new team will help coordinate the many resources available in WELS USA and around the world to provide teachers, curriculum help, mentoring and support so that many more of these men can become pastors in our fellowship and continue the Gospel’s march in countries like
- Nepal, Vietnam, Philippines, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Liberia, Venezuela, Guatemala, Haiti, St. Lucia, Grenada, Romani leaders in Europe, Pakistan, and these opportunities are growing.
- Many of these new contacts have come from immigrants to the USA who have become members of our WELS churches and experienced the training available through the Pastoral Studies Institute and are eager to bring this gift to others.
Moments with Missionaries video Episode: East Asia
Mission Friends, there are countless spectacular stories that can be shared in our world mission experience. What follows are two examples to give you an idea of what is going on in many more areas of the world. Before we watch this video, allow me to offer some suggestions.
- These videos have been prepared for our congregations to share them with their members. These resources are being refreshed and renewed on the wels.net/missions website. There you can find power point slides to show during the announcements at your church, videos like this one that can be shared, blogs with current updates from our mission team, maps and other resources. Please, spend some time on this website and see how you might help share the story of the amazing things God is doing through you in WELS missions.
- This first story is one that we dare not share or publish in a public setting online. It is a story from one of are largest mission efforts: China. Please, take care not to broadcast this presentation in a way that online eyes can see it.
- 39 -
NEW STRATEGIES FOR CHALLENGING LOCATIONS
- The security of our mission team in Mexico led to discussions about how to stay connected to our national partners if the mission team was forced to leave. Two missionary families had just been forced to do that when it was discovered that they had been targeted by criminal groups.
WELS SPANISH ONLINE PRESENCE
- This led to our Latin American mission team to design the Academia Cristo outreach efforts.
PROVIDING CHRISTIAN RESOURCES IN SPANISH
- A website page has been designed.
FOR MOBILE DIGITAL DEVICES
- Facebook advertising was ramped up and currently millions are being reached with posts every day. 270,000 people have liked the page and over 250,000 have gone to the website and watched the Come Follow Me and My Son My Savior movies.
GOD’S UNCHANGING WORD IN A CHANGING WORLD
- Thousands are connecting with us in this way and several hundred have requested online training in the Bible.
Moments with Missionaries video Episode: Latin America
- As this next video will show these efforts are joined by Gospel partners that are part of our churches all through Latin America.
After video
- The reason we have chosen to show these stories in this format is to highlight to you what WELS missions is enabled to do with your support. It is also to show you a ready tool for you to take to your congregation and spread the news of this work there. If you have any problems downloading any of the material from the website don’t hesitate to give our missions’ office a call. Again the website is wels.net/missions
- Thank you for this time and God bless.
wels.net/missions
- 40 -
Report of the Ministry of Christian Giving
The Nebraska District Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod WELS Ministry of Christian Giving Rev. Kurt Lueneburg
One in Christ – Scriptural Encouragement
“Speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body . . . grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Ephesians 4:15,16).
“As servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the mysteries God has revealed,” we need to keep growing into Christ, our Head. Jesus is the one who has graciously brought us into the Church and who enables his body to build itself up in love. We thank our Lord for enabling each of us to perform our part in speaking the truth of Jesus in love to souls in North America and around the world!
One in Christ – Worship and Bible Study
60.0 50.0 . 45.4% in worship 40.0 30.0 . 15.5% in Bible class 20.0 10.0 0.0 . 2.5% of income to offerings . 6.7% of church offerings given as Members in Worship Communicants in Bible Class Synod Avg for Worship Synod Avg for Bible Class CMO
According to the Spirit’s powerful work in the hearts of his people, our average worship attendance in 2015 was up from 42.1% in 2014, and average Bible class attendance was up from 15.2% in 2014. We thank our Lord for these blessings! In addition, personal income to offerings stayed the same, and church offerings given as CMO is slightly down from 6.8% in 2014. There’s room to grow in all these areas; let’s ask our gracious Savior to build us up in love for him and others.
2.5% income figure—based on WELS 2015 Statistical Report and the U.S. Dept. of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis (divided per communicant giving figure for synod by U.S. per capita income). 6.7% CMO figure—based on figures from WELS 2015 Statistical Report.
- 41 -
One in Christ – Congregation Mission Offerings
We’re truly grateful to our heavenly Father for the wonderful thank offerings his congregations gave him in 2015 for his worldwide work through our church body! $21.5 million – an all time high! We commend you for your part in encouraging and presenting such gifts!
• 2015 offerings of $21.5 million an all-time high! • $611,000 (2.9%) more than subscribed • $235,000 (1.1%) more than 2014 offerings • This is the fourth year in a row that receipts have exceeded subscriptions • God be praised!
Christ’s gifts through his people continue to be strong in 2016. To him be the glory! We commend you for your thoughtful generosity! • 2016 subscriptions show a decrease of 1.8% from 2015 actual offerings • CMO 2016 through April is $211,798 (3.5%) above 2015 gifts for the same period • Thank you, Lord! Christ’s gifts through his people continue to be strong in 2016. To him be the glory! We commend you for your thoughtful generosity!
Year to year CMO has been flat
It is evident that God’s people through their congregations glorify God through their Congregation Mission Offerings. As we acknowledge the Lord’s goodness to us, we also recognize that our CMO isn’t keeping up with the approximately 3.5% annual increase in the cost of maintaining our present level of ministry. Let us ask God for his blessings of contentment, trust, and generosity as we encourage growth in CMO and additional gifts from individuals.
- 42 -
• When setting CMO, aim for 10% of offerings. If at or above this goal, challenge your congregation to keep increasing. The reason? Because you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ! • “Excel in this grace of giving….For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 8:7,9)
Please note these resources that are designed to keep you and others informed about how CMO and unrestricted IMO is being used to further Christ’s kingdom.
• WELS Connection • Together e-newsletter • Forward in Christ • Annual Report • Annual CMO setting materials
One in Christ – Debt Elimination
• Goal: $4.7 million • Congregations: $1.02 million • Individuals and other organizations: $1.04 million • Payments: $1.6 million • Total: $3.66 million • Praise the Lord! • We’ll continue until it’s gone.
One in Christ – Individual Offerings
Ministry of Christian Giving
• Partners with WELS Foundation and WELS Investment Funds • Provides options to help you support family, the Lord’s work, and even retain an income • Can assist your church with ongoing education of members about planned giving
Christian giving counselors • Share opportunities, assist with gifts • Are available for group presentations or individual appointments • Serve your congregation
Your current giving counselor: Rev. Dr. Michael Dietz Phone: 507-276-7415 E-mail: [email protected]
- 43 -
Your deferred giving counselors: • Mr. Ken Dierks Phone: 605-321-5875 E-mail: [email protected] • Mr. Carl Leibner Phone: 352-638-7221 E-mail: [email protected]
One benefit of making use of our CGCs is proactive assistance with Christian estate planning, that can often include a gift to Christ’s kingdom work. Of every 10 Lutherans, 3 have a will of their own making. (The others die intestate and fall under the jurisdiction of their state’s laws.)
• 3 in 10 have a will • 1 in 3 remember a charity in their estate plan
On average, of every three Lutherans who have a will of their own making, only one leaves a gift to the Lord for his work. Clearly, there’s significant room for growth in this area. WELS MCG is well- suited to assist since we offer free, confidential counsel.
In fiscal year 2015–16 (through April), WELS Christian giving counselors (12.8 full-time equivalents) conducted 3,237 free, confidential visits with God’s people that helped facilitate $4.3 million in gifts received and $30.8 million in gifts expected for WELS.
One in Christ – Resources
An Encouraging Word • Tips from those experienced in the area of stewardship • News and updates on resources • Prayers for synod ministry • “Stewardship by the lectionary” devotionals based on weekly readings; share God’s stewardship truths according to the pericope • Cut and paste planned giving articles
Stewardship programs • 364 Days of Thanksgiving • Faith Focused Finances – “Joyful Generosity” School of Stewardship – “Heart in Focus” personal financial course • Archive of programs at Christian Giving page on WELS Cloud (login required)
Congregational planned giving program • A guide for encouraging planned giving in your church using synod resources and the assistance of your local giving counselor - 44 -
• Includes “quick starts” to promoting planned giving and setting up an endowment as well as more complex options
Thank you!
WELS Ministry of Christian Giving [email protected] 800-827-5482
- 45 -
WELS Ministry of Christian Giving (MCG) Director’s Report April, 2016
1. Congregation Mission Offerings January, 2016–April, 2016 $6,335,178 3.5% increase from 2015 January, 2015–April, 2015 $6,123,380 6.1% increase from 2014
Goal=CMO projected receipts for the calendar year; Amount Received=CMO received for the calendar year; Variance=how much gifts are above or (below) goal; No. Donors=number of congregations who gave CMO out of the 1,234 who were asked to remit them.
Kurt’s observations: We praise Jesus that his people gave him gifts totaling more than $6.3 million (through April, 2016,) for his work through our church body! This total reflects a 3.5 percent increase from 2015 offerings. We thank the Lord for this blessing and pray it continues as we share Christ’s forgiveness and peace in our churches and schools in North America and around the world!
2. Debt Elimination Join me in thanking God for the $2+ million in “One in Christ” gifts his people have given since July 1, 2015. What an amazing response to our Savior’s love for us! (This doesn’t include $1.6 million in planned payments this fiscal year.) We pray that God allows us to fully retire our debt by June 30, 2016, so that we can move forward in the ministry our Lord has given us. Program resources are posted online (www.wels.net/oneinchrist) including a link to order offering brochures through NPH.
- 46 -
3. WELS Endowment Fund Emphasis Report of Endowment Fund Totals as of April 30, 2016
Endowment December 2016 Cumulative Funds 2006-2015 Thru 4/30/16 Totals Expectancies WELS Min Education 4,016,806 159,355 4,218,735 9,692,188 MLC 2,505,732 43,616 2,574,826 5,963,971 MLS 326,489 8,024 337,860 138,356 WLS 1,554,806 27,950 1,598,500 8,267,400 LPS 468,509 7,727 480,967 507,750 WELS Mission 8,789,785 200,089 9,079,507 13,190,281 Home Missions 391,051 6,915 402,093 9,041,521 World Missions 2,059,543 36,181 2,117,237 3,531,704 ______Total 20,112,721 489,857 20,809,725 50,333,171 ______
July 2013 July 2014 July 2015 Distributions*_____ Distributions Distributions Distributions WELS Min Education 103,869 121,147 142,915 MLC 73,833 81,743 90,323 MLS 10,094 11,561 12,925 WLS 51,757 56,736 62,335 LPS 14,756 16,576 18,218 WELS Mission** 287,297 316,380 347,472 Home Missions 10,423 12,347 14,288 World Missions 38,639 41,970 46,855 ______Total 590,668 658,460 735,331 ______
* Distributions based on the three year rolling average as of June 30 ** Distributions are considerably higher since Mission Expansion Endowment balance as of 6/30/2007 was rolled into the new WELS Mission Endowment Fund
Kurt’s observations: The Lord continues to bless Missions and Ministerial Education through current and/or expected gifts to these funds as well as investment gains. With God’s blessing, we hope to make our sixth consecutive annual distribution from these endowments in July, 2016.
4. WELS Gifts/Bequests for the Fiscal Year
Unrestricted: 15-16 $5,413,697 30-Apr-16 14-15 $9,870,572 13-14 $8,675,351 12-13 $10,401,602 11-12 $13,766,405
- 47 -
Temporarily Restricted: 15-16 $7,682,172 30-Apr-16 14-15 $10,182,931.00 13-14 $10,704,249.00 12-13 $9,817,884.00 11-12 $6,679,935.00 Permanently Restricted: 15-16 $927,746 30-Apr-16 14-15 $5,386,733 13-14 $1,119,948 12-13 $935,143 11-12 $1,301,366
Kurt’s observations: Gifts/bequests come from individuals/foundations who are supporting WELS now with direct gifts or who arrange to make a gift after their entrance into heaven. These offerings are precious responses to Christ’s love for us! For assistance in encouraging such gifts/bequests, request a Different Ways to Make Planned Gifts presentation by calling 800-827-5482 (local: 414-256-3209).
5. WELS Connection May Women’s Ministry June Mission Work in Mexico July West African Refugees in Las Vegas August Home Mission Growth through WELS Church Extension Fund, Inc.
Kurt’s observations: WELS Connection is an exciting report of the ways God uses WELS to proclaim Christ’s love to the world supported by our Congregation Mission Offerings and individual mission offerings. Every congregation that subscribes to WELS Connection can order full color bulletin inserts that feature a key part of the story for that month and how to find further information online at the WELS website. If you would like more information on subscribing, please contact Sarah Proeber in Communication Services at [email protected].
6. Face-to-face Donor Nurture by our Christian Giving Counselors (through 4/30/16) FYTD team goal FYTD actual visits FYT over/(under) 3,197 3,237 40
Kurt’s observations: Our Christian giving counselors serve God’s people with the good news of Jesus and help them make gifts for Christ’s work in their congregations, area ministries, and WELS areas of ministry. Thanks be to God for their service, as well as the immediate gifts and deferred expectancies his people are offering to the Lord with our free, confidential assistance! 4
- 48 -
7. WELS Deferred Expectancies Arranged and Revised
Kurt’s observations: By God’s grace our Christian giving counselors (CGCs) regularly help WELS members arrange new deferred expectancies (irrevocable/revocable) for the ministries that touch their hearts. In addition, our counselors nurture those who have an existing deferred expectancy. We thank the Lord for prompting his people to arrange $30.8 million in new/revised deferred expectancies so far this fiscal year (FY16). To him be the glory! If your congregation would like to learn more about Christian estate planning and the resultant gifts that will benefit your ministry, please call your area’s deferred CGC or phone our office (800-827-5482).
8. Charitable Gift Annuity Appeal In October we mailed a charitable gift annuity appeal, sponsored by WELS Foundation, to all WELS members in our database who are ages 60+. We commend the Foundation for offering this unique giving tool that enables WELS members to arrange deferred ministry distributions and current personal income payments.
9. IRA Rollover Opportunity Working with WELS Foundation, MCG sent the first of a series of postcards in March to those 70.5 or older to inform them of the opportunity to give to WELS ministries from their IRA accounts. Distributions, including required minimum distributions, given directly to charity are tax-free for federal tax purposes and may be treated similarly by their state. We encourage our people to contact their financial/tax planner or a WELS Christian giving counselor (800-827-5482) to learn more. The next postcards will be mailed in September and November.
10. Donor Advised Funds/Supporting Organizations Gifts and Distributions
Gifts to Supporting Orgs Gifts to Donor Advised Funds 15-16 $ -0- $ 505,268 Apr 30, 2016 14-15 $ -0- $ 1,294,305 13-14 $ -0- $ 414,917 - 49 -
12-13 $ 2,828,206 $ 699,033 11-12 $ 1,672,695 $ 851,935
DAF Distributions to WELS Funds to WELS Synod Schools to WELS Endowments to Cong & Agencies 15-16 $ 405,251 $ 94,729 $ 52,711 $ -0- $ 257,811 Apr 30, 2016 14-15 $ 704,336 $247,800 $ 65,907 $ 2,250 $ 388,379 13-14 $ 507,574 $147,129 $ 46,619 $ -0- $ 313,826 12-13 $ 411,816 $ 10,183 $146,910 $ -0- $ 245,723 11-12 $ 489,797 $100,000 $ 40,624 $ -0- $ 349,173
Kurt’s observations: These special gifts and distributions reveal the fruit of the Spirit in the hearts of God’s people. We consider it a privilege to assist WELS donors and ministries in these ways.
11. Faith Focused Finances Faith Focused Finances is a Christ-centered, practical spiritual growth program that helps God’s people aim their treasures toward their Christ-centered mission. Details can be found by clicking “Faith Focused Finances” at the MCG resource center of wels.net. The resources include the Heart in Focus financial course for all members and a revised School of Stewardship (Joyful Generosity) for congregational leaders. For more information or to request a presentation please call 414-256-3214.
12. Stewardship Programs The “One in Christ” special offering to eliminate the synod’s debt offers a one-Sunday Bible study on living as Christians under the grace of God.
364 Days of Thanksgiving focuses on how we can be thankful every day for the blessings God gives us. The emphasis includes three weeks of worship and Bible study resources. Churches can also bulk order the devotional journal at a discount for members to use to write down one thing they are grateful for each day of the year. Find this program on the Ministry of Christian Giving resource center at wels.net.
Subscribe to An Encouraging Word (below) for tips and resources for year-round stewardship encouragement, including stewardship thoughts on each Sunday’s lectionary readings and the best Sundays in the church year for teaching stewardship.
Kurt’s observations: These various resources will help you encourage God’s people in the grace of giving. You will also find the Joyful Generosity resource (see #10 above) helpful for reviewing your past stewardship activity and planning future Christian giving encouragement.
13. Congregational Planned Giving Program WELS Ministry of Christian Giving has developed a new congregational planned giving manual to help congregations promote planned giving opportunities to members. It also provides guidance on starting an endowment for long-term ministry support as well as setting up a planned giving committee. The manual and related resources are available online at the Ministry of Christian Giving resource center under Congregational Planned Giving Program.
Kurt’s observations: I encourage congregational leaders to review this resource and implement its ideas in order to help God’s people better plan their gifts both now and at death.
14. An Encouraging Word E-newsletter WELS Ministry of Christian Giving (MCG) publishes an e-newsletter every other month intended to help congregations encourage joyful giving. Each newsletter contains several helpful resources
- 50 - including words of wisdom, ideas, news, and the latest synod resources. Subscribe by going to www.wels.net/subscribe.
15. WELS Christian Giving Training Sixteen WELS and ELS people participated in our January, 2016, WELS Christian giving training at the Center for Mission and Ministry. We appreciated the opportunity to encourage a common approach to serving WELS donors and to foster coordination among the participants!
This training is open to advancement personnel at any WELS/ELS school or institution. It provides participants with in-depth material to help them serve God’s people, and an opportunity to network with other WELS people working in this field. To register or receive more information for the January 11-13, 2017 training, please contact Karen Martinez at 414-256-3209 or [email protected].
EDIT DATE: June 3, 2016
- 51 -
Report of the Commission on Evangelism
NEBRASKA DISTRICT COORDINATOR: JESSE STERN (PEACE, BOULDER, CO)
“The Commission on Evangelism exists to assist congregations and members to seize every opportunity the Lord provides to evangelize lost souls.
THE COMMISSION EXISTS . . .
1) To develop and promote evangelism resources that faithfully proclaim the truth of Scripture.
THE COMMISSION ACTS . . . As it faithfully maintains the whataboutJesus.com website (which averages 70 hits a day); As it faithfully distributes the Daily Devotions (which has roughly 10k subscribers); As it continues to promote the movie, My Son, My Savior (which has distributed 75k copies); As it eagerly looks ahead to the fourth move in the series As it confidently coordinates a series of articles written on preaching to Millennials
THE COMMISSION EXISTS . . .
2) To promote evangelism attitudes, structures, and programs consistent with Christian doctrine and the situation into which God has called a church, its called workers, and its people. 3) To promote the ‘equipping of the saints’ for both organized congregational evangelism and individual Christian witness” (WELS RTTD: 2016, pg. 37).
THE COMMISSION ACTS . . . As, via MLC Online, it offers three, one-credit courses on Evangelism; those courses are . . . o The mission of the church; o Practical Evangelism for congregations; o Friendship Evangelism As, via School of Outreach, it continues to provide educational opportunities for congregations & individuals to grow in our efforts to connect souls to Christ o The next School of Outreach offered in our district will be held in Colorado. “Session 1” is set for Saturday, September 10 at Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School.
- 52 -
Report of the Nebraska District Worship Committee
Report to the Nebraska District Convention June 6-8, 2016
The Nebraska District Worship Committee serves in several ways:
by planning worship for the district convention and other conferences by disseminating resources produced by the WELS Commission on Worship by assisting district congregations in enriching their worship
National Worship Conference 2017
The eighth triennial WELS National Conference on Worship, Music, and the Arts will be held June 13-16, 2017 at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The WELS worship conference is the largest Lutheran worship conference in North America, despite WELS being a much smaller church body than other Lutheran denominations that sponsor similar conferences. The 2017 conference will include a strong emphasis on the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. The conference is designed not only for congregational worship leaders, but anyone interested in the various aspects of worship. It will feature sessions on music, architecture, visual art, and liturgy, preaching, and the intersection of worship and outreach.
Besides the main conference in Kenosha, the Commission on Worship is strongly considering two satellite conferences, one in the Atlanta area and another in the Phoenix area. While attendance at the worship conference is strong and continues to increase, attendance from outlying districts has decreased in recent years. The Commission’s hope is that these smaller, regional conferences would serve more people during the Reformation anniversary year.
Congregations may want to consider helping their musicians (organists, choir directors, teachers, pastors, and others) attend the worship conference next summer. For example, over the next year, congregations could make plans to pay the worship conference fees for their organist or choir director, while those individuals could plan to cover the costs of travel. Almost all our congregations benefit from the service of skilled musicians every week, but often we’re not able to compensate them or not able to pay them in a way commensurate with their skill. Helping them attend the worship conference may be a way to offer them support and to show gratitude for how they serve the Lord and his people.
Reformation 2017 (from RTTD, page 30)
The synod is planning a special service in downtown Milwaukee on Oct. 31, 2017, to commemorate the 500th anniversary of the Lutheran Reformation. The service will be the culmination of continuing education opportunities for WELS called workers held at the Wisconsin Center in downtown Milwaukee on Oct. 30– 31, including Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary’s annual symposium and the Wisconsin Lutheran Teachers’ Conference, which will be inviting WELS educators nationwide to participate. The service will be held at the Bradley Center (where the Milwaukee Bucks basketball team plays). Choirs from all WELS high schools will participate in the service.
Hymnology Curriculum
A new hymnology curriculum for Lutheran elementary schools is being prepared, chaired by Teacher Kevin Bode. This is a standalone curriculum (independent from Christ-Light) with three levels: K-2, 3-5, and 6-8. - 53 -
Students will learn a core of 8-11 hymns every year, with options for another 20-23 hymns. Students who attend an LES from Kindergarten through eighth grade would learn approximately 85 hymns over their time in school from this curriculum. NPH will release year one of the three-year curriculum by June 2017.
NE District Worship Committee Members
Pastor Jonathan Micheel, Prince of Peace, Salt Lake City, Utah (chairman) [email protected] Pastor Brent Merten, Mountain Valley, Eagle, Colorado Pastor Mark Haefner, Grace, Seward, Nebraska and Bethel, York, Nebraska Julianne Hardinger, Zion, Denver, CO Pastor Nathanael Seelow, Good Shepherd, Kearney, NE
We recognize the service of Claire Natsis, who served on our committee over the last year, and we wish her God’s blessings in her new district.
Pastor Jonathan Micheel Nebraska District Worship Coordinator
- 54 -
WELS Hymnal Project Update
2016 Hymnal Project Update - Video
Report from the 2016 RTTD – pp. 35-37
Our calling
In 2011, the synod in convention adopted a long-range plan that included this goal under strategies for congregation and district ministry: “establish a committee to publish a new hymnal by the 500th anniversary of the first Lutheran hymnal (1524).” This plan for developing our synod’s next hymnal was also in harmony with the 1993 Joint Hymnal Committee’s desire that Christian Worship: A Lutheran Hymnal would serve as our synod’s hymnal for approximately 30 years. In keeping with that long-range plan, the Commission on Worship began preliminary work on the project’s aim, scope, and timeline. In 2012, the Conference of Presidents called Pastor Michael Schultz to serve as project director. Soon afterward, the administrative structure of the project, which consists of a thirteen- member executive committee and seven subcommittees, began to take shape. The WELS Hymnal Project has adopted the following mission statement for its work: 1. This hymnal will confess Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, who comes to us in the means of grace. 2. This hymnal will provide materials that enable believers to use the means of grace in public worship and other devotional settings. 3. This hymnal will be faithful to the scriptures and to the witness of the scriptures in the Lutheran Confessions. 4. This hymnal will respect and draw from the historic worship voice of the Christian Church and from our Lutheran heritage. 5. This hymnal will include texts and music of excellent quality from past and present sources. 6. This hymnal will be produced with thorough study of the character of worship in WELS and the prayer that it may be used joyfully by the people and congregations of our synod. 7. This hymnal will be accompanied by print and electronic resources intended to meet the needs of various worship settings in WELS.
It remains our goal that our synod’s next hymnal would be released in the early part of the next decade.
Our current situation From the time each of the seven subcommittees began their work, they have been busy processing input gathered from throughout the church body, studying pertinent issues, and developing the necessary philosophical framework that will guide their committee’s work. Below is a brief summary of the responsibilities of each of the seven subcommittees and the direction they are heading with their work. The Hymnody Committee is responsible for the 650 or so hymns that will be found in the new hymnal. Following the lead of most recent hymnal efforts, approximately two-thirds of those hymns will come from the body of hymns currently found in Christian Worship and Christian Worship: Supplement. The Hymnody Committee hopes to make the settings of the hymns found in the pew edition of the hymnal as accessible as possible, with the singer especially in mind. The Hymnody Committee plans to make alternate accompaniments, instrumental parts, descants, and other opportunities for musical variety for each hymn available digitally outside of the pew edition. - 55 -
The Psalmody Committee is responsible for the musical settings of the psalms. As is the case in Christian Worship, the pew edition will include a selection of psalm settings. In addition to the psalms printed in the pew edition, the Psalmody Committee plans to compile even more psalm settings for even more psalms in a standalone volume called a psalter. Between the settings printed in the pew edition and those found in the psalter, the Psalmody Committee hopes to build on the significant contribution Christian Worship made to the use of psalmody in worship by providing congregations with even more options for using these divinely-inspired songs in worship. The Rites Committee is responsible for the orders of service found in the pew edition of the hymnal. The Rites Committee is proposing one main structure for a Sunday morning order of service that includes the celebration of Holy Communion. This one main structure will allow for flexibility and variety in a number of ways, including in the musical settings used for the service’s canticles. The main order of service will be very familiar for those who are used to the orders of service found in our current resources. A new set of musical settings for the canticles is being compiled. At the same time, the service will be able to be used just as easily with musical settings with which congregations are already familiar. The Occasional Services Committee is responsible for the orders of service not found in the pew edition. Many of these orders of service are currently found in Christian Worship: Occasional Services, such as installing pastors and teachers and receiving new members into the church. This committee has just recently begun its work. The Scripture Committee is responsible for the calendar that will guide churches in their annual remembrance of the life and teachings of Christ along with its accompanying three-year lectionary. The Scripture Committee has completed its first draft of a calendar and lectionary that closely resemble the calendar and lectionary found in our current resources, especially pertaining to the appointed Gospels. Where changes have been made, they establish a closer connection between the theme set by the Gospel and the other two readings and more closely align our calendar and lectionary with those used within the rest of Lutheranism and the Holy Christian Church as a whole. The Technology Committee is responsible for the digital delivery of the content of the next hymnal. The Technology Committee has prioritized its work in the following areas: a digital database of the hymnal content; tools that aid in worship planning; mobile applications that aid the devotional life of laypeople; and content formats that assist musicians. The Technology Committee is also responsible for the design and formatting that will be used across the print and digital resources of the next hymnal. The Communications Committee is responsible for gathering information and input from the congregations and schools of our church body. This research not only pertains to how current resources are being used but also includes gathering feedback on samplings of proposed new resources as they are developed. As the Hymnal Project progresses, work will transition away from research to the areas of education and promotion. As the release date approaches, the Communications Committee will partner with the marketing department at Northwestern Publishing House to promote the new hymnal and its accompanying resources within our church body.
A look ahead As each subcommittee starts to see some of the initial fruit of its labor, the Hymnal Project is excited to disseminate some of those resources to the congregations and schools of our church body for testing and feedback. That testing will primarily take place starting in the spring of 2016 and conclude around the time of the 2017 National Worship Conference. We will be asking for assistance from various random samplings of congregations and schools in order to carry out this testing process. We look forward to sharing updates and results from the testing process. As the project continues to progress, we plan to release to the church body as a whole a set of materials representative of each committee’s work to that point.
- 56 -
The members of the Hymnal Project ask for your continued prayers as we seek to assist the congregations, schools, and people of our church body in their continued desire to proclaim Christ’s saving name in their public and personal worship. Rev. Jonathan Bauer, reporter Rev. Jon Zabell, chairman Rev. Daniel Sims, secretary Rev. Caleb Bassett, Technology Committee Rev. Jonathan Bauer, Communications Committee Rev. Aaron Christie, Hymnody Committee Rev. Bryan Gerlach, director of the Commission on Worship Teacher Michael Marquardt Rev. Jonathan Micheel, Rites Committee Rev. Paul Prange, Psalmody Committee Rev. Jonathan Schroeder, Scripture Committee Rev. Michael Schultz, director of the Hymnal Project Prof. James Tiefel Rev. Keith Wessel, Occasional Services Committee
- 57 -
Report of the Commission on Youth and Family Ministry June 2016
Encouraging and assisting WELS congregations and parents as they nurture youth in the Word from birth through high school. (Early childhood ministries, Sunday school, vacation Bible school, pre-teen and teen groups, Confirmation classes, and parenting resources)
Commission Chairman: Pastor John Boggs ([email protected]) Administrator: vacant Nebraska District Coordinator: Pastor Matt Holtz (email: [email protected]; call/text: 970-576-1154)
2016 WELS International Youth Rally The WELS International Youth Rally will be held June 28-July 1, 2016, at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Registration is now closed, however, substitutions can be made until June 13. Nearly 2,500 youth and youth leaders have registered. That makes this rally the second largest in attendance.
Schools of Youth and Family This project, based on the model of Schools of Outreach and Schools of Worship Enrichment, is designed to aid congregations who are either struggling with family ministry or wanting to expand or improve their efforts. Schools of Youth and Family will be introduced at the 2016 WELS International Youth Rally. Contact your District Coordinator if your congregation would be interested in hosting a School of Youth and Family in 2017.
TRANSFORMED: Devotions Connecting Teen to Christ New in 2016, the WELS Commission on Youth and Family introduced “Transformed: Devotions connecting teens to Christ,” a weekly devotion tailored specifically for the Christian teenager. Each Sunday, a new devotion is published at wels.net/transformed. They can also be delivered via e- mail by subscribing at wels.net/subscribe.
Shared Full-time Director The Conference of Presidents has recommended to the Synodical Counsel that a full-time director be shared between the Commissions on Youth and Family and Adult Discipleship. The Commissions are hopeful that the funding for this position becomes available soon and the calling process can begin.
- 58 -
Report of the Commission on Lutheran Schools (CLS) Report to the Nebraska District Convention June 7, 2016
The Commission on Lutheran Schools (CLS) exists to guide and assist WELS congregations in advancing the Gospel of Jesus by providing resources, training, and personal assistance for starting and strengthening Lutheran Schools.
1. ECM Devotions: The ECME Devotions have been available since September and currently have 336 subscribers. At this time, the link is included each week in the CLS Enews with the encouragement and opportunity to subscribe online. Plans are underway for the next year regarding themes, authors, and reviewers.
2. ECM Task Force: This past summer the Ad Hoc Commission 2 of the Synodical Council brought a resolution to the Synod Convention. This resolution focused on early childhood leadership and a welldefined mission and purpose for each early childhood ministry. In response to this resolution, a task force has been formed to discuss the resolution and consider potential next steps. The group will consider current statistics as well as a number of documents related to WELS early childhood ministry.
3. Testing Task Force- The current contract with Terra-Nova is extended for the 2016-17 school year. Just over 200 of the 313 WELS elementary schools participate. Cooperative purchasing has been negotiated by CLS with NWEA MAP, which is a formative assessment with the capability for longitudinal data. Currently 44 schools participate in MAP. We expect several more to participate in MAP for 2016-17. In the coming weeks, all WELS schools will be contacted with information on registering and training for MAP. An online webinar on MAP for WELS schools is also available.
4. Voluntary Supplemental Contributions: Each year more and more schools are contributing. With these funds the CLS is able to offer our schools more tools and resources to help in the strengthening of our schools. Contributions are made each year in the fall and are based on enrollment from the previous year.
5. Reformation 500 Teacher Conference/National Leadership Conference- Jim Moeller from the Western Wisconsin District is serving as the chairman for the Reformation 500 teacher conference to be held on October 30-31, 2017, in downtown Milwaukee. CLS is the coordinating body for the teacher’s conference. A pastor’s symposium will run concurrent to the teacher conference. The next National Leadership Conference is scheduled for June, 2019.
6. Team Ministry Redesign- Pilot schools have had three modules of training to discuss teaching standards, formative evaluation strategies, and ministry development plans. The committee meets again on May 14th, with a face-to-face during the month of June to review the summative assessment models . The target is for full roll-out to all schools by 2018. Communication, education, and training will be critical as we move to the new model. Members of the GEM team have had the opportunity to present to a number of teacher conferences, and CLS is encouraging conference program committees to provide sectionals on the topic at district and federation conferences.
7. Accreditation- A total of 22 site visits will be made this school year. Three site visits were suspended and will be completed next school year. We are currently projecting 36-40 visits in 2016-2017. NCPSA will hold its annual conference at the WELS Center for Mission and Ministry June 5-8, 2016. This is a
- 59 -
wonderful opportunity for our WELS to work with various accreditation groups from across the country in our building.
8. Council of American Private Education- J. Rademan attended the CAPE meetings in Washington DC on March 14 and 15. Representatives from 17 of the largest private and parochial school systems in the country along with 28 state CAPE leaders spent two days discussing ways to preserve and protect the freedoms of our schools from government regulation and creep.
9. Telling the Next Generation On Saturday, April 9, ten congregations from the South Atlantic district met at Risen Savior in Orlando, FL for the first Telling the Next Generation: Utilizing Schools for Outreach workshop. This workshop was a joint effort of the Commission on Evangelism and CLS. The workshop is patterned after the Commission on Evangelism’s School of Outreach. The day included three sections: Committed to the Gospel, Relationships, and Harvest Strategies. The plan is to develop leader’s guides that can be used with future workshops. The goal is to provide at least one workshop in each of the twelve districts by the summer of 2017.
10. Principal Board Seminars- This is a priority for the 2016-17 school year. A clear understanding of leadership roles is perceived as a need in our congregations and schools.
11. School Consulting Services- Supporting the needs of struggling schools, congregations seeking to open schools, and congregations being visited by CCC and seeking support from Lutheran Schools are three main reasons for the surge of activity in school consulting. Plans are in place to host training for 25-30 potential consultants on June 27 and 28, followed by training presented to the District Schools Coordinators and Early Childhood District Coordinators during the September meetings. The goal is to have trained men and women in sectors of WELS throughout the country to serve the current needs.
Blessings and Challenges for Schools in the Nebraska District
Trinity Lutheran in Waco, Nebraska reported it's second highest ever enrollment this year. Good stability with having the same staff for the past 5 years. They are working through the challenge of reaching out in a small community.
St. Paul's Lutheran in Norfolk, Nebraska is going through a large reorganization of staff. New graduates Mike and Kinzie Paulsen will teach grades 7-8 and Kindergarten respectively. Mike will also serve as the school's Principal.
Mt. Olive Lutheran of Overland Park, Kansas is also going through many changes. Dan Douglas will be the new Principal and grades 5-8 teacher. Jason Dutcher will be the new teacher of grades 2-4. There seems to be a renewed enthusiasm within the church and school community. Their challenge is to grow the enrollment with their limited facilities.
Christ Our Redeemer in Aurora, Colorado will be welcoming a new Principal and teacher of grades 6-8. Phil Scriver and his family will be moving to Colorado from China. Dean Johnson has retired after teaching at COR for 33 years!
Lord of Life Lutheran in Thornton, Colorado is looking to break ground on a new school facility sometime this fall. The goal is to add the school onto the current structure allowing the fellowship area/gym to be reclaimed as well as re-designing the bathrooms and kitchen.
- 60 -
Report of the Commission on Adult Discipleship June 2016
For more information, please look to the WELS Report to the Twelve Districts, pages 48-49.
Mission Statement
Adult Discipleship assists congregations and called workers in helping individuals grow in their relationship with Jesus and become better equipped to use their unique gifts to bring Christ’s love and the gospel message into all their daily relationships and activities.
Interactive Faith Bible Studies
The next Interactive Faith Bible Study is scheduled for Wednesday, September 21-October 26, 2016 at 6:00 or 8:00pm CST. Rev. John Braun from Northwestern Publishing House will lead us in the topic: “What Does This Mean? The Continuing Importance of Luther’s Small Catechism.”
We will study the importance of Luther’s Small Catechism for our own society and culture. We will review the six chief parts. What does it mean for Christian morality in today’s world without moral standards? What does it mean for Christian beliefs in a world where you can believe anything? What does it mean for Christian devotion and our personal relationship with God? What does it mean for our church life as Lutherans when the church appears to be more social than spiritual? The class will start with a little history of the Catechism and its importance in the Reformation and conclude with a discussion of what the future may hold for us and the next generation.
Marriage Enrichment Opportunities
Rev. Randy Hunter offers Marriage Enrichment Courses throughout our synod. For more information on upcoming opportunities, go to the Facebook page: www.facebook.com/welsmarriage. You can also get a list of courses available from our WELS website under Adult Discipleship.
We would like to make congregations aware of a resource for congregations and individuals at www.graceformarriage.com. The marriage enrichment retreats that Pastor Hunter has led are now available online. You can use these marriage enrichment resources as individuals or as congregations. Check it out at www.graceformarriage.com.
Women’s Ministry Conference
The Women’s Ministry is organizing a National Conference at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary for July 21-23, 2016. This conference is designed to create pathways to service for women who desire to serve God to their full potential in the capacity God designed for them.
The Women’s Ministry has also developed prayer pamphlets entitled “Prayers for Your Husband” and “Prayers for Your Wife.” These pamphlets are available for purchase at Northwestern Publishing House as well as through our Women’s Ministry.
Dir ector ...... Vacant Laura Schulz, serving as Administrative Assistant ...... (414) 256- 3226 [email protected] Pastor Gary Pufahl, Commission Chairman ...... (262) 744-1619 (M) (262) 662-5004 (W) [email protected]
- 61 -
Commission Executive Team: Gary Pufahl - chair Aaron Boehm David Wenzel Jon Bergemann John Vieths
District Coordinators: Paul Schulz (AZ-CA) Jay Bickelhaupt (D-M) Glenn Rosenbaum (MI) Dan Voigt (MN) Brett Krause (NE) Wayne Halldorson (NA) Gregory Stahlecker (NW) Fred Schleg (PNW) Ben Kratz (SA) Jeremy Belter (SC) Vacant (SEW) Chris Koschnitzke (WW)
Advisory Members Prof. Steve Geiger (WLS) Prof. Ross Stelljes (MLC) Pastor Dan Schroeder (NPH)
- 62 -
Report of the Commission on Special Ministries June 2016
New Referral Form The WELS website has had separate referral forms to supply names for military personnel, for prison ministry, and for people with special needs. Now there is a new, simplified form for all referrals at wels.net/referral . WELS Military Services estimates that only 20% of the WELS / ELS military personnel are actually referred to us – we are working hard to make that 100%! Please give us the names of church members in the military (including National Guard and Reserves).
Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Ministry (IDDM) The new referral form can be used to give us the names of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities who might appreciate receiving Christian cards and letters from IDDM. Many adults with special needs want to serve in their church, and IDDM is recruiting a spokesperson to encourage churches to include men and women with disabilities in the life of the congregation according to their gifts. A position description and application can be found at csm.welsrc.net/download-csm/intellectual-developmental-disabilities
Retirement Planning for Called Workers Christians who have been blessed by the ministry of a pastor, teacher, or staff minister, want that servant of the Lord to be financially secure when he or she can no longer work. The WELS Care Committee for Called Workers is preparing materials to help congregations assist their called workers to plan for retirement. The materials will be released this fall, but if you would like to receive the planning materials sooner, contact [email protected].
WELS / ELS Seniors in Omaha The Organization of WELS Seniors (OWLS) invites all seniors in our WELS churches (retirees and / or over 50) to the October 11-13, 2016 convention at the Ramada Plaza Hotel and Convention Center in Omaha, Nebraska. The keynote speakers will share inspiring messages about how the harvest is being enlarged through Home Missions (Pastor Keith Free, WELS Missions), through missions in Russia and eastern Europe (Pastor Michael Ewart, former missionary) and through WELS Military Services (Pastor Paul Ziemer, WELS National Civilian Chaplain). Registration information can be found at wels.net/serving-you/christian-life/special-ministries/wels-seniors
Tools for the battlefront Special Ministries has Internet resources which are Christ-centered to help people resist and reject temptations to use pornography at conquerorsthroughchrist.net. A new ministry, Freedom for the Captives, offers resources on its website freedomforcaptives.com for survivors of child sexual abuse, and for those who minister to them, including information on policies to prevent abuse.
Chaplain Certification “Scriptural Approach to Addiction Counseling” by Professor Alan Siggelkow and “Geriatric and Care Facility Ministry” by Dan Krause are the two MLC online Chaplain Certification courses offered this fall. For more information on this program, check out the MLC website at: mlc-wels.edu/continuing-education/wels-chaplain-certificate Free recruitment and training for developing a Jail Ministry WELS Prison Ministry has a grant that will cover travel and costs of training called workers and lay people to form a team
- 63 - that does ministry in the jail and after care. Our goal is to help every district do this rewarding outreach work. Contact our Jail Ministry Team Training at [email protected] .
Lutheran Military Support Group (LMSG) A new organization of WELS / ELS veterans is focused on strengthening our ministry to the military. The LMSG already has over 200 congregations with liaisons. Locally LMSG will focus on care for active duty military and their families, and on care for veterans, but they also have helped WELS Military Services fund travel and training to carry out its work. More information on this group can be found at lutheranmilitary.org
Special Ministries Resources You will find a growing amount of resources for your congregation on the Special Ministries Resource Center (csm.welsrc.net) In addition to what you find on that home page, use the WELS Special Ministries drop down menu at the top of the page to locate all the resources we have posted. The number of resources is growing every week!
Looking for a Support Team I’m looking for a group of 3-4 people who might assist me and our Nebraska District by serving as a contact and perhaps advisor in the various areas of ministry that are under the umbrella of Special Ministries: Prison Ministry Committee on Health and Wellness (Nurses Association; Chaplain Certification) Military Services Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Ministry Mission for the Visually Impaired Mission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Care Committee for Called Workers Mental Health Needs Committee (Christian Therapist Network; Conquerors Through Christ; Freedom For Captives)
Pastor James Seiltz, Colorado Springs, CO, currently assists me by serving as a contact and advisor in the area of ministry to the military. If you have knowledge and experience in this area or in another area of ministry covered under Special Ministries, and if you’d be willing to assist me and the district as a contact, please speak with me or drop me a note at my e-mail ([email protected]).
Thank you and God help us to proclaim the Gospel to every soul!
Pastor Wayne Oblender, Nebraska District coordinator for Special Ministries 1414 8th Street, Aurora, NE 68818 (402) 694-5054 [email protected]
- 64 -
Report of the District Constitution Committee
Your District Constitution Committee stands ready to serve you in an advisory capacity to help formulate doctrinally sound and practically applicable constitutions for use in congregational settings. We especially look for conformity to orthodox Lutheran standards but also offer advice for practical “working use” within the congregation.
In the past Biennium assistance was given to the following congregations:
Living Shepherd, Laramie, WY (constitution approved for membership in the WELS Nebraska District) Good Shepherd, Kearney NE Gethsemane, Omaha NE Crown of Life, Pueblo West CO Our Savior, Longmont CO Our Savior, Harrisonville MO Living Hope, Reunion CO (congregation is not yet a district member)
Repectfully submitted,
Pastor David Wietzke, chairman Pastor Stephen Kruschel Pastor Will Harley
ACTION: Resolution No. 1 Subject: Reception of Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming
WHEREAS 1) Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming has submitted a constitution which conforms to the doctrinal standard and norms of orthodox confessional Lutheran church polity, and
WHEREAS 2) Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming has requested admission to the Nebraska District and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod; therefore, be it
RESOLVED a) that Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming be officially recognized and received as members in good standing of our Nebraska District and of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.
Submitted by Rev. David Wietzke, Chairman
- 65 -
Report – Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School (NELHS) June 2016
Our theme for the 2015-2016 school year was “God Is So Good” and is based on Psalm 118:29. The most important way that God demonstrates his goodness to us is by the gift of son, Jesus. Everything that occurs on our campus is focused on leading students to know Jesus better. This happens in our chapels, religion classes, academic classes, and extra-curricular activities.
We thank the Lord for 31 new students who joined us this fall and 5 new students who joined us in January They come from as far away as Korea and China, and as close as one block from campus.
NELHS had a record number of international students that attended this year.
Our students had a particularly outstanding year in their extracurricular activities. From the fall through the spring here are their accomplishments:
Volleyball– conference runner-up One-act Play- were conference runner-up Girls Basketball– conference champion Speech– conference champion Quiz Bowl– District runner-up Boys Track– conference champion Girls Track- conference champion
We praise and thank God for blessing our students in these ways
The Association delegates approved adding a Mission Advancement Director to our staff.
Our recruitment goal is to bring in 40+ new students next year to NELHS. Our mission is to bring even more students to NELHS so that they too can learn more about Jesus every day. We have 25 applications for news students for next year so far. This is ahead of last year, but much work and prayers are needed in this area. Contact Mr. Otte at [email protected] if you know of families who are looking for Christian secondary education.
Thank you for all of the prayers and support that you give on behalf of Nebraska Lutheran!
FACT SHEET Enrollment by state: International Students: Arkansas - 1 Brazil - 5 Colorado - 2 South Korea - 7 Iowa - 2 China - 4 Kansas - 2 Taiwan - 1 Missouri - 1 Spain - 2 Nebraska - 58 South Dakota - 1 Texas - 3 Wisconsin - 1 Total enrollment: 90 Freshmen - 21 Dormitory students: 68 Commuters: 22 Sophomores - 27 Male: 50 Juniors - 19 Female: 40 Seniors - 23 TOTAL - 90 - 66 -
Markers of Quality in Christian Education at NELHS ______ Every day students are immersed in God’s Word through chapel (twice a day), religion classes, and every subject taught in the light of God’s Word 100% of faculty is synod certified, 100% of faculty is state certified, 50% hold advanced degrees with several members working on their advanced degrees currently. Nebraska Lutheran is accredited nationally and synodically 96% of our students participate in extracurricular activities o 88% participate in sports over the last 5 years o 88% participate in music, drama, speech, etc. over the last 5 years
Consistent excellence in ACT scores 2015 average: 24.9
Last 5 year average: 24.0 Last 10 year average: 23.7 Last 15 year average: 23.5 Last 20 year average: 23.4 Last 25 year average: 23.2
State average: 21.5
National average: 21.0
1 to 1 student to computer ratio (each student is issued a laptop on enrollment) 100% of our campus equipped with wireless internet (with robust firewall and digital access policies to protect our students) Over 20 online courses offered (examples include Human Anatomy and Physiology, AP Computer Science, Latin, Chinese, German, AP Psychology) Online dual credit classes offered through Bethany Lutheran College 8.6 to 1 student to teacher ratio Average class size: 13 99% graduation rate ACT prep class offered, SAT test offered on campus twice a year Global student body with students from Brazil, China, Korea, Spain, and Taiwan One of the top math programs in the state (UNL Quiz Bowl Champions 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, UNL Math Probe Champion 2013) Strong speech, drama, and academic extra-curricular programs (one act-conference champs 2014, speech-conference champs 2016. quiz bowl-district champs 2015-runner-up 2016) Top level band and choir programs Wide range of sports programs Streaming events (home events broadcast on the internet) Graduates welcomed at colleges and universities across the United States (Class of 2016 won $450,000 in scholarship monies) History of sending many graduates into the full time ministry
For more information or to find out how to enroll check out our website www.nelhs.org or e- mail us at [email protected] or stop by for a tour in Waco!
- 67 -
Report – Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School (RMLHS) June 6 – 8, 2016
Our Board of Directors and Faculty are grateful for the many supporters of this ministry to teens in the Colorado Conference of congregations. The RMLHS Federation consists of seventeen Colorado Conference congregations. God has richly blessed our high school and its mission to train youth as disciples of Christ for lifelong service to their Savior.
Board of Directors Rev Phil Kieselhorst Chairman (Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster) Rev. Mark Birkholz - Vice Chairman (Christ Lutheran, Denver) Mr. Jeff Hanel– Secretary (Living Hope Lutheran Church, Commerce City) Mr. Jason Zemlicka – Financial Secretary (Lord of Life, Thornton) Mr. Chris Mattes– Internal Relations Committee, (Zion, Denver) Mr. Jeff Falck – Curriculum Committee, (SVL, Westminster) Mr. David Paul – Treasurer, (Lord of Life, Thornton,) Mr. Jody Behnke – Trustee (Zion, Denver) Mr. Jack Meyer – External Relations Committee (Fount of Life, CO Springs.)
Faculty and Staff
Rick Lohmiller - Principal, Bible 12, Economics, American Government, American History, English 10; Michael Schaefer – Assisstant Principal, Bible 10, Christian Doctrine, World History, English 11, Christian Wellness 12, Baseball; Kelly Presser – Activities Director, Geometry, Math Analysis, Physics, Calculus, Christian Wellness, Volleyball, Soccer, Basketball; Eric Brucker - Technology Director, Algebra I, Algebra II, Chemistry, Biology, Health; Digital Photography; Mish Al-Eisa- Spanish I, II, III, Bible 9, World Geography, Football,, Basketball; Dawn Punke – English 9, Instrument, Consumer Math, Band, Eagle Choir, Art 9; Laura Boniek – English 12, Concert Choir, and Piano; Kathy Kieselhorst- Administrative Secretary/Financial Secretary
We give thanks for these tireless workers who not only provide our teens with daily instruction in God’s Word, but also model the lifestyle of a disciple for these students 1. We sadly report that Mrs. Laura Boniek has decided to not continue her service at RMLHS. She has served the school and her Lord faithfully for the last nine years in the music department. May God bless her family and her as they move onto new endeavors. ts mission to train youth as disciples of Christ for lifelong service to their Savior.
Blessings in 2015 and 2016
Following are some of the blessings our school experienced during the last biennium:
o We completed building the first permanent home for Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School and Living Hope Lutheran Church. o Sixteen seniors graduated on May 28th. Pastor Phil Sievert served as the guest speaker. Christopher Wiedersberg, a member at Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, CO, was the class valedictorian and class speaker. o Students continue to perform above state and national averages on ACT tests. o The boys’ basketball team won the state consolation championship. The baseball team reached district playoffs for a program first. Two players, Jordan Cothran and Eli Sievert received all-state recognition in basketball. The girls’ volleyball team reached regional play for the third consecutive year. The girls’ basketball team advanced to regional tournament play. The girls’ soccer team qualified for the state tournament for the second consecutive year. o Band students participate in annual band festivals. o The Eagle Choir participated in the National and Regional Choral Festivals. They participate in a two-year cycle of singing in worship services at our Federation congregations. o Without our own athletic facilities, Miss Presser spends a great deal of time and energy finding facilities on which to practice and hold games. This past year, we reached an agreement with a nearby charter school to use their gym for practices and games. o Jim Hahn served as a consulttant to help RMLHS establish a Mission Advancement Team to assist with development work. The team consists of four lay people whose varied gifts combine to do the work of a development director.
- 68 -
Opportunities
The Lord is also blessing us with opportunities for our ministry:
o We continue to explore ways to meet the requests of families for an expanded curriculum. This coming school year RMLHS will participate in dual-credit courses offered by Bethany Lutheran College. These courses, along with the offerings from ALHSO, allow RMLHS to offer courses in subjects not offered or at AP level. o A Phase Ii committee has been formed to determine what should be the next stage in the campus development. Under consideration is possibly a gym that could also function as a worship center for Living Hope, and/or athletic fields. o The staff and faculty need to have a mssion mindset as we welcome families from non-churched or other church families. The faculty is studying the book The Essential Church and making applications to how we can make our high school essential to our students and families. o To continue to faithfully proclaim God’s Word to students and families who live in a society where Scriptural guidelines are constantly under attack. o The faculty has to remain aware of current education trends and to determine if and how we incorporate them into our Christian education objectives. o The joint ministry effort with Living Hope is exciting. The region around our campus is a rapidly growing residential area so is a field that humanly speaking is ripe for the church and for us as a Christian high school. We pray God lead the right man to accept the call to serve Living Hope. o Our faculty and Board are studying ways to effectively and efficiently reach into the community and tell them about Rocky. A member of our Mission Advancement Team responsible for publications has had several articles published in the local newspaper. We are using GoogleAds and other social media to advertise about the great things God is dong through the staff and students at RMLHS.
Respectfully submitted, Rick Lohmiller Principal
ROCKY MOUNTAIN LUTHERAN HIGH SCHOOL 10391 Luther Court Commerce City, CO 80022
Phone: 303 -346-1947 Fax 303 - 481-0817 Web: www.rmlhs.org
The mission of Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School is to use the Word of God to prepare youth as disciples of Christ by developing their spiritual, intellectual, physical, and social skills for lifelong service to their Savior.
- 69 -
Report of the Technology Committee 2016 Nebraska District Convention Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, NE
How, then, can they on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” (Romans 10:14-15)
In the above printed verses, the Apostle Paul points to what might be called the “practicality of preaching the Gospel.” With our limited “human resources” as a synod (i.e. the pastors) we have to consider how we can best maximize the efforts of “the few” for the greater good and so as to become a blessing for more. In short: how can we best be used by the Holy Spirit as His instruments to get the Gospel of Jesus Christ into as many ears as possible. Stated in an obviously absurd way: Either we consider the use of “human cloning” or we look at how to multiply the voice that is spreading the good news in another more practical way. This is where technology can serve as a wonderful blessing for the Church.
Your technology committee has been entrusted with the task of implementing new and effective tools in the best possible way for the greatest good. Our goal is to do things to the glory of God by giving Him our very best. Without using guilt we are here to encourage congregations to consider how they can most effectively advance the cause of the Gospel in their own “neck of the woods.”
Current and Previous Activities: In the two years since the last convention, the District Technology Committee has proactively improved, the District web page, Congregational web pages, and the District mailing list. And our biggest project work on the mobile technology trailer. The District Technology Committee wishes to extend their appreciation to all members of the District for their support of this important tool.
The End of an Era: Twelve years ago in this very gym the 2004 convention formed the District Technology Committee to setup operate a streaming media server to webcast worship services, district conferences and events. Many individual church and school had investigated this new means to spread the Gospel and educate but alone the cost were out of reach at that point in time. Therefore through the district’s efforts this share resource allowed world wide access to God’s Truth. In 2007 our district sever as used for the first webcast of the Synodical Convention. In 2014 came the end of our district supported streaming media server as our vendor Real Networks ended production and support of the Helix Media server.
Today streaming media has become main stream with several companies in the business to specifically support this media for churches and school. While our committee has ended its own server support it stands ready and able to help our district congregations make use of technology to spread the Word. For many in the district the committee was seen a one trick pony using district funding to support a few congregations whom wish to webcast. However check the list of services and equipment that your technology committee has to offer.
The committee continues to provide the technical resources and expertise for the biennial District Conventions. At our last Convention in 2014 the district had just received a trailer equipped with - 70 - various video, audio and data equipment to support our conferences, conventions and mission work via a grant and many generous donations from individuals along with the countless man hours of several volunteers. In the past two years the committee has added more equipment so that our district now does not need to rent, borrow, or by other means get equipment to use for covering district events. Other that the facility itself all of the equipment used at this convention to project, record, reinforce the audio in the hall is a district resource. Technically we are mobile and are able to hold small or large scale conferences, conventions and meeting in most anywhere in physical area of our district. Our mobile system has even been used to broadcast live and record on location from a city park via a cellular connection.
We would encourage congregations, schools and other district groups to not only use these equipment resources but the knowledge of the members of the committee who volunteer on this committee to serve the Lord of the Church.
Congregations wanting to initiate or upgrade their web presence are able to do so through the website design and hosting services of the Committee. While the initial purpose of the Technology Committee was to provide streaming video services, maintain the Nebraska District website and mailing list, and provide logistical support to the District in Convention, the role and function of the Committee has expanded exponentially. Some of the services currently available to congregations, schools, and organizations through the Technology Committee include, but are not limited to:
Equipment and Personnel: Through generous gifts and grants our district now has equipment for use for special events and with a group of volunteers to deploy, operate and vast inventory of audio, video and network equipment.
Audio Services: Recommendations for improvement of existing audio reinforcement systems Acoustical evaluation of building physical environments Design recommendations of audio systems for the hearing challenged Detailed design specifications (proposals) for audio reinforcement systems Live on-site demonstrations of audio system design and equipment options Evaluation of audio and video system bids and quotations from contractors Tuning of installed audio equipment to the physical environment Functional evaluation of existing audio reinforcement systems Design of new and upgrade of existing audio reinforcement systems Assistance in setting up, configuring, and running HymnSoft Hearing Loop Systems
Video Services: Maintenance of convention and conference video and document archives System design for recording/streaming worship services Traveling production crew for archiving meeting proceedings
Internet and Computer Services: Maintain video distribution resources for congregations and schools Setup and maintain the District electronic mail lists system - 71 -
Promote, design, and host Congregational websites Design, setup, and maintain public and restricted Nebraska District websites Design of computer network security, firewalls, Cloud, WIFI, Untangle Consultation and design of church and school computer networks End user computer software training of pastors, teachers, and office staff Assistance with virus, spyware, and malware removal
Telephone and Communication Systems: With VoIP service becoming the norm today we offer planning and implementation of these systems for our schools and churches.
Miscellaneous Services: Building and maintenance of the District media library Consultation and design of chancel and church lighting Consultation, design, and development of distance learning curricula Design of electronic distance learning system hardware and software On-site technical support for conventions, conferences, events, and meetings Production of multimedia presentations Discounted prices on technology equipment, telephone systems, & lighting
A simple, readily available tool for requesting the services of the Nebraska District Technology Committee is available through the district website WWW.WELSNE.ORG . Click on the "TECH" link in the upper right corner, identify the assistance being requested, and submit. The appropriate member of the Committee will contact you.
The full list of services available through the Committee can be seen by selecting the "full list" link in the first line of the first paragraph.
As the role, function, and services of the District Technology Committee expanded, it became apparent that a mobile production and support capability was necessary. In December 2013 the Antioch Foundation awarded a financial grant to initiate such capability, funding approximately one-third of the total cost. The technology support at this Convention, (including audio reinforcement, video production broadcast and streaming, and computer network support) is a function of that developing resource.
Technology Committee Recommendations for discussion: NE District Home Mission Boards: The NE Technology Committee is thankful for the on-going support of the congregations of the Nebraska District. The committee also believes that the available resources, personnel, equipment, and services can be better utilized by the many outreach efforts of the District in the future. The Nebraska District Technology Committee encourages the Nebraska District Mission Board and the Colorado District Mission Board to discuss ways to use technology to reach out to new and existing congregations, individual WELS members, and those who may not have the opportunity to attend worship services on a regular basis.
We also encourage the two Mission Boards in the District to consider and communicate ways to assist congregations that are worshiping without the assistance of a called worker. The Nebraska
- 72 -
District Technology Committee looks forward to developing a dynamic working relationship with the evangelism entities of the District.
For the past four years the total cost of the software, and internet connection fees have experienced a modest increase. There are also expenses related to procuring, maintaining, and updating hardware and software necessary to provide the services being requested by the various entities throughout the District. The committee respectfully suggests that the convention continue to support the work of this committee via the district fund be considered at this convention.
Respectfully submitted: NE District Technology Committee: Mr. Greg Boggs, Chairman, Lincoln, NE Rev. Norman Schell, Vice Chairman, Omaha, NE Mr. Jeremy Korell, Secretary, Omaha, NE Rev. Phil Hirsch, Treasurer, Manhattan, KS Mr. Greg Green, Omaha, NE Mr. Don Niemann, Lincoln, NE Mr. Ken Mayer, Omaha, NE Mr. Avery Quandt, Lincoln, NE Teacher David Ring, York, NE Teacher Eric Brucker, Broomfield, CO
- 73 -
Report of the Synodical Compensation Review Committee To The Nebraska District June 2016
One in Christ – Conpensation Review Committee (CRC)
• The 2015 Synod Convention directed the Compensation Review Committee (CRC) to work on a revision of the compensation guidelines. • The CRC is seeking feedback on a number of proposals. • The Synodical Council (SC) intends to present a final proposal to the 2017 synod convention. • The Ad Hoc Commission 2 (AHC2) asked the CRC to consider particularly . . . ‒ Salary increases based more on experience than called workers’ duties or responsibilities ‒ The lack of calls to older pastors and teachers ‒ The difficulty the synod is having in filling principal vacancies ‒ The lack of any mention of early childhood ministry positions in the present guidelines
One in Christ – Conpensation Guidelines Proposal (pp. 73-76)
• The CRC adopted the following goals for the revision: ‒ reflect the Scriptural principle that those who serve in the public ministry are worthy of double honor (1 Timothy 5:17); ‒ recommend appropriate compensation so that gospel servants may devote themselves to the work of the ministry (1 Corinthians 9:1-14); ‒ encourage equity in compensation, so that two called workers doing the same work receive the same compensation; ‒ recognize the value of experience, but place a greater emphasis on responsibilities assigned to the individual worker; ‒ make the guidelines easy for calling bodies to utilize in putting together a compensation package for their called workers; and ‒ will be relatively cost-neutral to the work we do together as a synod as they are implemented
Recommendations for which feedback is requested 1. Calling bodies set aside $1,000 a year for each of their called workers to reimburse costs associated with professional growth 2. Principals be compensated in the same range of columns in the matrix as pastors and missionaries
Teachers A-C Principals B-D Missionaries C-E Sem Prof. D-F
- 74 -
Draft Synod Schedule WELS COMPENSTION GUIDELINES .5% Schedule Adjustment Salary Matrix To SF 2014/2015 2015/2016
Range Spread 14,356 15,074 15,822 16,540 17,287 18,005 18,753 19,471 Range Spread 14,356 15,074 15,792 16,510 17,227 17,945 18,663 19,381 30-Yr Service Incr. 479 502 527 551 576 600 625 649 Increase Ranges A B C D E F G H D From FY14 Experience 0 28,712 30,148 31,584 33,019 34,455 35,891 37,326 38,762 1 29,191 30,651 32,111 33,571 35,031 36,491 37,951 39,411 716 2.1780% 2 29,670 31,153 32,639 34,122 35,607 37,091 38,576 40,060 718 2.1505% 3 30,148 31,656 33,166 34,673 36,184 37,691 39,202 40,709 721 2.1238% 4 30,627 32,158 33,693 35,225 36,760 38,291 39,827 41,358 724 2.0980% 5 31,105 32,660 34,221 35,776 37,336 38,891 40,452 42,007 727 2.0729% 6 31,584 33,163 34,748 36,327 37,912 39,492 41,077 42,656 729 2.0487% 7 32,062 33,665 35,275 36,879 38,489 40,092 41,702 43,305 732 2.0252% 8 32,541 34,168 35,803 37,430 39,065 40,692 42,327 43,954 735 2.0023% 9 33,019 34,670 36,330 37,981 39,641 41,292 42,952 44,603 738 1.9602% 10 33,498 35,173 36,858 38,533 40,217 41,892 43,577 45,252 740 1.9587% 11 33,976 35,675 37,385 39,084 40,794 42,493 44,202 45,901 743 1.9378% 12 34,455 36,178 37,912 39,635 41,370 43,093 44,827 46,550 746 1.9175% 13 34,934 36,680 38,440 40,187 41,946 43,693 45,453 47,199 748 1.8978% 14 35,412 37,183 38,967 40,738 42,522 44,293 46,078 47,848 751 1.8786% 15 35,891 37,685 39,495 41,289 43,099 44,893 46,703 48,497 754 1.8599% 16 36,369 38,188 40,022 41,841 43,675 45,493 47,328 49,146 757 1.8418% 17 36,848 38,690 40,549 42,392 44,251 46,094 47,953 49,795 759 1.8241% 18 37,326 39,193 41,077 42,943 44,827 46,694 48,578 50,444 762 1.8068% 19 37,805 39,695 41,604 43,494 45,404 47,294 49,203 51,093 765 1.7900% 20 38,283 40,197 42,132 44,046 45,980 47,894 49,828 51,742 768 1.7737% 21 38,762 40,700 42,659 44,597 46,556 48,494 50,453 52,391 770 1.7577% 22 39,240 41,202 43,186 45,148 47,132 49,094 51,078 53,041 773 1.7422% 23 39,719 41,705 43,714 45,700 47,709 49,695 51,704 53,690 776 1.7270% 24 40,197 42,207 44,241 46,251 48,285 50,295 52,329 54,339 779 1.7122% 25 40,676 42,710 44,769 46,802 48,861 50,895 52,954 54,988 781 1.6977% 26 41,155 43,212 45,296 47,354 49,437 51,495 53,579 55,637 784 1.6836% 27 41,633 43,715 45,823 47,905 50,014 52,095 54,204 56,286 787 1.6696% 28 42,112 44,217 46,351 48,456 50,590 52,696 54,829 56,935 790 1.6563% 29 42,590 44,720 46,878 49,008 51,166 53,296 55,454 57,584 792 1.6432% 30 43,069 45,222 47,406 49,559 51,742 53,896 56,079 58,233 795 1.6303% 31 43,547 45,725 47,933 50,110 52,319 54,496 56,704 58,882 798 1.6177% 32 44,026 46,227 48,460 50,662 52,895 55,096 57,330 59,531 800 1.6054%
3. The salary matrix provide for increases on the basis of experience from 0-22 years, rather than 0-32 as it is now (not as a way to reduce overall compensation for called workers, but to encourage calling bodies to base compensation more on duties and responsibilities than experience)
- 75 -
Draft Synod Schedule WELS COMPENSTION GUIDELINES .5% Schedule Adjustment Salary Matrix To SF 2014/2015 2015/2016
Range Spread 14,356 15,074 15,822 16,540 17,287 18,005 18,753 19,471 Range Spread 14,356 15,074 15,792 16,510 17,227 17,945 18,663 19,381 30-Yr Service Incr. 479 502 527 551 576 600 625 649 Increase Ranges A B C D E F G H D From FY14 Experience 0 28,712 30,148 31,584 33,019 34,455 35,891 37,326 38,762 1 29,191 30,651 32,111 33,571 35,031 36,491 37,951 39,411 716 2.1780% 2 29,670 31,153 32,639 34,122 35,607 37,091 38,576 40,060 718 2.1505% 3 30,148 31,656 33,166 34,673 36,184 37,691 39,202 40,709 721 2.1238% 4 30,627 32,158 33,693 35,225 36,760 38,291 39,827 41,358 724 2.0980% 5 31,105 32,660 34,221 35,776 37,336 38,891 40,452 42,007 727 2.0729% 6 31,584 33,163 34,748 36,327 37,912 39,492 41,077 42,656 729 2.0487% 7 32,062 33,665 35,275 36,879 38,489 40,092 41,702 43,305 732 2.0252% 8 32,541 34,168 35,803 37,430 39,065 40,692 42,327 43,954 735 2.0023% 9 33,019 34,670 36,330 37,981 39,641 41,292 42,952 44,603 738 1.9602% 10 33,498 35,173 36,858 38,533 40,217 41,892 43,577 45,252 740 1.9587% 11 33,976 35,675 37,385 39,084 40,794 42,493 44,202 45,901 743 1.9378% 12 34,455 36,178 37,912 39,635 41,370 43,093 44,827 46,550 746 1.9175% 13 34,934 36,680 38,440 40,187 41,946 43,693 45,453 47,199 748 1.8978% 14 35,412 37,183 38,967 40,738 42,522 44,293 46,078 47,848 751 1.8786% 15 35,891 37,685 39,495 41,289 43,099 44,893 46,703 48,497 754 1.8599% 16 36,369 38,188 40,022 41,841 43,675 45,493 47,328 49,146 757 1.8418% 17 36,848 38,690 40,549 42,392 44,251 46,094 47,953 49,795 759 1.8241% 18 37,326 39,193 41,077 42,943 44,827 46,694 48,578 50,444 762 1.8068% 19 37,805 39,695 41,604 43,494 45,404 47,294 49,203 51,093 765 1.7900% 20 38,283 40,197 42,132 44,046 45,980 47,894 49,828 51,742 768 1.7737% 21 38,762 40,700 42,659 44,597 46,556 48,494 50,453 52,391 770 1.7577% 22 39,240 41,202 43,186 45,148 47,132 49,094 51,078 53,041 773 1.7422% 23 39,719 41,705 43,714 45,700 47,709 49,695 51,704 53,690 776 1.7270% 24 40,197 42,207 44,241 46,251 48,285 50,295 52,329 54,339 779 1.7122% 25 40,676 42,710 44,769 46,802 48,861 50,895 52,954 54,988 781 1.6977% 26 41,155 43,212 45,296 47,354 49,437 51,495 53,579 55,637 784 1.6836% 27 41,633 43,715 45,823 47,905 50,014 52,095 54,204 56,286 787 1.6696% 28 42,112 44,217 46,351 48,456 50,590 52,696 54,829 56,935 790 1.6563% 29 42,590 44,720 46,878 49,008 51,166 53,296 55,454 57,584 792 1.6432% 30 43,069 45,222 47,406 49,559 51,742 53,896 56,079 58,233 795 1.6303% 31 43,547 45,725 47,933 50,110 52,319 54,496 56,704 58,882 798 1.6177% 32 44,026 46,227 48,460 50,662 52,895 55,096 57,330 59,531 800 1.6054%
4. The salary matrix be broadened by the addition of two columns to the left of column A in the current matrix (to provide for non-degreed called workers) and by the addition of one column to the right of column H in the current matrix (to provide for compensation based more on duties and responsibilities than experience)
- 76 -
Draft Synod Schedule WELS COMPENSATION GUIDELINES 0.75% Inflation Rate AdjustmentRange PROPOSED Salary Matrix (Revised) Based on Compensation Review Comm Recommendations 2017/2018
Range Spread 8,528 9,061 10,660 11,193 11,726 12,259 12,792 13,325 13,858 14,391 14,924 Service Incr. 388 412 485 509 533 557 581 606 630 654 678 Ranges A B C D E F G H I J K Experience 0 23,258 24,712 29,072 30,526 31,980 33,433 34,887 36,341 37,794 39,248 40,701 1 23,646 25,124 29,557 31,035 32,513 33,991 35,468 36,946 38,424 39,902 41,380 2 24,033 25,536 30,042 31,544 33,046 34,548 36,050 37,552 39,054 40,556 42,058 3 24,421 25,948 30,526 32,052 33,579 35,105 36,631 38,158 39,684 41,210 42,736 4 24,809 26,359 31,011 32,561 34,112 35,662 37,213 38,763 40,314 41,864 43,415 5 25,196 26,771 31,495 33,070 34,645 36,219 37,794 39,369 40,944 42,518 44,093 6 25,584 27,183 31,980 33,579 35,178 36,777 38,376 39,975 41,574 43,173 44,772 7 25,971 27,595 32,464 34,087 35,711 37,334 38,957 40,580 42,204 43,827 45,450 8 26,359 28,007 32,949 34,596 36,244 37,891 39,539 41,186 42,833 44,481 46,128 9 26,747 28,419 33,433 35,105 36,777 38,448 40,120 41,792 43,463 45,135 46,807 10 27,134 28,831 33,918 35,614 37,310 39,006 40,701 42,397 44,093 45,789 47,485 11 27,522 29,243 34,402 36,123 37,843 39,563 41,283 43,003 44,723 46,443 48,163 12 27,910 29,654 34,887 36,631 38,376 40,120 41,864 43,609 45,353 47,097 48,842 13 28,297 30,066 35,372 37,140 38,909 40,677 42,446 44,214 45,983 47,752 49,520 14 28,685 30,478 35,856 37,649 39,442 41,234 43,027 44,820 46,613 48,406 50,198 15 29,073 30,890 36,341 38,158 39,975 41,792 43,609 45,426 47,243 49,060 50,877 16 29,460 31,302 36,825 38,666 40,508 42,349 44,190 46,031 47,873 49,714 51,555 17 29,848 31,714 37,310 39,175 41,041 42,906 44,772 46,637 48,503 50,368 52,234 18 30,235 32,126 37,794 39,684 41,574 43,463 45,353 47,243 49,132 51,022 52,912 19 30,623 32,538 38,279 40,193 42,107 44,021 45,935 47,848 49,762 51,676 53,590 20 31,011 32,949 38,763 40,701 42,640 44,578 46,516 48,454 50,392 52,330 54,269 21 31,398 33,361 39,248 41,210 43,173 45,135 47,097 49,060 51,022 52,985 54,947 22 31,786 33,773 39,732 41,719 43,706 45,692 47,679 49,666 51,652 53,639 55,625
5. The range of columns for most ministry positions be increased by one column, resulting in a range of four columns for each (to provide flexibility for calling bodies as they seek to honor the gospel servants in their midst)
6. The range of columns for most ministry positions be increased by one column, resulting in a range of four columns for each (to provide flexibility for calling bodies as they seek to honor the gospel servants in their midst)
- 77 -
PROPOSED WELS SYNOCICAL SALARY RANGE ASSIGNMENTS Current Column New Column Position Assignment Assignment Early Childhood Ministry Teacher w/o degree n/a (new) A - B Early Childhood Ministry Teacher (BS or BA base) n/a (new) C - F Teacher (BS or BA base) A - C C - F Early Childhood Ministry Director n/a (new) D - G Preparatory School Professor B - D D - G Staff Minister B - D D - G Principal B - D E - H Pastor C - E E - H Home Missionary C - E E - H World Missionary C - E E - H Preparatory School Vice President C - E E - H Preparatory School Dean C - E E - H College Professor C - E E - H Center for Mission and Ministry Associate Administrator C - E E - H Associate Center for Mission and Ministry Director n/a (new) E - H Center for Mission and Ministry National Coordinator n/a (new) E - H Mission Counselor C - E E - H Center for Mission and Ministry Administrator D - F F - I Center for Mission and Ministry Director n/a (new) F - I Preparatory School President D - F F - I College Vice President D - F F - I College Dean D - F F - I Seminary Professor D - F F - I Seminary Vice President D - F F - I College President E - G G - J Seminary President E - G G - J Synod President H K
7. A web-based, user-friendly form be produced to assist calling bodies in determining compensation for their workers
8. The CRC work with WELS Human Resources Office to prepare materials for circuit pastors and district presidents to use in helping calling bodies understand and apply the compensation guidelines
9. The Human Resources Office, in conjunction with the district presidents, contact calling bodies annually with materials intended to assist them in determining appropriate compensation packages
The CRC needs the input of the Nebraska District in the form of a report or resolutions adopted by the convention.
- 78 -
Proposal – The Nebraska District Fund
What is the goal of establishing a District Fund? The goal of establishing a District Fund is to simplify the process for congregations in our district to support both the continuing education of our pastors as well as the business and administration of our district.
What is the rationale behind the establishment of a District Fund? The Praesidium of the Nebraska District plans to establish a District Fund for the following reasons: The District Fund will enable congregations to better budget for conventions, conferences, and institutes since the congregational dues will be annually set and communicated to congregations prior to their budgeting cycles. Not only will the District Fund spread out the cost of the biennial District Convention over two years but it will also factor in and stabilize the increased and decreased cost of the convention based on its location (Nebraska or Colorado). The District Fund will provide Mission Boards, Conference Chairmen, and the District Praesidium with a working budget around which they can plan their conferences and institutes. The District Fund will eliminate the need for host congregations to put out offering baskets in an effort to recoup their expenses. The District Fund will create additional accountability for Called Workers to make every effort to attend each convention, conference, and institute (while also reminding them of the many blessings and benefits of being in the Word with their brothers in ministry) since their congregations will have already paid the annual dues for those gatherings. The District Fund will create additional accountability for congregations to see to it that their Called Workers attend all of the conventions, conferences, and institutes (while also reminding them of the many blessings and benefits of being in the Word with their brothers in ministry) for which they have already paid the annual dues. The District Fund will eliminate the need for conference chairmen and treasurers to track down dues from pastors and their congregations. The District Fund will centralize all monies received and all monies spent on conventions, conferences, and institutes with an appointed District Fund Manager who will oversee all of the receipts and disbursements. The District Fund will support the work of the Nebraska District Technology Committee and formally bring the work of that Committee under the auspice of the District Praesidium. The District Fund will take the receipt and disbursement of the technology fund off the plate of the District President. The District Fund will support the work of the WLCFS Member Assistance Program.
What will the District Fund cover? The District Fund will cover the cost of: The Missionaries’ Conference that takes place in January each year The Pastors’ Institute that takes place in April of odd numbered years The District Convention that takes place in June of even numbered years Lodging at District Conventions that take place in Colorado The Western Conference Pastors’ Conference that takes place in October each year The Eastern Conference Pastors’ Conference that takes place in October each year - 79 -
The Praesidium approved work of the District Technology Committee Support of the WLCFS Member Assistance Program The District Fund would not cover the cost of: Travel Costs (gas, mileage, airfare, lodging) for all Conferences, Conventions, and Institutes Dues required for the Teachers’ Conference that takes place in October of each year Any travel costs (gas, mileage, airfare, lodging) associated with that Teachers’ Conference Lodging at District Conventions that take place in Nebraska Circuit Meetings (travel and fees) Summer School opportunities for pastors held annually in both Colorado and Nebraska
How will the District Technology Committee make use of their portion of the District Fund? The District Technology Committee supports the work and ministry of our District by: Supporting the District Website as a common site to connect the district churches and schools Servicing and maintaining the District Email Server for lay members, teachers, and pastors Coordinating the registration system for District Convention Streaming the presentations and papers at various Conventions, Institutes, and Conferences as directed by the Praesidium Streaming worship for congregations within the District who have the necessary equipment to do so (participating congregations currently pay a $500 annual fee for this service) Helping congregations find other ways to stream worship (or the sermon) over the internet without using the District Server Assisting churches and schools in our District with their sound systems, hearing loops, projection and display systems, data, phone systems, and other needs/wants that may be identified Consulting with congregations who have questions about or who are looking for recommendations regarding their technology needs The expenses of the District Technology Committee include: The software and equipment that the District Technology Committee owns and uses needs regular and ongoing upgrades The maintenance of, care for, and replacement of the equipment that the District Technology Committee owns Travel costs (mileage and lodging) that the District Technology Committee incurs when traveling to Conventions, Conferences, and Institutes Thanks to a grant in 2012 the District Technology Committee now has a fully equipped mobile trailer that can cover almost any A/V need in our District; however, the trailer does require ongoing insurance and license fees
How much funding will be needed annually? January Missionaries’ Conference $4,000 Spring Pastors’ Institute $1,050 June District Convention $13,000 October Pastors’ Conferences $800 Technology Fund $7,500 WLCFS Member Assistance $1,500 TOTAL $27,850 - 80 -
How will this be divided among the congregations of our district? Exploratory $0 4 locations $0 < 25 communicants $75 6 churches $450 25-50 communicants $175 13 churches $2275 51-75 communicants $225 16 churches $3600 76-100 communicants $275 8 churches $2200 101-125 communicants $325 12 churches $3900 126-150 communicants $375 7 churches $2625 151-175 communicants $425 4 churches $1700 176-200 communicants $475 4 churches $1900 201-225 communicants $525 2 churches $1050 226-250 communicants $575 2 churches $1150 251-275 communicants $625 3 churches $1875 276-300 communicants $675 2 churches $1350 301-325 communicants $725 1 church $725 326-350 communicants $775 1 church $775 351-375 communicants $825 1 church $825 376-400 communicants $875 0 churches $0 401-425 communicants $925 3 churches $2775 426-450 communicants $975 1 church $975 Total $30,150
Aren’t we already budgeting for and paying these expenses? Yes! Congregations are already making payments that enable their pastors and other Called workers to attend Pastors’ Conferences, Missionaries’ Conference, the Spring Pastors’ Institute, and the Biennial District Convention. Often congregations send their payments to three or four different entities at three or four different times of year. Also, depending on the year (Pastors’ Institutes held in odd numbered years and District Conventions held in even numbered years) and depending on the location of the District Convention, these amounts could vary greatly from year to year. One of the benefits of establishing the District Fund is not only to centralize the payments for all of these gatherings (appointing a District Fund Manager to oversee all of the receipts and disbursements), but to also stabilize this annual amount by averaging it out over a six year, three district convention schedule.
How soon will this begin? February 2016 The District Praesidium appointed a two man team to weigh the pros and cons of establishing a District Fund and to bring them a recommendation on whether or not this idea should be pursued further.
- 81 -
March 2016 The two man team researched, studied, and discussed the idea of establishing a District Fund, agreed that it would indeed be wise to establish a District Fund, and drafted a document for the Praesidium to review. March 2016 The document was reviewed and approved by the Praesidium. April 2016 The Praesidium shared the document with a cross-section of congregations within the district. April 2016 Based on feedback from those congregations, the Praesidium made some revisions to the initial document. May 2016 A final draft of the document will be submitted to Floor Committee #2 – Nebraska District Work – in the form of a report at the Nebraska District Convention for review. May 2016 Floor Committee #2 – Nebraska District Work – will share the document with the pastors, teachers, and congregations of the Nebraska District prior to the District Convention. June 2016 The two man team will be available at the Nebraska District Convention as well as at the disposal of Floor Committee #2 to answer any questions about the document. June 2016 The Praesidium will establish the District Fund following the 2016 District Convention and appoint a District Fund Manager to oversee the fund. July 2016 Congregations who operate on fiscal year budgets will include their respective annual dues in their 2016-17 budgets. October 2016 Payment will be due from those congregations who operate on a fiscal year budget. January 2017 Congregations who operate on calendar year budgets will include their respective annual dues in their 2017 budgets. April 2017 Payment will be due from those congregations who operating on a calendar year budget. June 2018 Opportunity at the Nebraska District Convention for delegates to react to a Floor Committee report regarding the District Fund.
Respectfully submitted,
Pastor Steve Helwig Pastor Dave Wietzke
- 82 -
Floor Committee #1 Report – District President’s Report
Floor Committee #1 – President’s Report Reference: Report of the District President Resolution No. 1 Subject: Application for Membership
WHEREAS 1) The following three candidates were received into membership during the 2015 convention of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and have requested membership in the Nebraska District. 1. Teacher candidate Jacob Ziel, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, from MLC. 2. Pastor candidate Kendall Cook, Shepherd of Peace, Norfolk, Nebraska, from WLS. 3. Pastor candidate Thaddeus Flitter, Zion, Valentine, Nebraska, from WLS; and
WHEREAS 2) District President Philip Hirsch reports the pastor and teachers who have transferred to our district from other districts in our synod; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we receive: 1. Teacher candidate Jacob Ziel, Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School, Waco, Nebraska, from MLC. 2. Pastor candidate Kendall Cook, Shepherd of Peace, Norfolk, Nebraska, from WLS. 4. Pastor candidate Thaddeus Flitter, Zion, Valentine, Nebraska, from WLS as voting members of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod; and be it finally
Resolved, b) that we welcome those individuals received into membership at the 2015 synod convention and those who have transferred to us from other districts.
Reference: Report of the District President, Page A-1 Resolution No. 2 Subject: New Application for Membership
WHEREAS 1) 1. Teacher candidate Jason Dutcher, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, KS. 2. Teacher candidate Benjamin Hansen, Immanuel, Hadar, NE. 3. Teacher candidate Michael Paulsen, St. Paul’s, Norfolk, NE. 4. Teacher candidate Thomas Stob, Zion, Denver were assigned to the Nebraska District in the spring of 2016; and
WHEREAS 2) 5. Teacher Phil Scriver, Christ Our Redeemer, Aurora, CO has applied for membership; therefore, be it
- 83 -
Resolved, a) that we receive: 1. Teacher candidate Jason Dutcher, Mt. Olive, Overland Park, KS 2. Teacher candidate Benjamin Hansen, Immanuel, Hadar, NE. 3. Teacher candidate Michael Paulsen, St. Paul’s, Norfolk, NE. 4. Teacher candidate Thomas Stob, Zion, Denver. 5. Teacher Phil Scriver, Christ Our Redeemer, Aurora, CO as voting members of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the Nebraska District.
Reference: Report of the District President, Pages A-3, A-4 Resolution No. 3 Subject: Transfers In
WHEREAS 1) 1. Rev. David Schmidt from the Dakota-Montana District. 2. Rev. emeritus Daniel Falck from the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 3. Rev. Daniel Johnston from the Western Wisconsin District. 4. Rev. John Koester from the South Central District. 5. Rev. Frederic Berger from the Dakota-Montana District. 6. Rev. Dennis Strong from the Minnesota District. 7. Rev. Joel Vogel from the Michigan District. 8. Teacher Joshua Danell from the Minnesota District. 9. Teacher Jacob Unke from the Arizona-California District. 10. Teacher Steven Springborn from the Arizona-California District. 11. Rev. Steven Prahl from the South Atlantic District. 12. Rev. emeritus Kerry Kronebusch from the Arizona-California District. 13. Rev. Jeffrey Enderle from the Arizona-California District. 14. Rev. Thomas Schneider from the Michigan District were transferred to the Nebraska District; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we receive:
1. Rev. David Schmidt from the Dakota-Montana District. 2. Rev. emeritus Daniel Falck from the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 3. Rev. Daniel Johnston from the Western Wisconsin District. 4. Rev. John Koester from the South Central District. 5. Rev. Frederic Berger from the Dakota-Montana District. 6. Rev. Dennis Strong from the Minnesota District. 7. Rev. Joel Vogel from the Michigan District. 8. Teacher Joshua Danell from the Minnesota District. 9. Teacher Jacob Unke from the Arizona-California District. 10. Teacher Steven Springborn from the Arizona-California District. 11. Rev. Steven Prahl from the South Atlantic District. 12. Rev. emeritus Kerry Kronebusch from the Arizona-California District. 13. Rev. Jeffrey Enderle from the Arizona-California District. 14. Rev. Thomas Schneider from the Michigan District as voting members of the Nebraska District. - 84 -
Reference: Report of the District President, Page A-4 Resolution No. 4 Subject: Transfers Out
WHEREAS 1) The following men accepted calls out of the Nebraska District 1. Rev. Matthew Krenke to the Western Wisconsin District. 5. Rev. Stephen Raddatz to the Michigan District. 6. Rev. emeritus Gary Schult to the Michigan District. 7. Rev. Matthew Kiecker to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 8. Teacher Seth Fitzsimmons to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 9. Teacher Joshua Johnson to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 10. Rev. James Fleming to the Northern Wisconsin District. 11. Rev. Chad Walta to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 12. Rev. Earle Treptow to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 13. Rev. Wayne Uhlhorn to the Arizona-California District; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we transfer the following men to their respective districts 1. Rev. Matthew Krenke to the Western Wisconsin District. 2. Rev. Stephen Raddatz to the Michigan District. 3. Rev. emeritus Gary Schult to the Michigan District. 4. Rev. Matthew Kiecker to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 5. Teacher Seth Fitzsimmons to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 6. Teacher Joshua Johnson to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 7. Rev. James Fleming to the Northern Wisconsin District. 8. Rev. Chad Walta to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 9. Rev. Earle Treptow to the Southeastern Wisconsin District. 10. Rev. Wayne Uhlhorn to the Arizona-California District.
Reference: Report of the District President Resolution No. 5 Subject: Appointments
WHEREAS 1) The District President is charged constitutionally with the responsibility of filling vacancies in all boards and committees of the district as well as the office of circuit pastor (District Constitution ARTICLE VI section 1.e); and
WHEREAS 2) all appointments made between district conventions shall be ratified at the next district convention (District Constitution ARTICLE XXVII); and
WHEREAS 3) the Nebraska District President during the past biennium appointed those listed in the Report of the District President on page A-5; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we ratify these appointments:
- 85 -
1. Rev. John Stelter as member of the Nebraska District Mission Board. 2. Rev. Jesse Stern as coordinator for Commission on Evangelism. 3. Rev. Don Windsperger as circuit pastor for the Rosebud Circuit. 4. Rev. Jon Rockhoff as chairman for the Ministry of Christian Giving Commission. 5. Rev. Tim Westendorf as member of the Ministry of Christian Giving Commission. 6. Rev. Phillip Sievert as assistant to the circuit pastor of the Northern Circuit. 7. Rev. Jeremy Laitinen as member of the Eastern Conference Continuing Education Committee. 8. Teacher Josh Glowicki as District Schools Coordinator. 9. Rev. Wayne Oblender as circuit pastor for the Platte Circuit. 10. Mrs. Julianne Hardinger to the Commission on Worship. 11. Teacher Claire Natsis to the Commission on Worship. 12. Rev. Nathanael Seelow to the Commission on Worship. 13. Rev. Stephen Kruschel as member of the Constitution Committee. 14. Rev. Will Harley as member of the Constitution Committee. 15. Rev. Jesse Stern as member of the Colorado District Mission Board. 16. Rev. Thomas Jeske as 2nd Vice President of the Nebraska District.
Reference: Report of the District President, Pages A-5, A-6 Resolution No. 6 Subject: Statistics
WHEREAS 1) The Lord granted many congregations, workers and facilities the privilege of celebrating anniversaries during the past biennium; and
WHEREAS 2) the Lord granted Christ, Denver, Colorado the privilege to dedicate a new addition to their facilities during the past biennium; and
WHEREAS 3) the Lord granted Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School the privilege to dedicate a new school building during the past biennium; and
WHEREAS 4) the Lord called to himself those who served at one time in the Nebraska District
1. Pastor emeritus Marvin Doelger – July 6, 2014. 2. Pastor emeritus Harry Hagedorn – April 17, 2015. 3. Teacher emeritus Laverna Everts – August 5, 2015. 4. Pastor emeritus Don Laude—May 22, 2016; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we thank the Lord for his blessings to his church within our district.
- 86 -
Reference: None Subject: Expression of Gratitude
We thank Professor Earle Treptow for his work as district president. May God continue to bless our church body through him and his ministry.
Respectfully Submitted,
Chairman: Rev. Troy Jacobs Rev. Mark Voss Rev. Don Windsperger Rev. Frederic Berger Rev. Brent Merten Rev. Jeff Enderle Rev. John Koester Mr. Jeremiah Drews Mr. Rick Lohmiller Mr. Jonathan Mayer Mr. Robert Grafe Mr. Alton Masske
- 87 -
Floor Committee #2 Report – Nebraska District Work
Reference: None Subject: Offering Designation
We recommend that the offering of $1,420 received at the 50th biennial Nebraska District Convention opening service be designated for the “One in Christ” WELS debt elimination.
Reference: Reports of the two mission boards, district commissions, Nebraska District Fund, and other district committee reports Subject: Thanksgiving, Acknowledgments and Support
A new district president has been elected and called. God’s richest blessings to Pastor Hirsch in his service on our behalf. We also pray for his family and the saints in Manhattan, KS as they prepare for this significant transition.
We take another opportunity to thank the previous District President, Professor Earle Treptow, for his faithful service throughout the past six years. The mind of a theologian, the heart of a pastor, and a great love for the Lord and his Church were so very evident in his service on our behalf. The Lord is ultimately the one who shepherds his Church, but graciously and astoundingly he chooses to do much of that work through simple, sinful (but washed) men like Professor Treptow. In this small, but formal way, we thank our God for the great work He accomplished through Earle. We thank him for faithful shepherding of our district and wish him God’s blessings as he uses his many God-given gifts at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary.
We thank the Colorado and Nebraska District Mission Boards for continuing to encourage and assist our congregations to reach the lost in our district.
We rejoice for the new opportunities which the eight new home mission starts will provide to reach new people with the gospel throughout the country, one of which is in our district (Lehi, UT).
We ask continued blessings for the three established home missions in the Eastern Conference: Living Savior, Blair, NE; Grace Hmong, Kansas City, KS; Good Shepherd (Sudanese) Omaha, NE.
We acknowledge and give thanks for more-than-a-decade of service on the NE DMB by Pastor Steve Helwig. He has been an amazing blessing to our district’s work of outreach and evangelism. We pray for God’s continued grace upon the work of the NE DMB and especially its new chairman.
We ask continued blessings on the ten established home missions in the Western Conference (Christ, Denver, CO; Carbon Valley, Firestone, CO; Eternal Rock, Castle Rock, CO; Foundation, Colorado Springs, CO; Living Hope, Commerce City, CO; Living Word, Montrose, CO; Living Shepherd, Laramie, WY; Christ the Rock, Farmington, NM; New Mission Start, Lehi, UT; Redemption, St. George, UT).
- 88 -
We acknowledge and give thanks for the many years of service Keith Eldred and Pastor Wayne Uhlhorn (chairman) gave to our Colorado DMB and wish them God’s blessings on their new endeavors. We also ask the Lord to bless its new Chairman, Pastor Matt Frey, with wisdom and strength to continue the DMB’s good work.
We give thanks for the many blessings of our two Nebraska District high schools; the service of the faculty, staff and 90 students enrolled at NELHS, along with faculty, staff and 60 students enrolled at RMLHS.
We recognize a significant decision to approve a Mission Advancement Director to NELHS staff and ask for God’s blessing upon that position.
We recognize the blessings and challenges of a new permanent home for RMLHS and pray the Lord grant continued success in their new location.
We recognize the various commissions that serve and function throughout our district (Evangelism, Worship, Youth and Family Ministry, Lutheran Schools, Adult Discipleship, and Special Ministries). We give thanks to God for them and pray for continued energy and blessings as they strive to serve the Lord of the Church.
Regarding the District Fund report, we give thanks for the time and effort the special Nebraska District Fund committee put into this matter.
We give thanks to the Nebraska District praesidium for, in good order and brotherly love, putting the potential fund before the brothers in convention seeking our thoughts and feedback.
We acknowledge the fourteen-point rationale behind the establishment of a Nebraska District Fund and, as a committee, support its implementation.
Reference: None Resolution No. 1
Subject: Reception of Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming
WHEREAS 1) Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming has submitted a constitution which conforms to the doctrinal standard and norms of orthodox confessional Lutheran church polity, and
WHEREAS 2) Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming has requested admission to the Nebraska District and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming be officially recognized and received as a member in good standing of our Nebraska District and of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. - 89 -
Reference: None Resolution No. 2 Subject: Eastern Circuit Re-Naming
WHEREAS 1) The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) Nebraska District stretches from far western Iowa to St. George, Utah; and
WHEREAS 2) the Eastern circuit is a part of the Eastern Conference of the Nebraska District; and
WHEREAS 3) this circuit is not the easternmost circuit of the Eastern Conference; and
WHEREAS 4) confusion can be caused by the doubling up of the word “Eastern;” and
WHEREAS 5) the Eastern Circuit received its name years ago when the boundaries of the Nebraska District were different; and
WHEREAS 6) this circuit is trying to establish its identity, to call workers to serve there, and to consider new mission start-ups in this part of the United States; and
WHEREAS 7) this name does not identify or communicate anything about the nine congregations of this circuit; and
WHEREAS 8) the names of districts, conferences, and circuits generally use historical or geographical references to identify them; and
WHEREAS 9) the Blue River runs through or near many of the communities that these congregations serve: therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that the name of the Eastern Circuit be changed to the Blue River Circuit.
Reference: None Resolution No. 3 Subject: Synod Convention Representatives
WHEREAS 1) A systematic rotation has been established to send pastors, teachers, and lay delegates to the Synod Convention; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that the following congregations represent the Nebraska District at the Synod Convention in 2017:
The Western Conference Delegate Congregations (5) Cheyenne, WY Good Shepherd Colorado Springs, CO Fount of Life Longmont, CO Our Savior - 90 -
Denver, CO Christ Farmington, NM Christ the Rock
Alternate #1—Greeley, CO Shepherd of the Hills #2—Fort Collins, CO St. Peters
The Eastern Conference Delegate Congregations (9) Seward, NE (Eastern) Grace Martin, SD (Rosebud) Our Redeemer Grand Island, NE (Platte) Christ Beatrice, NE (Eastern) Christ Wichita, KS (MidAmerica) Messiah Broken Bow, NE (Platte) St. Paul Kansas City, KS (MidAmer)Grace Hmong Hoskins, NE (3Rivers) Trinity Burke, SD (Rosebud) Grace
Alternate #1—O’Neil, NE (Rosbud) Beautiful Savior #2—Grafton, NE (Platte) Trinity #3—Lincoln, NE (Eastern) Mount Olive
And be it further
Resolved, b) That the following pastors represent the Nebraska District at the Synod Convention in 2017:
The Western Conference Delegate Pastors Rev. Michael Quandt Rev. Dennis Strong Rev. Tim Westendorf
Alternate #1—Rev. Michael Traudt #2—Rev. Jared Oldenberg
The Eastern Conference Delegate Pastors Rev. Michael Wolff (Rosebud) Rev. Don Windsperger (Rosebud) Rev. Chris Esmay (South)
Alternate #1—Rev. Roger Quandt - 91 -
#2—Rev. Wayne Oblender
And be it finally
Resolved, c) that the following teachers and/or staff ministers represent the Nebraska District at the Synod Convention in 2017:
Delegate Teacher Mr. Jacob Zimmerman Mr. Fredrick Lohmiller
Alternate #1 - Mr. Joel Lauber
Respectfully Submitted,
Chairman: Rev. David Koelpin Secretary: Rev. Noah Bater Rev. Seth Haakenson Rev. Steve Helwig Rev. Mike Wolff Rev. Tim Westendorf Mr. Josh Glowicki Mr. Brad Jensen Mr. Jeremy Korell Mr. David Brandt Mr. Brian Scheele Mr. Detlef Gartzke
- 92 -
Floor Committee #3 Report – Synod President / Conference of Presidents / Synodical Council
Reference: RTTD pp. 19-21 (23-25) Resolution No. 1 Subject: Joint Statement Regarding the Termination of Fellowship
WHEREAS 1) the “Joint Statement” was drafted in 1990 and was revised in 2015; and
WHEREAS 2) agreement on the doctrine of church fellowship would be a necessary first step toward the restoration of God-pleasing fellowship between the CLC, ELS, and WELS; and
WHEREAS 3) this “Joint Statement”, if and when adopted by the three synods, will supersede all previous statements or interpretations of previous statements that are in conflict with it; therefore, be it
Resolved a) that we thank the 9 members who formulated the statement; and be it it further
Resolved b) that we thank the Lord for opening doors to discuss these matters; and be it further
Resolved c) that we make time on agendas in pastoral circuits for Scriptural study of this document; and be it further
Resolved d) that we use this statement as a starting point for further fellowship; and be it finally
Resolved e) that we pray for true unity.
Reference: RTTD p. 4 Subject: Voters' assemblies
We thank the Conference of Presidents (COP) for their attention and work toward clarifying the need for orderly governance of the ministry carried out by the work of our Synod’s congregations. We note that the COP’s adopted resolution does not allow for a congregation's constitution or bylaws to be approved without a provision for voters’ assemblies. Congregations are encouraged to review the resolution they have adopted and consider how its directives might be best implemented.
Floor Committee #3 - Synod President/Conference of Presidents/Synodical Council Reference: RTTD p. 57 (63-67, 70-73) Subject: Long Range Planning
1. The Synodical Council adopted an initial Long-Range Plan for 2011-2017 (pages 63-67), including specific goals provided by the individual areas of ministry.
2. The Synodical Council has presented a Draft Long-Range Plan for 2018-2025 (pages 70-73). The points include “What you will recognize” from the previous plan (many things are carried over) and “What looks new” (new projects or a shift in focus) in the current plan.
- 93 -
3. The biggest visible difference in the proposed “road map” for our Synod is that it does not include numerical goals. Those will be again proposed by each area of ministry, rather than “top-down” expectations by the Synodical Council.
Reference: RTTD pp. 17-18 Subject: Translation Liaison Committee
The purpose of the Translation Liaison Committee (TLC) is to “evaluate major Bible translations; to communicate with their editors and publishers; to offer, when appropriate, suggestions to improve such translations; and to share its findings with the Synod at large" (Synod Proceedings, p. 68). In pursuit of that goal the TLC has submitted suggestions to Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) editors, the English Standard Version (ESV) oversight committee, and Dr. Douglas Moo, chairman of the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) overseeing the New International Version (NIV).
Fifty-six (56) pages of “Global recommendations” not limited to passage or context and one thousand, thirty-one (1,031) recommendations on individual passages were submitted to the HCSB. In July 2015 WELS submitted some recommendations to the ESV oversight committee for consideration, but they have already stated that they are not interested in making substantial changes to the text. In May 2016 the TLC was invited to send recommendations to the NIV CBT. What a blessing to have so many high- quality English Bible translations.
Respectfully submitted,
Rev. Matt Holtz, Chairman Teacher Jeffrey Falck, Secretary Rev. Matt Frey Rev. Mark Haefner Rev. William Harley Rev. Jeremy Laitinen Rev. Steve Prahl Rev. Rodney Rixe Mr. Ben Henning Mr. Martin Karst Mr. Wes Schroeder Mr. Richard Smith
- 94 -
Floor Committee #4 Report – Ministerial Education
Reference: RTTD, pages 126-145
Throughout our Ministerial Education system, the Lord of the Church has provided numerous pastors, teachers, and staff that continue to train future workers for our Lord's vineyard. We thank the LORD for the faithful service of those who are serving at our ministerial education schools (Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary [WLS], Martin Luther College [MLC], Luther Preparatory School [LPS], and Michigan Lutheran Seminary [MLS]). We especially note the faithful service of those who are retiring this year from the public ministry: Lyle Lange, professor of theology, Wayne Wagner, professor of music—both at MLC, as well as Robert Krueger, professor of Latin and German at LPS.
This past year LPS celebrated 150 years of existence, and we thank God for the many blessings that he has given LPS over the past 15 decades.
We would like to draw your attention to the work of our schools as they… Practice faithful stewardship in providing financial assistance to their students and in providing necessary maintenance to their campuses; Continue to properly and effectively train our future called workers through the early-field training that they are giving their students, so that they can get a taste of and a feel for full- time ministry; Seek to continue to develop the mentoring program that is established for new teachers for the first two years of their ministry; Continue in their outreach efforts in recruiting future students.
One final item to note is the exploration of LPS' participation in the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program [WPCP], often referred to as "school choice." Participation in the program proposes to benefit WELS parents of modest means who desire to send their children to LPS.
A potential conflict exists in the current enrollment policies of LPS, which were ratified by the Synod in convention, and the WPCP requirement that any qualified student must be admitted. We trust that the Governing Board has done and will do their due diligence in this matter as they continue to explore whether this program is truly beneficial to the mission and ministry of LPS.
May the Lord of the Church continue to bless our Ministerial Education schools and move us to support our schools with our generous offerings and with our earnest prayer.
In Christ's service,
Rev. Nathanael P. Seelow, Chairman Rev. Tony Allard Mr. Josh Danell Mr. Detlef Gartzke Mr. Joe Gumm Rev. Steve Kahrs Rev. Wayne Oblender
- 95 -
Mr. Dale Pohlman Rev. Mike Quandt Mr. Mark Tesch Mr. Robert Schmidt Mr. Daniel Schoenbeck
- 96 -
Floor Committee #5 Report – Home Missions / World Missions / Joint Mission Council
Reference: RTTD pp. 113-116 Subject: Board of World Missions
With Gratitude we note the following: We thank the Lord of the church for the many opportunities for Gospel outreach in which the Board for World Missions is engaged. The vastness of their work may be overwhelming and yet is incredibly exciting. As many Christians have endured before us, we are amazed what God can do through the persecution of his church. In multiple places, where our missionaries have been forced to flee, we see the Gospel taking root and flourishing (Pakistan, Indonesia, East Asia). We thank God for the gift of online education through which we have been able to continue to spiritually feed souls even when on the run and at a distance. We thank God for those Christians around the world who are eager for confessional Biblical teachings. We thank God for the amazing opportunities we are seeing in East Asia.
We encourage the following: We encourage the continuing outpouring of humanitarian aid to those in need around the world (Malawi, Romani). These acts of love open doors for the Gospel and simply reflect our compassion for those suffering.
Reference: RTTD pp. 117-120 Subject: Joint Missions Council
With Gratitude we note the following: We are amazed at the foreign-born opportunities here on our shores: 40 million foreign-born immigrants, 85% who speak multiple languages in their homes. An example of the fruits of our Gospel outreach to foreign born immigrants can be found in the incredible journey of our Sudanese congregations in Des Moines and Omaha. We thank God for the faithful work of Pastor Peter Bur who is serving as coordinator of the South Sudanese ministry. We thank the Lord of the church for Pastor Bounkeo Lor and the Hmong congregation in Kansas City, Kansas. They are the first Hmong congregation in our fellowship to purchase and own their own facility.
We encourage the following: We recognize the increasing globalization of our world and thus the connections between our World and Home Mission fields. The ongoing cooperation between these entities is encouraging and in the end serves souls. We would encourage the Joint Mission Council and Home Missions to recognize that the vast majority of these “at home” opportunities are disproportionately in large cities. The first stopping point for most immigrants are in these cities. If we want to reach immigrants, we will find them in our major Global cities.
- 97 -
We note with approval the appointment of the International Recruitment Director. We pray this position helps coordinate and capitalize on the opportunities here and abroad.
Reference: RTTD pp. 121-125 Subject: Board of Home Missions
With Gratitude we note the following: We thank the Board for Home Missions for the clarification and simplification of mission categorizations (subsidized and unsubsidized missions) and that, whether subsidized or unsubsidized, these are missions working to share the Gospel. We thank God for the partnership between the Ministry of Christian Giving and Home Missions. We encourage transparency when reaching out to donors regarding where their donations are going and who those donations are supporting. If these are gifts which will contribute over and above a mission’s subsidy, donors should know that. If their gifts to a specific mission will result in lowered subsidy of the same amount for that mission, they should know that as well. We thank God and applaud Home Missions for the aggressive mission advancement which has been encouraged and realized within our Synod. We thank God for the many new missions we have been opening year after year. Let us continue and increase our boldness in World and Home Missions. The time is short, and people need Jesus.
We encourage the following: We encourage the continued education surrounding the Multi-Site concept, and encourage congregations to consider attending the November 2016 National Multi-Site Conference for WELS churches to be held in Tucson, Arizona. We pray this concept helps us maximize resources, thus reaching more souls who are lost. We encourage a greater emphasis on Urban Ministry. Other than a small statement at the very end of the report, no mention was made of ministry to cities and urban centers. In addition to the amount of immigrants which these cities hold, global cities are growing at a disproportionate rate as compared to other areas of our nation. We must formally recognize and mobilize to meet people where they are, and they are increasingly in cities. We would like to encourage all congregations to pass along names of their members attending college to our Campus Ministry Committee. The only way we can support our students in universities is if we know they are there. We encourage vigorous support of missions through the CMO.
Respectfully submitted,
Chair: Rev. Shane Krause (Mt. Olive, Overland Park, KS) Secretary: Rev. Tim Spiegelberg (Carbon Valley, Firestone, CO) Mr. Rodney Bergmeier (Zion, Clatonia, NE) Mr. Scott Brown (St. Paul’s, Norfolk, NE) Rev. Chris Esmay (Beautiful Savior, Topeka, KS) Mr. Darin Krueger (St. Johns, Cortland, NE) Mr. James Oberlander (Grace, Geneva NE) Rev. Jesse Stern (Peace, Boulder, CO) Rev. Mike Traudt (Our Savior’s, Longmont, CO) - 98 -
Rev. Joel Vogel (St. Mark, Lincoln, NE) Mr. Paul Waker (Hope, Manhattan, KS) Mr. Benjy Wells (NELHS, Waco, NE) Mr. Rick Wilking (Shepherd of the Valley, Westminster, CO)
- 99 -
Floor Committee #6 Report – Congregation and Ministry Support Group
Reference: Congregation and Ministry Support Group RTTD p. 48-51, 60 Resolution No. 1
Subject: Calling a Director for the Commission on Youth and Family Ministry and the Commission on Adult Discipleship.
WHEREAS 1) We recognize that the Commission on Youth and Family Ministry and the Commission on Adult Discipleship would serve our church body much better with a director for their work; and
WHEREAS 2) The Conference of Presidents and the Synodical Council have voiced strong support for this position; and
WHEREAS 3) It may be difficult to fulfill a short term call with uncertain funding; and
WHEREAS 4) This recommendation is coming from the Synodical Council and the Conference of Presidents; therefore be it
Resolved, a) that we support approval of this joint director position in principle; and be it further
Resolved, b) that we seek full funding to make the position permanent; and be it further
Resolved, c) that the Conference of Presidents and the Synodical Council create a clearly laid out set of expectations for the called worker to be successful in this position; and be it finally
Resolved, d) that we encourage the Conference of Presidents and Synodical Council to fill this position.
Respectfully Submitted
Chairman: Rev. Mark Reichert Rev. Tom Schneider Rev. John Stelter Rev. Nate Wilke Rev. Josh Hillman Rev. Paul Biedenbender Mr. Phil Adickes Mr. Tim Tobeck Mr. Jacob Zimmerman
- 100 -
Floor Committee #7 Report – WELS Subsidiaries and Affiliate
Reference: RTTD p. 146-162 Subject: Blessings and Challenges
As Northwestern Publishing House celebrates their 125th anniversary, we thank them for their service of producing good Lutheran, Christ-centered literature, through which people’s faith is nourished and strengthened. We recognize the challenges that they face. Since WELS membership is not growing, NPH’s primary consumer base also is not growing. Also, church budgets are shrinking, leading to a decline in buying church supply materials from NPH. But we rejoice that through those challenges, NPH continues to work hard to proclaim the Gospel, especially by using technology. For example, what a blessing it is that the meditations app has had 41,000 downloads in more than 150 countries. We encourage all of you to make use of NPH’s work and to let your members and congregations know about the good material that it produces.
In addition, we thank God for the work of the Publication Coordinating Commission, WELS Historical Institute, Church Extension Fund, WELS Foundation, and the WELS Investment Fund, which recently combined a position with the WELS Foundation to streamline work and save money.
And finally we thank God for the WELS Benefit Plans Office and the work that they do to position VEBA, Pension and the Shepherd Plans for long term stability. We especially rejoice that many congregations have seen the value of using WELS VEBA, even after the passing of the Affordable Care Act, and we pray that this trend continues.
Respectfully Submitted
Pastor Joel Spaude—chairman Pastor Dan Frey Pastor Timm O Meyer Pastor Dennis Strong Pastor Kendall Cook Mr. John Moor Mr. Ardean Nunnenkamp Mr. Ted Rabenberg Mr. Caleb Mosel Mr. David Heberer
- 101 -
Floor Committee #8 Report – Finances
Reference: RTTD, pp 102-107 Resolution No. 1 Subject: WELS Finances
WHEREAS 1) We recognize that our God is the giver of every good and perfect gift; and
WHEREAS 2) Of the $31,836,793 total member financial support given to the WELS, the major portion ($21,507,137) of funding for the mission and ministry of the WELS comes from congregational mission offerings (CMO); and
WHEREAS 3) CMO reached a record high in 2015 (2.9% or $285,000 above subscriptions); and
WHEREAS 4) CMO subscriptions for 2016 were 1.8% lower than 2015 CMO receipts; and
WHEREAS 5) CMO subscriptions have risen an average of only .5% over the last five years; and
WHEREAS 6) costs of ministry have been increasing about 3% per year; and
WHEREAS 7) cost savings resulting in lower than planned expenditures have occurred, but cannot be counted on; and
WHEREAS 8) investments in restricted and unrestricted funds experience market downturns, reducing another major revenue stream to fund the ministry plan; and
WHEREAS 9) other unrestricted gifts, bequests, and grants fluctuate greatly; and
WHEREAS 10) the Financial Stabilization Fund (FSF) since fiscal year 2010 (FY10) has provided funds to make up shortfalls in the CMO and other revenue streams needed to produce a balanced budget for the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS 11) the Synodical Council (SC) has developed and adjusted the ministry plan so budgets have been balanced without mid-year adjustments (crisis management!); and
WHEREAS 12) continuing to use the reduced FSF to make up for shortfalls in CMO subscriptions to support the ministry plan is not sustainable; therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we thank God for every penny he has given to his people; and be it further
Resolved, b) that we pray God to continue to bless us with the money needed to do the work he has called us to do, as he has graciously promised, since “God’s work, done in God’s way, will never lack God’s supply” (Hudson Taylor); and be it further
- 102 -
Resolved, c) that we thank God for every penny God’s people in the WELS in faith have given to glorify God and fund the ministry of the WELS, also through the CMO; and be it further
Resolved, d) that we ask God to cause each member of our congregations to grow in faithful stewardship and the grace of giving; and be it further
Resolved, e) that we thank God for the wisdom he gave which resulted in the creation of the FSF, which has allowed the SC to make ministry plan adjustments since FY10 due to unexpected shortfalls in revenue, without mid-year reductions in ministry or emergency stewardship drives; and be it further
Resolved, f) that we thank God and the SC for the wise, responsible way the SC has developed and managed the last biennium’s ministry plan (FY15 and FY16); and be it finally
Resolved, g) that the Conference of Presidents (COP) consider every God-pleasing course of action to promote generous, increasing CMO subscriptions in all our congregations, especially through the circuit pastor, particularly in those congregations who currently make no CMO subscription.
Respectfully Submitted
Pastor Joel B. Schroeder, chairman Pastor Jon Klein, secretary Pastor David Haberkorn Pastor Tim Kemnitz Teacher Ryan Obry Mr. Bill Bauer Mr. Duane Ebach Mr. Dean Thaut
- 103 -
Floor Committee #9 Report – Next District Convention Planning
Resolution No. 1 Subject: Location of 2018 NE District Convention
WHEREAS 1) Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School continues to offer a hospitable and economical environment for our district convention; and WHEREAS 2) holding the convention in Colorado in 2014 was well received and beneficial but approximately double the cost of holding the convention at NELHS; and WHEREAS 3) the district praesidium has suggested a compromise of holding two consecutive district conventions in Nebraska followed by one in Colorado; therefore, be it Resolved, a) that the 51st Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District (2018) be held at Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School (Waco, Nebraska); and be it finally Resolved, b) that the 52nd Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District (2020) be held at a suitable location in the Western Conference of the district.
Resolution No. 2 Subject: Dates and Times of 2018 NE District Convention
WHEREAS 1) the first full week of June 2018 does not conflict with the schedules of Lutheran elementary schools or Lutheran high schools within the district; and WHEREAS 2) the first full week of June is agreeable to Nebraska Lutheran High School and does not conflict with their summer sports camp; and WHEREAS 3) the format of beginning the convention on Monday evening and finishing by Wednesday afternoon has been well received; therefore, be it Resolved, a) that 51st Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District be held June 4-6, 2018; and be it further Resolved, b) that the 2018 Nebraska District convention begin with an opening service at 5:00PM on Monday, June 4 at Bethel Lutheran Church in York, Nebraska; and be it finally Resolved, c) that the 2018 Nebraska District convention conclude no later than 4:00PM on Wednesday, June 6.
Resolution No. 3 Subject: Essayist, Preachers for 2018 NE District Convention
WHEREAS 1) Rev. Earle Treptow, former president of the Nebraska District, is now serving as professor at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary; and WHEREAS 2) as part of his call to serve as professor of systematic theology, Professor Treptow will soon be preparing a doctoral dissertation on a topic yet to be finalized; therefore, be it
- 104 -
Resolved, a) that Professor Earle Treptow serve as essayist for the 51st Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District; and be it further Resolved, b) that Professor Treptow determine the topic for his essay based on research for his doctoral dissertation; and be it finally Resolved, c) that Professor Treptow serve as preacher for the opening service (Pastor Phil Sievert as alternate) and Pastor Tom Jeske serve as preacher for the closing service. . Respectfully submitted,
Rev. Jonathan Micheel, Chairman Mr. Myron Hinricus Mr. Mark Otte Rev. Tyler Peil Rev. Fred Schurman Rev. Brett Krause Rev. Nate Buchner
- 105 -
Floor Committee #10 Report – Elections
Reference: None Subject: Election Report
The results of the 2016 Nebraska District Convention are as follows:
*District officers: Pastor Phil Hirsch (District President) st Pastor Phil Sievert (1 Vice President) Pastor Steve Helwig (2nd Vice President) Pastor Tyler Peil (Secretary)
*The following were elected as Mission Board members: Pastor Mark Haefner (Nebraska Mission District Mission Board Pastor Member) Pastor Shane Krause (Nebraska Mission District Mission Board Pastor Member) Mr. Bruce Berger (Nebraska Mission District Mission Board Lay Member) Mr. Matt Dettmann (Colorado Mission District Mission Board Lay Member) Pastor Jesse Stern (Colorado Mission District Mission Pastor Member)
*The following was elected as District Board of Appeals Teacher Member: Mr. Rick Lohmiller
*The following was elected as District Board of Appeals Lay Member: Mr. Don Kracke
*The following was elected as District Board of Appeals Pastor Member: Pastor Steve Kahrs
*The following were elected to the District Nominating Committee: Pastor Nathaniel Winkel (Eastern Conference, 4-year term) Pastor Brett Krause (Western Conference, 4-year term)
*The following was to the District Congregation & Ministry Support Youth & Family Ministry: Pastor Matt Holtz
*The following was elected to the District Ministry of Christian Giving: Pastor Jonathan Rockhoff
We ask God to bless these men with faithfulness as they carry out their various responsibilities in service to their Lord and our district.
- 106 -
We also thank God for the service for these men who have served us and our district faithfully and to the point of term limits:
Pastor Steve Helwig Nebraska District Mission Board Pastor Member Mr. Keith Eldred Colorado Mission Board Layman Mr. Mark Mauer District Board of Appeal Layman
Respectfully submitted,
Teacher Corey Pederson, Chairman Mr. Ben Leibl, Secretary Vicar Ross Chartrand Rev. Thad Flitter Rev. Daniel Johnston Rev. Roger Quandt Vicar Josh Shandor Mr. Justin Vilski Vicar Luther Zuberbier
- 107 -
Floor Committee #12 Report – Compensation Review
Reference: RTTTD pp.73 Resolution No. 1 Subject: Goals of the CRC (Compensation Review Committee)
WHEREAS 1) The CRC adopted a number of goals to guide its work on the revision of the compensation guidelines which are: 1. reflect the Scriptural principle that those who serve in the public ministry are worthy of double honor (1 Timothy 5:17); 2. recommend appropriate compensation so that gospel servants may devote themselves to the work of the ministry, without needing to find outside employment to support themselves and their families (1 Corinthians 9:1-14); 3. encourage equity in compensation, so that two people doing the same work receive the same compensation; 4. recognize the value of experience but place a greater emphasis on responsibilities assigned to the individual worker; 5. will be easy for calling bodies to utilize in putting together a compensation package for their workers; and 6. will be relatively cost-neutral to the work we do together as a synod as they are implemented; and
WHEREAS 2) these six goals are God-pleasing goals set before our church body by the CRC to address the issues set before them by the Ad Hoc Commission 2. Therefore, be it
Resolved, a) that we give thanks to our gracious God for the faithful work of the CRC; And be it further
Resolved, b) that the Nebraska District support the pursuit of these goals.
Reference: RTTTD pp. 74,75 Comments and Concerns Subject: Recommendations from the CRC
After reviewing the recommendations put forward by the CRC, we wholeheartedly support recommendations 1-3,6,7, and 10. We will not offer additional comments on these recommendations.
Recommendations 4 and 5
While we appreciate and concur with the desire to provide more opportunity for experienced called workers to consider calls later in their ministry, we are not convinced recommendation 4 provides the best solution. While the salary of a called worker has and will continue to be a factor in the Call process, we feel salary is one of a variety of factors that leads to fewer Calls being extended to more experienced called workers.
It is our understanding that once a worker in any field has 15-20 years of experience, the value based on experience alone diminishes thereafter. For example, while we recognize the increase in - 108 - the value of a worker as he progresses from 5 years of experience to 10, the same increase is no longer applicable as a worker moves from 20 years of experience to 25. Other value factors begin to carry more weight than experience alone.
Rather than truncating the salary matrix as the CRC suggests, we feel the committee should reconsider a banding of the salary matrix beginning in the 15-20 year range. This would provide a matrix that covers at least 30 years of experience, if not more. (A banded salary matrix begins to “band” years of experience together with no salary change. For example, if there is a 5 year band from 21-25 years of experience, during those years, the salary would not increase beyond the inflationary increase. The next increase would take place at 26 years.)
In light of what we have stated, we give our full support to the expanded range of columns as recommended in 6 and 7. The opportunities for an increase in salary during “banded” years of ministry would be found as one moves laterally to a column on the right. This system would reflect the reality that as we gain experience, our value is increased by our ability to take on more responsibility, excel in more tasks, and obtain further training.
Keeping 1 Timothy 5:17 in mind, as the CRC mentions in goal 1, we also feel truncating the salary matrix at 22 years may undermine the appreciation of veteran Called workers.
Recommendation 8
We encourage the CRC to pursue the web-based utility suggested in this recommendation. We feel it will be most helpful as it changes how a calling body will approach the salary process. Instead of looking to a matrix, the suggested web-based utility will put questions before the calling body that are easy to understand. While the established matrix would be available to any calling body who would like to see it, the matrix will operate in the background. Once all applicable questions have been answered, the utility would provide a salary number and show compensation plan components.
Below are a few functions we would like to see included with this utility.
The user should be able to easily select from a list of additional duties.
We envision a system where a duty could easily be selected, and then specified. For example. We begin with a first year teacher. In addition, this teacher will coach soccer. After “soccer coach” is selected, the level would be selected (LES, ALHS, MLC, etc.). We would hope the ability to specify duties will provide recognition of the varying time commitment often associated with the same duty in different settings (MLC soccer coach vs. local LES soccer coach).
As duties are listed for a position, the proposed utility should automatically adjust the base salary to reflect the duties that will be performed.
Recommendation 9
This is one of the CRC’s most valuable recommendations. Determining salary can be a confusing and complicated process. Guidance from an experienced circuit pastor could provide confidence and consistency as compensation is calculated. - 109 -
To best utilize the fine work of the CRC, we recommend materials be developed to assist circuit pastors in this process. We recommend this be a top priority of the CRC.
Respectfully submitted,
Rev. Jared Oldenburg (chairman) Rev. Kevin Klug Rev. Nathaniel Winkel Rev. Pete Zaferos Mr. Mike Schaefer Mr. Kyle Fax Mr. Jon Thibaudeau Mr. Harry Appel
- 110 -
Floor Committee #13 Report – Delegate Report
Reference: Official convention minutes Subject: Delegate Report for the 2016 District convention
The Nebraska District of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) met for its 50th biennial convention at NELHS in Waco, Nebraska from June 6-8, beginning with a service of Word and Sacrament, with synod president Mark Schroeder preaching Christ. (The Nebraska District includes congregations in Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and parts of Missouri, Iowa, South Dakota and New Mexico.)
The theme for the convention was “Here I stand.” Prof. Wade Johnston of Wisconsin Lutheran College led the delegates in a four-part presentation, “Lutheranism’s First Identity Crisis: The Struggle to Preserve Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel and Lessons for Today,” pointing to the similarities in challenges to the pure Gospel in the 16th century and our current 21st century.
Pastor Phil Hirsch (Hope, Manhattan, KS) was elected to his first two-year term as president of the district. Officers elected include: 1st vice-president Pastor Phil Sievert (Lord of Life, Thornton, CO), 2nd vice- president Pastor Steve Helwig (Gethsemane, Omaha, NE), and district secretary Pastor Tyler Peil (St. John, Stanton, NE). The convention thanks Rev Earle Treptow for his six years of service as District President, and wishes him God’s blessings as he transitions to teaching at our seminary.
WELS President Mark Schroeder addressed the convention in person on Tuesday afternoon. He highlighted challenges and opportunities for our synod today, especially regarding mission outreach, and gave an update on informal discussions with the Missouri Synod, and the One in Christ debt retirement. He especially encouraged a recommitment to point to the cross of Christ.
Former District President Earle Treptow presented for the Synod’s Compensation Review Committee which is working on a revision to the Synod’s guidelines for compensating called workers in a manner that reflects the double honor God prescribes in His Word.
Pastor Howard Mohlke, chairman of the Board for World Missions addressed the convention and shared a video showing the mission work being done to Spanish communities through missionaries and also web resources through Acedemio Cristo. In our district, a new mission will be funded south of Salt Lake City in Lehi, Utah.
Many plans are in the works to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, including a documentary film that will be broadcast nationally on PBS next year. Visit www.wels.net/reformation500.
The Nebraska District is establishing a District Fund that will streamline the process of collecting convention dues, and means that congregations are able to know, ahead of their financial planning, what their district expenses will be.
A conference for early childhood educators was also held alongside the convention at the same location, with Rev Michael Otterstatter from Martin Luther College presenting.
- 111 -
The next Nebraska District convention is scheduled for June 4-6, 2018, at Nebraska Lutheran High School in Waco, Nebraska.
For more information about the presentations and resolutions of the convention, visit www.welsne.org.
Respectfully submitted, Pastor Philip Kieselhorst, chairman Pastor Steph Kruschel Pastor Samuel Pappenfuss Teacher Andrew Danner Teacher Jeff Sell Lay Delegate Ron Kraemer Lay Delegate Mark Schleusner Lay Delegate Phil Larson
- 112 -
Non-Reporting Committee Assignments and Convention Guest
Floor Committee 11 – Steering
Chairman: Pastor Jon Rockhoff (Messiah, Wichita, KS) Pastor: Jeff Heitsch (Good Shepherd, Cheyenne, WY), Aaron Schumann (Faith, Pittsburg, KS); Teacher: Phil Stern (Trinity, Waco, NE)
Floor Committee 14 – Copy Review & Tech Support
Chairman: Pastor David Wietzke (Crown of Life, Pueblo West, CO); Michael Ewart (Good Shepherd, Omaha, NE) Pastors: Bob Smith (Redeemer, Hastings, NE); James Seiltz (Salem, Colorado Springs, CO); Norm Schell (Good Shepherd, Omaha, NE); Teachers: Eric Brucker (RMLHS, Federal Heights, CO); Joel Lauber (Good Shepherd, Omaha, NE ) Staff: Greg Boggs (District Tech Committee Chair), Don Niemann, Ken Mayer, Greg Green, Avery Quandt
Floor Committee 15 – Activities at this Convention
Chairman: Mr. Benjamin Wells (NELHS, Waco, NE) Pastors: David Schultz (Faith, Rising City, NE) Teachers: Mr. Mishaal Al-Eisa (RMLHS, Commerce City, CO); Mr. Jacob Ziel (NELHS); Mr. Alexander Mielke (NELHS); Steven Springborn (NELHS);
Convention Guests
Rev. Michael Dietz (WELS MCG, Dardenne Prairie, MO) Rev. Daniel Johnston (Exploratory, Blair, NE) Prof. Wade Johnston (WLC, Milwaukee, WI) Rev. James Mattek (Wisconsin Lutheran Child and Family Services, Watertown, WI) Rev. Howard Mohlke (Chairman, WELS Board for World Missions, Nampa, ID) Rev. Steven Prahl (Foundation Exploratory, Colorado Springs, CO) Rev. Matthew Scharf (Assigned to Hope, Manhattan, KS) Rev. Daniel Schroeder (NPH, Watertown, WI) Pres. Mark Schroeder (WELS President, Watertown, WI) Prof. Earle Treptow (WLS, Mequon, WI)
- 113 -
Minutes of the 50th Biennial Convention of the Nebraska District WISCONSIN EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN SYNOD June 6-8, 2016 Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School - Waco, NE “Here I Stand”
MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2016 District President Philip Hirsch opened the 50th biennial convention of the Nebraska District at 8:00 am on June 7 with prayer asking our Lord to be present with us and keep us humble as to ourselves and to make us bold in the merits of Christ. The convention’s opening service was Monday evening at Bethel Lutheran Church in York, Nebraska. District President Hirsch presided and Synod President Mark Schroeder was the preacher with a sermon based on Joshua 4. Committees met afterward. President Hirsch presented the District President’s Report. He introduced us to Pastor Matt Scharf who was assigned as Assistant to the NE District President (who will be elected at this convention) and his wife Rachel. Pastor Hirsch thanked Pastor Earle Treptow for his faithful service to us as District President. He highlighted the purpose of our convention (from the district constitution) and some of the things to look forward to, including first hand report on synodical matters from our synod president and a presentation that helps us think through our Lutheran identity in a changing world. We sang For All The Saints in thanksgiving especially for gospel servants who have been called to eternal glory in the last biennium. Pastor Troy Jacobs presented the report of Floor Committee #1. The report and resolutions of the committee included appointments, ordinations, installations and district membership changes. All 6 resolutions of floor committee #1 were supported and passed unanimously. Mr. Corey Pederson began the election process, which will continue through the convention until complete. After a prayer for the Lord’s guidance and asking blessing on the men elected to serve us, the election process began with nominations and elections, starting with the office of District President. Dr Wade Johnston presented the first session of his paper, Lutheranism’s First Identity Crisis: The Struggle to Preserve Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel and Lessons for Today. WELS President Mark Schroeder addressed the convention and thanked Dr. Johnston for the paper that is helping us to think about what it is to be distinctively Lutheran, to stake our claim at the foot of the cross in the midst of a world that talks about Jesus but doesn’t say much His cross. President Schroeder spoke about the challenges in front of us as a people of God. His encouragement was to remember that the Church has always been counter-culture and so to see the challenges we face together also as opportunities to bring the sweet news of Christ to a godless culture and build His Church with the Means of Grace. He highlighted some surprising opportunities around the world, including groups in southeast Asia and Africa that have requested our help to learn Lutheranism. He encouraged us to remember and remind our congregations that CMO is the bedrock of funding for the synod’s ministry, which is our work together. President Schroeder answered a number of questions from the convention floor. Mr Corey Pederson announced that Pastor Hirsch was elected as NE District President. Professor Johnston presented the second section of his paper and answered questions. Professor Earle Treptow addressed the convention on behalf of the Synodical Council Compensation Review Committee. He reported that this committee was asked to review a number of issues about the way Called Workers are compensated and the initial recommendations that are in the RTTD and being considered for
- 114 -
2017 convention (RTTD 73-88). He presented the recommendations with request for feedback and answered several questions from the floor. Lunch Break with committee meetings The convention reconvened at 1:30 pm, led in devotion and prayer based on Psalm 115 by Pastor Mike Traudt. Mr. Dale Pohlman (NE District Synodical Council Representative), presented a slideshow with updates on synodical finances and some of the SC’s future plans (RTTD 56-61). Pastor Howard Mohlke (chairman of the Board for World Mission) gave a report on World Mission work (RTTD 113-177). Pastor Mohlke shared a number of joys from our mission work together as synod and presented greetings and blessing to us from people in mission fields around the world. Pastor Matt Frey (chairman of the Colorado Mission Board) gave an abbreviated report on the young congregations (see full report in proceedings) and the missionaries on the western side of our district. He shared joys of each congregation. New mission starts are St. George, Utah with Mike Quandt serving in rented facility and Lehi, Utah for which the CMB will soon issue a Call for a missionary. The CMB continues to develop a request for a new start/second site for Shepherd of the Valley in Westminster. The District has 3 vicar in mission settings and continues to offer Schools of Outreach. Mr Pederson announced that Pastor Phil Sievert was elected to 1st vice-president. Dr Daniel Johnson (President of Wisconsin Lutheran College) showed a video and presented WLC as a Christ-centered college, affiliated with the WELS, glad to serve our young people preparing to serve in various vocations. Pastor Jesse Stern (District Evangelism) invited all of us to check out good and growing resources on the synod website for evangelism. He mentioned opportunities provided by the evangelism committee: schools of outreach and online classes among other things. Pastor Jon Micheel (District Worship Committee) announced that the next national WELS Worship Conference will be in June of 2017 at Carthage College in Kenosha, WI. He encouraged congregations to consider covering the cost of sending musicians to the Worship Conference - for their blessing and the congregation’s. He also explained that there is a new curriculum developed to help with teaching hymnology. Pastor Matt Holtz (Youth and Family Ministry) said that there are hopes for 2500+ kids at the WELS Youth Rally this summer. “Schools of Youth and Family” will begin in 2016 - designed after School of Outreach or Worship, to help a congregation evaluate and plan its family ministry. Mr Pederson announced that Pastor Steve Helwig was elected to 2nd Vice President. Mr Joshua Glowicki (Commission on Lutheran Schools) has taken over for Mr. Tom Plitzuweit, and offered help where he can help our schools, especially if a school is considering accreditation. He encouraged congregations/schools to remember their financial responsibility to CLS. Pastor Wayne Oblender (Special Ministries) shared a number of resources available through WELS Special Ministries and we tried to watch a video, but it didn’t work, but then it did work. Mr Pederson announced that Pastor Tyler Peil was elected to Secretary of the District. Circuit pastor elections were held by each circuit, with these pastors elected: Platte Circuit Pr Wayne Oblender Eastern Circuit Pr Steve Kahrs Three Rivers Pr Tom Jeske Mid-America Pr Joel Schroeder Western Slope Pr Brent Merten Rosebud Pr Don Windsperger Southern Colorado Pr David Koelpin Northern Colorado Pr Joel Spaude - 115 -
After a break (4:00 pm), Mr Mark Otte (NELHS) presented a report on Nebraska Lutheran. The high school faculty is very strong, test scores are strong, enrollment continues to grow and the hope is to return to over a hundred students in the next few years. Mr. Otte asked for our prayers for the recruitment goal of 40 new students in the coming year. Mr. Rick Lohmiller (Rocky Mountain Lutheran High School) presented a slideshow of pictures from the new building and permanent home that RMLHS dedicated this year. Mr. Lohmiller explained that the dedication and generosity of laypeople made this possible and has opened doors for the high school to reach their community. Phase 2 of a campus is on their radar. They had 60+ students last year and are hopeful for the same next year. Pastor Jon Micheel (Chairman of the Rites Committee, WELS Hymnal Project) brought a video that described the Hymnal Committee’s work on preparing a hymnal and gave a sketch of what will be included. (see also RTTD 35-37). Mr Pederson brought a slate of candidates, provided by the nominating committee, and the slate was approved by the convention. Pastor Dan Schroeder (Northwestern Publishing House) brought a presentation from NPH, which has been provided Christ-centered materials to our synod for 125 years now. It is challenging to keep NPH in front of WELS members, but NPH continues to connect with people through a number of channels, including books and ebooks, a better website, collaborative projects with other WELS entities, theological works, devotionals, redesigned Bible Studies and more. He asked us to be an advocate for our publishing house and welcomes feedback. (RTTD 146-149) Pastor Dan Schroeder also reported on Reformation 500 committee (RTTD 54-55). www.wels.net/reformation500 has a number of resources for using the 500th anniversary as an opportunity to teach the Faith and reach out with the Gospel. A large gathering is being planned, a documentary being prepared, books published, etc. He brought a video trailer…and it worked! Professor Earle Treptow (WLS) reported for Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary (RTTD 127-132). Pastor Michael Otterstatter (MLC - Vice President of Mission Advancement) reported for Martin Luther College, Michigan Lutheran Seminary and Luther Preparatory School. He pointed out that 18% of MLC’s budget funding is now from donations, scholarships and grants. (RTTD 133-145) Pastor Michael Dietz (Ministry of Christian Giving) reported on the “One In Christ” synodical offering and CMO. (RTTD 26-28). He reported that CMO has been flat for several years while expenses have increased. That said, this is the fourth year in a row that CMO has exceeded committments. After many and generous gifts, the synodical debt is slightly below one million and the plan is to have that paid off by the 2017 synod convention. Pastor James Mattek (Wisconsin Lutheran Child and Family Services - Director of Ministry) - the Member Assistant Program (MAP) has grown tremendously in the last few years. Pastor David Schultz closed the day with prayer at 5:30 pm.
TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2016 Pastor Mike Traudt opened the day with prayer in thanksgiving for the mercy of a new day and asking the Lord to bless our labors this day. Professor Johnston continued with part 3 of his presentation. The election committee handed out printed ballots (for Board of Appeals, District Mission Board, Nominating Cmte, Ministrof Christian giving coordinator) and Mr Pederson explained the procedure. - 116 -
Pastor David Koelpin reported for Floor Committee #2 - Nebraska District Work. The committee recognized the work of many servants in the district, including thanks to the Lord for Pastor Earle Treptow’s service among us. The committee supported the implementation of a Nebraska District Fund (see rationale document). The committee’s first resolution was to receive Living Shepherd Lutheran Church of Laramie, Wyoming. Passed unanimously. Cmte 2, resolution 2, to rename the Eastern Circuit as Blue River Circuit, passed unanimously. Cmte 2, resolution 3, listing of congregations, pastors and teachers, to represent the NE District at WELS Convention 2017, passed unanimously. Pastor Matthew Holtz reported for Floor Committee #3 - Synod President/COP/SC. Cmte 3, resolution 1 asks circuits to continue to study the revised “Joint Statement” on fellowship as a step toward restoration fellowship between CLC, ELS and WELS, passed unanimously. The Committee also reported on the work of COP and SC (RTTD 1-30; 54-72; 89-101). Pastor Nathanael Seelow reported for Floor Committee #4 - Ministerial Education. (RTTD 126-145) The committee reported on the issue before the Board of Luther Preparatory School - whether to participate in the Wisconsin choice/voucher program. The committee supported the Board of LPS. There was discussion and some concerns, but not a motion from the floor. Professor Johnston presented the 4th and final section of his paper and answered questions/received comments and was thanked by the Convention for his presentation. Pastor Shane Krause reported for Floor Committee #5 - Home Missions/World Mission/Joint Mission Council (RTTD 113-125). The committee noted, with gratitude, for the ministry carried out by our World and Home Missions. There was an encouragement for us to remember to give names of college students in our congregations to the Campus Ministry Committee and to vigorously support missions with our CMO. Pastor Mark Reichert reported for Floor Committee #6 - Congregation and Ministry Support Group (RTTD 31-53). The committee reminded us that much good and godly ministry is done through the CMSG, even though they are often financially strapped. Cmte 6, resolution 1 asks the we give our approval to the COP Calling a Director for Commission on Youth and Family and Committee on Adult Discipleship, which passed unanimously. Pastor Joel Spaude reported for Floor Committee #7 - WELS Subsidiaries (RTTD 146-162). The committee thanked NPH for faithful work for 125 years and encouraged pastors and teachers present to be advocates for NPH and it’s blessings in congregations. The committee encouraged congregations to use WELS Veba as part of our walking together. Pastor Joel Schroeder reported for Floor Committee #8 - Finances (RTTD 102-107). Cmte 8, resolution 1 - thanking God for His gifts, for the gifts of His people to the Church, for the wisdom of the Financial Stability Fund and encouraging us to increase CMO, passed unanimously. Pastor Jon Micheel reported for Floor Committee #9 - Next District Convention Planning. Cmte 9, resolution 1 - making the 51st NE District Biennial Convention (2018) at NELHS and the 52nd Convention (2020) in Colorado, passed unanimously. Cmte 9, resolution 2 - the 51st Convention (2018) to be held on June 4-6, 2018, starting with opening service at 5:00 pm on Monday night at Bethel Lutheran in York, NE and finishing Wednesday afternoon, passed unanimously. Cmte 9, resolution 3, Professor Treptow to be presenter and preacher for opening service (with Pr Sievert alternate); Pastor Tom Jeske preacher for closing service, passed unanimously. Pastor Jared Oldenburg reported for Floor Committee #12 - Compensation Review Committee Report (RTTD 73-88; 108-112). Cmte 12, resolution 1 - support the goals and work of the Compensation Review Committee, passed unanimously. The committee’s report expresses full support for recommendations 1- 3,6,7, and 10 (RTTD pgs 74-75.). On recommendation 4, the committee wishes to suggest a banded approach to the matrix instead of capping the salary matrix at 22 years - see their report. The report also - 117 - includes suggestions on the CRC recommendations numbers 8 and 9 - see their report. There was considerable discussion about the report and suggestions of the CRC, which is just what Professor Treptow was hoping for - he’ll carry the comments back to the CRC. Mr Corey Pederson presented a report with election results - Pastor Shane Krause (NE DMB); Mr. Bruce Berger (NE DMB Lay Member); Mr. Matt Dettmann (CO DMB Lay Member); Pastor Jesse Stern (CO DMB); Mr. Rick Lohmiller (District Board of Appeals/Teacher); Mr. Don Kracke (District Board of Appeals/Laymember); Pastor Steve Kahrs (District Board of Appeals/Pastor); Pastor Nathaniel Winkel (District Nominating -Eastern Conf) Pastor Brett Krause (District Nominating - Western Conf); Pastor Matt Holtz (District Cmte Youth and Family Ministry);Pastor Jonathan Rockhoff (District Ministry of Christian Giving). His committee also thanked Pastor Steve Helwig, Mr. Keith Eldred and Mr. Mark Mauer for their many years of service on the DMBs. President Hirsch adjourned the Convention at 12:00 pm. Following adjournment, Professor Earle Treptow presided at the closing service and installed the newly elected circuit pastors and District Praesidium. Pastor Steve Helwig preached our victory in Christ based on 1 Corinthians 15.
Respectfully submitted
Pr Tyler Peil, NE District Secretary
- 118 -
Opening Sermon – Joshua 4:1-7; 21-24 – Remember! What God Has Done. What God Will Do.
Nebraska District Convention June 7, 2016 Pastor Mark Schroeder
Joshua 4:1-7; 21-24 Joshua said to the Israelites, “In the future when your descendants ask their fathers,”What do these stones mean?” tell them “Israel crossed the Jordan on dry ground. For the Lord your God dried up the Jordan before you until you had crossed over. The Lord your God did to the Jordan just when he had done to the Red Sea when he dried it up before us until we had crossed over. He did this so that all the people of the earth might know that the hand of the Lord is powerful and so that you might always fear the Lord your God.”
It happened again the other day. And, I’m sorry to confess, it was not the first time. It’s just the most recent occurrence. I was getting ready to leave the house on a Saturday morning, heading out to do a number of errands that I’ve been saving for the weekend. The car needed to have its oil changed, so I will go to the Jiffy Lube. There’s a check that I need to deposit into the checking account, so I will swing by our bank that’s open on Saturday. And I needed to stop by the hardware store to get some spray paint. As I’m looking around for my keys and my wallet, thinking of all the places I need to go, my dear wife says, “Will you stop by the grocery store a pick up a few items?” “Sure,” I say. “Happy to.” And then she begins to mention the few things she needs. I hear her talking. I try to make a mental note of the four items. She asks, “Do you need me to write it down?” I say those famous words, “No, I don’t need a list. I can remember.” Big mistake. You’re thinking you know how this ends. You’re thinking that I get to the store and buy the items, only to get home and forget two of them. Nope. Not what happened. I forgot to go to the store. Do you have problems remembering sometimes? We all do—not just those of us with graying and thinning hair. So often we are caught up in the busyness of everyday life, so often our minds are focused on the urgency of the now, so often we are focused on ourselves and our own interests and desires that we fail to remember not just the little things but even significant things and why they are significant. God knows our tendency to forget. He knew that was true of us, and it was true of his Old Testament people of Israel in spite of all he had done to keep his many promises. So today we see how in love, God gave his people would have a vivid reminder of his faithfulness to his promises, of his love, and of his power. He said to them—and he says to us—Remember! Remember all that God has done in the past. And Remember all that God will do in the future. Forty years earlier, the Lord led his people out of slavery in Egypt with a striking display of his power. He demonstrated that power with the ten plagues, with the miraculous parting of the Red Sea, with the utter destruction of Pharaoh and his army. The Lord had miraculously preserved and protected his people from attacking enemies and provided for their needs. And finally, with the Promised Land in sight on the other side of the Jordan River, he provided another miracle of parted waters.
- 119 -
So, after crossing the dry bed of the Jordan River, the Israelites found themselves now safely in the Promised Land. But before they would go one step farther, the Lord wanted to give them and all who would come after them a reminder of what he had done. So he directed Joshua to have 12 men each take a stone from the dry Jordan River bed and to erect a memorial with those stones. From that day on, when people would ask, “What do these stones mean?” They would be told that those stones would be a reminder, a memorial, not only of what God did there at the Jordan, but of all the amazing things that God had done for his people. With their short memories and drifting attention spans, God wanted his people to remember all that God had done for them. And not just the physical blessings he had given. Not just the parting waters and the manna and the military victories. No, those were just steps in a journey to a much greater blessing. Those were just small chapters in the story of God’s plan to form and preserve a people for himself—from whom the promised Messiah would someday come. And so he gave them that memorial of stones to remind them of his power—but more importantly, to remind them of his faithful grace in keeping the greatest promises of all. Short memories and distracted attention didn’t just afflict the Israelites. We are no different. So God does the same for us as he did for the Israelites. He places memorial stones all around us. Not literal stones formed into a monument. But figurative stones that we can see every day. So that when we see these stones, we will remember. Do you see the stones? Go into church to gather for worship and you will see them. And you will remember all that God has done for you. You see the cross in the front of the church and remember the sacrificial love of a Savior who died on that cross for you. You see the pastor preaching a sermon in the pulpit reminds us that we have a God who has spoken his saving word to us and still speaks it to us today. You see the altar causing you to remember that there the true body and blood of Jesus—given and shed for you 2000 years ago—is given to you today to assure you of forgiveness and to strengthen your faith. You see the baptismal font—a memorial stone that reminds you of how God first brought you into his family and continues to shower you every day in that same baptismal grace and new Spirit-created life... You see the hymnal in the pew, and that memorial stone reminds you of how God not only speaks to you in the worship service but gives you an opportunity to sing your praise to him in return. Oh there are more stones that remind us not just as individuals, but as congregations and a synod what blessings God has given us. Attend a call day at Martin Luther College or an ordination of a new pastor. What do these stones mean? You are reminded of how God continues to provide messengers of the gospel to feed his sheep and lambs. A new mission congregation established, and that stone reminds you of how god continues to shower our synod with opportunities to spread the gospel to more and more people. You see missionary talking about mission opportunities in Asia and you are reminded of God’s promise that his saving gospel would be reached in all the world, of our privilege to take part in that. You see a catechism in the hand of a child, and the Bible in the hand of an adult, and you are reminded of the pure gospel that god restored to his church nearly 500 years ago by a simple Augustinian monk who had no idea what his hammer blows would accomplish. And what is most amazing about all those blessings is that you and I have not deserved a single one of them. In those pews and in this pulpit are people who have fallen completely short of what God has every right to expect of us. We see hearts that harden themselves to his Word. Hands that fail to do what God intended. Voices that speak words of criticism and falsehood. We see people
- 120 - whose prayer life is spotty and whose worship is so often distracted. People who have been promised by God that he would turn all things to our good, but we are filled with worry about today and fear for the future. Yet, in spite of all of that, God in his grace and mercy did not forget us. He remembered us. He loved us. He kept his promise. And he sent his Son to make us his own. And he has now adopted us as his people. So look at those stones and remember all that God has done for you in the past. 2. When the Israelites looked at that monument of stones from the Jordan, they remembered what God had done. But they would remember something else. They would remember what he would do in the future. You see, this was a God who, going back to the garden had made an amazing promise. He would send a Savior. And everything he did after that he did as one more step in keeping that promise. So the walk across the dry bed of the Jordan, as important as it was in helping them to remember what God had done for them. It would also help them to remember what a God of faithful grace would do in the future. As long as the Israelites remembered that, they would remain faithful, and they would be equipped to face any challenge that the future would bring. With trust in God’s promise for the future, the walls of Jericho fell. The rest of Canaan was conquered. Armed with trust in god’s promises for the future, David could slay Goliath. Solomon could build a temple. Elijah could stand and challenge the prophets of Baal. The prophets would proclaim both God’s call to repentance for those who did not remember, and the promise of a Savior for those who did. The remnant in Babylon remained faithful. God’s people would remember, until that time when the greatest promise of all was kept with a birth in Bethlehem and a sacrificial death in Jerusalem. What about us? The stones that remind us of God’s grace in the past and present will lead us to remember all that God will do for us in the future—as individuals, and as a synod. Remember! This faithful God has promised that the good news of Jesus will continue to be preached and proclaimed until the end of time. He will keep that promise. Remember! He has promised that the gates of hell will not prevail against his church. He will not forget that promise. Remember! He promises that his word will not return to him empty, but will accomplish his purpose. Remember! He has promised that we will continue to find full and complete forgiveness at the foot of the cross and continue to be sure of our victory at the door of an open empty tomb. Remember! He has promised that he will strength our faith through he means of grace and that he will equip us to serve as his messengers. Remember! He has promised that in the end he will return—not as a suffering servant but as the King of Kings. What he has done in the past guarantees that he will do as he has promised in the future. So we remember and rejoice. And as we remember, we pray that he will help us to be faithful. We hold on to his Word even though the world lashes out against it and us. We trust in the means of grace even when we are tempted to trust in something else to make the church grow. We recognized that we will in this world live under the cross even though the theology of glory beckons us to look for the church to be always growing in number and always succeeding in what it does. We recommit - 121 - ourselves to the mission he has given us, even when that work is difficult, even when hearts are hardened against the message, even when we slink away with Elijah and think that we may be the only faithful ones left. I don’t know the details of the future. But I do know that his promises to us can never be broken. Brothers and sisters, God has taken sinners like you and me, beggars every one of us, and made us his own in Christ. He’s redeemed us, washed us, and called us his own. Remember what he has done to make that happen. Remember all the blessings she has showed on us in the past. Remember the mission that he has given you. And remember, and never forget, that his blessings will continue and his promises will always be kept.
Amen.
- 122 -
Closing Sermon – 1 Corinthians 15:57-58 – “We’ve Already Won!”
Nebraska District Convention June 9, 2016
Pastor Steve Helwig
1 Corinthians 15:57-58 – But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.
“We’ve Already Won!”
They don’t get much recognition. You won’t find them on anyone’s fantasy football team; in fact, you can’t even draft them for fantasy football. But they are vital to the success of every football team . . . the offensive line. How do you gauge their value? How do you quantify their contribution? How do you judge their level of success? It was the great 20th century philosopher and linguist, John Madden, who once said, “That guy right there is a really good lineman. You know how I can tell that that guy right there is a really good lineman? You just look at his back side. See? If his back side isn’t dirty then he’s a really good lineman. This guy’s a really good lineman because his backside isn’t dirty.” His point? A good lineman refuses to be pushed backward. A good lineman never ends up on his backside. A good lineman holds his ground. A good lineman stands firm – certainly when he is pass blocking. And when he is run blocking? When he is run blocking, he might even initiate the contact, surge forward, and drive the defensive lineman backward while still standing firm.
Think about the old Packer sweep – the pulling guard has to get down the line and out in front of the pitch. Think about the screen pass – letting your man through, holding you spot for a second or two, then getting out into the flat so you can block down field. Offensive linemen. Holding their ground. Standing firm. As they move forward. Brothers, our convention is over. Soon we’ll all be heading home. This evening, many of us will eat dinner with our families. Tomorrow, several of us will go to work. Next week our daily routines will all resume. Things will get back to normal. As they do, brothers, don’t forget this one thing. “We’ve already won.” The victory. The victory over sin; the victory over death; the victory over the devil. We’ve already won. Thanks be to God. Thanks be to God he gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. We’ve already won, brothers, so stand firm! More than that. We’ve already won, brothers, so move forward!
“Stand firm.” Now, that’s not a synonym for “be idle.” That doesn’t mean “stay put.” That’s not a justification for being closed minded or stubborn. That’s not a call to sit in your office all day in front of your computer or even with your nose in a book. “Let nothing move you.” Oh, the Old Adam in us loves to hear that. But he twists it. “I’m not going to visit that delinquent member. I’m not going to follow up with that prospect. I’m not going to tackle that discipline case. I’m not going to update my lesson plans.” The only thing we and our nervous, lazy, unfaithful flesh are moved to do is stay put. We stay put in our pews forgetting that the greatest commission is to go and make disciples. We stay put in our insistence on doing things the way we’ve always done them ignoring the encouragement to be all things to all men so that by all possible means we might save some.
- 123 -
“Giving ourselves fully to the work of the Lord” is hardly attained by taking pride in a regular and active church calendar and meeting schedule where all we do is discuss ministry or outline strategies. “Giving ourselves fully to the work of the Lord” certainly cannot mean holding back or even cutting back on a CMO that would support the ministry of our greater church body or ignoring the needs at our high schools for both operating assistance and debt reduction. Stand firm? Let nothing move you? Give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord? And yet, somehow, in our pride and arrogance, we are able to pat ourselves on the back for how great we are as we wave over our heads, over our churches, over our schools the banners of “Scripture Alone” and “Confessional Lutheranism.” Faithfulness is found not simply in standing firm but also in moving forward.
Jesus stood firm in his resolve to save us from sin; that’s why he left the upper room. Jesus stood firm in his Father’s will that he drink every last drop from that cup of suffering; that’s why he picked himself up off Gethsemane’s sweat and blood spattered soil so that he could go and meet his betrayer. Jesus stood firm in his resolve to respect the office of the high priest; that’s why he told Caiaphas, “Yes, it is as you say. I am the Christ,” knowing that it would get him a one way ticket to see the Roman governor. Jesus stood firm, on his knees, with his hands tied to a whipping post to offer his back to the soldier’s whip. And yet, even there, in the Praetorium, Jesus would move forward because he knew that his work was not done. Pinned in place by nails yet fastened to that cross by love, Jesus stood firm on that little chunk of wood and did not give in to the insults, the jokes, the dares, or the name calling. He stood firm and would not come down – but he did move forward. While on that cross Jesus went to hell and back – for six hours Jesus endured the punishment of hell so that we will not have to spend a single second in that God-forsaken place.
Jesus stood firm until every last drop of his precious blood – blood that was needed to purify us from all unrighteousness – had dripped down his sinless body and onto the dusty ground beneath him so that it could cover both us and our sin. Fighting in the wooden trenches on that bloody hill our King stood firm, an army of one, giving himself fully to the work of the Lord, giving all he had – his very life . . . the one thing, the only thing, that would restore peace with a holy God. And he won. He won the victory. He paid the price. His Father did not abandoned him to the grave. His body never saw decay. Sunday morning. Easter day. Jesus swallowed death up in victory. Thanks be to God. He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. God accepted his Son’s payment for our sin and we hold that stamped receipt – an empty tomb – in our hands of faith. We’ve already won. Because he lives we also shall live.
We’ve already won. The victory is ours. The victory over sin; the victory over death; the victory over the devil. We’ve already won, brothers, so stand firm. Grace alone, faith alone, Scripture alone. Christ for me. Christ in me. Redeemed, bought, purchased. Reconciled, at peace, at one . . . with God himself. Baptized – adopted, washed, robed, crowned. Stand firm. By God’s grace stand firm. In his Word. On his truth. Let nothing move you. We’ve already won. Let nothing move you. But move forward. We’ve already won. Move forward. Give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord. Scour that prospect list, make those calls, foster those relationships. A second site? A mulit-site? A daughter congregation? Move forward. Step out in faith. Count the cost. Put your trust in a living Savior. Support our schools, look for ways to lower tuition rather than raise it, keep our schools in your prayers, encourage your teachers, support them in their work; expand your school’s ministry; expand your staff, expand your facility if need be.
We’ve already won. Move forward. Never be content with how you do worship. Keep it focused on Christ, for sure; of course. But equip God’s people? Use their gifts? Plan, prepare, do it well? How can we not? Consider ways to get involved with a particular area of your congregation’s ministry. What are your gifts? Where can they best be used? Who else can serve with you? How can you recruit them? How can you train - 124 - them? Prayer for your district leaders. Pray for your synodical leaders. Pray for the work of our synod – worker training, world missions, home mission, doctrinally sound publications and Bible studies. Brothers, we’ve already won. Stand firm but move forward. Your labor in the Lord, your faith-filled fruits, robed in the loving service of the One who already lived in our place will never be in vain. Ever.
Thanks be to God. Amen.
- 125 -
NOTES:
- 126 -
Lutheranism’s First Identity Crisis: The Struggle to Preserve Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel and Lessons for Today
LUTHERANISM’S FIRST IDENTITY CRISIS: THE STRUGGLE TO PRESERVE LUTHER’S UNCOMPROMISING GOSPEL AND LESSONS FOR TODAY
Wade Johnston, PhD
50th Biennial Conference of the Nebraska District of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod Nebraska Evangelical Lutheran High School Waco, Nebraska 6-8 June 2016
- 127 -
ABSTRACT
Lutheranism experienced an identity crisis after the death of the great reformer in 1546 and the defeat of the Schmalkaldic League at Mühlberg in 1547. The future of Luther’s Reformation was at stake, his theology threatened with obscurity or obfuscation. Two of Luther’s most powerful statements of the
Christian faith and its central article, the Heidelberg Disputation and On the Bondage of the Will, served, and still serve, as a sort of shibboleth. On the Bondage of the Will was one of but a handful of his writings Luther wanted preserved after his death. Already during his life, however, some of his colleagues and others under the evangelical banner were uncomfortable with his uncompromising positions on the will, justification, and good works. After his death, dissent became more open. The Gnesio-Lutherans, led by Matthias Flacius
Illyricus and Nicolaus von Amsdorf, sought to defend Luther’s teaching and legacy. Wittenberg’s cooperation in the production of the compromise formula, the Leipzig Proposal, also called the Leipzig
Interim, began a decades-long identity crisis within German Lutheranism. What began as an external, imperial threat was now seen as an internal betrayal. The most basic teachings of the Bible came into dispute.
The very heart of Luther’s theology was threatened. After reviewing the Heidelberg Disputation and On the
Bondage of the Will, this paper examines several of the key controversies that emerged as part of
Lutheranism’s first identity crisis and then proposes lessons for the Lutheran Church today. In so doing, it builds upon the astute observation of the committee of the 49th biennial convention of this district that charged the author with this task: “Many of the doctrinal and practical challenges the early Lutheran reformers faced still continue to confront present day confessional Lutherans.”
- 128 -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 134
Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel 139
The Heidelberg Disputation 139 On the Bondage of the Will 153
Lutheranism’s Identity Crisis 175
The Adiaphoristic Controversy 175 The Synergistic Controversy over Free Will 183 The Majorist Controversy over Good Works 187 The Osiandrian Controversy over Justification 189 The Dispute with Schwenckfeld over Scripture 191 The Flacian Controversy over Original Sin 193
Lessons from the “Culture of Conflict” 204
The Significance of Original Sin for Pastoral Care and Preaching 204 Adiaphora and the Connection between Doctrine and Practice 208 Conversing, Confessing, Correcting, and Being Corrected as Brothers 220 Scripture, Not as It Seems to You, but as It Is for You 223
Bibliography 225
- 129 -
Lutheranism’s First Identity Crisis
Introduction
The defining and most productive ages of the Church’s history have been, perhaps without exception, ages of crises. From creeds to confessions, martyrs to confessors, no times have given birth to such rich formulations and testimonies to Christ and His Word as those of great trial or tumult. In such periods, the doctrinal vitality of the church’s ministerium, the catechization of the laity, and the confession of the ceremonies of the divine service have played a crucial role in the perseverance of the Christian Church and the preservation of her Treasure.
Why begin a paper about pressing forward with an eye toward the past, though? Times have changed, haven’t they? We have iPhones and smart televisions, Google and Siri, a college football playoff.
What does the past have to teach us? In addition to humility, a lot. Times change, but people not so much.
Faces change, but we’re not so different now than we were at the end of Genesis 3. As Calvin put it, the human heart is an idol factory. Its inclinations are still evil, its hopes misplaced. As at Augustine’s time, it’s still curvatus in se.
Nietzsche described those bold enough to move beyond morality, Beyond Good and Evil, as “living touchstones of the human heart,” and he was more correct than he likely realized.1 He preceded this with a particularly artful, if unpleasant, observation about Christianity and its constituents. He wrote, “There is usually a stink wherever the common people eat and drink, and even in their places of reverence. Do not go into churches if you want to breathe clean air.”2 Obviously, Nietzsche intended to insult Christianity with this observation, but I don’t find it insulting at all. I think Christ fully expects His Church in this world to match Nietzsche’s description well. He pretty much said as much. After all, the Master sent His servants to
1 Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, trans. Marion Faber (Oxford: Oxford World’s Classics, 2008), 33.
2 Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, 31.
- 130 - the highways and byways, behind the hedges, and wherever the poor and crippled and lame could be found, in order to bring in guests for His feast when the hoity-toity were too busy taking in their clean air.3 The all too “common” people come dirty, filthy with sin. And yet, that being the case, they most certainly leave clean, their prayers having risen before him as incense.
An account of St. Lawrence comes to mind, when his greedy prefect tried to confiscate the treasures of the church: Lawrence asked the prefect for time to get together and inventory his treasures. He came back the next day followed by a crowd of beggars. “Behold the treasures of the Church,” he said, indicating them.
You might guess how well that went over:
In great anger, the Prefect condemned Lawrence to a slow, cruel death. The Saint was tied on top of an iron grill over a slow fire that roasted his flesh little by little, but Lawrence was burning with so much love of God that he almost did not feel the flames. In fact, God gave him so much strength and joy that he even joked. “Turn me over,” he said to the judge. “I'm done on this side!” And just before he died, he said, “It's cooked enough now.” Then he prayed that the city of Rome might be converted to Jesus and that the Catholic Faith might spread all over the world. After that, he went to receive the martyr's reward.4
Whose patron saint is Lawrence? This is one of the fun things about church history, it is seldom as dry as many assume: he is the patron saints of cooks and the poor. That might seem like a bad joke, but I think there is a certain beauty to it. What better thing could a cook do than persevere in Christ and die in the faith? St. Lawrence is a reminder of that. When it comes to making a new dish, cooks have Google for that.
They don’t need a prayer card. And as for the poor, Lawrence reminds them of the church’s true Treasure,
Christ, and that they, though impoverished in this life, like Lazarus, are treasured by Him.
So why all this talk of Nietzsche and Lawrence? The Church is not ashamed of the common, neither of common people nor common things. The Church’s treasure was, is, and ever shall be Christ, born in a manger, of whom Isaiah prophesied as though Christ had come a thousand years before, so sure are God’s promises: “For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form
3 Luke 14:21-24.
4 Omer Englebert, The Lives of the Saints, trans. Christopher and Anne Fremantle (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1994), 307; http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=366 (accessed December 18, 2015).
- 131 - or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.”5 And this common Christ comes through common Means—not with fireworks and a lightshow, but with water, bread, and wine (what could be more common!), and through common mouths on our common faces. Throughout history, the common Christ has used the most common people in even the most uncommon confusions and commotions.
And by His gospel, buoyed by His promises, these common people have confessed, catechized, and presided, steadfast, not by any special or peculiar virtue, but by faith, the gift of God. Christ’s word was as true for them as it was for the twelve common disciples Christ called as apostles: “And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not be anxious about how you should defend yourself or what you should say, for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”6 And what were they to say? My son reminded me of that when he was little. Sunday School was before the divine service at Christ Lutheran in Saginaw when I first got there. One day after Sunday School, we couldn’t find him. Eventually my wife discovered him in the parsonage watching cartoons. She asked him what in the world he thought he was doing. He told her he wasn’t going to church because it was always the same thing,
“Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.” I wasn’t happy with him for going home on his own. I was glad, though, that he got the point of the divine service and of the Church’s very existence, even if he didn’t appreciate it at the moment.
He had been listening. That is always a start. So, the question before us today is how we go forth as confessing Christians, as Lutherans—confessing Christianity at its best, that is, in the content of its confession, which is Christ—into a new day. My answer: the same way as the saints of the past, with Jesus on our heads, hearts, and lips, in, with, and under the host for the forgiveness of our sins, and as the reason for the hope that we have for the benefit of our neighbor.
How should we approach this task? We could cover the entire span of church history, but that might take longer than the time allotted for our study. I have thought it beneficial to focus on one specific period of history, a critical age for the history of Lutheranism and one pregnant with lessons for our own day. First, we’ll examine what exactly Lutheran identity is, as Luther understood it, which I will argue is encapsulated
5 Isaiah 53:2 ESV.
6 Luke 12:11,12 ESV.
- 132 - in two of his seminal, and yet understudied, works, namely, his Heidelberg Disputation and On the Bondage of the Will. Second, we will consider Lutheranism’s first identity crisis, the “culture of controversy” or
“culture of conflict,” as some historians have termed it.7 This period began with Luther’s death and the defeat of the Schmalkaldic League and ended with the Formula of Concord. Third, we will draw some lessons from the Lutheran Church’s experience in that crisis and the way it addressed the challenges it faced with the Formula of Concord, which, together with the earlier Confessions included in the Book of Concord, buoyed Lutheranism in these turbulent years and provided a peaceful, faithful, biblical answer to the questions that arose during them.
Contrary to the popular idiom, those who do not learn history are not doomed to repeat it. History is not repeatable. It is certainly instructive, however, and for that reason we do well to give it its due. We confess the communion of the saints and we are the communion of saints. We sing songs those before us sang, pray prayers they prayed, and gather around the same Jesus they gather round on the other side of the altar. We have a God who was born, suffered, died, and rose in history. We stand for the accounts of
Evangelists who took great care to include historical detail in their accounts of the life and message of Jesus
Christ—they wrote history, very living history. We trust that our ascended Jesus is the Lord of history, acting through and guiding it for the ultimate benefit of His Bride. Church history ought not have to make its case with Christians. Rather, there are few more Christian tasks than immersion in a past which at the same time becomes and effects our present—it’s downright sacramental!
I know some might be thinking, “We confess sola scriptura. We have the Bible. Why all this talk of church history and the Confessions? We don’t do father theology.” Yes, we do confess sola scriptura, and rightly so, and yet we do not read Scripture alone and woe to us if we ever do. Studying how those who have confessed the faith before us have read the Scriptures helps reveal potential blind spots and provide
7 See, for instance, Irene Dingel, “The Culture of Conflict, in the Controversies Leading to the Formula of Concord (1548-1560),” in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550-1675, ed. Robert Kolb (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 15-64; and Charles P. Arand, James A. Nestingen, and Robert Kolb, The Lutheran Confessions: History and Theology of the Book of Concord (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 171-190.
- 133 - additional perspective. Moreover, we bear historical titles: Christian, evangelical, Lutheran, and so forth.
These describe us in historical terms. They demarcate what we confess and what we do not. They are on our signs and in our constitutions, and for good reason. The Confessions are not the Scriptures, and they never claim to be. I challenge anyone to put the relationship between the two better than the Confessions themselves do. Essentially, the Confessions were Wauwatosan before Wauwatosa was cool. They quoted neither seminary professors nor Wittenberg publications as primary authorities. They quoted and confessed
Scripture alone as such. The Formula makes this plain, stating at the outset, unequivocally: “We believe, teach, and confess that the only rule and guiding principle according to which all teachings and teachers are to be evaluated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments alone…”8 The Confessions would have nothing to do with parity between themselves and the Scriptures, and we do them a disservice when we act as if they would. Rather, we do well to learn from them, to confess with them, to recognize that our fellowship transcends time and space, to recognize with them the viva vox
Evangelii and acknowledge it before men.9 The same is true of those whose confession helped prepare the way for them, who confessed by preparing them, and who struggled to preserve that confession, the confession of Christ and the Scriptures, both in the period of Lutheranism’s great identity crisis and beyond, in Europe, America, and the entire world. That’s the wonderful thing about the Christian Church: the dead still speak and the living, if they are wise, still listen.
8 Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), Formula of Concord, Epitome 1, 486.
9 Matthew 10:32,33.
- 134 -
Luther’s Uncompromising Gospel
The Heidelberg Disputation
Before delving into Lutheranism’s identity crisis, it is important for our purposes to consider two of
Luther’s most Lutheran statements of the faith, the latter perhaps his most important, alongside the catechisms, at least in the Luther’s own opinion. The first is the Heidelberg Disputation. The second is On the Bondage of the Will. Both clearly, powerfully, and pointedly set forth the heart of Luther’s theology.
Through relatively brief reflection upon these two works of the reformer, we will also gain insight into the ruptures that developed after his death among those who struggled to define the core and boundaries of this theology and legacy, as well as the best way to preserve the same in the face of external and internal threats.
Nestingen explains:
While he was fighting his way through the indulgence controversy, early in 1518, Luther was thinking through the meaning of Christ’s death and resurrection for the life of the believer. In several writings from this time, but especially in the Heidelberg Disputation, he set up a contrast between a theology of glory and a theology of the cross. The issue, after all he had been through, was basic: How do human beings really come to know God?10
No question could have been more important in the moment. Luther found himself in the midst of great theological tumult. The road from the Castle Church door to Worms was a rocky one. Luther was forced to wrestle with, refine, and defend his teaching regarding Christ and the Christian’s salvation. On what basis could he stake his claim to the truth, to be right? The answer for Luther was increasingly clear already in
1518: “I teach that the people should put their trust in nothing but Jesus Christ alone, not in their prayers, merits, or their own good deeds.”11 Nestingen observes, “As he worked his way through Paul’s Letter to the
Galatians in his first set of lectures on that book in 1516-1517”—there are few works that should be higher on your list of books to read than Luther’s later commentary on this crucial Pauline letter—“and took up the
Psalms once more, a new theme began to emerge. It is reflected in the different spelling of Luther’s name.
10 James A. Nestingen, Martin Luther: A Life (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 36.
11 LW 31:75, quoted in Scott H. Hendrix, Martin Luther: Visionary Reformer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), 68.
- 135 -
Martin Ludder or Lutter became Martin Luther, a small change based on the Greek word for freedom, elutherius.”12 This theme of freedom was crucial for Luther’s later theology, and for the Heidelberg
Disputation—freedom from sin, freedom from the law as a path to salvation, freedom from a role as an achiever in one’s redemption. Luther clearly contrasted the works of man and the works of God. He left no doubt about which brought divine righteousness. One packed thesis after another exploded medieval and innately human notions of some role, even just a little one, in our reconciliation with God. Luther, in short, turned contemporary theology on its head. Out went Aristotle, in came Paul. Out went the textbooks, in came the Scriptures, with Christ crucified as their key.
Luther presented these critical theses at the meeting of the Augustinian Order in Heidelberg, 26 April
1518. This meeting took place every three years. Luther was required to attend as one of two provincial vicars, a job that kept him quite busy in addition to his preaching and teaching in Wittenberg. He traveled with letters of safe conduct from his elector.13 Luther’s superior, Johann von Staupitz, arranged for Luther to defend his teaching at the assembly. He was to present the theological method of his university in
Wittenberg. As Hendrix notes, “The issue was: How did sinful human beings become lovable enough in the eyes of God to receive grace and forgiveness.”14 Luther’s answer was not new, but for most in attendance it was novel. Luther brought Paul’s unmistakable answer to light. Critical for his thinking was 1 Corinthians
1:23, where Paul explains that “we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles.”
Oberman notes, “This passage was fundamental to Luther. Already a shaping factor in the exegetical work of his first Psalms lectures, it was frequently referred to later on, and, in the form of theses, presented with all its implications before his own order at the disputation in Heidelberg in 1518.”15 Luther removed the bushel that had been placed over the lamp of the gospel. While a number of the older members of the order were
12 Nestingen, Martin Luther, 37.
13 Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 1483-1521, trans. James L. Schaaf (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 213, 214.
14 Hendrix, Martin Luther, 69.
15 Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil (New York: Image Books, 1992), 257-258.
- 136 - unconvinced, Luther won some of the prominent young Augustinians, including Martin Bucer, who would go on to become a very influential reformer in Germany and England. When reporting about his experience at Heidelberg, having listened to Luther, Bucer said that he was writing “as if in a dream.” Moved by the experience, his impression at the time, as Brecht reports, was that “Luther agreed with the (renowned)
Erasmus in everything, save that he, in contrast to Erasmus, taught freely and openly.”16 In this, Bucer would later be proven mistaken.
Luther addresses four key issues in the theological theses. Forde breaks them down as follows: the problem of good works, the problem of the will, the theology of glory vs. the theology of the cross, and the righteousness of faith.17 These four parts could essentially be broken down into two: our approach to God, which can only fail, and God’s approach to us, summarized in Luther’s twenty-eighth and final theological thesis: “The love of God does not find, but creates, that which is pleasing to it. The love of man comes into being through that which is pleasing to it.”18 The theses can further be reduced to one key assertion by
Luther: crux sola est nostra theologia, “the cross alone is our theology.”
The Heidelberg Disputation stands as a resounding challenge to medieval theology, the opinio legis, and all man-made religion. It is amazing that Luther wrote these theses so early in his career and years before the Diet of Worms. Here we find the building blocks for Wittenberg theology at its best and the beating heart of Lutheranism at its most faithful to the Scriptures. Seven years later, Luther powerfully reiterated and expanded upon these themes in his debate with Erasmus in On the Bondage of the Will. In what follows, we will briefly consider key theses for each of the four themes enumerated above, and I pray that we will not do so without effect. As Forde asserts, “Thus the cross story becomes our story. It presses itself upon us so that it becomes inescapable. It fights to displace the glory story. The cross thereby becomes the key to the biblical
16 Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 216
17 Gerhard O. Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation, 1518 (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997).
18 LW 31:41.
- 137 - story and opens up new possibilities for appropriating—or better, being appropriated by—the entire story.”19
God grant it: crux sola est nostra theologia!
As Luther began his discussion of the first issue, the problem of good works, he drove the lane hard, throwing elbows all the way: “The law of God, the most salutary doctrine of life, cannot advance man on his way to righteousness, but rather hinders him.”20 Down went Pelagius. Down went Aquinas. Down went the little Pharisee in all of us. This is the first bookend of these theological theses, partnered with the twenty- eighth thesis already quoted above. Out went the law. Well, not entirely, but completely with respect to our conversion and righteousness. What the law demands it cannot give. As he made plain later, “The law says,
“do this,” and it is never done. Grace says, “believe in this,” and everything is already done.”21 As Forde puts it, “In other words, from the vantage point of the righteousness of faith we see that the law comes up against its absolute end. The law ‘finishes’ its work in exposing sin and, indeed, making it worse.”22 How does it make it worse? Paul answers that, first, in Romans 5: “Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”23 Second, Paul shares his own experience with the law later in Romans 7:
What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.24
19 Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 8.
20 LW 31:39.
21 LW 31:41.
22 Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 25.
23 Romans 5:20-21 ESV.
24 Romans 7:7-12 ESV. - 138 -
Notice, “the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” The problem is that I am not holy. I am not holy and righteous and good. At least without Christ I am not, apart from the gift of faith.
That’s the whole point of Jesus. That’s Luther’s chief point. It’s not original to him. It’s not new—although it appeared so to his hearers. It’s Paul. It’s Scripture. It’s indeed the heart and core of all truly Christian theology.
In the early theses Luther entered into a discussion of categories of sin that might be unfamiliar to contemporary Lutherans. In Roman Catholicism mortal sin is sin that puts your soul at risk of damnation.
The one committing it does so on purpose, according to his own free will, committing a sin that is considered grave—the seven deadly sins might come to mind. Some sins thus become more serious than others, cardinal sins. Venial sins, on the contrary, are sins of weakness. They are not grave sins—minor sins, you could say.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes the distinction with the following assertions: “Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God's law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him. Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.”25 Examples of sorts of sin then follow:
Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: “Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother.” The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.26
Most interestingly, the Roman catechism continues: “Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself.”27 Notice where the Roman Church’s error springs from in this instance, as in so may others: free will. Luther would burst Roman and natural human bubbles in On the Bondage of the Will. Love—true
αγαπη love—is not a possibility of natural, fallen human freedom and mortal sin is the only possibility of it, radical as it is. Mortal sin is not a potentiality for the unbeliever. It is a way of life.
25 Catechism of the Catholic Church (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1994), IV. 1855, 454.
26 Catechism of the Catholic Church (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1994), IV. 1858, 455.
27 Catechism of the Catholic Church (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1994), IV. 1861, 456. - 139 -
Lutherans reject categories of sin, as if one sin were more deadly than another or more serious in eternal consequences, although we do acknowledge varying temporal, earthly consequences. Luther played on this distinction in Roman Catholic theology, then, when he classified the gravest sins as unbelief and a reliance upon the law for what it cannot give, not because of any fault of its own, but because of our inability to fulfill it. He insisted, “Although the works of man always seem unattractive and good, they are nevertheless likely to be mortal sins,” and, “although the works of God always seem unattractive and appear evil, they are nevertheless really eternal merits.”28 Once again, the problem is not the law, but us, what we expect it to deliver or how we think we stand with respect to it. The distinction rests, not in the sin, but in the sinner and his disposition and standing before God, whether in Christ or apart from Him. It boiled down to this for Luther: “To say that works without Christ are dead, but not mortal, appears to constitute a perilous surrender of the fear of God.”29 No work is good in God’s sight apart from Christ and certainly no work merits or delivers righteousness apart from Him. Rather, “In the sight of God sins are truly venial when they are feared to be mortal.”30 Our best works are filthy rags and the believer will know that and realize that his comfort and security rests, not in what he does, which is stained by virtue of his sinfulness, but in what Christ has done for him.31
Luther then addressed the problem of free will—the existence, or lack of existence, of free will in matters of salvation. Here Americans bristle, but we must remember that Luther isn’t talking about whether or not we can choose Big Macs or Whoppers, vanilla or chocolate custard, but whether or not we can decide to be saved, whether we can choose to do what is necessary for us to be righteous. We need not go into too much detail here, as this topic will be taken up again regarding On the Bondage of the Will. Thankfully,
Luther made it easy to keep things short. He wrote, “Free will, after the fall, exists in name only, and as long
28 LW 31:39.
29 LW 31:40.
30 LW 31:40.
31 Isaiah 64:6.
- 140 - as it does what it is able to do, it commits mortal sin.”32 One might be tempted to ask, “Tell us what you really think, Dr. Luther?” Sarcastic as such a request might be, Luther delivered: “Free will, after the fall, has power to do good only in a passive capacity, but it can always do evil in an active capacity.”33 What a devastating blow to optimistic notions of the capabilities of fallen human beings. It is not original to Luther, though. Once again, Paul beat Luther to the punch in his Letter to the Romans. In addressing whether or not a
Christian is free to eat foods previously prohibited by the Mosaic Law, Paul insisted, “But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”34 Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin, and what does the unbeliever not have? So what can the unbeliever do? And what about the believer, who thinks his works are the fruit of his own virtue or power? He is certainly not acting in faith. So what are his works? Luther’s point is proven. Our will is bound unless freed by Christ and it is in no way freed except through faith, the gift of God through Word and
Sacrament. Through these Means of Grace Christ’s cross breaks through our self-righteousness illusions and brings what we could never gain through work-based endeavors.
“A theologian of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theologian of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.”35 With this critical thesis Luther endeavored to remove the scales from the eyes of his fellow Augustinians who lived and practiced a disoriented religious life. As Arnold
Koelpin explains, “The cross is the revelation, and the theology of the cross the only one which deserves the name theology.”36 Luther’s warning is timeless. Sasse observed of his own day, and it rings true still:
32 LW 31:40.
33 LW 31:40.
34 Romans 14:23 ESV.
35 LW:40.
36 A. J. Koelpin, “Luther’s Theology of the Cross,” 6. http://www.wlsessays.net/bitstream/handle/ 123456789/2604/Luther%27s%20Theology%20of%20the%20Cross.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed December 21, 2015).
- 141 -
All Christian churches, also those of the Lutheran confession, must face the fact that as they are today they do not live from the Gospel alone but also from human illusions. It must be clear to us that only a church that is free of illusions in what it proclaims can today speak the Gospel to a disillusioned world—the pure, that is, the real Gospel, and not a gospel that men have fashioned for themselves.37
Parochialism, ahistorical assumptions, cultural presuppositions, all such things distract and delude.
The gospel must have its way, which means we must get out of its way, or better yet, we must be gospeled. In other words, we do not make the gospel our own; the gospel makes us its own.
Few people struggle more with the theology of the cross than the religious. Forde writes,
“Religious people in particular seem to have difficulty being theologians of the cross. That is because the theology of the cross is quite devastating for our usual religious aspirations under the wisdom of the law.”38 I am frequently reminded of this in the Ethics course I teach. The course has a wide variety of students, many of them Lutheran, many of them from other denominations, a handful with no religious background. Few struggle more, in my experience so far, with the notion of suffering and the place and purpose of our works than some of those who have been raised in the
Lutheran Church. How could God allow us to suffer? Why wouldn’t God want us to be a good person? Of course, God allows us to suffer because we live in a fallen world, and He uses that suffering for our good, as He used Christ’s, because He is loving, merciful, and wise. Of course,
God wants us to do good works, but we do so, not to be good people, but because we are His people. We are good because He declares us good, because He has planted and waters us in Holy
Baptism. Our works are fruits, not seeds. This runs counter to all that is most instinctive and intuitive for us as fallen humans, and so Forde writes, “Religiously we like to look on ourselves as potential spiritual athletes desperately trying to make God’s team, having perhaps just a little
37 Herman Sasse, We Confess Anthology (We Confess: Jesus Christ), trans. Norman Nagel (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 38.
38 Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 92.
- 142 - problem or two with the training rules.”39 Perhaps you don’t have that struggle. Good for you.
We’ll ring the church bells, sing a Sanctus, and parade you throughout town later. The rest of us have to settle on promised sainthood, a gift and not a reward—and, to be fair, we should want to have it no other way, because that is how God has arranged it. Baptism, we do well to remember, is not a quick bath: “Baptism teaches a crucial truth about justification. It is not exoneration, improvement, alteration, or cleaning off of the old Adam. David’s new heart is not a change of heart, but a creation ex nihilo.”40 A scene from Bo Giertz’s Hammer of God comes to mind, a discussion between an old, tried and true, orthodox dean of the parish and his new curate, Fridfeldt, who means well, but has been bitten by the bug of pietism.
“I just want you to know from the beginning, sir, that I am a believer,” [Fridfeldt] said. His voice was a bit harsh. He saw a gleam in the old man’s eyes which he could not quite interpret. Was approval indicated, or did he have something up his sleeve? The rector put the lamp back on the table, puffed at his pipe, and looked at the young man a moment before he spoke. “So you are a believer, I’m glad to hear that. What do you believe in? Fridfeldt stared dumbfounded at his superior. Was he jesting with him? “But, sir, I am simply saying that I am a believer.” “Yes, I hear that, my boy. But what is it that you believe in?” Fridfeldt was almost speechless. “But don’t you know, sir, what it means to be a believer?” “That is a word which can stand for things that differ greatly, my boy. I ask only what it is that you believe in.” “In Jesus, of course,” answered Fridfeldt, raising his voice. “I mean—I mean that I have given him my heart.” The older man’s face became suddenly as solemn as the grave. “Do you consider that something to give him?” By this time, Fridfeldt was almost in tears. “But sir, if you do not give your heart to Jesus, you cannot be saved.” “You are right, my boy. And it is just as true that, if you think you are saved because you give Jesus your heart, you will not be saved, You see, my boy,” he continued reassuringly, as he continued to look at the young pastor’s face, in which uncertainty and resentment were show in a struggle for the upper hand, “it is one thing to choose Jesus as one’s Lord and Savior, to give him one’s heart and commit oneself to him, and that he now accepts one into his little flock; it is a very different
39 Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 92.
40 Steven D. Paulson, Lutheran Theology (New York: T&T Clark International, 2011), 157.
- 143 -
thing to believe in him as a Redeemer of sinners, of whom one is chief. One does not choose a Redeemer for oneself, you understand, nor give one’s heart to him. The heart is a rusty old can on a junk heap. A fine birthday gift, indeed! But a wonderful Lord passes by, and has mercy on the wretched tin can, sticks his walking cane through it, and rescues it from the junk pile and takes it home with him. That is how it is.”41
The dean wanted to free his new, young curate from the bondage of the law, from works as a last resort for righteousness. He wanted to set him free. Rather, he wanted the Holy Spirit to do so, through the gospel. This is the true freedom of the theologian of the cross. He doesn’t have to move the peas and mashed potatoes around on his plate in the hopes of a better dinner. He doesn’t have to try to conjure up something in himself that isn’t there. He doesn’t need to find himself, transform himself, or reinvent himself. God makes him new, and in that is peace, comfort, hope, and, yes, true love, which can only overflow into the lives of others as well.
Paulson writes, “The theologian of glory looks at sin upon himself, forgets all about Christ, and goes back to the law as the means of ridding himself of the thing.”42 Growing up, it was a big deal when my parents finally trusted my brother and me to stay home alone. We lived in a little starter home at that time—we were starting for decades. One house was pretty much on top of another in the neighborhood. When my parents finally decided we could handle things at home without them, we squandered our opportunity to demonstrate our trustworthiness. Some friends came over and we had a regular WrestleMania in the living room. The neighbors told my parents they saw one of us flying across the room like “Superfly” Jimmy Snuka. In the process of our fun, we knocked over a plant. There was dirt everywhere. We got the bright idea to try to vacuum it up.
We only pushed the dirt deeper into the relatively new carpeting. My friends started to realize the trouble we were going to be in when my parents got home. Some scattered in terror. Some
41 Bo Giertz, The Hammer of God, trans. Clifford Ansgar Nelson and Hans Andrae (Minneapolis: Augsburg Books, 2005), 122-123.
42 Paulson, Lutheran Theology, 145.
- 144 - frantically helped us try to clean up the dirt with wet clothes—once again, a terrible idea. Needless to say, we got so caught up with the stain on the floor that we only made it worse. Rather than placing our hope in our parents’ forgiveness—they did have to love us, after all—we dug our hole deeper. We were like theologians of glory when it comes to sin. If only we’d have had a theologian of the cross for a friend to stop us and say, “That’s a stain, and it’s going to stay a stain no matter what you do. You can’t fix it. Someone else has to do it for you.”
“To be made a theologian of the cross rather than glory is always a shock. Faith that receives the communicated blessings of Christ’s victory does not see or feel those benefits. Faith therefore teaches us to believe against our feelings, and only in the promise.”43 Promises are funny things, though. We often take them as might-bes. They might come true. The Israelites struggled with this, as do we. In the midst of temptation and suffering we can start to panic. We look around us and we look within. Like Abraham with Hagar, we want to help God’s promise along. God’s promise needs no help, though—He will countenance absolutely nothing of the sort.
Deutschlander reminds us of so many of God’s Old Testament promises, “They are written in the past tense, as though the work of Jesus had already taken place! They and the other promises of the Savior are written in the past tense because his work described there must take place; God willed it, and it could not fail to take place just as he said.”44 Yes, God’s will is a stubborn thing, and thank Him for that. Luther recognized that, as we will see in On the Bondage of the Will. God’s promise is as sure and reliable as His person, and there is no better reminder of how reliable His person is than His body on a cross. The crucifix looms large. We live lives of the cross—Christ’s cross and our crosses. Luther argued, “He deserves to be a called a theologian, however, who
43 Paulson, Lutheran Theology, 141.
44 Daniel M. Deutschlander, The Narrow Lutheran Middle: Following the Scriptural Road (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2011), 101.
- 145 - comprehends the visible and manifest things of God seen through suffering and the cross.”45 The cross is our lens. It adjusts our vision and focuses our eyes. It turns us outside ourselves. It finds hope, not in what we might do, but in what God has done, and what He promises to do, which is as good as done. As Luther insisted earlier, “It is certain that a man must utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive the grace of Christ.”46 Pastors, Luther’s Sacristy Prayer might come to mind:
Lord God, You have appointed me as a Bishop and Pastor in Your Church, but you see how unsuited I am to meet so great and difficult a task. If I had lacked Your help, I would have ruined everything long ago. Therefore, I call upon You: I wish to devote my mouth and my heart to you; I shall teach the people. I myself will learn and ponder diligently upon You Word. Use me as Your instrument—but do not forsake me, for if ever I should be on my own, I would easily wreck it all.47
One of the most important insights Luther had was that God is not an idea. God is the crucified. He is Jesus Christ. He is a person. He is. His cross is. His grace is. He is not what we make of Him—sorry, postmodernity! His cross does not have whatever meaning we assign to it. His grace is not whatever we suppose it to be. These are concrete realities and they relate to, communicate with, and come to us in very definitive ways: Word and Sacrament. Oberman writes, “For Luther the disembodiment of God into an impressive idea is one of the Devil’s decisive misdeeds. Satan may be no doctor of theology, but he is very well trained in philosophy and has had nearly six thousand years to practice his craft.”48 When we fail to realize this, “God becomes subject matter, the topic about which we talk. But whoever talks about a subject must stand above it, must be ‘master of his subject.’ Thus all theology, as Luther rightly saw, stands in constant danger of losing the right relationship with God.”49 The theologian of the cross recognizes this and realizes the danger—inherent within us—of succumbing to the theology of glory. Yes, “all that we think and
45 LW 31:40.
46 LW 31:40.
47 http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/prayers/sacristy.txt (accessed December 23, 2015).
48 Oberman, Luther, 156.
49 Sasse, We Confess Anthology (We Confess: Jesus Christ), 46.
- 146 - do in the church has to be cleansed by the theology of the cross if we are to escape the perils of a theology of glory.”50 Deutschlander writes:
Could the theology of the cross be the litmus test of genuine Christianity in our day? The corrupt and counterfeit push aside the whole concept of cross bearing in favor of a joy without it. Fake Christianity offers the Christian an imitation of Christ’s glory in heaven, not of his humiliation on earth. The phony and the artificial church turns worship into a spiritual happy hour devoid of repentance, with cheap absolution, with no thought of taking God seriously in either the law or the gospel. And people love it. They still get to be their own god, their own bible, their own source of ultimate truth and salvation.51
That is a thought-provoking and critical question. God grant us the humility and the courage to ask and address it.
This brings us to the righteousness of faith, God’s gift to us and work in us, all through and by His promise and faith which clings to it. Our righteousness can only be of faith or it is no righteousness at all—not that which avails before God, at least. “The law brings the wrath of God, kills, reviles, accuses, judges, and condemns everything that is not in Christ.”52 There is no hope in the law nor our works of it. “He is not righteous who does much, but he who, without work, believes much in Christ.”53 Christ is the answer. Christ is our only hope. There is no other way out of the mire. “The laws says, ‘do this,’ and it is never done. Grace says, ‘believe in this,’ and everything is already done.”54 People need something to believe in—desperately—and there is only one thing that meets that need: the gospel. And God is not a grade school recess captain, picking his team from the most worthy to the least, the most able to the least coordinated. No, “the love of God does not find, but creates, that which is pleasing to it.” It is not like the love of man, “which comes
50 Sasse, We Confess Anthology (We Confess: Jesus Christ), 52.
51 Daniel M. Deutschlander, The Theology of the Cross: Reflections on His Cross and Ours (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2008), vii.
52 LW 31:41.
53 LW 31:41.
54 LW 31:41.
- 147 - into being through that which is pleasing to it.”55 Faith is the beggar’s hand, as Luther reminded his friends with his last words, and not like a beggar who plays the drums or dances for change outside a ballpark. No, faith is the hand of the beggar too weary to entertain, too embarrassed to ask, too disheartened to even make any effort at all, his fist clenched tight around some imaginary, absent, long ago lost treasure that spoiled, faded, and abandoned him to discontent and despair. He mumbles to himself the empty promises of a life that once held promise, his mind filled with what wasn’t. He sits lifeless in the gutter, cold, crippled, hopeless, head hung, unnoticed by all, consumed by shame and sickness. But what happens? The Savior comes along, tugs at his dirty fingers, prying open his filthy hand, and into it, trembling as with palsy, places all that he has: His very self. Even more, He speaks. He speaks of what is: forgiveness, life, and salvation. And just like that, the beggar is—the was, better yet, the wasn’t is banished; he is a child of God! Christ, like the Good
Samaritan, does just that, and any effort to bring our works back into the equation diminishes from
His gift and robs us of the certainty of His rescue. “Works performed on the premise that one was going to become righteous thereby are not good to begin with,” Forde points out. “They defend us against the goodness of God.”56 Christ does not need our help. We need his. Luther appealed to
Augustine: “The law (says Augustine) commands what faith obtains.”57 As Paul puts it, “For
Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”58 And if Christ is the end of the law, as He is, death loses its teeth. Gum us all it might, it can harm us none, for we are
Christ’s, and Christ is ours.
55 LW 31:41.
56 Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross, 105.
57 LW 31:56.
58 Romans 10:4 ESV.
- 148 -
On the Bondage of the Will
Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam was a distinguished humanist who had made numerous substantial contributions to the scholarship of his day long before his debate with Luther, significantly his edition of the
Greek New Testament, utilized by the great reformers. Born in Rotterdam sometime between 1466 and 1469, he received an excellent education and eventually became a monk, although it appears this was against his will.59 Well-travelled, he had a sophistication that far exceeded any of Luther’s own—to be fair, Luther did not strive for sophistication. The contrast between the lives, sensibilities, styles, and personalities of the two men couldn’t have been much more different. Pettegree observes of Luther:
Luther was a German figure and a German writer. His pleasures—food, music, family, beer—were not especially cerebral, and this was conveyed in and engaging style honed over many years of ministry and preaching to his Wittenberg congregation. Luther was a thoroughly educated man, but he wore this lightly. His sermons were littered with homely examples and improving tales, drawn equally from the fables of Aesop and the follies of life he observed all around him. All of this was integrated into a style of theological writing that Luther had essentially invented.60
Whereas Erasmus held up and imitated the method and style of antiquity’s towering figures, notably Cicero,
Luther, who was not unfamiliar with such men and such style, created his own. He was a gifted humanist, but he blazed a new path, particularly in German.61 Erasmus could hardly have been more cosmopolitan, and
Luther more German. Erasmus hid his barbs, couching them in nuanced prose. Luther was blunt, so that even
59 Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, eds. J.J. Packer and O.R. Johnston (Grand Rapids: Revell, 1957), 13. This is from the historical and theological introduction to Luther’s work.
60 Andrew Pettegree, Brand Luther (New York: Penguin Press, 2015), 33.
61 Luther was a lover of learning and in no way devalued the classics. He wrote to a Eobanus Hessus, “Do not worry that we Germans are becoming more barbarous than we ever have been, or that our theology causes a decline of learning. Certain people are often afraid when there is nothing to fear. I myself am convinced that without the knowledge of the [Humanistic] studies, pure theology can by no means exist, as has been the case until now: when the [Humanistic] studies were miserably ruined and prostrate [theology] declined and lay neglected. I realize there has never been a great revelation of God’s Word unless God has first prepared the way by the rise and the flourishing of languages and learning, as though these were forerunners, a sort of [John] the Baptist. Certainly I do not intend that young people should give up poetry and rhetoric. I certainly wish there would be a tremendous number of poets and orators, since I realize that through these studies, as through nothing else, people are wonderfully equipped for grasping the sacred truths, as well as for handling them skillfully and successfully. Of course, wisdom makes the tongues of infants eloquent; but [wisdom] does not wish the gift of language to be despised. Therefore I beg also you to urge your young people at my request (should this have any weight) to study poetry and rhetoric diligently. [As] Christ lives, I am often angry even with myself, that [these] times and ways of living do not give me leisure for an occasional reading of poets and orators. Once I [even] bought an edition of Homer in order to become a Greek.” LW 49:34. - 149 - his colleague and dear friend Melanchthon, who feared the vitriol with which Luther might attack the great humanist, wrote to a friend after Luther’s marriage, “I have hope that this state of life [marriage] may calm him down, so that he will discard the low buffoonery which we have often censured.”62 Needless to say,
Philipp would be disappointed. While some of Luther’s commentary might have been shrouded in the lowbrow, it was certainly not buffoonery. He dealt with life and death matters. As Pettegree comments regarding Luther’s style and labor as a whole, “But if we look beyond the steaming turds and farting
(graphically represented with all Cranach's customary skill), we should recognize the deadly seriousness of
Luther's purpose.”63
Erasmus had been in no hurry to attack Luther, although he had grown increasingly uncomfortable with the path reform was taking. Friends of both men worried that open conflict would only harm the reputations of both. Wolfgang Capito begged Erasmus to proceed with caution: “There is nothing [Luther’s] enemies wish more than to see you indignant with him.”64 Erasmus himself was hesitant to take up the task, and yet he feared the repercussions of perceived sympathy for Luther and his cause. Erasmus confided in an
English friend: “Even had all [Luther] wrote been religious, mine was never the spirit to risk my life for the truth. Everyone has not the strength needed for martyrdom.”65 A humanist through and through, Erasmus wanted moral reform, within the institutions of the church. He wanted what he considered to be a more simple, apostolic Christianity. His satirical work addressed to Sir Thomas More, In Praise of Folly, evidences this.66 Pressure increasingly mounted for him to distance himself from Luther and evangelical reform, though. Schwiebert writes, “What Erasmus failed to realize was that a scholar with his reputation could not remain on the sidelines; he must be either for Luther or against him.”67 Duke Henry pressed him
62 Hendrix, Martin Luther, 166.
63 Pettegree, Brand Luther, 302.
64 Pettegree, Brand Luther, 229.
65 Quoted in Pettegree, Brand Luther, 231.
66 Desiderius Erasmus, In Praise of Folly, trans. Betty Radice (London: Penguin Books, 1994).
67 E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times: The Reformation from a New Perspective (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950), 685. - 150 - to write against his great enemy, the reformer.68 Erasmus chose what he thought would be a tangential issue for Luther, free will, about which Luther had already written some. The product was A Diatribe or Discourse
Concerning Free Choice.
Luther delayed in reply. It was eleven months before he undertook the task. The Peasants’ War explains some of his tardiness, but one must wonder why, if Luther saw this as an attack on the heart of his theology, he wouldn’t start scribbling immediately. It is entirely possible that he simply had no desire to dispute with Erasmus. Brecht reports that “on 1 November Luther, with absolute loathing, had read less than two quires and was convinced that it would be an onerous task to reply to such an unlearned book by such a learned man.”69 Melanchthon, interestingly, was the first in Wittenberg to respond, and “he expressed a guardedly positive reaction.” Erasmus, he thought, had dealt fairly with Luther in tone and method, although
Philipp too recognized that he took up “a central theme of the Christian religion.”70 When Luther finally did respond, however, he exhibited no sympathy for Melanchthon’s grateful, positive impression of the Dutch humanist’s challenge. Luther wrote largely upon the prodding of friends and colleagues, but what he produced was “a crushing, comprehensive restatement of Reformation doctrine.”71 Erasmus was insolent at the tone and piercing criticism of Luther’s rebuttal. Pettegree recounts, “Erasmus, as was so often the case, took great offense at this personal criticism. His first reaction (also characteristic) was to try to shut Luther down with a behind-the-scenes maneuver, in this case appealing to the new Elector John,” a staunch defender of Luther, “to reprimand Luther for this insolence.” Nothing came of it. “The elector forwarded the letter to
Luther, and followed his advice to stay out of the quarrel.”72
68 Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation, 1521-1532, trans. James L. Schaaf (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 220.
69 Brecht, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation, 224.
70 Brecht, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation, 224.
71 Pettegree, Brand Luther, 233.
72 Pettegree, Brand Luther, 234.
- 151 -
Luther felt justified in his approach. This wasn’t a idle dispute about how many angels could dance on the head of a needle—though that dispute was less idle than many suppose. Erasmus had gone for the jugular, whether or not he realized it, and so Luther reacted accordingly. He told Erasmus in his conclusion,
“I praise and commend you highly for this also, that unlike all the rest you alone have attacked the real issue, the essence of the matter in dispute, and have not wearied me with irrelevancies about the papacy, purgatory, indulgences, and such trifles (for trifles they are rather than basic issues), with which almost everyone hitherto has gone hunting for me without success.”73 Intentionally or not, Erasmus had put his finger on the artery of Luther’s theology. If Luther confessed this, we do well to consider whether we ought to do the same. Moreover, when Luther elsewhere chided Erasmus with the objection that “your thoughts about God are all too human,” he reminds us still today that it is not Luther’s theology at all we confess, but the
Bible’s.74
From early on, Luther’s On the Bondage of the Will did not sit well with many, even within
Lutheranism. Luther’s treasured colleague, Philipp Melanchthon, was notoriously uncomfortable with it.
Few, even pastors, read it today with any regularity or particular attention, although, sadly, it is more pertinent than perhaps ever before in an American culture dripping with an obsession with choice, even in spiritual matters. Luther left little doubt about the regard he had for this work. In a letter to Wolfgang Capito, the same man who had urged Erasmus to practice restraint in challenging Luther, he wrote, “Regarding [the plan] to collect my writings in volumes, I am quite cool and not at all eager about it because, roused by a
Saturnian hunger, I would rather see them all devoured. For I acknowledge none of them to be really a book of mine, except perhaps the one On the Bound Will and the Catechism.”75 Concerning Luther’s composition of On the Bondage of the Will and his willingness to play within the tensions of human responsibility and
73 E. Gordon Rupp and Philip S. Watson, eds. Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969), 333.
74 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 125.
75 LW 50:172-173.
- 152 - fatalism, Kolb writes that we find there exhibited “the organic unity of his entire body of teaching.”76 In other words, On the Bondage of the Will does not deal with a few spokes in a doctrinal wheel; it rather reflects the whole wheel—spokes, rim, and all—working together and centered in Christ and His gospel.
Paulson explains, “Luther’s Bondage of the Will is actually a devotional, pastoral-care book meant to help people like Erasmus who are flummoxed over their salvation.”77 And this work ought confound not only
Erasmus or men like him at Luther’s time. It is an assault on contemporary thought. Oberman begins the section of his biography that deals with this debate, “In De servo arbitrio (Bondage of the Will; December
1525), his polemical tract against Erasmus—and ‘modern’ men of all eras—Luther took up and emphasized the subject of the distant and present God.”78 If you can read it without some part of you—namely, the old
Adam—starting to squirm, go back and start over, because you’re not reading it right.
Luther jumped on and returned to Erasmus’ skepticism early and often through his reply, and in so doing, he engages the creeping, shallow agnosticism of our own day as well. Luther could not countenance such a skeptical disposition in theology. The Scriptures, like preaching, are pastoral. The believer is to be comforted, not left wanting. Salvation is not a might-be. It is a certainty delivered through the proclaimed
Word—through Christ present among us in preaching and the Sacraments. Promises are not potentialities, not when they are from God. Our faith does not legitimize or make real our justification and forgiveness; no, faith, the gift of God, like Christ, like the promise, receives our justification and forgiveness. There is no redemption receptionism (when it hits your heart, then it is really what Jesus says it is). Nevertheless,
Erasmus had fatefully written, explaining his dislike of assertions, “And, in fact, so far am I from delighting in ‘assertions’ that I would readily take refuge in the opinion of the Skeptics, wherever this is allowed by the inviolable authority of the Holy Scriptures”—and he casts a wide net over just what teachings this might include, including that Mary is the Mother of God, the denial of which would be heresy!—“and by the
76 Robert Kolb, Bound Choice, Election, and the Wittenberg Theological Method: From Martin Luther to the Formula of Concord (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 42.
77 Paulson, Lutheran Theology, 222.
78 Oberman, Luther, 211.
- 153 - decrees of the Church, to which I everywhere willingly submit my personal feelings, whether I grasp what it prescribes or not.”79 In other words, Erasmus wanted to be a good son of the Roman Catholic Church, whatever that meant, and whether or not he understood it. This was the motivation with which he wrote. In this spirit, he concluded his work, “I have completed my discourse; now let others pass judgment.”80 In quite another spirit, Luther would end his, “I for my part in this book have not discoursed, but have asserted and do assert, and I am unwilling to submit the matter to anyone’s judgment, but advise everyone to yield assent. But may the Lord, whose cause this is, enlighten you and make you a vessel for honor and glory.
Amen.”81
As mentioned, what Luther attacked in Erasmus’ position on free will is not unique to Erasmus. It is native to fallen mankind. There is a little Erasmus in each of us. This is what makes On the Bondage of the
Will so critical. Like our Baptism, Luther assaulted what is deeply ingrained in us. He killed with the law. He permitted only an unconditional gospel which is gift and all gift. I get full credit for my damnation. God gets full credit for my salvation. And yet, even as I rejoice in God’s grace, part of me—once again, the old, sinful part—grates at the notion that my will, that I, can’t do something, even a little thing, tiny as can be. As I complained to Pastor Vertz when he catechized me as an adult convert to Lutheranism, “It’s too easy!”
That’s why it’s no coincidence that Nicholas Amsdorf, cognizant of dissonance within Lutheranism, even between the teaching of Luther and Melanchthon (and his Loci), already in 1534 published his correspondence with Luther regarding Erasmus of Rotterdam.82 As the human will started to peek its congested, sniveling nose into the tent of our conversion again, Amsdorf was confident Luther’s exchange was the antidote, even for so prominent a Lutheran as Philipp Melanchthon.
79 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 37, 40.
80 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 97.
81 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 334.
82 Nicolaus von Amsdorff, Epistolae Nicolai Amsdorfii et Martini Lutheri de Erasmo Roterodamo (Wittenberg, 1534).
- 154 -
Melanchthon’s addition of the human will as a third “cause” in conversion, after the Word and the
Spirit, was highly troubling for Amsdorf, the Gnesio-Lutherans, and all who held to Luther’s teaching regarding our lack of free will in things above us, in matters pertaining to salvation. This addition was reflective of a general shift in the Loci, originally composed as “a guide to reading Romans and thus an aid for teaching biblical doctrine in general.” Melanchthon instead developed “a new way of using the traditional medieval schema for organizing questions regarding the teaching of Scripture, according to the methods
Melanchthon had learned to use among the humanists.”83 In other words, the Loci lost some of their Pauline edge.84 In line with this, rather than rooting the question of the free will in election, as Luther had (and as the Synodical Conference did in the Election Controversy), Melanchthon began to root it in obedience to the law, a reaction to the sorry state of the churches in Saxony uncovered in the visitations of 1527 and 1528.85
In so doing, he drew nearer (although not) to Erasmus approach to the question of free will (God’s commands) and further from Luther’s (predestination). Like Erasmus, he wanted to maintain human responsibility and protect God from accusations of cruelty for commanding what man could not fulfill. He did not want God to be seen as an author of evil, since He creates men unable to do good by nature, as Luther asserted. Melanchthon sensed in Luther’s doctrine a degradation of humanity, as the will became like a stone or a block, or even worse. The will was not nothing, he held. God did use it, although not as a primary cause, in conversion. It was not purely passive, as Luther insisted, although deeply beset by weakness. In fact, after
1548 he even spoke of the human will’s ability to apply itself to grace to some extent, adopting a formula for human freedom employed by Erasmus against Luther. As Steinmitz notes, Melanchthon shifted in his
Variata from apparent agreement with Luther’s doctrine of predestination to disagreement with it, whether or not he said so directly.86 Luther meant On the Bondage of the Will to bring comfort, but such an attack on
83 Kolb, Bound Choice, 84.
84 For a contemporary work that strives to develop Lutheran theology around Paul’s Letter to the Romans see Steven D. Paulson, Lutheran Theology (New York: T&T Clark International, 2011).
85 Kolb, Bound Choice, 85.
86 David C. Steinmitz, Reformers in the Wings: From Geiler von Kayserberg to Theodore Beza, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 54-55.
- 155 - one of our most basic assumptions, a free will, made even Melanchthon uncomfortable. “Fear engulfed even
Melanchthon, who in later life could not stop warning his students against the ‘stoic madness’ of addressing
‘divine necessity’ and the hidden God as Luther did.”87
Melanchthon certainly was no Pelagian, and he definitely did not intend to make salvation our work, but his addition of the will in any capacity in conversion was problematic and alarming. Mathias Flacius therefore appealed to Luther’s On the Bondage of the Will against him. Regularly employing its imagery,
Flacius counseled, “For a sufficient foundation and demonstration of the truth one need only read blessed
Luther’s De servo arbitrio, whether in Latin or German.”88 Finally, in resolving the debates that had arisen during Lutheranism’s first great identity crisis, the Formula of Concord, after quoting Luther’s On the
Bondage of the Will as authoritative on the matter of free will, said of it and Luther’s commentary on
Genesis: “We appeal to these writings and refer others to them.”89 If Luther and the Formula held the work in such high esteem, surely we can benefit from consideration of it.
In HON 201: Renaissance and Reformation, I require the students to read Erasmus and Luther’s debate on free will. To my surprise, when they’ve had their oral examinations at the end of the semester, many have said Luther’s On the Bondage of the Will was their favorite thing we read. They themselves have more than once caught the connection between this work and the Heidelberg Disputation, and they are right in doing so. Throughout the work, we hear echoes of the Heidelberg Disputation. The seed sown at that meeting of Augustinians now blossomed. And this is not surprising. Schwiebert traces the kernel of Luther’s
Gottesbegriff in On the Bondage of the Will already back to his early lectures on Romans and Genesis and perhaps even his Erfurt days. Schwiebert writes:
87 Paulson, Lutheran Theology, 67.
88 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Bericht M. Fla. Jllyrici, Von etlichen Artikeln der Christlichen Lehr, und von seinem Leben, vnd endlich auch von den Adiaphoristischen Handlungen, wider die falsen Geticht der Adiaphoristen, (Jena, 1559), Civ v.
89 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration II.44, 552. Figure out a standard, consistent way to quote the Formula and the Book of Concord.
- 156 -
His later exegetical studies reveal that he consistently held this view in which the Bondage of the Will was firmly anchored. Luther believed that God is a “hidden God” whom natural man could only faintly detect from his five senses. What he determines on the basis of reason is almost wholly wrong. Only by divine revelation does the “hidden God” become the “revealed God,” a revelation which reached its peak in Jesus Christ. Beyond this revelation a human being cannot know God.90
Kolb writes, “Luther placed his teaching regarding God within the framework of his fundamental distinction between God Hidden and God Revealed, which he developed in detail first in his theses for his Augustinian brothers assembled at Heidelberg in 1518. This distinction formed a basic part of his ‘theology of the cross.’”91 This was a crucial distinction between the theology of Luther and Melanchthon as well as
Melanchthon and his followers and the Gnesio-Lutherans. Kolb observes:
Particularly important for Luther’s presentation of the biblical representation of God’s lordship was his distinction between the hidden God and the revealed God. Although Melanchthon could describe God in somewhat similar ways, this distinction did not find its way explicitly into his topical summary of the teaching of Scripture and so did not become a constitutive element in the public teaching of his students, as did the topics that organized his presentation. Gallus, however, recognized the value of the distinction and used it to warn against trying to plumb the depths of God’s wisdom with the temerity of human wisdom.92
This was no subtle difference in theological disposition, method, and emphasis. While Luther and
Melanchthon shared much in common theologically and both treasured the other, the tension here would become painfully evident after the reformer’s death and in the heat of the culture of conflict, after it had festered, unaddressed, perhaps even unperceived, for almost thirty years.
The Gnesio-Lutherans recognized the critical place the hidden God/revealed God distinction had in
Luther’s theology. They confessed the centrality of God’s revelation in Christ and the importance of acknowledging His hiddenness apart from Christ and His Word. Flacius, for instance, could identify with
90 Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, 692.
91 Gottesbegriff means “conception of God” and here refers to the fact that He is deus absconditus, hidden God. Kolb, Bound Choice, 35.
92 Kolb, Bound Choice, 144. Nicholas Gallus was a Gnesio-Lutheran friend and collaborator with Flacius and Amsdorf in Magdeburg’s campaign against the Leipzig Interim. He was also perhaps the author of the Magdeburg Confession of 1550: Bekenntnis Unterricht und vermanung der Pfarrhern und Prediger der Christlichen Kirchen zu Magdeburgk (Magdeburg: Michel Lotther, 1550). Confessio et Apologia Pastorum & reliquorum ministrorum Ecclesiae Magdeburgensis. (Magdeburg: Michaelem Lottherum, 1550).
- 157 -
Luther’s confessor’s counsel to the scrupulous monk, recorded by Luther in his commentary on Genesis 26, as Flacius himself had gone to Luther in the midst of great depression and spiritual struggle and found consolation from the reformer’s repetition of the wisdom he had learned from his own confessor decades earlier:
Staupitz used to comfort me with these words: “Why do you torture yourself with these speculations? Look at the wounds of Christ and at the blood that was shed for you. From these predestination will shine. Consequently, one must listen to the Son of God, who was sent into the flesh and appeared to destroy the work of the devil (1 John 3:8) and to make you sure about predestination. And for this reason He says to you: ‘You are My sheep because you hear My voice’ (cf. John 10:27). ‘No one shall snatch you out of My hands’” (cf. v. 28). Many who did not resist this trial in such a manner were hurled headlong into destruction.
Consequently, the hearts of the godly should be kept carefully fortified. Thus a certain hermit in The Lives of the Fathers advises his hearers against speculations of this kind. He says: “If you see that someone has put his foot in heaven, pull him back. For this is how saintly neophytes are wont to think about God apart from Christ. They are the ones who try to ascend into heaven and to place both feet there. But suddenly they are plunged into hell.” Therefore the godly should beware and be intent only on learning to cling to the Child and Son Jesus, who is your God and was made flesh for your sake. Acknowledge and hear Him; take pleasure in Him, and give thanks. If you have Him, then you also have the hidden God together with Him who has been revealed. And that is the only way, the truth, and the life (cf. John 14:6). Apart from it you will find nothing but destruction and death.93
Deutschlander beautifully drives home the implications of the hiddenness of God for the Christian life:
It is easy enough for us here to sum up Luther’s thought in the Disputation, but it takes a lifetime to learn it, even to become a beginner in appreciating it. Summed up most briefly, it is simply this: In our relationship to God, in the matter of our salvation, we are and ever remain desperate, poor, naked, starving beggars. God is everything; we are nothing. God accomplishes everything by the cross. All that we bring to him is sin and shame, death and damnation. That is true from the moment of our conception. It is true before our conversion and after it. It is no less true on our holiest day than it is on our most sinful day. And the greatest crime and sin and blasphemy of all is to imagine and think otherwise! For as his glory remains hidden on the cross, so the glory of our salvation remains hidden in our nothingness, our sin, our shame.
93 LW 5:47-48.
- 158 -
Even faith, no, especially our faith, is nothing for us to boast about. To proudly declare, ‘Well, at least I believe!’ is to miss the whole glory of Christ’s work and our salvation. For the faith of which we might like to boast is faith created and sustained entirely by the lowly promise in the lowly gospel. Its beginning, its middle, its end, its whole content from start to finish is to despair of everything in me and to trust alone in him, in his cross, in his promise given in the lowly Word and sacraments. Anything else is not faith at all but damnable unbelief.94
Amen! Enough on the connection with the Heidelberg Disputation for now. Back to On the Bondage of the
Will we go.
One of the things I try hard to do as I teach On the Bondage of the Will is to be fair to Erasmus. Not all of my honors students are Lutherans, but enough are that we can effortlessly and unintentionally become cheerleaders of a sort, especially since Luther’s style of writing makes it so easy to do. When I find myself getting a little too undisciplined, however, I see Erasmus. You see, I am an alumnus of Erasmus University in Rotterdam. Thanks to a sabbatical granted to me by the wonderful parish, Christ Lutheran in Saginaw, where I served at the time, I was able to study intellectual and cultural history there. I passed statues of
Erasmus almost daily as I rode my bike to and from campus and walked about. His face is implanted in my memory. Moreover, Erasmus espoused nothing new. He was a faithful son of the Roman Church of his day, even if he did take some satirical digs at it. He was a man, like so many, confused about how our will relates to God. That’s why Luther’s response to him, for all its bluntness, was at its heart a pastoral answer, a reply to a man wrestling with questions and presuppositions not unfamiliar to Luther personally or pastorally.
Recognizing that, we do well to review some of Erasmus’ chief arguments before delving into Luther’s response. In so doing, we will understand Luther all the better, too. Be aware that for the most part we will not engage various technical and deeply philosophical arguments regarding divine necessity as much as a thorough study of the work should (and as much as they do deserve consideration), but will limit ourselves for the most part to those arguments that touch more directly—and less confusingly, for those unfamiliar with the work—on matters of our salvation: how we are saved—by grace, works, or both—and what role our will places.
94 Deutschlander, Theology of the Cross, 127.
- 159 -
Erasmus from the outset made clear that he would play Luther’s game, as a gentleman, I suppose, but he was not thrilled about it. He wrote,
Now, since Luther does not acknowledge the authority of any writer, of however distinguished a reputation, but only listens to the canonical Scriptures, how gladly do I welcome this abridgement of labor, for innumerable Greek and Latin writers treat of free choice, either as a theme or incidentally, so that it would be a great labor to collect out of them what each one has to say either for or against free choice.
Ultimately, quoting the fathers would be, “as regards Luther and his friends, quite useless.” 95 As to what sort of response he expected from Luther, Erasmus demonstrated with a backhanded jab that he, too, could insult an opponent:
Certainly I do not consider Luther himself would be indignant if anybody should find occasion to differ from him, since he permits himself to call in question the decrees, not only of all the doctors of the Church, but of all the schools, councils, and popes; and since he acknowledges this plainly and openly, it ought not to be counted by his friends as cheating if I take a leaf out of his book.96
Erasmus then argued that the Scriptures are obscure, that one cannot know for certain what they teach, at least not in many regards. There was room for a diversity of opinions on a diversity of topics. “If
[Scripture] is so clear,” he asked, “why have so many outstanding men in so many centuries been blind?”97
It was best, he held, to avoid unnecessary squabbles. Luther, however, went too far when it came to free will, risking falling into the teaching of Manichaeus.98
Erasmus did not teach that our will is completely free, nor did he argue that it can attain to salvation without grace—indeed, he was clear that grace did most of the work. There was, however, a place for free choice, and it did do something. My students again and again return to a specific illustration Erasmus used:
“Nor in the meanwhile does our will achieve nothing, although it does not attain the things it seeks without
95 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 42.
96 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 36.
97 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 44.
98 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 43.
- 160 - the help of grace. But since our own efforts are so puny, the whole is ascribed to God, just as a sailor who has brought his ship safely into port out of a heavy storm does not say: ‘I saved the ship’ but ‘God saved it.’
And yet his skill and his labor were not entirely useless.”99 The sailor did something, right? He didn’t simply sleep below deck like Jonah. Let me use another illustration. When we moved to Milwaukee, we had to downsize. We live in a small house in a neighborhood of small houses and we have a small lawn, because we live in a neighborhood of small lawns. We figured, therefore, that we could save some money and maybe help the environment a little if we got one of those old-school manual mowers with the blades that rotate as you push. It was a great idea, but it cuts like a blind, pickled barber with dull clippers. Needless to say, sometimes when I mow, one of my little ones will want to “help me.” Of course, I allow them, and mowing takes twice as long and an extra beer. When we’re done, though, he or she looks at me with love and says,
“Daddy, look what I did.” What do I say? I’m not the best father, but I’m not a total failure at parenting. I say, “Yes, yes, you did!” And that is a wonderful picture of our sanctification, as we cooperate with God, ever so slightly—not like two horses pulling a wagon, as our Confessions note—in our Christian life.100 The
Formula explains: “As soon as the Holy Spirit has begun his work of rebirth and renewal in us through the
Word and the holy sacraments, it is certain that on the basis of his power we can and should be cooperating with him, though still in great weakness.”101 This is well and good, but it is after we are saved, not part of it.
In no way do we cooperate in or contribute to our salvation. This is above us—way above us.
The second key element of Erasmus’ argument is that there is no merit without choice, and no salvation (rewards) without merit. He wrote, “If man does nothing, there is no room for merits; where there is no room for merits, there is no room for punishments or rewards.”102 In Erasmus’ view, a grace that did not produce merits was an ineffectual grace—perhaps no grace at all. Keep in mind, again, he was speaking of merits with respect to salvation, not fruits of faith, truly good works. Once again, God was to receive credit
99 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 79.
100 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome II.66, 557.
101 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration II.65, 556.
102 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 73.
- 161 - for this, but we did do something: “And the upshot of it is that we should not arrogate anything to ourselves but attribute all things we have received to the divine grace, which called us when we were turned away, which purified us by faith, which gave us this gift, that our will might be synergos (‘fellow worker’) with grace, although grace is itself sufficient for all things and has no need of assistance of any human will.”103
In other words, grace doesn’t need our cooperation, it wants it.
The third main thrust of Erasmus’ case rested upon God’s commands. Erasmus assumes that God would be cruel to command what we can’t do, as if you were to threaten to tar and feather me if I don’t dunk a basketball—look at me, that’s not happening. He asked, “And in fact are not the Gospels and Epistles full of exhortations?”104 Erasmus placed one exhortation and command of God after another. “Here again you hear the words ‘set before you,’ you hear the word ‘choose,’ you hear the words ‘turn away,’” he explained.105 The only thing that could make sense of things was that God wants to “join the striving of our will with the assistance of divine grace.”106 In fact, Erasmus contended, when Scripture speaks of God providing aid it presupposes choice: “Hence, all the passages in the Divine Scriptures which speak of help serve also to establish free choice, and they are innumerable. I shall have own the day if the issue is settled by the number of testimonies.”107 “What is the point of so many admonitions,” he asked, “so many precepts, so many threats, so many exhortations, so many expostulations, if of ourselves we do nothing, but God in accordance with his immutable will does everything in us, both to will and to perform the same?”108 Finally, he wondered, blasphemously, no doubt, in Luther’s opinion:
Again, as concerns the precepts, if a lord were constantly to order a slave who was bound by the feet in a treadmill, ‘Go there, do that, run, come back,’ with frightful threats if he disobeyed and did not meanwhile release him, and even made ready the lash if he disobeyed,
103 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 81.
104 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 61.
105 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 55.
106 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 74.
107 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 85.
108 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 87.
- 162 -
would not the slave rightly call the master either mad or cruel who beat a man to death for not doing what he was unable to do?109
Erasmus failed to distinguish between works done for salvation and as its fruit, or to consider that the problem rested, not with God or His law, but with fallen man and His sinfulness.
Ultimately, this was an original sin issue. Erasmus, like all who assign our will or works a role in salvation, failed to grasp the seriousness of hereditary sin. He saw us as less than dead in trespasses and sins.
There was still a little breath, a little light, a little something God could work with, rather than just stink and rot and decay. He betrayed this view when he complained of Luther and those like him, “They immeasurably exaggerate original sin.”110 This explains the seriousness with which Flacius later approached Strigel’s attempt to revive from fallen human nature from the dead decades later. The devil may have been behind the surplice, as we will find out, but he was also behind any attempt to mitigate the stark reality of the fall and our original sin. As Luther pointed out, “Diatribe dreams that man is sound and whole.”111
Luther’s response was a tour de force. It was thorough, brutal, and uncompromising. Several times longer than Erasmus’ original challenge, there is too much to cover here, but we will flesh out some key points. Hopefully, they will whet your appetite for further study on your own. It is a worthy endeavor well recompensed.
As to the collating of testimonies and the number of authorities on his side, Luther dismissed
Erasmus’ boasting:
Granted, then, that we are private individuals and few in number, while you are publicans and there are many of you; we are uneducated, you most learned; we stupid, you most talented; we were born yesterday, you are older than Deucalion; we have never been accepted, you have the approval of so many centuries: in a word we are sinners, carnal men, and dolts, while you with your sanctity, Spirit, and miracles inspire awe in the very demons.
109 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 88-89.
110 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 93.
111 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 185.
- 163 -
You should at least grant us the right of Turks and Jews, and let us ask the reason for your dogma, as your St. Peter has commanded you (1 Peter 3:15).112
He added later for good measure, “Since it is Luther you are attacking, everything you say is holy and catholic.”113 What mattered was not what many men had said, nor what Luther says, but what God has said in His Word, and what He clearly meant by it. “Let Plato be a friend and Socrates a friend, but truth must be honored above all.”114 Jabbing again at Erasmus’ mention that he would prefer the company of the skeptics where Scripture would allow it, Luther urged, “Let Skeptics and Academics keep well away from us
Christians, but let there be among us ‘assertors’ twice as unyielding as the stoics themselves,” for Paul had made clear that those with faith in their hearts will confess it with their mouths (Romans 10:10), and Jesus had said, “Everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven.”115
Luther had little use for Erasmus’ example of a sailor caught in a storm at sea. We are not sailors doing our best to assist God’s grace. No, Luther developed his own striking image. He wrote: “Thus the human will is placed between the two like a beast of burden. If God rides it, it wills and goes where God wills…. If Satan rides it, it wills and goes where Satan wills; nor can it choose to run to either of the two riders or to seek him out, but the riders themselves contend for the possession and control of it.”116 The question, then, is what god are we under, the god of this world or the true God. How does God take the reins?
Through preaching—and here the Sacraments are not in opposition to preaching; they too preach, they too are the Word. God comes and casts off Satan to make us His own captives instead: “But if a stronger One comes who overcomes him and takes us as His spoil, then through his Spirit we are again captives and
112 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 140.
113 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 175.
114 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 113.
115 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 106; Matthew 10:32 ESV.
116 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 140. Luther quotes Psalm 73:22 for support here.
- 164 - slaves—this this is royal freedom—so that we readily will and do what he wills.”117 This is the reason for the church’s existence. Through it God storms in as a Stronger One and claims sinners as His own. In it He gathers, in a stable, so to speak, His beasts of burden, bestowing on them in their captivity a royal freedom.
We are, as Steven D. Paulson put it at one of the free conferences in New Ulm, God’s “royal asses.” God still rides sinners, even sinners like us, captive, riding them as His own for their own salvation and the good of their neighbors.118 It is hard to imagine an illustration that could drive home more clearly how God works in our salvation and how we don’t, how we are pure passive, recipients, and not acceptors, of His grace. Just as
Jesus rode a donkey to His passion, so now, by virtue of his passion, He rides us to glory. One again, we are speaking about our salvation, not what happens after we come to faith. This is our justification—preached and delivered to us—not our sanctification in the narrow sense, that is, our Christian service after conversion.
This is not choosing Big Macs or Whoppers, this is heaven or hell. Luther drove this home when he wrote of the term “free choice,” “But if we are unwilling to let this term go altogether—though that would be the safest and most God-fearing thing to do—let us at least teach men to use it honestly, so that free choice is allowed to man only with respect to what is beneath him and not what is above him.” Simply put, “in relation to God, or in matters pertaining to salvation or damnation, a man has no free choice, but is captive, subject and slave either of the will of God or the will of Satan.”119
Here another illustration is helpful to understand how exactly God works through man. Luther uses the image with respect to the question of how God works even through evil men—which we would all concede He does, working all things for the good of those who have been called according to His good purpose. It is also helpful, though, for understanding the Christian life: God works through sinners, declared saints, for His purposes. Even the good we do is not perfectly good. The Christian life is like baseball.
Batting .300—failing 70% of the time—is considered impressive. It is not like figure skating, striving for that
117 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 140.
118 Steven D. Paulson, “A Royal Ass.” Paper presented at Lutheran Free Conference, Martin Luther College, New Ulm, MN. November 6-7, 2013. I have a copy of the paper but it does not state on what day it was presented. I attended the conference, but I cannot find the date in my notes, either.
119 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 143.
- 165 - perfect 10 by doing everything right. This is expressed in the simul, that we are at the same time both sinners and saints, saints and sinners (simul iustus et peccator). Once again, I am sort of hijacking Luther’s image here, but it is faithful, I am convinced, to his argument and theology. Luther wrote:
Since, then, God moves and actuates all in all, he necessarily moves and acts also in Satan and ungodly man. But he acts in them as they are and as he finds them; that is to say, since they are averse and evil, and caught up in the movement of this divine omnipotence, they do nothing but averse and evil things. It is like a horseman riding a horse that is lame in one or two of its feet; his riding corresponds to the condition of the horse, that is to say, the horse goes badly. But what is the horseman to do? If he rides such a horse alongside horses that are not lame, this will go badly while they go well, and it cannot be otherwise unless the horse is cured. Here you see that when God works in and through evil men, evil things are done, and yet God cannot act evilly although he does evil through evil men, because one who is himself good cannot act evilly; yet he uses evil instruments that cannot escape the sway and motion of his omnipotence.120
Thus, God used Judas, who was not forced, but was willing to betray Jesus, although he couldn’t do otherwise, for God foreknew it. In so doing, God brought about our salvation, although it was Judas who sinned through his treachery. Similarly, God uses me—very occasionally—unforced and indeed willing, although imperfectly, to love and serve my wife as Christ does His Church. He in the one instance uses an evil instrument to work evil, not because He is evil, but the instrument is. He in the other uses a sinner/saint, because He is good, to work good, although the saint remains at the same time a sinner.
Why do I stress this? Why finesse Luther’s imagery? I think it is important for us to remember that this side of heaven we can’t get rid of our flesh, try as we might. Only the casket will bring that about. And so we do well to be realistic about who we are and who our fellow Christians are. We dare not be unrealistic.
We do a big disservice to the gospel if we give the impression that the church is mostly where you go because you have your ducks in a row, because you’ve nailed this whole sanctification thing. Most have heard someone explain that they don’t go to church “because it’s full of hypocrites.” A wise professor taught me to how answer them: “There’s always room for one more.” We should not be shocked when sin surfaces in the church. We should be thankful to God especially in those instances it doesn’t. When I was privileged
120 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 232.
- 166 - to serve in the parish, sometimes members would come into my office very apologetic, terrified that I was about to lose all respect and love for them as their pastor. They were about to confess their sin. I usually comforted them by saying, “First of all, you’re not the first sinner to come through that doorway today. How do you think I got in here? Secondly, I’m not nearly so concerned that you, one of my parishioners, is coming to confess his sin as I am that three-hundred-fifty of them haven’t been in here in a long time to do the same.” The church is a hospital for sinners, not a showroom for saints. The church grants forgiveness, it doesn’t give out merit badges. If you want a pat on the back, turn on Oprah.
This is not to say that there is no place for good works, for growth in sanctification. We do need to remember, though, that such growth most often can’t be plotted in a clean, linear fashion. Not too long ago a friend posted a wonderful picture of sanctification. It was a man who tripped on the escalator. He kept rolling down, but because he was on the escalator, as he did so, he also got closer and closer to the next floor. Paul tells us that God has prepared good works in advance for us to walk in as the redeemed (Ephesians 2:10), but that walking is something we learn to do. Have you ever watched a toddler walk? It’s not a straight line. It’s an adventure. The same is true for us. God rides us also in our sanctification, and when we limp, the problem is not Him. And yet He doesn’t hop off. He doesn’t leave us or forsake us. He rides on, rides on in majesty, even as His lame horse wobbles and waffles, and He is all right with that, and we should be, too. Frustrated, yes. Sorry when we fail, when we fall short, when we, dare I say it, sin, but also confident that the same one who took the reins from Satan has no intention of letting go, for He has died to ride us and He has risen to give us life. Once again, it’s not mostly grace, but all grace. We are not a sailor in the storm. Jesus calms storms. He bids His disciples walk on the water. Trouble comes only when we lose sight of Him who comes at pulpit, font, and altar.
As to the question of merit, Luther quickly cast off Erasmus’ argument: “Salvation is beyond our powers and devices, and depends on the work of God alone.”121 There is that Lutheran alone. In the
Lutheran identity crisis that followed Luther’s death, it was the absence of that “alone” that drove the
121 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 139.
- 167 - controversies that ensued. Luther burst Erasmus’ bubble. The world is not full of decent folk who just need a nudge in the right direction, he insisted, no matter how much Erasmus wanted to believe so, as much as we often want to believe so, as is sometimes evident in our well-meaning but misdirected attempts at evangelism. Luther wrote:
Meanwhile, we blandly persuade ourselves and others that there are many good men in the world who would willingly embrace the truth if there were anyone to teach it clearly, and that it is not supposed to be that so many learned men for so many centuries have been in error and ignorance. As if we do not know that the world is the kingdom of Satan, where besides the blindness we are born with from our carnal nature, we are under the dominion of the most mischievous spirits, so that we are hardened in that very blindness and imprisoned in a darkness no longer human but demonic.122
No, conversion is entirely God’s work. We are dead—worse than dead, His born enemies. And how does
God raise the dead? How does God reconcile the world to Himself? His Word. “Lazarus, come out.” “Wade, come out.” “You, come out.” And what do the dead do when God speaks? They listen. From nothing He made the world in the very same way. His Word is powerful. His will, not ours, is good. As Luther put it in the twenty-eighth and final theological thesis of the Heidelberg Disputation, drawing upon Augustine’s own similar observation: “The love of God does not find, but creates, that which is pleasing to it.”123 We are like a stone or log of wood in this regard. Luther countered Erasmus, “By [your] sort of method I can easily make out that a stone or a log of wood has free choice because it can move bother upward and downward, though by its own power only downward, and upward only by the help of another.”124 We have no choice in matters pertaining to salvation, and therefore no merit. Erasmus was correct to see a correspondence between the two. He was wrong to attribute either to fallen human beings in conversion.
Finally, and be aware, we are not taking these arguments necessarily in the order they appear in the book (I could make a good On the Bondage of the Will “necessity” joke here, but won’t), the fact that the law commands and exhorts in no way made Erasmus’ case. Luther wrote, “The words of the law are spoken,
122 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 139.
123 LW 31:41.
124 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 175.
- 168 - therefore, not to affirm the power of the will, but to enlighten blind reason and make it see that its own light is no light and that the virtue of the will is no virtue.” Luther continued, channeling Heidelberg, “For this knowledge is not power, nor does it confer power, but it instructs and shows that there is no power there, and how great a weakness there is.” And further:
Accordingly, my dear Erasmus, as often as you quote the words of the law against me, I shall quote Paul’s statement against you, that through the law comes knowledge of sin, not virtue in the will. Heap up, therefore, the imperative verbs (from the major concordances, if you like) into one chaotic mess, and provided they are not words of promise, but of demand and the law, I shall say at once that what is signified by them is always what men ought to do and not what they do or can do.125
Even Moses knew this. He knew his place. Luther explained, “Accordingly, it is Satan’s work to prevent men from recognizing their plight and to keep them from presuming that they can do everything they are told. But the work of Moses or a lawgiver is the opposite of this, namely, to make man’s plight plain to him.”126 The chief problem was therefore that “Diatribe is so blind and ignorant that she does not know what law and gospel are.”127 What Erasmus needed was to occupy himself with “God incarnate,” with
“Jesus crucified,” for there we find what we are to know and not to know.128 The problem wasn’t that the
Scriptures were unclear, that they did not use simple words, but rather that his opponents were not content with them: “What I have observed is this, that all heresies and errors in connection with the Scriptures have arisen, not from the simplicity of the words, as is almost universally stated, but from the neglect of the simplicity of the words, and from tropes or inferences hatched out of men’s own heads.”129 God’s commands were just that, commands, and they served the purpose He assigned them. As Luther argued in
Heidelberg, and as is certainly the case for the law in its first two uses and outside of talk of sanctification in the narrow sense, “The law brings the wrath of God, kills, reviles, accuses, judges, and condemns everything
125 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 190.
126 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 193.
127 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 194.
128 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 206.
129 Rupp and Watson, Luther and Erasmus, 222.
- 169 - that is not in Christ.”130 The law commands, but it cannot give righteousness. Luther had made that plain, too, at Heidelberg: “He is not righteous who does much, but he who, without work, believes much in
Christ.”131 Christ is the only answer. Christ is our only hope. There is no other way out of the mire. “The laws says, ‘do this,’ and it is never done. Grace says, ‘believe in this,’ and everything is already done.”132
This is the lesson Luther wanted to teach Erasmus. He wanted to deliver him from the doubt and fear of a work-righteous life honestly examined to the comfort and peace of our Christ crucified and risen for sinners.
This truth, this message, this hope, this JESUS is our Lutheran identity or we have no identity worth having.
This is our Baptism—nothing more and nothing less. His righteousness, our salvation. His Word, our justification.
130 LW 31:41.
131 LW 31:41.
132 LW 31:41.
- 170 -
Lutheranism’s Identity Crisis
The Adiaphoristic Controversy
While the doctrine of justification is the teaching upon which the church stands or falls, perhaps no doctrine, outside of that, is more relevant or in as urgent need of study for the Lutheran Church today than the doctrine of adiaphora. Historically at least, adiaphora, or purported adiaphora, have frequently betrayed deeper theological fault lines or tensions. Christian freedom is not a get-out-of-jail-free-card, but not a few have played it that way. We would be served well, therefore, if all who tried to play it in such a way would agree to answer one simple question first: Christian freedom is freedom from what? Moreover, we dare never forget the relationship between Christian freedom and Christian love. If we do, our discussions of our purported freedom have ceased to be Christian at all, and we are no different than the so-called epicureans
Luther so derided. Christians are not consumers. The church is not a business. Apart from the Means of
Grace, which do not change and are not marketable in the least—Christ was not very marketable, either— churches become nothing more than social clubs with a “t” on top, and not very good social clubs at that. The
Elks have better beer. Churches become, not houses of God, but dens of robbers.
Matthias Flacius Illyricus recognized this, and when he saw the doctrine of justification and our passivity in conversion challenged after Luther’s death, he spoke up prolifically and prophetically. His arguments are especially instructive and pertinent today, as is the article of the Formula of Concord which largely approved and adopted them, Article X. The conflict over adiaphora, or supposed adiaphora, as well as its applications today, will therefore garner significant attention in this section. Most of the other controversies of this period flowed from it and it set the stage for the identity crisis that ensued, ultimately addressed and largely settled by the Formula.
1547 was an absolutely disastrous year for German Lutheranism, one from which it was completely uncertain at the time it would recover. The Schmalkaldic League, a defensive alliance of Protestant princes and cities, was defeated in the Battle of Mühlberg. Philip of Hesse and John Frederick I, two of the most prominent political allies of Protestant reform, were taken captive, potentially subject to execution. Never
- 171 - was Luther’s voice more needed, and yet his body rested in the grave. His mantle had, for all accounts and purposes, fallen to Philipp Melanchthon. Melanchthon was no Luther, however. Certainly as brilliant, he lacked the personality. He did not have the same piercing eyes and prophetic voice. Complicating matters, the University of Wittenberg, along with the elector’s title and lands, now belonged to his traitorous cousin
Moritz of Saxony. Moritz, called the Judas of Meissen by many, had allied with the emperor to defeat John
Frederick and Philip of Hesse. He was a Lutheran, and he had been assured that he would not be expected, let alone forced, to renounce his faith by the emperor. But, he had greatly weakened the stability of Lutheranism within Germany by his actions. As Lutheranism’s most prominent prince, now his subjects, let alone his opponents in Magdeburg, had every reason to doubt the extent to which he could be counted upon to preserve the Word of God and Luther’s teaching. These were dark days.
When the more prominent Wittenbergers failed to speak up in the face of such challenges and coercive imperial mandates, a man as good as nameless, a Hebrew instructor in Wittenberg, Matthias Flacius
Illyricus, did. No one wrote more or so influentially in the Interim Crisis. The Augsburg Interim came first— its city of origin certainly poured salt in Protestant wounds, as it was there the chief confession of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church had first been presented. Charles V, riding the momentum of his military successes, reinstated, or attempted to reinstate, Roman Catholic theology and practice. He planned to proceed incrementally, but the increments were hardly slight. Published May 15, 1548, the Interim mandated a restoration of a wide range of Roman Catholic liturgical practices like episcopal ordination, the majority of the canon of the Mass, last rites, the seven sacraments, etc. Lutherans retained Communion in both kinds and the right to marry, but not much else. The Interim reinstituted the jurisdiction of bishops and included doctrinal articles that were ambiguous at best and outright denials of Luther’s teaching at worst.133 On justification it stated: “Since, just as through sharing his righteousness he produces inherent righteousness in the one with whom he shares it, so also he increases it, so that it is renewed from day to day, until that person
133 Article XIII in Robert Kolb and James A. Nestingen, eds., Sources and Contexts of the Book of Concord (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 158.
- 172 - is fully perfected in the eternal fatherland…. Thus, Christ’s merits and inherent righteousness come together, and we are renewed in them by the gift of love”134
The Augsburg Interim was received with hostility, even among some Roman Catholics concerned for the maintenance of peace. Melanchthon vocally opposed it. Amsdorf dissected it piece by piece—the beginning of Magdeburg’s resistance. It was only with the threat of force and the exile of numerous pastors that it was enforced in parts of southern Germany, closer to the emperor’s stronghold in the Low Countries and occupied by Spanish and Italian troops. A number of imperial cities like Nuremberg lost much of their autonomy. On the whole, northern German cities and territories fared better. Enforcement was more rare and resistance more vocal.
Moritz did not want to rock the boat in his new territories, where he was understandably very unpopular already, but he also didn’t want to risk upsetting the emperor. He sought a compromise. He set his newly acquired Wittenberg scholars to work on a middling formula. Melanchthon certainly did not savor the task, but undertook it without a fight. Part of the reason for his cooperation rested in his well-known astrological interests. He was convinced that the emperor would die soon, so he thought he only needed to buy time.135 A proposal was drafted in Leipzig. Flacius, in a publicity coup, popularized it as the Leipzig
Interim, associating it in the minds of most people with the Augsburg Interim. The authors of the Leipzig
Interim had opposed the Augsburg Interim, and so the Gnesio Lutherans called them “Adiaphorists.”
“Interimists” were those who had supported the Augsburg Interim. The authors in part justified their concessions because some Lutheran territories had retained certain of the practices included in the Leipzig
Proposal, including Moritz’ own territory of Meissen.136 Importantly, they claimed that such things were
“adiaphora,” “indifferent matters,” or Mitteldingen.
134 Article IV in Kolb and Nestingen, eds., Sources and Contexts of the Book of Concord, 151.
135 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Adiaphora and Tyranny, trans. Herbert C. Kuske and Wade R. Johnston (Saginaw, Michigan: Magdeburg Press, 2011), 275.
136 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 179.
- 173 -
One of the liturgical matters permitted in the Leipzig Proposal, a vestment called the chorrock, or surplice, became a potent image utilized by Flacius and others as a symbol of the demonic nature of the
Interims. The devil was behind the surplice, Flacius warned. “Resisting the surplice meant refusing to betray the church into the power of the state.”137 Kolb, Arand, and Nestingen reinforce this point well in The
Lutheran Confessions: History and Theology of the Book of Concord. They note, “Precisely this reinstating of long-discarded vestments elicited from Gallus and Flacius a stinging rebuke. Vestments are indeed adiaphora, they observed: it is a neutral matter whether the pastor wears an academic robe or surplice or chasuble. The effect of such vestments on the congregation is not, however, a neutral matter, Flacius and
Gallus argued.”138 The Leipzig Interim stung more than the Augsburg Interim for Flacius and those who agreed with him, because it was the work of friends, not enemies. Those who had the gospel had seemingly surrendered it. This was evident, the Magdeburgers insisted, in the article on the chief article, the doctrine of justification, which omitted the word “alone.” The vestments were but a symptom of a deeper disease.
Flacius sought to treat both.
137 Oliver K. Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform (Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2002), 160.
138 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 201.
- 174 -
- 175 -
The Adiaphoristic Controversy made Matthias Flacius Illyricus famous, his name known throughout
Europe. He became a lightning rod. Mention of him worked either admiration or hostility. A Croatian became the face of the fight to save the German Reformation. This role came with crosses. He was derided and mocked for his foreign ancestry. Some called him the “Illyrian viper” or a “runaway slav”—a racial slur utilizing a clever play on words because Latin does not distinguish the word Slav from slave. He became the single most divisive figure in German Lutheranism well beyond the time of the publication of the Formula of
Concord.139
Flacius was twenty-seven years of age at the time. He had been and remained a devoted student of
Melanchthon and Luther. No one published more than him in these contentious years. A brilliant propagandist, he framed the debate and shaped the discourse of the controversy. Together with the other
Magdeburgers, he helped define what was and wasn’t Lutheran. Within the walls of the last holdout against the imperial religious measures, which became heralded as “our Lord God’s chancery,” he produced pamphlet after pamphlet and furiously republished Luther’s works.140 Kaufmann writes, “No other figure in the sixteenth century, not even Martin Luther, wrote and published so many pages in so short a time as did
Flacius.”141
The pastors and theologians of Magdeburg called themselves “Christian exiles.” The enemy was at the gates, literally. Partly because of the stand he took at Magdeburg, Flacius’ life subsequently became one of perpetual exile. The cross marked every stage but his grave, as he was refused a Christian burial. One need not read many of Flacius’ pamphlets from the Interim Crisis to realize just how deeply he had imbibed the doctrine of Luther and methodology of Melanchthon. He had not wanted to leave Magdeburg. He had been happy there. And his departure stood as the key turning point in his life and career—one from which he
139 Oliver K. Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform, 129. The normally even-tempered Melanchthon himself used such slurs regarding Flacius.
140 Nathan Rein’s recent monograph on Magdeburg propaganda in the Interim crisis takes its title from this popular moniker for the city. Nathan Rein, The Chancery of God: Protestant Print, Polemic and Propaganda against the Empire, Magdeburg 1546-1551 (Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate, 2008).
141 Thomas Kaufmann, “‘Our Lord God’s Chancery’ in Magdeburg and Its Fight against the Interim,” Church History 73, no. 3 (September 2004), 576.
- 176 - would never recover. Nevertheless, he wrote and taught as a Wittenberger, synthesizing what he had learned there. The fault lines already present in Wittenberg before Luther’s death had now cracked under pressure and Flacius sought to preserve the best of both of the city’s great teachers.
For all the heat of the debate, Flacius maintained a heartfelt respect and gratitude for all that
Melanchthon had done for him. He acknowledged the formative influence Philipp had upon his theology and methodology. Even after all the contention of the Adiaphoristic Controversy he continued to laud the Loci, alongside Luther’s Postille, as a seminal Lutheran theological standard.142 Dingel explains, “In no other theologian of the second half of the sixteenth century does one find this synthesis of Melanchthon’s method and Luther’s theology so effectively.”143 Flacius meant no ill toward his mentor. Rather, he wanted to nudge him—increasingly publicly and forcefully—into taking a stand. He was convinced that Melanchthon lost something irreplaceable with the death of Luther: a clear, buoying, emboldening voice. As Melanchthon had often tempered Luther, so Luther had bucked up his colleague. Flacius provided the drafting of the Augsburg
Confession and its presentation as an example: “At Augsburg, at the Diet in 1530, some wanted to reconcile
Christ and Belial in adiaphora, and if Dr. Martin had not at that time been on guard, which one sees in his letters, which are now in print, we now through our own wisdom would not even have a trace of the truth among us.”144
Flacius left Wittenberg in 1549, initially leaving his “very pregnant wife” behind.145 At first he refused the hospitality of Magdeburg for the sake of his health. He was afraid he “would have to eat smoked
142 For instance, see Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Ein buch, von waren und falschen Mitteldingen, Darin fast der gantze handel von Mitteldingen erkleret wird, widder die schedliche Rotte der Adiaphoristen. Item ein brieff des ehrwirdigen Herrn D. Joannis Epini superintendenten zu Hamburg, auch von diesem handel an Illyricum geschrieben (Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1550), Miv r. See also Piv r.
143 Dingel, “Flacius als Schüler,” 83.
144 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Eine Christliche vermanung zur bestendigkeit, inn der waren reinen Religion Jhesu Christi, unnd inn der Augsburgischen bekentnis. Geschrieben an die Meissnische Kirche, unnd andere, so das lauttere Evangelium Jhesu Christi erkant haben (Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1550), Hiii r.
145 Thomas Kaufmann, “Matthias Flacius Illyricus. Lutherischer Theologe und Magdeburer Publizist,” in Mitteldeutsche Lebensbilder: Menschen im Zeitalter der Reformation, ed. Werner Freitag (Köln: Böhlau Verlag, 2004),183.
- 177 - bacon and meat, and also salted and dried fish.”146 He eventually changed his mind after further travels, to the great relief of the Magdeburgers. In many ways, Flacius would make Magdeburg in so far as it succeeded as the “chancery of God,” and yet, just as much, Magdeburg made Flacius. It was the definitive period of his life. Together, he, Amsdorf, Gallus, and the other theologians and pastors of the city made their famous resistance and preserved the Lutheran Reformation as they had known it.
In his pivotal work, A Book about True and False Adiaphora, as well as the admonitions he wrote to fellow Lutherans throughout the empire, Flacius set forth his argument for what made something an adiaphora or disqualified it from being the same.147 He established a “General Rule about Ceremonies” to serve as a guideline:
All ceremonies and church practices are in and of themselves free and they will always be. When, however, coercion, the false illusion that they were worship of God and must be observed, renunciation [of the faith], offense, [or] an opening for godless develops, and when, in whatever way it might happen, they do not build up but rather tear down the church of God and mock God, then they are no longer adiaphora.148
He outlined three grounds for the introduction or employment of adiaphora in the church:
One should now observe that there are three grounds for establishing adiaphora. The first is the general command of God that he wants to have everything in the church done in an orderly and proper fashion and to serve for edification, inasmuch as he is a God of order and not of disorder. The second is the free Christian desire of the church…. The third are the
146 Kaufmann, “Matthias Flacius Illyricus,” 183.
147 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Vermanung Matth. Flacii Illyrici zur gedult und glauben zu Gott, im Creutz dieser verfolgung Geschrieben an die Kirche Christi zu Magdeburg (Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1551); Ein vermanung zur bestendigkeit, in bekentnis der warheit, Creutz, und Gebett, in dieser betrübten zeit sehr nützlich und tröstlich (Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1549); Eine Christliche vermanung zur bestendigkeit, inn der waren reinen Religion Jhesu Christi, unnd inn der Augsburgischen bekentnis. Geschrieben an die Meissnische Kirche, unnd andere, so das lauttere Evangelium Jhesu Christi erkant haben (Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1550); Ein buch, von waren und falschen Mitteldingen, Darin fast der gantze handel von Mitteldingen erkleret wird, widder die schedliche Rotte der Adiaphoristen. Item ein brieff des ehrwirdigen Herrn D. Joannis Epini superintendenten zu Hamburg, auch von diesem handel an Illyricum geschrieben (Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1550).
148 Flacius, Ein buch von waren und falschen Mitteldingen, Ai v.
- 178 -
judicious, God-fearing people for whom the church is inclined to establish such adiaphora. This is what may be said about the establishment of adiaphora.149
This is not the place for an extended discussion for all of Flacius’ arguments or all of the Scriptures he summoned in support of his cause—I know a long theses by a dubious historian on that topic, if you ever have trouble falling asleep. Ultimately, Flacius confessed that Christians and churches are free, but also bound together in love. He echoed the maxim of St. Paul: “‘All things are lawful,’ but not all things are helpful. ‘All things are lawful,’ but not all things build up.’”150 Furthermore, the state had no right to force ceremonies and practices upon the church. This was a clear violation of Christian freedom and a confusion of the two kingdoms. This was one of the first great birth pangs of the rocky (and sometimes not rocky enough) relationship between church and state in Protestant Europe and Lutheran Germany. Unfortunately, Flacius’ concerns did not get lasting attention and the marriage between church and state proceeded apace in the centuries to follow in Germany, giving way to the nigh-confessionless state church of our day, in which all that Luther and his heirs fought to preserve gets more lip service than love and attention.
The Synergistic Controversy over Free Will
While this controversy played a pivotal role in the culture of conflict that developed after Luther’s death, in this study we will pay more attention to the subsequent controversy that developed over original sin, first, because we’ve covered much concerning free will already, and second, and most significantly, because the controversy over original sin was an expansion and natural offshoot of the Synergistic Controversy.
Regarding the connection between the two debates, unsurprisingly, since Erasmus already indicated the connection between the two when he complained that Luther greatly inflated original sin in arguing against free will, Bente rightly observes that “the Flacian Controversy sprang from, and must be regarded as an episode of the Synergistic Controversy, in which also some champions of Lutheran theology (Amsdorf,
149 Flacius, Ein buch, von waren und falschen Mitteldingen, Jiii v.
150 1 Corinthians 10:23 ESV.
- 179 -
Wigand, Heshusius, and others) had occasionally employed unguarded, extreme, and inadequate expressions.”151 That the debate over original sin flowed from a debate over free will shows what Flacius and Amsdorf thought was at stake: the very heart and core of Luther’s Reformation, the teaching plainly set forth in the work that Luther throughout his life considered to be one of his finest, On the Bondage of the
Will. “Luther had,” after all, “thanked Erasmus for putting his finger on the very heartbeat of his theology: his understanding that the sinful human will is bound and cannot choose to trust God and obey him by its own power and strength.”152
This struggle over the existence role of free will in conversion was therefore nothing new in the minds of a number of the Magdeburgers, especially the old stalwart, Amsdorf. He had been fighting this battle, although in a more muted fashion, since the 1530s, when he grew concerned about Melanchthon’s changes to his Loci. This was for Amsdorf part of a decades-long challenge to Luther’s teaching, confirmed further in the heat of the Adiaphoristic Controversy. In 1550, before the Synergistic Controversy had erupted,
Melanchthon attacked Flacius and the Gnesio-Lutheran on the matter of the will, using language that
Erasmus himself had employed against Luther. In the preface of a work translated by Caspar Cruciger,
Melanchthon warned about “Stoic ravings about necessity and fate,” and later he assailed the “fatalism” of those who focused too much on election.153 This is more evidence that differences of conviction regarding free will and conversion had festered in Wittenberg for decades, long before Luther’s death. And we dare not presume that the challenge hasn’t persisted ever since. It is only by God’s unfathomable grace that here, in the heartland of America, almost five hundred years later, Lutherans gather who are still committed to persisting in this teaching. If we are honest, much of Lutheranism abandoned it long ago, in practice if not in doctrine. Moreover, a number of those pockets of Lutherans who have held onto it by the mercy of the Savior seem hell-bent on following the path so many others have followed. The biblical doctrine of the will is a
151 F. Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 2nd ed. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005), 336.
152 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 201.
153 Kolb, Bound Choice, 107.
- 180 - potent teaching, but never popular. It is divine, but, as Luther warned Erasmus, not at all human. This is simply not how mankind imagines itself. If only heaven—and hell—were a function of our imagination!
Kolb notes, “It is no surprise that when one of Melanchthon’s students who had helped formulate the
Leipzig Proposal, Johann Pfeffinger, advanced his own version of Melanchthon’s doctrine of the free will, he raised Amsdorf’s ire, especially since Pfeffinger had been a close associate of Duke Moritz even before the
Smalcald War broke out.”154 As we established, this was an ongoing struggle, the fault lines were long there and visible to those who chose to look carefully. Pfeffinger had written theses about the role of the will in conversion to be debated within the University of Leipzig in 1555.155 Objections were quickly raised, however, and the discussion spread well beyond the university. Amsdorf saw in Pfeffinger’s teaching the forfeiture of all of Luther’s teaching and an attack on the very doctrine of justification. Flacius agreed. Now in Jena as a prominent professor, he made his displeasure known. Amsdorf “agreed that the sinful will is active, but it is captive to Satan. In other words, it plays only a negative, harmful role. God calls all people through the gospel, but he draws only those whom he has chosen as his children to himself.”156 The dispute led to a broader concern about Melanchthon’s teaching, and Nicholas Gallus, a partner in Magdeburg’s cause against the Interim, led the charge. Melanchthon denied he was in error, but he did concede “that Luther had erred in the same direction as Gallus.”157 There is much in this admission. Bente points back to the
Heidelberg Disputation in his review of the controversy.158 Luther’s teaching had been clear for almost forty years at this point. On the Bondage of the Will was but an extended commentary on what was already present, albeit nascent, in the Disputation.
154 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 201.
155 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 202.
156 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 204.
157 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 204.
158 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 294.
- 181 -
Johann Pfeffinger’s 1555 defense of the Leipzig Interim’s language in his work Five Questions concerning the Freedom of the Human Will flowed directly from the Adiaphoristic Controversy.159 It was an unabashed defense of the synergism of Melanchthon, at least as Pfeffinger understood and interpreted it.
A dispute largely about ceremony had thus become indicative and revelatory of deeper theological issues.
Adiaphora may be neither commanded nor forbidden by God’s Word, but they are not always indifferent—in other words, they are not always real adiaphora. Pfeffinger’s teaching was largely his teacher’s. He held to the three causes long taught in Melanchthon’s revised Loci of 1543: “the Holy Spirit moving the heart, the voice of God, and the human will which assents to the divine voice.”160 It was as a student of Melanchthon, holding essentially the same convictions, that Viktorin Strigel would envelope Flacius in the controversy that would prove the undoing of his academic career.
Amsdorf and Flacius opposed Pfeffinger, and through him, Melanchthon, not to be right, not because they were part of an inquisition, not because they did not love the brotherhood, but because they saw a threat to the very heart of the Scriptures and an undermining of the entire Lutheran Reformation. One’s position on the human will’s role in conversion and the state of man in original sin reveals what he really believes about how we are saved. Often false conceptions of the two, free will and original sin, serve to flank the chief article and overcome it, even while saying nice things about it. History bears this out and our own day attests to it as well. Justification is not another article in the Confessions. Justification is intimately connected to all of them. We do well to remember that. That was the message of the Heidelberg Disputation and On the
Bondage of the Will. That is part and parcel of true Lutheran identity. Doctrine is not a pizza pie made up of slices. Doctrine is a unity, a totality. That is why our Confessions more often than not speak of doctrine rather than doctrines. Christ is the center of all we believe and teach, and like rays of the sun, all we believe and teach emanates from Him, or is not of Him at all, and therefore unchristian. The same is also true of the relationship between doctrine and practice. Practice confesses doctrine. It shows what we believe and teach.
159 Johannes Pfeffinger, De Libertate Voluntatis Humanae Quaestiones Quinque (Leipzig: Gerorg Hantzsch, 1555).
160 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 50.
- 182 -
It makes clear how we think God does His work. It showcases His Word or it distracts from it. It trusts preaching—Word and Sacrament—to do its work, or it doesn’t. As with Abraham and the promise of a son,
God’s promise does not need any helping along, just as our will doesn’t need just a smidge of nudging in the right direction. God’s promise is sufficient, and it alone can take the sinful will captive, can take the reins from the devil. This is not one aspect of Lutheran doctrine. This is fundamental to Lutheran teaching, critical to a proper, Christian understanding of the Scriptures as a whole and at their most basic.
The Majorist Controversy over Good Works
“Major’s defense of necessary good works was no isolated phenomenon. The controversies of the
Late Reformation, adiaphorism, majorism, synergism, Otto Ritschl wrote, “belong together.”161 That is how
Oliver Olson describes the onset of this controversy over good works. Reflecting back in 1559, Flacius expressed the exact same take on things.162 Major was motivated by a desire to defend his and the other
Wittenbergers’ participation in the drafting of the Leipzig Proposal. Rather than admitting his error, he sought to defend it, and the reputation of Melanchthon, who would nonetheless disavow Major’s teaching regarding good works. Luther’s sola was left out of the Leipzig Proposal. That was indefensible.
Lutheranism hinges on that sola. The Gnesio-Lutherans were not imagining that the chief teaching of
Christianity was under attack. It was right there, not in print.
Major built on Melanchthon’s teaching, but did not repristinate it. He went farther than the Preceptor would ever have gone. Major argued that good works are not only necessary— a statement with which
Flacius, Amsdorf, and the Gnesio-Lutherans could have agreed—but that they are necessary for salvation.
This claim was not without strategic interests. The Wittenbergers had more than once and without ambiguity painted the Magdeburgers and those who agreed with them as antinomians who despised the law of God.
Amsdorf vigorously protested that Major knew full well that they taught correctly in Magdeburg regarding
161 Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform, 284.
162 Flacius, Bericht M. Fla. Jllyrici, Liii v.
- 183 - faith and good works.163 Flacius would have nothing to do with such claims.164 Coming from Major, though, they bore extra sting. Flacius had considered Major a good friend in Wittenberg. And yet Major had not only made false accusations, but he had done so in an underhanded and most unbrotherly way. Major held both Flacius and his positions up for ridicule, not because he demonstrated that Flacius was an immoral man or that his teachings were false, but on the grounds that he was a foreigner and not ordained.
Melanchthon, however, was also not ordained.165 In addition, Flacius never pretended he was a pastor. In the end, Melanchthon also publicly rejected Major’s teaching, together with other prominent theologians, and
Major eventually ceased employing such speech. Major’s position, which he himself later recanted, never gained much traction. Nevertheless, we see an important connection here. Only a few years after Luther’s death, the teachings of original sin, free will, and now good works were under assault. The old Adam was desperately trying to work his way back into our conversion and salvation, which would be no conversion or salvation at all, because the old Adam cannot be converted and will not be saved. On the contrary, he is to be drowned, daily, as we return to our baptism in repentance—sorrow over our sin and trust in Christ for forgiveness.
In 1552 Amsdorf declared on the cover page of a pamphlet against Major, “Good works are not necessary for salvation. Good works are necessary here upon earth for a Christian life.”166 This is a succinct, biblical, orthodox, confessional Lutheran statement. Unfortunately, in opposing Major, Amsdorf eventually made the same mistake as Flacius later regarding original sin. While defending Luther’s teaching, and even employing Luther’s language, he employed it in a context beyond that Luther had and in a manner that could be misunderstood. In opposing Major, he “resurrected Luther’s oft-repeated phrase that ‘good
163 Nicolaus von Amsdorff, Ein kurtzer unterricht auff D. Georgen Maiors Antwort / das er nit unschüldig sey / wie er sich tragice rhümet (Basel, 1552), Civ r.
164 Flacius, Bericht M. Fla. Jllyrici, Hiii r.
165 Luka Ilić, Theologian of Sin and Grace: The Process of Radicalization in the Theology of Matthias Flacius Illyricus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 99.
166 Amsdorff, Ein kurtzer unterricht.
- 184 - works are detrimental to salvation,’ that is, when someone places his or her trust in them.167 By this he did not mean truly good works, the fruits of faith, but works done in the hope of reward, to win the love of God, and not as a product of it. Amsdorf’s terminology did not bring the same consequences Flacius would and thankfully this old, steadfast friend and ally of Luther and of the gospel maintained his standing within
Lutheranism. While his phraseology was corrected by the Formula, he himself was not condemned by name.
Rather, the Formula confessed what Amsdorf had been after with the language he adopted without condoning the language itself. In this regard, the Formula provides a wonderful reminder about the language we use in the church, especially poignant for preachers. We read:
For, although before this controversy many pure teachers used these and similar expressions in the interpretation of the Holy Scripture, they never intended to confirm this error of the papists. Nonetheless, because later controversy over this controversy over this way expressing these ideas arose and resulted in all sorts of offensive exaggerations, it is safest to hold to St. Paul’s admonition regarding the ‘standard of sound teaching’ (2 Tim. 1:13) as well as pure teaching itself. In this way much unnecessary quarreling can be avoided, and the church can be spared much offense.168
The Osiandrian Controversy over Justification
Andreas Osiander was perhaps an unexpected opponent for Flacius. Osiander had been a confessor in the fight against the Augsburg Interim. A mainstay in Nuremberg and a very influential reformer and pastor there, he had nonetheless fled the city because of his unwillingness to accept the new imperial measures. This was a courageous stand to take, no doubt, and one the Magdeburgers would have deeply respected. After he left Nuremberg, Duke Albrecht, who had been won for the reformation in part through the teaching and preaching of Osiander, created a position for him at the fledgling University of Königsberg.
Safely entrenched in his new office and confident of the duke’s protection, Osiander felt emboldened to speak more openly about some key differences with Luther, now dead. Most consequently, Osiander rejected
167 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 191-192.
168 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome IV.36, 580.
- 185 -
Luther’s emphasis on justification as a forensic act—that God, like a judge after a trial, declares us righteous, not guilty, for Christ’s sake, of course. In so doing, he managed to do something no one else had been able to do at the time: he united the disciples of Melanchthon and Flacius, at least in disagreement with his teaching.
Osiander held that the believer receives his justification through infusion rather than imputation. Justification is done into the believer rather than declared to him from outside. The internal act of the divinity of Christ in us was emphasized more than the external declaration of God for the sake of Christ the God-Man. Flacius therefore rightly identified Osiander’s teaching with that of the pope, which Luther had vigorously and beyond any room for confusion rejected.
It appears that Osiander and Duke Albrecht had at first counted on Flacius’ support. The duke especially assumed that Osiander’s bold stand against the interims had at least earned him Flacius’ silence.
The duke was mistaken. Flacius later recalled, “I wanted rather to contend for the truth with my enemies in
Wittenberg than against the truth with Osiander, who was then my friend.”169 He could not be silent. He was convinced that Osiander’s teaching was a return to all that Luther had opposed: “That the infused love, which is also God, is our righteousness, teach the pope, Osiander and Schwenckfeld.”170 As Luther made plain on his death bed, faith was but the “beggarly hand.”171 It received what God declared. Fortunately,
Osiander’s misguided conception of justification never gained a true foothold within Lutheranism. While the duke continued to support him, most of the rest of Lutheranism did not. Here again, though, we see the simple, albeit profound, teaching of the Heidelberg Disputation and On the Bondage of the Will under attack.
Once again, the old Adam tried to finagle his way back into our justification, to do something, even as a lesser partner, to cooperate. And the old serpent at work, slithering through small holes in that day, is still busy at work, and we do well to remain on guard. As Amsdorf insisted in the conclusion of a pamphlet against Osiander, “Therefore, the righteousness of the Christian is and can be nothing other than the
169 Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform, 287.
170 Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform, 289. For more background, see Wilhelm Preger, Matthias Flacius Illyricus und seine Zeit, vol. 1 (Erlangen: T. Bläsing, 1859), 309ff.
171 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Breves Summae Religionis Iesu Christi, & Antichristi (Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1550), A4 r.
- 186 - righteousness of the humanity of Christ,” for it was Christ, not only in His divinity, but also and especially in
His humanity, who suffered and died for us who “are by nature yet sinners and unrighteous enemies of God.”
To this righteousness “we must diligently hold fast” or we have no righteousness at all.172
The Dispute with Schwenckfeld over Scripture
I remember once speaking to a dear relative of mine. She had begun going to a new church—not an orthodox one. She was raving about their small group Bible studies. Everybody’s opinion was valid.
Everyone had something to bring to the interpretation of the Bible. At one point she explained, expecting to impress me, “We just toss out a Bible verse and kick it around.” I should have been more tactful and gentle, but I couldn’t help myself. I simply replied, “Oh, I bet you do.” By the time they were done kicking that passage there couldn’t have been much life left in it. As Deutschlander observes, “As already noted, too often those who imagine that God answers prayers by blowing in their ears or whispering (apart from his
Word) into their innermost beings end up pushing aside the Word and sacraments.”173 Isn’t that essentially the not-so-faint echo of the first temptation in Genesis 3, after all, to have God’s voice sound unmistakably like our own, to be like God, to be god? Interestingly, Schwenckfeld had been to Wittenberg twice to
“interest Luther in the formation of conventicles” not all that much unlike the one attended by my relative.174 Needless to say, he was unsuccessful. Luther was no dolt.
Flacius’ literary struggle with Schwenckfeld, or as he called him, Stenkfeld, was different from the preceding controversies because it was not an inter-Lutheran battle. Schwenckfeld might not have been so vocal or open about his convictions without the Reformation, but his teaching was in no way Lutheran—it would fall, if anywhere, under the umbrella of what we call the Radical Reformation, not because it was
172 Nicolaus von Amsdorff, Auff Osianders Bekentnis ein Unterricht und zeugnis / Das sie Gerechtigkeit der menscheit Christi / darinnen sie entpfangen und geboren ist / allen Gleubigen Sündern geschanckt und zugerechent wird / und für ihr Person hie auff Erden nimmermehr Gerecht und heilig warden (Magdeburg: Rödinger, 1552), Biii v.
173 Deutschlander, Narrow Lutheran Middle, 75.
174 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 355.
- 187 - awesome, but because it sought to pull at the very roots of Christian teaching and practice. Schwenckfeld advocated a spiritual interpretation of Holy Scripture—a subjective, non-contextual, willy-nilly approach.
We would all agree with the writer to the Hebrews (I am the only one on the third floor at WLC, but I think it’s Paul) that the Word of God is living and active, but it lives and acts through what is written.
Schwenckfeld—taking Zwingli’s dichotomy farther than the Swiss reformer ever would have—sought to differentiate between letter and spirit. You had to catch the Spirit. He was not bound to what the prophets and apostles had recorded, at least not to the one simple sense. This was pure enthusiasm in Flacius’ opinion.
Luther would have agreed. Flacius insisted, “Spiritual exegesis [fits scripture] like a fist fits into an eye.”175
Schwenckfeld erred especially in separating God from His Means and true faith from God’s revelation, emphasizing our own inner revelation.176
As Luther had with Erasmus, Flacius found himself defending the clarity of Scripture as well as its authority and reliability. The proper Christian hermeneutic was not a matter of inner light or mysticism. It involved an act of the mind, taken captive by Christ, shaped by faith, and employing reason in its ministerial role. You did not have to feel the Spirit. The Spirit did not work on hunches. No, Flacius insisted, the Spirit was active in and through the Word, written and faithfully preached. The Spirit and the letter were not in opposition; the Spirit worked through the letter. It was, after all, the Spirit who inspired the Scriptures, so that still today they accomplish God’s purpose, which hasn’t changed: the salvation of sinners, for whom
Christ died and rose. One did not need to fit the Scriptures to the times. The Scriptures fit every time quite well, for they are God’s timeless promise to those bound by time but created for eternity. Whereas the other controversies attacked key teachings of the Reformation, Schwenckfeld attacked the very foundations, the source from which all true teaching flows. He traded one pope for many, not quite unlike the postmodernity we encounter, even in much of American Christianity. By calling into the question the clear meaning of
God’s revelation, Schwenckfeld called into question all that God had revealed, including the person and
175 Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform, 302.
176 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Von fürnemlichem stücke / punct / order artikel der Schwenkfeldischen schwermerey (Magdeburg, 1553), Ai v-Aii r. He expanded his critique in Etliche Contradictiones…des Stenckfeldts daraus sein Geist leichtlich kan geprüfet warden (Nürmnerg. 1556).
- 188 - work of Jesus Christ. Flacius found himself debating someone who refused to use the same terms and submit to the same authorities. We know the feeling all too well. We can learn, then, from how Flacius and our fathers approached this challenge and undertook their response. As it was wont to do, the Formula said it well: “Fundamental, enduring unity in the church requires above all else a clear and binding summary and form in which a general summary of teaching is drawn together from God’s Word, to which the churches that hold the true Christian religion confess their adherence.”177
The Flacian Controversy over Original Sin
Irene Dingel summarizes the heart of the dispute over original sin thusly: “The critical difference between Strigel and the viewpoint of Flacius and also Luther lay in Strigel’s failure to define conversion as a new creation, a revitalization of the spiritually dead, but rather as a reactivation of powers dormant in sinners, even before conversion—a slumbering, unconscious, but nonetheless real power.” Ultimately and significantly, “[Strigel] believed this made it possible to speak of responsible decision-making by the individual.”178 Flacius reciprocated Strigel’s collegial discomfort on confessional, not personal, grounds. He suspected that his coworker was a Philippist, and he was right. Strigel’s later teaching amply justifies
Flacius’ suspicions, as Strigel eventually adopted manifestly Reformed positions on the Lord’s Supper and other disputed doctrines. This raises an important issue regarding Flacius’ character. While many have painted him a volatile and unbrotherly spirit, his writings hardly evidence or bear out this caricature.
Diarmaid MacCulloch provides a fine example of the shallow and unsubstantiated stereotype of Flacius’ person that is presented in much of the English historiography to date. In passing, MacCulloch essentially dismisses Flacius as “chief among these watchful, angry souls” who opposed the Interims,” one of the
177 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, 1, 526.
178 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 50.
- 189 -
Lutheran “ayatollahs” of that age.179 Serious consideration of what we know for certain regarding his personal deportment and behavior, even in the midst of bitter controversy, divorced from the testimony of enemies with a vested interest in the besmirchment of his reputation, belies any charges of emotional instability or personal pettiness. In fact, his willingness to discuss (and not merely shout down) doctrinal differences, often with greater charity than his opponents, led the Illyrian, who held the upper hand in Jena and could have abused it, to accept the duke’s invitation to a debate with Strigel in the first place. There is no reason to doubt that he sincerely wanted to win over his rival and restore peace to the faculty. And this was certainly Duke John Frederick’s intention: the theological reconciliation of two of his university’s most recognizable and respected professors. Unfortunately, the Weimar Disputation, begun 2 August 1560, instead tragically dashed, yes, irreparably shattered, the duke’s hope for peace among his university’s shining lights.
Here, months after Melanchthon’s death, Strigel, one of Melanchthon’s few disciples at Jena, set a trap from which Flacius could not—or would not—extricate himself.
The Flacian Controversy over original sin, which the Formula of Concord sought to address in
Article I, tellingly followed by Article II on free will, was born of this Weimar Disputation. The debate’s chief focus was free will, but discussion eventually, and understandably, moved to original sin. Dingel notes,
“The question of the free human will led directly to the topic of original sin. Comments on the free will and its capabilities presupposed a definition of original sin and its implications for the human condition.”180
While Flacius entered the debate at Weimar confident that he and Strigel could quickly reach agreement, which he earnestly sought, his career, reputation, and entire life took an unfortunate turn.181 This happened in part because the Illyrian’s defense of Luther’s doctrine wasn’t properly understood in the kindest possible way and under the best construction, but rather exploited by his opponents, and in part—indeed, in large part—because of his refusal to concede the dangers and misunderstandings associated with his language.
179 Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation: A History (New York: Penguin Books, 2005), 349; Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Boy King: Edward VI and thre Protestant Reformation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 170.
180 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 51.
181 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 51. - 190 -
The chief sticking point of the debate developed when Strigel introduced Aristotelian language. This was in stark contrast to Flacius’ hermeneutic. His monumental Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, or Key to the
Sacred Scriptures is particularly striking for its emphasis on biblically defined categories and language to the considerable exclusion of the Aristotelian.182 Strigel endeavored to distinguish between the substance and accidents of human nature, that is, he argued that original sin was not an essential part of humanity. In
Aristotelian philosophy a substance is something that cannot be lost for a thing to be a thing, in this case, for a human to be human. Strigel was correct in asserting that original sin is not the substance of humanity, in so far as our dear Lord Jesus was truly human and yet lacked original sin. Nevertheless, in speaking of original sin as an accident, that is, something like the color of our eyes or the thickness of our hair, he failed to do justice to the depth of human depravity. Dingel explains, “Strigel correctly identified this distinction as widely-used; he was wrong in thinking it could help understand the biblical teaching on original sin and the free will. Flacius recognized correctly why that would not work, but he nonetheless decided to use this terminology which could only set the question in a false framework.”183 In other words, Flacius should have steered the discussion away from Aristotelian terminology; he should have refused to operate on the basis of philosophical and not theological language. And yet he failed to do just that. He accepted Strigel’s terms and employed them intemperately. He fell into Strigel’s trap. The debate proceeded as follows:
Strigel pressed Flacius, “An negas peccatum originis esse accidens?” “Do you deny original sin is an accident?”
Flacius stood with Luther: “Luther diserte negat esse accidens.” “Luther clearly denies it is an accident.”
Strigel persisted, “Visne negare peccatum esse accidens?” “Do you really want to deny that sin is an accident?”
Flacius tragically replied, “Quod sit substantia, dixi Scripturam et Lutherum affirmare.” “That it is a substance, I have already stated that Scripture and Luther affirm.”184
182 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 206.
183 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 52.
184 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 337.
- 191 -
Thus, “fatally, Flacius followed his colleague into the swamp of joining biblical concepts and Aristotelian categories; he tried to express the biblical understanding of sin within this alien paradigm.”185 Bente writes,
“Thus he fell into the pitfall which the wily Strigel had adroitly laid for him.”186 His colleagues, both in
Weimar and later, pled with Flacius to see the Manichaean baggage connected with his terminology and consider the impression, false or not, that such language could create. More fatal than his choice to accept and partake in Strigel’s use of Aristotelian language, however, was his unwillingness to surrender what he considered to be the language and imagery of Luther and the Bible, and more importantly, the teaching of
Luther and the Bible. Throughout he would appeal to Scriptures description of sin as “flesh,” of the “stony heart” of men, and other similar pictures.187
It is important to note that Flacius’ teaching concerning original sin was more nuanced than many have presented it to be in theological and historical accounts of the debate. Flacius did distinguish between substantia materialis and substantia formalis, material substance and formal substance.188 The material remained intact after the fall into sin, but not the formal. The material was morally neutral, neither good nor evil. The formal, however, Flacius divided into two parts, a higher and a lower. Free will belonged to the higher, substantia formalis in summon gradu. Christman notes that in Flacius’ view the higher grade
“originally gave humankind its true character” and thus “was the measure by which theology judged the essence of man.”189 Christman continues, “Because [the formal substance in the highest grade] has been turned into its evil opposite in the fall into sin, it now controlled man. So technically speaking, not all of
185 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 206.
186 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 336.
187 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 337.
188 See Matthias Flacius, Clavis Scripturae, seu de Sermone Sacrarum Literarum, plurimas generals Regulas continens. Altera Pars. (Basel, 1567), 479-498.
189 Robert J. Christman, “‘Wir sindt nichts den eytel sunde’: The Impact of Flacius’ Theology of Original Sin on the German Territory of Mansfeld,” in Matija Vlačić Illirik [III] (Labin: Grad Labin, 2012), 109. - 192 - human nature was substantially originally sin, but those components that were not had been so completely subjugated to the thralldom of original sin that the distinction was now moot.”190
Dingel writes about the controversy, “Since Strigel drew the conclusion that in fallen sinners the power to do the good and moral remained, Flacius felt challenged to emphasize the total sinfulness of the human being.”191 And that is just what Flacius did, and he did so by adopting language Luther himself had used, although without the proper sense, since Luther had never employed such language in a philosophical context where Aristotelian categories were in play. Flacius’ unwillingness to allow the will any role in man’s salvation, thereby diminishing the work of Christ and the complete and completed nature of his sacrifice, drove him to oppose Strigel, and yet it drove him too far in so doing, into speech that was poorly defined in the debate, and if not in Flacius’ own mind, in the minds of most others. However Flacius understood the terms in question, most comprehended them through an Aristotelian lens.
Bente explains, “The palpable mistake of Flacius was that he took the substantial terms on which he based his theory in their original and proper sense, while the Bible and Luther employ them in a figurative meaning, as the Formula of Concord carefully explains in its first article, which decided and settled this controversy.”192 For instance, in his Genesis lectures, Luther had written “that the fall into sin had caused such a transformation of the whole person that its essential characteristics that constitute its being in the image of God are not longer present.”193 Luther had also used the metaphor of a block of stone or wood—a picture that the Formula would caution against for fear of misunderstanding—in order to describe the sinner in conversion, as well as the metaphor of the sinner as a beast of burden ridden by God or the devil. In the course of the debate, Strigel had called Luther’s language on absolute necessity, especially as it appeared in
De servo arbitrio, a “horrid way of speaking,” and so Flacius felt himself obligated to defend, not only the
190 Christman, “‘Wir sindt nichts den eytel sunde,’” 110.
191 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 52.
192 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 337.
193 Dingel, “Culture of Conflict,” 52.
- 193 - biblical doctrine of original sin, but also the language of his mentor and theological hero.194 Bente surmises,
“In making his statement concerning the substantiality of original sin, the purpose of Flacius was to wipe out the last vestige of spiritual powers ascribed to natural man by Strigel, and to emphasize the doctrine of total corruption, which Strigel denied. His fatal blunder was that he did so in terms which were universally regarded as savoring of Manicheism.”195 Klann writes, “Unfortunately, Flacius good theological intention was soon displaced by academic pride.”196 Whether pride was at fault is hard to assess, as we cannot see
Flacius’ heart, and yet it was Flacius’ refusal to change his language, and not his theological intention, that led to his downfall and rebuttal by the Formula. To the end he defended what he considered to be Luther’s teaching and Luther’s own language. He failed, however, to craft his language in accordance with the different way in with both sides were using the chief terms in the debate.
Some have attributed Flacius’ embroilment in yet another theologians’ quarrel to well-night pathological obsession with doctrinal exactitude, and especially an exactitude measured according to his own opinions. Oversight of doctrine was a part of Flacius’ call to Jena, however, and that should not be forgotten.
The call document charged him to take care “that no one should introduce new doctrines and ceremonies, and that each pastor persevere in the religion established in the land.”197 While not obsessive, he was expected to be very attentive. Moreover, Flacius had not sought this fight. Strigel had brought it to him. Ilić faults Flacius for “not tending to unity” in such disagreements, and there is some measure of truth in that, but
Flacius’ conception of unity was certainly more akin to Luther’s than that of the Lutheran World Federation and the progressive Lutheranism of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. To weigh him in the scales of a
Lutheranism neither he nor his opponents would have recognized is not advisable. Flacius certainly enjoyed
194 Kolb, Bound Choice, 160-161.
195 Bente, Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 337.
196 R. Klann, “Article I. Original Sin,” in A Contemporary Look at the Formula of Concord, ed. Wilbert Rosin and Robert Preus (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978), 116.
Irene Dingel, “The Culture of Conflict in the Controversies Leading to the Formula of Concord (1548-1560),” in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550-1675, ed. Robert Kolb (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 15-64.
197 Ilić, Theologian of Sin and Grace, 135.
- 194 - and sought unity, but for him true unity must be unity in the truth, and especially in the chief truth, justification by grace, through faith. And that is precisely what Flacius saw under attack through any attempt to rehabilitate the image and role of the will. Christman rightly notes, “Flacius’ goal was to demonstrate unequivocally that humankind in no way contributed to its own salvation.”198
Lutheranism at this time “had been granted institutional status and had spread in many territories.”199 This did bode well for the survival of Lutheran institutions. Flacius was not concerned with institutional survival, however. It was the Wittenbergers who fretted for the future of their university and thus compromised. One will struggle in vain in the Book of Concord to find a primary, sustained, or even passing concern for the institutional status of the Lutheran Church, however. Lutheranism from its beginning has been about doctrine (doctrine was unquestionably unitary for Luther), a proclamation, a dialectic of law and gospel. For better or for worse Luther drew no blueprint for the institutional status of Lutheranism, although the visitations were a step in that direction. What Flacius was obsessed with was the survival of
God’s Word and Luther’s teaching, the preservation of Christ’s gospel in Word and Sacrament in truth and purity. Flacius was “adamant about holding on to his theological positions by not showing any willingness to re-think or modify them,” but his motivation for acting as he did was rooted in more than a personality defect.200 His adamancy sprang from his bondage to the Scriptures. Where Flacius was convinced that God spoke, there Flacius was unwilling to waver, even an inch, no matter the personal and professional cost. Such stubbornness has no doubt marked both church fathers and heretics throughout the history of Christianity— serving one well and the other poorly in the eyes of the orthodox. Flacius’ stubbornness drove him into both ditches, so to speak, so that he was both vindicated and condemned by the Formula of Concord, so that he both defended confessional Lutheran doctrine and clouded it, the former with respect to his teaching on adiaphora and the latter his position on original sin.
198 Christman, “‘Wir sindt nichts den eytel sunde,’” 110.
199 Ilić, Theologian of Sin and Grace, 142.
200 Ilić, Theologian of Sin and Grace, 157.
- 195 -
It is important to understand, too, that Flacius and the Gnesio-Lutherans who labored in the
Synergistic Controversy, including Amsdorf, who had his own intemperate words carefully repudiated in the
Formula, did not reject the obligation of new obedience. Some might, and indeed have, mistakenly drawn such a conclusion. Robert Kolb refutes such a notion:
Throughout their writings the Gnesio-Lutheran critics of Strigel and Pfeffinger insisted on the obligations of new obedience. They strove to make clear to their hearers and readers that God had created human beings to function responsibly according to his divine definition of what it means to be human. Like Luther, when engaged in the defense of God’s total responsibility for all things, they expressed his sovereign control of his creation with an emphasis on the bondage of the will. That did not mean that they wished to sacrifice their avowal of the integrity of the human creature and of the active nature of the human will in the midst of its captivity to Satan. They sought to proclaim both law and gospel and hold them in tension.201
Kolb’s description of the teaching of Nicholas Gallus, a fellow Magdeburg confessor with Flacius and
Amsdorf, and likely the author of the Magdeburg Confession, a work worthy of more contemporary study and research, helps clarify the teaching of the Gnesio-Lutherans on sanctification and new obedience:
On the basis of De servo arbitrio, Nikolaus Gallus rejected the idea that the free will apart from God’s aid has any power to repent and practice the Christian life, even as he acknowledged the necessity of this life of repentance and obedience. Such a recognition permeated the preaching and teaching of Gallus and his contemporaries. They had indeed grasped that God repeats and renews the baptismal death and resurrection he had given sinners throughout life because, for some mysterious and hidden reason, believers still must struggle against their own sinfulness…. Like Luther, they believed that God had bound his human creatures to trust and the obedience it produces in his shaping of their humanity. They proclaimed Christ’s liberation from the bondage to sin and Satan into which these creatures had fallen. They sought to cultivate a life of love, that is, true human freedom, by binding their hearers once again to God’s promises in Christ.202
Flacius certainly employed language that lent itself to misunderstanding, and he spoke in ways that flouted the conventional, Aristotelian use of terms employed for centuries, but Flacius was no heretic, although he certainly failed the test according to the famous Augustinian maxim, “Errare possum, hereticus esse nolo,” that is, “I might err, but I will not be a heretic.” Flacius certainly persisted in his language after
201 Kolb, Bound Choice, 165.
202 Kolb, Bound Choice, 166.
- 196 - others, even allies, raised concerns about it, in language condemned later by the Formula of Concord—and yet language he held to be Scripture’s and Luther’s own—but in what he sought to defend in the debate over original sin, he endeavored to be no false teacher. A lifelong experience with persecution, doctrinal controversy, and spiritual and militaristic assaults upon Luther’s Reformation had marked and shaped him, had made him desperate to preserve the truth of Scripture and the gospel of Jesus Christ. He indeed held to
Luther’s words, but the Formula better grasped and explicated their sense. Flacius’ chief fault rested in his linguistic obstinacy, not in his desire to defend the teaching of the Scriptures and his spiritual father, Martin
Luther. If he was anything, Matthias Flacius Illyricus was consistent. He who had called others to bear the cross and stand firm in their confession of the Word of God and Luther’s teaching stood firm in his convictions. After another conflict with the duke, this time concerning the freedom of the church from the state, he was forced to flee and lost his position as a professor.203 Sadly, after a long succession of exiles, he died an isolated, wandering man in Frankfurt am Main in 1575. Even more sadly, as a result of his confession and his controversial nature, he was denied a Christian burial.204 The cross marked even his death, as he likely long expected it would, if not his grave.
In many ways the Formula was a vindication of Gnesio-Lutheran concerns and emphases, while a critique of their language and temperament. One thing the Formula most certainly wasn’t was
Melanchthonian or Philippist in theological orientation, although it was Melanchthonian in structure, tone, and clarity. It must be remembered that almost all of those involved in the controversies that led to the
Formula and those that crafted the Formula were students of Melanchthon. Even as we might bemoan the damage Melanchthon’s later wavering, moderating, and revising did to Lutheranism, we must acknowledge
Lutheranism’s immense debt to the Praeceptor as well. He trained his students well, so well indeed, that they stood on guard even against his own deviations and molded a clear, concise, and lasting Formula, which
203 Oliver Olson, “Matthias Flacius (1520-1575),” in The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to the Early Modern Period, ed. Carter Lindberg (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), 87.
204 Oliver Olson, “Matthias Flacius (1520-1575),” 88.
- 197 - merged the best of his own theology and temperament with Luther’s. Not only was Flacius a “Schüler
Luthers und Melanchthons,” but so were the Concordists as well.205
The Concordists repudiated Flacius’ language concerning original sin without naming him specifically. Rather, they referred to “Manichaean error.”206 They “argued that Flacius’s view of original sin would twist and pervert the doctrines of creation, redemption, sanctification, and the resurrection of the flesh, for in each case it would ascribe false characteristics to the actions of God and to the created nature of his human creature.”207 After explaining the proper sense in which Luther’s use of the terms “nature-sin,”
“person-sin,” or “essential sin,” should be understood, the Formula did speak of original sin as “embedded in the human being’s nature, substance, and essence.”208 It is not human nature or substance, but embedded in it, which respected Flacius’ sensitivities even as it rejected his language. “The Concordists were deeply concerned that the people of God might get the impression that God was responsible in any way for sin.”209
In this manner, they shared Melanchthon’s fear, and correctly so, without, however, adopting Melanchthon’s emphasis on human responsibility and the three causes of conversion, which the Praeceptor had intended as a corrective. They left no doubt that original sin is a deep corruption of the human nature and no slight infirmity or minor defect. “The Formula insisted on the totality of this corruption of human creatures through sin but also insisted that the fallen sinner remains truly a creation of God, a creature whom God redeems, sanctifies, and raises from the dead as his own human child.”210 The Concordists affirmed the passivity of the human will in conversion while cautioning against misunderstanding Luther’s description of the will as
“pure passive” in a manner that might give the impression that the converted functioned in no way psychologically in the process. The Formula counsels in Article II:
205 Dingel, “Flacius als Schüler,” 77-93.
206 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome I.9, 490.
207 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 209.
208 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome I.20, 490; KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome I.21, 490.
209 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 209.
210 Arand, Kolb, and Nestingen, The Lutheran Confessions, 210. - 198 -
[It must be understood] insofar as God’s Spirit takes hold of the human will through the Word that is heard or through the use of the holy sacraments and effects new birth and conversion. For when the Holy Spirit has effected and accomplished new birth and conversion and has altered and renewed the human will solely through this divine power and activity, then the new human will is an instrument and tool of God the Holy Spirit, in that the will not only accepts grace but also cooperates with the Holy Spirit in the works that proceed from it.211
Notice, however, that the will is an instrument, not a cause, in conversion. God alone, acting through the
Means of Grace, is the cause. The Concordists insist in Article II: “As little as a corpse can make itself alive for bodily, earthly life, so little can people who through sin are spiritually dead raise themselves up to spiritual life.”212 In the end, the Concordists accomplished what Flacius could not. They stepped back, considered the concerns of all the parties involved—what they were trying to defend from the truth of God— and pondered, not what language could possibly be used, but rather what language best served the biblical concepts and images involved. In this way, the controversy was settled for roughly two-thirds of Lutheranism in Germany and a valuable theological treasure was bequeathed to subsequent generations, in Germany, here in America, and throughout the world.
211 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome II.18, 494.
212 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome II.3, 492.
- 199 -
Some Lessons from the “Culture of Conflict”
The Significance of Original Sin for Pastoral Care and Preaching
Steven D. Paulson has put it brutally beautifully when he writes, “Inner-blind and outer-dead people are a very poor demographic for making worship work.”213 The gospel isn’t a “would ya like,” a “thus saith the Lord.” God promises. Christians believe, because God promises. The gospel is unlike anything in this world. It is trustworthy, in every instance. It gives what it says, always. It does as if already done—indeed, it is as good as done before the believer even knows it is doing. We therefore do not woo the dead. God raises them through us, through His Means for which we merely serve as unimpressive and most unworthy feet, hands, and mouths. We live in a fallen world and deal with fallen people. We are fallen people in a fallen world. This is not an aspect of our existence. This is our existence. It is into this mess and mire that the Christ comes.
Flacius was intemperate in his language and stubborn in his persistence in that language, but his chief concern—the peculiar truth of the Bible and Luther’s proper emphasis of it—remains pertinent. First, we are reminded of the value of humility and a willingness to admit, not only when we have spoken incorrectly, but also when we have spoken carelessly. The preacher must strive not only to speak in such a way that he can be understood properly but also in such a way that he cannot be easily misunderstood.
Walther advises, “Another point you should bear in mind when writing your sermons is not to say anything that might be misunderstood.”214
Furthermore, we learn from the Flacian Controversy that as pastors we must take into account, acknowledge, appreciate, and articulate the lostness, the condemnedness, the fallenness, the depravity of the human condition and nature. It is meaningful that Article II and Article XVIII of the Augustana alike condemn and reject the Pelagians, Augustine’s vexing and formidable foes. This is no coincidence.
213 Steven D. Paulson, “What Is Essential in Lutheran Worship,” Word & World 26, nr. 1 (Spring 2006): 154.
214 C.F.W. Walther, Law and Gospel: How to Read and Apply the Bible, trans. Christian C. Tiews (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2010), 62.
- 200 -
Moreover, Article II explicitly asserts that those who admit works into justification diminish the glory of
Christ’s merits and benefits. This is crucial. How many aren’t offended at the notion that Jesus, and thus His
Bride, do not primarily exist in order to make good people? That is the truth, though. As a pastor I was not very concerned at all with my people’s sins. I was much more concerned with their repentance, which of course embraces and is realized only through faith. I didn’t want to make my people good people. I wanted to make them the most despicable and wretched scoundrels. That is, I wanted to convince them that they were such. Deutschlander warns, “It is surprising sometimes to find that people who are no longer coarse sinners have become refined Pharisees”—no battle is won in that, the field has merely shifted.215 The Apology explains, “The benefits of Christ cannot be recognized unless we understand our evil.”216 And this has consequences for preaching. People must know who they are without Christ. “Therefore our preachers have diligently taught about these matters,” the Apology states. People simply and literally have no chance in hell of being good people until they admit they are bad people—people who have lost the image of God. And even then, they cannot become good people through any new morality. They can become good people only through Christ and His Word, through Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, which is our reconciliation and justification—a reconciliation and justification for sinners. Any other approach robs Christ of His proper glory. Article IV must precede Article VI, and Article VI can come only through Article V. There is no other way that accords with the Scriptures and Christ’s honor. Will my people sin less? I hope so. Will my people then do some good works? How can they not, for Christ dwells in them? Will my people, though, then be better people, in civic righteousness, than Joe Unbeliever? Maybe, maybe not, because sometimes Joe
Unbeliever can be a swell guy. What’s the solution when my people fail to be the good people the world and many misguided people expect me to make them? It’s time to make them lousy people again. It’s time to convict them of their sin. And then it’s time, not to tell them to lift themselves up by their bootstraps, not to stage an intervention, not to give them a Dr. Phil talking-to, but to send Christ down into the gutter with them again, to speak Absolution, through which Christ, and not the sinner, does the lifting and cleansing.
215 Deutschlander, Narrow Lutheran Middle, 43.
216 KW, Apology of the Augsburg Confession II.50, 120. - 201 -
Pastors, you have a congregation of saints, but they remain sinners, just like you. And sinners sin.
Sometimes they sin marvelously—whoppers, dandies, front page sort of sins. Don’t let them see you act shocked when they confess their sins. Don’t let them think for a moment that they shouldn’t come to you with those sins. Don’t give the impression that they are less Christian when they have come to you to confess them—not to be convicted, for God has already worked that, but to be absolved—for in seeking absolution they are doing the most Christian thing of all, something only the Spirit can prompt. Rather, be concerned about the hundreds who consider their sins too lightly to address them, too frivolous for God to give much of a whoop, who are just glad to avoid the whoppers, the dandies, the front page sort of sins. This too is natural, but obviously not edifying or salutary. John Meyer writes, “Natural man likes to think of God as one who will overlook our shortcomings.”217 Even Christian pastors fall into this trap, as you know all too well from the iniquity of your own hearts and minds. We wouldn’t get so angry if it weren’t for the stress. We wouldn’t yell at our spouses or children if we could stick up for ourselves with anyone else. We wouldn’t, we wouldn’t, we wouldn’t… We expect God to overlook our transgressions but somehow notice and praise and amply reward the insignificant and trifling menstrual rags we deem “good” works. We want to be on the front page, not for our depravity, but for our righteousness—emphasis on the “our.” Luther’s warning from the Smalcald Articles comes to mind: “This inherited sin has caused such a deep, evil corruption of nature that reason does not comprehend it; rather, it must believed on the basis of the revelation in the
Scriptures.”218 Thankfully, those Scriptures remind us what is front page news in heaven: one sinner who repents.
We need to be the sinner. Our people need to be the sinner. Why? Because sinners sin and pastors forgive sinners (and pastors forgive sinners who are pastors)—repentant sinners—because pastors serve as the ambassadors of Christ, who forgave us our sins when were yet His enemies, when we were but a twinkle in our parents’ eyes. And no, I’m not asking you to excuse your peoples’ sins. I’m not asking you to downplay their sins at all. I am simply asking you to forgive them for what they are—fruits of original sin,
217 John Meyer, Studies in the Augsburg Confession (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1995), 33.
218 KW, Smalcald Articles III.1.3, 311.
- 202 - the handiwork of the sinful nature. Get wet in such moments. Drown the sinful nature again through the third
Sacrament. Give the devil a kick in his pants, because the devil can use guilt just as God can—He can drive the sorrowful sinner to despair—but the devil cannot touch guilt when God has wiped it away, blotted it out, cast it far as the east is from the west. Lazarus wasn’t ashamed to admit how dead he was. He wasn’t embarrassed of his linen cloths. Much to the contrary, his deadness and those cloths testified to the love of
Christ, just what a marvelous, miraculous, mind-boggling thing Jesus had done, unasked and unearned, but certainly not uneventful or worthy of unending praise.
Ultimately, the church’s task is not simply or chiefly transformative, but baptismal, and thankfully so. The Spirit’s primary task is not to transform sinners in the way that too many churches advertise, but to make them new. Yes, a transformation takes place. Paul writes in Romans 12:2, with the mercies of God pressed upon us in the preceding verse, and more importantly, by the entire letter to that point, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” This transformation, however, is not the sort measured in tallies of sins and works—works, as we’ve covered, will follow, but this is not the chief task of the church and it is the fruit of the gospel, not the gospel. The Spirit is not in this for a quick buck. He does not come in and flip a house. No, He renews it and makes it His own temple, His own eternal dwelling place. This is not a matter of some paint and new floors. The Holy Spirit kills and makes alive, drowns and raises. Transformation, as we understand it, is often measured in law. Baptism is measured in crosses,
Christ’s cross traced upon our head and our heart and the crosses we bear for Him. As Melanchthon was tempted and moved to turn his focus from the gospel to the law, from election to obedience, on account of the Saxon Visitation, so we can be tempted to lose focus on account of the state of our parishes and society in general. Does your church seem dead? Rejoice. Jesus loves to raise dead things. Does your Christian walk seem limp and lame? Take heart, those are the horses our Lord chooses to harness. We are who we are, but
Jesus is who He is, and we are now who we are in Jesus, and that we have certainty, consolation, and real hope.
- 203 -
Adiaphora and the Connection between Doctrine and Practice219
Disputes over worship practices, as we have seen, have a long history in Lutheranism. From early on they can be found in the American setting, especially as Lutherans wrestled with just how their rather un-
American faith would find a home within American culture—if that were even possible. Nelson recalls regarding the temptation to revivalism:
In addition to the language difficulties there was the controversial issue of revivalism. When, in the wake of the revolutionary war and the subsequent westward movements, individuals and groups frequently became detached from their churches, revivalism offered a means to renew and reawaken spiritual life. Protracted meetings and enthusiastic and emotional outbursts were often employed in attempting renewal. Some Lutherans were not immune to such methods and considered them spiritually vitalizing. In fact, sometimes Lutherans rivaled the Methodists, Baptists, and Finneyites in employing the techniques of the revivalistic system.220
New practices, or new measures, were not indifferent, however, as much as those adopting them may have thought. They came with baggage. The Lutherans who adopted revivalistic methods soon began to walk, talk, and believe like the American Protestants they mimicked. Nelson notes:
A dichotomy appeared between “head” and “heart” Christians…Where revivalistic techniques were employed consistently, the central doctrine of justification by faith in Christ was endangered and the theological complexion often became Arminian. The denial of original sin followed and the sinner was granted the ability to cooperate with God in the act of justification. Luther’s catechism fell into disuse.221
Wentz’ explains the tensions that developed between the Pennsylvania Ministerium and its more revivalistic neighbors who nonetheless still claimed the title “Lutheran,” and, for all accounts and purposes, likely with very sincere convictions that they were forwarding the cause of Lutheranism. He writes:
The predominating influences in the [Pennsylvania] Ministerium were German, and they harbored a strong aversion to the remnant of revivalism and Puritanism that still lingered in some parts of the General Synod. The Ministerium was in more direct touch with the
219 Much of what follows in this section has been reproduced or adapted from Wade R. Johnston, “Article X of the Formula of Concord and Lutheranism Today,” Lutheran Synod Quarterly 50, nr. 1 (March 2010): 67-94.
220 Clifford E. Nelson, The Lutherans in North America (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 215.
221 Nelson, Lutherans in North America, 216.
- 204 -
Lutheran reaction in Germany and its inspiring literature, made more constant use of Luther’s Catechism and German hymns, and received a larger number of German pastors. All this deepened the Lutheran convictions of the Ministerium beyond those of other synods.222
We do well to note the significant mooring role that worship methods, styles, customs, etc. played in the doctrinal leanings of the more conservative Pennsylvania Ministerium.223 The catholic principle, so often tested, once again proved correct: lex orandi, lex credendi. This was so, however, because the lex credendi conversely determined the lex orandi. The experience of the Pennsylvania Ministerium also provides a strong reinforcement of the importance of continued publication of sound, orthodox, carefully vetted literature, both works of the past and those produced in our own day, for the preservation of our theological and liturgical vitality. Much mischief can be started on the pastor’s bookshelf, in the parish’s library, and on the musician’s stand. We do well to be attentive to what might end up there and, in love, to encourage one another in using what is most faithful and consistent with the Scriptures and our Confessions.
Flacius and Article X of the Formula remind us of the vice versa relationship of the catholic principle. Both the orandi and the credenda can rightly claim first place in the formula. In fact, a confessional and ancient/historical church like the Evangelical Lutheran Church will insist on such a reciprocal relationship. Article X of the Formula has no use for “we’ve always done it that way,” “whatever works,” “it’s what the people like,” “must,” “should,” “have to,” or “who cares.” Rather, the confessors looked to the one fountain that truly issues “good order,” “Christian discipline,” and “evangelical propriety,” that is, the Word of God, and they then sought to practice, with an eye toward their received tradition, but without being handcuffed by it, that which best reflected such a relationship between doctrine and practice, practice and doctrine.
Armand Boehme drives home this point:
222 Abdel Ross Wentz, A Basic History of Lutheranism in America (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1955), 155.
223 Several synods influenced by revivalism and the Americanization include the following: the Hartwick Synod, the Melanchthon Synod, and the Franckean Synod. The admission of the latter to the General Synod in 1861 led to that body’s eventual decline, including the withdrawal of the Pennsylvania Ministerium.
- 205 -
For early Lutherans, lex credendi had precedence over lex orandi. They clearly saw the “law of believing founds the law of worshipping.” Central to faith and belief is the doctrine of justification, the article by which the church stands or falls. Therefore the Lutheran Confessions emphasize the fact that “worship is thoroughly grounded in the doctrine of justification and justification becomes the touchstone for liturgical change and adaptation.” The Lutheran Confessions note that the term liturgy is not seen as a work or action of the people; rather liturgy has to do with God’s working through the office of the holy ministry to grant his grace to sinners. Thus the Confessions’ emphasis is on justification in the divine liturgy, not on the sanctified work of the people in response to God’s justifying grace.224
He continues, contrasting the approach of Anglicans and Lutherans, two of the great ancient/historical
Protestant traditions:
Thus Anglicans and Lutherans view tradition differently. For Anglicans tradition (lex orandi) has near (if not equal) authority with Holy Scripture (lex credendi). Furthermore, tradition is something that continues to unfold as the Spirit gives insight. For Lutherans good traditions are respected, but all tradition is subordinate to Holy Scripture. In fact, if tradition is contrary to Scripture it must be rejected, and all the more so if the tradition conflicts with the doctrine of justification.225
This is nothing other than an articulation of Article X, a practice rooted in doctrine, respectful of tradition, but captive to the Word of God, keenly aware that only the gospel can do the work of the gospel, and yet also cognizant of the influence practice can have, intentionally or unintentionally, upon the doctrinal convictions of the laity.226
We are often in our circles keenly aware of the danger of Romanizing, of the danger of turning to tradition and ceremony to do what only the Means of Grace can do, of shrouding what bears God’s promise in the invention, albeit ancient, of men. This is a good vigilance. Smells and bells have more than once been the refuge of those who have abandoned the shelter of God’s inspired Word. We don’t fight on one front, however. We should be just as wary of the other ditch, too, of those who would turn to the practices of those
224 Armand Boehme, “‘But We’ve Always Done It That Way’: Wittenberg and Canterbury on Tradition,” Logia: A Journal of Lutheran Theology XII, nr. 4 (Reformation 2003): 12-13.
225 Boehme, “But We’ve Always,” 13.
226 Why and how someone does something in the realm of adiaphora, and not the fact that someone does it, makes a Lutheran Romanizing. The fact that the church always did something isn’t necessarily a reason to do it again. In fact, it was the reintroduction of ceremonies that led to the Adiaphoristic Controversy. The fact that you have catechized your members and it helps them appropriate the gospel and honor God, however, may be a reason to reintroduce such things.
- 206 - whose roots rest in the confession and methodology of men and women who deemed Luther’s Reformation incomplete and the Means of Grace ineffectual, or not effective enough, albeit while espousing a seemingly high view of the Scriptures, which has lured many to see kinship where there is in fact is little to none.227
Luther did insist in a passage often quoted from a work not often enough read, his Confession concerning
Christ’s Supper, “Sooner than have mere wine with the fanatics, I would agree with the pope that there is only blood.”228 Tossing out tradition is no special virtue and innovation is a byword, not a boast, in the
Confessions. We must always remember that evangelism springs from the God-given εὐαγγέλιον, the Good
News of Jesus Christ.229 The gospel doesn’t need help. The unbeliever has no free will to woo. The old
Adam has no redeemable desire to which we can appeal. In this regard, Nietzsche was right again, although unintentionally so. He wrote:
This is the same logic as: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out.” In the particular case in which that dangerous “innocent from the country,” the founder of Christianity, recommended this practice to his disciples, the case of sexual excitation, the consequence is, unfortunately, not only the loss of an organ but the emasculation of a man’s character. And the same applies to the moralist's madness that demands, instead of the restraining of the passions, their extirpation. Its conclusion is always: only the castrated man is a good man.230
The desires of the old man must be snuffed out. They certainly musn’t be appealed to, surveyed, or flamed.
The Formula is clear: “Likewise, we believe, teach, and confess that the unregenerate human will is not only turned away from God but has also become God’s enemy, that it has only the desire and will to do evil and whatever is opposed to God.”231 No matter how many times the sinful man or woman sings a chorus about
227 Indeed, enthusiast is often an apt term in this respect.
228 LW 37:317.
229 Those from the Church Growth Movement camp who have harped on addressing “felt needs” as a top priority (e.g The Purpose Driven Church by Rick Warren), must be reminded that the last “felt need” the sinful nature (and they are often talking about the “felt needs” of the unchurched, precisely the people who have only the sinful nature to guide their perception of what they need) will recognize or acknowledge is the gospel in Word and Sacrament—the foundation of the Lutheran worship service.
230 Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will to Power, trans. Walter Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale (New York: Vintage Books, 1967), Book II. 383, 207.
231 KW, Formula of Concord, Epitome II.3, 492.
- 207 - his or her love for God, he or she has none, and he or she will gain none through inane repetition. The gospel must be proclaimed, set front and center, unwrapped, not carefully and marketably packaged. The visitor’s hope rests, not in the personality of the pastor, the melody of the hymns, the beauty of the sanctuary, or the temperature of the coffee, but in Christ who comes, as He did on Christmas, wrapped in swaddling cloths, be they water, the pastor’s ugly mug, bread, or wine. “God the Holy Spirit does not effect conversion without means, but he uses preaching and the hearing of God’s Word to accomplish it…. And it is Gods will that people hear his Word and not plug their ears.”232 As much as we want to clean out the wax, their fingers are the problem, and only the Spirit can pry them from free.233 And wonderful things happen when we trust the promise and despair of our gimmicks or vain hopes of helping God’s Word out: “When one is able to trust
God by means of a word one speaks very differently to him---in the way a husband and wife speak to one another as opposed to the way an advertisement addresses an unknown client.”234
Separating the two, methods and Means, doctrine and practice, essentially is to adopt a Jesuitical approach (“the end justifies the means”). This is fundamentally un-Lutheran and, more importantly, unscriptural. When the Formula says, “Moreover, we must not include among the truly free adiaphora or indifferent matters ceremonies that give the appearance or (in order to avoid persecution) are designed to give the impression that our religion does not differ greatly from the papist religion or that their religion were not completely contrary to ours,” “papist” could well be changed to “Baptist,” “Presbyterian,” “Methodist,” or any other Protestant sect (even those unwilling to identify themselves in such a way, let alone put such an identity on a sign).235 We do well to ask ourselves, should a heterodox Christian walk into our midst, would he be aware of any differences between our confession and his, the orientation of our divine service and the orientation of his worship? Kurt Marquardt cuts to the heart with a quotation from Luther:
232 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration II.4, 492.
233 Just how contrary to our natural and surely well-intentioned thinking may well be demonstrated by an attempt from the floor to nuance this assertion, to allow at least some cleaning of wax.
234 Paulson, Lutheran Theology, 55.
235 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration X.5, 636
- 208 -
If now I seek the forgiveness of sins, I dare not run to the cross, for I will not find it given there. Nor must I hold to the suffering of Christ, as Dr. Karlstadt trifles, in knowledge or remembrance, for I will not find it there either. But I will find in the Sacrament or gospel the Word which distributes, presents, offers, and gives to me that forgiveness which was won on the cross.236
His own words then cast even more light:
In the face of the lunacies now masquerading as worship, one can only admire the wit of the woman who thought it was high time for the church “to stop trying to entertain the goats and get back to feeding the sheep” It was, one must remember, the devil who invented “entertainment evangelism” and tempted the Lord with it (Matthew 4:5,6).237
In God’s service, God’s Word does things. The sermon does things. God does things through the pastor, not by the pastor’s power, but His own. Yes, the pastor could refuse to speak, but God would not be daunted. The stones would cry out, or even better, the congregation would sing some solid Lutheran hymns.
One of the most frustrating inanities spoken in our circles involves the false conception that some hymns or services are too German, they are too unemotional, they are head-heavy but heart-light. People need practical theology, we are sometimes told. And yet there is no practical theology without theology. And the
Lutheran Church has always confessed that theology is a habitus practicus. Lutheranism has a rich history of melding the devotional and the didactic, in its sermons, its services, and its songs. Carl Schalk drives this point home:
Such a view incorrectly implies that proclamatory hymns are merely teaching efforts, at best, or rhymed dogma, at worst. It forgets that the proclamation of the gospel is directed not only to the world as a message of hope and salvation, and to God as the community of faith pleads the good news of the gospel before the Father—just as the Son pleads for us before him—and praised him for it, but to the Christian community itself as it confesses and celebrates the faith.238
John Donne was not a confessor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (he was an Anglican convert from Roman Catholicism), but he was a man with common sense, something, as the saying goes, that is not
236 Kurt Marquardt, “‘Church Growth’ as Mission Paradigm: A Confessional Lutheran Assessment,” in Church and Ministry Today: Three Confessional Lutheran Essays (St. Louis: Luther Academy, 2001), 58.
237 Kurt Marquardt, “‘Church Growth’ as Mission Paradigm,” 135.
238 Carl F. Schalk, “Hymnody and the Proclamation of the Gospel,” in Not Unto Us: A Celebration of the Ministry of Kurt J. Eggert (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2001), 138.
- 209 - so common nowadays. He wrote, “No man is an island, entire of itself.” The Evangelical Lutheran Church is a church of individual believers, as our scriptural distinction between invisible and visible church, or Church within the church, shows.239 With this in mind, however, it is important to recognize that in their conviction that “Dissonantia ieiunii non dissolvit consonantiam fidei” the formulators of Article X are not advocating a reckless smorgasbord of worship practices. Moreover, when the confessions recognize that different churches can have different practices, it is useful to remember that they were often thinking, not of individual congregations, as in our American voters-assembly context, but of territorial churches. Brothers and sisters were bound together in Christian love beyond the doors of their individual building. There is real value in an evangelical conformity in practice, after all. That is why we’ve had The Lutheran Hymnal, Christian
Worship, Evangelical Lutheran Hymnary, and similar hymnals. It is hard for a pastor who has had time enough at his parish to put all his books on his shelves to doubt that questions will arise in the mind of Joe
Pewsitter when, as he travels from WELS church to WELS church, or ELS church to ELS church, or WELS church to ELS church and vice versa, he observes a massive chasm in worship forms between parishes (and not mere subtle differences). These questions, if not answered with careful instruction and charitable patience, will inevitably lead to doubt and a loss of certainty in other areas of the Faith. Here too Article X’s concern for the weak brother is imperative. The individual church and Christian must always have a concern for the benefit of the brotherhood of the faithful as a whole.
Tiefel quotes Walther:
We refuse to be guided by those who are offended by our church customs. We adhere to them all the more firmly when someone wants to cause us to have a guilty conscience on account of them….It is truly distressing that many of our fellow Christians find the differences between Lutheranism and papism in outward things. It is a pity and dreadful cowardice when one sacrifices the good and ancient customs to please the deluded American sects, lest they accuse us of being papistic.
Indeed! Am I to be afraid of a Methodist, who perverts the saving Word, or be ashamed in the matter of my good cause, and not rather rejoice that the sects can tell by our ceremonies that I do not belong to them?
239 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration X.19, 639.
- 210 -
We are not insisting that there be unity in perception or feelings or of taste among all believing Christians, neither dare anyone demand that all be minded as he. Nevertheless it remains true that the Lutheran liturgy distinguishes Lutheran worship from the worship of other churches to such an extent that the latter look like lecture halls in which the hearers are merely addressed or instructed, while our churches are in truth houses of prayer in which the Christians serve God publicly before the world.240
Walther doesn’t stop there, lest we miss his point:
The objection: “What would be the use of uniformity of ceremonies?” was answered with the counter question, “What is the use of a flag on the battlefield?” Even though a soldier cannot defeat the enemy with it, he nevertheless sees by the flag where he belongs. We ought not to refuse to walk in the footsteps of our fathers. They were so far removed from being ashamed of the good ceremonies that they publicly confess in the passage quoted: “It is not true that we do away with all such external ornaments.”241
It is perhaps beneficial to briefly pause and remember again at this point that the Synodical
Conference was a fellowship of Lutherans who also confronted worship controversies among
Lutherans, some not so different than those we witness today. Times change, people not so much.
They want what they want, and what they want is not what God knows we need.
Article X, if hastily read, and with preconceived, modern, American notions, might seem to bespeak a rugged individualism in church practices. The Formula, however, was not written in a vacuum, and it was not unaware of what came before it. As the Nicene and Athanasian creeds built
240 James P. Tiefel, “The Formation and Flow of Worship Attitudes in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod,” in Not Unto Us: A Celebration of the Ministry of Kurt J. Eggert (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2001), 149-150. The preceding paragraph from Walther’s essay is also worth attention: “We know and firmly hold that the character, the soul of Lutheranism, is not found in outward observances but in the pure doctrine. If a congregation had the most beautiful ceremonies in the very best order, but did not have the pure doctrine, it would be anything but Lutheran. We have from the beginning spoken earnestly of good ceremonies, not as though the important thing were outward forms, but rather to make use of our liberty in these things. For true Lutherans know that although one does not have to have these things (because there is no divine command to have them), one may nevertheless have them because good ceremonies are lovely and beautiful and are not forbidden in the Word of God. Therefore the Lutheran church has not abolished ‘outward ornaments, candles, altar cloths, statues and similar ornaments,’ [AP XXIV] but has left them free. The sects proceeded differently because they did not know how to distinguish between what is commanded, forbidden, and left free in the Word of God. We remind only of the mad actions of Carlstadt and of his adherents and followers in Germany and in Switzerland. We on our part have retained the ceremonies and church ornaments in order to prove by our actions that we have a correct understanding of Christian liberty, and know how to conduct ourselves in things which are neither commanded nor forbidden by God.” C.F.W. Walther, “The True Visible Church and the Form of a Christian Congregation,” in Essays for the Church (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1992), 193-194.
241 Walther, “The True Visible Church,” 193-4. See the preceding footnote for further context.
- 211 - upon the Apostles’, the Formula, and Flacius, and the other Gnesio-Lutherans who objected to the liturgical regulations of the Interims, built upon the previous Lutheran Confessions. Indeed, perhaps no one, unintentional loner that he became through later isolation on account of the controversy over original sin, appealed more to Augsburg and its Confessions than Flacius. In no way would the
Gnesio-Lutherans or the Formula have repudiated Apology XXIV:
At the outset it is again necessary, by way of preface, to point out that we do not abolish the Mass but religiously retain and defend it. Among us the Mass is celebrated every Lord’s day and on other festivals, when the sacrament is made available to those who wish to partake of it, after they have been examined and absolved. We also keep traditional liturgical forms, such as the order of readings, prayers, vestments, and other similar things.242
The Lutheran Church is not an ahistorical church disconnected from those who have gone before her, but rather one rooted in the past and deeply aware of her indebtedness to the earlier confessors who have passed down to her the pure doctrine she holds so dear, and, at her best, constantly strives in whatever way possible to hand down that undeserved inheritance as undefiled as she received it.243 Hence, the Book of
Concord has attached to it a Catalogue of Testimonies, and such notable Lutherans as Chemnitz, Gerhard, and Flacius244 wrote extensive works compiling patristic writings on contested doctrines—indeed, in many
242 KW, Apology of the Augsburg Confession XXIV.1, 258.
243 A.L. Barry, in the article previously quoted, “Lutheran Worship: Beyond 2000,” writes: “Let us examine the flip side of this thesis. If Lutheran worship is a reflection of Lutheran theology, what do you think might happen if we were, for example, to begin to conduct our worship services in a manner similar to what one might find in a Baptist church, a Pentecostal church, or a non-denominational Evangelical church? Do you think it is reasonable to assume that if Lutherans worship like Baptists, it will probably not be too long before they believe as Baptists do? Or, if Lutherans worship like Charismatics, how long will it be before we embrace the doctrine and practices of the Charismatic movement? If we Lutherans recognize our roots and why we worship the way we do, it will probably also be true that we will wish to remain with that basic pattern of worship. As we contemplate changes in this pattern, we exercise restraint, care and caution, for we recognize that genuine Lutheran worship is a reflection of genuine Lutheran theology.” http://worship.lcms.org/2000theses.html (accessed when I was in seminary, 2000-2004, it is no longer available at this address). It should be noted with respect to this A.L. Barry’s observation above, however, that if Lutheran pastors and lay people are not educated in what worship really is and should strive to be (according to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions), they will not appreciate the tradition that they have received from our fathers in the faith. A knowledge of church history, especially in the area of worship practices, will also only enhance our appreciation for why we do what we do. Catechesis, as in every area of the church’s work, is essential.
244 Oliver K. Olson writes: “Where Aldus collected the classics, Flacius, having embraced the Reformation, turned Europe upside down searching for medieval manuscripts. As an answer to the reproach that the Reformation was a break with the Catholic tradition of the church, he published texts from his researches in a Catalog of Witnesses to the Truth. He was confident that such historical records demonstrated that Luther’s reform was faithful to the Catholic tradition. According to his ‘remnant’ argument, derived from 1 Kings 19:8 and Romans 11:4, there had always been a few faithful to the authentic tradition of the church. Catholicity, consequently, must be traced through the successio - 212 - ways pioneered the field of patristics.245 It was Carlstadt, not Luther, who gutted churches and rejected wholesale long-standing customs and ceremonies of the church. Luther, like the churches the Reformation inherited, left the majority of the Western Rite intact. Changes were made when the lex credendi required it
(the canon of the Mass), when ceremonies were misunderstood or irreparably associated with papistic idolatry (the elevation of the host in some areas, the eucharistic prayer, etc.), and when a superior way of communicating the gospel was available (placement of the Words of Institution within the communion liturgy and their being spoken aloud). Luther and the subsequent confessors had anything but a scorched earth approach (such an approach, as Napoleon learned, seldom leaves one well-fed and grounded), where everything was to be destroyed and rebuilt from the foundation, as was the case to a large extent among the sects. Rather, as Charles Porterfield Krauth called it, theirs was “the conservative Reformation.”246
Chemnitz put it well in his Examination of the Council of Trent, Part II, “And indeed, for the sake of order and decorum it should not be permitted to everyone willfully, without the decision and consent of the church, just because he desires it, either to omit or change anything even in external and indifferent things.”247
Freedom, while not free, as every crucifix ought remind us, does however exist.248 It is Christian freedom, though, and thus a freedom flowing from, grounded in, and governed by the gospel and Christian
doctrinae rather than in the successio personarum of the ‘historic episcopate.’” Oliver K. Olson, “Matthias Flacius,” in The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Modern Period (Oxford, Blackwell Publishers, 2001), 88). Notice that in Flacius’ view catholicity is found first and foremost in teaching, not ritual. It is this catholic doctrine that will lead to truly catholic ritual, whether or not that ritual has widespread and longstanding precedent. Many widespread and longstanding rituals, however, are found to be vehicles of a very catholic fides quae and therefore worth preserving.
245 The Lutheran Church confesses with the Augsburg Confession, “Since the churches among us do not dissent from the catholic church in any article of faith but only set aside a few abuses that are new and were accepted because of corruption over time contrary to the intention of the canons, we pray that Your Imperial Majesty will graciously hear about the changes and our reasons for them, so that people may not be compelled to observe these abuses against their conscience.” KW, Augsburg Confession, Articles in Which an Account is Given of the Abuses that Have been Corrected 1, 61.
246 Charles P. Krauth, The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology (Philadelphia: United Lutheran Publication House, 1871).
247 Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, Part II, trans. Fred Kramer (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978), 108.
248 Chemnitz writes about the freedom in ceremonies that existed also in the ancient church, which flies in the face of many a modern day liturgists who hold to the delusion of an utopian ancient liturgical community: “In the - 213 - love, not a willy-nilly permit for frivolity.249 Frivolity, as our Confessions, and I would hope common decency, make clear, has no place in the God’s services. As St. Paul warns, “For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.”250 This freedom has existed from the earliest days of the Christian Church and will exist until
Christ comes to rescue His Bride. Ecclesia semper reformanda est, and for that reason she has and must have the freedom and the responsibility to constantly adapt, improve and appropriate in each successive generation the traditions that have been passed onto it. Yet this adapting, improving, and appropriating, so necessary in every land and age, when it is done best and most rightly, however, will be done not on a whim and overnight, and not detached from the Church in the past or from the Church throughout the world, but thoughtfully, deliberately, and in accordance with and upon the foundation of the one infallible, unchanging, and salvific tradition: the Word. The Formula reminds us, first:
seventh place, the observance of these rites was free in the church; neither were such rites similar and the same in all churches; often also some of the most ancient rites were abrogated and omitted, such as the tasting beforehand of milk, honey, and wine, of which Tertullian and Jerome make mention. Some were changed and others newly instituted, as it was judged to serve the edification of the church. For the church used and preserved, not confused license but a godly and wholesome liberty in ecclesiastical ceremonies of this kind, instituted by men, so that by free discontinuance it abrogated, omitted, and changed also the most ancient such ceremonies when it was judged that by reason of circumstances they no longer were very important for piety, or when the cause for which they were first instituted and observed had either been removed or changed and they had thus ceased through the changed times to be useful for edification, or when they had turned aside from the purpose and use for which they had initially been instituted and had degenerated into abuse and superstition. But our opponents are delightful reformers who, when they have ex professo instituted a debate about ceremonies of this kind, do not with one word even make mention of these necessary reminders but only seek by their anathemas to burden the consciences, that at least the shadow of such rites, no matter what they are, which seem to have a certain pretext of custom in the Roman Church may be religiously observed, although now there is no true reason why they should be observed, no salutary purpose and use for edification; there are many such in the Canon of the Mass and in the ceremonies of Baptism, in the period of Easter and Pentecost.” Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, Part II, 115.
249 Marquardt observes: “The a-liturgical orientation of our modern Reformed-pietistic environment moreover jumps only too easily to the conclusion that Article X simply consigns everything liturgical to the realm of adiaphora, so that as long as Word and sacraments still come to expression somehow, all outward arrangements are free and ‘indifferent’ That too would be a grave misunderstanding. The term adiaphora applies only to the strictly circumscribed area of external details neither commanded nor forbidden in God’s Word. In no way does FC X abrogate Article XXIV of both the AC and the Apology, in which the Lutheran Church officially confesses its doctrinal stand on the nature of Christian worship—including such particulars as the divinely given relation between preaching and the sacrament (Ap XXIV, 33-40, 71-71, 80, 89), and the ‘right use’ of the historic Christian ‘mass’ (AC XXIV 35 German; Ap XXIV 74- 77, 87). It would be a reductionist fallacy to confuse all such deeply theological issues with mere adiaphora.” Kurt Marquardt, “Article X: The Formula of Concord: Confessions and Ceremonies,” in A Contemporary Look at the Formula of Concord (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978), 265-266.
250 Galatians 5:13 ESV.
- 214 -
For this reason the churches are not to condemn one another because of differences in ceremonies when in Christian freedom one has fewer or more than the other, as long as these churches are otherwise united in teaching and in all the articles of the faith as well as in the proper use of the holy sacraments. As it is said, Dissonantia ieiunii non dissolvit consonantiam fidei; (dissimilarity in fasting shall not destroy the unity of faith).251
And second:
Therefore, we believe, teach, and confess that the community of God in every time and place has the right, power, and authority to change, reduce, or expand such practices according to the circumstances in an orderly and appropriate manner, without frivolity or offense, as seems most useful, beneficial, and best for good order, Christian discipline, evangelical decorum, and the building up of the church.252
Flacius’ summary at the beginning of his great work on the subject of true and false adiaphora still serves us well:
All ceremonies and church practices are in and of themselves as free as they will always be. When, however, coercion, the false illusion that they were worship of God and must be observed, renunciation [of the faith], offense, [or] an opening for godlessness develops, and when, in whatever way it may happen, they do not build up but rather tear down the church of God and mock God, then they are no longer adiaphora.253
Pastor Mark Schroeder, President of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, succinctly stated the crux of the issue in his address to the 2009 convention of the synod, “In other words, when something is determined to be an adiaphoron, that’s not where the discussion ends; that is when discussion among Christians begins.”254
251 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration X.31, 640.
252 KW, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration X.9, 637.
253 Adiaphora and Tyranny, 166.
254 This was part of his report to the 2009 convention in Saginaw, Michigan, the sixtieth biennial convention of the synod. The proceedings are available here: https://connect.wels.net/AOM/cop/2010%20District%20Conventions/Shared%20Documents/2009%20Proceedings.pdf (accessed December 28, 2015). The passage quoted is on page 102.
- 215 -
Conversing, Confessing, Correcting, and Being Corrected as Brothers
Serious damage was done to the unity of Lutheranism in Germany, personal reputations, careers, and parish life by the controversies that developed after Luther’s death and the Leipzig Interim. Some of this was inevitable, but not all of it. There is a great benefit in St. Paul’s counsel, “Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.”255 In Christian freedom we have the freedom to adopt new or different theological language in order to express biblical truth, but in
Christian love we do well to exercise caution in doing so. When there are misunderstandings concerning the meaning of theological terms, that is, regarding how a brother is using them, we do well to explore precisely how those involved are understanding the words under discussion.
We owe it to each other to speak clearly, and when we have spoken carelessly, intemperately, or without due clarity, to receive correction with humility and gratitude. There is no reason to persist in our carelessness, intemperateness, or lack of clarity. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by growing in both our understanding and speech. Our brothers are gifts of God especially when they help us to grow in such a way. Our Lord Jesus deserves the best words and the most precise images and conceptions and we ought to want nothing less, both for His glory and for the benefit of His kingdom through the gospel properly preached and the gospel rightly administered. Let’s not be defensive. Rather, let us with humility strive together to defend the clarity, beauty, and majesty of the Scriptures.
As brothers we also owe it to each other to realize that personalities can get into the way. We do well to take into consideration weaknesses in our own personalities as well as those of our brothers, and to work to overcome them. We do well to heed Luther’s explanation to the Eighth Commandment, to be quick to forgive and quick to ask for forgiveness. Forgiveness is a powerful thing. Jesus knew that. As ambassadors of Christ, we do well to remember that as well.
We have an obligation to speak up for the truth, but we at the same time need not make quick recourse to polemics. We all have a little pope and a little Luther in us. We want to be the final authority and
255 2 Timothy 1:13 ESV.
- 216 - we want to take our stand at Worms. And yet God doesn’t need popes and Lutheranism already had its
Luther. God needs you to use your gifts in the places He places you in the ways that best edify His Church and benefit your neighbor. Your brother is your brother, not an enemy of Christ. He is a redeemed child of
God, not the offspring of the devil. Remember his Baptism when you address him—the same Baptism with which you were baptized. Remember the Spirit who has bound us together as one. When a brother errs, labor to restore him in love, in a way that places no undo obstacle in the way of future reconciliation. Yes, there is a time for polemics, but that time is often not nearly as early in the process as we might assume.
That being said, it is perhaps good here to comment on the difference between public and private doctrine and practice as well as public and private sin. Sometimes I’ve read concerns about pubic discussions regarding public doctrine and practice. Not too long ago I read a pastor, sincerely, I am sure, advise that we should act like the confessors at Augsburg and choose to address almost all things in a private meeting. I didn’t comment, but, I hope you know that is now how Augsburg worked, nor is it logistically possible. The confessors were summoned there to recant, in essence, but insisted upon presenting their faith, offering their heads before the Christian faith could be torn from their hearts. Imperial diets were few and far between, though. Lutherans did discuss doctrine and practice in the meanwhile. Luther certainly did. Flugschriften flew about. These things were fair game, although some discussed them unfairly. We need to strike a balance. We ought not be silenced into being silent about bad doctrine and practice. That is how orthodoxy is lost. Once again, though, we need to remember that we are not Luther, and our brother is not Erasmus or the pope, and the future of the gospel does not rest on our shoulders. There is a middle ground, and it is fraternal, even as it is frank. What does that look like? I could point to a number of Reformation pamphlets, but our time is limited. Ultimately, I trust that you, as my brothers, can feel it out and strive toward it.
Additionally, as we deal with each other, it is important to understand our brother’s position correctly, and to strive to understand what has led him to hold it—what is he trying, often rightly, to preserve, although perhaps in the wrong way or with the wrong words? A surprising number of false teachings arise from a desire to protect some correct teaching. This was true even of many of the ancient heresies. Your brother did not necessarily set out to deny the truth of God when he spoke as he did. What is - 217 - he trying to defend? What is his fear or concern? We can work together with great profit in order to address that fear and, in the process, we might even gain a better understanding for the biblical teaching the brother desires to defend and improve our own way of speaking about or understanding it. Thoughts do not spring from a vacuum. Endeavoring to discover why your brother is thinking what he is thinking is time well-spent and love well-shown. The major players in the “culture of controversy,” largely because they shared a common Wittenberg education, often assumed that they all shared common presuppositions and theological emphases. They did not, and they didn’t even think to consider the possibility that they operated with different starting points. We can easily make the same mistake. We share a common education, but that does not ensure that we always share and operate with the same presuppositions and emphases in our theological and ministerial labor. Some observations about the culture of conflict from Robert Kolb are perhaps pertinent for us today. Kolb writes:
Most participants in the synergistic controversies had known each other from the time of their university studies, and they naturally presumed that their colleagues had understood their instructors just as they themselves had. Thus, these disputes were battles in a civil war, a Bruderkrieg; the participants had gotten acquainted as they listened to Luther and Melanchthon lecture at the Leucorea. Flacius, Gallus, Irenaeus, Pfeffinger, Strigel, Wigand, Marbach, Flinsbach, Spangenberg, and Chytraeus had studied in Wittenberg at roughly the same time, in the early 1540s; Selnecker, Kirchner, Chemnitz, Heshusius a decade later.256
I would add to this that both Melanchthon and Amsdorf had been dear friends of Luther and fellow members of the intimate Wittenberg circle that made reform possible. Brothers, there is much in this for us to consider.
I pray the Lord Christ keeps us ever orthodox and true to His Word. If at all possible, I also pray that He ever keep us from unnecessary Bruderkrieg. Nothing is more bitter than a family feud, and many a family feud would end better if all involved remembered that they are family. How much more ought this be the case when we are family, not only by blood, but by Baptism—by blood, I suppose you could say, not that flows through our veins, but that flowed through the veins of God Himself. None of this is to say that we should compromise doctrine for a good ole Kumbaya. It simply means, when we must have it out, let’s have it out as
God would have us.
256 Kolb, Bound Choice, 277.
- 218 -
Scripture, not as It Seems to You, but as It Is for You
Scripture says things, and it says them as God said them in Genesis 1, with a creative, formative purpose and power. Scripture is not ours to play with; no, we are Scripture’s. Words mean things. The Word means things. He came, a real person, flesh and blood, was crucified, died, and was buried. Jesus is not an idea. He is not what we conceive of Him. He was conceived and born. He is, and so is His Word. His Word is bond. His promises cannot be thwarted, nuanced, or undone. We are captive to them. They take hold of us, not we them. And only disaster could and would result if it were not so. Through the Scriptures God makes chosen those He chose before the creation of the world. He takes the reins. He calms the sea. He does to us just what His Word says. Jesus comes to us as real as on Christmas, wrapped in the pages of our Bible and, specially, in the words of our preacher.
We are tempted in our day to speak of our interpretations of things. In this way, though, communication becomes both insincere and meaningless. Scripture is not the great American novel. We do not assign meaning to it. It has meaning. What matters is not what it means to us, but what it means for us.
Scripture alone is the foundation and source of the Church’s teaching and Scripture alone accomplishes what we cannot, for the Word acts through His Word. God might be hidden apart from His revelation, but in His revelation He is not hidden at all. He is there. The Scriptures do not need clarity, they are clear in and of themselves. Its words are not too simple to convey God’s message. Rather, God’s message is plain—and most beautiful—in the simple words of Scripture. While our old Adam loves to turn the issue on its head, the question isn’t whether or not the Scriptures are clear, for they are, but rather whether the interpreter is.257
The Scriptures are not a tool. We don’t take them up and do as we see fit. If anyone or anything is a tool, we are. The Scriptures lay hold of us. Yes, the Scriptures often come to us by the feet, in the hands, and through the mouths of another, but that another is a tool also. God is at work, through His Word, giving what
257 Gerhard O. Forde, The Captivation of the Will: Luther vs. Erasmus on Freedom and Bondage (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 27.
- 219 -
His Word has done, doing what His Word promises and died and rose to deliver. We do ourselves and God a disservice when we forget that. God bought us with His Word. God placed His Word on us and buried us in it in Baptism. He feeds us with it in Holy Communion. He absolves us with it. God words His Word to us every day and it is by that Word alone that we live. The Word became Man and dwelt among us and by His
Word He is with us still, delivering the benefits of His cross, claiming lame horses for His own—horses no one else in their right mind would claim. And so, may we, with the earliest Lutherans and with all believers of all time, confess what Isaiah first declared and Peter echoed, not by compulsion, but willingly, because
God’s election, made our election through the gospel—has forced us to do so, against our will, but now most gladly in accord with it, torn as we are as sinner-saints. “The word of the Lord remains forever.”258 What is this word? “This word is the good news that was preached to you.”259 What will it do? “It shall not return to me empty.”260
258 Isaiah 40:8 ESV; 1 Peter 1:25 ESV.
259 1 Peter 1:25 ESV.
260 Isaiah 55:11 ESV.
- 220 -
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary Sources
von Amsdorff, Nicolaus. Auff Osianders Bekentnis ein Unterricht und zeugnis / Das sie Gerechtigkeit der menscheit Christi / darinnen sie entpfangen und geboren ist / allen Gleubigen Sündern geschanckt und zugerechent wird / und für ihr Person hie auff Erden nimmermehr Gerecht und heilig warden. Magdeburg: Rödinger, 1552. von Amsdorff, Nicolaus. Epistolae Nicolai Amsdorfii et Martini Lutheri de Erasmo Roterodamo. Wittenberg, 1534. von Amsdorff, Nicolaus. Ein kurtzer unterricht auff D. Georgen Maiors Antwort / das er nit unschüldig sey / wie er sich tragice rhümet. Basel, 1552.
Bekenntnis Unterricht und vermanung der Pfarrhern und Prediger der Christlichen Kirchen zu Magdeburgk. Magdeburg: Michel Lotther, 1550.
Catechism of the Catholic Church. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1994.
Chemnitz, Martin. Examination of the Council of Trent. Translated by Fred Kramer. Vol. 2. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978.
Confessio et Apologia Pastorum & reliquorum ministrorum Ecclesiae Magdeburgensis. Magdeburg: Michaelem Lottherum, 1550.
Desiderius Erasmus. In Praise of Folly. Translated by Betty Radice. London: Penguin Books, 1994.
The English Standard Version Bible. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Flacius Illyricus, Matthias. Adiaphora and Tyranny. Translated by Herbert C. Kuske and Wade R. Johnston. Saginaw, Michigan: Magdeburg Press, 2011.
Flacius Illyricus, Matthias. Bericht M. Fla. Jllyrici, Von etlichen Artikeln der Christlichen Lehr, und von seinem Leben, und enlich auch von den Adiaphorischen Handlungen, wider die falschen Geticht der Adiaphoristen. Jena: Thomas Rebart, 1559.
______. Breves Summae Religionis Iesu Christi, & Antichristi. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1550.
______. Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, seu de Sermone Sacrarum literarum. Basileae: Ioannes Oporinus & Eusebius Episcopius, 1567.
- 221 -
______. Clavis Scripturae, seu de Sermone Sacrarum Literarum, plurimas generales Regulas continens. Altera Pars. Basel, 1567.
______. Ein buch, von waren und falschen Mitteldingen, Darin fast der gantze handel von Mitteldingen erkleret wird, widder die schedliche Rotte der Adiaphoristen. Item ein brieff des ehrwirdigen Herrn D. Joannis Epini superintendenten zu Hamburg, auch von diesem handel an Illyricum geschrieben. Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1550.
______. Eine Christliche vermanung zur bestendigkeit, inn der waren reinen Religion Jhesu Christi, unnd inn der Augsburgischen bekentnis. Geschrieben an die Meissnische Kirche, unnd andere, so das lauttere Evangelium Jhesu Christi erkant haben. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1550.
______. Entschuldigung Matthiae Flacij Illyrici, geschrieben an die Universitet zu Wittemberg der Mittelding halben. Item sein brief an Philip. Melanthonem sampt etlichen andern schrifften dieselbige sach belangend. Verdeudscht. Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1549.
______. Epistola S. Hulrici episcopi Augustani, circiter ante sexcentos et 50 annos, ad Pontificem Nicolaum primum, pro fefensone coniugii Sacerdotum, scripta, ex qua apparet, quam impudenter Papistae S. Patres jactent, cum et vita et doctrina cum S. Patribus plane ex Diametra pungent. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1549
______. Etliche Contradictiones…des Stenckfeldts daraus sein Geist leichtlich kan geprüfet warden. Nürmnerg, 1556.
______. Ein geistlicher trost dieser betrübten Magdeburigschen Kerchen Christi, das sie diese Verfolgung umb Gottes worts, und keiner andern ursach halben, leidet. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1551.
______. Qvod hoc tempore nulla penitus mutatio in religion sit in gratiam impiorum facienda. Contra quoddam scriptum incerti autoris [Melanchton] in quo suadetur mutatio piarum caeremoniarum in Papisticas per Hemannum Primatem. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1549.
______. Eine schöne Historia von der standfaftigkeit des heiligen mans Basilij, beschrieben in der Tripartita Historia, und ander schöne Exampel mehr itzt zu dieser zeit sehr tröstlich und nützlich zu lesen. Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1549.
______. Der Theologen bedencken, odder (wie es durch die ihren inn offentlichem Drück genennet wirdt) Beschluss des Landtages zu Leiptzig, so im December des 48. Jars, von wegen des Auspurgischen [sic] Interims gehalten ist. Welchs bedencken odder beschluss wir, so da widder geschrieben, das Leiptzigsche Interim gennet haben. Mit einer Vorrede und Scholien, was und warumb jedes stück bisher fur unchristlich darin gestraffet ist. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1550.
______. Ein vermanung zur bestendigkeit, in bekentnis der warheit, Creutz, und Gebett, in dieser betrübten zeit sehr nützlich und tröstlich. Magdeburg: Michael Lotter, 1549.
- 222 -
______. Vermanung Matth. Flacii Illyrici zur gedult und glauben zu Gott, im Creutz dieser verfolgung Geschrieben an die Kirche Christi zu Magdeburg. Magdeburg: Christian Rödinger, 1551.
______. Von fürnemlichem stücke / punct / order artikel der Schwenkfeldischen schwermerey. Magdeburg, 1553.
Kolb, Robert and James A. Nestingen, eds. Sources and Contexts of the Book of Concord. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001.
Kolb, Robert and Timothy J. Wengert, eds. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000.
Luther, Martin. The Bondage of the Will. Edited by J.J. Packer and O.R. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Revell, 1957.
______. Luthers Works, American Edition. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehman. 55 vols. Philadelphia: Fortress Press and St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1955- 1986.
Pfeffinger, Johannes. De Libertate Voluntatis Humanae Quaestiones Quinque. Leipzig: Gerorg Hantzsch, 1555.
Rupp, E. Gordon and Philip S. Watson, eds. Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969.
Secondary Sources
Arand, Charles P., Robert Kolb, and James A. Nestingen. The Lutheran Confessions: History and Theology of the Book of Concord. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2011.
Bainton, Roland. Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther. Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1950.
Bente, F. Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, 2nd Ed. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005.
Armand Boehme. “‘But We’ve Always Done It That Way’: Wittenberg and Canterbury on Tradition.” Logia: A Journal of Lutheran Theology XII, nr. 4 (Reformation 2003): 11-17.
Brecht, Martin. Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 1483-1521. Translated by James L. Schaaf. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.
Brecht, Martin. Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation, 1521-1532. Translated by James L. Schaaf. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994.
- 223 -
Brecht, Martin. Martin Luther: The Preservation of the Church, 1532-1546. Translated by James L. Schaaf. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.
Christman, Robert J. Doctrinal Controversy and Lay Religiosity in Late Reformation Germany. The Case of Mansfeld [Studies in Medieval and Reformation Traditions]. Leiden: Brill, 2012.
______. “‘Wir sindt nichts den eytel sunde’: The Impact of Flacius’ Theology of Original Sin on the German Territory of Mansfield.” In Matija Vlačić Ilirik [III], 294-315. Labin: Grad Labin, 2012.
Deutschlander, Daniel M. Grace Abounds: The Splendor of Christian Doctrine. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2015,
______. The Narrow Lutheran Middle: Following the Scriptural Road. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2011.
______. The Theology of the Cross: Reflections on His Cross and Ours. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2008.
Dingel, Irene, ed. Der Adiaphoristische Streit (1548-1560). [Controversia et Confessio. Theologische Kontroversen 1548-1577/1580: Kritische Auswahledition. Vol. 2]. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010.
______. “Bekenntnis und Geschichte: Funktion und Entwicklung des reformatischen Bekenntnisses im 16. Jahrhundert.” In Dona Melanchthoniana: Festgabe für Heinz Scheible zum 70. Geburtstag, edited by Johanna Loehr, 61-81. Stuttgart: Evangelische Friedrich Frommann Verlag, 2001.
______. Concordia controversa: Die öffentlichen Diskussionen um das lutherische Konkordienwerk am Ende des 16. Jahrhunderts. Göttingen: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1996.
______. “The Culture of Conflict in the Controversies Leading to the Formula of Concord (1548-1560).” In Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550-1675, edited by Robert Kolb, 15- 64. Leiden: Brill, 2008.
______. “Flacius als Schüler Luthers und Melanchthons.” In Vestigia Pietatis. Studien zur Geschichte der Frömmigkeit in Thüringen und Sachsen, edited by Gerhard Graf, Hans-Peter Hasse, and Ernst Koch, 77-93. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2000.
______, ed. Reaktionen auf das Augsburger Interim: Der Interimistische Streit (1548-1549). [Controversia et Confessio. Theologische Kontroversen 1548-1577/1580: Kritische Auswahledition. Vol. 2]. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co., 2010.
Dingel, Irene and Günther Wartenberg, eds. Politik und Bekenntnis: Die Reaktionen auf das Interim von 1548. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2006.
Englebert, Omer. The Lives of the Saints. Translated by Christopher and Anne Fremantle. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1994.
- 224 -
Forde, Gerhard O. On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation, 1518. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997.
______. The Captivation of the Will: Luther vs. Erasmus on Freedom and Bondage. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005.
Giertz, Bo. The Hammer of God. Translated by Clifford Ansgar Nelson and Hans Andrae. Minneapolis: Augsburg Books, 2005.
Haug-Moritz, Gabriele. Der Schmalkaldische Bund, 1530-1541/42. Leinfelden-Echterdingen: DRW-Verlag Weinbrenner GmbH & Co., 2002.
Hendrix, Scott H. Martin Luther: Visionary Reformer. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015.
Ilić, Luka. “‘Der Heilige Man und thewre held’: Flacius’ View of Luther.” In Matija Vlačić Ilirik [III], 294- 315. Labin: Grad Labin, 2012.
______. Theologian of Sin and Grace: The Process of Radicalization in the Theology of Matthias Flacius Illyricus. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014.
Thomas Kaufmann, Das Ende der Reformation (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003)
Kaufmann, Thomas. Das Ende der Reformation. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
______. Konfession und Kultur. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006.
______. “Matthias Flacius Illyricus. Lutherischer Theologe und Magdeburer Publizist.” In Mitteldeutsche Lebensbilder: Menschen im Zeitalter der Reformation, edited by Werner Freitag, 177-200. Köln: Böhlau Verlag, 2004.
______. “‘Our Lord God’s Chancery’ in Magdeburg and Its Fight against the Interim.” Church History 73, no. 3 (September 2004): 566-582.
Kittelson, James M. Luther the Reformer: The Story of the Man and His Career. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1986.
Klann, R. “Article I. Original Sin.” In A Contemporary Look at the Formula of Concord, edited by Wilbert Rosin and Robert Preus, 103-121. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978.
Koelpin, A.J. “Luther’s Theology of the Cross.” Paper presented at Dr. Martin Luther College, New Ulm, MN. 1981. In Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Essay File, http://www.wlsessays .net/bitstream/handle/123456789/2604/Luther%27s%20Theology%20of%20the%20Cross.pdf?seque nce=1&isAllowed=y (accessed December 21, 2015).
Kolb, Robert. Bound Choice, Election, and Wittenberg Theological Method. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005. - 225 -
______, ed. Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550-1675. Leiden: Brill, 2008.
______. Martin Luther as Prophet, Teacher, and Hero: Images of the Reformer, 1520-1620. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.
______. Martin Luther: Confessor of the Faith. [Christian Theology in Context]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Kolb, Robert, Irene Dingel, and L’umbomír, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).
Krauth, Charles P. The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology. Philadelphia: United Lutheran Publication House, 1871.
Lindberg, Carter. The European Reformations. 2nd Ed. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell, 2010.
______, ed. The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Modern Period. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002.
MacCulloch, Diarmaid. The Reformation: A History. New York: Penguin Books, 2005.
Marquardt, Kurt. “Article X. Confession and Ceremonies.” In A Contemporary Look at the Formula of Concord, edited by Wilbert Rosin and Robert D. Preus, 260-270. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978.
_____. “‘Church Growth’ as Mission Paradigm: A Confessional Lutheran Assessment.” In Church and Ministry Today: Three Confessional Lutheran Essays, edited by_____, page range. St. Louis: Luther Academy, 2001.
Meyer, John. Studies in the Augsburg Confession. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1995.
Moritz, Anja. Interim und Apokalypse. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009.
Nelson, Clifford E. The Lutherans in North America. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.
Nestingen, James A. Martin Luther: A Life. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by Marion Faber. Oxford: Oxford World’s Classics, 2008.
______. The Will to Power. Translated by Walter Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale. New York: Vintage Books, 1967.
Oberman, Heiko A. Luther: Man between God and the Devil. New York: Image Books, 1992. - 226 -
Olson, Oliver K. Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2002.
______. “Matthias Flacius (1520-1575).” In The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to the Early Modern Period, edited by Carter Lindberg, 83-93. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002.
______. Reclaiming the Lutheran Liturgical Heritage. Minneapolis: Bronze Bow Publishing, 2007.
______. “Theology of Revolution: Magdeburg, 1550-1551.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 3, no. 1 (April 1972): 56-79.
Paulson, Steven D. Lutheran Theology. New York: T&T Clark International, 2011.
______. “A Royal Ass.” Paper presented at Lutheran Free Conference, Martin Luther College, New Ulm, MN. November 6-7, 2013.
______. “What Is Essential in Lutheran Worship.” Word & World 26, nr. 1 (Spring 2006): 149- 161.
Pettegree, Andrew. Brand Luther. New York: Penguin Press, 2015.
Preger, Wilhelm. Matthias Flacius Illyricus und seine Zeit. 2 vols. Erlangen: T. Bläsing, 1859- 1861.
Preus, Robert D., ed. A Contemporary Look at the Formula of Concord. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978.
Rein, Nathan. The Chancery of God: Protestant Print, Polemic and Propaganda against the Empire, Magdeburg 1546-1551. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate, 2008.
______. “Faith and Empire: Conflicting Visions of Religion in a Late Reformation Controversy—The Augsburg Interim and Its Opponents, 1548-1550.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 71, no. 1 (March 2003): 45-74.
Sasse, Hermann. We Confess Anthology. Translated by Norman Nagel. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999.
Schalk, Carl F. “Hymnody and the Proclamation of the Gospel.” In Not Unto Us: A Celebration of the Ministry of Kurt J. Eggert, edited by William H. Braun and Victor H. Prange, 129-139. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2001.
Schorn-Schütte, Luise, ed. Das Interim 1548/50. Heidelberg: Verein für Reformationsgeschichte, 2005.
Skinner, Quentin. The Age of Reformation. Vol. 2 of The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978.
- 227 -
Spitz, Lewis W. and Wenzel Lohff. Discord, Dialogue, and Concord: Studies in the Lutheran Reformation’s Formula of Concord. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977.
Steinmetz, David C. Luther in Context. 2nd Ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
______, Reformers in the Wings: From Geiler von Kaysersberg to Theodore Beza. 2nd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Schwiebert, E. G. Luther and His Times: The Reformation from a New Perspective. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950.
Tiefel, James P. “The Formation and Flow of Worship Attitudes in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod” In Not Unto Us: A Celebration of the Ministry of Kurt J. Eggert, edited by William H. Braun and Victor H. Prange, 141-165. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2001.
Walther, C.F.W. Law and Gospel: How to Read and Apply the Bible. Translated by Christian C. Tiews. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2010.
Wentz, Abdel Ross. A Basic History of Lutheranism in America. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1955.
Whitford, David M. Tyranny and Resistance: The Magdeburg Confession and the Lutheran Tradition. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2001.
- 228 -