The reality is that the somewhat small diocese of Syracuse is a great deal larger than the districts of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod and some ten times larger than a few of our districts. We have been told over and over again how difficult or impossible it would be for our de facto bishops (District Presidents) to simultaneously serve as parish pastors. Of course, we have different duties and it might be near impossible for them to serve as such without help. But the point is that the one doing ecclesiastical supervision of doctrine and practice best serves by also doing what he supervises and practices regularly. We had it in the past and a couple of places still do but it is worth looking at this whole thing again. Do we wish our DPs to be administrators or pastors and how is this best expressed in the life of our church?
I do not have much today but I thought this was worth passing on. If Rome can do it, perhaps we can do it as well. The only question remaining is if we want to do it or have the stomach to do it. In any case, it could not hurt to have our DPs closer to an altar and pulpit. Obviously, I do not make the rules but this is one we ought to consider. Sadly, we have defined the office more by what they are not than by what they are. In so doing, we have removed from their duties those things that effectively identify them as pastors. The reality is that the shepherd's staff is the same from parish to diocese (district) and only the number of sheep might be different. Is the bishop a stripped down pastor with more administrative duties or a beefed up pastor with the same? That is the question.
Whether or not Rome's papist structure allows it to teach its false doctrine well has nothing to do with whether or not the Missouri Synod's congregational structure should be changed to teach its confessional doctrine better.
ReplyDeleteCarl has a point, an important one. I would like to add that in the case of the LCMS, there is no need to emulate the Catholic Church’s administrative organization. The Episcopal and Anglican churches, for example, also established a hierarchy of rank with numerous bureaucratic departments and administrators. On a practical level, it is true that some clergy must be involved in the management of missions, resources, education, seminary functions, and church building, etc. Even local pastors, with the help of lay members, retain organizational and management functions at the local church, in addition to pastoral duties. But Carl is right about false doctrines flowing out of the Catholic “Papist structure.” The Roman church has considerable wealth and property to manage, media expenses, television stations, numerous diocese needs, and of course, it is structured to meet these needs. But we must ask ourselves, is Christ pleased with these priorities? Soli Deo Gloria
ReplyDeleteLCMS District Presidents are NOT ipso facto "de facto bishops." A couple of DPs are also currently called pastors (bishops) to local congregations.
ReplyDeleteI've had DPs that I wouldn't have trusted to teach anything from a pulpit under my care. I also had a DP I trusted to preach at my son's funeral.
ReplyDeleteKeeping DPs associated with the parish can be good for their relationships with the pastors and congregations in their districts, but in some cases it could be destructive to the parish they'd be serving.
Bishop is of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions that every LCMS Pastor and Congregation has vowed unto. It is a theological poverty the LCMS does not have Bishops in accord with: Scripture; the historical apostolic Church; the historical Lutheran Church; and our Confessions. The Office of District President is of none of those things but an invention of man for good order. The DP is not a Divinely Called Office, as for example, one can be voted out of it; also most are conditional and temporary of which it cannot be a Divine Call.
ReplyDeleteTo the contrary, there is no such alleged "theological poverty". The LCMS does have bishops in accord with: Scripture; the historical apostolic Church; the historical Lutheran Church; and our Confessions. Such LCMS bishops are the divinely called pastors of LCMS congregations.
ReplyDeleteThe LCMS is not itself the "Church," but it is a humanly-made structure made up of congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, ordained pastors, and other commissioned ministers. According to the synod's constitution and bylaws, the synod's executives and administrators have responsibilities that are not congruent or equivalent to those of episcopal bishops.
The LCMS Convention and the Commission on Constitutional Matters have ruled several times in the past that the synod and district presidents are not bishops nor are they to have an official title of bishop.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSupervision of doctrine and practice is The universally common duty of the bishop. If that’s the job, then whether you call them bishops or not, District presidents are doing a bishops job. I’m not sure that what you call them in par is what is the concern of the CCM, but the acknowledgment of the appropriate titles assigned to those who do the function of a bishop in the LCMS which is defined by constitution and by law. For what it’s worth, we call Pastors, senior, executive, visitation, and a host of other titles that are also not in the constitution and bylaws of the Synod. Mr Strickert doesn’t seem to be as bothered by those terms.
ReplyDelete