tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post6077637108945727329..comments2024-03-27T15:47:46.091-05:00Comments on Pastoral Meanderings: What is the business of the Church?Pastor Petershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-12979768698454563392011-11-26T11:14:21.969-06:002011-11-26T11:14:21.969-06:00"I am not sure what it would be called to rem...<i>"I am not sure what it would be called to remove a congregation or Pastor from the Synod (morals clause excluded)"</i><br /> <br />Again, it simply would be called "removal from membership." Examples might include a pastor who accepted a call to a non-LCMS church, or resigned from his call to go into a secular occupation; a synodical congregation could be removed from membership for calling a non-LCMS pastor, or for not removing a pastor who was not a synodical member or just because they requested removal from membership without stating a reason at all. In none of these cases does removal from synodical membership include excommunication (with its Mt. 18:17 retention of sin) from the Church. In itself to leave the Missouri Synod is not a sin.<br /><br /><i>"... but if it were for cause of doctrine or practice, I would think that would be as close to excommunication as you could come."</i><br /><br />The Synod is not a church, nor is the SP or DP, by his elected office, a called pastor of the Synod or of other pastors. Therefore the office of SP or DP does not have the authority to impose excommunication. Removal of a person from synodical membership would be "close" if the unrepentant person were also excommunicated by his church around the same time.<br /><br />Despite some Loehist agitation within the Missouri Synod, the official understanding of excommunication within Missouri Synod churches includes Walther's Thesis IX on the Ministry: "... but the preacher has no dominion in the church; he has not, therefore, the right of... imposing and executing excommunication alone, without the previous judgment of the entire congregation [<i>Gemeinde</i>]."Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-37042511633296831992011-11-25T16:18:13.603-06:002011-11-25T16:18:13.603-06:00Actually, I am not sure that removal of a congrega...Actually, I am not sure that removal of a congregation or Pastor from Synod would be called excommunication but my concern was not vocabulary. I am not sure what it would be called to remove a congregation or Pastor from the Synod (morals clause excluded) but if it were for cause of doctrine or practice, I would think that would be as close to excommunication as you could come. Exaggeration? Maybe. But for a point.Pastor Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-78011884557919815132011-11-25T10:00:20.896-06:002011-11-25T10:00:20.896-06:00On November 25, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Mr. Anonymous tho...On November 25, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Mr. Anonymous thought <i>"the good pastor was talking about people removed for cause, namely for not being Lutheran in doctrine and practice."</i> <br /><br />Actually, on November 23, at 8:14 AM Pastor Peters stated that removal from membership constituted excommunication "[w]hatever the cause." <br /><br />As I explained on November 24, 2011, at 10:39 AM, removal from membership at the synodical level does not constitute excommunication. And in its 1985 report, "<a href="www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=420" rel="nofollow">Church Discipline in the Christian Congregation</a>," the CTCR pointed out that removal from membership at the congregational level does not necessarily (i.e., whatever the cause) involve excommunication, which would include the retention of sins.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-39636929017976984122011-11-25T08:15:30.998-06:002011-11-25T08:15:30.998-06:00Thought the good pastor was talking about people r...Thought the good pastor was talking about people removed for cause, namely for not being Lutheran in doctrine and practice. This is not about a gentlemanly disagreement or they would be able to stay in the LC-MS without a hitch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-89733066603710249272011-11-24T10:39:04.773-06:002011-11-24T10:39:04.773-06:00"Removal from membership is excommunication -...<i>"Removal from membership is excommunication -- removal from membership in the congregation and removal from membership in Synod. Whatever the cause, removal from membership constitutes excommunication on either level. I am clueless to know what else removal from membership would be called?"</i><br /><br />If it's through synodical bylaws, it's called "removal from synodical membership"; if it's through the Office of the Keys, it's called "excommunication."<br /><br />Church discipline, which includes excommunication, is part of the Office of the Keys. The LCMS Short Explanation to Luther's <i>Small Catechism</i> states: "What is the Office of the Keys? It is the peculiar church power which Christ has given to His Church on earth to forgive the sins of penitent sinners, but to retain the sins of the impenitent as long as they do not repent."<br /><br />Who has the Office of the Keys? In his Thesis VI.A on the Ministry, which is the official position of the Missouri Synod, C.F.W. Walther states: "The ministry of the Word [<i>Predigtamt</i>] is conferred [<i>übertragen</i>] by God through the congregations as the possessor of all ecclesiastical power, or the power of the keys, by means of its call, which God Himself has prescribed." <br /><br />Removal of a member from synodical membership and excommunication by the church, which is a member of the synod, may be for the same unrepentant offense by that member, and the former may precede the latter or vice versa. But they are distinct actions by separate organizations exercising their separate authorities, the former being human authority, the latter authority given by God.<br /><br />The distinction is that the removal from synodical membership, in itself, does not entail the retention of sins; excommunication does.<br /><br />Sometimes disregard for the Missouri Synod's understanding of church and ministry and the Synod's polity contributes to confusion about the distinction between "Church" and "Synod."<br /> <br />Finally, regarding excommunication and removal from synod or church membership, in its November,1985, Report, "Church Discipline in the Christian Congregation," the CTCR notes (pp. 21-22):<br /><br /><i>Depending on the circumstances, one may forfeit professional status and even membership in the congregation and church body without being subject to the congregational verdict of "heathen man and a publican" (Matt. 18:17 KJV).</i>Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-63929688869142121542011-11-23T21:58:37.106-06:002011-11-23T21:58:37.106-06:00Whoever You Are, the reference was to the "li...Whoever You Are, the reference was to the "liturgical movement". That is not the RCC, nor is a reference to the RCC a reference to any particular member or members. Oy. Go read some Table Talk.Terry Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17122266461403246084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-5075196928181313182011-11-23T08:32:31.805-06:002011-11-23T08:32:31.805-06:00Bowel movements?
We may have our theological diff...Bowel movements?<br /><br />We may have our theological differences with Catholics but there are still Christians among them and to use this kind of gutter language hardly glorifies Christ.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-50785115916795194322011-11-23T08:14:34.457-06:002011-11-23T08:14:34.457-06:00Forgot the rest of my comment...
Removal from mem...Forgot the rest of my comment...<br /><br />Removal from membership is excommunication -- removal from membership in the congregation and removal from membership in Synod. Whatever the cause, removal from membership constitutes excommunication on either level. I am clueless to know what else removal from membership would be called?Pastor Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-39242702614522869772011-11-23T07:50:30.117-06:002011-11-23T07:50:30.117-06:00"Carl" - the only reason I know who you ..."Carl" - the only reason I know who you are is from your posts and the responsive comments from other posters on OTHER blogs and forums... Apart from this I have no knowledge of who any of the anonymii are -- here or elsewhere. I do not find the anonymous commenting a problem unless or until it becomes one. So far, I have had to remove only a dozen or so comments in the time I have had this blog.Pastor Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-27931941923397415102011-11-23T00:50:42.595-06:002011-11-23T00:50:42.595-06:00Let us be shocked then, Carl! What's good for...Let us be shocked then, Carl! What's good for the goose is good for the gander!Terry Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17122266461403246084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-57505716469013042182011-11-22T16:03:06.663-06:002011-11-22T16:03:06.663-06:00Judas H. "Unknown for centuries" is not...Judas H. "Unknown for centuries" is not "never known". Didn't say that. It was among early practice, was abandoned for what was used for centuries, until the bowel, er, liturgical movement decided to resurrect it in the last century since we're all jumping past the Reformation and Trent to one big happy church.<br /><br />It's adopting the revived use by the RCC I meant. Vatican II For Lutherans.Terry Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17122266461403246084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-71113173388974276022011-11-22T15:58:23.746-06:002011-11-22T15:58:23.746-06:00Anonymous writes: "Carl Vehse is a PSEUDONYM?...Anonymous writes: <i>"Carl Vehse is a PSEUDONYM??<br />I'm shocked</i><br /><br />Perhaps Rev. Peters will refer by name to other (anonymous or "Lutheran pastor") posters. That might really be shocking!Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-57495212215389277312011-11-22T15:51:13.262-06:002011-11-22T15:51:13.262-06:00Rev. Peters asked: "If it [removal from synod...Rev. Peters asked: <i>"If it</i> [removal from synodical membership] <i>were to happen on the parish level, would that not be what we call excommunication?</i><br /><br />Are you talking about a church removing the synodical membership of its pastor, or a pastor removing the synodical membership of his church? I don't think that either can do that unless it is specified in the church constitution.<br /><br /><i>So what does it mean when the Synod says to a Pastor or parish you must leave?"</i><br /><br />Are you referring to a DRP decision on a pastor or church, or are you referring to someone in the Synod saying off-the-record "you must leave"?Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-66525134478500348992011-11-22T15:32:05.240-06:002011-11-22T15:32:05.240-06:00Dr. Strickert? Carl Vehse is a PSEUDONYM??
I'...Dr. Strickert? Carl Vehse is a PSEUDONYM??<br /><br />I'm shocked :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-87191151341836925682011-11-22T15:29:30.593-06:002011-11-22T15:29:30.593-06:00"Anyway, all this because we are more defined..."Anyway, all this because we are more defined by programs of man made design than by the Divine Service of Christ and His gifts -- well, I am happy for the discussion!"<br /><br />To which I add a hearty Amen!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-88945868072124844572011-11-22T15:26:45.691-06:002011-11-22T15:26:45.691-06:00Mr. Anonymous pleads: "In which year hundred ...Mr. Anonymous pleads: <i>"In which year hundred may I expect it</i> [stablecleaning] <i>to begin?"</i><br /><br />Check with the <a href="http://www.lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=704" rel="nofollow">head stablecleaner</a>. Contact info is at the bottom of the webpage. He will appreciate your support.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-20344368745245995692011-11-22T15:23:54.564-06:002011-11-22T15:23:54.564-06:00My, my, quite the hullabaloo... I leave to care fo...My, my, quite the hullabaloo... I leave to care for the flock and what a number of comments!<br /><br />Dr. Strickert says Removal from synodical membership does NOT amount to excommunication. If it were to happen on the parish level, would that not be what we call excommunication? So what does it mean when the Synod says to a Pastor or parish you must leave?<br /><br />Independence surrendered to abide by the rules of the Synod means that you are no longer independent in the same way. Should you choose to take up your independence again and violate the rules of our "walking together" you would also receive your walking papers, no?<br /><br />Anyway, all this because we are more defined by programs of man made design than by the Divine Service of Christ and His gifts -- well, I am happy for the discussion!Pastor Petershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-1722208447992747042011-11-22T15:16:50.442-06:002011-11-22T15:16:50.442-06:00Second, as for the Willow Creek droppings in the M...Second, as for the Willow Creek droppings in the Missouri Synod, see my earlier comment about stablecleaning.<br /><br />In which year hundred may I expect it to begin?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-64941174612201169122011-11-22T15:13:56.728-06:002011-11-22T15:13:56.728-06:00Communion in a manner unknown in the church, Luthe...Communion in a manner unknown in the church, Lutheran or Catholic, for centuries until resurrected by 1960s Rome. <br /><br />Oh, I see, it is unacceptable to offer Communion in the hand because it wasn't "done" in the early centuries (even though it was -- Communion on the tongue came much later) but not having weekly Communion is fine even though THAT wasn't the practice of the early church.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-54926590123505738712011-11-22T15:06:34.967-06:002011-11-22T15:06:34.967-06:00Mr. Anonymous: "So do you think Luther would ...Mr. Anonymous: <i>"So do you think Luther would have like the praise culture of Willow Creek?"</i><br /><br />First, may I recommend the following article, "<a href="http://westallen.typepad.com/idealawg/2011/10/so-you-want-to-know-what-george-gopen.html" rel="nofollow">So do you want to know what George Gopen, prof of English and legal writing, thinks about the word "so"?</a>"<br /><br />Second, as for the Willow Creek droppings in the Missouri Synod, see my earlier comment about stablecleaning.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-9781802692462311012011-11-22T14:53:55.306-06:002011-11-22T14:53:55.306-06:00So do you think Luther would have like the praise ...So do you think Luther would have like the praise culture of Willow Creek?<br /><br />No Communion, no mass. Period. There was no such thing in the early centuries.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-3502443658940583352011-11-22T14:49:40.108-06:002011-11-22T14:49:40.108-06:00Mr. Anonymous pontificates with the generalization...Mr. Anonymous pontificates with the generalization: <i>Seems to me that the term "mass" cannot be uniformly applied to much of what passes for Lutheran worship today.</i><br /><br />Although it was noted earlier that some synodical stablecleaning was in order, it doesn't appear that much Lutheran worship today in Missouri Synod churches is at the level of Martin Luther's description in the Smalcald Articles (Part II, Art. II): "In addition to all this, this dragon's tail, the Mass, has begotten a numerous vermin-brood of manifold idolatries."<br /><br />Any specific examples to the contrary (with substantiation) would be appreciated, since such evidence will be passed on to the appropriate DP... and the ACELC.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-12829421788217258442011-11-22T14:37:04.054-06:002011-11-22T14:37:04.054-06:00Fantastic post, Pastor Peters! I wish you were te...Fantastic post, Pastor Peters! I wish you were teaching in a Lutheran Seminary where you would be able to influence a new generation of Lutheran pastors. You have some great insights.BrotherBorisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-5382636208515676902011-11-22T14:36:00.124-06:002011-11-22T14:36:00.124-06:00Using an imaginative pseudonym, Anonymous asked: &...Using an imaginative pseudonym, Anonymous asked: <i>"Would Luther even recognize this setup?"</i><br /><br />The polity of the Missouri Synod is not the combined church/state polity Luther had in his day. The congregational polity of the Missouri Synod is based on the writings of Scripture, the Confessions, and the writings of Martin Luther and other Lutheran theologians that were used to support the theses in C.F.W. Walther's <i>Kirche und Amt</i>. Thus with his treatise, "Von der Freiheit eines Christenmenschen," (On the Freedom of a Christian), Martin Luther would probably recognize and approve of much in the Missouri Synod, although like in his day, some synodical stable-cleaning would be in order.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-77432657221321656702011-11-22T14:20:21.729-06:002011-11-22T14:20:21.729-06:00The self-called "Lutheran pastor": "...The self-called "Lutheran pastor": <i>"so there is somebody who supervises doctrine and practice"</i> <br /><br />As I explained in my 10:56 AM post above,"The synodical and district supervision is limited to administering synodical objectives and conditions of synodical membership." The phrase, "ecclesiastical supervisor," is a term associated with the Dispute Resolution process (for deciding on membership). Prior to 1992, the Synod had an adjudication system with adjudicators. The SP and DP also had the title, "Visitor," associated with visiting the member congregations to observe the pastor and congregation.<br /><br />The self-called "Lutheran pastor": <i>"so there are teeth since this amounts to excommunication"</i><br /><br />As I explained in my 10:56 AM Post above, "The SP and DP cannot depose a regularly called pastor or excommunicate any congregational member of a Missouri Synod church". Removal from synodical membership does NOT amount to excommunication.<br /><br />The self-called "Lutheran pastor": <i>"you confuse advisory meaning cannot interfere with the congregation's right of self-government with the exception where the congregation has relinquished that right of independence (doctrine and practice) and agreed to walk together according to Synodical constitution and bylaw"</i><br /><br />I have not confused "advisory", but you are playing sophistic wordgames. When a pastor or church joins the Missouri Synod they voluntarily agree to abide by the conditions of membership in Article VI, which includes accepting without reservation the confessions in Article II. The pastor or congregation do not relinquish the right of independence, or their property, since they are free to leave the Missouri Synod with their property if they wish no longer to walk together according to Synodical constitution and bylaws.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.com