It has been more than four years since Dr. David Luecke and I appeared in Dispute Resolution before Michigan Circuit Judge, Gene Schnelz. It was that event that led to the writing and publishing of the book, "Reclaiming the Gospel in the LCMS" available at 573-237-3110. A copy was sent to every delegate of the 1998 LCMS Convention. For the first time in the history of the Synod, the Convention voted on using the three Creeds in worship services. The Creeds passed 83% to 17%. It what that meeting that also lead to the creation of this website, Reclaim News, and the Luther Quest Discussion Group. We hope you will tell a friend to subscribe to Reclaim News.

Ten years after writing, "Evangelical Style and Lutheran Substance," Dr. David Luecke, an LC-MS Pastor, has updated his previous book entitled, "Apostolic Style and Lutheran Substance."

His approach in his new book is straight forward: The Missouri Synod may be Lutheran, but it is not following the Apostles. This new book has the endorsement of Rev. August Mennicke, former Minnesota District President and LC-MS Vice-President.

Since Dr. Luecke was kind enough to send me a copy of "Apostolic Style and Lutheran Substance," I do owe him a review.

On page 47 where Luecke writes, "Fostering change is the special responsibility of leaders." Luecke loves to talk about leaders, leadership and pastoral leadership.

His book, "The Other Story of Lutheran's At Worship" published in 1995, and for which I charged him with heresy in Dispute Resolution, was rife with quotes about "leaders." If there is any kind of a problem for Luecke, "leaders" can fix it or change it.

Naturally, Luecke calls the majority of young pastors who speak passionately for Lutheran tradition, "worrisome." (p. 47)

What did Luecke expect? Why would anyone want to be an LC-MS pastor if he didn't want to be Lutheran? There are other things to do in life besides being something one doesn't want to be.

When Luecke claims 43% of the LC-MS Pastors practice some form of contemporary worship, I think he is correct. (p. 47) However, the problem is, no one can define "contemporary," so we can be quite certain that these 43% don't know what they are doing.

If something in the church is traditional, Luecke vilifies it. Speaking about confirmation, Luecke says, "Kids hate it. Parents dread it. Pastors loathe it." (p.50) He then promotes Richard Melhiem's New Age Catechism "Faith Inkubators."

Luecke makes reference to our meeting in front of Judge Gene Schnelz in Dispute Resolution on February 10, 1996 at St. Matthew's Lutheran Church in Walled Lake, Michigan. (p. 61)

He describes "Christian News," who carried the story, publisher by Rev. Herman Otten, as "a well-known newspaper favored by the hyper-orthodox."

I like the sound of "hyper-orthodox" and I keep struggling to be more "hyper-orthodox." Of course, Luecke's God, who prefers "diversity," may be displeased with "hyper-orthodoxy."

"Teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:20) may be deleted from his edition. Or how about, l Cor. 11:2 "and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." But when he has a major church body to build how can Luecke be bothered with such trivialities?

He writes about my charges against him as follows: "The alleged heresy was teaching synergism. There were many other accusations, but they involved differing judgments about imprecise and emotive terms like 'Reformed theology of glory, 'pietism,' 'confusion of Law and Gospel.' I think he (meaning me) used synergism likewise for its emotive value. But in Lutheran theology, that term does have a precise meaning, and I challenged him either to show I was guilty of heresy or to apologize. The outcome was a boxed off, written apology in the same newspaper." (p. 61)

If these terms Luecke refers to have no theological value, they must be emotive.

Luecke does quite a bit of historical revisionism here. The reader is encouraged to read my "Reclaiming the Gospel in the LC-MS," published by CN (573-237-3110) where an entire chapter is dedicated to our encounter.

Assuming that Luecke would try to change the record, I simply published large portions of our conversation, verbatim, from the tape in my possession. Schnelz announced I would have the only tape for posterity.

Understanding that Judge Schnelz would not agree to any definition of synergism, I produced a photograph of Luecke with the Russian Pentecostal pastor his congregation was supporting. At that point Schnelz began to see there was some basis for my objection to Luecke's book.

Seeing that I was in a debate with no definition for terms like "synergism" and "contemporary," I told Judge Schnelz that I would apologize for calling Luecke a heretic if Luecke would agree to using the traditional wording of the Creeds in his worship services.

When Luecke refused to confess the Creeds in his congregation, Schnelz threatened his certification as a LC-MS pastor. Luecke thought that confessing the Creeds by rote was bad communication and bad for growth. He didn't want to accept the Apostle's Creed as an official statement of the Gospel.

After more than a four-hour conversation, Luecke agreed to confess at least one of the three Creeds, in one church service, once a month, for a total of 12 times a year. I agreed to apologize for calling him a heretic if Luecke would confess a Creed. I have his signed letter that he will confess one of the three Creeds at least once a month in his congregation. However, I now understand his mission congregation has closed.

All of this led to Redeemer Lutheran Church in St. Clair Shores, Michigan sending a resolution to the 1998 LC-MS Convention. For the first time in our history, the Synod voted on confessing the Creeds in its worship services. The Creeds passed, 83% to 17%.

Luecke calls the essays published by the Commission on Worship "antithetical of the Evangelical Lutheran understanding of worship." (p. 63) What he really means is, that anyone who promotes tradition, is antithetical of him.

On page 66, he encourages involvement in para-church organizations, like "Promise Keepers. There he also claims, "Nineteenth-century theological phrases like 'unionism, fellowship, and heterodoxy' beg for clarification." I say, why not deconstruct the meaning of any word you choose if you are of a mind to change Lutheran theology and practice?

He boasts that while serving as Vice President of Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, he was responsible for making sure that all of the students from some 70 different church bodies agreed with Fuller' s "Statement of Beliefs."(p. 67)

In regard to the Sacraments, they all had to affirm "the importance of word and sacrament ministry." Luecke comments that this statement was purposely short and did not define Baptism and the Lord's Supper, let alone profess Real Presence. (p. 67)

Luecke explains the danger of sacramentalism beginning on page 82. He writes, "There is a danger in the direction of increased reliance on the sacraments to carry the pastoral weight of stimulating and supporting a congregation of Christians growing in their faith." (p. 83)

On the next page, he calls too much reliance on the Sacraments "magic." He continues, "Indeed the magic incantation 'hocus pocus' has its roots in the Latin words medieval jugglers heard but did not understand at the consecration of the elements in the Roman Catholic Mass."

In the same vein, he recalls that "frequent reference to baptism as a basis for faith" led listeners to complain and the Moody Network dropping the Lutheran Hour in Cleveland. (p. 85) There, see what happens when Lutheran pastors get too sacramental?

He also brings up a Lutheran Pastor's counseling in a hospital waiting room who relies too heavily on Baptism as reassurance of eternal welfare. (p. 86)

It was interesting to see that Luecke thinks too much reliance on the Sacraments smacks of "magic." He gave me these responses in Dispute Resolution with Judge Gene Schnelz when we were talking about the power of the Gospel as expressed in the Creeds to convert a person to Christ, as follows:

(Schnelz is talking about conversion.)

Judge Schnelz: "That is interesting. What must I do then?"

Cascione: "Nothing. You can't do a thing."

Judge Schnelz: "I have to accept?"

Cascione: "You can only accept after you have faith."

Judge Schnelz: "Then how do I get faith?"

Cascione: "It is a gift of God."

Luecke: "It sounds like magic."

Cascione: "It comes through the Word. The Holy Spirit works through the Word and the Sacraments and gives me faith."

Luecke: "Part of that 'giving' in your faith is some acknowledgment that you have it.."

If too much reliance on the Sacraments and the Gospel remind Luecke of magic, where does the religion he claims to believe come from?

Four years after our meeting and remembering the confusion over his books then and now...what if.. Luecke has no faith? Then to him, it is all "magic!"

Just in case the reader wonders where Luecke looks for leadership, the following quote answers the question: "Where pastors used to look to District and Synod for program ideas, they now gather to learn from trend-setting congregations like Community Church of Joy in Phoenix or Willow Creek Community Church in the Chicago area."(p. 99)

Throughout the book, Luecke promotes greater doctrinal diversity to accommodate increased options. Indeed, diversity is the alternative to nearly every malady he identifies. In general, what was good for Fuller would be good for the LC-MS. Did we expect otherwise? (p. 100)

Luecke notes, "The Missouri Synod was the fastest growing single grouping of Lutherans in America during the late 1800's and 1900's." He concludes that Missouri was able to provide more and better trained ministers and teachers for the mushrooming number of congregations of immigrants. However, he believes that by 2006, the Synod may have nearly 2000 vacancies.

My conclusion is exactly the opposite of his. The more diversity there is, the more confusion and the more confusion, the less attention people give to the work of the church.

Why would men want to be pastors in the LC-MS if it can't focus on a unified doctrine and practice?