Letter to BHE Objecting to RSO Status for PLI by California Committee
By Rev. Jack Cascione

The following letter was sent to the members of the Synod's Board for Higher Education (BHE) meeting in Portland, Oregon, beginning October 19th. The purpose of the letter is to encourage the BHE not to grant Recognized Service Organization (RSO) status to Doctor Norbert Oesche's "Pastoral Leadership Institute," (PLI). The Committee believes that the 2001 LCMS Convention should have the final determination on who trains LCMS pastors. For the past 152 years this was the sole right of the Synod's two Seminaries.

You may request the attachments referred to in the letter by emailing your surface mail address to florencec@earthlink.net

---

October 3, 2000

Board Members
The Board for Higher Education
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod
1333 S. Kirkwood Rd.
St. Louis, Missouri 63122-7295

Dear Board Member:

I have recently read and studied the Curriculum for the Pastoral Leadership Institute. This has brought forth even more questions and concerns than I previously brought to your attention. I pray you will carefully study these materials.

I am not opposed to leadership being taught by PLI to any and all pastors, teachers, workers in our congregations and yes, all lay persons who are interested in our seminaries IF THE SYNOD IN CONVENTION ASSEMBLED CONCLUDES THAT:

a) The seminaries are not providing needed leadership training and

b) The seminaries already entrusted by the Synod for over 150 years to provide pastoral training all of a sudden should play a diminished role in pastoral training.

Over the last several years, I have spoken and met with pastors from around these United States who display the finest Christian leadership, amazingly, all products of our seminaries. I believe these pastors and many, many others in the LC-MS meet the following criteria: (Emphasis Added) "They are to take the long view, that is, they are to prepare people for 'the Day' - the day of the Lord's return. Whether they enjoy 'popularity' is of no importance. These matters are in God's hands. He requires faithful teaching of His sacred Word." - "Portals of Prayer" - Sunday, September 24, 2000.

I still feel there should have been a thorough study into the actual curriculum and material needed. If such a Program of Leadership is needed, it is my opinion PLI leaders should have gone to the seminaries first and under the guidance and direction of the seminaries set up new class offerings and then sought funding for our seminaries. DOES NOT THE SYNOD HANDBOOK DEFINE HOW PROFESSORS ARE CALLED? And if they should be called as professors in our seminaries they should be paid according to their education and experience in line with Seminary professional pay scale.

It is my understanding the responsibility of the education of our pastors has been entrusted to our seminaries and this is where it should stay. I have checked the curriculum of community colleges from around the State and most offer leadership programs, at a fraction of the cost of PLI. With today's telecommunication systems, even in our small towns we have the availability of accredited classes - free - from our educational channels on television. Others may be obtained over the computer. There is no reason our Seminaries, if needed, cannot provide this leadership training.

I find NOTHING new or persuasive in the curriculum of PLI. Enclosed is a list of recommended and required reading material for those attending conferences in May in Ellisville, Mo. and June in San Antonio, Texas and very few are Lutheran authors. (Attachments #1, #1A, #1B, #1C, #1D) Have any of the listed Lutheran authors had their theology questioned? How does trusting the Holy Spirit to build our churches conflict with these materials?

My research tells me these modern marketing techniques have not been beneficial to a number of LC-MS congregations who endorse the Church Growth Movement. Some have found that by going into bondage with large debts and being behind on their loan payments has placed them close to losing their church and they are having major problems.

ONE MAY WELL ASK: IS IT BIBLICAL AND CONFESIONAL for an ad hoc group of pastors to "call" an LC-MS rostered clergyman who has played a key role in forming PLI to be the Executive Leader thereof - even before PLI is incorporated? And then on their own decide further so-called "training" is best for certain specified LC-MS pastors AFTER such pastors have graduated from either of the two (2) Synodical seminaries?

Precisely, how does the "call" of an Executive Leader to PLI conform to the Doctrine of the Call as Missouri has always understood a call? Is it truly a divine call? In my opinion, you should seek a FORMAL WRITTEN statement on these questions from EACH of Synod's seminaries! Kindly explain why this ad-hoc, self-appointed group of pastors who formed PLI should decide what further training is needed and given to Synodical pastors.

Also, it would appear appropriate to inquire about the ad hoc group of pastors establishing salary, benefit and compensation schedules for PLI personnel, if PLI obtains any funds through Synodical organizations or if any of these pastors directly or indirectly stand to benefit financially.

Dr. Loren Kramer (now retired PSWD President) stated in a letter dated March 15, 2000 that the Pacific Southwest District extended a Divine Call to Dr. Norbert Oesch to be the Executive Director of the Pastoral Leadership Institute and that this was done on behalf of the board of PLI that is seeking Recognized Service Organization (RSO) status in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) (Call to be Interim) (BOD February 5, 1998)

I refer you to Question 14 found in the CCM report dated August 17, 2000.

Question 14: "Can a ministry of a District apply to the Synod for RSO status?"

Opinion: Bylaw l4.03, a, states that "Recognized Service organization status may be granted to a service organization (other than an auxiliary) that extends the mission and ministry of the Synod but is not a part of the Synod as defined by its Constitution and Bylaws." (Emphasis Added) "A ministry of a District is the District and a District is part of the Synod. Since an RSO cannot be a part of the Synod, a ministry of a District cannot apply RSO to the Synod for RSO status."

I believe there should be an investigation into the qualifications and capabilities of all the leadership of PLI and its programs and it should not receive RSO status from the BHE. This investigation should be done by a Blue Ribbon Committee appointed by the Synodical President!

Another area of concern is the use of "The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod" and Synod's "Logo" on letters and materials developed by PLI.

In my correspondence with the current Secretary of Synod, he advised me he "had inquired of Norbert Oesch, the executive of PLI, regarding his claim of a letter in his file from the Office of the Secretary granting permission to use the title. (Emphasis Added) He informed me that such a letter was supplied by my predecessor, Dr. Walter Rosin." I question whether PLI has the right to use the LC-MS name/or logo without approval of Synod's Board of Directors, for both are property rights belonging to the Synod.

No wonder a pastor enrolled in PLI feels as "one of the chosen few" and in most cases their importance is blown out of proportion when they receive a letter stating Congratulations! (Attachments #2, #2A) and see "The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod" as an integral part of PLI's stationary.

The PLI pastors are expecting their congregations to fund these large expenditures. Is this truly what God intended for His church in the way of stewardship?

While the use of the logo is very subtle, it is still being used and those pastors who have become students in the PLI Program have accepted and believe what PLI has stated in their printed material: (Emphasis Added) The cross overlaying the entire graphic with the LCMS logo as the shadow accentuates the uniqueness of PLI being a Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod ministry." (Attachments #3) Synod as a Synod has not made PLI a Synodical ministry.

PLI has this to say about its graphic image: "PLI uses a graphic image that depicts a world globe with the word "Ministry" superimposed on it, a Bible beneath the globe, a hand with the word "Training" superimposed on it, two chess pieces and a compass with the word "Leadership" written over them, while the entire graphic is under the cross symbol, (Emphasis Added) the shadow of it being the logo of the LCMS.." (Attachment #4) - WHO AUTHORIZED PLI'S USE OF THE "LOGO" ON THEIR MATERIALS?

The cross logo as I understand it, is a registered trademark of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and its use is restricted to congregations, boards, commissions and departments of the Synod. (Attachment #5) Also, as a registered mark, it must be used in exactly the same proportions as shown on the website of LC-MS - www.lcms.org/logos.html. Please tell me, which is PLI? Is it a congregation, a board, a commission or a department of Synod?

Another attachment is a printout taken from the website of Christ Lutheran Church in Lincoln, Nebraska. The Rev. Luke Schnake, Pastor of the church informed his church that "I was recently selected to be part of the inaugural class of (Emphasis Added) Synod's Pastoral Leadership Institute." (Attachment #6) WHO AUTHORIZED PLI TO CLAIM TO BE SYNOD'S PASTORAL LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE?

I call your attention to another attachment entitled "PLI Nomination and Enrollment." (Attachment #7) What discrimination! A pastor, and the greater majority of our pastors in the LC-MS, would never be eligible for entrance into the "elite" PLI.

It is deplorable so much valuable time, energy and expense have gone into this "secret organization." I say "secret," for I believe PLI is one of the "best kept secrets" in Synod. If one were to take a poll of the pastors and lay people of the LC-MS, PLI would not be a common household word and those who could identify the program would be very much in the minority.

As of January 23, 1998, the Pastoral Leadership Institute (PLI) was incorporated in the State of Missouri as a "not for profit" corporation. Its incorporating officers were:

Rev. Gregory Smith – Chairman
Rev. Vernon Gunderman – Secretary
Rev. Stephen Hower - Treasurer

Listed as a member of the Board of Directors was a Mr. John Kuddes (Attachment #8)

As late as December 31, 1999, Stephen Hower was still being shown on PLI's website as its Treasurer. Sometime between Dec. 31st and January 30, 2000 a change was made in its corporate officer structure with John Kuddes being shown as Treasurer. (Attachment #9) What is interesting to note, both of these men were serving on the LC-MS Foundation Board of Directors (see Lutheran Annual, 1998, 1999, 2000) and also on the PLI Board of Directors, one as the Treasurer and one as a member of the Board at the time a grant (the actual amount, as far as I know, has not been made public) was given to PLI by the Foundation.

IS THIS NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AS THESE MEN WOULD BE SITTING ON A BOARD giving money to an organization on whose Board they were active participants? In the CCM ruling of 17 August 2000, the LCEF gifts to PLI were not to an eligible recipient of LCEF grants, (Attachments #10, #10A) and would not this ruling hold true of the LC-MS Foundation also?

How could PLI which secured 100's of thousand of dollars, under questionable circumstances, even be considered by the BHE for RSO status given the CCM opinion that I read? The CCM states that some PLI money raising was improper. How could the BHE even consider placing them under the umbrella of the BHE? This is serious business, for heaven's sake! Take a real look at PLI's printed materials. Do you too wish to follow a "pied piper?" There is chaos in LC-MS churches over PLI. PLI has now deleted the "Cross Denominational Event" due to controversy and has replaced it with a Multi/Ethnic Event. (Attachment #11) This information was taken off of their website prior to July 22, 2000 and as of this date, nothing is available to the public relative to this event. Is this being forthright and open with the Synod? HASN'T THE LC-MS ALWAYS BELIEVED WE ARE TO SPREAD THE GOSPEL TO ALL PEOPLE OF ALL NATIONS? When have our doors not been open to ALL who would enter in? When have we NOT felt they should come and sit beside us, worship with us?

I feel that one of the largest concerns is PLI's incorporation of MARKETING TECHNIQUES into evangelism. In the business world this is acceptable. Their money is invested in products they wish to manipulate the public to purchase so they have a return for their investment and can make a profit. The volumes of suggested reading and required reading material for PLI's curriculum is taught to sales personnel and to CEO's to increase their sales productivity.

Is this what we want in our churches? Is it the goal of the LC-MS to build the largest churches and pack people in, any way we can manipulate them into the church, hoping the dollars will roll in so all our pastors can be CEO's to the tune of 100's of thousand of dollars. OR, SHOULD WE CONTINUE TO BELIEVE CONVERSION IS THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THROUGH THE GOSPEL and focus on Catechesis? President Barry has very properly pointed out a strong need for good Catechesis. THE CHURCH GROWTH/REVOLVING DOOR IS NOT NEEDED!

What has happened and is continuing to happen to the foundation of the LC-MS? Are we following the path of so many non-denominational churches? I 'm in three to four of these churches each week relative to my business and many churches are not there by the next year or they have been sold to another denomination.

Where is our faith in trusting the Holy Spirit to grow our churches, knowing and trusting the Lord Jesus is in the smallest as well as the largest church? That each pastor as he is called to serve is equally as important? What has happened to our thinking and our trust and our faith?

Was not our church founded as a church of the people, where we the lay people were given the responsibility to keep watch, to question, to research, to search the Scriptures, to seek counsel and pray? Were we not given the Scriptural responsibility to hold our trustees, elders, pastors and yes, even, the BHE, accountable?

I question the leadership of PLI when those who ask questions are told "how dare you question PLI?". I further question the leadership of PLI, when, I along with others have raised serious questions about PLI and are threatened with the 8th Commandment, even though documentation relevant to our questions is available on their website and in their printed materials.

Please refer to Page 58 of Luther's Large Catechism. In part, the text provides: "For when the thing is out in the open, there can be no question of slander, of injustice or false witness." IN OTHER WORDS, THE 8TH COMMANDMENT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE QUESTIONS I OR OTHERS HAVE RAISED ABOUT PLI BASED ON WHAT PLI HAS PUBLISHED ABOUT ITSELF.

Incidentally, DOES PLI CLAIM THAT MARTIN LUTHER VIOLATED THE 8TH COMMANDMENT by posting the 95 Theses on the door at the Castle Church in Wittenberg rather than first presenting the theses to the Pope?

I believe PLI should NOT be given RSO status or placed under the umbrella of the BHE:

1. Synod has not been presented with a sufficient need for PLI.

2. There has been no approval by the Synodical Convention for PLI.

3. SYNOD has not called or elected the PLI Officers, or teachers to teach in PLI.

4. SYNOD has not approved a PLI curricula.

5. The Seminaries have not been shown to be lacking in leadership training.

6. Large amounts of funds were secured under questionable circumstances.

7. "Discriminatory" methods are used to recruit students to participate in a flawed curriculum.

8. The "call" PLI issued is not a "divine call" as LC-MS Lutherans understand a "call."

9. Synod has not made PLI a Synodical ministry as PLI has stated in their letters and publications.

While I have used several pages of the CCM Report as attachments, a complete set is enclosed for your review.

In His Service,

Mrs. Georgann McKee
12791 Wheeler Place
Santa Ana, Calif. 92705

Phone and fax the same - on 24 hours a day - 714-532-3870

Enc.

CC: Dr. A. L. Barry, President - LC-MS
Rev. Dr. Alan Borcharding
Rev. Dr. Richard Kapfer
Rev. Dr. William Meyer
Mr. Paul Middeke
Rev. Dr. Robert Holst
Rev. Dr. John Johnson
Rev. Dr. Dean Wenthe
Rev. Dr. David Zersen
Rev. Dr. David L. Anderson
Rev. Dr. Conrad Kercher