A letter from Dr. Norbert Oesch of the Pastoral Leadership Institute.

---

PASTORAL
LEADERSHIP
INSTITUTE

December 4, 2000

Rev. Jack Cascione
31011 Greater Mack Ave.
St. Clair Shores, MI 48082-1446

Dear Jack:

The Reverend Herman Otten sent to me a copy of what you presented to the Second National Free Conference on C. F. W. Walther on November 4, 2000, entitled, "The LCMS: Can It Remain a Unified Synod Without Congregational Polity?" which he stated he intends to publish. I am grateful to him for the advanced notice, but deeply troubled over what you said, and what will now evidently be in print.

I have refrained from taking issue with you concerning what you have written in Reclaim News about PLI and me, hoping that my face-to-face meeting with you earlier, and the integrity with which I shared my concerns for you, would sooner or later lead you to check the veracity of your intended comments with me before you would put them out for others to read. But this has not happened. Now, in this speech you speak falsely and state matters as if you can look into the hearts of people and know what they believe. Therefore I am writing to defend what is true, and ask you to issue an apology for false representation on the following matters;

1. It is wrong of you to use the word "conspiracy" to describe anything that was done to start PLI or any actions involving the COP with PLI. The December 1997 issues of the Reporter was reporting that Rev. Hower and I, as representatives of the task force which was encouraged to design a model of leadership training for pastors, shared the concept of the Pastoral Leadership Institute. This was the first they heard of PLI, and we sought their assistance to identify pastors who may be interested in taking the planned continuing education training. We also stated to them we wished to contact these pastors to ascertain if what we were working on was something they would desire. This is often known as "market research." There was, and there is, no conspiracy.

2. It is a lie to state that "The Reporter" stated that Dr. Norbert Oesch had the unanimous support of the COP for a plan to "involve LCMS pastors." I have carefully reread the article in "The Reporter" and it does not state that I had the unanimous support of the COP. You are guilty of false reporting.

3. It is false to imply that PLI promotes "the Church Growth Movement.according to the model of Willow Creek, Community of Joy, Saddleback, and Crystal Cathedral." PLI was created precisely because of our deep concern that some LCMS pastors, after attending these events at these churches, seem to adopt uncritically some practices that are more Reformed than Lutheran. PLI was created to provide leadership training for LCMS pastors taught by LCMS pastors and theologians, and by selected leadership training facilitators. We do not teach "Church Growth" principles.

4. It is false to state that our purpose "is to supply further seminary education for LCMS pastors to be 'Church Growth Leaders.'" We simply do not "supply further seminary education." We are not a seminary. We teach advanced leadership continuing education. The advanced nature of this education is primarily focused on the administrative needs of pastors serving in large, multi-staff congregations. We believe this cannot be taught in the seminaries at an undergraduate level. This is no fault of the seminaries. They do an excellent job of training men for entry-level pastoral ministry. The issues PLI addresses have been identified by some of the most experienced pastors presently serving in very large LCMS congregations. We want each pastor in PLI, and for that matter in the LCMS, to assist their congregations to connect people to Jesus, but we do not want them to be "Church Growth Leaders," if by that term you are defining pastors who have mastered principles set forth by the Church Growth movement.

5. It is also false that PLI "discards the historic structure and polity approved by resolution for LCMS Congregations based on C. F. W. Walther's 'Church and Ministry ['] and the "Form of a Christian Congregation.'" PLI does not address polity issues. PLI is an organization, and as an organization we have taken no position on polity issues of the LCMS or LCMS congregations.

6. I believe your statements that "the COP believes leadership is the key to growth. Peter Drucker's management theories are preferred over C. F. W. Walther's congregational policy," is a case of violation of the Lord's injunctive not to judge unless you can show where the COP has publicly taken that stance. How can you know what the COP believes, except in what it has made public. You cannot look into the hearts of the COP members. And even if you could, you have no right to judge the COP based on what some in it might believe. Unless you can find public statements which support your accusation, I believe you owe an apology to them.

7. Finally, you are wrong and therefore are bearing false witness against Dr. John Johnson, Dr. Bill Meyer, and President Gerry Kieschnick when you state that "this conspiracy was initiated" by them. As I stated earlier, it is not a "conspiracy." Furthermore they did not initiate PLI. The eight LCMS pastors who were encouraged to design a model to provide leadership training to LCMS pastors initiated it. The above men and others were asked to consult with the task force after our initial meeting, because we believed it was important to get the advice and counsel of Synodical and seminary representatives. These men were doing what they should do, give valuable advice to those in the LCMS who seek it.

In these points, Jack, you are wrong. I ask you to retract them. You have made false statements. This is sinful. I trust you will seek forgiveness from our gracious Lord. And I believe you owe the COP, Dr. Johnson, Dr. Meyer, Dr. Kieschnick and me an apology.

Since your speech is to be published in "The Christian News," and because it was a public speech, I am informing Rev. Otten of the content of this letter.

Cordially,

Dr. Norbert Oesch

---

Cascione Reply to Oesch

December 18, 2000

Dr. Norbert Oesch
Pastoral Leadership Institute
550 North Parkcenter Drive
Suite 204
Santa Ana, California 92705-3529

Dear Norb:

Thank you for your letter of December 4.

1. You object to my use of the word "conspiracy" to describe the inception of PLI. There is no question that the COP and District Executives had been meeting with representatives of the Leadership Network in 1995 and 1996. The Leadership Network endorses many of the same principles, "leadership experts," and books promoted by PLI. The COP was predisposed to the tenets of the Church Growth Movement and Leadership Training as evidenced by the COP Chairman's endorsement on the back of Dr. David Luecke's book, "The Other Story of Lutherans At Worship." My major confrontation with Luecke in Dispute Resolution was over his objections to only confessing the three Creeds in LCMS worship services. Yes, there is a conspiracy to change worship in the LCMS and PLI is part of it. You even have the audacity to keep using the name "Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod" on your PLI stationary when it is well known that you do not have Recognized Service Organization status from the Synod.

2. You are correct about the word "unanimous" not being the exact word used in the Dec. 1997 "Reporter" in regard to the COP's support for PLI. It was an editorialized conclusion based on your following statements about your meeting with the COP in Nov. 1997 as published to your own congregation. You wrote about accepting the call in part to PLI as follows:

"To: Faculty and Staff of St. John's Lutheran Church and School from Pastor Norb February 6, 1998". . .

"There were several roadblocks standing in the way that needed to be cleared. The most important one was the response of the President, the Officers and the Executive Council of the Synod, along with the Council of Presidents. This past Wednesday PLI received 100% endorsement, encouragement and blessing by President Barry, the Officers and the Administrators. The Chairman of the Council of Presidents also strong blessed it."

"To Members of St. John's, February 9, 1998" . . . "However, no official sanction could be given, and no call could be issued without an appropriately authorized adoption of PLI. Synod's President and the thirty-five District Presidents making up the Council of Presidents (COP) met in November. The idea was shared with them and received warm support by the COP."

The President of the LCMS has publicly stated he did not endorse PLI. You have misrepresented him. In our meeting with Barry in January of 2000, with 12 people in attendance, Barry said he sent you a letter saying he did not endorse PLI.

3. Your denial that you don't teach Church Growth Principles is ludicrous. The following are the units from just one PLI clergy training session:

UNIT ONE: "A Biblical View of Nurturing CHANGE"
An examination of how change is both natural and Biblical
UNIT TWO: "Making the Vision Come Alive at Our Congregation"
Two case studies on CHANGE strategies in the local congregation
UNIT THREE: "Nurturing TRANSFORMATION"
An ongoing process activity: Learning and preparing to use the eight-stage process of creating major CHANGE
UNIT FOUR: "CHANGE: How to Do It and Live to Tell About It"
Recognizing, welcoming, and handling the challenges of CHANGE
UNIT FIVE: "Church on the Brink: Cultural and Theological TRANSFORMATION in the 21st Century"
The impact of cultural CHANGE on the CHANGE
UNIT SIX: "Developing the Action Plan"
Local lay involvement, 12-month goal setting, developing a system of accountability, planning mentor events

The following list was given to LCMS District Executives from the Leadership Network and then distributed in Michigan. They are titled "Leadership Network, Carol S. Childress, 1995 Evangelism Executives\Chairpersons Conference, LCMS, "Ten Keys for the Future" Irvine CA, April 28, 1995"
1. Relationships, Not Religion;
2. Authenticity Over Hype;
3. Connections and Community;
4. Burnout and Balance;
5. From Success to Significance;
6. Times of TRANSITION;
7. Growth and Groups;
8. Soul Care and Spirituality;
9. Ministry before Membership;
10. Multiply Disciples, not Decisions.
Formerly, the only keys the church claimed for itself were the "Office of the Keys." We could call these ten keys the Gospel according to Church Growth.

The "Ten Commandments" for the "Future Tense Church" are:
1. Focus on a vision of the future;
2. Learn all there is to know about the situation;
3. Concentrate on the big picture;
4. Look for breakthrough ideas;
5. Be willing to color outside the lines;
6. Be alert for patterns and cycles;
7. View CHANGE as an opportunity for growth;
8. Be willing to confront tradition;
9. Beware of the pooling of ignorance;
10. Give your ideas a reality check.
(The new law, "Ten Commandments of Strategic Thinking and Action," appears on another flip chart from Reginald McDonough, Executive Director, General Board of Virginia Baptists.)

Presentations were given from Lutheran, Episcopal, Baptist and United Church of Christ backgrounds in June of 1997 in St. Louis.
1. It's God's work so learn to get out of the way.
2. We must focus on trust and relationships.
3. We are moving from programming to process.
4. Our focus and mission must be on outsiders.
Alan Klass (LCMS) gave a draft of his paper reflecting 2 years of research on the topic. A full version is available through him. (Klass is President of "CHANGE Mentoring Partnership" Phone 414-830-1223).

"The mainline denominations are bleeding. Their churches have more pews than flock, and unless they CHANGE, they have more history than future." (Dave Travis, "Church Champions" Magazine, Published by Leadership Network August, 1996, website, page 2)

"...the Next Church strategy as succinctly as I was to hear it. 'We give them what they want,' he said, 'and we give them what they didn't know they wanted - a life CHANGE.'" (Dave Travis, "Church Champions" Magazine, Published by Leadership Network August, 1996, website, page 2)

The PLI course-reading list is a "Who's Who" of secular business leadership techniques including Covey, Glass, Drucker, Senge, and Gardner. Why isn't PLI teaching Luther, Walther, and Pieper? If Luther, Walther, and Pieper aren't working for PLI, you should consider forming your own church body and stop plaguing the LCMS.

4. You say I'm not truthful when I say PLI's purpose is to supply further seminary education for LCMS pastors to be "Church Growth Leaders." Then you say, "We [PLI] are not a seminary."

You told your staff on February 6, 1998, PLI is "a post graduate in-service training program targeted for leading pastors of the LCMS." Isn't this LCMS seminary graduate education without a vote of the Convention?

You are the one who told your congregation in February 9, 1998 that PLI ". is something like a 'Seminary without walls.'"

Again you wrote: "For those who wish to pursue a Doctor of Ministry degree, Concordia Seminary St. Louis is preparing to give 27 credit units of 54 required for the degree. It [PLI] will have academic and practical excellence." Currently, President Johnson has put everything on hold until you have RSO status even though he teaches for PLI.

Why are you seeking graduate credit for PLI from the St. Louis Seminary if PLI's goal is not to offer additional seminary education?

5. You say "PLI does not address polity Issues" At the May 1998, Michigan District pastor's conference, after your four hour presentation you asked us if we "would give up our hymn books to save a soul." Article VI.4 of the LCMS Handbook requiring use of orthodox Lutheran Hymn books is a polity issue.

Your delusion is that you believe all you're proposed changes, transformation, and restructuring of LCMS congregations and worship have nothing to do with polity. You claim PLI has no position on Walther's "Church and Ministry" and "Form of the Christian Congregation." Like they say in the Wizard of OZ, "Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain."

One would have hoped that an organization like PLI that wants RSO status from the LC-MS Board for Higher Education would be eager to publicly endorse Luther, Walther, and Pieper on Church and Ministry. But you have new plans to put the LCMS through the change ringer.

6. You claim I can't look into the hearts of the COP and conclude they have a preference for Peter Drucker's management theories. Michigan District President John Heins, Chairman of the Council of Presidents, quoted Drucker in the Michigan District paper in 1995. Texas District President Kieschnick and other District Presidents have often quoted him.

You told us at the South and East Michigan Pastor's Conference that the Vision Statement of the church is "Connecting People to Jesus with Truth, Grace, and Passion." You cited a book titled, "Five Challenges to the Once Future Church," by Warren Mead (also quoted above by the Baptists). You noted that Peter Drucker led the church in America to develop a Purpose Statement.

The COP and LCMS District Executives have attended and endorsed meetings with the Leadership Network. The Leadership Network claims the philosophies of Peter Drucker as its own guiding principles. You have Peter Drucker on your PLI reading list and the COP endorses PLI.

A dog doesn't have to bite a skunk to smell like one. The burden of proof is now on the COP to denounce what it was taught by the Leadership Network and the changes PLI wants to promote in LCMS congregations.

A majority of the COP and "Forward" openly endorsed Norm Sell as LCMS Treasurer in 1995. The LCEF and The Foundation both funded PLI. Now your former Congregational President has replaced Sell as President of the Foundation. Norm Sell resigned from the Foundation when they lost more then $40,000,000.00 in "exotic unhedged derivatives." When I asked Victor Bryant what the interest rate is for loans to District Presidents, Bryant said he was turning my letter over to his lawyers. I'm still waiting for an answer. You have also received funding from the COP and a number of individual districts. The COP can handle themselves without your defense. Let the COP tell the Synod they prefer Walther's Church and Ministry over Drucker's leadership principles. Why isn't the COP funding Walther studies in the LCMS? Why are the LCEF, the Foundation, and the COP funding PLI when PLI has no RSO status?

7. You say that I am bearing false witness for writing that Dr. John Johnson, Dr. Bill Meyer, and President Gerry Kieschnick initiated this conspiracy to change LCMS congregations through PLI. You are the one who wrote: On February 6, 1998, "In 1996 the Lutheran Church Extension Fund (LCEF) asked four of us to answer a question, namely, 'If the LCEF were to use some of its operating expenses to stimulate something that would make a difference in our church body, what would that be?' Unanimously we responded, 'Invest in pastoral leadership training.'. . . In consultation with Concordia Seminary President, Dr. John Johnson, with Dr. Bill Meyer (Executive Director) of the Board for Higher Education, and with President, Gerry Kieschnick of the Texas District, the idea of a Pastoral Leadership Institute was shaped. Although I was part of the shaping, I was overwhelmed when I was asked to bring it into reality."

This all took place at least a year before the November 1997 meeting with the COP. The conspiracy is for everyone to see in the unit titles above, namely; change LCMS congregations without a Vote from the Convention, which you could have sought in 1998.

I'm standing by my paper delivered at the Walther Conference. I will be in Orange, California from December 27-January 3rd. If you want to meet with me with a witness, I will be at Vi and Larry Keiser's home, members of your former congregation.

Sincerely,

Pastor Jack Cascione

December 18, 2000