The following is courtesy of LCMSNOTES@crf.cuis.edu
  Clarification of Charges Against Benke
  President Kieshnick's Most Recent Statement To the
  Press
  Date: Friday, 30 Nov 2001 15:09
  From: David Strand <david.strand@lcms.org>
  
  
  Clarification of Charges Against
  Benke
  
  The American news media has published and announced a number of erroneous
  reports that newly elected LCMS President, Dr. Gerald Kieschnick has been
  fired, removed from office, or sued, by LCMS pastors because he prayed with
  people in New Your City at ground zero.
  Actually, three LCMS Districts have requested clarification as to why LCMS
  Atlantic District President Dr. David Benke, a close friend of President
  Kieschnick, participated in a joint "Prayer Service" at Yankee
  Stadium in New York City on September 23, 2001. Among the many clerics
  participating in the "Prayer Service" were Moslems, Sikhs,
  Buddhists, Jews, and other groups that reject the deity of Christ.
  Many LCMS pastors would have overlooked this violation of the LCMS
  Constitution, but during the event, Benke, who did pray in Jesus' name, failed
  to identify Jesus Christ as the only God. Benke also refuses to answer the
  question, "Is Jesus the only way to heaven?"
  If Benke prayed in the name of Jesus Christ, who was to be understood as
  just one among many gods, he failed to warn these Jews, Buhdists, Moslems, and
  Sikhs, that they are eternally damned without Christ. "Acts 4:12 Neither
  is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven
  given among men, whereby we must be saved."
  If Benke was concerned about offending other clergy in the "Prayer
  Service" Benke should not have participated.
  Kieschnick has defended Benke's actions and wants to refer to this event as
  a "civic event" rather than a "Prayer Service." However,
  it was clearly identified as a "Prayer Service" by the Mayor of New
  York City.
  Two LCMS pastors have indeed filed charges against Kieshnick, not in civil,
  but in LCMS church court, called "Dispute Resolution."
  Kieschnick, Benke, or their associates, must have released reports about
  the charges to the media. Constitutional rules governing Dispute Resolution
  state that those filing the charges must keep their actions confidential.
  During the dispute between St. Louis Seminary President, Dr. John Tietjen and
  LCMS President Dr. Jacob Preus, that led to the Seminex "Walk Out"
  in 1974, the liberals led by Tietjen, regularly used the public media to
  promote their agenda.
  It appears that in 2001, liberals are again adopting the same tackics to
  influence LCMS theology and practice.
  
  
  President Kieshnick's most recent
  statement to the press.
  
  A Statement from Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick
  President of The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod
  News articles reporting on charges brought against me by two pastors in the
  Synod have resulted in confusion about the official position of The Lutheran
  Church--Missouri Synod regarding relationships with Christian churches not in
  altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS and regarding the participation of
  Missouri Synod pastors and congregations in events and occasions involving
  worship which also include the participation of non-Christians.
  The official position of the LCMS on these issues is presented in the
  Constitution of the Synod. The Synod's Constitution lists as one of the
  conditions for acquiring and holding membership in the Synod the
  "renunciation of unionism and syncretism of every description" such
  as "serving congregations of mixed confessions by ministers of the church
  and taking part in the services and sacramental rites of heterodox
  congregations or congregations of mixed confessions." This means that the
  pastors and congregations of the Synod are pledged by virtue of their
  membership in the Synod not to lead formal worship services with Christian
  churches and pastors not in church fellowship with the Missouri Synod.
  This is a position, which the Synod has repeatedly reaffirmed, most
  recently at the 2001 Convention of the Synod. This is the position to which I
  as the President of the Synod am fully committed. I am also required by virtue
  of the duties of my office "to see to it" that all the pastors and
  congregations of the Synod follow this position.
  In reaffirming this constitutional provision on church fellowship this past
  summer, the Synod in convention also adopted "for continued use and
  guidance" a report prepared by my predecessor Dr. Barry and by the
  Synod's Commission on Theology (2001 Res. 3-07A). The statement includes a
  section on "cases of discretion," which reads as follows:
  
    B. Cases Of Discretion
    "Not every occasion where worship takes place is necessarily a
    manifestation of church fellowship. There are situations where discretion is
    appropriate. Some laity raised concerns about attending Baptisms,
    confirmations, weddings, funerals, etc. of family and friends in churches
    not in church fellowship with the LCMS. Attendance at such services is
    generally a matter of personal judgment and individual conscience. On such
    occasions LCMS members will want to refrain from receiving Holy Communion
    and participating in rites of other churches that compromise their
    confession of faith. Doubtful situations may produce emotional distress and
    may require pastoral counsel.
    "Pastors, teachers, and other officially recognized church workers
    are often asked to participate in activities outside of their own and other
    LCMS congregations. Some of these are civic events. Offering prayers,
    speaking, and reading Scripture at events sponsored by governments, public
    schools and volunteer organizations would be a problem if the organization
    in charge restricted a Christian witness. For instance, if an invitation
    requires a pastor to pray to God without mentioning Jesus, he cannot in good
    conscience accept. Without such a restriction, a Lutheran pastor may for
    valid and good reason participate in civic affairs such as an inauguration,
    graduation or a right-to-life activity. These occasions may provide
    opportunity to witness to the Gospel. Pastors may have honest differences of
    opinion about whether or to what extent it is appropriate or helpful to
    participate in these or similar civic events. In these cases charity must
    prevail.
    "There are also 'once-in-a-life-time' situations. It is virtually
    impossible to anticipate all such situations or to establish rules in
    advance. Specific answers cannot be given to cover every type of situation
    pastors and congregations face. These situations can be evaluated only on a
    case-by-case basis and may evoke different responses from different pastors
    who may be equally committed to LCMS fellowship principles. The LCMS has
    always recognized this.
    "However, the response to one situation should not establish a
    precedent for future ones. Where pastors regularly consult each other and
    are convinced of one another's integrity, they are freer to use their
    discretion where such prior consultation is impossible. We do not want to
    fall into the trap of case law rigidity by setting down rules for every
    conceivable situation. At the same time, the exception should not become the
    rule, lest the truth of the Gospel be compromised.
    "A pastor may face situations in the community where no other
    pastoral care is available and he may be asked to minister to those outside
    his congregation. Before doing this, ideally he would consult with other
    LCMS pastors, especially the Circuit Counselor, District President or Vice
    Presidents. But often these cases do not allow for consultation of any kind
    and on-the-spot decisions have to be made. In these and other situations
    nearly every pastor may question even his own decision and wish he had taken
    another course of action. We do not have the option of changing the past but
    must be content with believing that we made the best possible decision under
    the circumstances."
  
  It was on the basis of this synodically approved understanding of the
  Synod's position on "cases of discretion" that I responded to
  Atlantic District President Benke's request for counsel regarding his
  participation in an event held in Yankee Stadium on September 23.
  Because some members of the Synod have raised questions regarding what
  constitutes a "civic event," I have formally asked the Synod's
  Commission on Theology and Church Relations to address this topic in greater
  depth. I have specifically asked the CTCR to take up the issue of the
  participation of Synodical pastors and congregations in civic events which
  include the offering "of prayers, speaking and reading Scripture"
  including civic events involving the participation of non-Christians. And I
  have asked the Commission to give this assignment the highest priority and
  have its response ready for distribution throughout the Synod prior to the
  2004 Synodical Convention.
  In conclusion, I would urge the members of the Synod to recommit themselves
  to the position of the Synod as set forth in the Synodical Constitution and in
  the official resolutions of the Synod. Occasions such as we have experienced
  in recent weeks call for difficult decisions to be made. Pastors and
  congregations of the Synod may have honest differences of opinion about
  whether or to what extent it is appropriate or helpful to participate in these
  or similar events and activities. But as former President Barry and the CTCR
  have stated, "In these cases charity must prevail." This is also my
  prayer for the Synod. May our continuing discussions in the Synod of these
  issues bring glory and praise to the precious name of our Lord Jesus Christ
  and His Gospel which offer life and salvation to all.