|
From CAT41:
+ Information for Confess And Teach For Unity's eList Subscribers +
For nearly a year, LCMS President Gerald Kieschnick has spoken of the Northern Illinois Confessional Lutherans (NICL) and of those who have signed
"That They May Be One" (TTMBO; see: http://www.CAT41.org/NICL/TTMBO/ttmbo.pdf
) as "divisive and schismatic and therefore subversive of the very purposes of the Synod." NICL has tried
repeatedly to engage President Kieschnick in dialogue concerning these matters, but has not even been afforded the courtesy of a proper response,
in spite of President Kieschnick's claim in a letter to the Synod this February that he has "engaged in fraternal dialogue with individuals
and groups in The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod who have expressed genuine
concern about matters of doctrine and practice in our Synod." Since
their attempts have been met with a refusal to dialogue, it was resolved at their
most recent meeting that they must "tell it to the Church." For
the correspondence leading up to and accomplishing this resolution, see NICL's
TTMBO website at:
http://www.CAT41.org/NICL/TTMBO
(Reclaim News Commentary Inserted Into CAT41 Communication
The following are a few points for NICL's consideration:
1: They use the term "we" (in the letter below) incorrectly like
other groups such as RIM, PLI, "Jesus First" and "That We May Be
One" use it incorrectly. Actually the term "we," according to the
agreement of pastors and congregations with the LCMS Constitution, cannot be a group representing
a separate confession or theology.
2. The LCMS is not a church. The congregations are churches, and the verse you quote, "tell it to the church" (Matt. 18:17) applies to
excommunication by the Voters' Assembly in the congregation. This is the official
position of the LCMS. They should have said, we are telling it to the members
of LCMS congregations. It looks like NICL hasn't been reading Walther's
"Church and Ministry."
3. If President Kieschnick is not going to answer questions about the Trinity, and he cannot be charged with false doctrine while in office
(according to the CCM), why do you think he could be forced to answer any questions he doesn't want to answer?
4. The LCMS President is not required to respond to any "rump
group" in the Synod. If you think that he has violated the doctrine of the Synod,
then you should say it as a signed petition of concerned individuals. Synodically speaking, "That We May Be One" has no Synodical
recognition, is not an RSO, and has no status in the LCMS.
My advice is that NICL start identifying the President's theological problems and stop talking about why the LCMS President should acknowledge
anything that their organization says or does. Every congregation has
the power to send in overtures to the Convention. Forget about
"we" and stick with the issues. You should take a few lessons from Christian News.
------
Their letter of February 5 is included below.
EJG
February 5, 2004
Dear President Kieschnick,
Greetings to you in the Name of our crucified and risen Savior, Jesus
Christ!
In your recent Memo to the church of January 22, 2004, you declared: "I
have engaged in fraternal dialog with individuals and groups in The Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod who have expressed genuine concern about matters of doctrine and practice in our Synod." We are saddened that those
discussions failed to include us, especially since we have sought to engage you in such
discussions since June of 2003. We write with no little concern that our last communication to you, dated November 6, 2003 was never acknowledged.
For these many months since your well-publicized Memo to the COP of May 30, 2003, your accusations that the signers of "That They May Be One"
are "divisive and schismatic and therefore subversive of the very purposes
of the Synod," continue to stand. Such a judgment we believe hurtful and
slanderous.
We communicated our concerns to you in a letter dated June 9, 2003 (see enclosed copy). We had hoped that you would respond to our letter so
that we could bring this situation to a God pleasing conclusion. You chose to
issue a second memo and refer us to the President of the Northern Illinois District.
To cooperate with your desire that he fulfill his responsibility to exercise
"ecclesiastical discipline," we met with our District President on
June 17, 2003. At the end of that meeting he stated he considers those pastors under
his ecclesial supervision who signed the document to be members in good standing of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod. This would hardly seem
compatible with those who are "schismatic and . subversive of the very purposes of the Synod." We continue to be deeply disappointed not only
in that you have chosen not to address our hurts and concerns, but that you have failed even to acknowledge our last correspondence with you (see
enclosed copy). Your subsequent dealings with this issue in the memo
of June 30, 2003 did not in any way alter your previous judgment against the
many pastors, teachers, deaconesses, lay individuals and whole congregations
from almost every district within Synod who have expressed agreement with the content of "That They May Be One."
You say that you seek "to promote and maintain the unity of doctrine
and practice in all the Districts of the Synod." We have from the very beginning, sought only to publicly and fraternally discuss these issues in
our synod as is clearly stated in the document. We seek a God-pleasing conclusion for the sake of the unity and doctrinal integrity of our church.
We having diligently sought the opportunity to resolve this issue with you fraternally, expressing a willingness to have representatives meet with you
at the time and place of your choosing and not received a response. Up to this point, we have remained publicly silent in this matter, but with your
false and damning accusations continuing to stand without retraction, correction or clarification, we believe it may become necessary for us to
make our exchange known to the church.
Respectfully, we ask again to have opportunity to meet with you at a time and place of your choosing that you might either justify your claims that
the signers of "That They May Be One" are "divisive and
schismatic and therefore subversive of the very purposes of the Synod," or publicly
retract your accusations.
Sincerely in Him,
Rev. Burneal Fick,
Rev. Steven Anderson,
Rev. Daniel Ognoskie,
Rev. Paul Mumme,
Executive Board,
On behalf of Northern Illinois Confessional Lutherans
Enclosures
Cc: Rev. William Ameiss,
Pres. NID - LC-MS
|
|