We Put The Creeds on Trial
by Rev. Jack Cascione

 

The planned destruction of the LCMS is outlined in Dr. David Luecke’s new book "The Other Story of Lutherans at Worship," endorsed by Michigan District President John Heins, Chairman of the Council of President (C.O.P.) of the LCMS.

With page after page of half truths, false comparisons and distortion of the facts, Luecke promotes emotional, Pentecostal style, synergistic worship instead of Lutheran Worship. Synergistic means seeking salvation from God through human effort instead of God seeking us through word and sacrament. He stands the Bible and the Confessions on their head. Like the snake in the tree, Luecke keeps questioning the purpose of worship with the approach, "Did God say?"

John Heins, Chairman of the Council of Presidents of the LCMS endorses Luecke’s book, the Church Growth Movement, contemporary worship, and "leadership principles" with the following words:

"E Pluribus Unum [the many become one] is also possible in Lutheran worship. Lutheran pastors and leaders who are struggling with the wind of diversity in worship need to read Dr. Luecke’s new book for insight, direction, and guidance. It’s well worth your time." John L. Heins, Chairman of the Council of Presidents.1

Dr. David Luecke is an LCMS pastor, with a degree in Business Administration and is a former Vice President of Fuller Theological Seminary. He is one of the foremost advocates of the Church Growth Movement, contemporary worship, and leadership principles in the LCMS. His books are published by Concordia Publishing House.

There is no question that the final goal of the Luecke’s book with the support of the C.O.P. is to redefine the Gospel for the benefit of growth. While Heins, the C.O.P., and Luecke claim they are freeing the Gospel from tradition, legalism, and party spirit, they are in fact removing its confession and witness from LCMS congregations in the name of change. Everyone who hates the Gospel must eventually attack the public confession and definition of the Gospel in the three Creeds. During his meeting with this author, Luecke attacked the confession of the Creeds in worship services as boring, repetitious, monotonous rote. He claimed confessing the Creeds in a communion service was a poor teaching practice that turns people away from the church. Why not just say the same old Jesus turns people away from the church?

Luecke’s work; the teaching of Fuller Theological Seminary; and the Leadership Network, aim to reduce church services to writhing, orgasmic, ecstatic, cultic, tribal ritual. The C.O.P. is simply searching for more effective ways to bring people into LCMS congregations and then explain how it is good for the Gospel after they get the desired results. They will know when they have arrived at the truth when they get the correct behavioral response from the crowds. It is called Outcome Based Theology.

The author of this book wrote a number of attacks against Luecke’s book. Luecke in turn charged this author with libel and slander for saying that Luecke was a synergist, one who leads people to earn God’s grace by human effort. Actually this author wrote far more criticism of Luecke’s book than calling him a synergist. On Saturday, February 10th, 1996, Luecke and this writer met in "Dispute Resolution" before 6th Michigan Circuit Judge, Gene Schnelz, who is also a volunteer Reconciler for the LCMS.

Schnelz is one of the originators of the "Dispute Resolution Process" that was adopted by the LCMS Convention in 1992 to replace the Commission on Adjudication. C.O.P. President, John Heins, and then Synodical President, Ralph Bolhmann helped promote this change in the LCMS. The result is that unqualified people now sit in judgment of LCMS clergy on matters of doctrine and practice in a virtual free-for-all where the rules of evidence, the LCMS constitution, and Lutheran doctrine are suspended at the whim of the Reconciler.

In the second part of this chapter, the reader will see part of the transcript from the tape as Cascione, Schnelz, and Luecke debate whether the Creeds should be paraphrased, printed or confessed in an LCMS communion service. For more than an hour we put the confession of the Creeds on trial in the new "Dispute Resolution Process" because every aspect of your faith and practice is now a matter of opinion under the spirit of compromise introduced by this new process. We have now made the confession of Christ an open question in his own church.

As skilled a jurist as Judge Schnelz is, he was unable to follow the import of the theological debate between Dr. Luecke and myself. There were no theologians present to hear us in addition to himself. The result was that the most holy confession of the Gospel in the LCMS was given a beating. It was only Schnelz’s faith as a layman that led him to defy the "Dispute Resolution Process" he had helped design for the Synod and start arguing for the confession of the Gospel. Not wanting to be cast in the roll of Pontious Piolate he found himself arguing as best he could to maintain the confession of the Gospel in the communion services of the LCMS. Once the confession of the Gospel becomes a subjective area of investigation between two clergy, the Synod is functionally void of objective truth. In "Dispute Resolution" it’s simply Schnelz’s opinion versus Cascione’s opinion versus Luecke’s opinion and may loudest and the most skilled debater win.

You poor layman. You thought you could trust your leaders in the church while you did other things. There is no reward for apathy. You have the leadership you deserve. The pious pastor who does not want to "trouble" his congregation with news that there are significant concerns about confessing the Creeds, that is the Gospel, in the LCMS will have no excuse for not warning his congregation when he appears at the judgment. You, brother pastor, took the call and you took the pay check. The buck stops with you.

Worship is not the subjective mystery that Luecke makes it appear to be. God said and the Confessions agree over and over again what worship is with quotations such as:

"The woman (Luke 7:47) came, with the opinion concerning Christ that with Him the remission of sins should be sought. This worship is the highest worship of Christ. To seek from Him the remission of sin was truly to acknowledge the Messiah. Now, thus to think of Christ, thus to worship Him, thus to embrace Him, is truly to believe."2

In his book Luecke systematically attacks the distinction between Law and Gospel, the office of the ministry, the church, and the purpose of worship. The carrot, the idol, the god from whom all blessings flow, is increased church attendance. How can any middle of the road pastor who wants his church to grow resist such a offer? He won’t even know why he should resist this offer.

Luecke applies the dialectic of marketing principles to worship and makes an argument for applying the principles of the Law and not the Gospel to have more effective worship. With a typically Pentecostal approach, Luecke identifies the purpose of worship with human origin "But the approach to worship as a love relationship is gaining in recognition in contemporary understanding of church worship"3  He also appeals to pietism. "The point at hand is simply to counter the Restoration Story’s negative view of Pietism with the Other Story’s (Luecke’s book) positive view of its impact on effective mission outreach.4  Luecke identifies Pietism as the Church Growth Movement of the 19th century. He acknowledges that some identify worship with the forgiveness of sins and the sacraments, but degrades the means of grace by calling this approach part of a "duality" in Lutheranism.5

On the first page of Chapter 2 in Luecke’s book we find the following definition of contemporary worship:

Chapter 2

What Is Contemporary Worship?

Contemporary worship is a movement touching churches of many denominations. Among Lutherans it is sometimes called alternative worship. As with most movements, it does not yet have a precise definition.

But there are clues. You are probably in a contemporary worship service when a few or more of the following things happen:

As a visitor, you do not feel too conspicuous. These are only clues, not a definition. Contemporary services come in all sorts of combinations of new with old, since such worship in a congregation usually evolves out of its traditional practices, many of which often continue with increased appreciation for their strengths."

Just by coincidence the above list of items are almost identical to what the Leadership Network and Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena California recommend.

Luecke’s book destroys Article IV section 4 of the LCMS Constitution that requires all congregations to use Lutheran hymn books, agenda, and Luther’s Catechism as a condition of membership. He writes as if there is no Missouri Synod and no Constitution. Heins loves it.

The confirmation vows in the Lutheran Agenda state:

"Do you also, as a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, intend to continue steadfast in the confession of this Church, and suffer all, even death, rather than fall away from it?"

I do so intend, with the help of God. (page 24, Rite of Confirmation).

The confession of the Evangelical Lutheran Church they all confessed was the Apostle’s Creed that was also confessed for them at their baptism.

However, all 44 Michigan Circuit Counselors supported Heins; rejected these confirmation vows; and gave pastors the "freedom" to write and confess their own creeds with the following statement:

"The Circuit Counselors and Vice Presidents of the Michigan District thank President Dr. John Heins and declare our support for him- - for his faithful adherence to Scripture and the Confessions of the Lutheran Church regarding freedom in worship forms and other matters of adiaphora (things neither commanded nor forbidden by Scripture), so that pastors and congregations can meet the spiritual needs of a changing culture."

Of course, they never consulted nor informed the lay people of their plan. The Council of Presidents has simply suspended the Synodical Constitution, by fiat.

Throughout his book Luecke speaks about pastors conducting a worship service, not as pastors but as "leaders" in the roll of "leadership." His words are filled with verbiage one can read in the publications and on the website of the "Leadership Network." Rather than administer a prescribed worship service, the worship "leader" exercises "leadership" by leading people to emotional encounters with God. In other words, leadership is the art of applying manipulation and mind control techniques to bring about the desired effect in the worshipers/audience/blind sheep. Luecke wrote, "One may observe that worship is receiving increased attention as an issue today largely because many worship leaders are learning to see informality as a strength rather then a weakness."6  In reference to leaders and leadership, Luecke speaks about Church Growth principles, studies, pragmatism, motivation, options, and feed back, all terms from marketing psychology.

My official call document for the calling of Pastor in the LCMS sent to me by my congregations says:

"We (the congregation) authorize and obligate our called minister:
To administer to us the Word of God....
To administer the holy sacraments...
To perform the function...
To guard and promote faithful...
To guide the congregation...
To promote and guide the mission...
To assist the congregations...
To serve the congregation..."

The word leader never appears. I wasn’t called to be the "leader," I was called to be the pastor who administrates Word and sacrament in a worship service that already belongs to the congregation. The pastoral office is not my place to lead, but to administrate an office that already exists. Somehow I thought of Paul, Peter, and James as apostles instead of leaders.

While the delegates were voting 65% to 35% at the 1995 LCMS Convention that all LCMS congregations should use Lutheran hymn books, flyers with Heins’ endorsement for Luecke’s book were placed on tables in the back of the Convention Hall. If the Council of Presidents were polled on that resolution, the numbers would be 80% against the name "Lutheran," hymn books, and catechisms, and 20% in favor. Marketing takes precedent over theology in the C.O.P.

Luecke argues that the worship service we see today is the result of liturgical renewal in the 60s and 70s. Luecke writes: "In Lutheran churches, the 1960s and 70s were a time of considerable attention to a movement called liturgical renewal, which concentrated on recovering worship ingredients and practices used extensively in previous centuries, especially the Sixteenth and, better, the Fourth Centuries."7  He blames the Lutheran Book of Worship for all the problems.

What lies! My TLH says it was written in 1941. It contains the Invocation, Confession and Absolution, Kyrie, Introit, Gloria in Excelsis, scripture lessons, Creed, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, Nunc Dimittis, and all the rest. I looked in my 1918 hymn book and they were all in there as well. All these were taken from German hymn books all the way back to Luther. Luther took them from the ancient church.

In the opening page Luecke recommends not using the Introit, Kyrie and Gloria in Excelsis. But there is the greatest bait and switch in the book. Church Growth also does away with the Invocation, the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer. Church Growth is not about the Introit, Kyrie, and Gloria in Excelsis. Church Growth is really about giving up the Gospel, Confession and Absolution, the appointed readings from the Scripture, Creeds, the Lord’s Prayer, any liturgy, hymnbooks, and doing what comes naturally.

Luecke appeals to the Lutheran Confessions claiming that they permit variations in worship, which they do, but not the removal of the basic parts of worship as the writers of the Confessions understood them. All the Lutheran pastors agreed to abide by the following quotes from the confessions:

"Falsely are our churches accused of abolishing the Mass....The Mass is observed among us with greater devotion and more earnestness than among our opponents...no conspicuous changes have been made in public ceremonies of the Mass...."8

"...although it is pleasing to us that, for the sake of tranquillity [unity and good order], universal rites be observed, just as also in the churches we willingly observe the order of the Mass, the Lord’s Day, and other more eminent festivals."9

"...we do not abolish the Mass but religiously keep and defend it. In our churches Mass is celebrated every Sunday and on the other festivals, when the sacrament is offered to those who wish for it after they have been examined and absolved. We keep traditional liturgical forms, such as the order of the lessons, prayers, vestments, etc."10

Glen Miller wrote a song call "In the Mood." Putting worshipers, "In the Mood," whatever mood the worship leader wants to create, is the purpose of Luecke’s endorsement of the Christian Copyright and Licensing Incorporated (CCLI) song disk on page 25 of his book. He lists the top 25 songs licensed by CCLI for contemporary worship services in the United States. There are some 5000 songs available. They are most often repetitive, syrupy, trite, mood altering, mantras strung out into 10, 15, or 20 minute song medleys prepping the "worshippers" for the mind controlling, success promising, message that follows. They think they feel closer to God but it is really the god who happens to be speaking up on the stage in front of them.

The lyrics of these songs are filled with constant verbiage on how we cooperate with, help, assist, decide for, and invite God to come into our lives and hearts. Synergism permeates the songs licensed by CCLI and published in "Songs of Praise and Worship" by Music Word, promoted on page 24-25. Rather than speak about the Holy Spirit’s operation on our hearts through the Word and sacraments, these songs are filled with emotional, synergistic, decision theology common to the Baptist, Assembly of God, Pentecostal, and Community churches. The appeal is clear, the money flows more easily from an emotion filled heart than a fact filled mind.

Naturally, Luecke does not see the Lutheran Confessions as evangelistic because the public proclamation of the Gospel and the means of grace are not enough for him. He writes:

"But missing from the Lutheran Confessions in general is concern for evangelism or outreach to those not in the folds of the church."11

Anyone who makes such a claim is unworthy of the name "Lutheran." Apart from the Creeds, the Lutheran Confessions have proven to be the most evangelistic documents published in the history of Christendom. At last record the Confessions were responsible for the Reformation and 60,000,000 Lutherans world wide. I call that evangelism, not cheep emotionalism, pandering for statistics and mindless sycophants.

Luecke, Heins, and the C.O.P. are clearly part of the overall conspiracy to destroy traditional Lutheranism for the sake of statistical success. They are simply trying to turn the LCMS into the Assembly of God with Communion once a month. Of course Luecke chooses Wednesday night so as not to offend visitor on Sunday. They trash the Reformation, Luther, Walther, and the LCMS Constitution in order not to offend the visitor on Sunday. Evidently, St. Peter’s sermon on Pentecost, when 3,000 people were baptized, would be much too offensive for evangelism today. In Acts, chapter two, Peter accuses all the "Sunday visitors" of murdering Christ.

Use of the Creeds on Trial

After reading the above criticism of his book David Luecke charged this author with libel and slander in the LCMS "Dispute Resolution Process." Luecke objected to my claim that his book promotes synergism and that he is therefore a synergist, that is, he leads people to believe they help Jesus Christ earn their salvation. Michigan Circuit Judge Gene Schnelz was selected by the Michigan District to begin the "Dispute Resolution Process" in response to Dr. Luecke’s charges.

We met on Saturday, February 10, 1996 at 10:00 a.m. Judge Schnelz, a former member of the Synod’s Commission on Constitutional Matters, is also one of the architects of the Synod’s new Dispute Resolution process adopted by the Synod in 1992. Judge Schnelz is also a volunteer Reconciler for the LCMS.

As the reader examines the following transcript keep in mind that "Dispute Resolution" is supposed to be an improvement over the former Commission on Adjudication that was replaced in 1992. Also keep in mind that Judge Gene Schnelz, with the full support of C.O.P. President John Heins, was the chief architect of this new system under which clergy are judged by lay people outside of their congregation without the presence of a theologian.

In order to give the reader a sample of the conversation prior to the discussion of the Creed, the following is Judge Schnelz’s approach to synergism. Basically he tries to show that no one knows what synergism is. However, if he is correct, then Luecke had no charge against me because I would be accusing Luecke of something that does not exist. Schnelz was trying to show how both of us had been "bad boys" and that debate about theology is nonsense, so what difference does it make.

Schnelz accuses Cascione of Synergism

(about an hour into the tape: ...)
Cascione: He said in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. But there was no Creed. The Mormons also baptize with the same formula. The Creed defines what we mean by Trinity. I believe that he (the pastor at Faith, Troy MI mentioned in Luecke’s book) agrees with the Creed. I hope I’m not going too far with that, but I think he does. But, they certainly didn’t confess it there. And what are we being baptized into? We are being baptized into the Creed. I need a definition for that phrase, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, ever since Nicea.
Judge Schnelz: Are words going to save us?"
Cascione: No.
Judge Schnelz: (angrily) You are only saved by the grace of God.
Cascione: And the meaning of the words.
Judge Schnelz: The grace of God, nothing else is going to save you. Don’t tell me any different.
Cascione: I can’t get grace without the meaning of the words.
Judge Schnelz: Then you are a synergist.
Cascione: Why?
Judge Schnelz: Because that’s the definition of synergism.
Cascione: How?
Judge Schnelz: You have said that. You have just told me you are a synergist.
Cascione: How could I get grace without the Scripture?
Judge Schnelz: I’m going to read to you from the Lutheran Cyclopedia.
Cascione: Can I get grace without the Scripture?
Judge Schnelz: You get grace through the means by God’s gift to you.
Cascione: Without the Scripture?
Judge Schnelz: Yes, Paul didn’t have the Scripture. Paul got it on the road. Didn’t he get it on the road? Where did any Scripture come from?
Cascione: He is an Apostle.
Judge Schnelz: What does that have to do with it?
Cascione: Is God going to talk to me direct?
Judge Schnelz: I am not saying you don’t, as a Christian, work to improve yourself.
Judge Schnelz: It says the synergistic view rests on such works as these. (He reads from Lutheran Cyclopedia) "If one can do nothing in his conversion he will become careless and fatalistic." (Judge looks at Cascione) That is what you are talking about. "The call to repent implies power to repent. If a man is entirely passive his conversion is mechanical. God makes conversion possible. Man makes it real." (Judge comments, I don’t believe any of this. In other words, the Judge is reading what he thinks is Cascione’s problem when Cascione says he must have God’s Word to get the Holy Spirit.) "Since man can hinder conversion he can also cooperate in it. Ability to resist implies ability to cease resisting."
Cascione: What are you saying?
Judge Schnelz: That’s synergism. Everyone of those things is synergistic. Now you just told me two things that are synergistic.
Cascione: What did I say?
Judge Schnelz: You said that if you didn’t confess that faith, that if you didn’t do it...
Cascione: No, I didn’t say that.
Judge Schnelz: That is my whole point. Remember what I said about the glass house?
Cascione: I didn’t say that.
Judge Schnelz: That’s what bothers me.
Cascione: I’m not saying that. How did I get grace without the Scripture?
Judge Schnelz: Because, God, (pause) You want me to interpret God for you. Are you telling me that God is limited in His power?
Cascione: We believe that God will not deal with us apart from Word and Sacrament.
Judge Schnelz: Wait a minute, you show me that.
Judge Schnelz: I think God’s Word,...it’s man not resisting God’s Word. That’s what it boils down to.
Cascione: We believe that God will not deal with us apart from Word and Sacrament.
Judge Schnelz: What does that mean?
Cascione: That means He is not going to come to me apart from Word and Sacrament.
Judge Schnelz: That means that I must actively seek out that Word and Sacrament.
Cascione: No, He comes to me. He calls me through Word and Sacrament.
Judge Schnelz: How did I get the Word and Sacrament?
Cascione: Through a preacher.
Judge Schnelz: "How did I get to the preacher."
Cascione: "God sent them."....(Try Romans chapter 10)

Luecke Claims Cascione Believes in Magic...

Judge Schnelz: (to Cascione) Isn’t that what you just said to me a few minutes ago, that I have to lay claim? I cannot reject?
Cascione: I’m saying you can reject it. (That is faith)
Judge Schnelz: And if I don’t reject it and I accept it?
Cascione: If you don’t reject it...
Judge Schnelz:...then you accept it.
Cascione: You know, I once tried that formula with this conclusion on a professor at the Seminary [Dr. Harold Buls in 1979]...he said they were going to hold up my ordination if I made any attempt at all to put [i.e. claim] my lack of rejection as the basis of my salvation.
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 Sacrament and gives me faith.
Luecke: Part of that giving in your faith is some acknowledgment that you have it....

Luecke and Schnelz tell Cascione Billy Graham is not a Synergist

Luecke: I agree completely with that. In fact I like the way Billy Graham put it when he was in Cleveland. That is, if I offered you a $400,000.00 car and you said, "Wait a minute, I want to put a nickel on it," that is really insulting to the one who gave it because you want to add your nickel to all the great gifts that he gives you. And that simply doesn’t work that way.
Cascione: Then Billy Graham turns around and tells everyone to come up and accept Christ because he does not assume that they are Christians unless they come up and we get the hour of decision. He takes it all back with his synergism at the end of the service.
Luecke: There is no synergism.
Cascione: The hour of decision! If you come forward and make your decision for Christ?
Luecke: Well, that is all these things: desiring, seeking, demanding. I think desire is a wonderful word for describing exactly what he is talking about.
Cascione: You come forward and make your decision for Christ?
Luecke: You (already) have made your decision.
Cascione: He doesn’t say that? He even calls it, "Decision Magazine." He is a synergist.
Luecke: I don’t agree.
Cascione: I know you don’t agree.
Luecke: I’ve listened to him preach.
Cascione: I’ve listened to him preach, too.
Judge Schnelz: (to Cascione) You are saying that when I come to your congregation after hearing a great sermon and I say I want to become a member and I accept Jesus Christ, can I become a member?
Cascione: Sure. That is an act of faith.
Judge Schnelz: It is a decision.
Cascione: It is your decision but you were not the one who brought yourself to that decision. It was the Gospel that brought you to that decision. Therefore, you cannot take credit for your own salvation.
Judge Schnelz: Billy Graham was not preaching Gospel?
Cascione: He preached the Gospel and he turned right around at the end of the service and said, "You come down and make your decision."
Judge Schnelz: You mean at the end of your service...and you say anyone interested in becoming a member here at Redeemer Lutheran Church, you have to talk to me at the end of the service--isn’t that synergism?
Cascione: I’ve invited people to become...
Judge Schnelz: Isn’t that the same thing?
Cascione: I don’t hinge salvation on their decision. God makes the decision.
Luecke: If they don’t make the decision they have to acknowledge the decision.
Cascione: That is part of the Creed, isn’t it? That is part of my confession. I believe in God...

Schnelz, Cascione, Luecke debate the use of the Creed in the LCMS

Context:
After 3 hours of debate between Dr. David Luecke and Rev. Jack Cascione over the definition of synergism, the importance of Confession and Absolution in the worship service, and how many means of grace there are, the discussion turned to the necessity of the Creeds and a clear confession of the Gospel in a communion service. We spoke about the use of the Apostle’s Creed during the communion service because Luecke prefers it to the Nicene Creed. I only held Luecke accountable to the communion service because it is currently impossible to prove there is actually a worship service taking place in the LCMS without it. There are many services of praise and celebration in the Synod, including Sunday morning at the LCMS Convention where women speak from the pulpit because its not a worship service. They hold the communion service on Saturday night. The reader will also notice that Schnelz defends private worship, something he can’t prove is actually taking place. The Bible says the church is, "wherever, two or three are gathered together in My name" (Matt. 18:20), not where one is gathered. The conversation begins with the Creed as follows from the transcript of the tape.

Cascione: To Judge Schnelz- What about the Creed?
Judge Schnelz: To Luecke- What about the Creed?
Luecke: The Creed is only there (in our congregation’s worship service) when we serve Communion.
Judge Schnelz: Do you have the Creed then?
Luecke: Not in every communion service. But here is how we do it. Anybody who comes in has a statement of faith that is like the Apostle’s Creed.
Cascione: I think the Apostle’s Creed is fine but is it part of the confession and (requirement for) membership so that I know I’m in fellowship with the people I’m taking communion with.
Luecke: Communion is certainly valid without the Creed.
Cascione: They didn’t say the Creed when Christ served the Lord’s supper, but they didn’t define Christianity either till 325 AD....
(They discuss which Creed to use.)
Judge Schnelz: You say they all get this every week, (a brochure with the Creed in it)
Cascione: They don’t all get this every Sunday. It is on a table for them to pick up.
Luecke: The people who are members know it.
Cascione: My confirmands know it. The idea is that we confess it.
Luecke: The reason I’m reluctant is that when it (the Creed) is said by rote most of the time I don’t think that is worship.
Judge Schnelz: (After three hours he finally wakes up to what is happening and that we are really putting the entire scope of the Lutheran faith through dispute resolution. Schnelz was actually unprepared for the thought that Luecke did not want to recite the Creed in a communion service.) You can’t say that because I say the Lord’s prayer every night. I have to believe with my heart. That is between me and God.
Judge Schnelz: Isn’t that the means of grace we were talking about?
Luecke: The Creed isn’t the means of grace.
Cascione: Yes, it is. The Creed is the Gospel.
Luecke: As a subsection of the word.
Cascione: The Creed is the Gospel. The Creed is my definition of the Gospel. The Creed is what I was baptized into.
Judge Schnelz: I know that I don’t need to have the Holy Spirit in me to read the Creed. But my reading the Creed helps me strengthen my faith.
Cascione: It is also a public witness at the Lord’s Supper, that this is our agreement in fellowship before I take it.
Judge Schnelz: I know that, but we are not going to decide what this Synod is going to do. If we could we are going to have to come up with something for everyone.
(Schnelz becomes uncomfortable and tries to say that what one pastor does with the Creed is not what the next pastor has to do with the Creed. However, the very Dispute Resolution Process Schnelz helped design for the Synod in 1992 was about to set the precedent for use of the Creeds in the LCMS. The Creed was going to be lost right in front of him. His entire attitude changed and he did all he could to persuade Luecke to confess the Creed in the Communion Service without appearing to persuade him.)
Cascione: I just want...
Judge Schnelz: Jack, I know what you want, you want it chapter and verse and I’m not arguing with you. David, you want it as some freedom of choice as you say Luther talked about. I understand that. Freedom of choice is what Luther wanted which is why he left the Catholic Church.
Cascione: Yes, but he (Luther) turned right around to the Livonians and told them this is how you are supposed to worship.
Judge Schnelz (talks about discussions on the CTCR....) We don’t worship Luther.... Is there a book in the Bible that Luther wrote?
Cascione: No.
Judge Schnelz: I guess the problem I’m having is I kind of side with Jack. I think a Creed a good idea at least once a month. (Note: How fortunate for the LCMS)
Luecke: Let me think of a way that kind of meets that need. We have communion liturgy that we use on a folder when we serve the Lord’s Supper. At the beginning of every communion service I take it out and show people and say this is what we believe about communion. So far we haven’t put the Apostle’s Creed in there but I would be glad to put it in there. What I resist is making everybody recite it every Sunday by rote.
Judge Schnelz: That is your freedom.
Luecke: Well sure.
Cascione: Do you put the words of institution in there?
Luecke: Sure.
Cascione: Why?
Judge Schnelz: How do you avoid the rote in that?
Luecke: I’m doing it. I’m saying the words of institution.
Judge Schnelz: The people are listening to the same thing.
Luecke: That is not the point. What Jack is looking for is that people know in what faith they are communing, and that is right. They should have a statement. I would be quite willing to print in our communion liturgy that we follow this, and this is what we believe and if you are not certain then read it.
Judge Schnelz I suppose you are saying "I, David Luecke, personally agree with these things...." (He attempts to get Luecke to agree with the basic parts of the service including the Creed.)
Luecke: Going back to the Creed, I would agree that the Apostle’s Creed be presented in the communion service.
Cascione: It has got to be a [verbal] confession. You can’t print something and make it someone’s confession.
Judge Schnelz: What about saying I believe in the use of the Apostle’s Creed.
Luecke: Fine.
Cascione: Then they don’t say it....
Cascione: I see what you are saying, but, there, at that point, we are saying we could put a Bible on a lectern, and point to it, say there is the Gospel lesson, there, there is the words of institution, there is everything.
Judge Schnelz: (suggests the wording) Participation by the congregation in the Creed.
Cascione: Most people will think that means they said the Creed.
Luecke: I prefer that a statement be presented.
Cascione: (Speaks about the 182 of the 257 hymns in the hymn book edited by Jack Hayford that Luecke recommends that don’t mention the name of Jesus. He accuses Luecke of making the church service safe for Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Pentecostals, Unitarians, and any Moslem and Jew to walk in and sing.)
Luecke: Jack, those are hymns are written by Christians for Christians.
Cascione: That is what you say.
Luecke : I know the people.
Cascione:...The hymns in this book speak about the Lord’s Supper as representational. (Cascione reads quotes from Hayford’s forward filled with synergism and charismatic style theology.12)  That book ["Songs for Praise and Worship"] is two thirds safe for Moslem worship and that is where this whole thing is going and you know it.
Luecke: That book is written by Christians for Christians.
Cascione: It is written by banana brains.
Judge Schnelz: Excuse me. ( He starts thumbing through a TLH, the one he used to have on his bike rack when he was boy going to confirmation class that he brought to the meeting. It still had the marks from the bike rack on it. He asks where did they get the words for the hymns in the hymnal? As he looks through the TLH he finds Christ and biblical words in hymn after hymn.)
Luecke: Here is my answer....
(Judge Schnelz and Cascione examine Luecke’s book recommending hymns from non-Lutheran hymn books.)
Luecke: Jack, they are written by Christians for Christians.
Cascione: I don’t sing Billy Graham’s favorite hits.
Luecke: That is your choice.
Judge Schnelz: (Notes the list of non-Lutheran hymns assembled by Cascione from the hymn book that Luecke recommended.)
Cascione (Says they are weak and reads synergistic hymn verses from the hymn book Luecke endorses in his book.)
Judge Schnelz (He summarizes that there are two spectrums of worship in the Synod but asks can we agree on the basics.)
Cascione (Produces newspaper clipping showing that Luecke visits and financially supports charismatic churches in Russia.)
Cascione Why don’t you support the Lutheran Churches in Russia. This is bizarre
Luecke: That [charismatic] church doesn’t have a creed.
Cascione: Of course not. They don’t know what they are.
Judge Schnelz: Why do you give them money?
Luecke. I visited them and they are totally Christian.
Cascione: But they don’t confess the Creed.
Judge Schnelz: Jack, judge not and you will not be judged...(They begin to debate synergism for about 10 minutes and the thought of surrendering ourselves to Christ versus doctrinal purity.)
Luecke: (He once again agrees to print the Creed in the communion folder but refuses to confess the Creed.)
Judge Schnelz: ( He gives a long explanation of the need for fundamentals in sports and importance of learning things by rote including the Creed.)
Judge Schnelz: (He offers to settle by Luecke publishing a Creed.)
Cascione: I never saw a Creed in a service that was not confessed.
Luecke: It is presented.
Judge Schnelz: (Agrees that utilization of the Creed means we say it.)
Luecke: I’m not binding myself to that.
Luecke (Repeatedly refuses to confess the Creed in the church service.)...
Judge Schnelz (Tries for agreement in practice with variation.)
Cascione: The first thing we confess is the Creed in the Lutheran Confessions.
Luecke: (Refuses to agree to confess the Creed once a month.)
Cascione: Is this a Synod of faith and practice or is this a Synod we all carry around in our hearts? I’m looking for the most basic unity here.
Judge Schnelz: I agree with you.
Luecke: (Denies he is a synergist)
Cascione: (Claims the hymns Luecke is promoting are synergistic.)
Judge Schnelz (Argues that the songs in the book are sung after conversion.)
Cascione: But Luecke’s services are designed for the unchurched.
Luecke: ( We assume they are not Christians and then have them sing songs about turning their lives over to Jesus.)
Cascione: I want to know what is the definition of contemporary worship?
Luecke: Lutheran pastors have been trained and should know what worship should be.
Cascione: So we have little popes saying, "I’ll invent worship today, trust me."
Luecke: The congregation decides that.
Judge Schnelz: (Presents a scenario on conversion...)
Luecke: (Says he doesn’t speak in tongues but he has the charismatic gift of administration.)
Cascione: The Synod doesn’t have a big enough umbrella for people who don’t want to confess a Creed.
Judge Schnelz: Luecke’s problem is the word utilization. Will I have a Creed I will confess or will I have it printed or will I read it?
Judge Schnelz: (Says he is not taking sides and is looking for common ground.)
Cascione: Worship must have the means of grace and faith....
Judge Schnelz: Are you saying I can’t worship God alone.
Cascione: I’m saying you can’t serve yourself communion.
Judge Schnelz: I’m not talking about communion.
Cascione: I am. I’m talking about the communion service.
Judge Schnelz: I need communion, but I also do need to worship God and don’t say I can’t worship God alone.
Cascione: I didn’t say that. I’m talking about corporate worship in the Missouri Synod. If everyone wants his own little denomination we don’t need a Synod. I’m talking about the fact that there must be faith on the part of the worshipers. What faith?
Luecke: That is the difference between faith in God and making statements. You are talking two different kinds of faith.
Cascione: There was such confusion at the council of Nicea they had to have a Creed to know what they were talking about.
Judge Schnelz: That is correct.
Cascione: And its still the same Dave. You can’t invent your own church.
Judge Schnelz: The Apostle’s Creed was corrected by the Nicene Creed. There is an error in the Apostle’s Creed.... We are not smart enough and wise enough...
Cascione:..to reinvent the church!
Judge Schnelz: That is my point.
Cascione: This has got to be the first time in the history of the Missouri Synod where a pastor says I want to see a Creed with a Communion Service and the other pastor says I don’t have to do it.
Judge Schnelz: I’m not going to say it is the first time.
Cascione: It has got to be rare.
Judge Schnelz: I won’t argue with that.
Luecke: Let me see if I can’t get closer. I’m not going to bind myself to having everyone confess the Creed. It is a pedagogical principle. Anyone who takes communion in the Lutheran Church should know the Creed we confess. What happens to the person who comes in unchurched and we ask that person to say the Apostle’s Creed? He may not believe it. The main point is that he has to know what Creed we confess. That is the principle that I will bind myself to.
Judge Schnelz: I guess the question is that anyone planning to take communion should say the Apostle’s Creed out loud.
Cascione: The reason I’m talking about the communion service is because that is not for the unchurched. We don’t serve the unchurched communion.
Judge Schnelz: Suppose someone wants to take communion and they didn’t recite the Creed, how do you know they have read it and understood it?
Luecke: The principles are they need to know they are sinners and they acknowledge Christ as their Savior and be ready to transform their lives.
Judge Schnelz:...my faith is meaningless unless I know what I believe. You have got to know what you believe in order to take communion.
Cascione: (Holds up the Synodical Handbook) These are the words of men. We have all of this here and I can’t get a Creed during a communion service? This is just a piece of pulp fiction....
Luecke: It has nothing to do with what the Synod approves.
Judge Schnelz: (Reads statement from Handbook on the individual congregation’s right to self government. His point being that the Handbook has made the use of Creeds optional in the LCMS.)....
Judge Schnelz: David I’m not going to argue with you. I will only tell you as an individual and an educator...in court I read the statements out loud to people before they sign them....
Cascione: The Creed is a written down statement to which everyone binds themselves which is antipenticostal.
Judge Schnelz: It doesn’t say I cannot be saved by faith alone.
Cascione: But the Creed states the Gospel, which is not some kind of intuitive vision that came to me, that I felt the Lord in my heart. The Creed is an objective....
Judge Schnelz: That’s right
Cascione: The Pentecostals despise the Creed....
Judge Schnelz: Jack you have to speak in love.
.....(There is a discussion where Luecke says the Creed is bad communication and Cascione says it’s really about Luecke making his church "Pentecostal friendly.")
Judge Schnelz: (Asks Luecke why it is bad for a congregation to recite the Creed out loud.)
Luecke: Because too often it becomes rote...
Judge Schnelz: Teaching is done by rote....(He gives many examples why rote is good.)
Cascione: (Says out loud that I thought to myself at what point would a synergist and a Pentecostal not agree?) He will not agree with the Creed.....
Luecke (Agrees to the Lord’s prayer but not to saying the Creed in the communion service. He believes that Creed is recitation but not the Lord’s prayer.)
(There is a long conversation about the importance of the Lord’s Prayer versus the Creed.)
Judge Schnelz: Which is worse, taking the chance that it becomes rote or people forgetting what the words say? Isn’t it a good idea to have them recite the Creed once in awhile.
Luecke: Absolutely! What is important for me is that they understand the faith we put in front of them.
Judge Schnelz: The Lord’s prayer is in the Bible. There is no question about that.
Judge Schnelz: The Creed will be acknowledged.
Cascione: Spoken!
Judge Schnelz: I’m tired, it is after 1:00 o’clock. (We started at 10:00AM with no break.)
Judge Schnelz: (Asks for a solution and Cascione says he will accept any one of the three Creeds.)
Cascione: It is spoken.
Cascione: (Offers to rotate the three creeds to save Luecke’s principle of pedagogy.)
Luecke: What are we trying to accomplish?
Judge Schnelz: We are trying to show that you are not promoting synergism in the church and you in fact adhere to the tenants of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.
Cascione: When do we have the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod? How do I know this a Lutheran Church.
Judge Schnelz: Intellectually, I think it is a good idea that we recite that Creed.
Luecke: I think we are arguing about a verb.
Judge Schnelz: Utilization versus spoken.
Cascione: There must be a practice.
Luecke: It will be printed in my communion liturgy. I’m saying we are going to acknowledge the Creed.
Judge Schnelz: How about full utilization by the congregation?
Luecke: I can buy that as long as that allows the possibility of the congregation saying the Creed.
Cascione: I will go with the congregation or the pastor confessing the Creed.
Luecke: I want to preserve the option of paraphrasing the Creed. (In other words putting the Creed in his own words.)
Judge Schnelz: (explains how he objected to a paraphrase of the Creed in his own congregation.)
Judge Schnelz: You know one thing you can’t paraphrase is the Miranda rights....
Luecke: Recitation does not make for a good worship service....
Luecke: My point is diversity in the worship service.
Judge Schnelz (talks about going on to a further reconciliation panel and explains we don’t know who will win.) (note: The Judge is right. He knows the confession of the Creeds is now optional in the LCMS according to the C.O.P. and the "Dispute Resolution Process." If a layman fails to keep the Creed as written in his own congregation he actually has no support in the Synod after 1992.)
Cascione: You mean the Creeds aren’t going to make it through the reconciliation process?
Judge Schnelz (Runs out of batteries for his tape recorder and notes that Cascione now has the only tape.)
Luecke (Asks for formulation that lets the Pastor speak the Creed....)

After a four hour meeting, Dr. Luecke agreed to the following statement. In turn I agreed to stop calling him a synergist.

I, David Luecke, wholeheartedly agree that all LCMS congregations and mission congregations must abide by the LCMS Constitution, Article VI, Section 4, that states all LCMS congregations follow "exclusive use of doctrinally pure agenda, hymn books and catechisms in church and school" as a condition for membership. I further believe that the Lord’s Supper should be celebrated at least once a month and that the worship service for Holy Communion should include a full confession of sin by the congregation and total absolution by the pastor or a declaration of grace, full utilization of any of the three creeds including participation by the congregation, a Scripture reading that presents the Gospel message, a sermon based on Law and Gospel, and the Lord’s Prayer.

If some of the wording sounds strange, it is because of the conditions Luecke wanted. He will only serve his church the Lord’s Supper twelve times a year, and during those occasions he will use the Invocation, Confession and Absolution, Scripture lesson, Creed, and Lord’s Prayer.

Two weeks after our meeting, Luecke wanted to back out of the agreement. He wanted the following words inserted in the agreement to modify his understanding of the LCMS Constitution.

"...as a condition for membership. This condition does not mandate regular use of an agenda or hymn book but expects that whatever resources are used in worship or education should be doctrinally pure. I further believe...."

I refused to agree to the change Luecke, the master of change, wanted to make in the above agreement. Schnelz tried to encourage my cooperation with Luecke on this change but I refused to renegotiate.

After Luecke agreed to the above statement this writer agreed to publicly ask Luecke’s forgiveness for calling him a synergist and continue to do. However, it was also agreed during the conversation that I may denounce his book as promoting synergism. Schnelz said I could condemn the book but not the author. God save the LCMS from the C.O.P., John Heins, David Luecke’s book, the Church Growth Movement, contemporary worship, leadership principles, and apathetic lay people and clergy who have no concern for preserving the clear confession of the Gospel.

For all of his confusion about Christian doctrine this author certainly admires Schnelz’s sincere attempt of layman to preserve the basic parts of worship in a communion service. Schnelz’s appeal to the Miranda Rights as the basis for not changing the wording of the Creeds may have been the best he could do to maintain the true confession of the Gospel in the LCMS. As Schnelz explained, the decision in "Dispute Resolution" can go almost any way depending on the opinion of the Reconcilers and the Dispute Resolution Panel. Schnelz’s ruling actually sets no precedent for any other forum. The agreement on the confession of the Creed is only between Dr. Luecke and myself. In a sense the three of us established our own little Synod. Any congregation, pastor, or district board can actually confess anything they choose. The entire "Dispute Resolution Process" is relative as is the Creed one chooses to confess or not confess in an LCMS church service. What was once, "thus saith the Lord" is now "thus is now my opinion of what the Lord saith."

The pastor who charges someone else in "Dispute Resolution" is moving into a forum with no moral, ethical, or doctrinal absolutes. Don’t waste your time. Settling differences on the basis of feelings, and relationships makes immutable facts irrelevant. The determination of right and wrong is now achieved by consensus facilitated by a Reconciler. The Reconciler’s methodology appears to be based on social psychology which is no different than transformational Marxism. The rules of evidence are superseded by the needs of the "group." Through the use of transformational processing and the application of the Delphi Technique the outcome is predetermined and then the system is set up to achieve the outcome. Any District President may set aside the ruling of the Reconciler which they often do. My prayer is that the delegates to the 1992 convention, who voted for this new system of "justice" in the LCMS, may learn why they don’t want to experience similar treatment through the civil courts. The callous disregard for facts and evidence they have shown for the administration of the Gospel in Christ’s Church has turned my life in the Synod into an Orwellian nightmare. Judge Schnelz created the venue of his dreams, the court of his own opinion. The District President is now "big brother." Now how do we all "feel" about that?

1.    David Luecke, "The Other Story of Lutherans as Worship" Fellowship Ministries, 6202 S. Maple St., Suite 121, Tempe, Arizona, 85283, 1995, back cover

2.    Concordia Triglotta, Apology, CPH, St. Louis, 1921, page 163

3.    David Luecke, "The Other Story of Lutherans as Worship" Fellowship Ministries, 6202 S. Maple St., Suite 121, Tempe, Arizona, 85283, 1995, page 40

4.    Ibid., page 90

5.    Ibid., page 35

6.    Ibid., page 78, see also pages 11, 17, 58, 91, 118, 121, 123

7.    Ibid., page 10

8.    Concordia Triglotta Acxxiv. par. 1 page 65.

9.    Concordia Triglotta Apvii. par. 33 page 239

10.    Concordia Triglotta Apxxiv. par. 1 page 383

11.    David Luecke, "The Other Story of Lutherans as Worship" Fellowship Ministries, Tempe, Arizona, 85283, 1995, page 63

12.    Jack Hayford, "Songs for Praise and Worship" Word Music, Division of Word, Inc, 1992
The following is just one paragraph from a two page forward by the editor of "Songs for Praise and Worship," Jack Hayford. For I am convinced that the Holy Spirit is waiting for hearts that hunger and thirst for an unprecedented visitation of God to our generation--displaying His glorious power and might to every culture and in every church. And I am equally convinced that the one pathway to having that take place is a reformation in the worship-life of the Church, just as dramatic and dynamic as the reformation in the theology of the Church was five centuries ago. I believe that reformation begins for each of us in our perceiving the true purpose and spiritual dynamic in worship. What has been defined for so long as an hour’s exercise on Sunday is being redefined today, and at the heart of this redefinition is music. (Author’s note: Quite frankly if the Holy Spirit is waiting for "hearts that hunger and thirst" as they say, hell will freeze over first. If the church is waiting for a visitation from God without the word and sacraments it is waiting for the devil. The Reformation is based on law and Gospel and not human perception that is by nature evil.)

Rev. Jack Cascione is pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church (LCMS - MI) in St. Clair Shores, Michigan. He has written numerous articles for Christian News and is the author of Reclaiming the Gospel in the LCMS: How to Keep Your Congregation Lutheran. He has also written a study on the Book of Revelation called In Search of the Biblical Order.
He can be reached by email at pastorcascione@juno.com.

April 17, 1999

 

[ Back ] [ Home ] [ Up ] [ Next ]