The following includes another letter from the
Chairman of the Board of Regents of Fort Wayne defending his faculty's refusal to explain
the polity that it is teaching or not teaching to its students. Such a position signals
continuing chaos and the inevitable decline of the LCMS. Christ said, "A house
divided cannot stand." The faculty at Fort Wayne won't even acknowledge the existence
of the house.
We also include our reply to Rev. Anderson in a
second letter in this release.
July 2, 2000
The Rev. Herman Otten
Christian News
3277 Boeuf Lutheran Road
New Haven, MO 63068
Dear Brother Herman,
I have always had the highest regard for you and for your integrity and of course,
still do. However, today we have a problem. You are contributing to the destruction of my
name and reputation.
Jack Cascione earlier accused me of using expletives when I talked to him in Chicago in
April. I called him on it, and he admitted (also in print in CN, June 26, 2000) that I had
referred to some of what he had said, not with expletives, but with the slang word
"crap" which he said I used repeatedly. I seriously doubt that I used it
repeatedly but, even so, it only means "nonsense" according to Webster; although
it undoubtedly is not the best word for a Christian to use.
He then went on to misrepresent what I had written. (To me it seems intentional and
willful.) Fortunately I have copies of my letters, which were also printed in CN. Without
going into a lot of detail, let me mention a couple examples. He wrote! "It appears
Anderson got his signals crossed. I polled the faculty on their support for Voter
Supremacy and discovered that only six out Of 33 agreed to it. Then on May 11, Anderson
did a reverse and begins accusing me of attacking the greatest Seminary in the world for
suggesting that as many as six of their (sic) faulty might agree with Voter Supremacy.
Anderson writes 's (Cascione's statement.) 'At this time, 6 of the 33 professors at Fort
Wayne have agreed with Walther's Voter Supremacy' doesn't mean too much.' Anderson had to
go back to the faculty to find out what the greatest Seminary in the world believes about
Voter Supremacy so he could defend their position whatever it is at the moment."
My position has not changed and I take issue with Cascione for suggesting that my,
theologica1 stance changes with the wind. The full quote on that point stated! "The
faculty met a couple of weeks back to discuss whether or not to respond to his
(Cascione's) attacks. And it was decided that he would never stop, no matter what was
said. Thus they resolved to let the matter drop with- out further comment- So his
statements at this time' "6 of the 33 professors at Fort Wayne have agreed with
Walther's voter supremacy" doesn't mean too much. He should readily understand that
what doesn't mean too much was the result of his poll as the faculty decided not to
respond any further.
In the next paragraph in his 6/26/2000 article he said: "I'm well aware Anderson
believes my writing about voter supremacy is crap-' who needs those stupid lay people? The
Synod can do very well with no polity, thank you very much." That is again the spin
he put on my comments. Some of what he said was nonsense, i.e. "crap" but not
Voter Supremacy as such. I always supported Voter Supremacy and always will. A1so, I still
don't know of any Fort Wayne professor who doesn't support a similar view, whether you
want to call it "Voter Supremacy" i.e. "Congregational se1f
government," "Congregational Autonomy" or something else entirely. (That
doesn't mean that there aren't any; I just don't know about it, if there are.) And yet the
scriptures do not set forth any particular form of church polity- Our synod decided on
what form we would polity," and I have always abided by that.
Cascione also seems to have a problem with referring to CTS as "the greatest
seminary in the world-" The manner in which he uses that phrase over and over again,
literally dripping with sarcasm, is offensive to me. But that's his right. I still stand
by the fact that in my estimation it is "the greatest seminary in the World."
And I praise God for it-
If he does not willfully lie, he apparently tries to misunderstand and plays fast and
loose with the truth. He judges people's motives and puts his own imagined spin on things.
And this is true, not even in his responses to me, but also in his letters to others. If
he wants to be truthful he should not quote things out of context, as he has done with me
and with others. What is more, I feel that he does this on purpose, but of course that is
only my opinion. Yet I maintain that the Synod in the immediate future has far more
important issues to race than Voter supremacy.
I would like an apology from him for what I believe is an intentional attempt to
destroy me and my reputation and, yes Herman also one from you for repeating his untruths
in print.
Sincerely in Christ Jesus,
David L. Anderson
1413 9th Avenue North
Fort Dodge, IA 50501
(515) 575-5842
FAX: (515) 576-3690
Reply to Rev. David L. Anderson
By Jack Cascione
Over the years, Rev. Herman Otten has been unscrupulously fair in publishing opposing
points of view on issues in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. This has been one of the
outstanding hallmarks of CN. Now, Rev. David L. Anderson, Chairman of the Board of Regents
of Fort Wayne writes to Herman Otten: "You are contributing to the destruction of my
name and reputation."
If Otten were only publishing his views, there wouldn't be any Christian News. Otten
has published a number of articles critical of my positions. If he did not allow rebuttal,
it wouldn't be Christian News, but OE, Otten's Editorials.
If Anderson isn't able to take criticism for Fort Wayne's refusal to endorse Voter
Supremacy, he should not blame Otten.
I stand by my quotations in Anderson's latest letter because they are taken from his
own letters. From my observation, he is at best hopelessly confused on what Voter
Supremacy is. He promised a reply from the Academic Dean to my question. Nothing was
received. I polled the faculty with the following question.
"The following are three quotations on Voters' Assemblies. Do these quotations
represent the position of the Faculty and Board at Fort Wayne?
'Finally the congregation is represented as the SUPREME TRIBUNAL, Matt.18:15-18....'
Note 7 on p 29 refers to this using the term 'highest jurisdiction' and referring in turn
to the 'Power and Primacy Of the Pope,' 'highest and final jurisdiction to the church..'
(Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis, 1989, p.24)
'In public church affairs nothing should be concluded without the vote and consent of
the congregation.' (Form of the Christian Congregation, C.F.W Walther, CPH, St. Louis,
1989, p.48)
'A. The Voters' Meeting: If the congregation is to function and fully exercise its
DIVINELY IMPOSED RIGHTS AND DUTIES in a conscientious, profitable, and God-pleasing
manner, IT MUST, in the first place, hold public church assemblies in which it considers
and determines all things THAT ARE NECESSARY for its special church management. Such
public executive church assemblies Christ presupposes when He commands Matt. 18:17-18
'Tell it unto the church.' Such executive assemblies were generally maintained in the
first Christian congregations, as the Book of Acts records, 1:15. 23-25, Acts 15:5: 23. We
call these assemblies, voters' meetings, for we admit to them as authorized to vote only
the adult male members of the church. Since the final authority in all matters is vested
in the congregation and not in a few members of the congregation, it would seem evident
that all of the members of the congregation are responsible for what the congregation
does. But God Himself has made certain restrictions.' ('The Abiding Word' CPH, 1947,Vol.
II, page 460 "The Lutheran Congregation" by G. Perlich)"
Only 6 of the 33 professors agreed to these quotations as the position of the LCMS on
Voter Supremacy. Now the faculty says it won't answer because I will never be satisfied.
They are correct. I will never be satisfied until they agree with the position of the LCMS
on Voter Supremacy, and they refuse.
Anderson says that the entire faculty agrees with Voter Supremacy. Yet, professor
Marquart writes: "'Voter Supremacy' is worldly, political sloganeering. Zeal for any
'supremacy' except Christ's is alien to His church. One might as well be shouting: 'All
Power to the Soviets!' How's that for Hyper-Euro-Proletarianism?"
The only one destroying David Anderson's reputation is David Anderson.
Marquart is in favor of "Congregational Self-Governance" which Anderson
incorrectly equates with "Voter Supremacy." "Congregational
Self-Governance" is such a nebulous elastic term even Martin Stephan was in favor of
Congregational Self-Governance which is why the German authorities hounded him out of
Dresden. Without the definition of Voter Supremacy, congregational self-governance by
itself could include an autonomous dictatorship, corporate hierarchy or episcopacy.
Marquart's own interpretation is that the congregation should control the property, but
not have the final word in judging doctrine or the pastor.
Pastor Steve Bohler, a recent graduate of Fort Wayne, speaking of Voter Supremacy
writes in defense of Anderson: "BUT I deny that you (Cascione) or anyone else has the
right or mandate to demand such a polity;.."
This is the real position that Fort Wayne is teaching its graduates. Congregations in
the Synod are free to follow any polity they choose. With this position, graduates of both
Seminaries must inevitably break up the Synod, as we know it.
Anderson is the Chairman of the Board and he cannot avoid being accountable for Fort
Wayne and its graduates refusing to support Voter Supremacy as the only official polity of
the LCMS. The Seminaries are simply changing the polity of the LCMS without agreement of
the Convention.
If the laypeople don't support a resolution supporting Voter' Supremacy at the 2001
Convention, the laypeople of the LCMS will lose control of their congregations like all of
the other mainline denominations in America.
Anderson said it himself. The greatest Seminary in the world refuses to respond and be
accountable for any position on polity in the LCMS. They are actually working against the
existence of the LCMS as we know it.
There is little wonder why the graduates of our two Seminaries would not voice a single
objection to the adoption of the Michigan District Core Values at the District's recent
Convention. The reason is simple. They have no polity.
Anderson should resign.