There was no balm in Gilead and no joy in the paper given by Dr. David
Scaer at the 2002 Fort Wayne Symposium.
The halls of hyper-euro-Lutheranism are still shaking after the 2001 LCMS
Convention adopted Resolution 7-17a. Scaer warned that the adoption of 7-17a
was an act against Christ.
This resolution reaffirmed Walther's "Church and Ministry" and
thus voter supremacy, as the only official congregational polity of the LCMS.
It was Montana District President, Dr. George Wollenburg, Chairman of Floor
Committee Seven, and the champion of Walther's "Church and Ministry"
who brilliantly guided Resolution 7-17a, after a long hard floor fight, to a
rousing 73% to 27% victory. In a dramatic moment, Wollenburg held Walther's
book over his head and declared, "This is Synod's Magna Carta!"
It was also Wollengburg who led the Convention to support Resolution 7-11
by more than 90%. This resolution declared that Synod couldn't hold equity in
any congregation.
Now brooding over the defeat, Dr. David Scaer, the dark lord of medieval
clergy domination, explained to a record 775 pastors, students, faculty, and
officials why the Synod must gain control of congregational properties in
order to be a true church. Scaer's paper was received with thunderous
applause.
In the past four years this writer published two books through CN,
"Reclaiming the Gospel in the LCMS" and, most recently, "How To
Start or Keep Your Own LCMS Congregation."
One of the major premises of these books is that the loss of congregational
polity and voter supremacy would result in the loss of congregational
property. Copies were sent to every convention delegate explaining why they
should reaffirm Walther's "Church and Ministry" if they wanted to
keep control of their churches and church property.
It is only by the grace of God, that little Redeemer Lutheran Church in St.
Clair Shores, Michigan, was instrumental in leading the adoption of 7-17a. Its
repercussions are now being felt throughout the LCMS.
There were many outstanding papers, but none of them supported Walther's
position.
Doctor David Scaer's paper was titled, "Missouri's Identity Crisis:
Rootless in America." In the following section from his paper, Scaer
laments that the passage of 7-17a keeps Synod from controlling local
congregations.
After you read it, I'm convinced that some will believe congregations, for
their own good, would be better served if they were owned by the Synod.
Now that Scaer's hyper-euro-Lutheran faction was thoroughly defeated with
the adoption of 7-17a, he and others must blatantly lead the charge to
overturn 7-17a at the next LCMS Convention.
Scaer writes as follows:
"Church as Corporation Another group understands the Synod as an
association of congregations held together historically by a commitment to
the Lutheran Confessions and in practice as members of an ecclesiastical
corporation sealed by an oath to uphold the Synodical handbook. 'Walking
together' is the code term for this group. Synod is thought of as also a
corporation of congregations and employees bonded together by retirement and
health plans. This corporation invests funds and owns properties. Doctrinal
differences and disagreements among members are handled as disputes within
the corporate structure. District presidents who authorized the ordination
of uncertified Seminex graduates were removed for a Handbook violation.
Though organizational matters are seen as adiaphora, the corporate view
affects how ministry is defined. Anyone employed by a member congregation or
a Synod entity is put into a common pot called 'professional church
workers,' a phrase or idea unknown by the Bible or the Confessions. This
kind of language allows congregations to see pastors as just one kind of
minister, pushes the pastors into the category of employee, and makes the
congregation the final judge in all matters of doctrine, polity and
practice. This can be personally disastrous for the pastors and worse, it
denies Christ's establishment of the ministry, which is at the heart of the
Walther resolution (7-17a). A corporate view of the Synod also sees it as an
educational system of colleges and seminaries that are virtually autonomous
in their funding and governance. Pre-ministerial programs are often subsumed
into other departments and their students listed in the general category of
'church workers.' Lutheran enrollment may have increased in the last years,
but rare is the school where Missouri Synod students account for more than
half of the student body.
"Several resolutions of the 2001 convention reinforced the corporate
view of Synod. Resolution 7-08, 'To Add New Bylaw to Govern Dissolution of
Synod Wide Corporate Entities,' allows the Board of Directors to dissolve
institutions like colleges to limit the Synod's liability. Things financial
and not theological determine the fate of institutions. Resolution 7-ll, 'To
Move Property Ownership Bylaw to Constitution,' reaffirms that the Synod is
more a corporation than a church by asserting that it has no equity in a
congregation's property. This prevents the Synod from expanding its
financial resources at the expense of congregations, but it can also be used
to show that the Synod has no responsibilities for its congregations. It
allows for a bizarre congregationalism in which any number of people can
constitute a legal meeting and can deprive others not in attendance of
church property. This follows from seeing the Synod as a free association of
congregations and not a church. Fellowship between congregations of the same
faith is merely voluntary and lacks a confessional center to hold it
together. This has its consequences and may be a cause that more and more
congregations give less and less or even nothing to support the Synod, which
then is increasingly dependent on direct bequests and grants from
foundations. Synod is now really a not for profit organization which
resembles other charitable and educational institutions. Not only do its
educational institutions have a freer hand in the conduct of their affairs,
but congregations are freed up to adopt their own requirements for Baptism,
Confirmation, and admission to the Lord's Supper. Whether or not the terms
like 'sovereign' and 'autonomous' are theologically appropriate for
congregations, they do describe the state of affairs. Sadly the downside is
that Synod loses its churchly character and we see ourselves as members of a
mere confederation at best and a free association at worst. How we organize
ourselves as synod does affect how we understand ourselves."
Rarely have I ever read a more manipulative string of false dichotomies and
assumptions in such a compact space. On this issue, Scaer is brilliant and
totally wrong.
As we read above, the "other group in the Synod" is those who
want to keep voter supremacy, congregational self-governance and own their own
property with in the Synod. "Synod" is that awful buzzword Scaer
refers to for, "Walking Together." That is why they called it,
"Synod."
Those pejorative "others" want to follow the Synodical Handbook.
What a sin! How right Scaer is. Yet, for Scaer, this means at the expense of
following the Bible and Lutheran Confessions. Hence, the old LCMS was bad.
He blames the lack of doctrinal unity and practice in the Synod on an
impersonal corporation, but fails to state how often that the Council of
District Presidents has neglected to follow the doctrinal regulations of the
Synod in their districts. Hence, Scaer makes the LCMS Corporation itself, and
not pastoral and congregational neglect of doctrine and practice, the cause of
evil.
He encourages pastors to join the battle to take over church property
because they are being treated like employees. Of course, Scaer's definition
of the ministry is that the pastor receives extra grace through the
"sacrament of ordination." To him, all LCMS pastors have been
employees since the beginning of the Synod. If he has his way, the pastors
will have full authority over the congregations. How fortunate for the
congregations.
Scaer claims that 7-17a "makes the congregation the final judge in all
matters of doctrine, polity and practice." What Scaer denounces here is
what Walther calls the heart of the LCMS and we applaud.
He calls 7-17a "personally disastrous for pastors and worse, it denies
Christ's establishment of the ministry."
There you have it. Traditional LCMS voters' assemblies and voter supremacy
are bad for pastors and against Christ, says David Scaer. Maybe we should all
surrender the deed to our churches to the LCMS right now so that we can go to
heaven. Let's throw in the deeds to our homes for good measure.
The following sentence explaining why the Synod can't be a
"church" unless it owns church property is a beauty. "This
prevents the Synod from expanding its financial resources at the expense of
congregations, but it can also be used to show that the Synod has no
responsibilities for its congregations."
Here is a switch. The congregation's were originally supposed to be
responsible for the Synod and now the Synod can't be responsible for the
congregations unless it owns them.
Scaer calls voter supremacy and ownership of church property "a
bizarre congregationalism." One wonders why he originally joined a
bizarre Synod like the LCMS.
What happens when the Synod doesn't own the congregations? For Scaer it
means the Synod "loses its churchly character." In other words, the
Synod, which was created by the congregations, should now be the church over
the congregations.
The Church Growth Movement and PLI promote pastors as CEO's and the
hyper-euro-Lutherans promote pastors as the Bishops in their congregations. In
either case, the congregations will eventually lose control of their property.
Loss of church property begins with the voters' assemblies meeting less
frequently. Then boards of directors or elders make decisions for their
congregations. Then the CEO's or Bishops help steer control of the deed into
the hands of the District.
Resolution 7-17a, a great victory led by Montana District President George
Wollenburg at the 2001 LCMS Convention, must not be overturned in 2004!
This is just one of the reasons why this writer did not support Dr. Dean
Wenthe as President of the LCMS and will never support Dr. Dean Wenthe as
President of the LCMS.