YOU GOTTA!
By Herbert Schaefer, Ph.D*"YOU GOTTA" means, "You have to believe, do or practice something. There are two kinds of YOU GOTT As - those which are of faith or belief (the Gospel, which is of the "right hand Regime" of God in Lutheran confessional theology) and those which are of practice, order or polity (the Law, that is, of the "left hand Regime" of God).
Church constitutions are full of YOU GOTTA’s. There is nothing wrong with this. They state the agreed order by which a congregation or community governs itself. For example, a congregation must call its pastor from among those named on the ELCA pastors' roster if it wants to remain a congregation of the ELCA-unless, of course, the Bishop refuses to invoke the YOU GOTT A. This has happened with the current Bishop of the Sierra Pacific Synod who flatly refuses to act against University Lutheran Chapel for calling a pastor not on the roster of the ELCA (see accompanying article: "A Good Shepherd Letter.")
The issue which is now dividing the ELCA, breaking the unity of the church and driving it tow a r d "'YOU GOTTA' schism, is means, "You have to believe, do or basically a practice something." It’s a matter of YOU GOTTA. The ELCA leadership insists that adoption of the Lutheran Episcopal document, "Called to Common Mission" (CCM), with its uncompromising prescribed historic episcopate (HE) is such an YOU GOTTA. It is only a matter of polity or order, says the leadership, not a matter of belief or doctrine. The Lutheran Confessions would call the HE a non-differentiating idea, an "adiaphoron," that is, a polity by which a congregation or church governs itself that is not germane to salvation. It is a matter of order. Thus, since the governance of a church is not a matter of salvation, a church is free to adopt whatever form of government it chooses.
Why Not?
?If the ELCA wishes to have pastors and bishops with the HE as a strategy for Christian unity and for the governance of the church, say the ELCA leaders, it is free to choose to do so - and has done so in 1999 at the Denver ChurchWide Assembly. Since both the ELCA and the Episcopal Church confess that salvation is by faith in Christ alone, the adoption of the CCM and hE in no way affects this commitment. So, adopting the hE without coercion makes it a matter of polity, not belief. Therefore, all in the church are to practice this whether they believe it or not. We are to do this for the sake of order, not doctrine.
What is wrong with this? argue the ELCA leaders. The HE is not about salvation. It is not contrary to the Gospel. It has not been laid upon us by the Episcopalians. It is a
YOU GOTTA of governance, of order. Therefore, the ELCA leadership presses on in its determination to implement HE in the church.
But there are those in the ELCA who are adamantly opposed to the CCM and the historic episcopate laity, clergy, congregations and synods. They do not buy the reasoning of the church leaders. They insist the HE, as a YOU GOTTA is not simply a matter of polity. For these protestors it is also a matter of doctrine, of belief. They therefore ask for "wiggle room," that is, ask for the removal of the HE from the category of YOU GOTTA. As the church provided "wiggle room" to those who, as a matter of conscience objected to the ordination of women, they argue that the ELCA should now accommodate those who are conscience bound to reject the CCM with its HE. Some of their arguments are as follows: violation of Article 7 of the foundational Lutheran confession of faith, the Augsburg Confession (AC).lt asserts, "for the unity of the church it suffices that the Gospel be preached purely and that the sacraments be administered in accord with the Gospel." As Prof. Ed Schroeder says, "One might say that these AC 7 specs amount to YOU GOTTA’s for the unity of the church, but they are the unique YOU GOTTA’s without which there is no unity of the church at all. Preaching the Gospel purely and doing the sacraments in accord with the Gospel, constitute, create, maintain the church's unity. Without these it doesn't exist."
Adopting HE as a sign of unity in the church is an unacceptable add on. Faith is created by the Holy Spirit working through the Word of God and the sacraments. It is the consequence of the Holy Spirit working in us, of God's acting in accordance with his promise. It is not dependent on human intervention in any way. The church, God's own people, are called to faith and salvation by God through His Word and Sacraments, and by nothing else.
So, placing bishops and pastors on a level with God's Word and Sacraments as a sign of unity is contrary to our Confessions. It is heresy, which cannot be accepted.No Elitism
2. The HE is contrary to Lutheran doctrine and practice of the priesthood of believers. All who have been brought by God's Spirit to saving faith in Jesus Christ are equal members of Christ's holy Church. There is no rank among believers. All are sinners and all are saints. The blood of the Lamb washes away the sins of all equally. All are members of the Royal Priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people (I Peter2:9). All have received mercy and all "are to declare the praises of him who called [them] out of darkness." All are responsible for the work of the church. All are to be missionaries, for if one is not a missionary, one is a missionary field.
According to Luther, all are ordained in their baptism to be ambassadors of Christ. The pastor, and therefore the bishop, is specially called to serve an equipping function within the community of believers. But the ordination is of all who are baptized. Therefore, all authority rests in the community of believers. The right to call and ordain rests with the believers, that is, with the congregation.
The validity of an ordination does not depend on the laying on of hands by bishops with historic succession. It rests with the community that calls and ordains a person. So also, in the last analysis, responsibility for the preaching/teaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments rests with the congregation, the community of believers, not with a bishop or pastor who, by virtue of the laying on of hands by a bishop with HE in his/her ordination is given special rank or responsibility.
Moreover, in this day and age, when society is ever moving toward decentralization, the imposition of a hierarchical structure of governance may be wrong as an "adiaphoron." For it places undue responsibility on the bishop and pastor; it negates God's mission rather than enhances it.
3. The imposition of the historic episcopate on the ELCA makes it a matter or doctrine, not polity, and therefore contrary to the Lutheran Confessions. An increasing number of persons within the ELCA are saying, "If you do not like our decision to force the HE by means of the CCM agreement, get out and seek church membership elsewhere." Presiding Bishop Anderson is reputed to have said of seminarians who object to HE that they should seek ordination in some other church. In other words, no "wiggle room" is to be granted to synods, congregations, pastors and individuals who, as a matter of faith, oppose the CCM and HE.
This impacts the unity of the church, and the unity of the church is a Gospel issue. "Telling people to seek their fellowship elsewhere, or coercing their departure, for any reason other than that they no longer trust the Gospel, is itself 'contrary to the Gospel'" (Schroeder). According to Article 10 of the Formula of Concord, another endorsed confessional statement of the ELCA, when an "adiaphoron" becomes a YOU GOTTA for remaining a member of Christ's church it must be disobeyed.
It is time for all members of the ELCA boldly to profess that the Word of God and the administration of the sacraments is "satis est", enough, all sufficient (AC 7), for the unity of the Church. HE, as now held by the ELCA, instead of being a sign of unity, is tearing asunder what the Gospel has joined together.
May our Lord grant both the leadership of the ELCA and those who are opposed to the CCM and the HE the wisdom, charity and patience to overcome the present impasse in the ELCA.
*Dr. Schaefer is president of the FELLOWSHIP OF CONFESSIONAL LUTHERANS, and former Sec. of Education for the Lutheran World Federation. He explains: I want to acknowledge a debt to Ed Schroeder for introducing me through his article on the WAN Iistserv, to the phrase, "YOU GOTTA, " and for some of the rationale which follows.
SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU
Since about 1875, a concerted effort to discredit the Bible as the authoritative source for our faith and life has laid siege to churches in the West. It has finally also infiltrated the Lutheran theological witness in this country.
Strangely, our ELCA laity have had such confidence in their pastoral leadership that they seldom questioned what they heard from the pulpit. Until the mid '90s, that is. Then their shocked eyes saw from the national media that our ELCA leaders intended to foist upon the ELCA a strictly unbiblical pattern of sexual behaviors. ELCA support was to be given to indiscriminate premarital and extramarital liaisons and to the deviancy of homosexual lifestyles. An outraged membership forced the hasty withdrawal of the document.
But the defense of these biblical aberrations continues on the plea that we can no longer trust the biblical witness, old-fashioned and unscientific as it is. Don't we know so much more now? Pastor Jensen wants to remind the ELCA teachers and clergy that the Bible remains astonishingly contemporary.
The whole question before us again is "The Word Alone". Is "The Word Alone" our "Source and Norm of our Church's Faith and Life", as our ELCA constitutional pledge states? Or is it not? For the last 483 years since Luther nailed his 95 theses on the door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg, that has been the issue. It is God's Word, the Bible--both Old and New Testaments--that sits in judgment upon popes, bishops, priests, pastors and the councils of the church. This is what I solemnly vowed to uphold and maintain since I was ordained 47 years ago.
Even today when a pastor is ordained, he is reminded by the following words: "The Church in which you are to be ordained confesses that the Holy Scriptures are the Word of God and are the norm of its faith and life. We accept, teach, and confess the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds. We also acknowledge the Lutheran Confessions as true witnesses and faithful expositions of the Holy Scriptures. Will you therefore preach and teach in accordance with the Holy Scriptures and these creeds and confessions?"
The answer, given by the candidate, is: "I will, and I ask God to help me!" When the pastor is installed he is asked: "Will you preach and teach in accordance with the Holy Scriptures and the Confessions of the Lutheran Church? And in turn he answers: "I will, and I ask God to help me!"
I dare say this is no small matter or insignificant vow that one can easily forget or deny in the course of one's ministry.
This is a "life-long" commitment that the pastor makes before God and the congregation he is called to serve.
Suddenly to insist that we are more enlightened today than in St. Paul's day, and that we don't have to pay any attention to or can simply dismiss passages that deal with our sexual expressions, such as Romans 1: 18ft or First Corinthians 6:9-11, both violates the vows we made and goes against our confessions.
I think that the eminent biblical scholar William Barclay can help us here. In his commentary on The Letters to the Corinthians, p. 51ft., he puts it tar better than I can. He speaks in terms of Christ as the great "Lite Changer" who is able to change lives even today!
Here are a few paragraphs from his commentary on I Corinthians 6:911, under the title, "Such Were Some of You."
“Here St. Paul breaks out a terrible catalogue of sins, a grim commentary on the debauched civilization in which the Corinthian Church was growing up. There are certain things, which are not pleasant to talk about, but we must look at this catalogue to understand the environment of the early Christian Church. Look and see that human nature has not changed very much. There were fornicators and adulterers .... there were idolaters .... there were sensualists ... there were thieves and robbers . . . there were drunkards ... there were rapacious men and robbers . . . "
Barclay adds on page 53,"We have left the most unnatural sin to the end ... there were homosexuals. This sin had swept like a cancer through Greek life, and from Greece invaded
Rome. We can scarcely realize how riddled the ancient world was with it.
"Even so great a man as Socrates practiced it. Plato's dialogue The Symposium is always said to be one of the greatest works on love in the world, but its subject is not natural but unnatural love. Fourteen of the first fifteen Roman Emperors practiced unnatural vice. At this very time Nero was emperor. He had taken a boy called Sporus and had him castrated. He then married him with a full marriage ceremony and took him home in procession to his palace and lived with him as his wife. With incredible viciousness, Nero had himself married a man called Pythagoras and called him his husband. When Nero was eliminated and Otho came to the throne, one of the first things he did was to take possession of Sporus. In this particular vice, in the time of the Early Church, the world was lost to shame; and there can be little doubt that this was one of the main causes of its degeneracy and the final collapse of its civilization.
"After this dreadful catalogue of vices, natural and unnatural, comes Paul's shout of triumph, 'AND SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU.''' The proof of Christianity lay in its power. It could take the dregs of humanity and make them into men (and women). It could take people lost to shame and make them children of God. There were in Corinth, and all over the world, people who were living proofs of the recreating power of Christ.
"The power of Christ is still the same. No man can change himself, but Christ can change him . . ."
By indulging, coddling, studying, agreeing with alternative life-styles etc., etc., we are denying the power of Christ to change people and thus denying Christ himself. Minister to homosexuals, yes, indeed. Proclaim the Word of God, the law and the Gospel, yes indeed! But tolerate the sin, overlook it, or any other sin for that matter. ... NO! If Christ can take a Mary Magdalene and cast out seven demons from her; if Christ can take a woman who was caught in adultery and forgive her and restore her and tell her, "Go your way and sin no more – then He can surely do that also for the homosexual-male or female.*Pastor Jensen has had a long and distinguished career as a Canadian and USA pastor, bringing to the ELCA the inheritance of the Danish Lutheran congregations of the United Evangelical Lutheran Church. His father was the forthright editor of the Ansgar Lutheran, a predecessor official journal incorporated into the ELCA through the Lutheran Standard.
GOOD NEWS GETS AROUND
Disheartened over the lethargy of American church life? As never before, Christianity is reaching around the world, affirms Charles Lindquist, General Director of the World Mission Prayer League. This independent mission movement, largely peopled by ELCAers, has 125 people sharing Christ around the globe.
Lindquist quotes Luis Bush of AD 2000 and Beyond who estimates that by end of 2001 , eight out of ten people will have access to the entire Bible in their own language, nine out often will have access to the New Testament. Radio broadcasts are expected to cover 99% of the world's population.
Lindquist notes that the unevangelized, as a percent of the world's population, have decreased steadily throughout the last century-from 50.2% to 25.7% in the past 100 years. So the Good News is getting around, and we can begin to sense the fulfillment of Jesus' timetable for the end of the world: "And this Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come. (Matthew 24: 14).
A GOOD SHEPHERD LETTER
The following letter from Pastors Ron Thoreson, Phil Lee, and Kelly Crithfield was published in the November 2000 edition of the newsletter of The Lutheran Church of The Good Shepherd in Sacramento, CA. This letter to Bishop Robert W. Mattheis is in response to a September 29, 2000 letter from the Bishop to the Sierra Pacific Synod membership in which he states that he has decided not to discipline University Lutheran Chapel in Berkeley, CA for issuing a call to Jeff Johnson to serve as its pastor.
Jeff is a homosexual who refuses to abide by the ELCA policy which requires pastors of the ELCA to remain celibate if they are not a married man or woman living in a heterosexual marriage. Despite the threat of a bishop's "letter of censure, " University Lutheran Chapel has chosen to defy the constitution of the ELCA and has installed Jeff Johnson, who is not on the ELCA Clergy roster, as its pastor. {Ed. Note: Reformation Church in St Paul, MN has recently similarly defied the ELCA and is ordaining a practicing lesbian as one of its pastors.] In his letter Bishop says he is "revoking the threat of discipline in January of 2001". That is the same day the full communion agreement between the Episcopal Church in America and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America goes into effect.
Unlike the ELCA, some ECUSA Bishops have ordained practicing homosexuals and have approved them to serve as Priests. The Letter from the three Pastors of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church expresses their dismay to the Bishop upon his failure to take meaningful disciplinary action against the congregation in Berkeley. The text of that letter is as follows:
October 11,2000
Bishop Robert Mattheis Sierra Pacific Synod, ELCA 401 Roland Way, Suit 215 Oakland, Ca 94621-2034
Dear Bishop Mattheis,
After considerable conversation and prayerful deliberation, we have decided to write a letter to you. There is no joy in this; however, we believe that it is necessary.
We believe you have erred in your decision to take no action to discipline University Lutheran Chapel, Berkeley, CA, and that you have failed in your responsibility as a bishop of this Synod and of the church. University Lutheran Chapel has violated the constitutional provisions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America by calling Mr. Jeff Johnson to serve as its pastor. That statement is not in dispute. For a congregation of the ELCA to call a pastor not on the clergy roster of the ELCA is a defiant action. For such a defiant action to be met with an insipid response by a bishop is unacceptable in the extreme.
Let's imagine you were faced with this: A congregation of the Sierra Pacific Synod willfully and deliberately calls a person who espouses a Mormon (or Baptist, or Unitarian) theology to serve as its pastor and that person is not on the ELCA clergy roster. What would you do in response? Would you apply an insipid letter of censure upon the congregation and take no further action? We believe you would take far stronger action than that, and rightly so.
We care deeply for the church, and your failure to bring discipline against University Lutheran Chapel has brought sadness and cynicism to us. Is anarchy to be tolerated in the church because you personally agree with the political agenda of University Lutheran Chapel? If this is what the ELCA has come to, we are troubled and disheartened.
You said in your letter that you arrived at your decision to take no further action against University Lutheran Chapel because in your mind, in dealing with those who misbehave, if you are uncertain whether to discipline or to hug - "hugs win". As one educated at a Lutheran seminary, you were taught that Lutheran theology includes Law and Gospel. That theology - not "hugs win" - would be far more solid ground upon which to make decisions and carry out responsibilities as a bishop of the church.
There is a way that University Lutheran Chapel can call Mr. Jeff Johnson - or any other homosexual living in a relationship with another person of the same gender - to serve as its pastor. Those who advocate that position, as you have publicly done, may attempt to persuade the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to adopt that position. There is a constitutional process available to you by which you may attempt to achieve your desired end. But in the meantime, while our church body has a policy directly opposed to your desired end, it is just not right that congregations and bishops disobey that policy without consequence.
We understand that the role and responsibilities of a Synod Bishop are demanding and complex. We continue to uphold you in prayer.
In Christ Jesus,
Pastor Ron Thoreson
Pastor Phil Lee
Pastor Kelly Crithfieldcc: Dr. H. George Anderson
The Good Shepherd Newsletter contains the following note immediately following the text of the letter to the Bishop:
Note: In December 2000, Good Shepherd adopted a resolution in a special meeting of the congregation that the Sierra Pacific Synod take disciplinary measures of more consequence than "censure and admonition by the Bishop of the Synod" against University Lutheran Chapel.
Perspectives
Ominous Developments for the abortion industry:
So predicts the legally oriented Americans United for Life (AUL). Researchers have released a major study showing that abortion increases a woman's risk of breast cancer by the daunting figure of 30 percent on average. This finding has fueled a nationwide effort to pass informed consent legislation known as Women's Right to Know (WRTK) laws, which require abortion providers to tell this information to any woman considering abortion. This information, says AUL, could send industry profits tumbling and shake the entire abortion enterprise to its core. The breakthrough study was made by a team of researchers at Baruch College and Penn State, led by Dr Joel Brind. They analyzed 23 abortion-breast cancer (ABC) studies going back to 1957, and reached the alarming verdict:
Abortions since 1971 could soon be causing 40 to 50,000 cases of breast cancer per year in American women who have reached menopause. Currently 19 states have passed WRTK laws.
Another Evangelism Task:
According to a recent Barna Research Group study, Christian teen-agers are moving further away from the truths of the Bible. They appreciate the value of faith, but cling to erroneous doctrines that "lead to bad choices and spiritual confusion." Among the findings:• Teens are more likely than adults to reject the existence of Satan, to believe in salvation by good deeds, and to contend that Jesus was a sinner.
• They accept distorted theology from their parents, friends, and popular American entertainment.
• Most are complacent and even arrogant about their faith.
• They say they already know all the major teachings ofthe Christian faith, and don't expect their religious beliefs to change. Thirty-three percent believe "most adult Christians are hypocrites."
Barna concluded that something radical has got to happen to fix the problem. The solution is beyond the capabilities of churches, and the answer rests with families, which "must become more diligent and reliable in the religious training they provide to their children."
Fewer Americans are reading the Bible regularly.
According to a new Gallup Poll, the number of Americans who frequently read the Bible has dropped considerably. Women, non-whites, the elderly, Republicans, and those who are less educated are more likely to read the Bible than men, whites, the young, Democrats, and the more educated, the survey found.
. . . About 59 percent of Americans say they read the Bible at least occasionally, down from 73 percent in the 1980s . About 41 percent say they read it rarely or never. Thirty- seven percent read it weekly, down from 40 percent, and 16 percent read the Bible daily.
. . . The poll showed that 65 percent of Americans said the Bible answers all or most of the basic questions of life. People who read the Bible are likely to be more content with their own lives and more discontent with the moral decline in the country, according to the poll.
Are the Churches next?
Increasing numbers of local governmental units, including school districts, are refusing to allow the Boy Scouts access to public facilities or funds. Janet Folger of CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA asks, "If they kick the Boy Scouts out of public schools merely for refusing to permit homosexuals to serve as Scout leaders, what will stop them from forcing churches and other Christian ministries to hire homosexuals?" She says, "We want to equip Christians to protect this great American institution, which has stood for everything that is good about America for 90 years." The CENTER challenges, "Whether or not we should allow local governments and school boards to discriminate against organizations like the Boy Scouts, simply for exercising their First Amendment rights, is a question that needs to be put to a vote of the people." Further information can be found on the web at www.reclaimamerica.org.Reader Responses
Dear Mr. Editor:
The many scholarly reviews of the "Historic Episcopate" (HE) that have appeared in the FOCL Newsletter have stirred me to respond. As an early lifetime very active Lutheran who later joined the Episcopal Church to maintain peace in the household, I possess binocular vision: I have embraced the priesthood of all believers within my very soul and also personally witnessed the neo-Roman arrogance of the Bishop.
The acceptance of the Episcopal HE represents far more than simply a limitation on the ordination of seminary-trained pastors and priests. Within the Episcopal Church only the Bishop can confirm new members: The Bishop physically and legally owns all the property of the congregation and the congregation may not dispose of, modify, expand to other use or in any way change the congregational property without the express written consent of the Bishop. The very life of the congregation is constantly scrutinized and judged by the standard of the Canons, a legalistic approach to define the very different roles of the clergy and the laity and the rules by which "the game" shall be played.
There is a logical consequence of this neo-Roman heritage that arrogantly claims an unbroken line back to Peter (without accepting any detour via London or Canterbury). That is an attitude that the Episcopal clergy is "set apart", best summarized in my mind by the hilarious fact that my tennis-playing priest friend plays tennis in his clerical collar! Martin Luther's profound revelation of the priesthood of all believers from Paul's teaching in Romans 3 "For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God" both humbles Christ's church and energizes its people. To demand spiritual subjugation to an office created by man as a prerequisite to joining our voices together in praising Him who has so richly blessed us is ecclesiastical arrogance. The prescription of the term, "Father", within the Episcopal Church carries with it all the emotional and psychological control systems imbedded within our life history. Indeed, there is a significant difference between "Father" and "Pastor: both in formal definition and in deference. The HE rests upon "Father."
Charles Greene, Ph.D Sebastapol, CA