Atlantic District Issues 6 Questions:
Texas Concord Replies
The acting President of the Atlantic District, who replaced Rev. David Benke after Rev. Wallace Schulz suspended Benke, issued the following six questions. Reverend Al Loeschman of Texas Concord has issued the following replies to those six questions.
From the Atlantic District Web Page
SIX QUESTIONS FOR THE LCMS
Presented at a Hearing Convened by Rev. Wallace Schulz
May 22, 2002
Charles Froehlich, First Vice-President
Atlantic District
July 22, 2002(Loeschman comments: Taking the Matter to the Streets is Okay for Benke's Buddies, but not for True LCMS Members)
Dear Sisters and Brothers in Christ:
Greetings in the Name of our Lord of love!
With this letter comes for your reading and discernment six questions. These questions were originally posed in response to the complaints made against Dr. David H. Benke and presented at a hearing held on May 22, 2002. By agreement of both the complainants present at that hearing and Dr. Benke, the questions were to have been submitted to the LCMS Commission on Theology and Church Relations as part of the investigative process of adjudication by the adjudicator, Rev. Wallace Schulz. At this time, since Rev. Schulz has made his decision, the questions are presented to you as pastors and members of the Atlantic District of the LCMS at your request following our meeting yesterday. They are illuminating and useful for the church, I believe, and will assist the people of God in the Atlantic District as well as around our church body in understanding the "stakes" when it comes to prayer participation in the civil context.
May the Lord bless your discernment in reading and using this document!
In Christ, our Lord,
Rev. Charles Froehlich, First Vice-President
Atlantic District, LCMS1. Within a Lutheran theological framework, is there a difference in applying our prohibition against unionism and syncretism of every description whether an event is held under the auspices of church or civil government?
(Loeschman Comments: No! If Nebuchadnezzer or his priest calls for worship of false gods, it makes no difference, does it?)
2. Since the religious pluralism of the United States acknowledges that our Lord Jesus Christ is "one among many," to what extent should Lutherans be involved in the trappings of civil religion such as:
a. Singing "God Bless America" within a pluralistic gathering;
(Loeschman Comments: This is a good question. It seems to me that we sing it often in church, but not often in a secular setting.)
b. Pledging allegiance to "one nation under God" together with Jews, Muslims and Hindus;
(Loeschman Comments: It seems to me that the Jews, Muslims and Hindus would be the ones having the problem with this. Obviously the legislators who passed this amendment to the pledge did not have in mind Jehovah, Allah or Vishnu when they passed it.)
c. Taking the oath "so help me God" administered by a Muslim;
(Loeschman Comments: As long as this oath is not given in the name of the god of a state sponsored religion, no problem. If one were in a Muslim country, you would specify: "So help me, Triune God.")
d. Being syncretistically lumped together with Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Scientologists, witches, etc. under the common IRS designation "Ministers of Religion" in order to receive tax-free housing?
(Loeschman Comments: Are we worshipping with them with such designation? Is not the government allowing the clergy of non-Christian religions the same benefits as Christians in this law? It is the toleration of Christians for those of other religions in America, not the admission that their gods are the same as the true God, that makes America free.)
3. If it is wrong for a Lutheran to participate in a civil event in which prayers are offered by non-Christian participants, is not the event essentially wrong and therefore wrong for the government to hold it?
(Loeschman Comments: Good gravy! When has the government done anything morally right in the last 50 years? Even its good intentioned laws backfire. But the government can do anything it likes if it is constitutional (and sometime even if it is not). But that does not mean that Christians are forced to join in what the government holds. Even Chaplains in the Armed Forces are not forced to go against their faith's teachings - though many of them seem to do it to advance their careers, as confessed by President Linderman of the Texas District. )
Do we not as a church, for the sake of bringing the light of truth to our people, have the responsibility to renounce our government for promoting such an event?
(Loeschman Comments: Of course, we have the obligation to instruct our people in the truth of God's Word - Law and Gospel. And we certainly have the obligation to point out the wrong decisions of the government, as with do with abortion. Because the law says abortion is legal does not give us the right to have or promote abortion. It is still murder, no matter what an amoral government says.
Better than renouncing the government for the event, we should instruct our people to stay away from such gatherings. Worship with those who worship, honor and glorify the one, true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Flee from idols. Do not touch them or look at them.)
4. Would, under Article VI, 2. of our Constitution, such renunciation be a condition for membership in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod?
(Loeschman Comments: The members of the Atlantic District should read the Constitution. It spells it out in three subparts. "Participation" in these things is contrary to membership in the synod. It is assumed that ministers of the Gospel who are faithful will not only avoid such idolatrous activities, but will teach their members the truth about such gatherings. Obviously, since so many support Benke, some have not done a very good job of catechesis. But what is the surprise? 54% of Lutherans think they will get into heaven by their works. If they have not gotten the Gospel, why should we expect they would be taught the Law? )
5. As a part of our "daily bread" we thank God for godly government. In response to a national tragedy, is it an example of "godly government" if our leaders call for an event in which God is implored by the religious leaders representing the religious pluralism of our nation?
(Loeschman Comments: The government should do what it did in the time of wars and does for Thanksgiving. Call on all to give thanks in their own places of worship and stay out of religious stuff. It becomes an ungodly government when it tries to sponsor a specific or melded religion as strictly forbidden in the Constitution of the United States.)
6. How do we distinguish whether participation in such an event manifests the error of mixing darkness into the light of truth or manifests the opportunity of bringing the light of truth into the darkness?
(Loeschman Comments: The answer to this is obvious. We don't have to distinguish regarding events such as this. How much pollution is pollution? Mixing a little Christian truth with lots of error is wrong. So is mixing a little error in with 95% Christians truth. When does Jesus ever give us permission to mix His Name with a few of the names of false gods? Never.)
July 28, 2002