LCMS Crisis Management in the Benke Case With a Flawed System
By Rev. Jack Cascione

 

The following two sentences are the beginning of a release on the internet from The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod Board for Communication Services -- LCMS News -- No. 7 February 11, 2002 in an article titled: "BOD orders information halt in Benke dispute" By David L. Mahsman.

"The Synod's Board of Directors Feb. 1 ordered an immediate halt to distribution of any information concerning charges brought against Atlantic District President David Benke.

"The charges, brought by a number of pastors and a congregation, relate to Benke's participation in 'A Prayer for America' Sept. 23 at Yankee Stadium."

The end of the article stated, "Dr. Martin Schramm, chairman of the Board for Communication Services (BCS), said 'that he fears the Board of Directors action halting all information through official channels will contribute to misinformation and rumor.'"

"Schramm said the BCS may consider an official response to the Board of Directors resolution.

"The New York Times," February 8, 2002, published an article titled, "Seeing Heresy in a Service for Sept. 11" by Daniel J. Wakin stated:

"The Lutheran charges created headlines. The Associated Press and newspapers like The Washington Post, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch and The Los Angeles Times wrote about them. Embarrassed by the attention, the leadership of the Missouri Synod issued a letter on Feb. 1 that barred the parties and the church's communications department from discussing the Benke case. It ordered the church newspaper to stop reporting on the matter and had references pulled from the church's Web site. 'The publicity given to this matter in dispute has been divisive and unfair' and has 'brought shame upon the synod,' the letter said.'"

Reclaim News pointed out that both the LCMS and the Media were unaware of the charges involving President Kieschnick and President Benke until the information was released by the Synod's Board for Communication Services on November 9 over the internet in an article titled, "Events prompt two to bring charges against Kieschnick."

In response, a member of the Synodical media staff stated over the phone and by email to this writer that the release of the information was not in violation of rules governing Dispute Resolution. He also could not recall how he heard about the charges that were filed against Benke and Kieschnick.

Now The Board of Directors states that releasing the information does indeed violate the rules of Dispute Resolution in the LCMS Handbook and has brought "shame on the Synod."

Things to Consider

First: While conservative and liberal factions of the Synod may blame each other for the "shame," the New York media has little interest in LCMS politics. But just as Wakin said above, "The Lutheran charges created headlines." There would not have been any headlines if the information had not been released from the Board for Communication Services.

Second: The action by the Board of Directors to cease all communication on the subject after the information is already public, created more headlines, as evidenced by the "New York Times," etc.

Thirdly: What is the "shame?" Is it that our dirty laundry is being aired in public or that we have a lot of dirty laundry we haven't washed and now we are ashamed that the public knows it? So, now it is easier to blame the messengers for causing shame.

Fourth: What would Luther have done? He used the press to promote his cause that the Pope was the Antichrist without ever having gone through Dispute Resolution. By the Synod's own Constitution on Dispute Resolution, promoted by the COP, Ralph Bohlmann, and John Heins at the 1992 LCMS Convention, Martin Luther would have had to have been thrown off the clergy roster.

Fifth: The events at Yankee Stadium took place on September 23rd. The Synod may resolve the issue by April or later. In other words, the system is so ponderous; the Synod can't react in a crisis. Thus managing the information leaks becomes a disproportionate priority in the Dispute Resolution process. Thank God, the US Government was able to respond to Afghanistan far more quickly than the Synod to Yankee Stadium.

Sixth: The very nature of the Gospel, the necessity to make God's Word public, is counter to the church's desire for secrecy about its doctrine and practice.

Seventh: The horses are already out of the barn.

Eighth: What we call "shame" may be a necessary part of public confession. Which is more shameful, that the church can't speak about its doctrine and practice in public or that the church is not in agreement on its own doctrine and practice in public?

Ninth: Under the rules of Dispute Resolution, the 12 Apostles would have had to recuse themselves from the Praesidium.

Tenth: The Synod's President, according to Dispute Resolution, can't be charged with anything without a meeting of the Convention. Thank God, the U. S. Government can put the President of the United States on trial in Congress at any time during his office instead of having to wait for the next Presidential election. Thank God the United States Government doesn't operate with Dispute Resolution. Thank God for the United States Court System.

Eleventh: Nothing exposes the weakness in a system like a crisis. In comparison to the former Board of Adjudication system, the current Dispute Resolution process is a dismal failure. By freeing itself from a "worldly system" of checks and balances and the rules of evidence, the Dispute Resolution process is open to subjectivity and demagoguery. The law is not of faith. There is no such thing as a Gospel oriented trial or system of judgment. The confusion of Law and Gospel in the Dispute Resolution process is self-evident. The Handbook labels a "win-lose" approach in the judgment process sin. Pietism has captured our church courts. Thank God the U. S. Court System is based on a win-lose system.

Twelfth: Under the current circumstances, did the Synod's Board of Directors act properly? Perhaps it was the best they could do now that they are stuck with a very flawed system that calls, "win-lose" sin.


[file:///D:/My Web/bronzebusiness/bio/biojmc.htm]

February 18, 2002