Click above to email President Kieschnick, Secretary Hartwig, and the board of communications. The email is already written for you, all you need to do is sign it.
Get connected
• Join Our Yahoo Group
• Subscribe to our RSS feed
Sign the petition
While it's not our goal to bring "Issues, Etc." back to KFUO, we still encourage you to sign the petition and show your support for the show.
I commend to you David Berger’s excellent essay responding to a plan of the Commission on Worship. Berger is the librarian at Concordia Seminary in St. Louis and is a member of the Board for Communication Services.
Filed under: Updates
 | Beth on Cringe inducing |
 | Helen on As I was saying . . . |
 | steadfastlutherans.o… on Another firing |
 | sumbody on Comment line is open! |
| Helen on They’re reading petition… |
Brandon Booth
Mollie
Excellent essay.
However, at the end Berger writes: “Someday, sooner rather than later let us pray, we will come full circle.”
I disagree.
The New Measures in LCMS worship don’t grow out of the teachings of Scripture or the Lutheran Confessions. They grow out of false teaching and a foolish desire to accommodate the world’s sensibilities on Sunday morning.
What does error have to do with Truth? Nothing. Error never “comes full circle” back to the Truth. Error always leads away from the Truth.
The New Measures in LCMS worship aren’t benign experimentation; they are rebellion.
So, sadly, the New Measures in LCMS worship are leading those who practice them away from Scripture and the Confessions –perhaps never to return.
TW
That’s the problem with lettuce, ‘let us’. Arguments are not static. An argument used to reject the real presence does not thereafter lie quiescent. It then turns and is used to reject infant baptism.
When you turn from who God is and what He has done in Christ to let us (this past Sunday’s reading), when you decide that the means of grace are inadequate to attain your desired end, when you decide to use the world’s means, the arguments used for rejection do not remain static but will be used to reject other sound doctrines as well. I very much doubt that those in ELCA who first set foot on the path of ‘let us’ be relevant saw where that path led.
I hesitate to say that those on the path of let us be relevant cannot return, but that path seems to lead through the pig sty first. The sad thing of course is the damage done.
Mark:
God can certainly lead them to repent; and I pray He does.
My point is that that path of New Measures in LCMS worship won’t “come full circle” to the Truth. It can’t. That path, and the path of the Truth never meet.
In fact, only repentance (leaving the path of the world’s error and influence) will lead those who practice the New Measures in LCMS worship back to the Truth.
In the case of the New Measures, we’re not talking about a new way of being Lutheran; we’re talking about the old way of being heterodox.
TW
The article by David Berger is excellent. As I looked at the website (http://seminary.csl.edu/facultypubs/) I saw on the first page a video marked breaking news that has Dr. Dale Meyer with Leonard Sweet and I’m wondering ‘what does this mean?’ I’m thinking I know )-:
Look for Berger’s head to be next on the chopping block?
Who’s leonard sweet? I wondered. So I did what anybody with half a brain would do. I google’d him. The fourth hit was this:
“Leonard Sweet: Quantum Spirituality and a Christ Consciousness
Quantum Spirituality by Leonard Sweet
Leonard Sweet (endorsed by Rick Warren) thanks New Agers for helping him find the “New Light”: … ”
The hit linked to a website devoted to warning against the dangers of contemplative Christianity. Uh-huh.
So I went back and clicked on the Sem faculty pages video of Dr. Meyer (also known as Cwistian’s paw paw on his often irritating-as-all-get-out “Meyer Minute” on KFUO) and saw that Dr. M and Sweet Leonard were sittin’ around talkin’.
Like lay woman above, I think I know what this means.
My new question is: How can I help increase the awareness of those still in the LCMS as to how this is permeating their churches?
Print it out, copy it, and give it to people on Sunday morning.
You may wish to check this website also since it concerns Leonard Sweet - he will be a presenter this August when the conference on changing synod structure meets in St. Louis.
http://216.73.105.27/2008/03/msg00082.html
“Sponsored by the COP and the CTCR, the convocation will feature a presentation on the theological principles by the presidents of the Synod’s two seminaries. Also on the schedule as a presenter is Dr. Leonard Sweet, a theologian, author, and church futurist who was voted “one of the 50 most influential Christian leaders in America” for 2006 and 2007.”
Wait…..I think I hear something…..oh oh …it’s the fat lady singing!!!!
What the hell is a “church futurist”?
Pr. Wilken: maybe ? a church futurist decides what the future of the church is and what it should be? How church should be ‘done’?
That is so very tongue in cheek of course…sorry, I couldn’t resist ….
It is all so rediculous one wants to cry and just gets silly instead )-:
FYI, Leonard Sweet was the keynote speaker at the LCMS CNH District Convention held during May 2006. I read a report about his presentation written by a delegate from my former congregation. It seems she was not sure what Dr. Sweet’s presentation was all about and how Lutherans would find his ideas useful. Dr. Sweet has been criticized for mixing New Age Mysticism and Panentheism with Christianity.
A “church futurist” is kind of like a psychic who can predict the future of the church. They don’t use crystal balls or palm readings, instead they can take a check from a church and read it. The check can actually tell them what the future of a particular church or church institution holds. A check with large numbers bodes well for the future of that church. On the other hand, if the check has small numbers, watch out, trouble looms.
The church check is not the only means by which a church futurist reads the future of a church. He can also read the church’s membership. To a church futurist If the membership is heavily into idolatry, mysticism, self pleasure, witchcraft, or satanism, the future holds great things. If the church is really into Christ, His Word and Sacraments, it is as good as dead as far as the church futurists can tell.
There is only one true Church Futurist, Jesus Christ. May he preserve us from the ‘church futurists’ of this world. Apparently the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Synod Structure and Governance does not intend to do so.
Merriam-Webster defines a futurist as: “One who studies and predicts the future especially on the basis of current trends.”
Since when does the Church chart its future on the basis of current trends? How perverse is that?
Had Luther acted on the basis of the trends of his day, the Reformation would never have happened. We would all still be Roman Catholic.
Good thing Luther was guided by the unchanging Word of God and not current trends.
TW
I agree ‘dazed and ablazed’ completely. I suggest also reading this informative blog concerning where things are heading:
http://www.extremetheology.com/2008/04/changing-the-lc.html
From what I have read Mr. Sweet is into things that are completely un-Lutheran:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/leonardsweet.htm
from his book, “Quantum Spirituality: A Post-Modern Apologetic” :
“What role will Christianity have in the next millennium? Postmoderns have no trouble singing with Mariah Carey “You and I must make a pact/We must bring salvation back.” Can postmoderns learn to make a pact with the church as well as with pop culture to “bring salvation back?” In fact, might the church learn some things from pop culture about how to “bring salvation back?”
I would like to know why this man is presenting anything at the conference which is to discuss the 22 theological principals which are underlying the change of structure in the synod?
Why has there been no outcry by the leaders? COP and others to this sort of …….well, words fail me at this point.
lay woman,
In the light of that article at Extreme Theology I find it chilling that the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Synod Structure and Governance already exists and has laid out a roadmap for implementation at the next convention. If the ideas Mr. Sweet promotes are indicative of the Task force work product we are in for a rough ride. Does anybody know if the referenced booklet, “Congregation-Synod-Church” or the “22 basic theological principles” are actually published and available?
I think I am going to be sick. If Dale Meyer is meeting with Leonard Sweet to tell him how terribly off base he is then that is a good thing, but in fact I doubt that is the case and I am feeling so BETRAYED by the leaders of Concordia Seminary. I have a good reason to feel betrayed and used also that I cannot share but right now suffice it to say, not only is this not my grandfather’s church, it has ceased to be Martin Luther’s church. I guess I was naive when I came back to the lcms. As some have said, we should not support the lcms under any and all circumstances. I think we are beginning to see the narrow way the Bible speaks of.
Congregation-Synod-Church can be found here:
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=11678
http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/Office%20of%20the%20President/Congregation-Synod-Church.pdf
Dazed And Amazed:
“Congregation-Synod-Church” a 46-page document, can be found at:
http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/Office%20of%20the%20President/Congregation-Synod-Church.pdf
I read this document yesterday. The 22 Theological Principals are all well and good. Then there is a copy of our constitution and referenced documents from Walther. Pay particular attention to the study questions….that is where the interesting reading begins.
Why is Leonard Sweet acting as a consultant for the LCMS? Here is a quote from the front page of his website:
“Energy-fire experiences take us into ourselves only that we might reach outside of ourselves. Metanoia is a de-centering experience of connected-ness and community. It is not an exercise in reciting what Jesus has done for me lately. Energy-fire ecstasy, more a buzz than a binge, takes us out of ourselves, literally. That is the meaning of the word ‘ecstatic.’”
“Note: This ecstasy Sweet speaks refers to the New Age ecstasy that occurs in an altered state of consciousness.”
Is it fair to say that the leadership of the Missouri Synod are beholden to a new-age cult? I never understood what Fuller and the CGM gurus had to say to the LCMS, but this is very disconcerting. Has anyone asked keischnick why Sweet is being consulted?
mrs241:
Just wait until CSL “goes public” with its huge capital campaign later on this year (Sept. 08); $77 million by 2017 (to increase its $50 million endowment to $127 million).
An article in the student paper is here:
http://www.csl.edu/Img/Publications/Student/ATT_April_2008.pdf
“It is our belief that the greatest honor any Christian can give to God is to uphold the shed blood of the Lamb of God as all sufficient and necessary to salvation to those who cling to it by faith and confirm it by the fruit of their works.” Lighthousetrailsresearch.com
Where did Leonard Sweet ever state such synergistic nonsense? It is so hypocritical to critique the Synod’s Seminary by urging others to visit a website that denies the pure Gospel of justification by grace through faith alone.
Now, John, I think the 8th commandment requires you to assume that the synergistic nonsense was approved by the man’s ecclesiastical supervisor…so it must be OK, right?
If anyone wants to ask Kieschnick a question you can find him at St Paul Des Peres this Sunday at 10:45. He will be speaking (not the sermon) at their dedication of their new building additions.