I normally try very hard not to cross the streams of the
left and right hand kingdoms, mostly because I am just as passionate about
theology as I am about politics and am probably just as polarizing in both
realms, but here goes nothing.
I took a brief hiatus from Party politics last week to
attend the 49th
Rocky Mountain District Convention for the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod
7-9 June in the Denver Tech Center. This
was quite unexpected. At our May voters
meeting at Church, I was elected as a last-minute alternate to replace our
other alternate who had a conflict arise, just in case our delegate couldn’t
make it. No one else volunteered, so I
did. Our Delegate swore up and down that
he would be there—and I know it would have taken an act of God to keep him from
it. Which is what happened. Those incredible rains came last week in
Colorado Springs, and late Wednesday evening, I got an email from him informing
me his house had flooded and he couldn’t make it. Our Pastor’s house flooded, as did my
mothers. All three live very near each
other. So I, living in Denver now, ended
up attending as our congregation’s voting delegate.
After a little kerfuffle with the sign-in (I was so
last-minute my paperwork wasn’t there, and because my Pastor, who is the
District Secretary, had a flooded house, he was delayed in getting to the
convention), the fun began.
Without getting too much in the minutia of the theology of
the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, let me give a brief overview for those who
aren’t too familiar.
We are a creedal church, meaning we confess the Ecumenical Creeds (Apostles, Nicene and Athenasian). We believe in Faith Alone through Grace Alone by Scripture Alone. We believe that the Bible is the infallible Word of God. We are a sacramental church, which means we actually value the saving properties of Baptism and Holy Communion (which we believe in Real Presence, which means that the Body and Blood are in, with and under the elements—not transformed into, nor merely representing). The Book of Concord is our confession of
faith, and is entirely based upon and in accordance with Scripture. We hold tradition and history to be
important, but not on the same level as the Bible.
Anyone who wants to know more may certainly ask.
Now, as with party politics, there are essentially two
sides in our synod. The
“confessional” side, the Quia subscribers to the Book of Concord (“Quia” is
simply Latin for “because”, meaning that we believe in the Book of Concord because it is supported by Scripture,
indeed, in full support by Scripture), are all very conservative. The liberal side, the Quatenus subscribers to
the Book of Concord (“Quatenus” is Latin for “insofar as”, meaning that they
believe in the Book of Concord only insofar
as it is supported by Scripture), are the folks who promote things like
ordination of women and contemporary worship.
I am just as conservative in my church politics as I am in
my party politics. In fact, on Facebook,
I identify myself as a “Confessional Quia Reformed Catholic”. Originally, the word Lutheran was a
pejorative used to try and convince others that those subscribing to the
Augsburg Confession were following a man, not God, so while it is an identifier
now, I prefer to not use it when at all possible. When not using it as a title, I also
specifically use small “c” catholic (like my many rants on “l” vs. “L”
libertarianism) because it refers to the church universal, not the Roman
Catholic church.
Hopefully that helps give you a foundation to understand where I’m coming from religiously now, so that the rest of this makes a little more sense.
I hope sometime soon to have the chance to expand this more,
but for now I am just throwing out some notes I made during the convention.
·
Confessional Lutherans seem to have a slightly small
“L” libertarian tendency—this, largely, I think is due to our strong left-hand,
right-hand kingdom doctrine (one that, interestingly enough, Kevin Miller—a
non-Lutheran—used as the basis for his book “Freedom Nationally, Virtue Locally
or Socialism”)
·
Lutherans really do just have more fun. How many other church bodies can you think of
where you can sit down with your Pastor, the President of the Synod and your
husband… drink whiskey, smoke cigars, listen to U2 (on the iPhone of the
Synodical President) and talk left-hand kingdom politics? I dare you to find me one.
·
Speaking of our Synodical President, Matt
Harrison… you might know him as the man who kicked serious butt testifying
before Congress earlier this year on HHS rules.
If you missed it, it is so worth it to watch/read (various video, audio and statements can
be found here). Find me another
church body that, on their website, implores their members to actually study
the Constitution (“Learn about our rights under the U.S. Constitution to freely
exercise our beliefs and to speak of Jesus Christ and our conscience in the
public square.”).
·
There was a huge political emphasis at this
convention. Colorado Right to Life was
present with a table and petitions to take to churches. The banquet speaker (which I missed due to a
previously-scheduled conflict) was the National Right to Life President—a
Missouri-Synod Lutheran, I might add.
Tim Goeglin was one of the session speakers. Even during President Harrison’s address the
opening night of convention, a few political questions were asked. This is a church body that, more than most I
can think of, is engaged in and understands public policy and the left-hand
kingdom. I’m glad they are getting more
engaged as Pastors, as we only have 6 LCMS Congressmen right now (one of them
is our own Cory Gardner, though!), and I think that may be changing soon.
·
On a less political note, Colorado has some
absolutely incredible confessional Pastors.
It was such a blessing and salve for my soul to be around God’s servants
who preach, teach and confess everything I hold dear. For too long, we’ve been fighting against the infiltration of liberalism into
our Synod (anyone who knows me knows that I refer to the ultimate outcome
of Seminex, the formation of the ELCA, as the E?CA, because they’re not
Lutheran but I don’t know what they are…), and I am so pleased to see a marked
return to our confessional roots. In
speaking to several there, it appears this is a pretty drastic shift from even
10 years ago. I couldn’t be more
pleased.
Now, for a few thoughts on the parallels I saw there between
the GOP and the church politics. Maybe
I’m just reaching. I’d love your input
on whether or not I’m crazy or if there are the actual parallels I’m seeing,
particularly from those who were in attendance.
Topic
|
GOP
|
LCMS
|
Declaration of Independence/Bible
(conservatives)
|
Our ‘roadmap’ for the founding of this
nation given to us by our founding fathers
|
The ‘roadmap’ for the foundation of
Christian life and doctrine, given to us by our Lord
|
Declaration of Independence/Bible (liberals/progressives
)
|
Worth
reading, but an old history lesson
|
Worth
reading, but not always right
|
Constitution/Confessions (conservatives)
|
Sacred, means today what it has meant
always, unchanging
|
Sacred, means today what it has meant
always, unchanging (quia, because
the Word of God is unchanging)
|
Constitution/Confessions
(liberals/progressives)
|
A living,
breathing document, can change over time to mean whatever we want it to mean
|
A living,
breathing document, can change over time to mean whatever we want it to mean
(quatenus, because the Word of God
is not sacred and can be reinterpreted to “fit the times”
|
Conservative
|
Traditional, “old-fashioned”, time-tested
principles with a focus on actually retaining and promoting those principles
of governance
|
Traditional, “old-fashioned”, time-tested
principles with a focus on actually retaining and promoting those principles
of faith
|
Liberal/progressive
|
Focused on
growth and unconstitutional practices to gain the illusion of more power,
principles can and are sacrificed in order to obtain more power
|
Focused on
growth and extra-biblical practices to gain the illusion of more power,
principles and doctrine can and are sacrificed in order to obtain more
‘power’
|
Like I said, maybe I’m reaching, but the parallels are
pretty obvious to me. The fight of
principle vs. the illusion of power is alive and well in the GOP, and appears
to be in my church body too, which of course means I just can’t sit idly by, I
must engage in this battle. Party
politics is important, and I will likely be engaged in it for the rest of my
life. But church politics… that is of
eternal importance, and so I can’t be uninvolved any longer. I’m looking forward to the 2013 Synodical Convention
now.
Let me be clear… this is not the time or place to debate me
on religion. Comments like that will be
removed because they have nothing to do with this post. Notice I didn’t evangelize in the least here,
I’m simply talking about my faith and am looking mostly for input from those
who share it (meaning all of Christendom, not just Missouri-Synod
Lutherans). Don’t attempt to evangelize
me on your beliefs or lack thereof here.
We can do that another time. Just
talk to me on the elements here. Thanks!
Oh, and one last comment—that was the best run convention
I’ve ever seen, bar none. Somebody there knows Robert’s Rules of Order pretty darn well (actually, I think most of the
attendees knew RROO pretty well, which helped significantly). There were a few nit-picky things I noticed,
but not enough to really even bug me.
The GOP could learn a thing or two (or ten) from them on how to run a meeting.
You could probably draw comparisons economically, too. Or maybe not. In my experience, the argument of the liberal element in the LCMS boils down, simply, to money in the plate. The concern for doing things differently, changing to meet the culture of our time and place, etc., is all done in order to protect the local institution, to ensure that there is enough cashflow to keep the lights on, with a little extra to make sure that the proclaimer lives comfortably. Every time I've seen, read, heard, or been involved in discussions with those of this ilk, the number one concern expressed is butts in the pews, to which I always ask (when I'm involved), "Which means dollars in the plate?" The responses I get are always short and concise; it's like their face lights up, because I got it: "Yes!" "Exactly!"
ReplyDeleteWhile that is certainly a concern of the confessional/conservative element, it is not the chief concern. Often, it's not even in mind. We couldn't care less, at times, if the offerings this week are enough to meet our budget because we rejoice that for this week we are meeting and receiving our Lord come to us.
I see it often as the Sarai Moment. Do we trust God's providence or do we help Him along and do something ourselves? Are we like Sarai in that we cannot bear to wait for God to keep His promise or do we wait for Him to do so? It's really a question of faith: Do we trust God to be providential or do we doubt it, like Sarai?