PLEASE, LORD, BRING FIRE

For
me one of the most challenging parts of writing an article or a letter is
knowing where and how to start.  I know
what I want to say.  I know what I want
to include.  But where and how do I
begin?

That
is the challenge I was facing with my August letter from the director, where I
wanted to write about and review two church gatherings that took place during
the same week – the ELCA Churchwide Assembly in Milwaukee and the NALC Theology
Conference, Mission Festival, and Convocation in Indianapolis.  I attended the NALC events.  Many thanks to ELCA pastor Steve Gjerde, vice
president of our board, who attended the ELCA event and gave us on Facebook an
account of the proceedings as they occurred.

I
wanted to write about those two gatherings and I knew what I wanted to include,
but for several days I could not answer the question, “Where and how do I
begin?”  But then, one week after both
events, during a telephone conversation with a pastor colleague, I was reminded
of the Gospel reading for August 18, the second Sunday after both assemblies –
Luke 12: 49-56.  In that passage Jesus
said, “I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already
kindled! . . . . Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the
earth?  No, I tell you, but rather
division!”

During
the days leading up to and even more so since the 2009 ELCA Churchwide
Assembly, we all have grieved over the relationships that have been strained
and even broken, the damage that has been done to congregations, and a church
body that is going off in the wrong direction.  The division is even greater – the lines are
now even more sharply drawn – as the ELCA goes further and further away from a
traditional, orthodox understanding of the authority of the Bible, the mission
of the church, and moral values. 

Four days after the close of the assembly, on August 14, the ELCA released a summary of actions that were taken by the assembly.  A link to that summary can be found here.  The opening sentence stated that the voting members made “a number of key decisions to further the mission and ministry of this church.”  Those key decisions included naming patriarchy and sexism as sins; calling on the church to take action against gender-based violence, workplace discrimination, and economic inequality; pursuing racial diversity and inclusion; adopting memorials dealing with gun violence, engagement in the Holy Land, and gender identity; affirming the ELCA’s long-standing commitment to migrants and refugees; declaring the ELCA to be a sanctuary church body; committing the ELCA to support a campaign against rape and violence; and condemning white supremacy. 

NO MENTION OF JESUS

Did
you notice that there is one thing missing in all these actions?  There was no mention of Jesus.  And there was only one mention of God, and
that one mention had to do with speaking “boldly about the equal dignity of all
persons in the eyes of God.”  I did see
one other mention of God in one of the daily press releases during the
assembly, but that reference had only to do with using gender inclusive and
expansive language for God.  With no
mention of Jesus, there is nothing in these actions regarding telling the world
about what Jesus has done (grace). 
Instead they are all about what I need to do (works). 

Now
some might say that that lack of reference to Jesus and that minimal mention of
God was only true of the summary of actions taken by the assembly.  Certainly Jesus must have had a more
important place during the assembly.

You might be able to convince me of that possibility if it had not been for the action taken by the assembly to adopt “A Declaration of Inter-religious Commitment” as “church policy for inter-religious relations.”  A link to that declaration can be found here.  The Declaration said, “We must be careful about claiming to know God’s judgments regarding another religion.”  It also stated, “Lutheran tradition has understood the word ‘faith’ to mean trust rather than affirming beliefs.  Hence, we also must be careful not to judge our neighbors only on the basis of their religious beliefs. . . . All we know, and all we need to know, is that our neighbors are made in God’s image and that we are called to love and serve them.”

I
do not know how anyone could read the Bible and study church history and say
that “we must be careful about claiming to know God’s judgments regarding
another religion.”  The prophet Elijah
spared no energy in warning Israel against the worship of Baal.  Other Old Testament prophets joined with him
in clearly warning against worshipping the idols of the surrounding
peoples.  The apostle Paul warned the
churches to whom he was writing about the other religions of the day.  How could we say that the Bible says that we
cannot know God’s judgments regarding other religions?  And besides, to argue that faith means trust
rather than affirming certain beliefs does not support the intent of this declaration
because my trust is only as good as the object of my trust.  I am not showing love for and I am not
serving my neighbors (which the declaration calls upon me to do) if I do not
warn them that what and/or whom they are placing their trust in is not worthy
of their trust.

We
commend a voting member of the assembly for reminding the assembly that in the
words of Jesus in John 14: 6 we do have “a basis to know God’s views on
religions that do not require faith in Jesus Christ.”  This voting member proposed an amendment to
the declaration both prior to and during the assembly.  His motion to amend was overwhelmingly
defeated.  The policy statement was
adopted with 97.48% voting in favor.  How
can we view the fact that the discussion took place in the presence of
thirty-nine ecumenical and inter-religious guests on stage as anything other
than the ELCA’s manipulating and controlling the outcome?

IN SHARP CONTRAST

In
Luke 12 Jesus said, “I came to bring fire to the earth.”  “I came to bring division.”  Contrast the actions and priorities of the
ELCA Churchwide Assembly and its de-emphasis upon Jesus with the clear
statements from the Rev. Dr. Daniel Selbo, who was elected to be the new bishop
of the NALC (North American Lutheran Church). 
In answer to the question, “What hopes do you have for the mission of
the NALC?” he wrote, “As a Christ Centered church body my hope is that we will
continue to grow in our relationship with Jesus as our Savior and Lord.  I hope each member of the NALC will become
stronger in their own personal faith-walk with Christ.  I hope our preaching and teaching will lift
up the name of Jesus. . . . My hope is that Christ will be seen in us because
we have fallen in love with Him and we have no greater purpose in life than to
live for Him. . . . Because ‘God so loved the world that he gave his only Son,’
we must be tireless in our efforts to increase the number of people who come to
know Him as Lord.”  

I AM DEEPLY DISTURBED AND
CONCERNED

I
am deeply disturbed by the actions taken, the resolutions approved, and the
memorials adopted by the 2019 ELCA Churchwide Assembly.  I am even more concerned when I consider the
percentages of the votes. 

The
“Declaration of Inter-religious Commitment,” which we discussed above, was
approved by a vote of over 97%.  The
social statement, “Faith, Sexism, and Justice,” was approved by a vote of
97%.  Elizabeth Eaton was re-elected on
the first ballot by a vote of over 81%. 
She is the first ELCA presiding bishop to win re-election on the first
ballot.  How could we expect her to view her
re-election as anything other than a clear mandate to continue leading the
church in the direction in which she has been leading it?

What
is the significance of all of these nearly unanimous or high percentage votes?  (Every photo I saw of voting members’ voting
by ballot showed everyone holding up their green cards.)  I can think of several probable outcomes from
the ELCA’s leadership and chief decision-making body becoming almost completely
of one mind.

• An increasingly intolerant attitude towards and eventual suppression of any dissenting position.  They are well on their way to eliminating anything other than the preferred view.  If they are already at 97%, and there were about nine hundred voting members, they only have to eliminate twenty-seven people in order to be at 100%.  Why would they even bother to pretend to honor bound conscience and listen to and give a place for traditional views if the prevalence of revisionist views is so strong?  Even though the ELCA leadership and makeup of the churchwide assemblies will be increasingly out of synch with the majority of congregation members sitting in the pews and supporting the work of the church, those in power will fully be able to implement their agenda and priorities.     

• An even stronger trend to promote only the official ELCA values and views at the ELCA seminaries.  While we are very thankful for every orthodox ELCA pastor serving in an ELCA congregation and as Lutheran CORE want to do everything we can to support them, it is only a matter of time until every ELCA rostered leader will have attended and graduated from seminary post 2009.  Orthodox churches who are blessed to have an orthodox pastor and who believe that all of this cannot and will not affect them are in for a rude awakening. 

• An even easier path for positions that a few years ago would have been unthinkable to become acceptable, mainstream, and even preferred.  For example, there is a video in which Bishop Elect Leila Ortiz of the ELCA’s Metro Washington D. C. Synod speaks favorably of polyamory (a relationship in which there are three or more partners).  A link to that video can be found here.  With the churchwide assembly being so strongly of one mind, what is to prevent an even further erosion of Biblical views and values from taking place? 

TRUSTWORTHY SERVANTS

In the July 2019 issue of CORE Voice we wrote about the document, “Trustworthy Servants of the People of God,” which was written in order to express what the ELCA expects of its rostered leaders.  A link to that article can be found here.  As we mentioned, the document was recommended to the ELCA Church Council by the ELCA Conference of Bishops.  But after hearing from many who objected to it, the ELCA Church Council declined to consider it and instead referred it back to the Domestic Mission Unit, who had originally written it, for review and revision.  In our opinion it was rejected because it was just too traditional and conservative.  We believe that the review and rewriting process will continue until it is exactly what the LGBTQIA+ agenda and community want it to be. 

There was a very interesting email that was sent out
to some ELCA rostered leaders on August 3, in which Pastor Phil Hirsch,
executive director of the ELCA’s Domestic Mission Unit, asked for input.  He said that the review and rewriting
committee wanted to hear from “various communities,” including “the
confessionally conservative” and “those from all four convictions identified in
the social statement ‘Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust.’”

On the one hand, we are encouraged by the possibility
that an ELCA task force might actually want to hear from “the confessionally
conservative” and those who hold to more traditional views.  But then we wonder whether traditional views
will actually be taken seriously and whether this is only a way so that they
will be able to say, “We heard from all sides.” 
We are reminded of how strongly some people objected even to Lutheran
CORE’s presence at the 2016 Churchwide Assembly.  Some people said that even our presence made
them feel unsafe, to say nothing about the willingness on the part of the
leadership of the assembly to announce our evening hospitality gathering twice.  One person asked, “Who will they allow to be
here next?  The Taliban?”

If even our presence at the 2016 Churchwide Assembly
was so strongly objected to, how much more of an outcry will there be against
the review and rewriting committee’s wanting to hear from “the confessionally
conservative” and from those who hold to positions one and two as identified in
the human sexuality social statement? 
And will it be even easier for the objecting voices to prevail given
that the votes at the 2019 Churchwide Assembly were so close to being unanimous?

Still, if you have received one of those emails from
the Domestic Mission Unit, asking for your input, we urge you to respond.

IS
THERE ANY HOPE?

Many
times I have been asked by people, “Is there any hope that the ELCA will turn
around?”  I always tell them, “It would
take a major intervention on the part of God. 
It would take a powerful working of the Holy Spirit.”  Jesus said, “I came to bring fire to the
earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! . . . . Do you think that I have
come to bring peace to the earth?  No, I
tell you, but rather division!”

We
pray for a sending of the power and fire of the Holy Spirit, to convict us of
error and to bring us back to Biblical truth. 
We pray that we will not be comfortable and at peace until the church
returns to recognizing Jesus rather than a social activist agenda as its
Lord.  We pray that the church will be
united under the authority of God’s Word, which is living and active, sharper
than any two-edged sword (Hebrews 4: 12), and able to pierce and divide truth
from error, true worship from idolatry, true values from misplaced
priorities. 

Jesus
said, “I came to bring fire to the earth.” 
Jesus, we need Your fire.  We need
Your fire to reform, renew, reorient, and redirect Your church.  Please, Lord, bring Your fire.  How we wish it were already kindled!

Pastor
Dennis D. Nelson

Executive
Director of Lutheran CORE

909-274-8591

[email protected] 

Photo courtesy of Life Issues Institute

In This Issue…

Women and Justice is an example of postmodernism gone viral within the Body of Christ, seeking to destroy it, and if the ELCA hopes to remain Christian in a way that will permit them to be recognized as such by other Christians not held captive to the postmodern mindset, they must not only reject it, but the worldview that informs it.

---

All Christian communions functioning within the increasingly-postmodern West must be on guard against the same virus that has so deeply infected the ELCA. We must fortify our immune systems against it if we hope to not have our health compromised… or worse, to die as non-Christians mouthing Christian-sounding words.

Scroll Down for More

---

Postmodernism Gone Viral: What Is Disingenuous About the ELCA Social Statement

“Ah! Words! Just words!” the person shouted to the man at the lectern whose speech had just concluded.  “Who told you culture is a search for coherence? Where do you get that idea from? This idea of coherence is a Western idea.”

Coherent
or Incoherent?

---

I heard Ravi Zacharias tell this story.  With a quickness of wit that I can only marvel at, he responded to the person (whom he later learned was transgendered) by saying, “Before I answer you, Madame, let me ask you this, then: would you prefer that my answer be coherent or incoherent?”[1]

[1] https://www.rzim.org/read/just-thinking-magazine/an-ancient-message-through-modern-means-to-a-postmodern-mind

---

Coaches for Congregations in Transition

• 

• 

• 

• 

One thing I’ve learned over the years is that congregations can sometimes feel so desperate to call a pastor, any pastor, that they rush through the call process and sometimes make a bad decision. And if the process drags out, they become so discouraged that they simply drift – and some members just leave, often permanently. An experienced coach helps them understand that they really can see – and take – one small, necessary “discipleship step” after another; and each small step can strengthen their faith, prayer life, discipleship, fellowship, stewardship, and outreach.

The CORE Voice Newsletter Looks Different … Very Different!

Lutheran CORE is trying a new format for its newsletter and moving away from its traditional glossy magazine-style newsletter to one that is easier to read on small devices like cell phones and tablets. There will always be a printable version, but CORE will also have versions of the newsletter on our website and on Facebook that will make it easier for our readers to decide which articles they want to read and which they prefer to skip. We will also send out a version via email. If you would like to be added to the email list, please contact [email protected] with your name and email address.

Photo by Filip Mroz on Unsplash

Rekindle Your First Love

In the March issue of our newsletter, CORE Voice, we included information about the ministries of two of the pastors who were going to be presenters at the Rekindle Your First Love event.  Another one of the persons who was scheduled to be a presenter, NALC pastor Wendy Berthelsen, heads up a non-profit Christian teaching ministry called Call Inc., which mobilizes ordinary people “called” by Christ Jesus our Lord to “incorporate His call” into all of life, 24/7: home, family, church gathering and “glocal” (local to global). 

Pithy Responses to CORE’S April Letter from the Director

I am continually blessed and encouraged by the very positive and uplifting responses which I receive to my letters from the director, articles in our newsletter, CORE Voice, and other written communications.  It is good to know that people read our materials and appreciate, value, and support our work.  The responses I received to my most recent (the April) letter from the director were no exception.

One NALC pastor wrote, “There have been times when I have wondered why CORE staff and adherents remain in ELCA, but after reading this letter, I am thankful that you are still there.  If you were to leave, it would please them because they wouldn’t have to deal with your wisdom any more. . . .

Photo by Fred Kearney on Unsplash

The Uncle Charlie Program @ St. Timothy

This program, for adults with special needs and sponsored by St. Timothy Lutheran Church, has been serving Chicago’s Hermosa neighborhood for nearly 30 years. Meeting monthly since 1990, the Uncle Charlie program serves an average of 50 residents from eight group homes on the northwest side of Chicago.

American Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB)

Books by Robert W. Jenson and Eric W. Gritsch!

Photo by Jonathan Simcoe on Unsplash

Coming Events

Print Version of the Full Newsletter

HAS THE ELCA SPUN OUT OF CONTROL?

My original plan was to share with you the letter I wrote to my synodical bishop regarding “Trustworthy Servants of the People of God.”  That is the document which the ELCA was considering to replace “Visions and Expectations” as a statement of the behavior that is expected of pastors and deacons.  But after receiving a very strong negative response to the document, the ELCA Church Council – at their meeting in early April – declined to consider it.  Instead they referred it back to committee for further review and redrafting.  After all of that, what I had been planning on writing seemed so out of date.  Therefore, instead I will be reviewing and evaluating what the ELCA Church Council had to say as it decided not to consider for adoption a document which had been recommended to them by the Conference of Bishops. 

First,
the ELCA continues to be obsessed with sex. 
Any who thought (and maybe even hoped) that this obsession would subside
after the 2009 Churchwide Assembly should now see that this preoccupation will persist
until the radical, relentless LGBTQIA+ community and agenda get all that they
want.  Many times we of Lutheran CORE
have been accused of being obsessed with sex, as we have been advocating for
the historic, traditional view of human sexuality that the vast majority of the
world’s Christians for two thousand years have understood the Bible to clearly
be teaching.  We are not the ones who are
obsessed with sex.  We are not the ones
who keep on bringing up the subject, always pushing the perimeters one step
further.  Rather we are the ones who keep
on lifting up and holding onto traditional Biblical values and views as others
keep on pushing for an erosion of Biblical understanding and standards.

Second,
something is wrong if ELCA leaders do not realize by now what they have enabled
and even created by continuing to cater to the radical, relentless LGBTQIA+
agenda.  They have allowed it to become
more and more prominent and empowered.  One
group that appeared before the ELCA Church Council, which calls itself the
“Trustworthy Servants” Public Witness Team, wants at least 25% of the members
of a task force that would carry out the work of revision to be LGBTQIA
people.  The traditional view was trashed
at last summer’s youth gathering, the LGBTQIA+ community was able to force the
firing of a seminary president, and ELCA leaders refuse to stand up to a
movement which rejects marriage by any definition as normative for sexual
activity.  Is all this being allowed
because ELCA leaders agree with it, or do they feel powerless and unable to
stop it?  Either way we have a serious
problem. 

Third,
the ELCA expects its leaders to be trustworthy, while the ELCA itself is not
trustworthy.  It was only after a very
long, painful, and divisive process that the 2009 Churchwide Assembly approved
the possibility of ordaining persons, and the possibility of congregations
calling persons, who are in publicly accountable, life-long, and monogamous
same gender relationships.  And yet the
ELCA has neither honored the commitments that were made nor remained within the
boundaries of what was actually officially approved.  The 2009 Social Statement, “Human Sexuality:
Gift and Trust,” describes a wide range of four positions on human sexuality
that exist within and that would have a place within “this church.”  The “Trustworthy Servants” document describes
only one acceptable position – that “those who serve as pastors and deacons
reflect a variety of sexual orientations and diverse gender identities” (page
11).  Even though the ELCA has broken
trust by developing a document that goes way beyond what the 2009 Churchwide
Assembly actually officially approved, it is not enough for the LGBTQIA+
community.  They have risen up against
it, claiming that the document’s expectations concerning marriage are shame
producing and not life-giving.  Therefore,
the ELCA Church Council declined to consider it and instead sent it back to
committee for review and rewriting – I assume until it turns out the way the
LGBTQIA+ community wants it. 

Fourth,
I am not aware of any statement from the Presiding Bishop concerning this
fiasco.  She will make and has made statements
on many things – including gun violence, immigration, the recent vote taken by
the United Methodist Church, and the Middle East.  But on subjects where a statement from her
could elicit a strong negative response – such as standing up to the “We Are
Naked and Unashamed” movement, dealing with a prominent ELCA “public
theologian” who advocates for sex outside of marriage and “ethically sourced
pornography,” and addressing recent state legislation on abortion which is
clearly contrary to the ELCA social statement on abortion – she is silent. 

Fifth,
what is the ELCA Church Council saying to and about the Conference of Bishops
when they decline to consider what the Conference had recommended?  What are they saying to and about the Domestic
Mission unit, which developed this document? 
What are they saying to and about the leaders of the ELCA for the first
twenty years of the life of the ELCA when they say that now they especially
want to hear from “those who have been most harmed by the misuse of ‘Visions
and Expectations’”?  How will they feel
if twenty years from now the new leadership of the ELCA most wants to hear from
“those who have been most harmed” by the statements and actions of the current
leaders of the ELCA?

Having
made these five general statements about the Church Council’s response, I would
now like to comment on specific parts of their response.

First, the Church Council referred the document back to the Domestic Mission unit “for further review and redrafting that is governed by this church’s social teaching documents.”  And then it gives “Sexuality” as an example of one of those social teaching documents.  A couple things are significant here.  For one, the review and redrafting are not to be governed by the Bible and the Lutheran confessions, but instead by “this church’s social teaching documents.”  Once again, the ELCA sees itself as wiser and more insightful than the authors of the Bible and the writers of the Lutheran confessions.  Also, if this review and redrafting truly were to be governed by this church’s social teaching documents, it would have to include and respect the wide range of views that are described and honored in the 2009 social statement, not just the one view that endorses a “variety of sexual orientations and diverse gender identities.”

Second,
the Church Council said that they want a “process that intentionally includes diverse
voices.”  The “Trustworthy Servants”
Public Witness Team, which I previously mentioned, wants at least 25% of the
people on the task force to be LGBTQIA. 
Once again will the makeup of the group be so lop-sided that the end
result is predicable?  Will these “diverse
voices” also include voices that will give credible, respectable expression to
the traditional view?  Will there be
enough credible, traditional voices so that it will not be just a token group
so that the ELCA can say, “We also listened to the traditional view”?

Third,
the Church Council said that they especially want to include the voices of
those who have been most harmed by the misuse of “Visions and Expectations.”  What about the voices of those whose
congregations have been most harmed by the actions of the ELCA since 2009?  Do the leaders of the ELCA care – does the
LGBTQIA+ community care – about the amount of turmoil that has been created in
and the amount of damage that has been done to congregations where many, if not
most of the people, have traditional views? 
How can they say that there are people who have been “most harmed by the
misuse of Visions and Expectations” when the original wording in “Visions and
Expectations” was not misused but instead was applied in determining who would
be eligible to be a rostered leader in the ELCA?

Fourth, the Church Council said that they would support the Conference of Bishops in their “living into their commitment . . . to listen and take seriously the concerns of all our leaders – particularly those who historically have been marginalized.”  What about those who currently are being marginalized?  First as president of the board and now as director of Lutheran CORE, I have written many times to the presiding bishop and the sixty-five synodical bishops.  Over the years I have written on such subjects as the Supreme Court decision on same sex marriage, the ousting of the president of an ELCA seminary, last summer’s youth gathering, state legislation on abortion, the removal of our former director from the ELCA clergy roster, and the question of whether anyone from Lutheran CORE is welcome at a synod assembly.  Once in a while I do receive a response.  I would want to say that my own bishop was most gracious in her response to my letter to her about the “Trustworthy Servants” document.  But usually, if I do hear anything, the response rarely engages with and takes seriously what I have said.  Usually I am completely ignored.  I have written many times to the bishop of the synod in which I was rostered before I retired.  I have never received a single response to any of my communications.  When one is usually completely ignored, is not that person being marginalized?  Do the Church Council and Conference of Bishops only want to listen to and take seriously the concerns of those whom they say have historically been marginalized, or are they also willing to listen to and take seriously the concerns of those who currently are being marginalized?

As I read what has been posted on Facebook by some of the people who attended the meeting with the ELCA Church Council, and as I read statements from the “We Are Naked and Unashamed” movement, I conclude – If the real issue is that there are ELCA pastors and seminarians who do not want to have to be married in order to be sexually active and/or do not want to be limited, bound, or confined by the expectation that they will be monogamous, then the ELCA Church Council and Conference of Bishops should just admit it and state it rather than use all of this other language to make it sound better than and/or different from what it really is. 

Blessings in Christ,

Dennis D. Nelson

Executive Director of Lutheran CORE

[email protected]

909-274-8591

Editor’s Note: this article first appeared in the March 2019 edition of CORE Voice.

Lutheran CORE strives to be a voice and network for “confessing Lutherans.”  But just what is a confessing Lutheran?  People sometimes ask that question, and it deserves a good answer.

Historically, the terms “confessing” or “confessional” hearken back to the Lutheran confessions, or statements of doctrine, published in the Book of Concord in 1580.  These documents, which include writings by Martin Luther, his friend and colleague, Phillip Melanchthon, and their successors, have served as touchstones of Lutheran orthodoxy across place and time. 

Most if not every Lutheran pastor has vowed some kind of allegiance to this set of documents at ordination, and Lutheran laity will (hopefully) recognize one of its most beloved portions, Luther’s Small Catechism.  At the book’s very start stands perhaps its second most famous document, the Augsburg Confession.   This document was written by Melanchthon in 1530 to set forth the doctrine of the churches in Germany (the “evangelicals”) that had embraced Luther’s teachings.  For this reason it carries the label of confession: it publicly states, or confesses, what the evangelical Germans believed. 

This history brings us to a simple definition: confessing or confessional Lutherans are Lutherans who adhere to the teaching of the Book of Concord over against all doubts and doctrinal assaults.  They stand in line with those earliest confessors of the Lutheran church and say, “Our churches teach thus and so.”  Lutherans do disagree over the status of some of the writings in the Book of Concord (notably, the Formula of Concord), but all would agree that confessing or confessional describes a Lutheran’s fidelity to the contents of this book.

Digging a bit deeper, we may look at the term confess in light of Scripture.  There we find that the term most frequently connected with “confess” is the Greek term homologeō: “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9).  The term used here and in similar passages is a simple combination of two words, logeō (to say or speak) and homo (same).  To confess is to “say the same thing.”  

A beloved Lutheran theologian named Norman Nagel expressed this aspect of confession in his description of Lutheran worship from 1982:

Our Lord speaks and we listen.  His Word bestows what it says.  Faith that is born from

what is heard acknowledges the gifts received with eager thankfulness and praise . . . .

Saying back to him what he has said to us, we repeat what is most true and sure.

(Lutheran Worship [St. Louis: CPH, 1982] page 6).

The Book of Concord and the churches that cherish it seek to confess or say the same thing that the Lord has said through His prophets and apostles, trusting that word to be “what is most true and sure.”  We could therefore say that confessing Lutherans say the same thing as the Lutheran confessors before them because those confessors said the same thing as God says in His word. 

One famous use of the term confessing comes from May 1934, when German Protestants, under the leadership of such men as Karl Barth and Martin Niemöller, adopted the Barmen Declaration, resisting the racist, Nazi-inspired “German Christian” movement.  The Declaration condemned the attempt of National Socialism to change church doctrine and dictate church polity in support of Hitler’s “Aryan” ideology.  Indeed, whenever the church resists changes to the doctrines of its Lord, it becomes a confessing church, saying what God has said over against all falsehood.

With churches across America struggling to know and believe what God has spoken, and with attempts at changing church doctrine multiplying daily, Lutheran CORE exists to support Lutherans engaged in this act of confession.  As the Danish pastor and hymnwriter, Nicholas S. Grundtvig, teaches us to sing,  

 

             God’s Word is our great heritage and shall be ours forever;
		to spread its light from age to age shall be our chief endeavor.
		Through life it guides our way, in death it is our stay.
		Lord, grant while worlds endure, we keep its teachings pure
		throughout all generations. 

May God grant us the strength to will and to do this good and loving work.

Editor’s Note: this article first appeared in the March 2019 edition of CORE Voice.

Click here to read the article.

Editor’s Note: this article first appeared in the March 2019 edition of CORE Voice.

Click here to read the article.

March 2019 Lutheran CORE Newsletter