Three
Scenarios

Perhaps one of these three scenarios applies to you or your congregation.

1. You are a Boomer pastor approaching retirement.  Like literally hundreds—if not thousands—of
Lutheran pastors, retirement is looking pretty enticing. You’ve faithfully
served as a pastor for thirty or forty years, and it’s time. And when you begin
to waver about this your spouse confirms what you know, in your heart, to be
true, and says, “Honey it is time.” But you’re concerned about what the
future might hold for your congregation. Even in normal times a transition like
this can present significant challenges for churches; especially when their
solo pastor departs. But these are not normal times. There is a developing
clergy shortage among Protestant denominations, and this shortage might soon
become a true crisis. Boomers (like you) are retiring in increasing numbers,
and seminary enrollment is rapidly declining. It’s beginning to look like the
“perfect storm.” So you’re worried about how long it would take for your
congregation to find the “right” pastor.

2. Second scenario: You are a lay leader in a
congregation where your solo pastor has already left. Maybe you are on
the church council, or the recently organized call committee. You are just
beginning to see how difficult this search process will be.  Perhaps you’ve discovered that the minimum
financial package needed for a new pastor could be 25 to 40% more than what
your previous pastor received. (You keep hearing that college student debt has
become a common issue.) Or maybe you sense that available pastors are unlikely
to be interested in living in your local small-town or rural community.  They are more interested in suburban
congregations. In some cases there is the issue of the pastor’s spouse needing
to live where she/he can pursue his/her chosen career.

3. Or the third scenario: You are on a call committee
that has already been meeting and working for many months. You and your
committee are beginning to get discouraged, if not pessimistic. And making
matters worse is an increasing sense of urgency. This prolonged interim is
beginning to impact worship attendance and congregational giving. Some of your
once active members are drifting into inactivity. Perhaps your congregation was
not able to secure the services of an interim pastor; at least not a full-time
one. And this has had a profoundly negative effect on your congregation’s
ministries and morale.

Lutheran
CORE Can Help

Do any of these scenarios apply to your situation?  If so, Lutheran CORE can help, and help in
meaningful, practical ways. We are training a group of recently-retired,
confessional Lutheran pastors to consult with congregations like yours. And
these pastors, by the way, are volunteering their time, so the only cost
to your congregation is the actual travel expenses for one initial visit to
your community, and a nominal sign-up fee ($150) to cover CORE’s administrative
costs. But know this: That initial on-site visit to your community will only be
the beginning of a six to nine-month (or longer) phone and online relationship
with key congregational leaders chosen by your church council. The primary
purpose of all this? To help you address the immediate ministry challenges of
your transition.

Loss
of Momentum

Here is the tragic irony for many congregations in transition: Their
search process can be so prolonged that they lose essential ministry momentum.
This lost momentum then, in turn, jeopardizes their financial ability to find
and call a competent pastor. Just one hypothetical example: After a twelve to
eighteen month search process a congregation’s financial giving suffers and
they find they can no longer afford a full-time pastor’s salary and benefits
package.

This new CORE ministry is called Congregations in Transition (CiT),
and we’d like to help you navigate a transition process often characterized by
challenges that could put your church’s health and future stability at risk.
However, it is not just about minimizing risks, it’s about capitalizing on
ministry opportunities. That’s right, opportunities. Opportunities to
mobilize your lay leaders, renew your church’s spiritual life, and embrace the
full potential of what God has in mind for your congregation and its mission.

Contact
Us

So if any of the above scenarios resonate with what your faith community
is facing, contact Pastor Don Brandt, or CORE Executive Director, Pastor Dennis
Nelson. Coach training is scheduled in early April, but CORE is already signing
up a limited number of congregations. Any and all of our thirty-two written CiT
resources are available to you; at no cost and with no obligation. (Or if
that’s too many, we can email you some samples.) Also, Dennis and Don are
available to answer any questions.

We hope to hear from you. Never underestimate what God can accomplish in
and through your congregation; even in this time of transition.

Please contact either Don Brandt at
[email protected] or Dennis Nelson at [email protected].

I was tasked by the Board of Lutheran CORE to formulate a response to the
ELCA draft social statement, “Women and Justice.” These are my own impressions and thoughts,
however, and ought not to be construed as The Official Stance of Lutheran CORE
on this statement.

Observations

I begin with two editorial observations. First: For a statement that is
centered on justice, and which mentions the word justice several hundred times,
it’d have been helpful to put the definition right up front at the beginning,
not simply hyperlinked to the glossary entry. After the first few dozen
repetitions, “justice” becomes a blur-word.

Second: The brief section on immigration touches on timely concerns but
is almost perfunctory.

Next, I have a few observations that don’t fit neatly in the categories
I’ll use shortly.

Interchangeable
or Not?

The document rightly complains that female bodies and physiology were
often ignored in medical studies. But transgenderism, which it supports as a related
“justice category,” posits an almost ontological change, as if male and female
bodies are interchangeable. The document wants to have it both ways. If
women are assumed to be “just like men” but that doesn’t fit a narrative, it is
a sign of sin and injustice. If women are discerned to be “not just like men”
but that doesn’t fit a narrative, it’s also a sign of sin and injustice.

Next: Although “justice” becomes a blur-word, there are a few
exceptions.  In lines 999-1025, the
discussion of “gender justice” speaks of living out our faith in God by love
for neighbor, with God’s grace healing and covering all our brokenness.
Similarly, in lines 522-530 there’s a reasonable description of “neighbor
justice.”  (Although how this differs
from the Golden Rule, aside from trendier language, is unclear). It’s hard,
though, to see in this draft how God’s revealed Word is greater than the sum of
feminist, intersectional, and “gender/sexual justice” language. It’s as if the
ELCA is trying to improve on what God SHOULD have said and commanded, if he’d
just been as “woke” as the This Church.

Explicit
Silence?

In the list of sins and injustices committed primarily against women, sex
trafficking and sexual abuse are rightly condemned. Oddly, neither prostitution
nor pornography are explicitly mentioned. Granted, they are specific examples
of the objectification, abuse, and commodification of women’s bodies, but they
are also the most lucrative, widespread, and pernicious examples thereof.
Perhaps the drafters wrestled with how they might have to treat a pronouncement
of This Church’s “public theologian,” Nadia Bolz-Weber, who recently opined
that there is such a thing as “ethically sourced porn” which can be enjoyed and
commended.

Scriptural
Imposition

The draft statement names real evils that injure real people. Lines
1013-1014 properly state, “Being freed in Christ involves being freed from all
that tries to replace Jesus Christ as Lord in our lives….” The document then
names “systems of patriarchy,” apparently all of them, as examples of sinful
bondage. It lifts up, as an example of the justifying freedom in Christ, being
“freed to recognize God’s work in creation through… human expression through
gender. We are enabled to see that humans are not simply gender-based opposites
and that we are not created in a hierarchy.” Elsewhere (Section 3) the document
states: “We believe God creates humanity in diversity, encompassing a wide
variety of experiences, identities, and expressions, including sex and
gender” (emphasis added). “Contemporary science” and “neurological
research” are trotted out to debunk “idolatrous” distortions of Scripture,
especially a binary interpretation of “male and female He created them.” There
is no citation from Scripture explaining how “God’s diversity in creation”
includes multiple sexual orientations or gender identities. This notion is
being imposed on Scripture for ideological purposes.

Stand
Under Scripture

This leads to the final section of this essay: more “thematic”
critiques. A fine theologian and churchman (can I still say that?), the late
Lou Smith, warned of the perils of simply trying to understand Scripture,
rather than to “stand under” it. The former puts us in control, using
our own criteria for dissecting, analyzing and judging Scripture. We treat it
as a “dead letter,” or as a merely human document, subject to our standards for
approval, critique, and judgment. The latter reminds us that Scripture
is God’s Word, sharper than a two-edged sword, piercing heart and soul, mind
and flesh, revealing our sinfulness and God’s remedy. It’s therefore something
that has authority over us, whether we approve of it or not.

“Women and Justice” belongs firmly in the former camp.

Problems
within the Scriptures?

Section 16 states: “While God’s Word of Law and Gospel speaks through the
Scriptures, there are words and images, social patterns, and moral beliefs in
them that reflect the patriarchal values of the cultures and societies in which
they arose. Their continued misuse contributes to maintaining hierarchies and
patterns of inequity and harm.… Our tradition’s complicity in patriarchy and
sexism is connected to such biblical interpretation and to the nature and focus
of some of the Lutheran theological tradition. We confess that there are
problems within the Scriptures themselves and that our theological
tradition has led to a theological understanding of humankind that is overly
male-identified. These problems even become idolatrous as deeply rooted but
false beliefs” (emphasis added).

The statement comes perilously close to declaring much of Scripture to be
sinful, or at least to aiding and abetting the sins of idolatry and
patriarchalism. It doesn’t quite cross the line, as it identifies sinful
material as the product (and hobby-horse) of misogynistic males, intent on
preserving their privilege and thereby contaminating, obscuring, or defying
God’s intent.

Scriptural
Authority

This does considerable violence, though, to any notion of Scriptural
authority. Section 16 continues: “The Word of God is first and foremost Jesus
Christ, God incarnate. Secondarily, we encounter the Word as Law and Gospel in
preaching and teaching. The Canonical Scriptures are the written Word of God,
which proclaims God’s grace and sustains faith in Jesus Christ…. The Word of
God is living and active, and we take the written form of the Word of God as
the authoritative source and norm for faith. In its use as Law, it provides
guidance and reveals human brokenness. In its use as Gospel, it reveals God’s
love and promise.”

Jiggering
the Parameters

Once again, the statement tries to have it both ways. Yes, Scripture is
held “within the ELCA” as authoritative. But apparently the only way to discern
“authoritative Scripture” is to jigger the parameters. God’s Word speaks
through Scripture. Law is contrasted with Gospel love. “Guidance” softens
“God’s will.” Sin is recast as “brokenness.” In this diminished and muted
framework, the Gospel is reduced from “forgiveness of sin, and life from
death” to “God’s love and promise.” The upshot is that the social
statement jettisons anything that a feminist/intersectional arbiter might
declare to be offensive, misogynistic chaff from the “real” Word of God. This
is Marcionism for the Woke Generation.

Shockingly
Incurious

There is another problem with the philosophical and theological
underpinnings of this social statement. The drafters are shockingly incurious.
They show no interest in asking, “If patriarchy is universally evil, why did
God routinely work within it? God explicitly condemned many evil
practices. Why not this one?” They do not wonder if at times, patriarchy might
be “the best of a bad lot” of options for sinful and broken human beings to
live as a community of men, women, and children.

They insist the scandal of Jesus’ particularity as a male has no bearing
on his work. They do not ponder why Jesus routinely used “Father” language.
There is no engagement with any rationale for “male images” for God the Father,
except to warn of abuse and misuse by those who are so inbondage to the sins of
patriarchy and sexism that they clearly think of God the Father as literally
male: genitalia, patriarchal privilege, and all: “When Christians rely almost
exclusively on male images and language for God, the images and language become
literal understandings of God. This is poor theology because God always exceeds
human understanding. Taking male images of God literally can also lead to
idolatry, meaning we idolize or hold onto only the male ima-ges” (lines
966-973).

God
is Opposed to Idolatry

There is no discussion of how God’s self-revelation in Scripture
repudiates the blatantly sexual, copulating deities of surrounding cultures, or
of how the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” stands adamantly opposed to the idolatry,
fertility cults, and sacred prostitution that were rampant in the Middle East
and entirely too seductive to the people of Israel.

No one examines how relationships within the Trinity help us learn right
relationships with others, male or female. There is no discussion of the
nuptial imagery used for the relationship between God and Israel, or Christ and
the Church, except to tie it to oppression, sexism, and patriarchy. The
possibility that this divine/human intimate relationship could challenge,
purify, and be a model for marriage and family life is not on This Church’s
radar.

Victimhood
Instead of Justice?

There is no exploration of how Father language for God might transform
the sinful ways human fatherhood and masculinity are sometimes expressed. No
thought is spared for how matriarchies might foster other, equally harmful
pathologies, or how intersectional feminism might be a form of idolatry,
detrimental to women and men. No one seems to wonder whether intersectionality perpetuates victimhood instead of promoting justice.

Still
Idolatry

There is no interest in exploring why sexual sins in Scripture are
deemed real, even deadly sins. In the Bible, rape, incest, fornication,
adultery, homosexual activity, and prostitution are flatly condemned. They are
linked to idolatry. Why? Surely this is not simply another instance of male
hegemony!

In lines 570-575, we read, “We must continue the task of embracing our
unity and diversity so we welcome and uplift people of every sex and
gender—indeed, every body—in our work together as the Body of Christ in the
world. God’s love feeds the Body of Christ so that it might live in love.” No
one questions whether gender dysphoria or same-sex attraction should ever be
considered anything other than God’s intention and good gifts, to be celebrated
and incorporated into the Body of Christ without comment except “it’s all good.”
No one wrestles with the possibility that “God’s love” be more than sheer
affirmation and welcome, with no dying to self, repentance, forgiveness, or
transformation involved (except for the sins of male privilege and the failure
to rejoice in the marvelous diversity of sexes and genders in God’s wondrous
creation). I ask what, apparently, none of the drafters or leadership in the
ELCA has asked: what if This Church has gotten this all wrong?

“De-privileged”
Scripture

It may be a lack of curiosity. Or it may be the determined resolve to
brand such questions as dangerous manifestations of patriarchal privilege.
There’s certainly no attempt to wrestle with difficult passages of Scripture,
much less to consider whether any of them might reflect the will of God.
They’re merely “de-privileged.”

Egregious
Examples

Additionally, only egregious examples of sexism are cited as entirely
representative of most of the early church fathers. Church history, liturgy,
and ministry are seemingly unrelieved by non-misogynistic practices and
pronouncements. “The Christian Church as an institution, including the Lutheran
tradition, has been complicit in these sins” (lines 440-441). Even the
classically Lutheran notion of the “theology of the cross” is deemed
problematic because it might be perceived as abusive, demanding subservience
and suffering – especially by women.

Blanket
Condemnation

As far as I can tell, there is not one “positive” citation from the early
church fathers, the history of the Western church, the theological “Great
Tradition” that encompasses orthodox Christian thought, or much of Lutheranism
(except for the somewhat convoluted parsing of Law and Gospel, and of
justification by grace through faith, mentioned earlier). Even with qualifying
phrases (“continued misuse;” “can also lead to”), it’s not hard to read the
statement as a thoroughgoing condemnation of Scripture and Tradition from the
earliest stories of the Old Testament until the #metoo moment.

Contradictions

This leads to some genuinely contradictory statements. For example, in
lines 367-372, a perfectly fine observation is made: “The differentiation of
humankind into male and female, expressed in Genesis 2, communicates the joy
found in humans having true partners, true peers: “This at last is bone of my
bones and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23a). God creates community and family,
not a hierarchy…”

 Dishonesty

But then it goes awry: … “not a hierarchy based on race and ethnicity,
ability, social or economic status, or sex (what our bodies look like biologically)
or gender (how people express themselves)” (emphasis added). The document
rightly states that the very possibility of family is grounded in God-given
sexual differentiation between peers. But didn’t the writers remember that
they’d identified science as the proper arbiter of sexual and gender identity
and insisted that both are fluid human constructs? God’s Word, or science:
which is given precedence? And is it not simplistic and misleading – to the
point of intellectual and scientific dishonesty – to state that sex is defined
as “what our bodies look like” and gender as “how people express
themselves?”

Additionally, there are two sidebar graphics (see lines 727-747 and
1048-1060), illustrating how societal attitudes, religious beliefs, and laws,
policies and practices lead either to gender injustice or justice. It’s
presupposed that societal attitudes precede and shape religious beliefs.
Together, they shape unjust or just laws and polities which create communities
of injustice or justice for women and sexual minorities. Referring to lines
1048-1060, on forming a just society: “Working together, we can begin to
transform the circle of injustice…. Individuals and groups can challenge
harmful social attitudes and practices, reject sexist religious beliefs, and
work to change laws and policies that justify and reinforce patriarchy.”

The
Obvious Question

Nobody seems interested in what to me was an obvious question: If we
believe that God’s Word truly is “lively and active,” the “source and norm of
faith and life,” as this document states, then why is the revelation of
God’s word never considered the starting point for transformation of society? Why
is “religious belief” always secondary?How does all This Church’s
earnest language about Scripture as foundational allow the Word of God to COME
FIRST to challenge, forgive, and transform sinful human attitudes, and then to
change unjust laws and create a just community?

Let me conclude with this: If the Draft Social Statement on Women and
Justice is approved by the ELCA, then This Church neither understands, nor
stands under Scripture. And the tragedy is, it seems incurious and unconcerned
about what that means for the very real women and men it purports to care
about, and for.

Editor’s Note: This 4 page article by Pastor Cathy Ammlung originally appeared in Lutheran CORE’s January 2019 newsletter. It is a must-read for anyone trying to digest the 76 page statement that the ELCA will vote on at its Churchwide Assembly in Milwaukee in August 2019.

Click here to read the article.

January 2019 Lutheran CORE Newsletter

LIFE IS HARD, BUT GOD IS GOOD

If Mary were with us today, what are the lessons that she would share as the mother of our Lord? I believe that the first thing she would say to us is this – LIFE IS HARD.

Mary should have known from the beginning that her life was going to be hard. Spending the last few days of her pregnancy on the back of a donkey and having no better a place for the birth of her child than a cave with the odors of cattle and sheep, Mary should have known that her life was going to be hard. And the journey to Bethlehem was not her last journey that was going to be hard. Mary and Joseph and the new-born Jesus are forced to flee to Egypt to escape from Herod’s wrath. Mary and Joseph are on the run, fleeing to protect the life of their son.

Martin Luther said this about the flight to Egypt. “The artists give her a donkey; the Gospels do not.” She might have had to trudge over hills and desert sand on foot, nursing her precious child and leaning on her beloved Joseph for support. It was not until Herod’s death that the young family was finally able to return to their home in Nazareth. In a world filled with refugees, it is important for us to remember that our Lord Jesus Himself at one time was a refugee.

The next dozen or so years in Mary’s life were undoubtedly good ones. Except when Jesus gave them the scare of their life when He remained behind in the Temple at the age of twelve. Mary and Joseph were never prosperous. But Joseph was a hard worker and an able provider. And their oldest son, Jesus,was turning into a fine young man as He was growing in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and other people.

But then something must have happened to Joseph. After Jesus turned twelve, Joseph is never mentioned again in the Gospels. Mary might have found herself left as a young widow, as her oldest son, Jesus, would have taken Joseph’s place in the carpenter’s shop.

But the loss of her husband Joseph was not going to be the last major source of sorrow for Mary. She experienced a parent’s worst nightmare. She watched her beloved, oldest boy die as a common criminal on a cross. Can you feel her agony as she watched the cruelty of death by crucifixion? I am certain that Mary would have gladly taken her son’s place on the cross, just as Jesus took our place on the cross.

Yes, LIFE IS HARD. That is the first thing that I believe Mary would say to us today. But then I believe she would also say, BUT GOD IS GOOD.

Mary must have been overwhelmed that the God of all creation would have chosen her for the high honor of being the mother of His Son. No wonder she sang –

“He has looked with favor on the lowliness of His servant;
Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed.
For the Mighty One has done great things for me,
And holy is His Name.”

In Mary’s mind only a good and gracious God would bypass the wealthy and powerful and choose a young peasant girl to bear His Son.

“He has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts.
He has brought down the powerful from their thrones
And lifted up the lowly.”

You and I will never play as significant a role in God’s plan of salvation as Mary did. And yet each one of us can know what it is like to be humbled by God’s great concern for us. We do not deserve His care. We do not deserve to be able to play even a minor role in His plan for the future. After all, who are we that the God of wonders beyond our galaxy would be aware of us and our needs and would have any need and use for us? And yet, with a sense of deep gratitude, we teach our children to bow their heads and pray, “God is great and God is good.”

LIFE IS HARD, BUT GOD IS GOOD. Not only did He choose the lowly maiden of Nazareth. Not only was He aware of her needs. And not only does He choose us and is He aware of our needs. He also keeps all His promises. No wonder Mary also declared –

“He has filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty.

He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy.

According to the promise He made to our ancestors,

To Abraham and to his descendants forever.”

Mary understood that the coming of the Messiah was the fulfillment of God’s great,long-awaited promise. Yes, LIFE IS HARD, BUT GOD IS GOOD.

Mary’s story is a story that has been duplicated millions of times throughout human history. It is the story of a mother’s deep, deep love for her child. Even when He was a grown man, with a ministry she could barely understand, still for Mary He was her son. But even Mary’s love for Jesus is but a pale reflection of God’s great love for you.

I do not know what kind of a holiday season this one has been so far for you and will continue to be for you. I hope and pray it has been and will be the best one ever. But I also know that for some it is shaping up to be a very difficult one. Either way, may we all learn these lessons from Mary – LIFE IS HARD, BUT GOD IS GOOD. 

Pastor Dennis D. Nelson

Executive Director of Lutheran CORE

Editor’s Note: The new article below, by Pastor Keith Forni, is CORE’s final report on the 2018 Encuentro event and well worth a quick read.

Click here to read the article.

 

Second Mini-Newsletter – Late November 2018

November 2018 Lutheran CORE Newsletter

MAKE THE MOST OF EVERY OPPORTUNITY

That is a theme that I heard twice during the same week – at both the LCMC annual gathering October 7-10 and the Lutheran CORE-sponsored, Spanish and bi-lingual ministries Encuentro on October 12.

Kent Hunter, founder of Church Doctor Ministries and keynote speaker at the LCMC gathering, was sharing how our nation as a civilization is showing deep signs of stress. Our culture is deteriorating from the inside. For the church of Jesus this undeniable reality is a great opportunity. If you were to ask unchurched people, “What do you think it is going to be like for your children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren?” their response is likely to be one of hopelessness. This hopelessness is a sign of receptivity to spiritual things. It is a lie from Satan to say that people today are not receptive. We are living in a season of receptivity. As a simple way in which everyone can respond to this season of receptivity, Dr. Hunter suggests that you ask the person who is waiting on you at a restaurant for their name, and then ask them if they have any concerns that you can pray for when you pray for your food. People are hurting. People are in need. People are receptive and will value and respond to your offer to pray for them.

I saw this principle illustrated a few days later at the Lutheran CORE-sponsored Encuentro in the Hermosa neighborhood of northwest Chicago.  The previous Saturday a two-year-old boy had been tragically shot and killed in an eruption of violence in the area surrounding the host church. The following Monday there was a neighborhood gathering with city officials and law enforcement personnel. Keith Forni, pastor of the host church, St. Timothy’s, as well as pastor of First/Santa Cruz Lutheran Church in Joliet, coordinator of the Encuentro, and member of the board of Lutheran CORE, was present at the gathering and was asked by a city official to lead in prayer. Keith told about the prayer gathering that had already been planned for the closing of the Encuentro the following Friday evening. This time of prayer out in front of the church was being held for the city of Chicago, which has seen so many homicides and so much violence, and for the victims of shootings and their families. This prayer gathering was announced in the Chicago Tribune, and cameramen from two local television news stations came to film the vigil and to interview participants. What an opportunity. What a moment of receptivity.

Pastor Forni also described the practice of Las Posadas as an opportunity for a congregation to do neighborhood ministry. Reenacting the search of Mary and Joseph for a place to stay for the night, Lutherans in changing neighborhoods can reach out to and take the first step in connecting with a neighborhood that they may have lost touch with.

IT IS ALWAYS A JOY

It is always a joy to represent Lutheran CORE at the annual LCMC gathering. These people are warmly welcoming, fervent in their love for Jesus, and passionate in their commitment to mission. They are innovative and creative in their seeking to share their faith in a twenty-first century world. They are not going to become discouraged. For example, I was talking with a man who has been president of his congregation in Texas. After their pastor retired, they found that they no longer had the numbers and resources to call a new pastor. Rather than close the congregation, the church council told the president that they wanted him to be their next pastor. That person is now pursuing theological training online so that he will be able to fill the role that has been given to him by the congregation. I was reminded of the number of times in the New Testament when the apostle Paul appointed leaders in churches after he had been there for only a short time, and then he wrote letters to those churches in order to teach them what they should believe and how they should live.

As I experienced at the NALC convocation in August, there were so many people at the LCMC gathering who came up to me or who came up to my Lutheran CORE table and told me how they read our materials and how much they value and appreciate the work we are doing. They particularly mentioned reading our recent correspondence with ELCA Presiding Bishop Elizabeth Eaton about the ELCA youth gathering and our evaluation of Bishop Eaton’s response. We were mightily encouraged by all the expressions of appreciation and support from our friends in LCMC.

Attending the gathering also gave me abundant opportunity to tell people about the upcoming Congregations in Transition ministry initiative and the Rekindling Your First Love event.

CONGREGATIONS IN TRANSITION MINISTRY INITIATIVE

The Congregations in Transition ministry initiative is an effort to train (mostly retired) Lutheran pastors to serve as coaches to congregations whose pastor has retired or resigned to take another call. A very generous gift has been received to cover the travel and lodging expenses of pastors for a three-night, two-full-day training and relationship building event probably in early April 2019 in the Phoenix area.  The need for this initiative is greatly increased by the number of soon-retiring Baby Boomer pastors, declining seminary enrollment, increased student debt for those graduating from seminary, the loss of congregational momentum that can occur during an interim period, and the fact that interim pastors will not always be available.

In this initiative a congregation organizes a Leadership Team of a few key leaders (separate from the church council and the call committee), which then works with their coach, primarily online. The ministry arrangement begins with an initial onsite visit to introduce the coach to the entire congregation and that includes the coach’s spending a full day with the Leadership Team. The primary purpose of this ministry is for far more than simply offering encouragement to the congregation in a time of crisis. It also includes helping the Leadership Team maintain not just stability but momentum in regards to the congregation’s vital ministries during this transition time.

There is no financial cost for those who volunteer to serve as coaches. Their travel and lodging expenses for the training event are being covered by a generous gift. There are very few financial costs to the congregations. The trained coaches are active retired pastors who are willing to volunteer their time. The only significant expense for the congregation would be if they decided that they would like their coach to visit their church.

Please watch for more information about this ministry initiative in future issues of our newsletter, CORE Voice, and in future letters from the director. Please contact me at [email protected] if you are interested and/or if you would like to know more.

REKINDLING YOUR FIRST LOVE

Another one of our upcoming projects which I was very happy to be able to tell people about at the LCMC gathering is our “Rekindling Your First Love” event. This gathering will take place on Wednesday, May 1, 2019 in the Baltimore area and will be a full day of spiritual and emotional renewal for pastors. It will include presentations, discussion, processing, prayer, fellowship, worship, determining next steps, and personal ministry time. NALC pastor Tim Hubert will talk about “Rekindling Your First Love for Christ.” NALC pastor Wendy Berthelsen will speak on “Rekindling Your First Love for the Church as the Body of Christ.” ELCA pastor Brian Hughes will address “Rekindling Your First Love for Mission and Ministry as the Work of Christ in the World.”

The idea of the gathering is as follows. At the end of his letter to the Ephesians, the apostle Paul commended that church for their undying love. A generation later in Revelation 2 when John writes to the church in Ephesus he tells them that they have lost their first love. Many pastors – because of the demands of ministry, the painful experience of being hurt and even betrayed by congregational members, and having to deal with so much conflict – have lost their first love. If that is you, we want to invite you to rekindle and regain your first love. Please be watching for more information, which will be available soon.

PASTORAL FORMATION

We are also working with Perry Fruhling, LCMC coordinator for pastoral ministry, to identify congregations that have seen two or more people go to seminary recently and pastors who have seen two or more people go to seminary during their ministry. We will then work with these pastors and the leaders of these churches to identify the common factors that make a congregation and a pastoral ministry a good nurturing place for future pastors.

WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL

We are very grateful to Kim Smith for taking on the role of president of the board for Lutheran CORE. Kim has been serving on our board for a little under two years. She is the one who developed our new website and now is keeping it current. She is also editor of our newsletter. I was elected president of the board in early 2015. A year later I was also hired as part-time director. Because the ministry is ever-increasing, we are very grateful that Kim is willing and able to serve as president of the board while I remain as executive director.

We are also very grateful for all of our friends – individuals as well as congregations – who support our work. This is the time of year when many congregations are determining their benevolence budget and mission dollars recipients for next year. We urge you to speak with your pastor, and, pastors, we ask you to speak to your church councils about including Lutheran CORE in the list of missions which will receive financial support from your congregation next year.

As a partner with you in seeking to make use of every opportunity to share the love of Jesus,

 

Pastor Dennis D. Nelson

Executive Director of Lutheran CORE

909-274-8591

[email protected]

Editor’s note: The article below by Pastor Brett Jenkins originally appeared in the July 2018 newsletter.

Click here to read this very short and helpful article.