As a working journalist and producer, writing meaningful and understandable pieces is important. I love talking about issues. I love that issues can have two, four, six, twelve sides or more. I love that writing and talking can actually persuade people and effect change. Journalists are trained to be fair (“balance” is a popular word these days, but it’s not the journalists job to “balance” anything, it’s their job to report it).
If you can’t see through lead, that’s normal. Most people don’t have actual “super vision.” LCC also lacks supervision.
An essay on the “Brother’s of John the Steadfast” website put a pretty fine point on things where one pastor serves in Central District. He raises good points that one would have hoped would be raised at convention. Instead: restructuring. Meh. The Titanic is shuffling the deck chairs.
You can read the essay on the Brothers of John the Steadfast* website. It comes replete with a spitball title: “Ecclesiastical Supervisors as the Devil’s Accomplices.”
Ouch. Forget the spitball, that’s a bean-ball. And right on target.
* John the Steadfast was Luther’s elector (Prince) and defender
note: the opening paragraph of the article outlines a situation in Central District where a congregation turfed its pastor without ecclesiastical cause (which is what’s required). We’ll have a future blog on the situation and on District and Synod’s inaction in the near future.
Classic films speak to the past, but they also inform the present with an unfamiliar chronological context. In short: films speak to the past and the present. For example, “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre,” has a classic line: “Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges?” (that’s a good paraphrase actually). At the LCC convention last weekend a pastor stood up and basically said the same thing.
In LCMS and LCC, all synod documents, everything produced by auxillaries (LHM, LWML) and RSO (registered service organizations) MUST go through doctrinal review. Video, audio, books, magazines, articles – there’s a very well established and organized process to review public materials to make sure they are consistent with scripture and the confessions as the standard exposition of it. Lutherans are used to standards (that’s the whole point of the confessions – to all be on the same page). One more difference between LCC and LCMS: LCMS has never openly discussed eliminating doctrinal review. So good for you, LCC convention, for breaking new ground toward a more heterodox tomorrow.
At convention last weekend, one pastor made a motion to remove LCC’s requirement for doctrinal review. Now, it was never going to pass. But, it was brought up, and the motion DID get seconded. Every second that our Synod convention delegates talked about removing our need for doctrinal standards was one second more than CEF/DIL was talked about.
For context: In LCC, we can talk about removing the requirement for doctrinal review and theological consistency (which is alarming), but not talk about thousands of our own members who the church harmed through CEF and DIL.
Not so awesome.