Pastor Don Brandt

The Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC), on its website, lists the average worship attendance of each of their 818 U.S. congregations.  This data represents a veritable “treasure trove” of information when it comes to how many of these congregations might be facing a crisis in the coming years concerning the viability of their ministries.  (This kind of information, by the way, is not available on the NALC or ELCA websites.)  Regarding the accuracy of these numbers, we need to keep in mind that the diligence of congregations in regularly updating their reported average attendance is probably a “mixed bag”.  To my knowledge the LCMC does not contact their churches each year to insure that the reported attendance figure is up to date.  And there’s another reality to consider: the cross-denominational impact of the pandemic on worship attendance.  We know that many churches saw their attendance drop between 10 and 40 percent between 2020 and 2023.  And some churches never fully recovered their losses in terms of in-person average attendance.  However, to avoid argument, I will assume that the LCMC attendance data is reasonably accurate and up to date.

Before summarizing this data I want to pose this question: At what point—when it comes to average attendance—are most churches facing nothing less than an existential crisis?  And for those churches facing such a crisis is there anything that can and/or should be done to maintain and preserve the viability of their congregational ministries?  Also, at what point do these smaller churches need to be asking whether they will always be able to assume the availability of an ordained pastor to lead them?

The following information represents the results of my online “survey.”  Of the 818 LCMC churches in the U.S. 484 churches report an average weekly worship attendance of 75 or less.  And of these churches, 276 report a weekly attendance of 40 or less.  Now given what I know regarding the current costs involved in calling a full-time pastor, I believe many of these 484 churches will be unable, in the coming years, to afford a full-time pastor’s salary with benefits and housing.  And because of the current clergy shortage, qualified pastors who are looking for a call usually have more than one opportunity to consider.  This gives a distinct advantage to those congregations that are able to offer the better salary and benefits package.  (In other words, usually larger churches.)

So what of the possibility of calling a part-time ordained pastor; especially when it comes to the 276 churches that have 40 or fewer people in worship each week?  This is definitely a possibility for churches that can no longer afford a full-time pastor.  However, as with full-time candidates, there is also a shortage of part-time pastors.  And with part-time pastors, call committees typically need to find a candidate that is close enough to commute to their community.  This factor, above all, limits the options when it comes to finding a qualified part-time pastor, especially in rural settings.  Then the usual fallback option is to find one or more “supply preachers” who live within driving distance of the congregation.  One more possibility to consider for these churches: enlist (and “train?”) one or two (or more) active members to share preaching responsibilities.

Here is the “bottom line”; too many smaller churches are making the erroneous assumption that they can stake their congregation’s future on always being able to find, call and afford an ordained pastor.  This is simply not the case for most of these smaller congregations.  When considering the LCMC, 60% of their congregations serve 75 or fewer worshipers in a typical week.  And over one-third of their churches serve 40 or less worshipers.

It is time for smaller congregations to consider long-term ministry strategies that do not assume the ongoing availability of ordained pastors.  Here—on a more constructive note—are some options that congregational leaders from these churches need to consider.  And sooner rather than later.

1. Consider whether one, two or three active members might be enlisted and trained to become part-time lay ministers for your congregation.  Their “training” could be online; either from Lutheran seminaries (like St. Paul Seminary), or through lay minister training programs like Beyond the River Academy or the LCMC Texas Mission District’s Harvest Workers ministry.  Online courses might focus on biblical studies, Lutheran theology, and preaching.
2. Check out Lutheran CORE’s Congregational Lay-leadership Initiative (CLI), which would mean having an “outside” coach to help your congregation address this ministry challenge.  (Full disclosure: I am the person for you to contact to find out more about CLI.)
3. Contact your regional mission district leader and ask for one or two names of competent retired Lutheran pastors who might be willing to enter into an online coaching relationship with your church council.  The primary focus of such a relationship is to prepare your congregation for a future that might not necessarily include an ordained pastor.
4. And the best long-term strategy might be do “raise up” someone among your active members who would consider eventually becoming your future ordained pastor.  This person might be active retired, or someone younger who would become a bi-vocational pastor, or a stay-at-home parent who has reached the empty-nest stage of life.  Obviously not all congregations have such a potential “candidate.” However, my guess is that too few congregations are even asking the question as to whether such a person is already a part of their congregational life.

What about your congregation?  Are you currently without a pastor?  Or is your current pastor close to retirement?  Does your church have an average weekly attendance of (approximately) 75 or less?  Or 40 or less?  Has your attendance been declining over the last five years?  Or longer?  If you have been in decline, and that decline continues, what do you anticipate your attendance will be in 2030?  What do you guess is the average age of your active members?  Is it old enough where your decline might actually accelerate?

These are difficult questions to even reflect upon, let alone discuss with your lay leaders.  However, this is a discussion smaller congregations definitely need to have.  We are entering an era when most congregations will not be able to depend on available ordained pastoral leadership.  We cannot afford to put off confronting this ministry challenge.  It’s time to act.

If you have any questions for me, including whether I can be of some assistance, email me at…

[email protected]

Editor’s Note: Lutheran CORE is collecting and possibly publishing stories from our readers and congregations about the process they followed when they tried to exit the ELCA — successfully or not — including any abuse by church authorities towards their congregation. This article by Dr. Brian Hughes, Lutheran CORE Board Vice-President, is the first in our new Escaping Egypt series.

He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers.” Matthew 12:48-49

Hi. My name is Brian and I’m an ACOA. I’ve had friends in ministry question why it took so long for me to finally exit the ELCA and roster with another church body, a fair question and one that needs to get lifted for those who are still inside. Make no mistake, as our director Dennis Nelson has begun to warn, the doors are likely to slam shut next August at the national ELCA Assembly.  So why are you and your congregation still inside, especially if you’re a moderate, grace filled compassionate confessional Lutheran?

 So why DID I hang on so long? I served as Assistant to the Bishop of the Sierra Pacific Synod in the early 2000s when the advocates came after me, tried to destroy my career because I was merely a moderate and not a champion for their movement of change.  As I like to say, I didn’t know what the words slander, libel and defamation meant, but my attorney wife did. I left that call, moved to the other side of the country (Maryland) and helped continue building out a prevailing ministry, but still in the ELCA until finally retiring early and leaving January 2020.

Welcome to the world of ACOA (adult children of alcoholics).  We give prodigious loyalty long after it’s not warranted or deserved.  We’re hard wired to hang in there no matter how bad it gets.  We also tend to overachieve and become Type A personalities which can lead to other issues like stress induced cardiac problems.  Someday ask me about the heart attack I had underwater while on a shipwreck. It’s a great story.  It helps to explain why some of us aging confessional Lutherans hung on despite all we experienced, all we observed, all we came to understand about the trajectory of the ELCA. Undeserved loyalty.

Like many of his generation, my dad never talked about his experiences in WWII.  Later in life I came to know he was a medic in the European Theater and, through education and pastorally interacting with middle east deployed veterans, I have come to understand the impact PTSD has on them. I can only imagine the horrors my dad witnessed during his generation’s war, but as a child I didn’t understand why he drank so much, physically abused our mom and yelled at me and my sister.  With these ingredients properly measured and poured into the cauldron of development an ACOA was formed.

So brothers and sisters still inside, why are you still there and what are your hopes going forward?  My moment of decision to go was when, in 2018, the ELCA at their national youth gathering put a chemically and surgically mutilated child on stage and celebrated God’s handiwork in creating a trans child. And at that moment it was clear they were not my brothers and sisters and likely not disciples of Jesus either. The pull of loyalty was broken.  How about you?

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25 – 11 AM EDT

In addition to alerting people to ways in which the ELCA is going further and further off the rails, we of Lutheran CORE see as part of our work providing encouragement and resources for congregations and their leaders and lay members. 

Lutheran CORE is about to embark on providing a new series of resources – webinars on church leadership and ministry led by practitioners who know what they are talking about because they will be sharing insights and approaches that they have learned from their own ministry experience and have put into practice in their own ministry settings.  Many thanks to three members of the board – NALC pastors Brian Hughes, David Charlton, and Doug Schoelles – for articulating and developing the vision for this new ministry and doing the work to bring it to life.

The first webinar, entitled “Planning as a Paradigm Shift,” will be offered on Wednesday, September 25 from 11 AM to 12 noon Eastern Daylight Time.  Lutheran CORE vice president Brian Hughes says concerning the webinar, “Planning is deciding about a preferred future, especially when it comes to creating faithful disciples.”  He also said, “Planning for ministry means setting priorities which might, even in the best and healthiest of situations, require pruning something in order to add a new emphasis.”  He also shared that as we deal with the diminishment of our ministry amid the accelerating de-churching of America, church leaders need to figure out what path to take and how to convince others to join.

When asked why this webinar series starts with planning, Brian answered, “Planning assumes we’ve looked at our current reality and want to be somewhere else.  What is not working and what do we want to be about that’s different?”  When asked whether this webinar is a one-time event, he replied, “This is a taster offered by Lutheran CORE that will likely become a monthly offering with more content and other presenters already in the wings depending on the response and needs we hear.”

Brian Hughes is a retired pastor now rostered with the NALC and living in South Carolina.  After serving ELCA congregations in places like Capitol Hill (Washington DC), Pittsburgh PA, and the Bay Area of California, he finished up with almost twenty years in Columbia MD.  For several years he served as assistant to the bishop in the ELCA’s Sierra Pacific Synod (northern California and western Nevada) with seminary candidacy and first call leadership development as part of his portfolio.  He continues to be part of a movement of reintroducing faith formation into homes, multi-generationally.   After retiring from his ELCA congregation in Maryland in 2019 (where they had nine services a weekend in five languages) he launched an NALC street ministry in Baltimore that evolved into leading a Sunday morning worship service in a strip club.  His former congregation in Maryland is now LCMC.  He currently serves as vice president of the board of Lutheran CORE.  Mission and discipleship have been his passions throughout his entire ministry.

Here is a link to register for this webinar.  There is no charge for attending.

Do you worry if your children will be wise when they go off to live in this corrupted world? Have you given them the foundation they need?  Jesus said our world is under attack by forces seeking to destroy you and your children. This battle is happening in Christian families as they allow the breach in their Christian practice. As families attend worship less, as parents and children pray and read the Bible less, and as families stay together as families less, the breach in our lives widens.

“Hear, O sons, a father’s instruction, and be attentive, that you may gain insight.” (Proverbs 4:1) Your spiritual path is the greatest factor of your child’s spiritual path. If a father goes regularly, regardless of the practice of the mother, between 2/3 and 3/4 of their children will become churchgoers (regular and irregular). But, if a father does not go to church — no matter how faithful his wife’s devotion — only one child in 50 (1/50) will become a regular worshipper.  

Part of the reason for this distinction is that children tend to take their cues about domestic life from Mom while their conceptions of the outside world come from Dad. If Dad takes faith in God seriously then the message to their children is that God should be taken seriously. My dad, Richard, who worked long hours as a foreman in a Chevrolet factory, made sure his kids knew the value of faith.

One of the key reasons for Christian families faltering under the attacks of Satan is that many Christian men have not been willing to “step into the breach” – to fill this gap that lies open and vulnerable to further attack. 

 “And I sought for a man among them who should build up the wall and stand in the breach before Me for the land …” says the LORD. (Ezekiel 22:30) MEN … these are the times in which you and I live … this is the hand we have been dealt. Are we standing in the breach for our children? 

Do you think it is easier or more difficult to be a child growing up in these times?  How much have you taken for granted the spiritual grounding your elders gave you? Are you making sure your child has at least as much spiritual grounding in this more godless age? 

• What wisdom are you imparting to your children, even if they are grown up?
• Are you leading your sons and daughters in the path of wisdom? (Prov 4:2-13)
• Or do you let your progeny, your precious children, wander around to follow the ways of the world? (Proverbs 4:14-19)

 “Men do not hesitate to engage in the battle that is raging around you, the battle that is wounding our children and families, the battle that is distorting the dignity of both women and men. This battle is often hidden, but the battle is real. It is primarily spiritual, but it is progressively killing the remaining Christian ethos in our society and culture, and even in our own homes.” (Bishop Thomas Olmsted)

Men you are to love your wives as Christ loves the church, modeling the love of the Father in their most important earthly relationship. (Eph 5:25-30)  Men, as fathers, you are to care for your children as your heavenly Father cares for you. 

• How are you the spiritual protector of your wife and children? 
• How are you training your family for spiritual battle now and in the future?
• How are you leading your family through the spiritual attacks?

As the father you play a primary role in teaching your children the truth about reality. (Eph 6:2-4) Men, you are the one who should instruct your children to understand the world from a consciously and informed Christian worldview.  So, impart life-giving wisdom to your children as you send them into the world with a biblical view of reality and a faith in Jesus Christ that is rooted in solid example. 

Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Hebrews 13:20-21)

Your Servant in the Gospel, Pastor Douglas    

An Analysis of the Work Of the ELCA’s Commission for a Renewed Lutheran Church

As promised, we continue to monitor the work of the ELCA’s Commission for a Renewed Lutheran Church (CRLC).   The Commission was formed in response to action taken by the ELCA’s 2022 Churchwide Assembly.  The assembly directed the Church Council to establish a Commission “comprised of leaders of diverse representation” that shall “reconsider the statements of purpose for each of the expressions of this church, the principles of its organizational structure, and all matters pertaining thereunto.”  The Commission was instructed to be “particularly attentive to our shared commitment to dismantle racism” and to “present its findings and recommendations to the 2025 Churchwide Assembly in preparation for a possible reconstituting convention.”

There was a very interesting article in “Living Lutheran,” the ELCA’s digital magazine, dated August 2, 2023 and entitled “Inside the commission that could restructure the ELCA.”  Here is a link to that article. The article begins by comparing the original Commission for a New Lutheran Church, which met between 1982 and 1987 and whose work led to the formation of the ELCA, and this recently appointed Commission for a Renewed Lutheran Church.  According to the article, the original Commission (from the 1980’s) was “a mammoth research project that held forums across the country, reviewed over 12,000 letters from Lutheran faithful, and processed responses from the synod, district and national conventions of three Lutheran denominations hoping to merge.”  The original Commission was composed of seventy persons who spent five years doing their work.  In contrast, the current Commission will have less than two years to complete its work.  The article in “Living Lutheran” says, “The new group of 35 rostered ministers and laypeople from across the church will conduct a more condensed version of the original group’s investigation, examining ‘statements of purpose’ and ‘principles of organization’ for all three expressions and conducting nationwide research and listening forums.”

A Timeline for the work of the Commission can be found on their website. Here are some key dates.

The Churchwide Assembly that directed the Church Council to form the Commission was held August 8-12, 2022.

It was not until January-March 2023 that there was a nominating process for members for the Commission.

On April 20, 2023 the ELCA Church Council appointed members to the Commission.

On June 20, 2023 the Executive Committee appointed Leon Schwartz and Carla Christopher as co-chairs of the Commission.

It was not until July 13-15, 2023 that the Commission held its first meeting – almost a full year after the assembly which directed the Church Council to form the Commission and just a little more than two years before the July 28-August 2, 2025 Churchwide Assembly, which will vote on the recommendations from the Commission.  But the Commission needs to complete its work well before then.  Here are a couple more very significant dates coming up very soon which are on the Commission’s Timeline –

Spring 2025 – A draft of the Commission’s report and recommendations is to be shared with the Conference of Bishops for comment.

April 3-6, 2025 – The Commission’s final report and recommendations are to be shared with the Church Council, who will forward the report and recommendations to the 2025 Churchwide Assembly for the assembly’s consideration.

The “Living Lutheran” article is filled with hope and anticipation.  It quotes from the memorial submitted by the Northern Texas-Northern Louisiana Synod, which says, “The governing documents, constitutions, bylaws, and continuing resolutions of the ELCA do not allow (congregations, synods and the churchwide organization) to reorganize quickly to meet the changing realities for effective mission in today’s world.”  According to the article the other nine synods which submitted memorials used similar language. 

The article shares comments made by Carla Christopher and Leon Schwartz, the two co-chairs of the Commission, in a sit-down interview after the first meeting of the Commission.

Carla Christopher said, “Church itself has changed.  The people coming to church have changed, and the systems necessary to support the work the church is doing have changed. . . . We want to make sure that churchwide is resourcing the best places where mission is happening and innovation is happening, that synods have the ability to support and address and equip rostered (ministers) for the future, that seminaries have relevant curriculum, and that parishioners have the ability to be active and involved even if they’re not traditional parishioners.”

Both Christopher and Schwartz told stories of a “church struggling to react quickly in a century when crisis is becoming the norm.”  Leon Schwartz added, “When the churchwide assembly meets every three years, and that’s the only chance you have to change the constitution, it’s very cumbersome. Even bylaws or continuing resolutions, they take a lot of time to change anything.”

Christopher cited numerous examples of the “church’s command structure breaking down” during the COVID lockdowns of 2020-21.  According to the article, neither co-chair would say that the decades-old model of three expressions is fundamentally flawed, but they did state that many areas of ministry do not fit under any of the three expressions.  These ministries include camps, colleges and universities, interfaith engagement, and environmental agencies.  Schwartz commented, “There’s a lot of things that have just grown up over the past 40 years.”

Leon Schwartz pointed out that the original Commission (from the 1980’s) “took six years to collect its data whereas the new commission is down to about a year and a half before its report comes due.”  Therefore he “lamented that so much time had elapsed already.”  “It’s a different environment,” he said. “You can’t take six years to make changes anymore in this world.”

This same attitude of hope and anticipation continues as the article says, “When the next churchwide assembly convenes, in summer 2025, the CRLC will present its findings and recommend whether the church should then mount a special reconstituting convention without delay.”  I do not remember the words “without delay” being in the original motion.

If all that is the hope, dream, plan, goal, anticipated outcome, and reason for which the Commission was formed, what is the reality?  As of the time of the writing of this article, the Commission has met six times – three times in 2023 and three times in 2024.  Three of the meetings were in person; three were online.  The plan is that the Commission will meet twice a year in person and online every other month during the other months.  Summaries of the first six meetings can be found on the Commission’s website – Commission for a Renewed Lutheran Church – Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (elca.org)     

I have read, studied, and reflected on the written summaries of the first six meetings of the Commission.  I noticed that earlier summaries were more specific in their content.  For example, the Commission revealed their priorities through whom they invited to address them.  They also mentioned their receiving a copy of the DEIA audit which the ELCA had done of their governing documents.  They have not stated what impact that audit will have on their final report and recommendations.  But the two members who held a listening session for the synod in which I am rostered celebrated the fact that the ELCA is the first of its kind of organization to have such an audit done.

For me, the summaries of the more recent meetings are very general and non-informative.  They speak of such things as reviewing highlights from listening sessions and online surveys, holding listening sessions at the recent youth gathering and adjacent events, identifying essential functions of the three expressions of the church, hearing from synods about their functions, ensuring that their work is viewed through a lens of antiracism, and discussing the current seal and name of the ELCA.  Nothing specific is said.  Reading the summaries tells you nothing about what actually is being done and is going on.

I can think of two possible explanations.  First, they are not getting a whole lot done.  They have grand ideas but do not know how to make those ideas a reality.  After more than half of the time has passed between their first meeting and when they need to give their report and recommendations to the Church Council, they are spinning their wheels.

There is also a second possibility.  They are intentionally not telling us what actually is going on and specifically in what direction they are heading.  For example, they are not disclosing how the ELCA’s DEIA audit will impact their recommendations.  This possibility reminds me of how quickly the recordings of the evening sessions from the recent youth gathering were removed from the internet.

Either way, I see and have a problem and will continue to keep you informed. 

Given the increasing shortage of ordained pastors available for call, now is the time when many churches will need to take the initiative to enlist one or two (or three) active members to be equipped and eventually called to serve their own congregation.

Now before you dismiss this strategy as totally impractical, first consider the difficulties involved in finding and calling a full-time ordained pastor in the next few years.  Then I will describe one possible scenario where a congregation chooses to equip and call one or two (or three) of their own members to serve in a pastoral role.

So first, to answer the question: just how difficult could it be in 2024, or 2025, to fill your congregation’s pastoral vacancy?  Glad you asked.  The answer, in part, comes down to basic math.  There are simply too many vacancies for too few available pastors.  And the small number of pastors who are looking for a call have too many options.  This means applicants for your vacancy will often be comparing your church with other vacant churches where they are also interviewing. 

However, it is not just about the quantity of available pastors, it’s often about the quality.  Many of the pastors out “looking” are not vetted; and might not be qualified to serve your church.  This is especially true in the LCMC, where their online “call packet” information makes it clear that vetting your applicants is entirely your congregation’s responsibility.

One more challenge related to the current clergy supply shortage: it will only become more severe in the coming years.  Projections are that there will be twice as many pastors retiring ten years from now than are retiring in 2024.

So now for a hypothetical example of how a congregation—Grace Lutheran—is addressing its pastoral vacancy.  It involves the following steps:

1. Once the congregation’s retiring pastor—who served Grace for 15 years—departed, the Church Council organized a transition team to consider how to move forward when the larger church is dealing with an unprecedented clergy shortage.  That transition team, after meeting for a couple of months, recommends that the Council pursue a two-prong strategy to address their vacancy.  First, they recommend organizing a call committee to “test the waters’ regarding whether the “right” pastor is out there; whether to serve as an interim or more “permanent” pastor.  The second recommendation is that, while the call committee begins this search, the Council begin a discernment process as to whether one or two (or three) active members can be convinced and recruited to take at least one seminary online course.  This initial course would be a way for these members to consider a seminary education and, hopefully, eventual ordination.  The cost of this seminary course would be covered by the congregation.

2. The Council’s first challenge is, of course, one of discernment.  In other words, identifying the right members to approach regarding this opportunity.  Prayer would play a large role as the Council moves forward.  Those considered would be active members who are already known by name by the majority of church members.  Just as important, they would be members who are recognized as having proven ministry gifts.

3. Given the long-term scope of this strategy, those approached would ideally be 60 years of age or younger.  That way they would potentially be able to serve the congregation in a pastoral role for years to come.

4. Those approached and recruited for this ministry opportunity would hopefully have a college degree. This would make them immediately able to pursue a seminary education without additional schooling.

5. These future pastoral ministers could either be currently working full-time (after all it’s only one initial online course) or part-time; or be active retired; or be a nesting-stage or empty-nester parent not working outside the home; or currently be serving the church as support staff.

6. Which initial seminary course would they be taking?  Negotiable.  I would recommend either Biblical studies, preaching, or Lutheran Confessions.

7. Who would these “recruits” be accountable to as they begin this online course?  Either the Church Council or a mentoring team of two to four lay leaders appointed by the Council.

8. What would the financial cost be to the congregation?  Minimal.  Initially, just the cost of the online seminary course(s). However if these members are also recruited to serve in some ministerial role while taking this course, they should be given a stipend as compensation.

I have, since 2019, provided some level of assistance to 38 different congregations dealing with a pastoral vacancy.  Most of these congregations initially approached their vacancy with the assumption that finding and calling a new pastor is essentially the same challenge it was ten to twenty years ago.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  The current shortage of qualified pastors available for call is unprecedented in my lifetime.  (And I’m seventy-two!)

This crisis is not something that can be entirely addressed by top-down denominational strategies.  Not only are such top-down strategies inadequate in 2024; they will be increasingly insufficient as long as the number of available pastors continues to plummet in the coming years.

So if top-down, national-church initiatives prove inadequate, what can the local church dealing with a vacancy possibly do?  Take ownership in addressing your long-term need for pastoral leadership.  In other words, “raise up” competent and gifted future pastoral leaders from among your own congregational members. 

And if your church is, or soon will be facing a pastoral vacancy, where do you begin?  By doing four things:

1. Read this article a second time.

2. Start praying; asking God for guidance when it comes to identifying active members of your church who have the personal integrity and the proven ministry gifts to consider becoming a pastor.

3. Approach your congregational leaders about considering some version of the above ministry strategy.

4. And if you initially need to talk with someone who is not a part of your congregation about how to proceed, email me, Don Brandt, at [email protected].

For an additional written resource related to this ministry challenge you can click on the link below.

Grace and peace,

Pastor Don Brandt

Lutheran CORE’s Congregational Lay-leadership Initiative (CLI)

“How Your Congregation Can Identify, Enlist and Train Part-time Lay Ministers”

“RESIDENT ALIENS: LIFE IN THE CHRISTIAN COLONY”

A video book review by Douglas Schoelles  

Many thanks to Douglas Schoelles, pastor of St. John’s Lutheran Church in Fort Wayne, Indiana (NALC) and member of the board of Lutheran CORE, for giving us a video review of the book, “Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony” by Stanley Hauerwas and William H. Willimon (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989).  A link to Doug’s review can be found here.  A link to our You Tube channel, which contains reviews of around three dozen books as well as a dozen CORE Convictions videos on various topics related to the Christian faith and life, can be found here. 

Doug writes: “While this book has been out thirty-five years, it is worth the read because the points Hauerwas and Willimon make are more salient than ever.  Congregations will need to see themselves as unique faith communities set apart in our neo-pagan, post-Christian society. Paganism permeates our society, filling our thoughts, converting our youth, and subverting the church.  Efforts to accommodate the society whether with liberals or cultural conservatives is an empty effort to underwrite American societies.  The message of the church is not for ourselves, but for the whole world.  As an incarnation of Christ, our purpose and only significance is a vessel of the Gospel which God uses to bring hope and salvation to the whole world.”

Doug continues: “In our world where loneliness and detachment are epidemic many people are searching for a rooted tradition.  Do we offer that?  ‘With our emphasis on the narrative nature of Christian life, we are saying that salvation is baptism into a community that has so truthful a story that we forget ourselves and our anxieties long enough to become part of that story, a story God has told in Scripture and continues to tell in Israel and the Church’ (Hauerwas & Willimon, p. 59).  As we are baptized to be priests we are commissioned to help people in the name of Jesus, not do-gooders who help people.  We are called to be a community of disciples who believe the gospel and are shaped by it.”

Doug concludes: “The authors did not anticipate some twists of history, but much of what they forecast is spot on.”

Although the appellation “woke”—used by Ricky Gervais to the Hollywood establishment at the Oscars as “insider” language just a few years ago—is eschewed by progressives now that cultural conservatives have fastened onto it and redeployed it as a demeaning epithet, its inception in progressive circles originally indicated a true stance of religious conversion that Christians should recognize.  As the Church year winds to its eschatologically focused close and begins the new year in Advent, both Jesus and John the Baptist exhort us to “wake” up to the reality of our spiritual situation. Such an awakening is at once a combination of intellectual recognition and a posture of preparation for incipient action. “Woke” originally meant to the true believer in progressive ideals much the same thing that “newly illumined” meant to the just baptized in the early Church; it signaled the passing of a liminal threshold and the adoption of such a substantially new interpretation of age-old data points and orientation to the challenges of life as to be only capturable in the proclamation of a new identity.

It is by now not particularly provocative or insightful to interpret the constellation of ideological commitments that goes variously by the names woke, postmodern, poststructuralism, or social justice as a religion, but it is helpful to explore why this is formally rather than merely experientially the case. If religion is defined sociologically as a set of communal behaviors rather than as a set of metaphysical beliefs or commitments (a hopelessly Western definition in any case), this progressive set of beliefs above-labeled clearly functions as a religion for its adherents.

Channeling the work of Émile Durkheim, Jonathan Haidt helpfully identifies the sociological characteristics of a religion. By designating something as “sacred” a group of disparate people can have a sense of unified identity. You know you are in the presence of a thing (or value system) that has been designated by a group as “sacred” when that thing must be defended at all costs from even ridiculous or accidental insults. “Jokes, insults, and utilitarian trade-offs” cannot be tolerated if they impugn the honor of the thing held sacred because they threaten the fundamental social cohesion of the group’s acolytes. When what is at stake is the sacred, blasphemy codes dictate the range of acceptable expression, and such cannot be challenged by rational objections.

In a lecture at Duke University,[1] Haidt identified six groups that are now identified as sacred in the social justice milieu: the “big three” of blacks, women, and LGBTQIA+ along with a secondary group deemed slightly less sacred consisting of Latinos, Native Americans, people with disabilities, and more recently, Muslims.  Comments or ideas that are deemed less than laudatory of people in these groups or their behavior are met not only with outrage but disgust, an emotional response whose purpose is to get us to avoid things that are potentially poisonous to us—contagions and pathogens.

I spoke in last issue’s article of not permitting the pain of a student in my care—very real pain for which I had genuine empathy and wanted to see healed—to colonize my theology, coming to exercise a controlling influence over it. Viruses colonize their host by hijacking the cell’s DNA reproduction system, turning its very system of replication and renewal to its own purposes. The reason why progressive Christianity quickly ceases to be Christianity at all is that the Church’s ministries of renewal and replication—catechesis and evangelism—are necessarily reemployed in service of the new objects that are, in fact, now deemed sacred.

In the case of progressive Christianity, the aforementioned victim groups replace the orthodox objects of worship (the Triune God, revealed by the life, teaching, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ) as the center around which the group’s identity revolves.  In the same way, the holy tasks of pursuing an amorphously defined and ever-mutating sense of justice for these sacred victims replaces the orthodox tasks of preaching the stories of Scripture and celebrating the Sacraments commanded by God’s Sacred Victim, as well as the repentance, conversion, and amendment of life according to the revealed will of God to which these lead. Progressive Christianity quickly ceases to be formally Christian precisely because it holds different things to be sacred than does the Biblical, Apostolic faith. I will have more to say on this in the next issue, but for now it is enough to note that it represents a different religion, not a different way to be Christian.

[1] https://youtu.be/Gatn5ameRr8?si=5elvFmZJAPTJyapK

Most people would call me a “conservative” Lutheran, although I would prefer to be called orthodox or traditional. Nevertheless, I will accept the label. Therefore, as a conservative Lutheran, it is incumbent upon me to differentiate myself from the conservative Christians who hold views that I reject. So let me say clearly that I reject Christian Zionism.

What is Christian Zionism?  Normally, that term describes a fundamentalist dispensationalist theology that believes the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 was the fulfilment of prophecy.  Furthermore it holds that all the land currently in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza belong to the State of Israel by divine right. As a result, it holds that Israel has the right to annex territory and establish settlements wherever it wishes.  It does not recognize the Palestinians as a people, nor their right to have a state of their own.  Finally, it sees conflict between Israelis and Palestinians as a necessary and unavoidable precursor to the End Times.  Anyone who does not support Israel militarily is therefore considered an enemy of God. (Not everything called Christian Zionism falls under this definition.  See Israel Matters and The New Christian Zionism by Gerald R. McDermott)

I reject Christian Zionism as described above because it is a form of Millennialism, which the Augsburg Confession rejects in Article XVII.  I also reject Christian Zionism because I reject the notion that a person’s rights should be based on their religion or ethnicity.  In other words, I am a “classical liberal”.   I support a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, in which Israelis and Palestinians, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, and people of other religions have equal political and human rights.

Having said that, I would like to ask why some Lutherans of the left refuse to distance themselves from groups that deny the right of Israel to exist, that teach violent Antisemitism, and that use Marxist dualism to justify violence and terrorism? A very concrete example of the refusal to renounce Christian Marxist Antisemitism occurred at the 2024 Synod Assembly of the Florida-Bahamas Synod, ELCA.  In a resolution entitled Resolution 24-02 Palestinian Advocacy and Dismantling Christian Zionism in Our Churches, the assembly lamented the destruction caused by Israeli attacks in Gaza, saying

Be it Resolved, The Florida Bahamas Synod in Assembly laments both the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure, housing, schools and universities, hospitals, and places of worship–and the millions of people who are experiencing displacement, facing malnutrition, and starvation, as a result primarily of Israel’s continuing air strikes and blocking entry of humanitarian aid trucks…

Among other things, it also recommends that congregations learn about the  SUMUD initiative and spend at least three hours of adult education time in the next three months in learning more about the conflict, occupation and Christian Zionism.  Missing is any condemnation of HAMAS for the killing of 1200 people in Israel on October 7, 2023, or of any attribution of responsibility to HAMAS for starting the war that is now devastating Gaza. 

Consider an earlier part of the resolution:

Whereas, The ELCA Presiding Bishop, Elizabeth Eaton, on October 13, 2023 denounced the attacks and hostage-taking on October 7, 2023, by HAMAS and has denounced the subsequent disproportionate death toll among Palestinian civilians; as reported by the United Nations, more than thirty-four thousand civilians have been killed in Gaza since October 7, 2023 ; https://elca.org/News-and-Events/8207…

Please notice two things.  First, while the resolution mentions that Bishop Eaton denounced the attacks and hostage taking, it never joins her in that denunciation.  Secondly, while it mentions the number of people killed by Israel in Gaza, it never mentions the number killed by HAMAS on October 7.

Is this an oversight?  Did the resolution simply assume that everyone denounces HAMAS and its ideology?  Sadly, the answer is no.  An amendment was proposed that clarified things by adding the following words:

and emphatically denounce the following Palestinian groups that have been involved in politically motivated violence to include the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC), the Democratic Front for the Liberation of organizations[sic], Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Abu Nidal Organization, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas,

However, the Florida-Bahamas Synod declined. Why? The only answer that I can see is a convergence
of historic Christian Antisemitism and Christian Marxism. The Antisemitism of the Christian left follows
the Marxist practice of dividing all of humanity into oppressor and oppressed. This Marxist dualism sees the oppressor as always evil and the oppressed as always innocent. Furthermore, the oppressed are never really responsible for their actions. Whatever they might do, even if it involves the kind of
atrocities perpetrated on October 7, it is never their fault. The oppressor drove them to it. As Bishop
Eaton said in her letter on October 13, 2023, to which the resolution refers,

We must also call a thing a thing. The power exerted against all Palestinian people — through the occupation, the expansion of settlements and the escalating violence — must be called out as a root cause of what we are witnessing. 

Bp. Eaton

According Bishop Eaton, the root cause of the violent Antisemitism of HAMAS, is Israel. The Florida-
Bahamas Synod Assembly concurs. The refusal to denounce HAMAS and other militant groups is
intentional. So, one would guess, is the refusal to address the Antisemitic rhetoric, intimidation, and
violence at anti-Israel rallies in the U.S.

As a “conservative” Lutheran I am glad to renounce Christian Zionism. Are there any “liberal” or
“progressive” Lutherans who are willing to renounce Christian Marxist Antisemitism?

Ever been ghosted? Ever have someone with whom you were connected not call you back? Ever have someone stand you up? Most of us have been ghosted some time.

Cutting off contact with a friend without giving any warning or explanation is ghosting. Essentially, they vanish into thin air as if they were a ghost. Sherry Turkle, MIT sociology professor, says that “ghosting has serious consequences because when someone treats us as if we could be ignored, we begin to think this is okay and we treat ourselves as people without feelings. At the same time we treat others as people who have no feelings, so empathy begins to disappear.”

Are you okay with being ghosted? I presume not. While we certainly don’t want to be treated as though we can be ignored or dismissed, whom do we ghost? Ghosting or being inactive in a relationship negates the whole point of being in a friendship or relationship. If someone says they are your friend, but then ghosts you, then their words are worthless and empty.

If we say we are Christians we are claiming to be friends of Jesus. But if we are inactive in our relationship with Christ, if we ghost Jesus Sunday after Sunday, month after month, then we are inactive friends, right? And to be clear, Jesus has an opinion on friends who ghost him. The nicest word he uses is “lukewarm” which he says he will spit out (Rev 3:14–22).

Saying one believes in Jesus doesn’t carry much water because even the demons believe in the one true God. But demons do not have a faith relationship. They don’t claim Jesus as a friend. If you are ghosting Jesus, why? An inactive faith is really no faith at all.

A complacent or inactive faith weakens our ability to fight off the devil and allows Satan’s temptations to lead us into brokenness and sin. As a matter of fact, an inactive faith blocks Christ’s courage to overcome the devil’s cunning and deceptive plan (Ephesians 6:11). So letting faith die is unwise. True faith does something (2 Pet 1:5-9).

Jesus calls you a friend (Jn 15:13-15). He seeks having an active faith relationship with you where he connects with you and you connect with him (Jn 15:4). A true friendship with Jesus is living and vibrant. It is active.

While we may go through times when our faith is weak or small and inactive, faith can always be revived, grow stronger and be more active. A living relationship with God brings you a holy strength. This mighty power comes from your relationship with Christ and gives you resolution to life’s circumstances.

Does the LORD ghost us? Never. He is the LORD who neither slumbers nor sleeps. God keeps watch over his people. Christ never abandons his people, but rather comes for his lost sheep who ghost him. Christ takes on all our rejection, not just ghosting him, but our unfaithfulness through our entrusting our lives to false values and empty gods. All through Scripture, God demonstrates his heart for his people.

While an inactive faith is kind of worthless, Jesus does want you to have a ghosted faith. The LORD gives you the Holy Spirit – the Holy Ghost so you will never feel abandoned or ghosted. “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” (Jn 14:26) When the Spirit of Truth comes to you, he will guide you into all the truth and will make known to you Christ’s friendship (Jn 16:12-14).  You can be certain that Christ is always ready to have an active faith relationship with you!

God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us. (Rom 5:5)

Your servant in the Gospel,

Pastor Douglas