As the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) considers sweeping constitutional amendments in 2025, it is crucial to revisit the foundational principles of the Lutheran Reformation—the Five Solas—and assess the implications of these changes for our confessional identity and mission. The Five Solas—Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (grace alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (to God alone be the glory)—are not merely historical slogans but enduring guideposts for Lutheran faith and practice. Recent proposals within the ELCA threaten to compromise these pillars at a time when clarity and fidelity are most needed.

Sola Scriptura and the Authority of God’s Word

The move toward gender-neutral and nonbinary language in ELCA governing documents, as proposed in the November 2024 Church Council actions, raises significant concerns about Sola Scriptura. While inclusivity is a worthy goal, altering biblical terms such as “brothers and sisters” risks detaching the church from the clear witness of Scripture, which affirms humanity as “male and female” (Genesis 1:27, Matthew 19:4). The authority of Scripture, upheld by the Lutheran Confessions, must remain the foundation for doctrine and practice. When church language is shaped more by cultural trends than by God’s revealed Word, we risk undermining the very principle that sparked the Reformation: that “God’s Word shall establish articles of faith” (Luther).

Solus Christus and the Marks of the Church

Another critical issue is the proposed expansion of voting rights to synod assemblies for non-congregational ministries—such as camps and nonprofits—that do not regularly offer Word and Sacrament ministry. The Augsburg Confession defines the Church as the assembly where the Gospel is purely taught, and the sacraments rightly administered. To broaden the definition of “church” to include organizations whose primary mission is not the proclamation of the Gospel or the administration of the sacraments risks severing the church from its Christological center. Solus Christus reminds us that Christ alone is the head of the Church, and it is His presence in Word and Sacrament that constitutes the true church—not organizational structure or social activism.

Soli Deo Gloria and Church Governance

The Commission for a Renewed Lutheran Church (CRLC) has proposed streamlining the constitutional amendment process by eliminating the second Assembly vote, thereby centralizing authority and reducing congregational input. Such a move contradicts both the spirit of the Augsburg Confession and the principle of Soli Deo Gloria, which insists that all church governance must ultimately glorify God, not merely serve institutional efficiency. Furthermore, the lack of proactive communication about these amendments undermines transparency and trust, violating the church’s commitment to open dialogue and discernment.

Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, and the Marginalization of Confessional Voices

Perhaps most troubling is the increasing marginalization of confessional and conservative voices within the ELCA. Sola Fide and Sola Gratia teach that all are justified by faith and saved by grace alone—not by ideological conformity or prevailing cultural opinions. When traditional perspectives are dismissed or excluded from meaningful dialogue, the church risks replacing genuine unity with superficial consensus, undermining the mutual respect and forbearance to which we are called (Romans 14:1, Ephesians 4:3). True inclusion, rooted in the grace of Christ, embraces the full spectrum of faithful Lutheran convictions.

A Call to Faithful Reformation

The proposed constitutional changes present a pivotal moment for the ELCA. To remain faithful to our Reformation heritage, the church must:

• Ensure all amendments are publicized directly to congregations, upholding Sola Scriptura.
• Reject fast-tracking governance changes that bypass congregational discernment, preserving Soli Deo Gloria.
• Host open forums to discuss amendments through the lens of the Five Solas, especially Solus Christus.
• Appoint confessional leaders committed to upholding Reformation theology.

The ELCA cannot credibly champion inclusion while sidelining conservative voices and obscuring governance changes. Only by realigning with the Five Solas can the church preserve its confessional integrity and witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Sola slide with list of solas and German church, courtesy of Paul Fleming.

It started with Holy Communion.  When people ask me to share my experience with leaving the ELCA, the story begins where questions of church fellowship must always begin: the altar.

Following the churchwide votes of 2009, people started using “impaired communion” more frequently to describe the ELCA’s situation.  I particularly recall David Yeago using it to good effect.  To commune is to share something in common, and what the Church shares is Christ.  Not only the 2009 votes, but also the long trajectory of the ELCA’s doctrinal development, made it clear that differing Christs were confessed in the ELCA.

I remember a dedicated revisionist agreeing with me, already in 2003.  “Yes,” he said, “that would be the classical Lutheran understanding of our situation.”  Communion could not proceed as usual.  I realize that many people, including many conservatives, might disagree with that diagnosis.  But that’s where my experience began: the simple recognition that “impaired communion” impairs Communion.  It is there, at the altar, that impaired communion is either repaired, or it is not.

Our first bishop under this new circumstance didn’t like our perspective, especially when we informed him that we would no longer host the Supper at conference or synodical events, but he did not press us to change.  The second bishop was far less sympathetic.  Here I should pause and note that we’ve already encountered two key points about leaving the ELCA.  Having led two congregations out of the ELCA, and counseled and accompanied several others, I’ve seen these points prove valuable time and again.

First, start by asking what your dissatisfaction with the ELCA has to do with doctrine, if anything at all—determine if you disagree on the fundamental question of “Who do you say that I am?”—and distinguish those concerns from other, lesser ones (like, “We’re willing to bet we can get a pastor faster and cheaper somehow else” [unfavorable odds, honestly]).  Then, if you have a doctrinal disagreement, ask yourself how Jesus repairs that sort of thing.  Is it at the conference table, debating constitutions, or at His table, communing or not communing? 

At the very least, that sort of reflection will help clarify your thought.  Constitutions are works; Communion is grace.  Are your problems with the ELCA work problems or grace problems?  If grace is being misunderstood, then the place to begin the remedy (and, potentially, to begin changes in fellowship) is where grace is clarified.  Trying to address a grace problem through a works solution (i.e., trusting a constitutional rearrangement alone) won’t get at it, ever, because the problem is not disagreement about your works, but about the Lord’s gifts. 

Fumbling this distinction continues to hound the various departure movements, I would suggest.   Holy Communion is where Jesus forgives sins.  So, if we now disagree over what sins He forgives, how He forgives them, or who He even is, then we also disagree about what He does at His altar.  Burying that simple problem under layers of constitutional finesse will not clarify the situation to you or to the people whom you serve—and when I say, “the people whom you serve,” I include representatives of your synod, which brings me to the second point.

One bishop is not like another.  Like you and me, each is his or her own little bundle of insecurities, aspirations, and ideas half finished.  If you think it’s hard to be you, being you as an ELCA bishop would be ten times worse for everyone.  I don’t say so out of any animus towards those who hold the office.  We should sympathize with them.  The office as presently constituted is a nightmare, as if someone had found the corpse of a thirteenth-century bishop of Bangor and used an electrical storm to try combining it with Grok, only to find too much personality remained.  The point is: the bishops need your help.

The bishops and their representatives belong to a much larger organization that tries to solve grace problems with work solutions.  “Synod means walking together,” apparently, and each churchwide assembly tries to lock the step, but the differences only widen because they’re trying to heal a flesh wound with a welding torch.  Still, that’s the solution they have, and so the bishops and their representatives will come to you by way of constitution, not Communion.  If your beef is a grace problem, you will need to help them face it, not for the sake of justice or something like it (you’re a Christian, so there’s no room for revenge here), but for the sake of their own souls.  

They will not appreciate this idea.  It won’t be easy.  I call it “playing catch with someone who won’t throw back.”  Here’s how it went for me:

Bishop: “Well, Steve, thank very much for meeting with us today.  I appreciate that your time is valuable.  Why don’t we begin with you explaining to me what your concerns are?” [this starting point can be a trap, but that’s another article]

Me: [Explains my concerns.]

Bishop: [silence]

Me: [shrugs eyebrows]

Bishop: I’m not going to engage you on that topic right now.

Different words could be used. Sometimes no words would be used. There would simply be a long stare, followed by a deep breath and a change of subject.  At other times, there may be honeyed expressions of sympathy followed by continued denials: “That is not the problem.”  Or as one bishop put it to me, “I don’t accept what you’re saying, because I never learned that.”  He said so years ago, and it’s not a horrible answer in some instances.  But it is rather like being asked to play catch, and in good faith tossing the first pitch, only to watch the other person catch the ball, drop it in a bucket, and look back at you.

They won’t engage you on theology.  They don’t think it’s a grace problem.

So if you have a confessional point you want to make, you will need both to confess the truth and to create a situation in which they slow down long enough to a) hear it and b) consider their own confession in light of it.  At its best, the process of leaving the ELCA is an opportunity for everyone to walk away knowing more clearly who they are and why.  There are some synodical leaders who understand this, and if you should encounter some, you’ll feel the difference and be thankful for it.  Either way, remember that what you’re doing is for their sake, not yours, since you are a Christian.  The goal isn’t for you to win, nor is it only for the congregation to leave, but also for the bishop and their representatives to grow in the faith.  They will not necessarily look at it that way—to many of them, you are the problem, and you will be fixed constitutionally—and so you must help them see it.

You’ll do so by starting with Communion, not the constitution.

With all that said, there is one particular way that the ELCA constitutions perform a strangely gracious function, though I’ve rarely heard anyone acknowledge it.  By including in its governing documents a method for leaving the ELCA, the ELCA acknowledges that leaving its fellowship is both permissible and potentially good.  Constitutions are works and seek to govern works.  By including among their works the ability to leave the ELCA, the ELCA constitutions confess that it’s a potentially good work to do so.  If you are part of a congregation considering leaving the ELCA, please make that point to your congregation: the ELCA believes it’s okay to do this.

You’d be forgiven for not realizing it.  I do know one bishop who acknowledged that leaving can be a good work, and she didn’t even mean it in a passive aggressive way.  The acknowledgement is rare!  But no matter.  It’s there in print, and no church should pass into law something it thinks is inherently sinful.  If it is—if a church thinks that leaving is inherently wrong—then it needs to take the process right off the page.  But if it stays on the page, and so far it has, then every congregation needs to know that even the ELCA thinks this process is a totally okay thing.  Sure, you’ll sin along the way—watch for it; repent of it—but so it goes for every good work.  Abusus non tollit usum: the abuse of a thing does not nullify its use.

Don’t look at the process as your enemy.  It’s a friend if you make it so.  “To the pure all things are pure” (Titus 1:15).  You agreed to that process by virtue of being in the ELCA, so follow it.  That’s part of love.  At the same time, you can always read the process closely.   To create a circumstance where you may press the confessional point and help everyone clarify who they are in the light of grace, you may find unexpected, entirely permissible ways to fulfill and participate in the process outlined.  These unexpected ways will surprise others, but just so, they may create, for the Gospel, a forum. 

The cool kids are now calling that sort of thing “interruptive,” and they make it part of their mission statements.  I’d suggest that you just call it “all in day’s work” and not think very much about it.  It can be done politely and kindly enough, even joyfully, the way you’d perform a Baptism or eat soup at a soup supper (yes, Baptisms are very different from soup-eating, but you doing the Baptism, and you sitting with your congregation and eating the soup, are not).  Other, cooler kids will have even more important things for you to consider than what I’ve written here, but this is what I’ve got: start (and end) with Communion, be prepared to play one-sided catch, work hard to create a situation where they at least catch it, and know that the ELCA totally thinks this is an okay thing to do.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t be on the page. 

SINCE GOD IS FOR US

I am a Phoenix Symphony groupee. I feel very fortunate to live in a metropolitan area that has a symphony orchestra of the quality of the Phoenix Symphony. On September 30 I went to a performance which featured Carl Orff’s “Carmina Burana.” HERE is a link to a video of that composition.

Even if you are not a fan of classical music, I am sure you recognize its dramatic opening, entitled “O Fortuna.” It has been used dozens of times in movies, TV shows, commercials, and even football games. The major theme of this mighty work is the unpredictability of life. The Roman goddess Fortuna and her “wheel of fortune” make sure that the outcome is always outside of our control. The text is based upon a manuscript by the same name that was compiled between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. The concert notes for the evening said that the theme “clearly resonated with the medieval authors who lived in a violent, disease-ridden world over which they had so little control, just as it resonated in Orff’s Germany in the grips of the Nazi regime on the march toward war, and still resonates amid today’s disorienting turbulence.” The piece ends with the same pounding timpani and spine-chilling choral harmonies as it began. “O Fortuna” – the fateful wheel of fortune is still spinning recklessly and out of control. It is a profoundly moving and disturbing musical composition.

My wife often accuses me of anticipating the “worst possible scenario.” I told her that “Carmina Burana” is worst possible scenario on steroids. But then, because I am a Lutheran pastor, it got me to thinking of the way that Martin Luther viewed God and the world before he discovered the Gospel. If God is an angry judge whom I am completely unable to satisfy, then how could I have a view of life and the world that is any less frightening and any more hopeless than the perspective of “Carmina Burana”?

But fortunately Martin Luther found in the writings of the apostle Paul the Good News that we can be “justified by (God’s) grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3: 24). Instead of feeling and fearing that the world is against me, God is angry with me, and life is out of control, I can say with the apostle Paul, “If God is for us, who is against us?” (Romans 8: 31). None of the powers of this world “will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8: 39). Therefore, we can be “steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord” because we can know for sure that our labor in the Lord is not in vain (1 Corinthians 15: 58).

I am thankful to God for the Reformation. Because of the Gospel and Martin Luther’s rediscovery of the Gospel I do not have to approach life with the attitude of “Carmina Burana.”

* * * * * * *

ABUSE OF POWER IN THE ELCA’S METROPOLITAN CHICAGO SYNOD

In my Summer Letter from the Director I gave a very detailed account of how Bishop Yehiel Curry of the ELCA’s Metropolitan Chicago Synod committed egregious acts of abuse of power, threatening, bullying, and intimidating against a retired pastor rostered in another synod and lay leaders of a congregation in that synod. A link to that letter can be found HERE.

As I communicated in my August Letter from the Director, on March 15 I wrote to Ms. Judith Roberts, senior director for ELCA Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and co-convenor of a task force for addressing the disciplinary concerns of leaders of color. A press release dated March 10 had told of how her task force had made a presentation to the February 28-March 4 meeting of the ELCA’s Conference of Bishops. I told her about the situation with Bishop Curry and St. Timothy Lutheran Church. I described how leaders who are not people of color had been bullied by a synodical bishop, who is a person of color. A leader of color had been the perpetrator rather than the victim of harassment and discrimination.

The next day she wrote back. She said, “Thank you for sharing your concerns, and we will certainly take them into account. The Churchwide Organization takes misconduct complaints against synod bishops seriously; if you believe that a synod bishop has engaged in misconduct, please direct that concern to the Presiding Bishop.”

I knew that I could not write to Bishop Eaton right away. I had to wait until after the three sons of the former pastor who had been maintaining the property and providing leadership and stability for the congregation were safely out of the parsonage. When they were safe, I sent an account of the events at St. Timothy to five ELCA leaders – Presiding Bishop Elizabeth Eaton; Imran Siddiqui, vice president of the ELCA; Tracie Bartholomew, chairperson (at the time) of the Conference of Bishops; and the two members of the task force who made the presentation – Judith Roberts and Bishop Paul Erickson of the Greater Milwaukee Synod. I never heard from any of them.

After an October 4 news release told about a follow up report from the task force to the September 26-30 meeting of the Conference of Bishops, I again wrote to Ms. Judith Roberts. I told her why I had not written right away and then said, “I never heard from anyone, even though you said that ‘the Churchwide Organization takes misconduct complaints against synod bishops seriously.’ And now that Bishop Curry has been elected chairperson of the Conference of Bishops, I doubt that there is any chance that I will be heard.”

I then added, “The only conclusion I can come to is this. Even though the ELCA claims to be an organization that pursues justice, it does not wish to hear and will not hear anything other than the preferred narrative. Even though the ELCA says that it wants to reach out to those on the margins, it will not reach out to those whom it has marginalized. Even though the ELCA desires the role of speaking truth to power, it refuses to realize where it is the power that truth needs to be spoken to.”

I concluded, “The October 4 news release said that your task force has ‘considered a process for community healing and grief.’ The ELCA has caused great grief. It does not seem to have any concern or interest in helping to bring about healing. The recent events in the Sierra Pacific Synod give the impression that it is only if enough people are able to create a big enough groundswell for long enough that the ELCA will stop and take notice and deal with where it has caused great grief, pain, offence, and damage.” I then thanked her for hearing my concerns.

I am very glad to be able to share that on October 12 I received a very cordial response from Ms. Roberts. She said again, “Any concerns related to a synod bishop and issues of abuse are to be directed to Bishop Eaton.” Therefore I will write – again – to Bishop Eaton. Stay tuned.

* * * * * * *

VIDEO MINISTRIES

HERE is a link to our You Tube channel. In the top row you will find both our Video Book Reviews as well as our CORE Convictions Videos on various topics related to Biblical teaching, Lutheran theology, and Christian living. You will find these videos in the order in which they were posted, beginning with the most recent. In the second row you will find links to the Playlists for both sets of videos. Many thanks to Pastor Nathan Hoff for his CORE Convictions Video, which we are featuring this month. A link to his video can be found HERE.

A SIMPLE WAY TO PRAY

by NATHAN HOFF

Martin Luther described a simple way to pray in a letter to his barber, Peter. It is a spiritual treasure: https://ms.fortresspress.com/dow…/R2R_ASimpleWaytoPray.pdf.

In this video Pastor Nathan Hoff gives us a tutorial in the Way of Word and Prayer, which is part of the spiritual practices at his congregation, Trinity Lutheran Church in San Pedro, California. As very young children we learned to speak by listening to our parents. In the same way Pastor Hoff and the people of Trinity Lutheran use the Moravian Daily Text to respond to God’s Word in prayer. In this video he shows us how he used the Scriptures passages for September 20 as an example of first hearing the Word of God and then praying. The Moravian Daily Text can be found at www.groundupgrace.com.

Eugene Peterson encouraged this form of praying when he said, “Prayer is answering speech.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer agreed when he added, “We do not pray from the poverty of our own hearts, but from the riches of God’s Word.”

In addition to serving as pastor at Trinity Lutheran Church, Nathan has taught extensively at such places as Mount Carmel Ministries in Alexandria, MN, Canadian Lutheran Bible Institute, Master’s Institute Seminary, The Awaken Project, and the World Mission Prayer League.

More information regarding Trinity’s Rule of Life, which includes a commitment to the Way of Word and Prayer, can be found at www.trinitysanpedroorg/rule of life.

Grateful for the Gospel,

Dennis D. Nelson

Executive Director of Lutheran CORE

[email protected]

WILL YOUR CHURCH BE NEXT?

There are three things that I would like to say as follow up to my last two articles about two ELCA congregations where their respective synods used paragraph S13.24 in the ELCA’s constitution for synods as justification and empowerment to take over and close a CORE-friendly congregation and to claim to have the right to the property of a former-ALC congregation that had taken its first vote to disaffiliate from the ELCA. 

The first one is this: It could happen to anyone. S13.24 empowers a synod council to “take charge and control of the property of a congregation” if “the membership of a congregation has become so scattered or so diminished in numbers that it cannot provide required governance or . . . fulfill the purposes for which it was organized” and if the synod council determines that it needs to take this action “to protect and preserve the congregation’s property from waste and deterioration.” Since telling the story of two congregations – one in the Metropolitan Chicago Synod and one in the Southwest California Synod – I have been informed of situations in other synods where the synod council has taken similar action against congregations. And in none of those situations has the membership of that congregation become “so scattered or so diminished” or has the property of that congregation become in danger of “waste and deterioration.” Rather in each situation either the synod did not like the direction of the ministry of the congregation (it did not line up with the ELCA) or the synod wanted to grab the assets of the congregation before that congregation were to leave the ELCA. In one situation the synod council took this action against a congregation even though the synod committee that was charged with reviewing the situation did not find sufficient reason for the synod council to do so. 

It is important that people know what this kind of total takeover entails. In one situation the synod closed the congregation. In another situation the synod demanded that the congregation turn over the deed to the property. In a third situation the synod appointed a group of trustees to have full and complete authority in regard to the assets and business affairs of the congregation. In other words, the congregation’s elected leadership is completely disempowered.

It is my opinion that we are going to see an increasing number of examples of synod councils’ using (mis-using) S13.24 to close, take over, and/or seize the properties of congregations. As synods continue to experience a decrease in their number of congregations and a decrease in the financial viability of congregations, they will experience a decrease in income from congregations. And with the severe shortage of pastors, synods will not be able to provide all congregations with a pastor. So what will they do? I believe they will take over and close congregations, get the number of congregations down to the number of available pastors, sell buildings and properties, and thereby accumulate financial assets that will enable them to continue to advance their radical, leftist agenda for years to come. 

Because synods are taking this kind of action against congregations whose membership is not scattered or diminished, and whose property is not in danger of “waste and deterioration,” this kind of takeover could happen to anyone. Will your congregation be next?  

The second thing I want to say is this. I continue to be absolutely astounded at how quickly the ELCA is departing from Biblical moral values, confessional Lutheran theology, and a Biblical concept of the mission of the church. Once the dam broke, it did not take long for anything holding back the floodwaters to be completely washed away.

In my Summer Letter from the Director I wrote about St. Timothy Lutheran Church in the Hermosa neighborhood of northwest Chicago. This was the location for Lutheran CORE’s annual Encuentro festival for bi-lingual and Spanish language ministries. The bishop of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod threatened the supply preacher (who also was the coordinator of the Encuentros) with discipline and possible removal from the ELCA clergy roster if he did not immediately cease his ministry there. And the sons of the former pastor who were maintaining the property and providing stability and leadership to the congregation were evicted from the parsonage (and have since then moved out of the area). 

Within a few short days after the removal of confessional Lutheran leaders, what is happening at that congregation now? Under the guidance and with the permission of the two Latinx pastors who were appointed by the synodical bishop, a neighborhood group that makes use of a South American psychoactive and entheogenic brewed drink called Ayahuasca is holding weekend-long gatherings in the church building. In case you are not familiar with it, Ayahuasca is used both socially and as a ceremonial or shamanic spiritual medicine among the indigenous peoples of the Amazon basin. Its use has recently spread to North America and Europe. This drink creates altered states of consciousness and psychedelic experiences which can include visual hallucinations and altered perceptions of reality. Before the weekend-long event a shaman blesses the space, which once had been the location of a Christo-centric Lutheran ministry. 

How could one possibly justify the holding of this kind of alternate spiritual experience on the property of a Lutheran congregation? According to one of the Latinx pastors who was appointed by the synod to lead and serve the congregation, the people of South America who make use of Ayahuasca were oppressed by the Conquistadores and their religions and culture were marginalized if not destroyed. Therefore, we must be hospitable to them today. Certainly we need to be welcoming and hospitable to all people. But I cannot imagine the Old Testament prophets saying to the Canaanite people, “We have oppressed you ever since we moved into this land. We have marginalized if not destroyed your religions and culture. Therefore, we will invite you to set up an altar in the Temple.” What that synod-appointed Latinx pastor is doing sounds consistent with the “Declaration of Inter-Religious Commitment,” which was overwhelmingly approved by the 2019 ELCA Churchwide Assembly. After declaring that “we must be careful about claiming to know God’s judgments regarding another religion,” that document then states that our main role as Christians is to love and serve our neighbor. In other words, as followers of Christ we have nothing unique to offer. And if we have nothing unique to offer, why not invite a shaman to bless the space, which once had been the location of a Christo-centric Lutheran ministry, and why not offer Ayahuasca-induced altered states of consciousness, psychedelic experiences, and visual hallucinations, instead of introducing people to Jesus, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and who came that we might have life and have it abundantly?

The third thing I want to say is this. As expected, the ELCA has absolutely no interest in hearing any voice other than its own.

As I wrote in my Summer Letter from the Director, I was very pleased to hear back – and in a very timely way – from Judith Roberts, senior director for ELCA Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and co-convenor of a task force for addressing the disciplinary concerns of leaders of color. I told her about the situation with the bishop of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod and St. Timothy, and how in this situation a leader of color was the perpetrator rather than the victim of harassment and discrimination. She wrote back –

“Thank you for sharing your concerns, and we will certainly take them into account. The Churchwide Organization takes misconduct complaints against synod bishops seriously; if you believe that a synod bishop has engaged in misconduct, please direct that concern to the Presiding Bishop.”

I waited until after the three sons of the former pastor who had been maintaining the property and providing leadership and stability for the congregation were safely out of the parsonage. Then I sent an account of the events at St. Timothy to five ELCA leaders – Presiding Bishop Elizabeth Eaton; Imran Siddiqui, vice president of the ELCA; Tracie Bartholomew, chairperson of the Conference of Bishops; and the two members of the task force that made the presentation to the Conference of Bishops – Judith Roberts and Bishop Paul Erickson of the Greater Milwaukee Synod. I never heard from any of them.

* * * * * *

VIDEO MINISTRIES

HERE is a link to our You Tube channel. In the top row you will find both our Video Book Reviews as well as our CORE Convictions Videos on various topics related to Biblical teaching, Lutheran theology, and Christian living. You will find these videos in the order in which they were posted, beginning with the most recent. In the second row you will find links to the Playlists for both sets of videos. This month we want to feature two videos.     

WHO GETS TO EAT? ISSUES OF ADMISSION TO THE LORD’S SUPPER

BY ERIC W. GRITSCH

REVIEWED BY FR LAWRENCE (LARRY) RECLA

Many thanks to Fr Lawrence (Larry) Recla STS for his review of the book, “Who Gets to Eat?” by Eric W. Gritsch. Pastor Recla is a retired ELCA clergy now serving an Episcopal Church. He is also Dean of the Florida Chapter of The Society of the Holy Trinity. HERE is a link to his video review. 

Pastor Recla writes, In the 1970’s several seminarians at Gettysburg Seminary wanted to have their children receive Communion. The Reverend Dr. Eric W. Gritsch became the center of what some would call a controversy. “Who Gets to Eat?” is my editing nine lectures and printed essays from the late 1970’s as well as other original materials into a format more suitable for reading in a book. Dr. Gritsch invites us to a reasoned debate with the presentation of the various historical positions the Church has practiced and espoused. He has the integrity to include all positions, not just those supporting his conclusions. While I am at some divergence with some of his conclusions, I am convinced that everyone, clergy and laity, would be informed and humbled by attending to his presentation. Some might even be convinced to the contrary of their initial inclinations; all would be the more respectful of others’ conclusions.

REFRESHMENT AND DELIVERANCE: THE MUSIC OF FAITH

BY WILLIAM DECKER

Many thanks to William Decker, retired ELCA deacon (and formerly an associate in ministry), for reminding us of how music will always play an integral part in human life, and this includes the music of faith. HERE is a link to his video, which underscores the amazing role that music has played in Christian congregations.

The author introduces the video with some pivotal theological insights from Martin Luther. In his own writings, Luther spoke the words of a true musician, giving to music his “highest praise” next to theology’s fundamental truths about the Christian life. The video ends by emphasizing the place that Christian hope embodies in each of us as we sing the Lord’s song.

In between these theological pillars, the author then looks at a variety of practical ways that our congregations have sought to worship God through music: that is, through the choir, summer worship, the organ, instrumentalists, and traditional hymns. His video is based on a little more than six decades of congregational experience.

Bill Decker recently retired as the musician at Messiah Lutheran Church in Park Ridge, IL after more than four years. He has sung in children’s and adult choirs and his college’s Chapel Choir. He plays the piano, writes a bit of music, and is a novice at the organ.

* * * * * *

May the Lord bless you, keep you, make His face shine upon you, be gracious to you, look upon you with favor, and give you peace. 

Dennis D. Nelson

Executive Director of Lutheran CORE

As the Directors of the Global Lutheran House of Studies at United Theological Seminary (UTS) in Dayton, Ohio (established in 1871), we are honored to announce the launch of a new program for pastoral ministry formation in the Lutheran Tradition that is deeply committed to The Historic Faith and Church Renewal. At UTS, we are motivated by the belief that the church is essential to the renewal of the world and the development of disciples of Jesus Christ. We are dedicated to empowering faithful and fruitful Christian leaders to fulfill this mission. Visit https://united.edu/global-lutheran-house-of-study/ for the most current information on The Global Lutheran House of Study at United Theological Seminary.

One way we aim to honor the legacy of Martin Luther is by emphasizing confessional Lutheran teachings and the importance of upholding and declaring the Lutheran Confessions. We believe that the church has a responsibility to remain true to its Lutheran distinctives and to pass on the rich heritage of the Lutheran tradition to future generations. This includes offering classes on the Lutheran Confessions and their relevance for practical ministry, as well as opportunities for students to learn from and connect with scholars and leaders from various Lutheran traditions.

The Global Lutheran House of Studies (GLHS) also supports its vision and goal by emphasizing education in global ministry, theology, and global Lutheran traditions. We believe that the church has a duty to confront the challenges and opportunities of a rapidly changing world, and we are dedicated to providing our students with the skills and knowledge they need to serve as church leaders worldwide. This includes classes on cross-cultural mission, global theology, and the unique Lutheran perspective on ecumenism, as well as opportunities for students to participate in international contextualization trips, mission trips, and internships as required by the programs we offer through UTS.

In addition to our emphasis on confessional Lutheran teachings and global mission, we are also committed to academic excellence and providing our students with a high-quality education. The Association of Theological Schools accredits United Theological Seminary, which includes The Global Lutheran House of Studies, and we are dedicated to helping our students achieve academic and professional success. We offer a range of educational programs and resources, including master’s degrees (M.A., Masters in Christian Ministry, Masters of Theology, MDiv, MDIV/MBA), doctorate (DMin), certificates (Lutheran Ministry and others), and continuing education programs. United students can study in resident, hybrid, Live-online, or virtual courses.

As Directors of the Global Lutheran House of Studies, we are dedicated to our students’ success and helping them fulfill God’s mission to create disciples of Jesus Christ and renew the church. We will work closely with them to provide the support and resources they need to succeed in their academics and their current and future vocations, and we encourage them to participate in school life and take advantage of UTS’s numerous activities, events, and training opportunities.

Overall, we are excited about the impact that the Global Lutheran House of Studies will have on the lives of our students and the church at large, and we are committed to carrying out this vital work in the coming years. We believe that our school is uniquely qualified to help confessional Lutheran students develop their faith and prepare for mission-driven leadership in the Church. For more information, visit https://united.edu/global-lutheran-house-of-study/. The first twelve admitted MDiv students receive 50% off tuition, with additional scholarships available for other programs, including the DMin.

The Directors of the Global Lutheran House of Studies at United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio, are Reverend Dr. Thomas Thorstad STS, Reverend Daniel Landin, and Reverend Dr. Richard Blue, Jr. The faculty and staff serve this house of study, who are all Lutheran pastors within various Lutheran denominations, have been approved and remain in good standing with ongoing approvals as of January 1, 2023.. The faculty and staff include Reverend Dr. Douglas Schoelles, Reverend Dr. Wesley Teixeira, Reverend Dr. Rod Ford, Reverend Dr. Thomas Thorstad STS, Reverend Daniel Landin, and Reverend Dr. Richard Blue, Jr.

Image in page header (left to right): Rev. Richard Blue, Rev. Thomas Thorstad, Rev. Daniel Landin

Note from CORE’s Executive Director: Many thanks to a seminarian, who wishes to remain anonymous, for writing about what it was like to attend an ELCA seminary.  Students considering enrolling in an ELCA seminary, as well as members of orthodox congregations still in the ELCA, need to know what is being taught and what they can expect from their future pastor.  Will this kind of woke educational experience train someone who will provide good pastoral care and leadership for your congregation?  Those who believe that theologically solid pastors are and will continue to be available within the ELCA should know that there are some (Thanks be to God!) but the number is decreasingly rapidly.   

I attended United Lutheran Seminary (United), in Gettysburg, for 3 semesters. My time there led me to realize that there was no place for a confessional Lutheran faith within the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). Growing up in central Pennsylvania, I knew nothing of the other Lutheran denominations. Every Lutheran church within an hour of my house was ELCA and that was all I knew. Upon entering seminary, I was assured by my synod’s bishop that there was a place for a confessional Lutheran in the “big-tent,” that is the ELCA.

United did not share this view and I realized this in my first semester, when I began questioning the “sacred doctrines” of the ELCA that were invented in the last 10 years. My first semester I took the class Systematic Theology 1: Creation, Sin, and New Creation, which I thought would provide me with a greater understanding of the ELCA’s newly held positions as well as a basic overview of theological concepts and systematics. I hoped that it would answer some of my questions and strengthen my ability to conduct ministry faithfully. I was disappointed to find that much of the class was heavily focused on womanist, feminist, and other niche and modern theological interpretation rather than core or confessional concepts. This was the only theology class that I was required to take. This lack of true theological instruction allows seminarians to believe they understood yet have made strawmen of a Biblical Christianity. Much of what the Church held for the last 2000 years could be dismissed as “privileged,” “racist,” or “sexist.”

My first (and only) sermon I gave at United was for my homiletics class. I was assigned to preach on the first week of Lent, which includes the Gospel reading of Christ being tempted in the wilderness. In my sermon I mentioned, not as the message of the sermon but to highlight the goodness of Christ, that hell was real. I felt relatively proud of my sermon while giving it. Given that it was my first sermon, it could have been better, but I stand by my message today. It shocked me when my homiletics professor opened my sermon up for critique and she implied that I shared a heretical message. I did not realize that the acknowledgement of hell was such a faux pas. After my professor shared that I was a heretic, much of my peers’ remarks echoed her idea. I called my parents as well as a mentor that evening and shared that I wanted to leave seminary because apparently, I did not understand anything about the faith.

Getting raked over the coals for believing that Christ was not lying when He spoke of hell was the straw that broke me. I realized that I could not stay at United, and I would not be welcome in the ELCA, if this is where the publicly acceptable discourse is.

Some of the common talking points that the professors would push in a variety of their classes include: using non-masculine pronouns for God, the merits of a variety of sexual relationships, how the church has been a force for bad in the world, and leftist political talking points.  It is a shame that there could not be serious theological discussions concerning these topics as to disagree with any point carried with it accusations of being “not-loving,” among other unflattering titles, and being shut down by the professor.

When I told my synod’s bishop about leaving the ELCA, I told her how I felt betrayed by a church that I grew up in and how I was lied to when I was told that there was a place for me. She was sorry and could not defend the actions of the ELCA from polygamy to the disbelief in hell. There is no Biblical defense, and she couldn’t spin one. When I went to my home congregation to tell my pastor, whom I grew up with, he was not nearly as cordial. He tried to challenge me as misinformed when I pointed to the ELCA’s radical direction. He accused me of being political for not agreeing with the ELCA.

Although the gospel is not preached there anymore, it is sad to know I am no longer welcome in my home congregation.

Since coming to the North American Lutheran Church (NALC), I have appreciated the professionalism of the professors in the North American Lutheran Seminary (NALS), the comradery among clergy, and general support from congregations. It is refreshing to be able to read the Bible and confessions in a seminary setting and have genuine discussions about the application and use of the concepts. There is a fellowship among the students as members of Christ’s Church, here for Christ, unlike what I have known within the ELCA.

I write this because this is my story. I could have shared more anecdotes about the inability of United to form its students, the unprofessionalism of the professors and ignorance of those who followed the party line, but these examples make my point. I do not want to slander the ELCA or any pastors or congregations in it. I only want to bring light to what is going on in the once great Lutheran seminary of Gettysburg, PA, United Lutheran Seminary.

It breaks my heart to have had to leave but I have found a home in the NALC.

After reading two recent communications from ELCA Presiding Bishop Elizabeth Eaton, the only conclusion I can come to is this.  She just does not get it.

The first communication is dated September 3, 2021 and is entitled, “We Are the Body of Christ.”  A link to that communication can be found here. In that letter Bishop Eaton writes about the great, long-standing animosity between Jews and Gentiles, and about how in the early church, these two groups of people were able to be brought together.  She refers to the council in Jerusalem in Acts 15 as well as to the second chapter of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, and to how “the dispute between the two groups was healed.”  She said that this healing “went to the very core of what it meant to be part of the church.”  She then said, “They were one body.  We are one body. . . . Yes, we have significant disagreement about very important issues, but our cultural and political differences cannot dissolve this bond.”  I was absolutely floored by what she wrote next.  “We can take heart from the example of the early church.  If, by the Spirit’s power, they could set aside their differences – which were far greater than any of ours – then we, too, by the power of the Sprit, can live into the unity that already exists in Christ.”

She just does not get it.  The differences between confessional Lutherans today who hold to the authority of the Bible and who believe that the Lutheran Confessions are a reliable interpretation of the Bible and those who would call themselves the “progressives” are not far less than, instead they are far greater than the differences between Jews and Gentiles in the early church.  For example –

No one in the early church led the young people of that church in denouncing the views of the more traditional folks as a lie from Satan that needs to be renounced – unlike what happened at the 2018 ELCA youth gathering. 

The apostles did not ignore, dismiss, minimize, or marginalize the Hellenists when they expressed their concern that their widows were being neglected (Acts 6).  Instead, they appointed seven deacons to resolve the matter.  In contrast, those with traditional views are usually totally ignored when they express their concerns to those in positions of power.    

Heresies in the early church were dealt with (for example, see Colossians 2) rather than just accepted or even celebrated as culturally sensitive ways to contextualize the Gospel.

After the early church made their decision in Acts 15 as to how uncircumcised Gentiles could be a part of the church, they did not then a few years later claim to have decided something else.  Their honesty and integrity in holding to what they had decided stands in sharp contrast with the way in which the ELCA has expanded and re-interpreted what was actually voted on and approved in 2009 so that they are now able to embrace the full LGBTQIA+ agenda. 

The apostles did not break promises and ignore commitments as the ELCA has done by its not giving a place of honor and respect to traditional views and those who hold them.  I have heard of white male seminarians with traditional views being told to put tape over their mouths and not speak.  I also know of people whose ordination candidacy process was cancelled or who were denied entrance into the candidacy process because of their traditional views.   

Yes, Bishop Eaton just does not get it.  The differences between confessional Lutherans and those who would call themselves the “progressives” are not far less than, instead they are far greater than the differences between Jews and Gentiles in the early church.

Even more out of touch with reality is what Bishop Eaton wrote in the second communication, which is dated October 20, 2021, and is entitled, “A pastoral letter from the ELCA presiding bishop regarding the actions of the Reformed Church in America General Synod 2021.”  A link to that communication can be found here.  In that letter she told about one of the ELCA’s full communion partners, which had recently met in General Synod.  The final Vision 2020 Report was presented to the assembly, with its recommendations for the future of the denomination “with regard to staying together . . . and grace-filled separation.”  Bishop Eaton commended that church body for “adopting regulations to provide an unobstructed pathway for those local churches that will depart the denomination.”  She praised their actions, which she says “reflect the RCA’s commitment to walking together, respecting differences, and affirming common mission and ministry.”  She described the spirit of the synod as “conciliatory and hope-filled, as delegates shared their disagreements in the bond of peace.” 

What she then says in the next paragraph is totally out of touch with reality.  She talked about how the ELCA has “traveled this same road.”  She uses language from the 2009 social statement, “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust,” when she says, “It is possible, by the grace of God, to be a church that makes an active choice to live with the disagreement among us, and ‘to accompany one another in study, prayer, discernment, pastoral care, and respect.”  How out of touch can you get?  There may have been those who – back in 2009 – were deceived into buying that line so that they were willing to vote in favor of the human sexuality social statement and the changes in ministry policies.  But I do not know anyone today who continues to believe that the ELCA has any plans to “honor bound conscience.”

I know that there are ELCA bishops and synod councils who have been gracious in their dealings with congregations who were voting to disaffiliate from the ELCA.   But I have also heard many stories of bullying, intimidating, threats to take property, and efforts to get as many dollars as possible from congregations who wish to leave.  I know of retired ELCA pastors who were told by their synods that they would be removed from the ELCA clergy roster if they did not leave a congregation that has voted to disaffiliate from the ELCA.  I know of a seminarian who was no longer welcome at an ELCA seminary once the congregation that she was affiliated with began the process of leaving the ELCA. 

Too many ELCA congregations have not experienced a “grace-filled separation.”  Too many ELCA congregations did not find “an unobstructed pathway” when they began the process of voting to leave the ELCA. I am certain that what Bishop Eaton wrote in her October 20 communication is something that she wishes were true and that she desires to be true.  But why does she not know that it is not true?  Does she really think that people will believe what she wrote?   

Lutheran CORE wants to be of support and assistance to orthodox, confessional congregations in every way that we can.  Three of the ways in which we are seeking to do that are through a catalog of sermon resources, Clergy Connect, and Congregations in Transition.

I have spoken with lay leaders of congregations that are either too small or too remote to be able to find and call a pastor.  Other congregations are in the process of calling a pastor, and at this point do not have an interim.  Some of these congregations have a pastor who is available to come, preach, and preside at communion once or twice a month.  Many times it is a retired pastor, or a chaplain in a nearby care facility, who is able to help out.  I have spoken with some pastors who travel a great distance in order to provide care for the people of God.  Because of the distance, some of these pastors will preach and lead worship one Sunday a month, and then write and send sermons which a lay leader in the congregation can deliver on the other Sundays of the month.  There are many different kinds of situations, and many different kinds of arrangements that have been made.  We want to thank all of the lay leaders of congregations who “step up to the plate” and all the pastors, including retired pastors, who help meet the need.

We are also very grateful to Cathy Ammlung, NALC pastor and former secretary of the board of Lutheran CORE.  Cathy has a special passion and heart for smaller and/or more remote congregations and congregations that do not have a pastor.  She has begun the process of compiling a resource bank of sermons that lay leaders could use on the Sundays when their congregation does not have a pastor.  She describes her concept and vision in an article in the March issue of CORE Voice.  A link to that article can be found here.

Many thanks to all those who have already responded and sent Cathy one or more of their sermons.  If you have not already done so, please consider sending her one or more of your sermons which can be added to this resource bank.  Sermons will be organized by topic, Scripture passage, and Sunday of the church year.   Please email her your “best sermons” at [email protected]. 

Another resource I want to lift up is Clergy Connect.  A link to this page on our website can be found here.

Many congregations have reported how difficult it is to find an orthodox, confessional, Great Commission minded pastor.   An anticipated increase in the number of retirements of pastors post-COVID, and the decrease in the number of seminary enrollees, will make and have made this situation even more severe.

We invite you to post your position on our website.  If you check out the page you will see the kind of information that other congregations have provided.  Congregational search committees are asked to submit church name, location, description of the position and the congregation, and contact information.  Vacancies can be emailed to [email protected].   

Third, if you have a pastoral vacancy, please also consider our Congregations in Transition ministry initiative.  We have a group of (mostly) retired Lutheran pastors who have been trained to be transition coaches.  They are able and available to help congregations whose pastors have retired or resigned, or soon will be retiring or resigning, maintain stability and momentum in regards to the congregation’s vital ministries during the transition process.  For more information check out our Transitions page or contact [email protected]. 

The official report from the November 8-11 meeting of the ELCA Church Council, dated November 19, 2018 said that “the council engaged in discussions around a ‘well-governed, connected and sustainable church.’” I do not see how the Church Council could call the ELCA well-governed, connected, and/or sustainable.

The
Math Doesn’t Add Up

First, sustainable. The predecessor church bodies that merged in 1988 to
form the ELCA achieved their statistical peak in 1968 when they reported a
combined total of 5.9 million members. Fifty years later, in 2018, the ELCA
reports having only about 3.5 million members. That represents a 41% loss in
fifty years. How long can a decline like that be sustainable? The synod in
which I was rostered before I retired balances the budget by spending money
obtained by selling the buildings of closed congregations. These buildings were
built and paid for by faithful followers of Jesus whose view of the Bible,
orthodox theology, priority of evangelism, and views on such things as human
sexuality that synod rejects. How long can a synod continue to exist and how
can it be sustainable if it balances the budget by closing congregations?

Actions
Speak Louder

Second, connected. The 2009 ELCA Churchwide Assembly said that a wide
variety of views on human sexuality, including the traditional view, would be
treated with respect. And yet a keynote speaker at last summer’s youth
gathering (who could very well be the prime spokesperson for the ELCA) led
31,000 young people in rejecting the traditional view as a lie. My letters to
synodical bishops were totally ignored when I wrote to them about the free
reign and amount of power that are being given to the LGBTQIA+ community and
about how the ELCA’s doing so is a blatant betrayal and violation of trust
because of the way in which the LGBTQIA+ agenda goes way beyond what was
approved at the 2009 assembly. How could a church that advocates for justice
but then acts so unjustly, and that claims to be inclusive and yet consistently
excludes, diminishes, and dismisses a significant part of its constituency call
itself connected?

Restore
Sanity

Third, well-governed. In a recent letter to Presiding Bishop Elizabeth
Eaton I challenged her to exercise the authority of her office and hold the
organizers of the youth gathering accountable for their choice of speakers. I
also called upon her to restore sanity to the ELCA’s teachings on human
sexuality by working with the administration and faculty of the Lutheran School
of Theology in Chicago to renounce the “We Are Naked and Unashamed” movement.
That movement rejects marriage by any definition as normative for sexual
activity. It was well-represented among the keynote speakers at last summer’s
ELCA youth gathering. Bishop Eaton gave a very limp reply when she said that
she will be “speaking to the leadership team of the Youth Gathering.” She also
said that she did not want to “give more attention and credence to a movement
that is outside this church’s social teaching by speaking about it publicly.”
As Bishop Eaton refuses to speak publicly about movements within the ELCA that
are out of control, Nadia Bolz-Weber is gaining visibility and notoriety as she
is promoting her new book, Shameless: A Sexual Reformation, and as she
is calling upon women to send in their purity rings so that she can melt them
down and make a statue of a golden vagina. How could a church that refuses
to address actions and behaviors that are in direct violation of what it claims
to be its beliefs and standards call itself well-governed?

Too
Late for Damage Control

Either the leaders of the ELCA are in agreement with Nadia Bolz-Weber or
they are not. If they are in agreement, we have a problem because they are
joining with her in calling the traditional view of human sexuality a lie. If
they are not in agreement, they have a problem because they have allowed her to
become so prominent. They did nothing about her at a time when it would have
been easier to do something about her. How would they be able to stop her now? When
a church body has allowed a situation that is doing great damage to become so
large and out of control, how could it call itself well-governed? The
situation created by Nadia Bolz-Weber is doing great damage because of the
message she is communicating to young people and the turmoil she is creating in
some congregations. 

Repent
and Re-Examine

That same report said that the ELCA Church
Council formed a working group which would develop a document which would
contain “a confession of this church’s bondage to the sins of slavery, racism,
discrimination, white supremacy and quietism, and a commitment to begin the
work of repentance, which this church confesses to be ‘the chief topic of
Christian teaching.’” The ELCA has far more that it needs to confess
besides racism, discrimination, white supremacy, and quietism. It also needs to
repent of its own acts of betrayal of trust, violation of agreements,
and marginalization and even bullying and intimidation of pastors and
congregations who hold to traditional views. It also needs to seriously
re-examine its own theology. How could it call itself confessionally
Lutheran when it says that our need to confess rather than God’s work of
salvation through Jesus Christ is “the chief topic of Christian teaching”?