Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mike Bennett

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 68
Your Turn / Re: CORE/NALC
« on: August 11, 2011, 05:19:28 AM »
I hope some here have taken advantage of the live internet feed of the Lutheran CORE theological conference to listen to the Rev. Dr. Sarah Hinlicky Wilson's presentation this evening.  It was absolutely stunning.  I particularly appreciated her response to a comment/question following her paper, in which she spoke to her own continued membership in the ELCA and called for those present to pray for all those who work at the ELCA offices on Higgins Road. 

   Plus, she gave a teaser about her own commitment to the Book of Concord:  it is in the next issue of "Lutheran Forum" magazine, so subscribe already!  :)

I was there and I agree.

Gary C. Nuss, STS

I thanked her afterward for (1) being the editor, (2) her paper, and (3) most of all for her answer to the question "what am I to do when I've been wronged?"

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: An appeal for an Apology for Evangelical Catholicism
« on: June 09, 2011, 10:12:44 PM »
The Catholicity of the Reformation ed Braaten & Jenson.
Frank Senn
James Crumley
Gunther Gussman
Robert Wilken
David Yeago

Available at, among other places,, where you can view, among other things, the table of contents.

Mike Bennett


So, how many SUV's, rowboats, and helicopters are you going to ignore while waiting for God to rescue you?

God has rescued me already, with a cross.  It is enough.

Sounds like you're stripping away some things that are pretty significant. If all that mattered was that God rescued us from sin, then the only logical thing to do is commit suicide so that we can return to the Lord right away. Ultimately, being rescued by the cross is the most important thing, but while we live on this earth awaiting His second coming and the end of the time God allotted for us here on earth, we shouldn't just sit back and do nothing, should we? Our efforts do not earn our salvation for us, only God's grace redeems us. But is that an excuse for living a life of disconnected laziness?

Erma  does not live a life of disconnected laziness.

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: Berger on Same-Sex Marriage
« on: February 18, 2011, 05:43:24 PM »
I can't understand how any Lutheran Pastor could chose to bless sin.

It's likely that most of us pastor do that when we pronounce the benediction. There are unrepentant sinners in the congregation; and we ask God to bless them.

Signed onto ALPB for the first time in a week, and got ticked off at a subscriber for making a churlish comment.  Next I read your reply here, and I want to respond with a churlish comment.  Can't win.

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: Private C&A
« on: February 18, 2011, 05:37:51 PM »
Came up on another thread, about Luther being challenged by it falling into disuse.  It seems it has fallen into disuse...but stats are better. 

For discussion - should be restore it - how have you seen it restored?

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the suject of what you want to discuss could actually be spelled out instead of reduced to initials? Must all Lutherans make a false idol of acronyms for everything?

What's a suject?

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: Private C&A
« on: February 18, 2011, 05:36:52 PM »
Has never been announced in our congregation ("never" meaning not in my 18 years as a member).  Under the prior pastor (10+ years ago) I requested it two times and was accomodated.  He told me that one other member had also utilized private c & a during his 20 years as pastor.  

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« on: February 08, 2011, 04:42:54 PM »

I can understand how the ELCA powers-that-be might regard starting an organ fund as a premature action, or misprioritization of resources. I grew up in a mission congregation of the ULCA. I can recall the adults discussing priorities, and securing a piece of land and enough funds to break ground and start the building was a much higher priority than an organ fund. If that anecdote was about attempting to start an organ fund before other, more pressing matters had been resolved, I'd be inclined to agree with the ELCA powers-that-be (and that doesn't happen in here more than once every three months!). On the other hand, if the mission start had their building under construction and all of their other ducks in a row, then maybe it was time to start an organ fund. Then again, once the mission congregation had reached that point, then maybe it was time to stop being a mission congregation.

Precisely.  I love our organ, but a good one isn't something to be fund-raised for while receiving alms from other congregations. 

Rather like a young man saving up for a Corvette while living rent-free in what would otherwise be his parents' spare bedroom, because he "can't afford" his own place.  (I like Corvettes, and approve of giving a generous hand to our kids as they start out in life, but not both at the same time).

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: Would Disaffected ELCA'ers Consider LCMS? Why or Why Not?
« on: February 08, 2011, 12:59:03 PM »

Because even if the answer is, "Well, we're not like that in church," that simply compounds the issue-- it seems like we're being told, "We're nice in person but when we leave church and get in a discussion, our pleasant attitude goes away."

No denomination's members have that unfortunate trait monopolized.

Mike Bennett

Maybe, rather than having their situation used as political fodder by CORE and others, those directly involved decided to deal fraternally with each other in their dispute. Rare. But a good ideal.

Two African congregations are summarily thrown out of their worship space, for the stated reason that ELCA finds they disagree with a CWA-approved social statement.  We'd been ureged by ELCA to respect one anothers' bound consciences regarding the matters in that social statement.  And those who would publicly protest the unChristian act are accused of using it for political fodder.  Cute.  Not surprising, but cute. 

Your approval of what you speculate might be a silencing of this news is very comparable to Chinese radio coverage of President Hu's visit to the U.S. this week literally going silent when he was asked about human rights in China.  Chinese listeners weren't even permitted to hear the question, let alone Hu's answer.  Journalist Austin believes this sort of thing to be "a good idea."

My remaining in ELCA has been instructed by David Yeago's application of Luther's commentary on Galatians 6:1-3.  This week's vicious actions in Texas and Colorado have moved the ELCA one step further toward being a place where I can't remain. 

You can find David Yeago's comments at

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: The Ordination of Women
« on: December 19, 2010, 07:58:59 PM »
As for the North American Lutheran Church and its "study" of the issue. It was clear to me watching the proceedings that the NALC has no intention of studying the issue with a view toward abandoning this unapostolic and anti-catholic practice, but rather to bolster the practice by studies that are more theologically oriented. I think that is a key point to make.

1. I am not a member of the NALC.  At the assembly where it was formed I signed the list for the minutes disavowing any participation in its formaion, though as a layman there was no "reason" for me to do so.  I simply wanted it to be clear.

2. Having said that, what you've written above is as blatant a violation of the Eighth Commandment as I've confronted recently.  You have no earthly idea what NALC's intention is, and your pretending otherwise is inexcusable. 

3. As Mrs. Meyer has in the introductory posting of this topic been meticulously clear in stating here position, both personal and theological, regarding women's ordination, do you now publicly undertake to abandon your habit of hectoring her about it, as though she somehow owes you a statement of her positon?

Mike Bennett

Forum Blogs / Re: So what about Joseph?
« on: December 19, 2010, 07:27:21 PM »
ptmccain writes:
Indeed, let's use the Holy Family as a way to shoehorn in homosexual "marriages" or "unions." Any such idea is vile, disgusting and perverse.

I ask:
And who exactly is doing that? Not me. I just wondered whether the basis of a marriage between a man and a woman (or even Joseph and Mary) might be commitment, vocation, care, etc. etc., rather than boudoir activity, or the creation of children. I made no mention of same sex unions. That seems to be the obsession of ptmccain, not me.

Eddie Haskell strikes again.  Golly, Mr. Cleever, the words "same sex unions" never passed my lips.

And another perfectly good topic is trashed.

Mike Bennett

Your Turn / Re: Baseball and a Bad Night for Atheists
« on: December 03, 2010, 05:25:29 PM »
Progress on Chicago's south side:  Pierzinski and Ramirez signed; Adam Dunn signed out of free agency; tendered Paul Konerko and awaiting his exploration of the free agent market.  Confident that Paulie will do the right thing, thoughts of Spring Training are warming my heart even in early December.  :)

Mike Bennett


Because many folks here are unable to deal with the subtle nuances that some of us have in our posts. Or, in other words, they are unable to see shades of gray from their black and white world. Those who see gray have no problems with Charles's posts.

Your contempt for folks who "have a problem" with Charles's posts " ("unable to see shades of gray from their black and white world") shows you absolutely don't get it.  You remind me a bit of somebody else who doesn't get it:  a recent presidential candidate whose efforts to understand those who disagreed with his views were expressed in words something like the following:  "unemployed, frightened, angry, clinging to their guns and their churches."  He understood them and sympathized with them.  Yeah, sure he did.

Mike Bennett

What is interesting is, if it is indeed time for traditionalists to "pack their bags and go...", then why would the ELCA make the restrictions more onerous for those seeking to depart? 


Your Turn / Re: Pastor compensation
« on: November 30, 2010, 01:27:55 PM »
In my local paper Sunday morning there was a letter to the editor claiming there is "no biblical proof pastors should be paid." The writer further asserts that "St. Paul was a tentmaker and therefore all pastors should be." He then challenges readers to point out more than one biblical passage to justify paying pastors. I would link to the letter, but by the time the moderators approved me, it was taken down. In our new norm of austerity will we see more and more of this? In our "post Christendom" society are pastors and by extension the churches they serve future targets of austerity measures? No more tax exemptions? Should we start ensuring our candidates for ordained ministry have a second vocation?

1. I would challenge Mr. or Ms. Smartypants Letterwriter to present the "biblical proof" that "because St. Paul was a tentmaker therefore all pastors should be."

2. Separately, I'm reading more and more about financially challenged local congregations that make it appear that the next 50 or 100 years might see more tentmaker pastors than did the previous 50 or 100 years.  Unless of course we can figure out how to re-teach tithing.   ::)

Mike Bennett

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 68