Author Topic: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?  (Read 8097 times)

Keith Falk

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #15 on: July 04, 2013, 01:55:10 PM »
I also received this email.  I believe the ACELC to be unhealthy for the Missouri Synod and engaged in schismatic activity precisely because of this paragraph detailing their activity from their letter:

On July 15, 2010, the Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations (ACELC) mailed a “Letter of Fraternal Admonition” to every congregation in the LCMS. At that time the ACELC was not an organized group, but merely a collection of individuals concerned about their church, and a number of matters of doctrine and practice that seemed to be contrary to God’s Word and the Lutheran Confessions.  Many responded favorably to that letter and several months later (March, 2011) the ACELC was officially formed.

The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity.

It is an attempt and will continue to be an attempt, from recent missives by the ACELC, to subvert the Koinonia process and project. 

What this email is, as far as I can tell, is an attempt to discredit the Commission on Constitutional Matters for answering a question posed to them according to the rubrics under which the CCM operates.  So in that regard, it's an attempt to undermine the operation of a denominational commission from doing the work it is called to do in the way that the bylaws of the denomination prescribe.  More unhealthy behavior by a group not healthy in and for the denomination.

Dave Benke

President Benke, it's been a long time since I looked at the ACELC's list of "infractions."  Did you personally make their list? 

Also, how is that SHT (STS, in Latin) does not qualify as schismatic, according to your definition?

The STS (which Dr. Benke is not a member of, fwiw) is not an organization within the LCMS or any other denominational structure; members who subscribe to the rule may also be members of the LCMS (and the ELCA and LCMC and NALC and WELS and ELCIC and... so on and so forth).  They have not requested that individuals or congregations join with them over/against the LCMS or any other denominational structure for doctrinal reasons.  So... not schismatic based off of Dr. Benke's definition of the word.
Rev. Keith Falk, STS

James_Gale

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4049
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #16 on: July 04, 2013, 02:18:49 PM »
What does the CCM (Call to Common Ministry), the agreement between the ELCA and TEC, have to do with ACELC?

It's Called to Common Mission, fwiw.

Pastor Ted Crandall

  • Guest
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #17 on: July 04, 2013, 04:54:22 PM »
Ted, how unbelievably tacky that was

You think?  I just went back and refreshed my memory (http://acelc.net/page/acelc_admonition__error_documents_12773).  Here is what I found (Part IV. Unionism and Syncretism, p. 14): 

Interfaith Worship Service, St. Patrick’s Roman Catholic Church, New York City, NY,
September 9, 1998:
On September 9, 1998, Rev. Dr. David Benke, President of the Atlantic District of The
LCMS participated in an interfaith worship service at St. Patrick’s Roman Catholic
Cathedral, New York, NY. At that time the President of The LCMS, Rev. Dr. Alvin Barry,
placed Dr. Benke under discipline and a public apology was demanded and given on the
convention floor of the ensuing Synodical convention by saying:
“My participation in this service was a direct violation of the Holy Scriptures and the
Lutheran Confessions, and consequently, violation of the Constitution, Bylaws and
doctrinal resolutions of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. I also recognize that my
participation in this interfaith prayer service was a violation of my duties and responsibilities
as an elected officer of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. While wellintended,
what I did was wrong. I therefore sincerely and publicly apologize to the
Synod for my actions in this connection. I assure the Synod that I will not repeat this
error in the future by participating as an officiant in ecumenical services.”

LutherMan

  • Guest
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #18 on: July 04, 2013, 05:03:28 PM »
PC/Politeness is more important than doctrinal integrity in these precincts, didn't you know that Chap. Crandall?

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12134
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2013, 05:20:43 PM »
What I found tacky was refering to the STS as SHT.

Dan
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

LutherMan

  • Guest
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #20 on: July 04, 2013, 05:36:07 PM »
What I found tacky was refering to the STS as SHT.

Dan
May I ask why?  Isn't Society of Holy Trinity abbreviated with those initials in English?

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12141
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #21 on: July 04, 2013, 05:52:46 PM »
Ted, how unbelievably tacky that was

You think?  I just went back and refreshed my memory (http://acelc.net/page/acelc_admonition__error_documents_12773).  Here is what I found (Part IV. Unionism and Syncretism, p. 14): 

Interfaith Worship Service, St. Patrick’s Roman Catholic Church, New York City, NY,
September 9, 1998:
On September 9, 1998, Rev. Dr. David Benke, President of the Atlantic District of The
LCMS participated in an interfaith worship service at St. Patrick’s Roman Catholic
Cathedral, New York, NY. At that time the President of The LCMS, Rev. Dr. Alvin Barry,
placed Dr. Benke under discipline and a public apology was demanded and given on the
convention floor of the ensuing Synodical convention by saying:
“My participation in this service was a direct violation of the Holy Scriptures and the
Lutheran Confessions, and consequently, violation of the Constitution, Bylaws and
doctrinal resolutions of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. I also recognize that my
participation in this interfaith prayer service was a violation of my duties and responsibilities
as an elected officer of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. While wellintended,
what I did was wrong. I therefore sincerely and publicly apologize to the
Synod for my actions in this connection. I assure the Synod that I will not repeat this
error in the future by participating as an officiant in ecumenical services.”

So thus far you have started a thread in which you allow us to know that the schismatic behavior of the ACELC has
a) been identified as such by the CTCR
b) has been denied by the ACELC because they were organizing their behavior, as the ACELC, but had not completed their recruitment campaign
c) countered by the ACELC by the ACELC attempting to divert the "blame" to the Commission on Constitutional Matters, which responded to a question asked of them. 

Your response is to
a) say nothing about the ACELC or the CCM to counter the logic of the schismatic activity they have engaged in and defended
b) refer to a fifteen year old incident involving me

Thanks for initiating this thread.  Happy Fourth!

Dave Benke

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #22 on: July 04, 2013, 07:30:25 PM »
What I found tacky was refering to the STS as SHT.

Dan
May I ask why?  Isn't Society of Holy Trinity abbreviated with those initials in English?


Only in some circles.


Keith Falk

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #23 on: July 04, 2013, 07:55:32 PM »
What I found tacky was refering to the STS as SHT.

Dan
May I ask why?  Isn't Society of Holy Trinity abbreviated with those initials in English?


Because the Society does not refer to itself with those letters, and if one were to do so, it would lead to a phonetic pronunciation of SH!T.  Being that I believe you are a reasonably intelligent fellow, I am sure you deduced that.


I also note that Pastor Crandall did not address my post, so I will assume that he now understands why STS is not schismatic using Dr. Benke's definition.  Again, I note that Dr. Benke isn't a member anyhow, so I'm not sure what the point was anyhow.
Rev. Keith Falk, STS

Robert_C_Baker

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #24 on: July 04, 2013, 08:11:50 PM »
Dave Benke: "The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity."

And disallowing any form of dissent, or fraternal encouragement to seriously call into question the status quo of doctrine and practice, simply because said doctrine and practice are "held positions" within the denomination, is sheer tyranny.

The LCMS isn't the Roman Catholic Church, or Nazi Germany, Dave.

Robert

I also received this email.  I believe the ACELC to be unhealthy for the Missouri Synod and engaged in schismatic activity precisely because of this paragraph detailing their activity from their letter:

On July 15, 2010, the Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations (ACELC) mailed a “Letter of Fraternal Admonition” to every congregation in the LCMS. At that time the ACELC was not an organized group, but merely a collection of individuals concerned about their church, and a number of matters of doctrine and practice that seemed to be contrary to God’s Word and the Lutheran Confessions.  Many responded favorably to that letter and several months later (March, 2011) the ACELC was officially formed.

The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity.

It is an attempt and will continue to be an attempt, from recent missives by the ACELC, to subvert the Koinonia process and project. 

What this email is, as far as I can tell, is an attempt to discredit the Commission on Constitutional Matters for answering a question posed to them according to the rubrics under which the CCM operates.  So in that regard, it's an attempt to undermine the operation of a denominational commission from doing the work it is called to do in the way that the bylaws of the denomination prescribe.  More unhealthy behavior by a group not healthy in and for the denomination.

Dave Benke

Pr. Terry Culler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #25 on: July 04, 2013, 08:22:23 PM »
Of course I meant the snide lettering for the STS.  And I say that as someone who can not join the STS because I have zero interest in reunion with Rome until it renounces its errors
Goodnewsforabadworld.wordpress.com

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12141
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #26 on: July 04, 2013, 08:26:48 PM »
Dave Benke: "The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity."

And disallowing any form of dissent, or fraternal encouragement to seriously call into question the status quo of doctrine and practice, simply because said doctrine and practice are "held positions" within the denomination, is sheer tyranny.

The LCMS isn't the Roman Catholic Church, or Nazi Germany, Dave.

Robert

I also received this email.  I believe the ACELC to be unhealthy for the Missouri Synod and engaged in schismatic activity precisely because of this paragraph detailing their activity from their letter:

On July 15, 2010, the Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations (ACELC) mailed a “Letter of Fraternal Admonition” to every congregation in the LCMS. At that time the ACELC was not an organized group, but merely a collection of individuals concerned about their church, and a number of matters of doctrine and practice that seemed to be contrary to God’s Word and the Lutheran Confessions.  Many responded favorably to that letter and several months later (March, 2011) the ACELC was officially formed.

The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity.

It is an attempt and will continue to be an attempt, from recent missives by the ACELC, to subvert the Koinonia process and project. 

What this email is, as far as I can tell, is an attempt to discredit the Commission on Constitutional Matters for answering a question posed to them according to the rubrics under which the CCM operates.  So in that regard, it's an attempt to undermine the operation of a denominational commission from doing the work it is called to do in the way that the bylaws of the denomination prescribe.  More unhealthy behavior by a group not healthy in and for the denomination.

Dave Benke

The person on the Council of Presidents who called this activity out at every turn was George Wollenburg (+).  You understand, Robert, that what is NOT being called out is dissent.  Dr. Wollenburg helped write the bylaws on dissent. 

What IS being called out is circularizing and creating a membership organization within the denomination on doctrinal grounds - a "church within the church."

Dave Benke


Robert_C_Baker

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
    • View Profile
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #27 on: July 04, 2013, 08:39:26 PM »
What I understand, Dave, is that you interpret their actions as "schismatic" and creating a "church within the church" on doctrinal grounds. That is your opinion, and you're welcome to it.

It is not my opinion, however, and I would suspect that many in our Synod who eschew heavy-handed, paternalistic, authoritarian missives from "on high" would agree with me.

We need healthy debate about serious doctrinal issues affective our Synod, not being beat over the head with a gilt crozier. That's unhealthy.

Robert

Dave Benke: "The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity."

And disallowing any form of dissent, or fraternal encouragement to seriously call into question the status quo of doctrine and practice, simply because said doctrine and practice are "held positions" within the denomination, is sheer tyranny.

The LCMS isn't the Roman Catholic Church, or Nazi Germany, Dave.

Robert

I also received this email.  I believe the ACELC to be unhealthy for the Missouri Synod and engaged in schismatic activity precisely because of this paragraph detailing their activity from their letter:

On July 15, 2010, the Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations (ACELC) mailed a “Letter of Fraternal Admonition” to every congregation in the LCMS. At that time the ACELC was not an organized group, but merely a collection of individuals concerned about their church, and a number of matters of doctrine and practice that seemed to be contrary to God’s Word and the Lutheran Confessions.  Many responded favorably to that letter and several months later (March, 2011) the ACELC was officially formed.

The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity.

It is an attempt and will continue to be an attempt, from recent missives by the ACELC, to subvert the Koinonia process and project. 

What this email is, as far as I can tell, is an attempt to discredit the Commission on Constitutional Matters for answering a question posed to them according to the rubrics under which the CCM operates.  So in that regard, it's an attempt to undermine the operation of a denominational commission from doing the work it is called to do in the way that the bylaws of the denomination prescribe.  More unhealthy behavior by a group not healthy in and for the denomination.

Dave Benke

The person on the Council of Presidents who called this activity out at every turn was George Wollenburg (+).  You understand, Robert, that what is NOT being called out is dissent.  Dr. Wollenburg helped write the bylaws on dissent. 

What IS being called out is circularizing and creating a membership organization within the denomination on doctrinal grounds - a "church within the church."

Dave Benke

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12141
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #28 on: July 04, 2013, 09:29:09 PM »
What I understand, Dave, is that you interpret their actions as "schismatic" and creating a "church within the church" on doctrinal grounds. That is your opinion, and you're welcome to it.

It is not my opinion, however, and I would suspect that many in our Synod who eschew heavy-handed, paternalistic, authoritarian missives from "on high" would agree with me.

We need healthy debate about serious doctrinal issues affective our Synod, not being beat over the head with a gilt crozier. That's unhealthy.

Robert

Dave Benke: "The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity."

And disallowing any form of dissent, or fraternal encouragement to seriously call into question the status quo of doctrine and practice, simply because said doctrine and practice are "held positions" within the denomination, is sheer tyranny.

The LCMS isn't the Roman Catholic Church, or Nazi Germany, Dave.

Robert

I also received this email.  I believe the ACELC to be unhealthy for the Missouri Synod and engaged in schismatic activity precisely because of this paragraph detailing their activity from their letter:

On July 15, 2010, the Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations (ACELC) mailed a “Letter of Fraternal Admonition” to every congregation in the LCMS. At that time the ACELC was not an organized group, but merely a collection of individuals concerned about their church, and a number of matters of doctrine and practice that seemed to be contrary to God’s Word and the Lutheran Confessions.  Many responded favorably to that letter and several months later (March, 2011) the ACELC was officially formed.

The circularizing of the denomination by the organization's original leaders is schismatic activity - they requested individuals and congregations to join in with them in their organization within the organization of the Missouri Synod for doctrinal reasons, many of which are in distinction to the held positions on doctrine and practice within the denomination.  That's pretty much the definition of schismatic activity.

It is an attempt and will continue to be an attempt, from recent missives by the ACELC, to subvert the Koinonia process and project. 

What this email is, as far as I can tell, is an attempt to discredit the Commission on Constitutional Matters for answering a question posed to them according to the rubrics under which the CCM operates.  So in that regard, it's an attempt to undermine the operation of a denominational commission from doing the work it is called to do in the way that the bylaws of the denomination prescribe.  More unhealthy behavior by a group not healthy in and for the denomination.

Dave Benke

The person on the Council of Presidents who called this activity out at every turn was George Wollenburg (+).  You understand, Robert, that what is NOT being called out is dissent.  Dr. Wollenburg helped write the bylaws on dissent. 

What IS being called out is circularizing and creating a membership organization within the denomination on doctrinal grounds - a "church within the church."

Dave Benke

What missives?  The only missives I have received in this regard are the long listing of doctrinal statements from the ACELC and their many emails either enlisting new members or informing of their point of view and upcoming conferences to convince me of their point of view. 

The CCM received a question, answered it in a couple of paragraphs two years ago, and this is then to you the "missive from on high?"  All the energy is coming from the ACELC as I see it. 

Dave Benke

Pastor Ted Crandall

  • Guest
Re: Does Matthew 18 Apply to ACELC's Antagonists?
« Reply #29 on: July 04, 2013, 09:38:11 PM »
What I found tacky was refering to the STS as SHT.
May I ask why?  Isn't Society of Holy Trinity abbreviated with those initials in English?
Because the Society does not refer to itself with those letters, and if one were to do so, it would lead to a phonetic pronunciation of SH!T.  Being that I believe you are a reasonably intelligent fellow, I am sure you deduced that.
I, even I, deduced that.   ;)
Why on earth would you select a name with such an acronym?  I mean, you could have called it the Holy Trinity Society (HTS)... 

Quote
I also note that Pastor Crandall did not address my post, so I will assume that he now understands why STS is not schismatic using Dr. Benke's definition. 
Silence is not always assent. 

Quote
Again, I note that Dr. Benke isn't a member anyhow, so I'm not sure what the point was anyhow.

The point is that President Benke has a personal bias against the one and in favor of the other.  I'm surprised he's not a member.  President Benke, you were invited, weren't you?



What IS being called out is circularizing and creating a membership organization within the denomination on doctrinal grounds - a "church within the church."
I'm a morning person and it's getting late...  Please explain to me again why the Society of the Holy Trinity does not qualify, using this definition of schismatic.  Do they get a pass, simply because they are a unionistic ministerium and not "within the denomination"?