Unite Leadership Collective's interview with retired Pastor Mark Schulz and Lutherans for Racial Justice representative Joshua Salzberg was removed after Synod pressure.
I hope that pastors are teaching theology, but, even if not, it is extremely likely that heterodox - at best - teachings are creeping into her curriculum. This is, as you rightly point out, extremely concerning.
There are times I envy the top-down hierarchy of Rome.
No. Don't envy Rome their hierarchy is corrupted by gays, the intelligence community, the freemasons and by satanists. Remember during the battle for the Bible the role of the laity in pushing back at the false doctrine issuing from Concordia Seminary Saint Louis.
So sad. Orange Lutheran was once a fine institution. Satan is working overtime to subvert the LCMS. Hopefully she repudiates her husband's errant teaching.
It would be prudent to delete your comments about Sarah.
If we are serious about guarding against false teaching in the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, then we must also be serious about guarding against false accusation, rumor, and presumption. The Eighth Commandment does not become optional when controversy is involved. To suggest that someone is endangering students without evidence is itself spiritually dangerous.
Emily, I get that in a legal setting, a spouse is not guilty of a spouse’s conduct, but I am sure you realize also in a legal system, before the bulk of evidence is ultimately gathered, and before anyone is ever convicted of anything, reasonable suspicions have to be considered and investigated. That does not mean there is an official conviction of anything without proven facts, but the common sense awareness that the spousal relationship, being the closest relationship there is, especially in terms of common beliefs, most of the time, is an association of beliefs that must be seriously considered, rather than ignored. The close association of a spousal relationship is good cause for reasonable suspicion that should be properly investigated in almost any case. Ignoring reasonable suspicion is also unwise, and dangerous. I have not said she is guilty, that is your word. My comment acknowledged a reasonable suspicion, but I am also fine with reframing the comment.
I would suggest that if you are curious about something like this, instead of inciting a witch hunt, you reach out directly to the person in question. We need more
Your characterization of “witch hunt“ is false, and inflammatory. When the spiritual life and souls of children are at serious risk, no one has any right to play games with their well-being by ignoring obvious, dangerous risks that should be investigated properly by authorities charged with that duty, not by me. Statistically, at least 75% of spouses share common religious beliefs. That is a fact. The Orange Lutheran problem is a public matter which concerns many people, and the children at that school. It is not my personal issue. They are under the jurisdiction of the LCMS and the LCMS is responsible for the oversight, investigation, any disciplinary action, or for ignoring publicly obvious concerns. The LCMS is responsible for any consequences of ignoring what happens there.
Elizabeth, I have removed the comment because it was a form of guilt by association. Please reframe the points and only mention the facts attached to the specific individuals. Many thanks.
Bringing up dusk in the conversation seems to be a Dodge or distraction regarding abherrant sexual behavior. Reading Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 5:11., 6:9, 6:18 should be enough to clarify that such behavior, practice, orientation or mindset is not something a Christian should be doing. It is painful to know loved ones who are in the grip of this or any other sin--or to be battling any number of sins in one's own life....but as we cannot and should not make excuses for our own sins, we likewise should not condone such sins being practiced and call it a "lifestyle."
We can treat any sinner with kindness and dignity as a person made in God's image, but should clearly share the Good News that we need not live singular lives in bondage to sin. There is forgiveness and grace for the repentant sinner, and that is something all Christians need and depend on from Christ. Christ compels us to repent and turn from the evil deeds that run rampant in today's society. In humility as a redeemed sinner, should we not share our dependence on Christ to overcome the sin(s) that so easily beset us all?
Based on later statements, he obviously does not. He's well down the path of using scripture to justify his brother's sin.
He's muddying the difference between public sin with repentance and without repentance. His brother struggling with homosexuality in a private manner versus publicly participating in it are two different things. The former recognizes the sin and with God's grace will overcome it. The latter is flaunting their sin, claiming it isn't a sin, and damages others in the church.
"The former recognizes the sin and with God's grace will overcome it." I fear this is a bit overly optimistic. I am not saying that overcoming sin is impossible, but such a deep seated sin, one frequently born out of deep scars in the memory, may not be overcome in this life. This is not an excuse for blatantly living contrary to God's Word, just acknowledging the heart breaking truth that many homosexuals will struggle, fail, need forgiveness and mercy, for the rest of their natural lives. We need to come to grips with this truth if we are going to minister to them. Yes, leaving them alone in their guilt, patting ourselves on the back for being "accepting", is not the answer. But I caution against the belief that the sin will always be overcome in this life. Paul never tells us what his "thorn in the flesh" was. I suspect that is because he, or in fact the Holy Spirit, left it for each struggling Christian to supply his own answer. For some it is compulsive sin, for others a difficult situation in their life, for others an illness or injury they must live with. In all of these God offers grace, not easy solutions or promises that it will all be overcome. That would be a theology of glory, and we still live under the cross.
Sorry if it looked like I implied that they would necessarily overcome it or not have relapses. My point is that it is seen as a sin. The person is not saying otherwise or obviously living otherwise. On the other side, Paul did say to cast out people from the congregation who refused to repent and stop their very public sins. We're all sinners. Calling evil good is a sin. That's the issue here.
I spent too many years is holiness charismatic groups. Their concept of "overcoming" sin was that you would come to a time in which you would experience complete victory over the sin and never be tempted by it again. I knew far too many homosexuals who lived with that false hope until they fell. When they fell they believed that there was no hope, no forgiveness for them, for they had return to their former way of life and "trampled the blood of Jesus underfoot." To my knowledge, none of them are Christians today, and that is the worst part. They do not believe Jesus paid for their sins. I appreciate that this is not what you intended. PTL
Please tell me if I am missing something, but am I correct in understanding that what Synod officials have done in response to the YouTube video, amounts to removing the public evidence of these LCMS pastors and lay leader demonstrating their false teaching, but not, as far as we know, putting any restrictions in place, or enacting any disciplinary measures to prevent these false teachers from further false teaching which subjects all Lutherans subject to their leadership to severe spiritual danger? In other words, the public evidence of the problem may be mostly removed, but is there any word on, or evidence that the problem itself has been, or is being addressed to stop the false teaching? Now, if one is the type of person who thinks the PR problem is the primary problem, and that the problem of the false teachers persisting in their false teaching is insignificant, then I can see how removing the public evidence of the problem would be your idea of solving the problem, but for the rest of us, I think my question is a fair question.
Yes, under former leadership, the LCMS in convention removed the ability of Synod or District officials to formerly discipline pastors and congregations for false doctrine. Now all has to be handled by "Dispute Resolution" processes. It is infuriating for everyone involved except the unrepentant preacher of false doctrine or promoter of false practice. Thankfully, there are resolutions going before Synod this convention to deal with that. Pray for those on the committee turning these into matters for vote that they do so faithfully, and pray for those attending that both discussions and votes on these resolutions restore godly order to our Synod.
I am skeptical that resolutions will restore godly order to our Synod, for several reasons, but one is even though resolutions are nice, they become effectively irrelevant when officials charged with enforcing them, refuse to enforce them. I do fully support, however, praying for committee members, and attendees, that God grants them courage, and that their discussions and votes are God pleasing.
Yes, this hardly seems like the way to restore order, but it is what we have. Of course, our best resource is to pray to God Almighty, through Jesus Christ, His Son our Lord, that He would restore order and obedience to our church. That we must do every day.
His point about money is puzzling to me. From my experience, the LCMS has done a good job teaching that how one stewards their money is indeed indicative of their Christian faith. Am I missing something? Is he talking about stereotypical televangelists ...or about orthodox Lutherans?
Concerning to say the least!! When struggling, it’s always best to return to The Word. I cannot get around 1 John 1:5-10. “If we say we have no sin, we make Him a liar and His Word is not in us.”
It is very important that these conversations be had in public rather than people with authority being allowed to smuggle heresy into the church with only small numbers of people aware of it. The video should not have been deleted. A big bright light needs to be shined on this.
No, the video needed to be deleted, otherwise there would be the accusation that by leaving it up, the LCMS was endorsing the teaching. It absolutely needed to be removed from public view so as to stop the offensive teaching. However, it also needs to have been recorded as evidence in proceedings to remove those involved for teaching false doctrine. Unfortunately, they fall under one of the west coast districts, and they are both known for thumbing their noses at the LCMS doctrine and teachings on any number of issues, so it is unlikely they will do anything about this. This becomes a question, is this time for throwing out the old leaven to purify the loaf, or for not pulling up weeds for fear of pulling out some of the plants in the process. It would be nice if there were easy answers, but the time for easy solutions and answers is past. I suspect it passed us by in the 40s, with the "Statement of the 44". They were ordered to retract it, but not disciplined for presenting it, and the seeds of division were sown, and have been growing ever since.
That being said, I still no of no other church body in the US where true fidelity to Scriptures is so well promoted, encouraged, and supported. Dr. Luther said it well, "Wherever the Lord plants a Church, Satan builds a chapel." Or, as the Apostle John says, it is necessary for false teachers to be in our midst, so the truth may shine greater against it. That does not mean sitting back quietly and doing nothing. Reporting on it, exposing it, shining a light on it, and bringing it up again and again in District and Synodical gatherings are very important. Yes, expose such works of darkness.
Black eyes from the large catechism issues, and broken bones from the failure of synodical leadership to be minimally bold in a time of SO much drifting to the left. Would it be too far of a stretch to say that all these issues constitute "a new synod"? I know, wild thought. But how will we ever have unification, a continuity of understanding on so many issues in the LCMS? Lord have mercy upon us.
It hasn't worked well for b those who went that route in the past. Look at the Lutheran Churches of the Reformation and ELDONA for a more contemporary version. Splinter groups tend to remain small and never seem to catch on. I spent the first twenty years of my ministry in a conservative splinter group that split off from the American Lutheran Church. My advice is either stay and fight for Missouri or if you can accept their position on Church and Ministry join WELS. Take it from someone who labored for many years in a splinter group. Life is better in a greater fellowship. The LCMS is worth fighting for.
It seems some that pastors officially affirm orthodox teaching on homosexuality while privately changing their minds. Arguing that Christian hypocrisy on materialism (or anything else) justifies Christian acquiescence on homosexuality is a glib secular argument.
At least there are many folks working hard to oust young men from the synod for listening to certain podcasts. Virtue signaling, thats what we should be doing. Who cares about doctrine?
My second comment concerns Joshua Salzberg, and his statement in his video, that his wife, Sarah Salzberg, teaches Old Testament theology at Orange Lutheran High School, in Orange, California. Everyone who watched the video heard and saw what Joshua Salzberg said. Many of his statements interpretating Scripture, “impudently contradict the clear teaching of Scripture and the Evangelical Lutheran Church.” In addition to Salzberg’s statements quoted in Ad Crucem’s article here, asserting God’s spectrum of creation demonstrates validity of non-binary sexuality claims, Salzberg made other statements, like his interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah, which contradict Lutheran doctrine.
Synodical officers should be investigating more thoroughly, and monitoring much more closely, what is being taught and communicated at Orange Lutheran High School. Especially considering the recent event of Orange Lutheran publicly presenting an award for Christian character and integrity to an alumna who thanked her “wife” in her acceptance speech: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cdTp4JsRM5PWAI2gxZzE4VhsJOWjwWhd/view?usp=drivesdk. (This is a link to where the criteria for induction into the Athletics Hall of Fame is posted under “Hall of Fame Selection Process” near the bottom of the webpage:
https://www.lhsoc.org/athletics/athletics-hall-of-fame. Under “Individual Athletes Consideration Criteria” the criteria plainly states “The Athlete must possess and shall have possessed such qualities as Christian character and integrity.”) The award has not been rescinded or removed by the school, or by Synod officials, and neither Orange Lutheran, nor anyone authorized to speak publicly on their behalf, has provided a public explanation for what they are permitting.
How would Synodical officers even know what is taking place in the classrooms at Orange Lutheran? If your children were students at Orange Lutheran High School, after having seen what Joshua Salzberg said in this YouTube video, and knowing about the award they gave to the alumna openly in a same sex union, where they have not rescinded that award, would you be concerned about what your child is being taught at Orange Lutheran? Would you expect Synod officials to be actively concerned about what your child is being taught or led to believe at this LCMS institution?
Hi Gary, "Evangelical Lutheran Church" is not a denominational reference, but a generic one, i.e. Lutherans who hold to the supreme authority of Scripture, and the Book of Concord as the correct exposition of Scripture.
Good to understand, as someone who spent most of his adult life in the Evangelical Camp, and spent it as a street apologist. I think I can fit right in. Reading the book of Concord.
Love the liturgy. Was drawn by choir membership, but I would say beauty.
The LCMS Constitution refers to the "Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church" (i.e., the Book of Concord of 1580) See the online (and 148 MB downloadable) _Concordia Triglotta_ for the combined German/Latin/English edition of the Book of Concord, along with Bente’s 256-page “Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church” (https://archive.org/details/concordiatriglot0000vari/page/n11/mode/2up).
I hope that pastors are teaching theology, but, even if not, it is extremely likely that heterodox - at best - teachings are creeping into her curriculum. This is, as you rightly point out, extremely concerning.
There are times I envy the top-down hierarchy of Rome.
No. Don't envy Rome their hierarchy is corrupted by gays, the intelligence community, the freemasons and by satanists. Remember during the battle for the Bible the role of the laity in pushing back at the false doctrine issuing from Concordia Seminary Saint Louis.
Yeah, they've got more than enough of their own problems.
So sad. Orange Lutheran was once a fine institution. Satan is working overtime to subvert the LCMS. Hopefully she repudiates her husband's errant teaching.
It would be prudent to delete your comments about Sarah.
If we are serious about guarding against false teaching in the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, then we must also be serious about guarding against false accusation, rumor, and presumption. The Eighth Commandment does not become optional when controversy is involved. To suggest that someone is endangering students without evidence is itself spiritually dangerous.
Emily, I get that in a legal setting, a spouse is not guilty of a spouse’s conduct, but I am sure you realize also in a legal system, before the bulk of evidence is ultimately gathered, and before anyone is ever convicted of anything, reasonable suspicions have to be considered and investigated. That does not mean there is an official conviction of anything without proven facts, but the common sense awareness that the spousal relationship, being the closest relationship there is, especially in terms of common beliefs, most of the time, is an association of beliefs that must be seriously considered, rather than ignored. The close association of a spousal relationship is good cause for reasonable suspicion that should be properly investigated in almost any case. Ignoring reasonable suspicion is also unwise, and dangerous. I have not said she is guilty, that is your word. My comment acknowledged a reasonable suspicion, but I am also fine with reframing the comment.
I would suggest that if you are curious about something like this, instead of inciting a witch hunt, you reach out directly to the person in question. We need more
communication in this Synod, not accusations.
Your characterization of “witch hunt“ is false, and inflammatory. When the spiritual life and souls of children are at serious risk, no one has any right to play games with their well-being by ignoring obvious, dangerous risks that should be investigated properly by authorities charged with that duty, not by me. Statistically, at least 75% of spouses share common religious beliefs. That is a fact. The Orange Lutheran problem is a public matter which concerns many people, and the children at that school. It is not my personal issue. They are under the jurisdiction of the LCMS and the LCMS is responsible for the oversight, investigation, any disciplinary action, or for ignoring publicly obvious concerns. The LCMS is responsible for any consequences of ignoring what happens there.
Elizabeth, I have removed the comment because it was a form of guilt by association. Please reframe the points and only mention the facts attached to the specific individuals. Many thanks.
No problem, I will reframe.
Bringing up dusk in the conversation seems to be a Dodge or distraction regarding abherrant sexual behavior. Reading Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 5:11., 6:9, 6:18 should be enough to clarify that such behavior, practice, orientation or mindset is not something a Christian should be doing. It is painful to know loved ones who are in the grip of this or any other sin--or to be battling any number of sins in one's own life....but as we cannot and should not make excuses for our own sins, we likewise should not condone such sins being practiced and call it a "lifestyle."
We can treat any sinner with kindness and dignity as a person made in God's image, but should clearly share the Good News that we need not live singular lives in bondage to sin. There is forgiveness and grace for the repentant sinner, and that is something all Christians need and depend on from Christ. Christ compels us to repent and turn from the evil deeds that run rampant in today's society. In humility as a redeemed sinner, should we not share our dependence on Christ to overcome the sin(s) that so easily beset us all?
Disgraceful.
And "the authors" of Genesis?
"I fully subscribe to the Lutheran Confessions."
Based on later statements, he obviously does not. He's well down the path of using scripture to justify his brother's sin.
He's muddying the difference between public sin with repentance and without repentance. His brother struggling with homosexuality in a private manner versus publicly participating in it are two different things. The former recognizes the sin and with God's grace will overcome it. The latter is flaunting their sin, claiming it isn't a sin, and damages others in the church.
"The former recognizes the sin and with God's grace will overcome it." I fear this is a bit overly optimistic. I am not saying that overcoming sin is impossible, but such a deep seated sin, one frequently born out of deep scars in the memory, may not be overcome in this life. This is not an excuse for blatantly living contrary to God's Word, just acknowledging the heart breaking truth that many homosexuals will struggle, fail, need forgiveness and mercy, for the rest of their natural lives. We need to come to grips with this truth if we are going to minister to them. Yes, leaving them alone in their guilt, patting ourselves on the back for being "accepting", is not the answer. But I caution against the belief that the sin will always be overcome in this life. Paul never tells us what his "thorn in the flesh" was. I suspect that is because he, or in fact the Holy Spirit, left it for each struggling Christian to supply his own answer. For some it is compulsive sin, for others a difficult situation in their life, for others an illness or injury they must live with. In all of these God offers grace, not easy solutions or promises that it will all be overcome. That would be a theology of glory, and we still live under the cross.
Sorry if it looked like I implied that they would necessarily overcome it or not have relapses. My point is that it is seen as a sin. The person is not saying otherwise or obviously living otherwise. On the other side, Paul did say to cast out people from the congregation who refused to repent and stop their very public sins. We're all sinners. Calling evil good is a sin. That's the issue here.
I spent too many years is holiness charismatic groups. Their concept of "overcoming" sin was that you would come to a time in which you would experience complete victory over the sin and never be tempted by it again. I knew far too many homosexuals who lived with that false hope until they fell. When they fell they believed that there was no hope, no forgiveness for them, for they had return to their former way of life and "trampled the blood of Jesus underfoot." To my knowledge, none of them are Christians today, and that is the worst part. They do not believe Jesus paid for their sins. I appreciate that this is not what you intended. PTL
Please tell me if I am missing something, but am I correct in understanding that what Synod officials have done in response to the YouTube video, amounts to removing the public evidence of these LCMS pastors and lay leader demonstrating their false teaching, but not, as far as we know, putting any restrictions in place, or enacting any disciplinary measures to prevent these false teachers from further false teaching which subjects all Lutherans subject to their leadership to severe spiritual danger? In other words, the public evidence of the problem may be mostly removed, but is there any word on, or evidence that the problem itself has been, or is being addressed to stop the false teaching? Now, if one is the type of person who thinks the PR problem is the primary problem, and that the problem of the false teachers persisting in their false teaching is insignificant, then I can see how removing the public evidence of the problem would be your idea of solving the problem, but for the rest of us, I think my question is a fair question.
You've got the correct picture.
https://theleadersdigest.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/sweep_under_carpet.jpg
Too much of this going on in the LCMS right now. K. Elizabeth brings up an excellent point.
Yes, under former leadership, the LCMS in convention removed the ability of Synod or District officials to formerly discipline pastors and congregations for false doctrine. Now all has to be handled by "Dispute Resolution" processes. It is infuriating for everyone involved except the unrepentant preacher of false doctrine or promoter of false practice. Thankfully, there are resolutions going before Synod this convention to deal with that. Pray for those on the committee turning these into matters for vote that they do so faithfully, and pray for those attending that both discussions and votes on these resolutions restore godly order to our Synod.
I am skeptical that resolutions will restore godly order to our Synod, for several reasons, but one is even though resolutions are nice, they become effectively irrelevant when officials charged with enforcing them, refuse to enforce them. I do fully support, however, praying for committee members, and attendees, that God grants them courage, and that their discussions and votes are God pleasing.
Yes, this hardly seems like the way to restore order, but it is what we have. Of course, our best resource is to pray to God Almighty, through Jesus Christ, His Son our Lord, that He would restore order and obedience to our church. That we must do every day.
His point about money is puzzling to me. From my experience, the LCMS has done a good job teaching that how one stewards their money is indeed indicative of their Christian faith. Am I missing something? Is he talking about stereotypical televangelists ...or about orthodox Lutherans?
Concerning to say the least!! When struggling, it’s always best to return to The Word. I cannot get around 1 John 1:5-10. “If we say we have no sin, we make Him a liar and His Word is not in us.”
It is very important that these conversations be had in public rather than people with authority being allowed to smuggle heresy into the church with only small numbers of people aware of it. The video should not have been deleted. A big bright light needs to be shined on this.
No, the video needed to be deleted, otherwise there would be the accusation that by leaving it up, the LCMS was endorsing the teaching. It absolutely needed to be removed from public view so as to stop the offensive teaching. However, it also needs to have been recorded as evidence in proceedings to remove those involved for teaching false doctrine. Unfortunately, they fall under one of the west coast districts, and they are both known for thumbing their noses at the LCMS doctrine and teachings on any number of issues, so it is unlikely they will do anything about this. This becomes a question, is this time for throwing out the old leaven to purify the loaf, or for not pulling up weeds for fear of pulling out some of the plants in the process. It would be nice if there were easy answers, but the time for easy solutions and answers is past. I suspect it passed us by in the 40s, with the "Statement of the 44". They were ordered to retract it, but not disciplined for presenting it, and the seeds of division were sown, and have been growing ever since.
That being said, I still no of no other church body in the US where true fidelity to Scriptures is so well promoted, encouraged, and supported. Dr. Luther said it well, "Wherever the Lord plants a Church, Satan builds a chapel." Or, as the Apostle John says, it is necessary for false teachers to be in our midst, so the truth may shine greater against it. That does not mean sitting back quietly and doing nothing. Reporting on it, exposing it, shining a light on it, and bringing it up again and again in District and Synodical gatherings are very important. Yes, expose such works of darkness.
Black eyes from the large catechism issues, and broken bones from the failure of synodical leadership to be minimally bold in a time of SO much drifting to the left. Would it be too far of a stretch to say that all these issues constitute "a new synod"? I know, wild thought. But how will we ever have unification, a continuity of understanding on so many issues in the LCMS? Lord have mercy upon us.
It hasn't worked well for b those who went that route in the past. Look at the Lutheran Churches of the Reformation and ELDONA for a more contemporary version. Splinter groups tend to remain small and never seem to catch on. I spent the first twenty years of my ministry in a conservative splinter group that split off from the American Lutheran Church. My advice is either stay and fight for Missouri or if you can accept their position on Church and Ministry join WELS. Take it from someone who labored for many years in a splinter group. Life is better in a greater fellowship. The LCMS is worth fighting for.
It seems some that pastors officially affirm orthodox teaching on homosexuality while privately changing their minds. Arguing that Christian hypocrisy on materialism (or anything else) justifies Christian acquiescence on homosexuality is a glib secular argument.
At least there are many folks working hard to oust young men from the synod for listening to certain podcasts. Virtue signaling, thats what we should be doing. Who cares about doctrine?
Love your sarcasm.
Thanks. We heard about the original virtue signalers in Matthew 6 on Ash wed. A good and fruitful lesson.
My second comment concerns Joshua Salzberg, and his statement in his video, that his wife, Sarah Salzberg, teaches Old Testament theology at Orange Lutheran High School, in Orange, California. Everyone who watched the video heard and saw what Joshua Salzberg said. Many of his statements interpretating Scripture, “impudently contradict the clear teaching of Scripture and the Evangelical Lutheran Church.” In addition to Salzberg’s statements quoted in Ad Crucem’s article here, asserting God’s spectrum of creation demonstrates validity of non-binary sexuality claims, Salzberg made other statements, like his interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah, which contradict Lutheran doctrine.
Synodical officers should be investigating more thoroughly, and monitoring much more closely, what is being taught and communicated at Orange Lutheran High School. Especially considering the recent event of Orange Lutheran publicly presenting an award for Christian character and integrity to an alumna who thanked her “wife” in her acceptance speech: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cdTp4JsRM5PWAI2gxZzE4VhsJOWjwWhd/view?usp=drivesdk. (This is a link to where the criteria for induction into the Athletics Hall of Fame is posted under “Hall of Fame Selection Process” near the bottom of the webpage:
https://www.lhsoc.org/athletics/athletics-hall-of-fame. Under “Individual Athletes Consideration Criteria” the criteria plainly states “The Athlete must possess and shall have possessed such qualities as Christian character and integrity.”) The award has not been rescinded or removed by the school, or by Synod officials, and neither Orange Lutheran, nor anyone authorized to speak publicly on their behalf, has provided a public explanation for what they are permitting.
How would Synodical officers even know what is taking place in the classrooms at Orange Lutheran? If your children were students at Orange Lutheran High School, after having seen what Joshua Salzberg said in this YouTube video, and knowing about the award they gave to the alumna openly in a same sex union, where they have not rescinded that award, would you be concerned about what your child is being taught at Orange Lutheran? Would you expect Synod officials to be actively concerned about what your child is being taught or led to believe at this LCMS institution?
I don’t understand this reference to “Evangelical Lutheran Church”, it’s that ELC?
The heretical split?
From your article:
“These statements, along with many similar ones, impudently contradict the clear teaching of Scripture and the Evangelical Lutheran Church.”
-a new LCMS member
Hi Gary, "Evangelical Lutheran Church" is not a denominational reference, but a generic one, i.e. Lutherans who hold to the supreme authority of Scripture, and the Book of Concord as the correct exposition of Scripture.
Thanx
Good to understand, as someone who spent most of his adult life in the Evangelical Camp, and spent it as a street apologist. I think I can fit right in. Reading the book of Concord.
Love the liturgy. Was drawn by choir membership, but I would say beauty.
Welcome!
The LCMS Constitution refers to the "Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church" (i.e., the Book of Concord of 1580) See the online (and 148 MB downloadable) _Concordia Triglotta_ for the combined German/Latin/English edition of the Book of Concord, along with Bente’s 256-page “Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church” (https://archive.org/details/concordiatriglot0000vari/page/n11/mode/2up).
For more information on the Evangelical Lutheran Church, see the 25 Theses (http://www.lutherquest.org/walther/articles/cfw00006.htm) from C.F.W. Walther's book, _The Evangelical Lutheran Church - the True Visible Church of God on Earth_, in which he discusse each thesis. The book is available at CPH (https://www.cph.org/the-true-visible-church-and-the-form-of-a-christian-congregation?srsltid=AfmBOooYTO9htUoCbNn5Hk5mbx9VTBzUrZQv81BHxFbn4Jygf2zADW86).
If you know German, you can read Walther's original 1867 book, _Die Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche - die wahre sichtbare Kirche Gottes auf Erden_ (https://archive.org/details/dieevangelischlu0000walt/page/n5/mode/2up?ref=ol)
I own the Kindle version, slow going.
It’s competing with Chemnitz on Trent!