As a whistleblower, I have submitted to the ACELC incidences of two DPs sweeping non-confessional practices under the proverbial rug, one was even to an elected LCMS officer in St. Louis who referred me back to the DP who had previously ignored my attempts to contact him, and at present has not responded back, despite the assurance the synod officer gave to me. My reported and never-resolved issues regarded a LCMS RSO's Communion policy and another the allowance of a non-licensed 'deacon' to preach and commune at a parish with a pastoral vacancy, and with no ordained pastor present to 'oversee'. I'm thankful that there may be some traction with the forthright attempts by the ACELC and Ad Crucem's truth in journalism.
This is a great presentation; thank you for putting it together, and sharing it. I intend to share key parts of it with Facebook connections and others.
One point I would contend with in a way is the expectations presumed of whistleblowers, who are individuals with complaints or concerns they believe probably require various forms of disciplinary action toward church workers. The expectation expressed by Snow, and shared by others, that individuals who see a problem should report it privately before getting help and protection from others, like from a journalist, is dangerous and wrong under the current circumstances that you described repeatedly where whistleblowers are routinely, severely punished for reporting. I and my loved ones have also suffered those punishments for trying to warn people about a serious problem. That problem, by the way, ended up inflicting real damage in the lives of the former pastor and key members of the congregation, so I know whereof I speak. Those punishments are not minor; they devastate lives, therefore it is wrong to expect people to foolishly put themselves and their families in that kind of harms way when we know there is a consistent pattern of the punishments we will endure if we dare to report anything without more protection than we have currently. Right now, as you explained, whistleblowers in our LCMS have virtually no protection, and until we have much more documented official protections to speak the truth and report all the legitimate problems taking place in the congregations and other LCMS institutions, the people who hold the offices with all the power have no right to expect us to willingly submit our loved ones and ourselves to destruction and punishment. When there are far greater official, reliable protections for whistleblowers in our LCMS, then more of us will be able to report the problems privately to authorities, but until then, these people who are above it all have no right to expect that of us. As with the recent topic of self-defense, we are called to protect our loved ones and not to subject ourselves to the irresponsible mismanagement of the current “system“ that destroys the lives of whistleblowers more often than not.
As a whistleblower, I have submitted to the ACELC incidences of two DPs sweeping non-confessional practices under the proverbial rug, one was even to an elected LCMS officer in St. Louis who referred me back to the DP who had previously ignored my attempts to contact him, and at present has not responded back, despite the assurance the synod officer gave to me. My reported and never-resolved issues regarded a LCMS RSO's Communion policy and another the allowance of a non-licensed 'deacon' to preach and commune at a parish with a pastoral vacancy, and with no ordained pastor present to 'oversee'. I'm thankful that there may be some traction with the forthright attempts by the ACELC and Ad Crucem's truth in journalism.
I am sorry to hear that
Good diagnosis, prescription, and analysis. I concur.
This is a great presentation; thank you for putting it together, and sharing it. I intend to share key parts of it with Facebook connections and others.
One point I would contend with in a way is the expectations presumed of whistleblowers, who are individuals with complaints or concerns they believe probably require various forms of disciplinary action toward church workers. The expectation expressed by Snow, and shared by others, that individuals who see a problem should report it privately before getting help and protection from others, like from a journalist, is dangerous and wrong under the current circumstances that you described repeatedly where whistleblowers are routinely, severely punished for reporting. I and my loved ones have also suffered those punishments for trying to warn people about a serious problem. That problem, by the way, ended up inflicting real damage in the lives of the former pastor and key members of the congregation, so I know whereof I speak. Those punishments are not minor; they devastate lives, therefore it is wrong to expect people to foolishly put themselves and their families in that kind of harms way when we know there is a consistent pattern of the punishments we will endure if we dare to report anything without more protection than we have currently. Right now, as you explained, whistleblowers in our LCMS have virtually no protection, and until we have much more documented official protections to speak the truth and report all the legitimate problems taking place in the congregations and other LCMS institutions, the people who hold the offices with all the power have no right to expect us to willingly submit our loved ones and ourselves to destruction and punishment. When there are far greater official, reliable protections for whistleblowers in our LCMS, then more of us will be able to report the problems privately to authorities, but until then, these people who are above it all have no right to expect that of us. As with the recent topic of self-defense, we are called to protect our loved ones and not to subject ourselves to the irresponsible mismanagement of the current “system“ that destroys the lives of whistleblowers more often than not.