Why the laity must become urgently assertive over Synod institutions to protect the vulnerable and innocent, and regain high fidelity institutional governance.
Upon reading this news, I have numerous thoughts, but for whatever it’s worth here are some of them:
(1) To be certain of the truth in this case, the public will have to wait until all the evidence from both sides is presented, but, considering the allegations, even though we don’t have all the evidence yet, it is reasonable and important to immediately take the precautions of suspending the charged clergyman from the positions or roles he has occupied, as suggested by Ad Crucem, until the involved parties have had the opportunity to officially present the evidence they have.
(2) Depending on whether the allegations against Mohr are true, if they are true, my sympathies are with any people he abused, and/or misled, if they are untrue, my sympathies are with Mohr.
(3) What has been a revealing, and in my opinion, embarrassing spectacle, is much of the public expressions on other social media sites, which leave the impression that LCMS officials, and commenters who appear to exhibit an attitude of blind faith in their beloved leaders, care more about how an incident like this case makes LCMS officials look, or about the corporate reputation, than about much worse harms inflicted. Official comments and press releases from the LCMS have communicated impassioned explanations which distance corporate LCMS and its officials from any responsibility for preventing Mohr’s alleged misconduct. LCMS authorities made a point of explaining they intend to fully cooperate with the civil authorities, which, of course, is what anyone would expect them to do, and everyone knows to do otherwise would be an indefensible public scandal. That distracts from the real question which is whether LCMS authorities supervising Mohr have a responsibility to prevent the alleged abuse? It is a good question, and one that should not be ignored if evidence shows the allegations to be true.
So many commenters on these other sites, in response to LCMS official press releases, have expressed their deep concern that this all must be so very difficult for the LCMS officials having to deal with this matter. Commenters offer their heartfelt sympathies and support… primarily for LCMS officials because they might have to endure some discomfort in dealing with this problem. I have good reason to believe there is a silent majority of LCMS churchgoers, and Christians in general, who are not easily fooled or manipulated by words in press releases. I have reason to believe a large number of Christians have a very similar reaction to the press releases as I have had. I doubt it is unusual for Christians observing the press releases and comments on them to roll their eyes, silently saying to themselves some version of, “Are you kidding me, so the big concern is that this incident is causing LCMS ecclesiastical supervisors some discomfort?” Christians who have suffered from church worker misconduct, especially where church officials have refused to hold church worker perpetrators accountable, recognize infuriating hypocrisy, but usually continue to suffer in silence. Based on my own long-term observation and experience in LCMS church communities both on the West Coast, and in the Midwest, I believe their instincts are correct to feel that way. I thank our Lord for our civil authorities who often seem to be the only authorities left with the strength to enforce God’s good laws that are in place to protect vulnerable sheep against harm by church worker misconduct of a serious nature that profoundly continues to erode faith and trust.
A commenter on the recently documented case of mistreatment of congregants of the Pastor who publicly modeled a transgender affirming stole, explained the numbers of people profoundly hurt by church worker misconduct are likely to be considerably higher than what is reported statistically because most people, especially in the church, will suffer even severe trauma in silence, and will be successfully silenced, or driven out of a church community, while the misconduct is swept under the rug, and not recorded as part of any statistical record. I’ve witnessed that happen repeatedly, and I am not referring to simply behavior directly against me. I have witnessed incidents involving at least a dozen individuals I can count off the top of my head, across the spectrum geographically, in different LCMS churches or other LCMS institutions, plus the entire core of a congregation, all faithful confessional Lutherans, including even a brother of a very high-ranking LCMS official, driven out of their home congregation by the insidious deceit of a pastor who talks a good game of identifying as a “confessional,” who to this day, still holds his job and has not been held accountable by any LCMS authorities. In that case, when formal complaints were made, LCMS authorities decided not to even hear the testimonies of the laypeople involved. (This was NOT a Pacific Southwest District congregation.)
Those who suggest there are more people suffering from church worker misconduct than what is statistically reported have correctly assessed the reality, in my opinion. If God‘s patience with that reality, and its concealment is running thin, I am grateful for His judgment as maybe the only means of help for all the voiceless in the LCMS who have suffered intensely, and privately from church worker misconduct. It seems to require civil authorities to step in to enforce God‘s laws that are in place to protect God’s sheep against church-worker misconduct. That is a shame, but God‘s work in protecting His sheep is not a shame, it is a long-awaited blessing and vindication where those placed in offices within the church charged with protecting sheep from church worker misconduct, neglect or refuse to do it.
Excellent observations. I have been asserting that church worker misconduct, which includes inaction when action is morally and spiritually required, is a huge cause of attrition from the LCMS. Many who are driven out leave the LCMS and some leave the church entirely. Those who stay will never have the same trust in their shepherds. LCMS authorities, who are in a position of power and authority, must do a much better job of protecting the sheep. We have personally seen them abysmally fail at this.
I would agree with that, and as with most things, there are intersecting dynamics and causes to consider, but I will mention one dimension I think has taken us (i.e. the LCMS) to where we are now. For at least the last 10 years I have watched the dispute resolution system, or the way disagreements and conflicts are dealt with in the LCMS, flip on its head. Now the system is mostly set up to shield first the clergy, and next, other church workers from any criticism, valid, or not, particularly from anyone outside of those offices.
I saw the early stages of this developing, and it was apparent where it was heading. Not that long ago what was a relatively small number of “sheep“ who in some congregations, treated their pastors, or other church workers very badly, developed into an excuse for LCMS officials to raise the standard of proof of guilt in any church worker misconduct dispute, higher and higher, where now it is so high that it’s nearly impossible to meet, and takes civil criminal charges to even begin to get the attention of LCMS officials to acknowledge any incident of church worker misconduct. Whereas, on the other hand, now, the sheep are presumed guilty until proven innocent, so to speak.
Officials from the top down, went to work, erecting more and more walls to shield church workers from any criticisms, or accountability, or consequences of their misconduct. These shields included everything on both sides of the spectrum, from calls for “unity and peace,” meaning officials began aggressively shutting down any signs of criticism or conflict at all, to building internal networks among church workers where they started convincing themselves, they could police each other, and the modus operandi was to presume clergy and various other church workers were the good guys, while they needed to stick together against the sheep who were presumed to be the bad guys in almost any dispute, disagreement, or conflict. And here we are. Just about any LCMS official will, by default, work to shut down and conceal criticisms or complaints about church worker conduct, unless they are absolutely forced not to, as in this public case of the district president being arrested, where they could not realistically hide it.
The only way to return to fairness and deal with this problem now is transparency. When disputes are public or at the Matthew 18 juncture of having to take it to the church at large, full transparency is necessary, which is exactly what many of our officials are afraid of, and do not want, but it is the correct and biblical path forward if we want true unity and peace. Transparency may make things a little more uncomfortable temporarily, but it does not change the authority of our officials to make their judgments. The difference with transparency is they will have to own their judgments instead of hiding them, but hiding them never should have been accepted or permitted as a standard in the first place. If an official has the authority to make a judgment in a conflict, they should be able to take responsibility publicly for their judgment. The transparency also encourages more care and thought be taken with those judgments rather than a brief, casual consideration in which serious problems can easily be swept under the rug behind closed doors.
Same. My “investigative” process was a joke when I reported CSM. Institutional abuse is as big of a problem as the abusive pastors. Leadership must do better.
I'm not sure there needs to be dissatisfaction with the Synod's response to this matter. It is in the hands of the court system and they will judge guilt or innocence. What would you have the Synod do differently this early in the process unless the DP has admitted guilt?
M. Harrison wrote:
"If these allegations prove true, they are an unfathomable betrayal of the responsibility and trust placed in the servants of the church by Christ and His people. To commit sexual violence or exploitation against others, especially children, is an unconscionable sin and crime. This has no place in the church. Our Lord has strong words for all who would lead His little ones to stumble (Matt. 18:6). The LCMS will fully cooperate with civil authorities on this matter."
As far as statements go this seems right on and your article a bit too critical in the first 2 paragraphs. Your suggested check list has merit however.
For one they could make clear that he is no longer in his positions within the LCMS until the case is decided. For another they could have come up with much of the stuff in the article 3+ years ago when various others have been caught in similar scandals within the church.
This Editorial has some valid points, but some of your commentary is gross. You sound wise in places, and in others like a very young man.
Is the resurgence of emphasis on theology and practices in line with Scripture and confessions really all smells and bells? You suggest without clear cause that the change is all style has no substance, and by extension that the pastors and laity who have embraced our theological and liturgical heritage are somehow insincere or hypocritical.
Are the men who looked up to a seemingly devout, pious brother not entitled to feel a sense of betrayal. If the allegations are true then obviously the chief victims are those of his direct actions. But as a young man I got to watch a couple of what I thought were strong faithful men I could depend on turn out to be wicked. That cut deep. Maybe the "kvetching" of a wounded brother who just lost a friend in a way that he wishes rather that he were dead is legitimate.
Continuous reform is necessary, and good governance is a must. We ought to demand it, and we will need to apply pressure to synod to make it so. That said, this article also took the occasion as an excuse for a needless dig at some of our confessional clergy and congregations.
Maybe your axe to grind was with synod, and your cuts to my brothers were incidental, and you would clarify that this was not in fact your meaning?
Thank you, Patrick. I am glad that the vigor of the prose evokes the zeal of a very young man!
I’m afraid you protest too much about the Confessionals. I did not write that ALL Confessionals, or even a majority, are suspect. I simply noted that under the cover of the Confessional label and its accoutrements, a good deal of mischief has crept in. For example, right there in Ft Wayne, Gain of Function Theology took root and spread its limbs over the Synod for decades. Do all the Confessional men love the shade of the antinomian tree? Clearly not, but it is an undeniable problem.
As for grief over betrayal, I recommend keeping it private or limited to a small group of confidantes. What we have seen this week are shouts for attention and a desire to make it "local" (I have not seen anything you posted; I have no idea if you did or did not. I am talking about and to the pastors emoting online.) It's like the local TV news. "Mandy, tonight we speak with one of our own, John Smith, who was in Bora Bora 30 years ago for a snorkeling trip. John, how do you feel about the volcano in Bora Bora? You must be devastated?" People seem to forget survivors are also reading it, and they must be grossed out about the me-tooisms. Righteous raging anger would have been appropriate, not the weepy tone policing that I read.
I have no axe to grind with anyone or anything except falsehood and evasion. This was a very black-pilling week for those of us who have warned, for a long time, of the pervasive Sixth Commandment problems in the LCMS, and the antinomianism/universalism. What I discovered this week is that antinomianism is not confined to a few pockets. It is a default feature, and it needs to be fixed, stat. I encourage you to take Dr. David Scaer for a coffee and a long chat.
Thank you, for the response, and the the banter--always best if we can proceed as men of good will and good humor. If you are a fellow Fort resident I hope for the chance to meet you one of these days.
Alright, on to the meat.
1a) You painted with a broad brush, and there is no way you did not know it; your reply was too nuanced and coherent to play dumb. You used the nomenclature oft employed by those who assail the idea of confessionalism from both the Berhold von Schenky and missional spaces. Why not own it? Be bold. Maybe sexual deviancy would have nowhere to hide if we could get rid of all the dang incense smoke obscuring it, amirite?
1b) The gain of function comment is delightfully vague; I'm sure in service of the eighth commandment, which was given to protect us from clarity. Or it is a reference to an erudite published work and I've revealed I'm out of my depth? It seems to be tied to anti-nomianism. Your tie of confessionalism to antinomianism is puzzling, when the men in the parish I've known who are confessionals seem more regularly to come under the charge of legalism.
2) As to those responding and emoting, (not I, as I only met him once), he was a public official, with a supervisory role, and was better known by the few people I know who posted about it. Public comment could even have been expected. Grief over the very public ugly news that your brother might have been a monster is not unseemly. Perhaps we just saw comment from different spheres, and are reacting to different things?
3) Sixth commandment problems are endemic to mankind. A life well ordered by the law is certainly the best guard against such things (Memento70 plug here), but no amount of pure doctrine is going to permanently relieve us from the scourge of sexual sin. Unfortunately, I think that hypocrisy, insincerity, and weakness can wear any theological face they care to.
I think your other suggestions around what is to be done practically to ensure that we are accountable and protecting the vulnerable among us are spot on. Congregations should have well articulated policies to protect the chastity of the members and officers, especially in mixed contexts. Pastors who commit abuses cannot be allowed to resign. They must be defrocked.
Do not despair. Do not take the black pill, and close your inbox to anyone who uses the phrase. The black pill is a call to surrender or schism. The right call is a call to reform. Your call to action is right, but evil will live even in the midst of the cult of pure doctrine. Sometimes sin is just a weak man who began to act against what he taught and confessed. It is fitting that we put accountability in place to make these evils more difficult to perpetrate, but we should not necessarily assume that a failure of institutional accountability and risk management is necessarily a sign of deep spiritual rot.
You were probably autocorrected, so just wanted to point out your plug should say Memento70 not Momento70. Just in case that causes confusion to someone who reads it!
This opinion piece is thoughtful and well-grounded, and implementation of its recommendations urgently needed. The people in the pews of the LCMS -- Christ's lambs -- are to be protected by their shepherds, not abused, violated, attacked, or ignored. Comprehensive, informed, and godly changes are needed, and needed now.
These changes can and should be immediately enacted at local levels if they are not already in place. Parents need to be hyper-aware and advocate for children -- their own and others. Protection of our family is part of our parental vocation.
Best practices for matters such as this have been available for decades. The Church should be leading in their implementation, not derelict and lagging at the risk of harming God's lambs.
The article takes a strong and much needed position. Keep doing more of this.
Excellent call to action. I was already planning to bring this up at the next PTL meeting for the Lutheran school my children attend, but I should not wait and will be emailing them immediately. Thank you for spurring me to not delay any longer. Congregational members have been subtly and not so subtly patronized and infantilized by the pastorate, being far too deferential. It is certainly time that members of the congregation rightly assert their role and duties.
I really appreciate this article, sir. All these are excellent recommendations.
If a church or school group just "trusts each other," well and good. But then it should be simple and emotionally/socially unburdensome to "prove" it by the adoption of clear protocol. In fact, the trust should go *up* post a dispassionate implementation of standard measures. Removing uncertainty increases peace and eases consciences. It works in doctrine and in practice!
It might feel like "we're all family" in certain churches and communities, but the fact remains that none of those groups of such sentiment literally live under the same roof in the same building.
Combining multiple roofs under "living conditions" like travel, overnights, special events/parties, etc. logically creates a third "roof" over everyone: the "roof of the household of God," if you will. These protocols are simply the "house rules" of the bigger, combined roof. Very reasonable, very rational, and ultimately, logically necessary.
This is one of the reasons that I, as a pastor, do not participate myself in youth events/retreats/conferences. I ask parents to go as the chaperones and I stay home and write my sermon.
First, because we live in a society that is eager to accuse clergy.
Second, because pastors should not do anything that could open the door for accusation (not that this is completely avoidable, but everything he can do he should).
Third, because pastors don't have to be involved with every activity to which the youth attend.
If I must go, I will get my own hotel room and likely in a different hotel (I have a dog that comes with me).
These days pastors have to be extra careful to protect themselves. A person could get upset at a pastor for no good reason and turn around and accuse the pastor of something horrible out of spite.
I have a camera in my office/study for when I'm doing counseling, so should anyone accuse me of anything, I can have a defense. The camera is right there where anyone can see it and I tell them that I record, especially if it's a female. We never want to show impropriety.
However this situation turns out, prayers for the district and the LCMS, for Mohr's family and for the families of the alleged victims. Pastors, do your due diligence! Make sure no one can accuse you of anything. Be above reproach; be mindful of where you put your hands and what your eyes see. I won't go so far as to say don't play video games, but be mindful of the type of games you play, that they aren't tempting you to do horrible things. If you're married, stay close to your wife. Be sure you have a Father Confessor with whom you can confess your sins and struggles. If you are single as I am, suffer all the more that you do not frequent the bars or clubs, but spend your "me time" praying the Catechism or reading the Psalms rather than hitting Facebook or worse.
Remember your baptism! Focus your time on sermon prep, bible study prep, visiting your shut-ins and the sick, and keeping yourself occupied. Put the freakin' cellphone down -- lose it like I do for a day every once in a while.
As I told you privately yesterday, I truly do appreciate you, AC retail, and AC News. And I think you have many good suggestions in the post. I especially commend the bullet list just under the bolded "Let's start here..." However, I think you're committing some errors in this editorial. These criticisms are offered in good faith.
1) This event *must* cause congregations, schools, youth orgs, etc. to reassess policies and procedures. Anytime an abuse occurs this should happen. But I fear your insisted-upon timeline and elevated rhetoric are going to inflame increased distrust in the pastors of Christ's Church, other church workers, etc. (Which is already a great temptation in a situation such as this.) We should not tempt Christ's people to distrust those charged with keeping watch over their souls. I believe that is not your intent. But that is the effect.
2) If your elevated rhetoric and insisted rapid timeline are due to you having private and well-founded cause for widespread alarm, then I urge you to *stop posting* and instead spend your time personally reaching out to DPs directly. Take a week or two (or however long) to do that. Take another week or two to let them handle matters. Follow up. Then, perhaps, post. Otherwise you are akin to someone in one of the small towns that Mohr served making a public comment to a Lutheran parishioner in the grocery store, "I always knew it." Well, then, why didn't you say something?
3) Regarding how widespread abusers might be, statistically speaking, I think this analysis by Lyman Stone is very helpful. These are sobering matters. We should approach our consideration of them sober-mindedly. (And note the observation of the recently undertaken and ultimately ineffectual and not particular helpful Southern Baptist clergy sexual abuse project) https://x.com/lymanstoneky/status/2017007598524850419
4) You are accusing men of social media grieving rather than action. Though I likewise find social media grieving distasteful, it is not correlative with inaction. Just poor taste.
Brother, I rejoice to receive Christ's Body and Blood together with you tomorrow, from afar, along with all the company of heaven.
1. I regret to report that LCMS clergy (and the establishment surrounding) are earning the distrust. We have been very public about having the ear of the laity - we hear a great deal through business interactions and the publishing arm. Our "ear" spans all 50 states (58 if you count the Canadian provinces and territories). There is widespread dissatisfaction and alarm about the apparent insouciance and lack of urgency in addressing a range of small and large problems. The people in the pews are tired of the soft, soothing words that all is well when attendance has crashed 50% in 25 years.
I greatly fear the divide between laity and clergy, but I'm merely the messenger, not an activist who generated it. It is very unhealthy, but only the clergy have the power to fix this. You guys control all the top levels with a sprinkling of laymen here and there. It is the collars making the final decisions, and so you bear the most responsibility.
Here's one illustrative issue that ENRAGES the laity we interact with: Lutheran Family Services Rocky Mountains trades on the full faith and credit of the LCMS as an RSO in good standing, yet it was marketing foster kids and adoptions at a pride festival in Greeley. That RSO has multiple failed audits, citing shocking deficiencies. Nothing has been done about it because "contracts" and "procedures".
We constantly see messages fluffing Synod tail feathers about "Our Great Theology™" and how we revere the Bible and being "Book of Concord Lutherans". It's half-truths if you examine the facts, and I am sorry that it has to be splashed about publicly, but so it is.
On Monday, we will publish a survey asking readers to rate our coverage; no holds barred. The results will be very interesting.
2. As demonstrated with the Southeastern District scandal, we gave everyone a heads up on both sides of the aisle and in the middle of the aisle, to little avail. We are not going to spring any hidden camera surprises on the DPs. However, once we make contact and present the evidence, how will they respond? It will be fascinating to see if they take umbrage like Harmon. In the meantime, I urge them to be Chief Theological Officers. There is no district so healthy that DPs should travel abroad with offering plate dollars - stay home and help get the house in order, please.
3. I was statistically cautious in saying there is a probability of more; not high, not low. Lyman is thrilled that we are below this and that rate of abuse. Great. The actual standard is ZERO. We get to zero by actively pursuing measures whose purpose is zero. Synod leadership missed a significant opportunity by not implementing an emergency call to action that demanded what I have recommended. It is incomprehensible that it did not happen on the same day as the first announcement.
4. I'm not accusing grievers of failing to take action. I am accusing them of emotional incontinence. Get a grip, guys! This is not about you! The greatest sin in the LCMS is apparently NBN - Not Being Nice. The days of rug sweeping and endless theses are over - let's confront the problems with honesty and sincerity, and not worry about shouty words.
We will go to the rail tomorrow in your spiritual company, but with less confidence that the confession LCMS Lutes are meant to share is truly shared. However, we will trust in the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, not our fears or rationalizations.
I must applaud this reply because there are so many individuals who desperately do not want to hear the truth on these issues, but who need to hear it, without apology. Thank you, Ad Crucem, for speaking the truth, despite the resistance in a variety of forms, that predictably will continue to be aimed at you when you tell the truth the people in charge don’t want to hear.
1) I agree that unfortunately there is far too much *earned* distrust in the Synod. But there is also too much *unearned* distrust – guilt by association, as it were. My voiced concern has to do with the danger of encouraging unnecessary unearned distrust.
Could you point me anywhere that links distrust as a substantial factor in our membership losses? I suspect it's a part of the problem. Though I wonder if it's being overblown, and how much? Truly, I just don't know and I am curious as to any data that's out there. I would love to see more on this.
The RSO you cite is in fact very concerning, and I note that they currently remain an RSO. I perused their website and I have some concerns with what I see there. You might be aware that I am a member of the LCMS Board for National Mission. (Though I am not writing in that capacity here. All of these thoughts are only my own and I am not speaking for the Board nor the LCMS in my comments.) Nevertheless, the BNM does have policy oversight for granting RSO status within the US in regards to alignment and augmentation of the mission and ministry of the Synod (bylaw 6.2.3(b)), so I'm going to inquire about this issue. Just a note: for financial and governance issues with RSOs, that falls under the policy-setting authority of the LCMS Board of Directors (bylaw 6.2.3(a)).
2) I am thankful for your voice on the LCMS SE District issue.
3) I agree that our goal for instances of clergy abuse is zero. I don't know if it is realistic to expect that we can have procedures that achieve that. I don't mean to be defeatist in saying that, and welcome pushback. But I find it to be the case that over-legislating procedures and processes can frustrate the work of the ministry. Obviously, it's finding the right balance. I think it's fair for you to say that we don't have that balance, currently. Though I wonder if it's less a matter of policies and procedures and more a matter of the appropriate people *doing the work* of oversight, visitation, etc.?
Re: your comment here: https://www.adcrucem.news/p/do-not-wait-for-synod-leadership/comment/208905897 – you raise a good point that resignations for cause that do not rise to the point of criminal charges or convictions, etc. would not necessarily factor into the statistics that Lyman cites. So we might be celebrating something that only *appears* favorable. Only transparency in resignations for cause will help correct that.
Reverend, I fear you underestimate how much distrust already existed before this. I've distrusted much of the LCMS leadership and a fair number of outer organization pastors since even before LCACA revealed some of the real rot within the organization, and certainly since this event revealed that said rot has real consequences. Something like this, and a call to move as quickly as possible to do as much as possible to prevent this sort of thing from easily happening, will not inflame distrust (at least not remotely to the level that the behavior of leadership already has), and would be a good sign of actually doing something worthwhile instead of chest puffing and words with no action that seems to be the common 'solution' by the LCMS.
With regard the statics. Lyman's data produces a clergy sexual offense *conviction* about once every 13-14 months. That will significantly undercount cases in which people are allowed to quietly resign because there is reasonable suspicion but not enough evidence to reach a verdict. Likewise, statutes of limitations can be exceeded in some sexual abuse cases depending on jurisdiction, despite the fairly recent trend to eliminate expiration for felony sexual offenses.
All that said, if we use an example of two clergy arrested and charged with identical alleged offenses within two days of each other, the odds are only 1 in ~3,040 based on Lyman's data. Not even close to lightning striking twice in the same place. So, we must be cautious not to be overly confident that a low rate of conviction relative to selected cohorts means we could not see clusters of cases that defy the simple odds.
This begs the question as to whether overnight trips should even be taken. The logistics is overwhelming. Also, sexual impropriety and pressure can come from peers, not only those in authority.
The sermonette you dug up and dusted off is astounding. It sounds just like the sermon we hear at our parish nearly every week. I listened to it three times and pulled up last Sunday's sermon (Transfiguration) just to be sure.
And it's the same. Same structure, same thematic development, same rhetorical pivots, same pacing, same vague psychologized Law that hits everything and nothing all at once, same cross -> Baptism -> Lord's Supper home stretch, same everything. This is the exact sermon we hear almost every week, regardless of the appointed readings (which are really only a hook for The One Sermon, anyway).
Please help me out and explain in detail where the sermonette goes off the rails. I'm not disagreeing with you at all-it did sound "off" to me, but it would be helpful to know exactly where it goes wrong and what should have been said instead.
Hi Ellen, please don’t feel bad for not pinpointing it. The problem is very subtle and we have been conditioned to this type of preaching. I am going to leave the analysis for a while to allow it to circulate and percolate a little longer.
Is the analysis STILL circulating and percolating??? The sermonette (aside from the Scripture reading) was only about 2-1/2 minutes long. How long does an analysis for that sort of thing take to circulate and percolate? I'm not defending Mr. Mohr at all, I'm just very curious about your take on the sermonette.
No, that’s fair. I serve on a Lutheran school board across town from you and this has my full support. I know first hand the cronyism, lawyerly cowardice, and overall moral injury that is caused by what you name here. Let’s do it.
There's been plenty written about this and other incidences and I have to say this article is one of the better pieces I've come across. Thank you for taking the time to thoroughly list the ideas of what can be implimented. I can say with confidence my church already does many of the things you suggest, and it's likely others do as well. But a broad reminder to put a refresher on practice is excellent and you've essentially offered us a free "copy and paste" outline. Thank you for this!
Thank you, Rosalie. Many churches and institutions do have policies in place, but we must ensure, as you say, that they are refreshed, and constantly managed. I am of the view now that every church constitution should include a board or elder role for “Safeguarding” so that there is a responsible and accountable person.
First, I hesitated to post anything last evening for fear of an 8th commandment violation timeout. Yes, there is an urgency to getting something done. Thanks for recognizing it. As time passes, the "let it go" feeling increases. I am 68 years old. I have seen many things just slide by. I remember hearing about Luther saying that if you lose private confession you will never get it back. I understand and believe that more and more each year. Why is it that pastors don't enjoy the same trust and respect that they did years ago. I could write and write on that. I know it is not right but many folks do lump all pastors together.
Second, I agree with some folks that say synod establishment is not transparent, willing to share, slow to act and react. Along the same lines, I feel there tends to be a strong brotherhood of the men with the collars. I believe that it is more than just an appearance of such.
Third, here are a few more suggestions. How about some pastors publicly getting off facebook, sharing the number of hours spent on the computer each week with their elders, do we really need so many blogs and podcasts. My thought is that time could be much better spent paging through the congregation pictorial directory and praying for those in each family picture. Perhaps it would be even better to go to the back of the directory and pray for those listed but not in pictures. A phone call or home visit might even be better. Pastors, honestly, when was your last home visit just to get to know a member of your flock a little better.
Fourth, if nothing else, this article has provided the needed push to get this congregation chairman to put the whole concept of a review of how things are done on the next church council meeting.
Regarding current events in the LCMS, I have a couple of concerns......
1.) What steps will synod take to ensure that the LCMS and/or its districts do not share the same fate as the Roman Catholic dioceses? How many Roman Catholic dioceses have declared bankruptcy due to abuse? How many of them have ignored the abuse instead of taking steps to deal with their problems and work to prevent new incidents from occurring? I have included a Roman Catholic watchdog link not to brag "At least we are not like Rome!", but to serve as a warning to LCMS synod and district officials. Does the LCMS really want a reputation of abuse that discourages non-Lutherans from joining it?
2.) Below is a summary of my experiences with LCMS congregations. I am sure this is "old news" for you. Here you go:
LCMS theology is the best, but the laymen treat their congregations like private country clubs. Each LCMS congregation is run by prominent local families "with the right last names." Beware of the twelve toxic Boomer women and their allies, who are the real leaders of the congregation. As a visitor, you are sized up by the lay leaders on whether or not you will fit in. If a couple of "the wrong people" decide they don't "like" you, you will be shunned, gossiped about, and harassed. Want to volunteer in an LCMS congregation? Assume a position of leadership or criticize leadership, and you have set yourself up as a target. The best you can hope for is to be ignored.
Adam Koontz describes the toxic culture of LCMS congregations. Who wants to be sucked into the rabid politics inside an LCMS congregation? More abuse. A thicket of idols, indeed!
SERIOUSLY? I knew I had joined a horrible congregation. All I would need to do is church shop for another LCMS congregation within a 25 mile radius, join that one, and all would be well - right?
Once I realized that the "country club" behavior is the norm for LCMS congregations, and once I discovered that leaders such as Adam Koontz and Tim Wood are sounding the alarm that this is a serious problem all over the LCMS, I was placed in a dilemma. I could not just "leave" one toxic LCMS congregation without jumping into yet another toxic environment at a different toxic LCMS congregation.
If I had any sense, I would turn my back on Lutheran churches and go elsewhere. The problem is that the mainline churches with their "rainbow theologies" are out of the question. Even many Reformed and Evangelical/Baptist congregations are embracing "wokeness." For example, the PCA has a "non-practicing h0mosexual" on its clergy roster.
Where would I go? Even if I were to find a conservative Bible church out in the middle of a cornfield, I just cannot get myself to embrace strange things such as the rapture, "inviting Jebus into my heart," double-predestination, you cannot lose your salvation, and total immersion baptism.
I suppose I could become just like most Roman Catholics and show up for church twice a year, but I would miss communion too much.
The fact that Lutheran leaders would rather prefer to erect and knock down Christian Nationalist strawmen instead of solving decades-long rot in LCMS congregations is astounding.
All well and good if there are many LCMS congregations from which to choose in your area. My friend, I chose the best of those in my area. Feminism abounds, but the new (10 year) pastor has done his best stopping many Fem practices.
In the Midwest, we have too many small and struggling congregations located within a 25-50 mile radius. Such congregations should sell property, merge, and centralize. I understand that in other parts of the country, it is rare to find an LCMS church - especially a liturgical one. So we have two extremes. I get it. You have to go where you can find a congregation, or not attend a Lutheran church at all!
Where I am, I am seeing churches of all kinds still fall over themselves to imitate the non-denominational megachurches. Granted that the mainlines are dying out at the fastest rate of all church bodies, advocating for the feminist mindset in a Lutheran congregation seems suicidal.
Right. Feminism kills families, marriage(s), and churches.
Feminism is an abomination in EVERY way. I often speak with women in my congregation about the evil of feminism and am shocked that so many of us do not get it.
Upon reading this news, I have numerous thoughts, but for whatever it’s worth here are some of them:
(1) To be certain of the truth in this case, the public will have to wait until all the evidence from both sides is presented, but, considering the allegations, even though we don’t have all the evidence yet, it is reasonable and important to immediately take the precautions of suspending the charged clergyman from the positions or roles he has occupied, as suggested by Ad Crucem, until the involved parties have had the opportunity to officially present the evidence they have.
(2) Depending on whether the allegations against Mohr are true, if they are true, my sympathies are with any people he abused, and/or misled, if they are untrue, my sympathies are with Mohr.
(3) What has been a revealing, and in my opinion, embarrassing spectacle, is much of the public expressions on other social media sites, which leave the impression that LCMS officials, and commenters who appear to exhibit an attitude of blind faith in their beloved leaders, care more about how an incident like this case makes LCMS officials look, or about the corporate reputation, than about much worse harms inflicted. Official comments and press releases from the LCMS have communicated impassioned explanations which distance corporate LCMS and its officials from any responsibility for preventing Mohr’s alleged misconduct. LCMS authorities made a point of explaining they intend to fully cooperate with the civil authorities, which, of course, is what anyone would expect them to do, and everyone knows to do otherwise would be an indefensible public scandal. That distracts from the real question which is whether LCMS authorities supervising Mohr have a responsibility to prevent the alleged abuse? It is a good question, and one that should not be ignored if evidence shows the allegations to be true.
So many commenters on these other sites, in response to LCMS official press releases, have expressed their deep concern that this all must be so very difficult for the LCMS officials having to deal with this matter. Commenters offer their heartfelt sympathies and support… primarily for LCMS officials because they might have to endure some discomfort in dealing with this problem. I have good reason to believe there is a silent majority of LCMS churchgoers, and Christians in general, who are not easily fooled or manipulated by words in press releases. I have reason to believe a large number of Christians have a very similar reaction to the press releases as I have had. I doubt it is unusual for Christians observing the press releases and comments on them to roll their eyes, silently saying to themselves some version of, “Are you kidding me, so the big concern is that this incident is causing LCMS ecclesiastical supervisors some discomfort?” Christians who have suffered from church worker misconduct, especially where church officials have refused to hold church worker perpetrators accountable, recognize infuriating hypocrisy, but usually continue to suffer in silence. Based on my own long-term observation and experience in LCMS church communities both on the West Coast, and in the Midwest, I believe their instincts are correct to feel that way. I thank our Lord for our civil authorities who often seem to be the only authorities left with the strength to enforce God’s good laws that are in place to protect vulnerable sheep against harm by church worker misconduct of a serious nature that profoundly continues to erode faith and trust.
A commenter on the recently documented case of mistreatment of congregants of the Pastor who publicly modeled a transgender affirming stole, explained the numbers of people profoundly hurt by church worker misconduct are likely to be considerably higher than what is reported statistically because most people, especially in the church, will suffer even severe trauma in silence, and will be successfully silenced, or driven out of a church community, while the misconduct is swept under the rug, and not recorded as part of any statistical record. I’ve witnessed that happen repeatedly, and I am not referring to simply behavior directly against me. I have witnessed incidents involving at least a dozen individuals I can count off the top of my head, across the spectrum geographically, in different LCMS churches or other LCMS institutions, plus the entire core of a congregation, all faithful confessional Lutherans, including even a brother of a very high-ranking LCMS official, driven out of their home congregation by the insidious deceit of a pastor who talks a good game of identifying as a “confessional,” who to this day, still holds his job and has not been held accountable by any LCMS authorities. In that case, when formal complaints were made, LCMS authorities decided not to even hear the testimonies of the laypeople involved. (This was NOT a Pacific Southwest District congregation.)
Those who suggest there are more people suffering from church worker misconduct than what is statistically reported have correctly assessed the reality, in my opinion. If God‘s patience with that reality, and its concealment is running thin, I am grateful for His judgment as maybe the only means of help for all the voiceless in the LCMS who have suffered intensely, and privately from church worker misconduct. It seems to require civil authorities to step in to enforce God‘s laws that are in place to protect God’s sheep against church-worker misconduct. That is a shame, but God‘s work in protecting His sheep is not a shame, it is a long-awaited blessing and vindication where those placed in offices within the church charged with protecting sheep from church worker misconduct, neglect or refuse to do it.
Thank you, Elizabeth. God bless you.
Excellent observations. I have been asserting that church worker misconduct, which includes inaction when action is morally and spiritually required, is a huge cause of attrition from the LCMS. Many who are driven out leave the LCMS and some leave the church entirely. Those who stay will never have the same trust in their shepherds. LCMS authorities, who are in a position of power and authority, must do a much better job of protecting the sheep. We have personally seen them abysmally fail at this.
I would agree with that, and as with most things, there are intersecting dynamics and causes to consider, but I will mention one dimension I think has taken us (i.e. the LCMS) to where we are now. For at least the last 10 years I have watched the dispute resolution system, or the way disagreements and conflicts are dealt with in the LCMS, flip on its head. Now the system is mostly set up to shield first the clergy, and next, other church workers from any criticism, valid, or not, particularly from anyone outside of those offices.
I saw the early stages of this developing, and it was apparent where it was heading. Not that long ago what was a relatively small number of “sheep“ who in some congregations, treated their pastors, or other church workers very badly, developed into an excuse for LCMS officials to raise the standard of proof of guilt in any church worker misconduct dispute, higher and higher, where now it is so high that it’s nearly impossible to meet, and takes civil criminal charges to even begin to get the attention of LCMS officials to acknowledge any incident of church worker misconduct. Whereas, on the other hand, now, the sheep are presumed guilty until proven innocent, so to speak.
Officials from the top down, went to work, erecting more and more walls to shield church workers from any criticisms, or accountability, or consequences of their misconduct. These shields included everything on both sides of the spectrum, from calls for “unity and peace,” meaning officials began aggressively shutting down any signs of criticism or conflict at all, to building internal networks among church workers where they started convincing themselves, they could police each other, and the modus operandi was to presume clergy and various other church workers were the good guys, while they needed to stick together against the sheep who were presumed to be the bad guys in almost any dispute, disagreement, or conflict. And here we are. Just about any LCMS official will, by default, work to shut down and conceal criticisms or complaints about church worker conduct, unless they are absolutely forced not to, as in this public case of the district president being arrested, where they could not realistically hide it.
The only way to return to fairness and deal with this problem now is transparency. When disputes are public or at the Matthew 18 juncture of having to take it to the church at large, full transparency is necessary, which is exactly what many of our officials are afraid of, and do not want, but it is the correct and biblical path forward if we want true unity and peace. Transparency may make things a little more uncomfortable temporarily, but it does not change the authority of our officials to make their judgments. The difference with transparency is they will have to own their judgments instead of hiding them, but hiding them never should have been accepted or permitted as a standard in the first place. If an official has the authority to make a judgment in a conflict, they should be able to take responsibility publicly for their judgment. The transparency also encourages more care and thought be taken with those judgments rather than a brief, casual consideration in which serious problems can easily be swept under the rug behind closed doors.
Same. My “investigative” process was a joke when I reported CSM. Institutional abuse is as big of a problem as the abusive pastors. Leadership must do better.
I'm not sure there needs to be dissatisfaction with the Synod's response to this matter. It is in the hands of the court system and they will judge guilt or innocence. What would you have the Synod do differently this early in the process unless the DP has admitted guilt?
M. Harrison wrote:
"If these allegations prove true, they are an unfathomable betrayal of the responsibility and trust placed in the servants of the church by Christ and His people. To commit sexual violence or exploitation against others, especially children, is an unconscionable sin and crime. This has no place in the church. Our Lord has strong words for all who would lead His little ones to stumble (Matt. 18:6). The LCMS will fully cooperate with civil authorities on this matter."
As far as statements go this seems right on and your article a bit too critical in the first 2 paragraphs. Your suggested check list has merit however.
What the Synod could and should have done differently was ensure that grandees would be dealt with just like ordinary pastors who get shipped out within hours of an arrest for a sexual offense, like this guy https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/former-huron-pastor-facing-child-porn-charges/
For one they could make clear that he is no longer in his positions within the LCMS until the case is decided. For another they could have come up with much of the stuff in the article 3+ years ago when various others have been caught in similar scandals within the church.
This Editorial has some valid points, but some of your commentary is gross. You sound wise in places, and in others like a very young man.
Is the resurgence of emphasis on theology and practices in line with Scripture and confessions really all smells and bells? You suggest without clear cause that the change is all style has no substance, and by extension that the pastors and laity who have embraced our theological and liturgical heritage are somehow insincere or hypocritical.
Are the men who looked up to a seemingly devout, pious brother not entitled to feel a sense of betrayal. If the allegations are true then obviously the chief victims are those of his direct actions. But as a young man I got to watch a couple of what I thought were strong faithful men I could depend on turn out to be wicked. That cut deep. Maybe the "kvetching" of a wounded brother who just lost a friend in a way that he wishes rather that he were dead is legitimate.
Continuous reform is necessary, and good governance is a must. We ought to demand it, and we will need to apply pressure to synod to make it so. That said, this article also took the occasion as an excuse for a needless dig at some of our confessional clergy and congregations.
Maybe your axe to grind was with synod, and your cuts to my brothers were incidental, and you would clarify that this was not in fact your meaning?
Thank you, Patrick. I am glad that the vigor of the prose evokes the zeal of a very young man!
I’m afraid you protest too much about the Confessionals. I did not write that ALL Confessionals, or even a majority, are suspect. I simply noted that under the cover of the Confessional label and its accoutrements, a good deal of mischief has crept in. For example, right there in Ft Wayne, Gain of Function Theology took root and spread its limbs over the Synod for decades. Do all the Confessional men love the shade of the antinomian tree? Clearly not, but it is an undeniable problem.
As for grief over betrayal, I recommend keeping it private or limited to a small group of confidantes. What we have seen this week are shouts for attention and a desire to make it "local" (I have not seen anything you posted; I have no idea if you did or did not. I am talking about and to the pastors emoting online.) It's like the local TV news. "Mandy, tonight we speak with one of our own, John Smith, who was in Bora Bora 30 years ago for a snorkeling trip. John, how do you feel about the volcano in Bora Bora? You must be devastated?" People seem to forget survivors are also reading it, and they must be grossed out about the me-tooisms. Righteous raging anger would have been appropriate, not the weepy tone policing that I read.
I have no axe to grind with anyone or anything except falsehood and evasion. This was a very black-pilling week for those of us who have warned, for a long time, of the pervasive Sixth Commandment problems in the LCMS, and the antinomianism/universalism. What I discovered this week is that antinomianism is not confined to a few pockets. It is a default feature, and it needs to be fixed, stat. I encourage you to take Dr. David Scaer for a coffee and a long chat.
Best,
Tim
Thank you, for the response, and the the banter--always best if we can proceed as men of good will and good humor. If you are a fellow Fort resident I hope for the chance to meet you one of these days.
Alright, on to the meat.
1a) You painted with a broad brush, and there is no way you did not know it; your reply was too nuanced and coherent to play dumb. You used the nomenclature oft employed by those who assail the idea of confessionalism from both the Berhold von Schenky and missional spaces. Why not own it? Be bold. Maybe sexual deviancy would have nowhere to hide if we could get rid of all the dang incense smoke obscuring it, amirite?
1b) The gain of function comment is delightfully vague; I'm sure in service of the eighth commandment, which was given to protect us from clarity. Or it is a reference to an erudite published work and I've revealed I'm out of my depth? It seems to be tied to anti-nomianism. Your tie of confessionalism to antinomianism is puzzling, when the men in the parish I've known who are confessionals seem more regularly to come under the charge of legalism.
2) As to those responding and emoting, (not I, as I only met him once), he was a public official, with a supervisory role, and was better known by the few people I know who posted about it. Public comment could even have been expected. Grief over the very public ugly news that your brother might have been a monster is not unseemly. Perhaps we just saw comment from different spheres, and are reacting to different things?
3) Sixth commandment problems are endemic to mankind. A life well ordered by the law is certainly the best guard against such things (Memento70 plug here), but no amount of pure doctrine is going to permanently relieve us from the scourge of sexual sin. Unfortunately, I think that hypocrisy, insincerity, and weakness can wear any theological face they care to.
I think your other suggestions around what is to be done practically to ensure that we are accountable and protecting the vulnerable among us are spot on. Congregations should have well articulated policies to protect the chastity of the members and officers, especially in mixed contexts. Pastors who commit abuses cannot be allowed to resign. They must be defrocked.
Do not despair. Do not take the black pill, and close your inbox to anyone who uses the phrase. The black pill is a call to surrender or schism. The right call is a call to reform. Your call to action is right, but evil will live even in the midst of the cult of pure doctrine. Sometimes sin is just a weak man who began to act against what he taught and confessed. It is fitting that we put accountability in place to make these evils more difficult to perpetrate, but we should not necessarily assume that a failure of institutional accountability and risk management is necessarily a sign of deep spiritual rot.
Yours in Christ
Patrick
You were probably autocorrected, so just wanted to point out your plug should say Memento70 not Momento70. Just in case that causes confusion to someone who reads it!
I mean LCMS women have been calling for this for years….🤷🏻♀️ but maybe they will listen now that a man says it
This opinion piece is thoughtful and well-grounded, and implementation of its recommendations urgently needed. The people in the pews of the LCMS -- Christ's lambs -- are to be protected by their shepherds, not abused, violated, attacked, or ignored. Comprehensive, informed, and godly changes are needed, and needed now.
These changes can and should be immediately enacted at local levels if they are not already in place. Parents need to be hyper-aware and advocate for children -- their own and others. Protection of our family is part of our parental vocation.
Best practices for matters such as this have been available for decades. The Church should be leading in their implementation, not derelict and lagging at the risk of harming God's lambs.
The article takes a strong and much needed position. Keep doing more of this.
Excellent call to action. I was already planning to bring this up at the next PTL meeting for the Lutheran school my children attend, but I should not wait and will be emailing them immediately. Thank you for spurring me to not delay any longer. Congregational members have been subtly and not so subtly patronized and infantilized by the pastorate, being far too deferential. It is certainly time that members of the congregation rightly assert their role and duties.
Thanks, Justin. That is great to hear. Drive them to deliver!
I really appreciate this article, sir. All these are excellent recommendations.
If a church or school group just "trusts each other," well and good. But then it should be simple and emotionally/socially unburdensome to "prove" it by the adoption of clear protocol. In fact, the trust should go *up* post a dispassionate implementation of standard measures. Removing uncertainty increases peace and eases consciences. It works in doctrine and in practice!
It might feel like "we're all family" in certain churches and communities, but the fact remains that none of those groups of such sentiment literally live under the same roof in the same building.
Combining multiple roofs under "living conditions" like travel, overnights, special events/parties, etc. logically creates a third "roof" over everyone: the "roof of the household of God," if you will. These protocols are simply the "house rules" of the bigger, combined roof. Very reasonable, very rational, and ultimately, logically necessary.
This is one of the reasons that I, as a pastor, do not participate myself in youth events/retreats/conferences. I ask parents to go as the chaperones and I stay home and write my sermon.
First, because we live in a society that is eager to accuse clergy.
Second, because pastors should not do anything that could open the door for accusation (not that this is completely avoidable, but everything he can do he should).
Third, because pastors don't have to be involved with every activity to which the youth attend.
If I must go, I will get my own hotel room and likely in a different hotel (I have a dog that comes with me).
These days pastors have to be extra careful to protect themselves. A person could get upset at a pastor for no good reason and turn around and accuse the pastor of something horrible out of spite.
I have a camera in my office/study for when I'm doing counseling, so should anyone accuse me of anything, I can have a defense. The camera is right there where anyone can see it and I tell them that I record, especially if it's a female. We never want to show impropriety.
However this situation turns out, prayers for the district and the LCMS, for Mohr's family and for the families of the alleged victims. Pastors, do your due diligence! Make sure no one can accuse you of anything. Be above reproach; be mindful of where you put your hands and what your eyes see. I won't go so far as to say don't play video games, but be mindful of the type of games you play, that they aren't tempting you to do horrible things. If you're married, stay close to your wife. Be sure you have a Father Confessor with whom you can confess your sins and struggles. If you are single as I am, suffer all the more that you do not frequent the bars or clubs, but spend your "me time" praying the Catechism or reading the Psalms rather than hitting Facebook or worse.
Remember your baptism! Focus your time on sermon prep, bible study prep, visiting your shut-ins and the sick, and keeping yourself occupied. Put the freakin' cellphone down -- lose it like I do for a day every once in a while.
Well done, pastor. Wise advice. God bless your labors in service to the gospel.
Dear Tim,
As I told you privately yesterday, I truly do appreciate you, AC retail, and AC News. And I think you have many good suggestions in the post. I especially commend the bullet list just under the bolded "Let's start here..." However, I think you're committing some errors in this editorial. These criticisms are offered in good faith.
1) This event *must* cause congregations, schools, youth orgs, etc. to reassess policies and procedures. Anytime an abuse occurs this should happen. But I fear your insisted-upon timeline and elevated rhetoric are going to inflame increased distrust in the pastors of Christ's Church, other church workers, etc. (Which is already a great temptation in a situation such as this.) We should not tempt Christ's people to distrust those charged with keeping watch over their souls. I believe that is not your intent. But that is the effect.
2) If your elevated rhetoric and insisted rapid timeline are due to you having private and well-founded cause for widespread alarm, then I urge you to *stop posting* and instead spend your time personally reaching out to DPs directly. Take a week or two (or however long) to do that. Take another week or two to let them handle matters. Follow up. Then, perhaps, post. Otherwise you are akin to someone in one of the small towns that Mohr served making a public comment to a Lutheran parishioner in the grocery store, "I always knew it." Well, then, why didn't you say something?
3) Regarding how widespread abusers might be, statistically speaking, I think this analysis by Lyman Stone is very helpful. These are sobering matters. We should approach our consideration of them sober-mindedly. (And note the observation of the recently undertaken and ultimately ineffectual and not particular helpful Southern Baptist clergy sexual abuse project) https://x.com/lymanstoneky/status/2017007598524850419
4) You are accusing men of social media grieving rather than action. Though I likewise find social media grieving distasteful, it is not correlative with inaction. Just poor taste.
Brother, I rejoice to receive Christ's Body and Blood together with you tomorrow, from afar, along with all the company of heaven.
-Rev. Michael Schuermann
Thank you, pastor.
1. I regret to report that LCMS clergy (and the establishment surrounding) are earning the distrust. We have been very public about having the ear of the laity - we hear a great deal through business interactions and the publishing arm. Our "ear" spans all 50 states (58 if you count the Canadian provinces and territories). There is widespread dissatisfaction and alarm about the apparent insouciance and lack of urgency in addressing a range of small and large problems. The people in the pews are tired of the soft, soothing words that all is well when attendance has crashed 50% in 25 years.
I greatly fear the divide between laity and clergy, but I'm merely the messenger, not an activist who generated it. It is very unhealthy, but only the clergy have the power to fix this. You guys control all the top levels with a sprinkling of laymen here and there. It is the collars making the final decisions, and so you bear the most responsibility.
Here's one illustrative issue that ENRAGES the laity we interact with: Lutheran Family Services Rocky Mountains trades on the full faith and credit of the LCMS as an RSO in good standing, yet it was marketing foster kids and adoptions at a pride festival in Greeley. That RSO has multiple failed audits, citing shocking deficiencies. Nothing has been done about it because "contracts" and "procedures".
We constantly see messages fluffing Synod tail feathers about "Our Great Theology™" and how we revere the Bible and being "Book of Concord Lutherans". It's half-truths if you examine the facts, and I am sorry that it has to be splashed about publicly, but so it is.
On Monday, we will publish a survey asking readers to rate our coverage; no holds barred. The results will be very interesting.
2. As demonstrated with the Southeastern District scandal, we gave everyone a heads up on both sides of the aisle and in the middle of the aisle, to little avail. We are not going to spring any hidden camera surprises on the DPs. However, once we make contact and present the evidence, how will they respond? It will be fascinating to see if they take umbrage like Harmon. In the meantime, I urge them to be Chief Theological Officers. There is no district so healthy that DPs should travel abroad with offering plate dollars - stay home and help get the house in order, please.
3. I was statistically cautious in saying there is a probability of more; not high, not low. Lyman is thrilled that we are below this and that rate of abuse. Great. The actual standard is ZERO. We get to zero by actively pursuing measures whose purpose is zero. Synod leadership missed a significant opportunity by not implementing an emergency call to action that demanded what I have recommended. It is incomprehensible that it did not happen on the same day as the first announcement.
4. I'm not accusing grievers of failing to take action. I am accusing them of emotional incontinence. Get a grip, guys! This is not about you! The greatest sin in the LCMS is apparently NBN - Not Being Nice. The days of rug sweeping and endless theses are over - let's confront the problems with honesty and sincerity, and not worry about shouty words.
We will go to the rail tomorrow in your spiritual company, but with less confidence that the confession LCMS Lutes are meant to share is truly shared. However, we will trust in the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, not our fears or rationalizations.
I must applaud this reply because there are so many individuals who desperately do not want to hear the truth on these issues, but who need to hear it, without apology. Thank you, Ad Crucem, for speaking the truth, despite the resistance in a variety of forms, that predictably will continue to be aimed at you when you tell the truth the people in charge don’t want to hear.
I apologize I'm so tardy in replying.
1) I agree that unfortunately there is far too much *earned* distrust in the Synod. But there is also too much *unearned* distrust – guilt by association, as it were. My voiced concern has to do with the danger of encouraging unnecessary unearned distrust.
Could you point me anywhere that links distrust as a substantial factor in our membership losses? I suspect it's a part of the problem. Though I wonder if it's being overblown, and how much? Truly, I just don't know and I am curious as to any data that's out there. I would love to see more on this.
The RSO you cite is in fact very concerning, and I note that they currently remain an RSO. I perused their website and I have some concerns with what I see there. You might be aware that I am a member of the LCMS Board for National Mission. (Though I am not writing in that capacity here. All of these thoughts are only my own and I am not speaking for the Board nor the LCMS in my comments.) Nevertheless, the BNM does have policy oversight for granting RSO status within the US in regards to alignment and augmentation of the mission and ministry of the Synod (bylaw 6.2.3(b)), so I'm going to inquire about this issue. Just a note: for financial and governance issues with RSOs, that falls under the policy-setting authority of the LCMS Board of Directors (bylaw 6.2.3(a)).
2) I am thankful for your voice on the LCMS SE District issue.
3) I agree that our goal for instances of clergy abuse is zero. I don't know if it is realistic to expect that we can have procedures that achieve that. I don't mean to be defeatist in saying that, and welcome pushback. But I find it to be the case that over-legislating procedures and processes can frustrate the work of the ministry. Obviously, it's finding the right balance. I think it's fair for you to say that we don't have that balance, currently. Though I wonder if it's less a matter of policies and procedures and more a matter of the appropriate people *doing the work* of oversight, visitation, etc.?
Re: your comment here: https://www.adcrucem.news/p/do-not-wait-for-synod-leadership/comment/208905897 – you raise a good point that resignations for cause that do not rise to the point of criminal charges or convictions, etc. would not necessarily factor into the statistics that Lyman cites. So we might be celebrating something that only *appears* favorable. Only transparency in resignations for cause will help correct that.
Reverend, I fear you underestimate how much distrust already existed before this. I've distrusted much of the LCMS leadership and a fair number of outer organization pastors since even before LCACA revealed some of the real rot within the organization, and certainly since this event revealed that said rot has real consequences. Something like this, and a call to move as quickly as possible to do as much as possible to prevent this sort of thing from easily happening, will not inflame distrust (at least not remotely to the level that the behavior of leadership already has), and would be a good sign of actually doing something worthwhile instead of chest puffing and words with no action that seems to be the common 'solution' by the LCMS.
With regard the statics. Lyman's data produces a clergy sexual offense *conviction* about once every 13-14 months. That will significantly undercount cases in which people are allowed to quietly resign because there is reasonable suspicion but not enough evidence to reach a verdict. Likewise, statutes of limitations can be exceeded in some sexual abuse cases depending on jurisdiction, despite the fairly recent trend to eliminate expiration for felony sexual offenses.
All that said, if we use an example of two clergy arrested and charged with identical alleged offenses within two days of each other, the odds are only 1 in ~3,040 based on Lyman's data. Not even close to lightning striking twice in the same place. So, we must be cautious not to be overly confident that a low rate of conviction relative to selected cohorts means we could not see clusters of cases that defy the simple odds.
This begs the question as to whether overnight trips should even be taken. The logistics is overwhelming. Also, sexual impropriety and pressure can come from peers, not only those in authority.
Remember when the 8th Commandment was about lying, not kindness?
The sermonette you dug up and dusted off is astounding. It sounds just like the sermon we hear at our parish nearly every week. I listened to it three times and pulled up last Sunday's sermon (Transfiguration) just to be sure.
And it's the same. Same structure, same thematic development, same rhetorical pivots, same pacing, same vague psychologized Law that hits everything and nothing all at once, same cross -> Baptism -> Lord's Supper home stretch, same everything. This is the exact sermon we hear almost every week, regardless of the appointed readings (which are really only a hook for The One Sermon, anyway).
Incredible.
Please help me out and explain in detail where the sermonette goes off the rails. I'm not disagreeing with you at all-it did sound "off" to me, but it would be helpful to know exactly where it goes wrong and what should have been said instead.
Hi Ellen, please don’t feel bad for not pinpointing it. The problem is very subtle and we have been conditioned to this type of preaching. I am going to leave the analysis for a while to allow it to circulate and percolate a little longer.
Done percolating yet?
Is the analysis STILL circulating and percolating??? The sermonette (aside from the Scripture reading) was only about 2-1/2 minutes long. How long does an analysis for that sort of thing take to circulate and percolate? I'm not defending Mr. Mohr at all, I'm just very curious about your take on the sermonette.
Via an expert, a concise diagnosis:
"Law" - we want purpose and victory
"Gospel" - only Jesus has purpose and victory
Correction - Christ gives us purpose and victory over sin through His purposeful victory
----
Please also listen to an audio excerpt from a recent episode of a Brief History of Power that I am going to load into the same note shortly.
No, that’s fair. I serve on a Lutheran school board across town from you and this has my full support. I know first hand the cronyism, lawyerly cowardice, and overall moral injury that is caused by what you name here. Let’s do it.
Thank you, pastor. We appreciate your witness and service.
There's been plenty written about this and other incidences and I have to say this article is one of the better pieces I've come across. Thank you for taking the time to thoroughly list the ideas of what can be implimented. I can say with confidence my church already does many of the things you suggest, and it's likely others do as well. But a broad reminder to put a refresher on practice is excellent and you've essentially offered us a free "copy and paste" outline. Thank you for this!
Thank you, Rosalie. Many churches and institutions do have policies in place, but we must ensure, as you say, that they are refreshed, and constantly managed. I am of the view now that every church constitution should include a board or elder role for “Safeguarding” so that there is a responsible and accountable person.
Many good comments posted. My thoughts thus far.
First, I hesitated to post anything last evening for fear of an 8th commandment violation timeout. Yes, there is an urgency to getting something done. Thanks for recognizing it. As time passes, the "let it go" feeling increases. I am 68 years old. I have seen many things just slide by. I remember hearing about Luther saying that if you lose private confession you will never get it back. I understand and believe that more and more each year. Why is it that pastors don't enjoy the same trust and respect that they did years ago. I could write and write on that. I know it is not right but many folks do lump all pastors together.
Second, I agree with some folks that say synod establishment is not transparent, willing to share, slow to act and react. Along the same lines, I feel there tends to be a strong brotherhood of the men with the collars. I believe that it is more than just an appearance of such.
Third, here are a few more suggestions. How about some pastors publicly getting off facebook, sharing the number of hours spent on the computer each week with their elders, do we really need so many blogs and podcasts. My thought is that time could be much better spent paging through the congregation pictorial directory and praying for those in each family picture. Perhaps it would be even better to go to the back of the directory and pray for those listed but not in pictures. A phone call or home visit might even be better. Pastors, honestly, when was your last home visit just to get to know a member of your flock a little better.
Fourth, if nothing else, this article has provided the needed push to get this congregation chairman to put the whole concept of a review of how things are done on the next church council meeting.
Thank you, Dave. Very wise words and thank you for taking it to your leadership for consideration.
I love this. Spot on.
Regarding current events in the LCMS, I have a couple of concerns......
1.) What steps will synod take to ensure that the LCMS and/or its districts do not share the same fate as the Roman Catholic dioceses? How many Roman Catholic dioceses have declared bankruptcy due to abuse? How many of them have ignored the abuse instead of taking steps to deal with their problems and work to prevent new incidents from occurring? I have included a Roman Catholic watchdog link not to brag "At least we are not like Rome!", but to serve as a warning to LCMS synod and district officials. Does the LCMS really want a reputation of abuse that discourages non-Lutherans from joining it?
https://www.complicitclergy.com/2018/12/15/u-s-dioceses-declaring-bankruptcy/
2.) Below is a summary of my experiences with LCMS congregations. I am sure this is "old news" for you. Here you go:
LCMS theology is the best, but the laymen treat their congregations like private country clubs. Each LCMS congregation is run by prominent local families "with the right last names." Beware of the twelve toxic Boomer women and their allies, who are the real leaders of the congregation. As a visitor, you are sized up by the lay leaders on whether or not you will fit in. If a couple of "the wrong people" decide they don't "like" you, you will be shunned, gossiped about, and harassed. Want to volunteer in an LCMS congregation? Assume a position of leadership or criticize leadership, and you have set yourself up as a target. The best you can hope for is to be ignored.
Adam Koontz describes the toxic culture of LCMS congregations. Who wants to be sucked into the rabid politics inside an LCMS congregation? More abuse. A thicket of idols, indeed!
https://abriefhistoryofpower.com/brief28-out-from-the-thicket-of-idols/
wow, i have seen this in action. Not pretty and pretty discouraging
SERIOUSLY? I knew I had joined a horrible congregation. All I would need to do is church shop for another LCMS congregation within a 25 mile radius, join that one, and all would be well - right?
Once I realized that the "country club" behavior is the norm for LCMS congregations, and once I discovered that leaders such as Adam Koontz and Tim Wood are sounding the alarm that this is a serious problem all over the LCMS, I was placed in a dilemma. I could not just "leave" one toxic LCMS congregation without jumping into yet another toxic environment at a different toxic LCMS congregation.
If I had any sense, I would turn my back on Lutheran churches and go elsewhere. The problem is that the mainline churches with their "rainbow theologies" are out of the question. Even many Reformed and Evangelical/Baptist congregations are embracing "wokeness." For example, the PCA has a "non-practicing h0mosexual" on its clergy roster.
Where would I go? Even if I were to find a conservative Bible church out in the middle of a cornfield, I just cannot get myself to embrace strange things such as the rapture, "inviting Jebus into my heart," double-predestination, you cannot lose your salvation, and total immersion baptism.
I suppose I could become just like most Roman Catholics and show up for church twice a year, but I would miss communion too much.
The fact that Lutheran leaders would rather prefer to erect and knock down Christian Nationalist strawmen instead of solving decades-long rot in LCMS congregations is astounding.
All well and good if there are many LCMS congregations from which to choose in your area. My friend, I chose the best of those in my area. Feminism abounds, but the new (10 year) pastor has done his best stopping many Fem practices.
In the Midwest, we have too many small and struggling congregations located within a 25-50 mile radius. Such congregations should sell property, merge, and centralize. I understand that in other parts of the country, it is rare to find an LCMS church - especially a liturgical one. So we have two extremes. I get it. You have to go where you can find a congregation, or not attend a Lutheran church at all!
Where I am, I am seeing churches of all kinds still fall over themselves to imitate the non-denominational megachurches. Granted that the mainlines are dying out at the fastest rate of all church bodies, advocating for the feminist mindset in a Lutheran congregation seems suicidal.
Right. Feminism kills families, marriage(s), and churches.
Feminism is an abomination in EVERY way. I often speak with women in my congregation about the evil of feminism and am shocked that so many of us do not get it.
^^^THIS. Without the traditional family, there is no Church.