Wow isnt this pretty remarkable? Following this from afar, but I would have guessed that after the surprise last round that a Harrison push would finish this up.
Sure, some (or many?) people may not like Matt Harrison, but the alternative is much worse. I am not looking forward to watching the LCMS return to the Kieschnick years. Why would the LCMS want to transition into a non-denominational church?
You don't get to be a Synod President for 5 terms without being popular, and we need to recognize that reality. I think the most distilled analysis of what has happened is that President Harrison tacked toward the center (from the hard right relative to Kieschnick) with each election, and then he ran into a center-left candidate, Joel Biermann, whom people are unable to distinguish from MH at this point. MH failed to conserve the bloc sitting in Ben Ball's corner.
Biermann would / will be a disaster, but not because he is taking the Synod back to 2000. He has no scaled administrative experience, so he will be heavily dependent on a shadow cabinet drawn from the most overwrought places in the Synod. Meanwhile, the convention playbook is pretty much set. There will be very few genuinely contested resolutions, so Biermann will be a functional lame duck for more than a first term
If I may please lightly push back a bit. For many of us young conservative generation, Harrison really does seem indistinguishable from Biermann. It's not like for the past 16 years of Harrison's presidency have we seen any mass crackdown on open communion, contemporary worship, etc.
Harrison might say a lot of "conservative" things out-loud, but sometimes it what he says comes off as being a bit lip-servicey, no action ever follows. Granted, it's not like the president has all of the power to make actions either. But for all intents and purposes, Harrison and Biermann could very well be lock-step in agreement together. After all, the two of them both serve as pastors at the very same church is Village Lutheran in St. Louis.
In terms of being center-left, both Harrison and Biermann appear indistinguishable but Biermann has the unique popularity of being a seminary professor. A lot of young men know him personally. If you ask any young man in our Synod what is this biggest difficulty he is facing, he will probably say is family formation. Biermann as a seminary professor works with young men for a living, and he seems to at least be somewhat a little understanding as indicated in the recent On the Line podcast, where he very briefly mentioned this.
Most young men, me included, probably find Ball to be the most agreeable candidate. He is conservative in doctrine, traditional in worship, and has a very good track record history; his church is St. Paul's Hamel and has really healthy family formation rates and classical education program for children. But practically speaking, Ball is not in election. So between Harrison and Biermann, a lot of young men feel Biermann is slightly more preferable.
Anyways, thank you to Ad Crucem for all the reporting you have been doing. I have been subscribed since the very beginning. Recently I bought a new Book of Concord title page from the woodshop and I absolutely love it!!
Thank you Ad Crucem and team, also love the Kelly's angled crucifix so much that I came back and bought a second one. But recently I think it's been removed from the catalog? I hope you guys bring it back.
Thank you for those thoughts. I've been convinced that the push for Biermann can't be all from former Kieschnick supporters and the like (how could they possibly be so large these days?), and I don't suppose I know of much reason to oppose him in comparison to Harrison, except for the fact that part of the push for him is from former Kieschnick supporters and the like (as a CUAA grad who's been following that sad scenario, it's especially sad how many bitter CUAA devotees, who refuse to acknowledge that the institution had serious theological and economic weaknesses for years, think that Biermann is the clear solution to all of Synod's mission woes, as if he will promote the Michigan District's vision of church growth).
So when I don't/can't vote for Ball (depending on which round that happens), can I stomach an 'alliance' with those folks, even if they're delusional, just because I wish Harrison would do better? And then where does that leave us in three years?
Didn’t see this coming, or at least hoped it wouldn’t. If Harrison loses it will cast a shadow over the convention and all of the progress made over his first four terms. I really can’t believe this voting. It really shows that the number of heterodox among us is larger than I thought. Not even sure I want to be a member of a synod that wouldn’t re-elect a Matt Harrison.
There are other, smaller synods, including ELDoNA, ULMA (United Lutheran Mission Association), LCR (Lutheran Churches of the Reformation), CLM (Confessional Lutheran Ministerium), COELC (Confessional Orthodox Evangelical Lutheran Communion), CLC (Concordia Lutheran Conference), and CLC (Church of the Lutheran Confession). There may be others I'm missing, but these would be some alternatives.
If you think Biermann should not be president, and it’s worth leaving the synod over, do you think he should also not be a professor in the St. Louis seminary? Also, are you potentially bringing your church out of the synod or are you going to leave your home church (which is presumably a good church)?
One election, whatever the final result is, cannot change the course the Synod is on for several cycles.
We must be charitable and Christian about these matters. Biermann's voters are not heretics or heterodox, though some might be. It's not the Synod that goes to heaven, it's the people.
A key detail that needs attention is the voter turnout - the first ballot had 4,676 votes (85.4% of electorate), the second 4,842 votes (88.4% of electorate). As a result, the raw vote totals prove more helpful than the percentages, as it wasn't simply a matter of shifting votes from the first ballot, but also of votes from those who didn't participate in the first ballot.
Vote totals from first to second round:
Total: 4,676 -> 4,842 (+166)
Harrison: 2,050 ->2,243 (+193)
Biermann: 1,822 -> 2,229 (+407)
Ball: 371 ->212 (-159)
Finnern: 321 -> 158 (-163)
Lange: 112
If you add together the Lange total and Ball defections between rounds, 271 votes result, which probably accounts for most of the 193 new Harrison votes. Assuming that some unknown number of voters voted for Harrison in the first but not at all in the second ballot, it seems likely that most of Biermann's increase in support came from Finnern defections and the 166 new ballots cast.
My suspicion is that the remainder of Ball's vote is a Harrison protest vote and will (eventually) move to Harrison, which is more than enough to reach 50%, but there may also be a number of people who consider forgo voting in the final round if it comes down to a choice between Harrison and Biermann. The biggest question is not so much where votes move, but if turnout holds up in the next round, and, if it does, who turns out. Either way, we're in for another week of uncertainty over razor thin margins. It's like the NBA Finals all over again.
It looks like Lange's 1st ballot votes (112), as well as some of the votes for Ball and Finnern got split between Harrison and Biermann. Also there were 166 more votes cast in the 2nd ballot than in the 1st ballot.
Changes in the 2nd ballot voting:
Harrison: +193
Biermann: +407
Ball: -159
Finnern: -163
In the 3rd ballot, even if Biermann gets all of Finnern's votes (and no other votes from previous nonvoters are cast) neither Biermann or Harrison will have a majority vote.
In a 4th ballot assuming all of Ball's votes go to Harrison, he will then have 50.7% of the votes, assuming no more votes come in from previously nonvoting delegates.
On the other hand, if, for the 3rd ballot, Biermann supporters (in addition to getting Finnern's 2nd ballot votes) can scrape up 69 more votes among authorized voting delegates who had not previously voted, Biermann will win with 50.01% of the vote.
From Bylaw 3.12.2.3, a congregation has to select the authorized voting delegates 90 days before the election of the President. Thus it would seem, unless elections are held like Chicago political elections, no late registered voters would be allowed from congregations that had not already sent in the name(s) of the authorized voter(s).
Wow isnt this pretty remarkable? Following this from afar, but I would have guessed that after the surprise last round that a Harrison push would finish this up.
It's very unexpected for most people.
Question about lay voting, is there a way I can contact you?
Please DM @adcrm through the Substack app
Sure, some (or many?) people may not like Matt Harrison, but the alternative is much worse. I am not looking forward to watching the LCMS return to the Kieschnick years. Why would the LCMS want to transition into a non-denominational church?
You don't get to be a Synod President for 5 terms without being popular, and we need to recognize that reality. I think the most distilled analysis of what has happened is that President Harrison tacked toward the center (from the hard right relative to Kieschnick) with each election, and then he ran into a center-left candidate, Joel Biermann, whom people are unable to distinguish from MH at this point. MH failed to conserve the bloc sitting in Ben Ball's corner.
Biermann would / will be a disaster, but not because he is taking the Synod back to 2000. He has no scaled administrative experience, so he will be heavily dependent on a shadow cabinet drawn from the most overwrought places in the Synod. Meanwhile, the convention playbook is pretty much set. There will be very few genuinely contested resolutions, so Biermann will be a functional lame duck for more than a first term
If I may please lightly push back a bit. For many of us young conservative generation, Harrison really does seem indistinguishable from Biermann. It's not like for the past 16 years of Harrison's presidency have we seen any mass crackdown on open communion, contemporary worship, etc.
Harrison might say a lot of "conservative" things out-loud, but sometimes it what he says comes off as being a bit lip-servicey, no action ever follows. Granted, it's not like the president has all of the power to make actions either. But for all intents and purposes, Harrison and Biermann could very well be lock-step in agreement together. After all, the two of them both serve as pastors at the very same church is Village Lutheran in St. Louis.
In terms of being center-left, both Harrison and Biermann appear indistinguishable but Biermann has the unique popularity of being a seminary professor. A lot of young men know him personally. If you ask any young man in our Synod what is this biggest difficulty he is facing, he will probably say is family formation. Biermann as a seminary professor works with young men for a living, and he seems to at least be somewhat a little understanding as indicated in the recent On the Line podcast, where he very briefly mentioned this.
Most young men, me included, probably find Ball to be the most agreeable candidate. He is conservative in doctrine, traditional in worship, and has a very good track record history; his church is St. Paul's Hamel and has really healthy family formation rates and classical education program for children. But practically speaking, Ball is not in election. So between Harrison and Biermann, a lot of young men feel Biermann is slightly more preferable.
Anyways, thank you to Ad Crucem for all the reporting you have been doing. I have been subscribed since the very beginning. Recently I bought a new Book of Concord title page from the woodshop and I absolutely love it!!
That's great insight, thank you for sharing, Jacob. Thank you for reading and for your business.
Thank you Ad Crucem and team, also love the Kelly's angled crucifix so much that I came back and bought a second one. But recently I think it's been removed from the catalog? I hope you guys bring it back.
Many of Kelly's items are one-offs, but we will pass on the message and see if she intends to make more of them.
Thank you for those thoughts. I've been convinced that the push for Biermann can't be all from former Kieschnick supporters and the like (how could they possibly be so large these days?), and I don't suppose I know of much reason to oppose him in comparison to Harrison, except for the fact that part of the push for him is from former Kieschnick supporters and the like (as a CUAA grad who's been following that sad scenario, it's especially sad how many bitter CUAA devotees, who refuse to acknowledge that the institution had serious theological and economic weaknesses for years, think that Biermann is the clear solution to all of Synod's mission woes, as if he will promote the Michigan District's vision of church growth).
So when I don't/can't vote for Ball (depending on which round that happens), can I stomach an 'alliance' with those folks, even if they're delusional, just because I wish Harrison would do better? And then where does that leave us in three years?
Happy season of happenings.
Nothing ever happens, they say.
Didn’t see this coming, or at least hoped it wouldn’t. If Harrison loses it will cast a shadow over the convention and all of the progress made over his first four terms. I really can’t believe this voting. It really shows that the number of heterodox among us is larger than I thought. Not even sure I want to be a member of a synod that wouldn’t re-elect a Matt Harrison.
What’s your alternative? WELS? ELS?
There are other, smaller synods, including ELDoNA, ULMA (United Lutheran Mission Association), LCR (Lutheran Churches of the Reformation), CLM (Confessional Lutheran Ministerium), COELC (Confessional Orthodox Evangelical Lutheran Communion), CLC (Concordia Lutheran Conference), and CLC (Church of the Lutheran Confession). There may be others I'm missing, but these would be some alternatives.
If you think Biermann should not be president, and it’s worth leaving the synod over, do you think he should also not be a professor in the St. Louis seminary? Also, are you potentially bringing your church out of the synod or are you going to leave your home church (which is presumably a good church)?
One election, whatever the final result is, cannot change the course the Synod is on for several cycles.
We must be charitable and Christian about these matters. Biermann's voters are not heretics or heterodox, though some might be. It's not the Synod that goes to heaven, it's the people.
A key detail that needs attention is the voter turnout - the first ballot had 4,676 votes (85.4% of electorate), the second 4,842 votes (88.4% of electorate). As a result, the raw vote totals prove more helpful than the percentages, as it wasn't simply a matter of shifting votes from the first ballot, but also of votes from those who didn't participate in the first ballot.
Vote totals from first to second round:
Total: 4,676 -> 4,842 (+166)
Harrison: 2,050 ->2,243 (+193)
Biermann: 1,822 -> 2,229 (+407)
Ball: 371 ->212 (-159)
Finnern: 321 -> 158 (-163)
Lange: 112
If you add together the Lange total and Ball defections between rounds, 271 votes result, which probably accounts for most of the 193 new Harrison votes. Assuming that some unknown number of voters voted for Harrison in the first but not at all in the second ballot, it seems likely that most of Biermann's increase in support came from Finnern defections and the 166 new ballots cast.
My suspicion is that the remainder of Ball's vote is a Harrison protest vote and will (eventually) move to Harrison, which is more than enough to reach 50%, but there may also be a number of people who consider forgo voting in the final round if it comes down to a choice between Harrison and Biermann. The biggest question is not so much where votes move, but if turnout holds up in the next round, and, if it does, who turns out. Either way, we're in for another week of uncertainty over razor thin margins. It's like the NBA Finals all over again.
I didn't have praying for Harrison's reelection on my 2026 bingo card.
It looks like Lange's 1st ballot votes (112), as well as some of the votes for Ball and Finnern got split between Harrison and Biermann. Also there were 166 more votes cast in the 2nd ballot than in the 1st ballot.
Changes in the 2nd ballot voting:
Harrison: +193
Biermann: +407
Ball: -159
Finnern: -163
In the 3rd ballot, even if Biermann gets all of Finnern's votes (and no other votes from previous nonvoters are cast) neither Biermann or Harrison will have a majority vote.
In a 4th ballot assuming all of Ball's votes go to Harrison, he will then have 50.7% of the votes, assuming no more votes come in from previously nonvoting delegates.
It is going to a fourth round.
On the other hand, if, for the 3rd ballot, Biermann supporters (in addition to getting Finnern's 2nd ballot votes) can scrape up 69 more votes among authorized voting delegates who had not previously voted, Biermann will win with 50.01% of the vote.
From Bylaw 3.12.2.3, a congregation has to select the authorized voting delegates 90 days before the election of the President. Thus it would seem, unless elections are held like Chicago political elections, no late registered voters would be allowed from congregations that had not already sent in the name(s) of the authorized voter(s).