Forgive me for any speculation but it looks like a classic case of a new pastor coming into a congregation that has strayed in error. He fixed said errors. Some congregants got mad they can’t keep doing what they were doing wrong and then went around the proper channels to oust their pastor. I know nothing of the Montana district but I know some of the western districts and coastal districts like to get a little loose with doctrine and practice.
Context will likely come at a later date. Ad Crucem is likely holding off to be as accurate as possible on the situation. I’m sure more will surface later this week considering his sermon was yesterday
I don't have any insight, but from his sermon linked, my assumption was that the faithful that were run out of the church are the ones who started Genesis Lutheran where Rv. Baseley went. As he said, he hasn't changed his confession, just that him (and presumably the faithful who were also run out) couldn't remain in the LCMS.
>>> In summer 2025, Wendt intervened, but Baseley rejected his directives, disputing the complaints and the district’s process.
You forgot the part about how the former district president intervened long before Wendt. They had poisoned the well against Baseley. Wendt threatened removal in his very first interaction with Baseley. Wendt- if you are reading this: repent.
I experienced something analogous to this one and I imagine that its happening all around the country as the institutions are destroyed. The faithfull get chased out by the faithless, leaving the pastor to choose between preaching to those who wont hear or to move along. The raging disavowel war about racism/ anti-semitism is going to turbo charge the young people's exit.
A "group of congregants"? How many was that out of Trinity's 196 baptized members and 154 confirmed members?
How many "concerns" were compiled? Less than a dozen? More than two dozen? Rev. Baseley showed a copy of the (1-page) petition during his November 2, 2025, sermon (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZiiEqxc6YY). Did the group of congregants give him a copy when meeting with him?
"Unilateral leadership"? "Reduced accessibility"? "Changes to long-standing customs?" These euphemisms are not alleged specifics and amount to little more than "Somebody said something about someone, without telling some others". Furthermore it appears there were no accusations of false doctrine.
If the petition concerns were submitted directly to the Montana DP, bypassing the Elders, who put them on the social media?!?
What were the DP's directives and why were they ignored by Rev. Baseley? Did the DP provide any directives to the Elders and congregational president or to the group of congregants that sent him the petition?!?
Since in typical Lutheran fashion, Ad Crucem is leaving out the important details you're rightly asking for, I'll tell you that 1) the "faction" is sizeable but started by a few loud and highly influential individuals, one of whom is a member of an LCMS board.
2) Yes, lots of lies and rumors behind closed doors. The faction operated in darkness. They were mostly mad because Baseley chose to condemn sin, especially sin that hit close to home, from the pulpit. 3) The faction didn't just all-of-a-sudden send a petition. They've been calling up the former DP long before this about any petty complaint they had. They never followed Matt 18. Never went to Baseley first. The petition was slander. And the people who signed it were proud. 4) Wendt picked his side. He asked Baseley to recant and remove his sermons, and apologize to those who heard them. As far as I know, no directives toward the congregation.
I don't have any insight into this incident, and it would be unfortunate if a faithful pastor was run out of the LCMS as a result. The parts that strike me in this comment is that this was led by a member of an LCMS board and operated in darkness. From other insight I have, there is a broad effort being taken in darkness to oppose faithful pastors and LCMS board members who aren't seen to be sufficiently in line with the administration. This seems to be motivated out of fear of losing power and influence due to a perception that "if we don't get them first, they are going to get us". I get the feeling that the increasing cracks in the facade that we on the outside have been seeing are only going to spread and get worse. I simply pray that the good and faithful congregants of LCMS congregations remain steadfast in their faith in Christ regardless of any tumult in the broader LCMS as all things work together for good.
How do you know none of us talked to Baseley first? When we did, we were ridiculed, yelled at, preached about from the pulpit and gaslighted to believe that "nobody else has a problem. You're the only one who has complained."
Read Matthew 18 and tell me you followed it with reconciliation in mind. Congrats for outing yourself on Ad Crucem. Now we know who signed the petition.
Yes, for over a year. It was also not a petition for removal. It was a list of concerns about how things were being neglected. I've got nothing to hide and have been done fighting for a long time now.
No, this is the first and probably last post unless there is a follow-up at the Synod or district level about what went on. There was clearly a terrible breakdown at every level, and we would hope that there is a proper "accident investigation" and report.
I hope so, but based on how the Synod has acted since Covid, I'm guessing this is just going under the rug so we can pretend that "we all walk together."
I noted above that while I don't know any more than you, my impression from the video and the youtube channel was that Genesis is the congregants that left with the pastor. I'm assuming they just started it up upon leaving LCMS and are unaffiliated, but perhaps we'll get more info soon.
Is this really an accurate or fair presentation of the situation? I’m curious. Just what were the charges? Did all the elders disagree with his departure?
We will, obviously, say that it is both accurate and fair to all the parties, and we did not take a view. No charges were brought, although we understand the situation was tracking toward filing formal charges on both sides.
This is definitely not the whole story. In all my years as a Lutheran, I have never had a pastor like this who yells and screams at people both privately and from the pulpit, who puts on theatrics and sows division rather than ever reaching out to his congregation.
Do you know him? Where are your two witnesses? And I suppose Jesus was also damned for flipping the tables? Grow up and look in the mirror if you want to learn about sowing division.
This seems like a tone complaint rather than a substantive response to gospel issues.
Could the reasons you have never seen this behavior before be that either A - no one has ever been brave enough to face the persecution from calling evil evil, or B - a man of God could not stand by while the sheep entrusted to his care were heading happily into eternal damnation and he needed to wake them up?
It is absolutely not a fair representation as it depicts a situation where a faithful pastor has been run out for his fidelity to God’s Word. That does happen in far too many congregations; that is not the case here and Ad Crucem should consider how they are stirring the pot and opening a cesspool of internet gossip with very few actual facts.
NP. I happily use AI for large-scale ingestion and parsing projects, along with Excel and other productivity tools. Ultimately, any of us who use digital tools are consuming and producing AI derivatives, and have been doing so for at least 30 years.
Anyone have any more info into what happened?
Have not previously heard anything about this. Curious.
Forgive me for any speculation but it looks like a classic case of a new pastor coming into a congregation that has strayed in error. He fixed said errors. Some congregants got mad they can’t keep doing what they were doing wrong and then went around the proper channels to oust their pastor. I know nothing of the Montana district but I know some of the western districts and coastal districts like to get a little loose with doctrine and practice.
Thought the same, but he is leaving the LCMS. But then, judging from his dress, I'd guess he's conservative.
Alright Ad Crucem... consider adding some context.
Context will likely come at a later date. Ad Crucem is likely holding off to be as accurate as possible on the situation. I’m sure more will surface later this week considering his sermon was yesterday
"but he is leaving the LCMS"
I don't have any insight, but from his sermon linked, my assumption was that the faithful that were run out of the church are the ones who started Genesis Lutheran where Rv. Baseley went. As he said, he hasn't changed his confession, just that him (and presumably the faithful who were also run out) couldn't remain in the LCMS.
>>> In summer 2025, Wendt intervened, but Baseley rejected his directives, disputing the complaints and the district’s process.
You forgot the part about how the former district president intervened long before Wendt. They had poisoned the well against Baseley. Wendt threatened removal in his very first interaction with Baseley. Wendt- if you are reading this: repent.
I experienced something analogous to this one and I imagine that its happening all around the country as the institutions are destroyed. The faithfull get chased out by the faithless, leaving the pastor to choose between preaching to those who wont hear or to move along. The raging disavowel war about racism/ anti-semitism is going to turbo charge the young people's exit.
A "group of congregants"? How many was that out of Trinity's 196 baptized members and 154 confirmed members?
How many "concerns" were compiled? Less than a dozen? More than two dozen? Rev. Baseley showed a copy of the (1-page) petition during his November 2, 2025, sermon (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZiiEqxc6YY). Did the group of congregants give him a copy when meeting with him?
"Unilateral leadership"? "Reduced accessibility"? "Changes to long-standing customs?" These euphemisms are not alleged specifics and amount to little more than "Somebody said something about someone, without telling some others". Furthermore it appears there were no accusations of false doctrine.
If the petition concerns were submitted directly to the Montana DP, bypassing the Elders, who put them on the social media?!?
What were the DP's directives and why were they ignored by Rev. Baseley? Did the DP provide any directives to the Elders and congregational president or to the group of congregants that sent him the petition?!?
Since in typical Lutheran fashion, Ad Crucem is leaving out the important details you're rightly asking for, I'll tell you that 1) the "faction" is sizeable but started by a few loud and highly influential individuals, one of whom is a member of an LCMS board.
2) Yes, lots of lies and rumors behind closed doors. The faction operated in darkness. They were mostly mad because Baseley chose to condemn sin, especially sin that hit close to home, from the pulpit. 3) The faction didn't just all-of-a-sudden send a petition. They've been calling up the former DP long before this about any petty complaint they had. They never followed Matt 18. Never went to Baseley first. The petition was slander. And the people who signed it were proud. 4) Wendt picked his side. He asked Baseley to recant and remove his sermons, and apologize to those who heard them. As far as I know, no directives toward the congregation.
It's unfair.
I don't have any insight into this incident, and it would be unfortunate if a faithful pastor was run out of the LCMS as a result. The parts that strike me in this comment is that this was led by a member of an LCMS board and operated in darkness. From other insight I have, there is a broad effort being taken in darkness to oppose faithful pastors and LCMS board members who aren't seen to be sufficiently in line with the administration. This seems to be motivated out of fear of losing power and influence due to a perception that "if we don't get them first, they are going to get us". I get the feeling that the increasing cracks in the facade that we on the outside have been seeing are only going to spread and get worse. I simply pray that the good and faithful congregants of LCMS congregations remain steadfast in their faith in Christ regardless of any tumult in the broader LCMS as all things work together for good.
How do you know none of us talked to Baseley first? When we did, we were ridiculed, yelled at, preached about from the pulpit and gaslighted to believe that "nobody else has a problem. You're the only one who has complained."
Read Matthew 18 and tell me you followed it with reconciliation in mind. Congrats for outing yourself on Ad Crucem. Now we know who signed the petition.
Yes, for over a year. It was also not a petition for removal. It was a list of concerns about how things were being neglected. I've got nothing to hide and have been done fighting for a long time now.
Is there a prior post? Is this an update? Im just trying to wrap an understanding around what happened.
No, this is the first and probably last post unless there is a follow-up at the Synod or district level about what went on. There was clearly a terrible breakdown at every level, and we would hope that there is a proper "accident investigation" and report.
I hope so, but based on how the Synod has acted since Covid, I'm guessing this is just going under the rug so we can pretend that "we all walk together."
Anyone know anything about the church he is going to, Genesis? Unaffiliated? AFLC?
I noted above that while I don't know any more than you, my impression from the video and the youtube channel was that Genesis is the congregants that left with the pastor. I'm assuming they just started it up upon leaving LCMS and are unaffiliated, but perhaps we'll get more info soon.
Church names that indicate the congregation could well be the result of a split:
Love
Peace
Faith
Genesis
Is this really an accurate or fair presentation of the situation? I’m curious. Just what were the charges? Did all the elders disagree with his departure?
We will, obviously, say that it is both accurate and fair to all the parties, and we did not take a view. No charges were brought, although we understand the situation was tracking toward filing formal charges on both sides.
This is definitely not the whole story. In all my years as a Lutheran, I have never had a pastor like this who yells and screams at people both privately and from the pulpit, who puts on theatrics and sows division rather than ever reaching out to his congregation.
Do you know him? Where are your two witnesses? And I suppose Jesus was also damned for flipping the tables? Grow up and look in the mirror if you want to learn about sowing division.
This seems like a tone complaint rather than a substantive response to gospel issues.
Could the reasons you have never seen this behavior before be that either A - no one has ever been brave enough to face the persecution from calling evil evil, or B - a man of God could not stand by while the sheep entrusted to his care were heading happily into eternal damnation and he needed to wake them up?
It is absolutely not a fair representation as it depicts a situation where a faithful pastor has been run out for his fidelity to God’s Word. That does happen in far too many congregations; that is not the case here and Ad Crucem should consider how they are stirring the pot and opening a cesspool of internet gossip with very few actual facts.
Hey Ad Crucem: did AI write this article? ZeroGPT is telling me it's 76.6% AI-generated...
LOL, no.
To be very clear, I rely on Grammarly to keep the spelling and grammar straight.
Ah! That must be what it is. Thanks for the clarification. Me and a few friends were curious.
NP. I happily use AI for large-scale ingestion and parsing projects, along with Excel and other productivity tools. Ultimately, any of us who use digital tools are consuming and producing AI derivatives, and have been doing so for at least 30 years.