LCMS Convention matters:

A snippet regarding change in by-laws for LCMS president oversight:

Praesidium responds to concerns
posed by former CCM members
 An open letter to the Synod by three former members of the Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM) has recently been widely disseminated. These are brothers in Christ, respected fellow members of the Synod, who are entitled to their opinions regarding the election of the President—as is every member of the Synod. However, we also ask that all the members of the Synod prayerfully and with open minds consider the following information.


What precipitated the need for taking a look at the dispute resolution process as it currently exists in our Bylaws?

The suggestion to examine the current Bylaws on dispute resolution came from President Harrison when the system had exonerated a pastor who was publicly and aggressively teaching that the Bible has errors, that women should be ordained, that homosexual activity is not sinful, and that evolution is true. Prior to all of this, President Harrison had patiently arranged for this man’s dissent regarding A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles (which rejected the errors of Seminex and was adopted by convention as official Synod doctrine in 1973) to be considered by the CTCR. After the CTCR unanimously rejected the dissent, President Harrison—in a spirit of patience, and hoping to win the brother—requested that the CTCR staff (the Rev. Dr. Joel Lehenbauer and the Rev. Larry Vogel) and two seminary professors serving on the CTCR (one from each seminary) meet privately to try again to win the brother. All efforts failed. After the brother’s exoneration by a panel, a new case was filed regarding his teachings on evolution. As a result of this last case, however, the individual in question was removed from the Synod. It was in this context, after some five years dealing with the problem, that President Harrison appointed a task force to examine the current Bylaws and make recommendations for improvement.

Read it all: http://www.lcms.org/emailviewonwebpage.aspx?erid=11106479&trid=c275b8c2-82ee-402d-838a-7ff4e26822a7

Bible Important?

Quote:

Here are the stats plainly listed for you:

  • 42% of American Christians find “reading the Bible/religious materials” to be an essential part of what it means to be a Christian.
  • 35% of American Christians find “attending religious services” to be an essential part of what it means to be a Christian.
  • 28% of American Christians find “helping out in congregation” to be an essential part of being a Christian.

Now, if you’re like me, you may think what I thought at first, “Well, to be fair, the way the question is asked, maybe the respondents think ‘essential’ means “necessary for salvation.” That’s a fair point. Christians don’t need to be saying reading the Bible daily, attending church weekly, or teaching a Sunday school class is essential for salvation—so, in that way, these actions aren’t “essential.”

That may be the case. But these statistics are evidence of an epidemic Christian leaders have recognized for some time: American Christianity has been hijacked by the individual at the expense of the whole.

Majority of American Christians Do Not Find Bible Reading and Church Attendance Essential

 

More culture wars….

More from Moehler:

“When God is dead,” argued Dostoyevsky, “anything is permissible.” The permissiveness of modern American society can scarcely be exaggerated, but it can be traced directly to the fact that modern men and women act as if God does not exist, or is powerless to accomplish His will.

The Christian church now finds itself facing a new reality. The church no longer represents the central core of Western culture. Though outposts of Christian influence remain, these are exceptions rather than the rule. For the most part, the church has been displaced by the reign of secularism.

The daily newspaper brings a constant barrage which confirms the current state of American society. This age is not the first to see unspeakable horror and evil, but it is the first to deny any consistent basis for identifying evil as evil or good as good.

Read it all:

Keeping the Faith in A Faithless Age: the Church as a Moral Minority

Culture wars

Culture wars. Have Christians lost?

quote:

But in the most crucial section of his essay, Professor Tushnet delivers the ultimatum to the losing side in the culture conflict, including evangelical Christians — “You lost, deal with it.” To his fellow revolutionaries Tushnet announces, “The culture wars are over; they lost, we won.  Then he goes for the kill in making his argument:

For liberals, the question now is how to deal with the losers in the culture wars. That’s mostly a question of tactics. My own judgment is that taking a hard line (“You lost, live with it”) is better than trying to accommodate the losers, who – remember – defended, and are defending, positions that liberals regard as having no normative pull at all. Trying to be nice to the losers didn’t work well after the Civil War, nor after Brown. (And taking a hard line seemed to work reasonably well in Germany and Japan after 1945.)

Read it all: http://www.albertmohler.com/2016/05/12/the-moral-revolutionaries-present-their-demands-unconditional-surrender/