Rev. Tim Johnson Presentation

The first presentation at the Failure of Dissent and New Beginnings Conference was by the Rev. Tim Johnson, pastor of Grace Lutheran Church, Dawson Creek, BC. His presentation will included:

• Brief critique of the convention decisions 
• Prerequisites for institutional church unity 
• A reaffirmation of the ultimate authority of the Scriptures for faith and life 
• A renewed emphasis on evangelism and world missions

View PDF of presentation

The Voice of a Dissident

Dr. Lothar Schwabe

Presented at the Solid Ground Conference “THE FAILURE OF DISSENT AND NEW BEGINNINGS”, Calgary, Sept. 21, 2011                                         

Take heart.  Be of good cheer

John 16: 33

“In this world you will have troubles. But take heart (be of good cheer, KJV) I have overcome the world.”

At this conference on “The Failure of Dissent and New Beginnings” I am with fellow dissidents who, like me, have failed to have our ELCIC remain loyal to the Bible and treat it as the only source of its doctrines and actions.

We are totally dependent on what God has chosen to reveal to us in what we know about God. That is why the Bible is so important for us.

I believe that our God is so enormous, so unimaginable, and so multi-dimensional that our human mind is incapable of objectively perceiving and analyzing God. We simply cannot comprehend God. I agree with Paul,

“Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” Ro. 11:33-34. (NIV)

God reveals himself to us in the inspired Word of God. That is all we have.

What God has revealed to us in Holy Scriptures does not even make much sense. It does not make sense to humans because it comes out of the mind of God which is far greater than any human can comprehend.

- Grace does not make sense.

- God’s love for sinners does not make any sense.

- Forgiveness does not make any sense.

- Miracles do not make any sense.

- Christ’s death on the cross for our sins does not make any sense.

- The Trinity does not make any sense.

- God’s mercy does not make any sense. The laws of nature do not reveal any mercy to us. Just try to jump off a twenty story building and hope for the law of gravity to show you some mercy.

Holy Scriptures have a message that is radical, amazing, and defies all human logic. Human wisdom could never come up with something like “Saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.”

What God has revealed to us often does not make any sense to us because God, like his peace, passes all understanding. We cannot comprehend this mind-boggling divine reality. We can only believe.

Actually, it is the heresies that make sense. All heresies are products of the human mind and therefore always make sense. Arians made sense in their claim that Jesus was just a human being. Antinomians make sense.

It also makes sense the church should be inclusive and not exclude homosexuals from being ordained, even though some parts of the Bible have something else to say about homosexuality. Jesus did not talk about homosexuality. Therefore it makes sense to ignore all that Jesus said about marriage being between a man and a woman. This all makes sense and sounds reasonable. The problem for us is that the revealed Word of God has something different to say about homosexuality.

Sin makes a lot of sense. It makes no sense to tell the truth all the time because it gets you into deep trouble. Greed makes sense and not only on Wall Street.

My point is that what makes sense and sounds reasonable is not always right before God.

On the other hand, teachings from the Word of God that may sound foolish are right.

That all is very confusing to intelligent people who have been trained to reason and think logically. Our choice is to follow the wisdom of the world and human intelligence or to believe what Holy Scriptures say.

Paul must have confused a few intelligent scholars when he said,

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing,

But to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;

The intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”

Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar?

Where is the philosopher of this age?

Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

1 Corinthians 1:18-20 (NIV).

The human mind has a great way of messing things up. Humans can rationalize anything. Luther knew that and cautioned about “die Hure des Verstandes”, the whore of reason.

Unfortunately many of our brothers and sisters in our ELCIC have decided to follow the wisdom of this world. 

God is not an object that can be studied objectively. Theology must approach the Word of God with humility and respect and stand under the Word and not over it. The wisdom of this world must not take control of Holy Scriptures. Article II of our Constitution is good and it is very Lutheran.

We are totally dependent upon Holy Scriptures to know anything about God.

No theological tower of Babel can penetrate the heavens to get a glimpse of God.

That is why Lutherans (Sola Scriptura) along with Christians of other denominations have such high respect for the Bible as the inspired Word of God. Yes, God spoke through people and also through a mule.  But it was God who spoke.

Luther insisted that we have to let the Bible speak for itself and take the Word of God for what it says.

Those who won the vote told us, “but we have to interpret the Bible”. True.

However, anybody who knows more that one language and is able to interpret will know

that an interpretation is not valid if the translation says the opposite of what it means in the other language. It is simply a wrong interpretation when it says the opposite of what Romans 1:26-33 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 say.

                                                                                                                                   

There are four critical “Ifs”:

- If the Bible is the revealed Word of God, then we cannot mess around with it. We have to take it or leave it.

- If the Bible is not the revealed Word of God but a human product, then the teachings of the church do not carry any divine authority.

- If our knowledge of God is not based upon the revealed Word of God, then everybody can make up their own God.

- If reason is the ultimate authority, then faith has no substance and you can believe whatever you like.

The Constitution of the ELCIC (Article II) treats Holy Scriptures as divinely inspired (Article II, Section 3) and authoritative for what we believe and do. But our current ELCIC treats Holy Scriptures as either a human product that can be decided upon by a single majority vote at a National Convention or at best as a mixture of divine and human products which gives the National Convention the right to decide which is which. This is the critical point at which we, the dissidents, tell our church, “You are wrong and our Constitution is right.”

To say that this is just a work in progress and that our individual congregations can state their own position in this matter is simply a political ploy. It is an act of damage control in an attempt to prevent congregations from leaving the ELCIC. There has been a paradigm shift in the ELCIC. It is no longer the church we knew. That is why we are here.

Our ELCIC did not hate homosexuals when it refused to ordain homosexuals or marry them until the last National Convention. It did so because of our understanding of Holy Scriptures. As a pastor of the ELCIC I have never witnessed a refusal to minister to homosexuals.  We wanted to be faithful to the Bible.

Our National Bishop and Synodical Bishops were not homophobic when, in 1991, they affirmed the Social Statement on Sex Marriage and Family (1970). They took their stand because of Article II of the Constitution of the ELCIC which confesses the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the “only source of the Church’s doctrine and the authoritative standard for the faith and life of the Church.”

Like our former Bishops, we are not homophobic; we just want to be faithful to the Holy Scriptures. That is why we are here.

With its new theology, our church has become less of a Lutheran church and more like the United Church of Canada or even the Unitarian Church. It must be a real problem for other Lutheran Churches like Lutheran Church Canada to relate to the ELCIC as if it were still a Lutheran Church in its confessions and actions.

So we are now in a church that consists of two groups of people:

Those who believe what the Word of God says and those who believe what the Word of God should have said, according to their opinion.                                                                                                                  

With its recent decision, the ELCIC no longer takes the Bible as the sole source of the church’s teachings and actions. That cuts to the very core of what we believe.

                                                                                                                                   

What hurts is that we all had so many social relations through our church; so many friends and connections. Now even some families are divided.

The vote was 61% to 39%. People like us are in the minority. Can the majority be wrong? In Nazi Germany the majority of Christians were wrong and people like

Bonhoeffer were right. Group-think can do marvellous things. People have a psychological need to belong to the majority and to please their superiors.

Yes, we are a minority. But the majority that voted for the changes at the last convention is a huge minority among all the Christians in this world.

The 5.6 million strong Mekane Jesu Church of Ethiopia is cutting its ties with the ELCA and forming a strong relationship with the North American Lutheran Church. Worldwide, our ELCIC is on the outside of Lutheranism and of all Christianity.

Many of us are grieving. I have even shed tears. What shall we do now? Where shall we go? Some dissidents may stay with the ELCIC and test the claim that the ELCIC is a loving and welcoming church, open to embrace diversity with hearts filled with love.

You might then conclude that this love includes us dissidents who enrich the diversity of the ELCIC.

Many others simply cannot do that anymore. They are looking for a new beginning. The greatest loss to the ELCIC will not be the congregations which will now take their votes to leave the ELCIC. The greatest loss will be the individual faithful members who will now leave their ELCIC congregation and find another church home, or who will simply give up on their church. No amount of damage control can prevent that.

As a dissident member of the ELCIC, my message to leaders and pastors of my church is, “You have abandoned the Word of God and are on a path of destruction. Repent or you will perish.”

My prediction is that, unless my church repents and returns to honour its Constitution, the ELCIC will dwindle and end up merging with the Anglicans. This may be the only way to get rid of Article II in our Constitution. That article is unalterable and cannot be changed as long as the ELCIC exists. A merger with the Anglicans requires a new constitution and would be a way to get rid of Article II. That is a very attractive solution to the constitutional problem.

What does the Word of God have to say to us who are likely gathered like this for the last time?

Be of good cheer. The real church, which is a spiritual and not an organizational entity, is as alive as ever. My ecclesiology has changed. Leaving a denomination does not mean leaving the church. It may simply mean a fresh start as it was in the case of Martin Luther. Those who left the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation did not leave the Church of Jesus Christ. We are not dividing the real invisible Church.

The Holy Spirit is active, still calling and leading and guiding those who gather in the Name of Jesus; building the real church.

Be of good cheer, take heart, have courage!

Jesus promised not to leave you. You may go different ways and seek different church families. Some of you want to be in a Canadian Lutheran Church like CALC or LCC. Some will find a home in NALC or LCMC. It is important that we do not compete but support each other in the cause to stand up for the authority of Holy Scriptures. We all need each other and must work together.

These are good times for the Church of Jesus Christ. Our congregations will not have all that many lukewarm Christians anymore.

You will be with people who are not going to church because it is a tradition. Yes, there will be some hurt. That always comes with disturbed human relations. I personally find that to be true.  Smile. Be of good cheer.  God is with you! There are good days ahead for you because they are God’s days.

The failure of dissent? Perhaps our witness was not in vain. New beginnings or another reformation, a reshaping, forming something different, a forming of a new wine skin?

If it is God’s will, the Holy Spirit will guide you. May God have mercy on us all.

A post-mortem: A delegate’s review of the July 14-17, 2011 ELCIC National convention

The decisions made at the 2011 ELCIC National convention marks a seismic and irreversible shift of ELCIC’s theological foundation. There was the re-election/election of a liberal, continually endorsed leadership. There was the endorsement of the proposal to begin the lengthy process of restructuring the ELCIC, to respond to present financial realities. However, most of the focus for the majority of the delegates at the convention was on the Social Statement on Human Sexuality, and the subsequent enabling motions to accept same gender relationships within the ELCIC.

* As observed by a number of speakers but vehemently denied by a member of the Task Force, a major but unstated goal during the past decade at national and Synodical conventions as well as within the Task Force on the Study and Statement on Human Sexuality seems to have been the advancement of the same gender agenda politically. And at the 2011 National Convention this carefully orchestrated goal was fully realized.

* During this past decade there had indeed been evidence of considerable dissent, particularly among the laity. But many of the dissenters were gradually marginalized. Through its elected and appointed positions, as well as its magazines, the ELCIC would ensure that only those voices who were supportive of the same gender agenda would receive church wide hearing.

* The Task Force attempted to persuade the delegates that the Statement was merely a "work in progress", admittedly imperfect but potentially alterable. But the introduction and adoption of the enabling motions showed their claim to be a false façade for the implementation of those decisions would result in a seismic and irreversible shift in the theology and practices of the ELCIC.

* Recognizing the profound and permanent impact of the changes, several speakers attempted to introduce a 2/3 requirement for their adoption. But those attempts failed to receive the necessary support.

* The delegates were informed by the Task Force that its members had read and considered each and every one of the submissions in response to the Study and the Statement, taking these responses into account in future revisions.

Those documents referenced a number of Scripture passages. The submissions by Solid Ground were among those who questioned the glaring absence of those Scripture passages which addressed homosexual directly (e.g. Leviticus 18:22; 20:18; Romans 1:26-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Genesis chapters 1-2 was referenced only in the most general manner). 

The omissions were particularly troubling in light of Article II, Section 3, of the ELCIC Constitution which accords the Scriptures the ultimate authority in matters of faith and life. When a similar concern was raised on the convention floor, the members of the Task Force continued to avoid providing any explanation, leaving a distinct impression that those omissions had been deliberate. The huge disconnect between the political decision-making process and the Scriptures continued throughout the convention.

* The same gender proponents showed themselves to be extremely well organized and disciplined. They seemed to be well coached on the convention site politically.

* One of the speakers referred to the incident of the woman caught in adultery in John's Gospel (chapter 8). The speaker spoke about Jesus' comforting words of absolution, "Neither do I condemn you". However, the speaker then reminded the delegates of Jesus’ admonition which followed, "Go your way, and from now on do not sin again." (NRSV). The theme of repentance was strikingly absent in the convention deliberations.

* All agreed that God’s love is indeed universal and unconditional. The difference lies in radically differing understandings of human “love”.

The same gender proponents persistently lifted up their particular notion of human “love”, a “love” which seemed vague and theoretical and curiously condoned behaviour which is expressly condemned in the Scriptures. 

On the other hand, those opposed to the Statement and its enabling recommendations affirmed a “love” which cares enough for ourselves as well as others to hold all of us accountable to God. One could not escape sensing that the same gender proponents considered those who do not share their perspective of “love” neither loving nor compassionate.

* A same gender proponent brought up the long discredited and greatly exaggerated statistic regarding homosexuality (e.g. citing the 10% in Kinsey's Report). The proponents glibly spoke of orientation rather than behaviour, as if "orientation" was self-evident, as though "orientation" had been definitively established.

* It seems that another of the great disconnects on the convention floor was the recommendation to maintain the institutional unity of the ELCIC. Various speakers used a variety of theoretical and oblique arguments, along with many of the familiar Scriptural references, to try to persuade the delegates to set aside their differences about what supposedly were merely adiaphora matters. The delegates were asked to place the survival of the 25 year old ELCIC organization at the very centre of their concern, while at the same time disregarding the 2000 year old history of the larger Christian community (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran, etc.), which resolutely adheres to the rejection of same gender relationships, anchoring their opposition on the Scriptures.

* In conclusion, contrary to the claims of some, my understanding of “love” includes a commitment to respect, protect and show compassion for all others, including those who persist in same gender relationships. My understanding of love includes the acknowledgement and acceptance of the boundaries set for us in the Scriptures, recognizing that, sinners as we all are, all of us need to confess and repent. My understanding of “love” includes a confidence in a God who even while holding us accountable for our actions and behaviour, also assures us of the possibility of forgiveness, transformation and new life.


The Rev. Dr. Peeter Vanker

July 2011

Many Lutherans still support traditional marriage

(An article from www.canadianlutheran.ca)

The online magazine of Lutheran Church–Canada

Responding to a vote by delegates at the convention of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada (ELCIC) meeting in Saskatoon, July 15 and 16 which authorizes its pastors to conduct same-gender marriages and finds sexual orientation no longer an issue for ordaining pastors, the leaders of Lutheran Church–Canada (LCC) issued a statement noting that the ELCIC does not speak for all Lutherans in the country.

The statement at www.lutheranchurch.ca/marriage notes that the ELCIC is the only Lutheran church body in Canada “that has approved such a departure from accepted Christian teaching.”  While the ELCIC is the largest Lutheran body in Canada, statistics available online show that nearly 40 percent of Lutherans worshipping each week belong to congregations outside the ELCIC.

Noting the words of Jesus who spoke of marriage in terms of a man leaving his father and mother, being united to his wife, and the two becoming one flesh, LCC’s presidents (bishops) declared the church body’s continuing witness to “Christ’s clear teaching that God designed marriage as the lifelong union of one man and one woman.” They further state that LCC will not ordain pastors who do not support this position.

At its 2002 convention Lutheran Church–Canada affirmed the historic biblical definition of marriage. At its most recent convention in June 2011, delegates agreed that the Bible’s qualifications and standards for a pastor include a heterosexual orientation.

LCC’s position is one held by the Church for the past 2000 years and supported by millions of Christians worldwide including the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and a rapidly growing number of Lutheran churches in Africa. “LCC is not speaking from the margins,” the statement notes.

The statement also rejects any notion that holding to “historic Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality constitutes ‘homophobia,’ an irrational fear and hatred of people with same-gender orientation.” LCC’s leaders refuse to defend those who take a threatening or insulting approach to the issue, but instead “repent of such sin and ask God to help His people overcome it wherever it occurs.”

After noting that there are Lutheran Christians in Canada “still deeply committed to the Bible as the authoritative Word of God and still dedicated to its clear witness on human sexuality, marriage and standards for ministry,” the leaders pledge prayers for those within the ELCIC for whom their church body’s decision is troubling.

A Crisis of Faith in the ELCIC

View PDF of article by Pastor Edward Skutshek, President of the Canadian Association of Lutheran Congregations (CALC)

Open Letter to Delegates re Proposed Human Sexuality Social Statement and Connected Motions

Dear delegate, 

There are some very important and potentially divisive issues facing our church in convention this July. The more information that delegates can have in front of them before making decisions, the better it is for the delegates, for us and for the ELCIC. And so, in the interest of church unity and a more informed dialogue, here are some reflections on the theology and implications of the motions on same sex blessings put forward by the NCC.  

There are several problems with the motions as they exist. The most serious one is the theology. In downplaying “disagreement over moral issues,” point #1 of the NCC motions, the motion concerning the Unity of the Church downplays the importance that Luther placed on the preaching of the Law and its role in preparing us to receive the gospel. 

Lutherans are required to preach both Law and Gospel. And there is good reason for this. Luther states that although the Law does not on its own justify, but because the Law prepares us to receive grace, we cannot be saved unless it is properly preached! If we wish to call ourselves Lutherans, we cannot dismiss the preaching of the Law as motion #1 of the NCC motions does. 

In brief, here are some of Luther’s statements about the Law’s importance for justification: “For as long as the presumption of righteousness remains in a [person], there remains immense pride, self-trust, smugness, hate of God, contempt of grace and mercy, ignorance of the promises and of Christ. The proclamation of free grace and the forgiveness of sins does not enter [that person’s] heart and understanding, because that huge rock and solid wall, namely, the presumption of righteousness by which the heart itself is surrounded, prevents this from happening.  . . . To break and crush it, God needs a large and powerful hammer, that is, the Law . . .”(Luther’s Works Vol. 26 p. 310).

“To the question, If the Law does not justify, what is its purpose? Paul therefore, replies: Although the Law does not justify, it is nevertheless extremely useful and necessary.  .  .  . It has this value, that grace can have access to us. Therefore the Law is a minister and a preparation for grace (Luther’s Works Vol. 26 p. 314).

Therefore we do not abolish the Law; but we show its true function and use, namely, that it is a most useful servant impelling us to Christ.  . . .  When the Law drives you this way, so that you despair of everything that is your own and seek help and solace from Christ, then it is being used correctly; and so, through the Gospel, it serves the cause of justification”  (Luther’s Works Vol. 26 pp. 315-316).

This is the absolute heart of the issue which is at stake here—the correct preaching of Lutheran doctrine so that people can be saved. Obviously then, given how different the NCC motion is from Luther’s own perspectives on the Law’s importance, with all respect to those who have proposed it, it would be difficult if not impossible to pass this motion through our national convention and still call ourselves Lutherans. 

The second difficulty with this motion is that it is almost certainly schismatic and will provoke a large-scale split within the ELCIC. Similar motions passed through the ELCA national assembly in 2009 provoked a large-scale split there. Over 1000 congregations have already left the ELCA and still more are considering leaving. 

Furthermore, the NCC cannot attempt to push through a motion with questionable doctrine and then use the argument for national church unity to avoid the consequences of its actions. Luther himself criticized the Pope for the same tactic. “In our time, whenever the pope does not have the authority of the Scriptures on his side, he always uses this same single argument against us: The church, the church!” (Luther’s Works Vol. 26 p. 15).

 For Luther and Lutherans, the basis for church unity is not adherence to a certain church body, like it is with the Roman Catholics. For Lutherans, correct doctrine is the basis for church unity. That was the reason the Reformation happened in the first place. 

Third, this divisive motion hurts the world’s poor. We do more as a church than merely exist. Through our gifts to CLWR we help the poorest of the poor. Some of the world’s poor need our aid even to remain alive. But if we split our denomination by passing the NCC motion, then we will have fewer resources available to help those in the world who most need it. If we truly care about justice, then those with the greatest needs have to be foremost among our concerns. The poor have to be considered first! 

Fourth, the ELCIC is bound by its constitution to follow the Scriptures. In the case of women’s ordination, there are many and very good passages from Scripture that support it, (Deborah, leading the Israelites, Priscilla, together with her husband Aquilla leading churches, just to name a few.) But with respect to homosexuality, there is no place in the Scriptures that speaks about it positively. Raymond E. Brown has been hailed by many other New Testament scholars as being North America’s foremost New Testament scholar, noted as being neither liberal nor conservative. Yet even a mainstream scholar like Brown strongly states that the Scriptures critique homosexual practice (See Brown’s: An Introduction to the New Testament pp. 528-531). If we pass this motion we violate the ELCIC constitution and its statements about Scriptural primacy.

For all these reasons: preservation of Lutheran doctrine, church unity, concern for the lives of the poor, not betraying the trust of ELCIC members past and present, adherence to the ELCIC constitution and it statements of Scriptural primacy, I urge all delegates to defeat the NCC motions. 

ELCIC Pastor Bart Eriksson,  MDiv., ThM. (New Testament).

Letter to 2011 ELCIC Delegates

Download pdf of Cover Letter

June 1, 2011

Dear 2011 ELCIC Convention Delegate,

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and from our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ!

Congratulations on your being chosen a delegate to the 2011 ELCIC National Convention.  The upcoming convention will be the most important in the ELCIC's 25-year history in that the outcome will have a profound impact on the short, medium and long-term future of this Lutheran body.  Consequently, as a delegate, a serious responsibility and accountability has been entrusted to you.

The Social Statement and sexuality motions put before you violate the Triune God's Will regarding human sexuality presented in the Bible and the Book of Concord, and, accordingly, they are in violation of Sections 3 and 4 of Article II (Confession of Faith) of the ELCIC Constitution.

Those who would lead the ELCIC to policies and faith practices that are in direct opposition to the Bible and orthodox Christianity should at least have the integrity to propose removal of Article II from the ELCIC Constitution.  Although many in the ELCIC determine moral issues on the basis of personal experience, science, political correctness, congruence with cultural norms, homosexual behaviour of relatives or close friends, etc., ELCIC doctrine and policy cannot be based on anything other than the "Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments" (Section 3, Article II, ELCIC Constitution).   The ELCIC hierarchy has decided that the Scripture of the Old and New Testaments should be ignored regarding acceptable sexual behaviour.  They are in error.

All convention delegates have a responsibility and accountability to the Triune God to make decisions on the basis of His revealed truth in the Scriptures.  The Social Statement and sexuality motions recommended by the ELCIC hierarchy, or the personal views of individual delegates, cannot be the basis for decision making at the National Convention.

The attached questions may prove helpful in understanding the short, medium and long term consequences on the ELCIC by adopting the homosexuality proposals. Solid Ground’s answers to these important questions are provided in the attached pages as well. Also, see "95 Questions and Answers", posted on the Solid Ground website at www.solid-ground.ca for more commentary.  We encourage you to take the time to review this material prior to the National Convention.

"No greater mischief can happen to a Christian people than to have God's Word taken from them, so that they no longer have it pure and clear.  God grant we and our descendants be not witnesses of such a calamity." - Martin Luther

When a church body makes sin and apostasy part of its official doctrine and practice, Christians have an obligation to oppose it and, where necessary, depart from it.