FdL minister accused of stealing from his church
The longtime pastor of a Fond du Lac church is accused of stealing as much as $10,000 from church offerings collected during the holidays, a police official says.
The Rev. Stuart Zak, 55, resigned from Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, 855 Martin Ave., Nov. 30 after he confessed to stealing money over a period of 10 years, according to a press release issued by church pastor, the Rev. Brett Naumann.
“The Fond du Lac Police Department was alerted by staff at Good Shepherd after they discovered missing cash — a discrepancy — in offerings made during holiday seasons,” said Major Kevin Lemke.
An internal investigation revealed the church was missing between $5,000 and $10,000, said Lemke.
“The suspect has spoken with police and has admitted to stealing the money from the offerings,” Lemke said. “We believe the investigation will be wrapped up by the end of the week.”
Zak told The Reporter he would not comment on the alleged theft.
In the release, Naumann said Zak would no longer be allowed to serve as pastor in any Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod program. Good Shepherd is one of three WELS churches in Fond du Lac. It has a congregation of 450.
Naumann declined to comment when asked why Zak stole the money.
“Even as we grieve over this turn of events, we thank Mr. Zak for the many blessings that the Lord has brought to Good Shepherd through his work,” Naumann said. “The Lord has brought about amazing growth both spiritually and physically through the work that was accomplished through Mr. Zak during his years of service as a pastor.”
Zak became pastor at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in 1993. He served on the Board for Wisconsin Lutheran Child and Family Service, the District Board for Parish Education as coordinator of early childhood education, a consultant for Parish Assistance and Northern Wisconsin District chairman of Evangelism, according to his past profile on the Good Shepherd Web site.
Lemke, a 28-year veteran of the Police Department, said he couldn’t recall a case of a “person of the cloth” stealing money from a church.
---
| Small town evangelism | Stuart A. Zak | May 1988 |
---
For more information and registration go to www.wels.net/evangelism and click on Welcoming Worship Seminar, or contact the district evangelism coordinator the Rev. Stuart Zak (920-921-8500 or email).
That means Zak arranged for Ski to do evangelism presentations for the district, two years in a row.
***
GJ - One WELS pastor has suggested having all accounts audited wherever Zak was involved.
---
rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "WELS Fond du Loot Pastor Donates 10 Grand to Himse...":
There is something subliminally creepy about stealing from a congregation's offering, no matter who does it. The recommendation for an audit in other areas outside of the congregation could be very telling. My guess is that skimming the pocket change from offerings could be small potatoes in comparison.
There is one missing detail in the story. I cannot determine how the pastor even had access to the offerings. This is especially true in this age of night depository boxes at banks. The counting and recording of the offerings is always done by laity such as a finance committee, trustees, financial secretary or a combination of them. This was true 40 years ago when my father was involved with it.
At my previous congregation, after the offerings were counted and recorded, they went into the bank bag with the deposit slip and dropped into the night depository on the way home.
There appears to be a defect in the manner in which this was done at Zak's former parish. The offerings sit in the plates on the altar until after the service. There is usually more than one member who counts it. The treasurer or bookkeeper will have some notice from the bank as to the exact amount of the deposit. All of this is designed to minimize the contact that a pastor would have with the offerings. There are several checks and balances. Please pardon the unintentional pun.
***
GJ - Some bad ideas are:
1. Having only one person count the offering.
2. Leaving the offering at the church, even in a safe.
3. Letting the treasurer count the offering.
4. Giving the same person permission to write checks and count the offering.
5. Assuming everything is fine and never having an annual audit. Federal Reserve - take note.
I was skeptical about the money spent on financial controls at the Love Shack when SP Schroeder took office. That was needed, as insiders know, and the results have been good.
---
PJL has left a new comment on your post "WELS Fond du Loot Pastor Donates 10 Grand to Himse...":
For much of this year I've been a daily reader of "Ichabod." (By the way, I found it when I did a google search of "WELS.") Though many in our synod may not appreciate this blog, I must admit that it does provide more realistic news of what's happening in the WELS than we'd ever get through the official channels. And it's true, going through the official channels simply means that your question or concern is usually "forgotten." Either that, or you're passed from one ecclesiatical official to the other with no one really willing to step up and say what needs to be said.
Since this is true, I can imagine that Pastor Jackson easily became frustrated during his days in the WELS trying to get his DP and others to listen to him. That may explain his biting sarcasm on this blog. If he were simply expressing concerns in a nice way, no one would probably listen!
That said, I'd like to caution all of us from thinking everything that happens to someone in the WELS is because of CGM and Church and Change. Neither is everyone who sins a shrinker.
I'm a WELS pastor in the area around Lake Winnebago. Stu Zak has been part of our pastoral conference. I don't know him real well, but I don't believe we need to connect his personal sins to the shrinkers.
There are many who are hurt by Pastor Zak's actions. Most unfortunately, the gospel and the credibility of gospel ministry in and around FDL is taking a hit from his actions. Just take a look through the ignorant comments to the article at the FDL Reporter website to find that out.
So, while I, too, smell the stench of CGM and secrecy coming from parts of Appleton, I'm not so sure I can smell it in Fond du Lac.
---
PJL has left a new comment on your post "WELS Fond du Loot Pastor Donates 10 Grand to Himse...":
Oh no, I've been found out! Actually, I knew that someone would find me if I gave even a hint of where I was from.
One of the things I admire about Pastor Jackson, Michael Shottey and others on this blog is that they're willing to step out and be counted. They sign their names.
If you want to know ...
1) We print out the service because many of our elderly members find it easier to hold a bulletin than a hymnal. So, I listen to the people I serve.
2) Yes, I make use of a screen and PowerPoint. I had stopped doing this for about nine months, but again, many of our members, even some seniors, told me how much it helped them. They said that they're visual learners. So, again, I listen to the people I serve.
3) I didn't know that the NIV was tacky. It's the version of Scripture I've been using since I was ten years old!
Make me to be what you want me to be. Since you found me, feel free to e-mail or call so I can know more about you.
***
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "WELS Fond du Loot Pastor Donates 10 Grand to Himse...":
>>>But watch out!!
No use of the hymnal (merely printed for "ease of use", no doubt. More like ashamed of ancient text if you ask me)<<<
Did you bother to notice that the church in question is using the Common Service from Christian Worship? It's not the Lutheran Hymnal, but this service is rooted in the Western Rite that dates back to at least the third century A.D.
It does not help the cause to lambaste pastors who are actually upholding liturgical worship, especially in such a superficial manner.
***
GJ - The pastor is not a Shrinker, based on several marks (notae). He has a statement of faith which emphasizes the Means of Grace. I find his wording a bit awkward overall, but it does seem to be his own rather than something borrowed from the Evangelical Covenant Church. Kelming another confession is something I noticed at Gunn's sect and some other quasi-WELS parishes. Also, this pastor gave away his identity, which is very un-Growthy. His response to criticism was light-hearted, very unlike the Shrinkers I know. They rage and fume, but always anonymously.
I saw no link to Time of Generic Grace, which is one good indication by itself. He did not say, "God has blessed this congregation with membership growth ever since I arrived," - typical of Shrinkers. See Dom Perignon Patterson and VP Huebner.
As Paul said in Galatians, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails, so we should not condemn based on the hymnal or Bible translation. This pastor is explicit about the Means of Grace on his website, something I hardly saw in WELS or Missouri over the years.
WELS pastors are starting to feel safe in being Lutheran. That is a good sign.
---
Michael Schottey has left a new comment on your post "WELS Fond du Loot Pastor Donates 10 Grand to Himse...":
Pastor Lidtke...another in a long line of younger men from the Michigan District that I can't wait to be old enough to be "in charge."
***
GJ - The Chicaneries know they are losing. That is why the attacks on the blog are mounting. Of course, Chicanery attacks are like being stoned to death by popcorn.
Did I say popcorn? I wasn't even thinking even Ski.
23 comments:
There is something subliminally creepy about stealing from a congregation's offering, no matter who does it. The recommendation for an audit in other areas outside of the congregation could be very telling. My guess is that skimming the pocket change from offerings could be small potatoes in comparison.
There is one missing detail in the story. I cannot determine how the pastor even had access to the offerings. This is especially true in this age of night depository boxes at banks. The counting and recording of the offerings is always done by laity such as a finance committee, trustees, financial secretary or a combination of them. This was true 40 years ago when my father was involved with it.
At my previous congregation, after the offerings were counted and recorded, they went into the bank bag with the deposit slip and dropped into the night depository on the way home.
There appears to be a defect in the manner in which this was done at Zak's former parish. The offerings sit in the plates on the altar until after the service. There is usually more than one member who counts it. The treasurer or bookkeeper will have some notice from the bank as to the exact amount of the deposit. All of this is designed to minimize the contact that a pastor would have with the offerings. There are several checks and balances. Please pardon the unintentional pun.
The Zak story should serve as a warning to congregations that expect their pastors to do evangelism. Pastors hate it, and will get even somehow -- even steal or slack off in other duties.
WELS discourages pastors from doing evangelism. To make matters worse, pastors do not even teach members how to do evangelism although they tell members to do it.
Ski doing evangelism presentations, I seriously doubt it.
I pray that Pastor Zak is truly repentent. Remember that not one of us is without sin. My church has two leaders who are the only members with access to the bank account. In addition, there is a team of two people who immediately count the offerings after church. This is done in a closed room. The pastor does not perform any of these duties.
My question is, was someone else acting along with the pastor? Was the money being funneled to a para-church organization? In other words, do any of the less-than orthodox C&C leaders who head such organizations incourage this kind of activity?
You want to do evangelism? Put on some appropriate shoes and hit the pavement. The Lord delights in any one who believes in His Name. We cannot expect more than that.
In Christ,
from WELS church lady
That's a very sad story. For all his work in building up and growing the congregation over the years he's been there, how many will now flee as fast as they can with a bad taste of the WELS to report to others? So much for church growth. I presume he will be soon involved in a growing prison ministry, right??
For much of this year I've been a daily reader of "Ichabod." (By the way, I found it when I did a google search of "WELS.") Though many in our synod may not appreciate this blog, I must admit that it does provide more realistic news of what's happening in the WELS than we'd ever get through the official channels. And it's true, going through the official channels simply means that your question or concern is usually "forgotten." Either that, or you're passed from one ecclesiatical official to the other with no one really willing to step up and say what needs to be said.
Since this is true, I can imagine that Pastor Jackson easily became frustrated during his days in the WELS trying to get his DP and others to listen to him. That may explain his biting sarcasm on this blog. If he were simply expressing concerns in a nice way, no one would probably listen!
That said, I'd like to caution all of us from thinking everything that happens to someone in the WELS is because of CGM and Church and Change. Neither is everyone who sins a shrinker.
I'm a WELS pastor in the area around Lake Winnebago. Stu Zak has been part of our pastoral conference. I don't know him real well, but I don't believe we need to connect his personal sins to the shrinkers.
There are many who are hurt by Pastor Zak's actions. Most unfortunately, the gospel and the credibility of gospel ministry in and around FDL is taking a hit from his actions. Just take a look through the ignorant comments to the article at the FDL Reporter website to find that out.
So, while I, too, smell the stench of CGM and secrecy coming from parts of Appleton, I'm not so sure I can smell it in Fond du Lac.
Most churches follow good order in not having only one person handle money most of the time.
However, the one area where many churches fail is leaving money in a safe at the church. Other than counting offerings immediately after church and placing the monies in a deposit box at the bank immediately thereafter on Sunday, a safe is normally used.
When a safe is used, it is imperative that no one on staff has the combination to that safe. Only the Financial Secretary or his immediate assistant should have the combination to that safe. If any staff member has the combination to the safe, there will be temptation. It is also imperative that the person with the combination to the safe does not have a key to the building the safe is kept in. That would require two people to always be present when offerings are handled.
It is also imperative to change the combination on the safe regularly. If that is not possible, it is worth to money to get a new safe every once in a while.
The alternatives are not good because it is not wise for a lay person to take home the offering and deposit on Monday.
Extreme care is always needed when handling those precious offerings of God's people.
There are anony-mice out there that think Ichabod is terrible. Let us put this in perspective. Go to the link provided here that is the original story at the FDL Reporter's website. Right now, the story is on the main page. Please read the comments as they pile up. This is a small sample of the real world. The comments here on Ichabod are usually much kinder than this. The shrinkers are both thin skinned and quite delusional, not living in the real world at all.
A Lord's Prayer petition is "lead us not into temptation," and it sounds as though the way it was run, that's what was happening. At our church there is a treasurer and a financial officer as a double control. Usually these guys are elected because they already have loads of money, and wouldn't be tempted by offerings. A pastor, on the other hand, is usually not so well paid, and thus should keep a distance, if only to allay suspicions.
such a sad story... its not the first time it has happened to a pastor WELS or otherwise and probally not the last. Did Jesus hate Judas or feel sadness at the lose of a soul? A sin is a sin... none are greater than others. Do not feel pride that you are better than he.. you too are tempted and sin everyday.
“PJL” is http://www.cometobethlehem.net/site/cpage.asp?cpage_id=140001358&sec_id=140000554 I presume...
But watch out!!
No use of the hymnal (merely printed for "ease of use", no doubt. More like ashamed of ancient text if you ask me)... and SERMON NOTES???
That SCREAMS of CGM!
Plus the tacky use of the NIV... can you say wolf in sheep's clothing? Perhaps he should stop looking outwardly for shrinkers and start examining his own CG practices.
Oh no, I've been found out! Actually, I knew that someone would find me if I gave even a hint of where I was from.
One of the things I admire about Pastor Jackson, Michael Shottey and others on this blog is that they're willing to step out and be counted. They sign their names.
If you want to know ...
1) We print out the service because many of our elderly members find it easier to hold a bulletin than a hymnal. So, I listen to the people I serve.
2) Yes, I make use of a screen and PowerPoint. I had stopped doing this for about nine months, but again, many of our members, even some seniors, told me how much it helped them. They said that they're visual learners. So, again, I listen to the people I serve.
3) I didn't know that the NIV was tacky. It's the version of Scripture I've been using since I was ten years old!
Make me to be what you want me to be. Since you found me, feel free to e-mail or call so I can know more about you.
>>>But watch out!!
No use of the hymnal (merely printed for "ease of use", no doubt. More like ashamed of ancient text if you ask me)<<<
Did you bother to notice that the chuch in question is using the Common Service from Christian Worship? It's not the Lutheran Hymnal, but this service is rooted in the Western Rite that dates back to at least the third century A.D.
It does not help the cause to lambast pastors who are actually upholding liturgical worship, especially in such a superficial manner.
Pastor Lidtke...another in a long line of younger men from the Michigan District that I can't wait to be old enough to be "in charge."
Pastor Lidtke, thank you for your comments and gracious attitude.
That being said sincerely, Pastor Lidtke, your This We Believe section of your church website under Justification states, "We believe that God has justified all sinners, that is, he has declared them righteous for the sake of Christ."
This confession is opposed to the Lutheran Confessions which state:
The Defense of the Augsburg Confession, What Is Justifying Faith?. 48] "The adversaries feign that fiath is only a knowledge of the history, and therefore teach that it can coexist with mortal sin. Hence they say nothing concerning faith, by which Paul so frequently says that men are justified, because those who are accounted righteous before God do not live in mortal sin."
http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php
Note, "those who are accounted righteous before God do not live in mortal sin." Your confession has those living in mortal sin declared by God to be righteous.
What say ye?
Brett:
I'll make one brief comment about your idea regarding "universal justification." It is not universalism, so why the wariness?
Seriously,though, check out these passages (even in the KJV, if you desire): "Christ Jesus came into the world to SAVE SINNERS" (1 Timothy 1:11); "God was reconciling the WORLD to himself through Christ" (2 Corinth 5:19); "God so loved the WORLD" (John 3:16). Need I say more? The sins of all sinners were paid for! "We have put our hope in the living God, who is the SAVIOR of ALL MEN." (1 Tim 4:10)
The problem arises when you separate Universal Justification and Subjective Justification. Subjective Justification without Universal Justification leads you to say something to the effect of "We are saved BECAUSE of faith" which the Bible does not teach (it teaches "Through faith"). Universal Justification without Subjective Justification leads to Universalism that says "All are saved and all will be in heaven." Both are dangerous ditches to be in.
There is another major issue that you need to address, and that is that you continually run back to the Confessions and not Scripture. I hold to the Confessions because they expound correctly on Scripture, but they are not the end-all and be-all of doctrine. If they are silent on an issue, it does not make it contrary to God's Word. It simply means that that particular point of doctrine was not an issue at the time of their writing. Doctrinal writings are never written in a vacuum - they always have something that they are being written in response to (whether we know of the issue or not), so sometimes we can easily quote a letter or piece and spin it in our favor instead of taking it in the proper context to see what's going on.
In regards to justification, Universal Justification was not being disputed during the the Reformation - so why write about it? Instead, the writers deemed it better to use ink to fight the Roman Catholic idea which said Subjective Justification only BEGINS with faith (but needs works to be completed). So the writers of the Confessions emphasized Justification through faith to fight that particular heresy, instead of writing about something which was universally accepted.
Study your Scriptures, man. You're swerving on the narrow middle road and the ditches are deep!
Anonymous, you ignored the specific question that was asked. The Lutheran Confessions state that those who live in mortal sin are not accounted righteous by God. This is the polar opposite to the base claim of Objective Justification as taught by the Lutheran Synods and the New Age religions (case in point, The Shack).
Do you reject the this Confessional statement?
Hi Brett,
A quick answer for you. Reading our congregation's website you probably noticed that the confession of faith listed is the WELS doctrinal statement, "This We Believe." Plain and simple. We are a congregation in fellowship with WELS. It only makes sense that we agree with our church body's official doctrinal statement. It takes more than one pastor and one congregation to change that! And right now, if I/we disagree, we'd better leave the synod.
Brett:
You are right, those who continue to live in sin, unrepentant, are not counted among the righteous. However, this is not due to the fact that those sins were not paid for by Christ (that they were not saved by Christ!), but because they, by their impenitence, have forsaken and rejected that universally objective truth.
If you still doubt whether objective justification is universal, I suggest you check out the Formula of Concord: Solid Declaration, Article 11, paragraph 28. The confessions DO teach universal justification!
PJL, yes, you should disagree with the false doctrine being taught as the baseless central doctrine of your synod. And you should leave but I doubt that you will otherwise you wouldn't have used this as a response to a purely doctrinal question. I've heard this response before:
Thank you Brett.
The board will discuss and consider your request at our next regular convening in late October.
I’d like to clarify Evergreen’s relationship with ELS and WELS. Evergreen is in fellowship with,
and supported by ELS and WELS congregations in the Pacific Northwest and all of our called
workers have completed their education through synod schools. Therefore, the teachings of ELS,
WELS, and Evergreen are in complete doctrinal fellowship. Any break in the teaching of God’s
true Word as professed in the ELS/WELS doctrine would be a break in fellowship.
As you know, Objective Justification is a subject that can be easily misspoken or misunderstood.
I'll get back with you following the board meeting.
In Christ,
Gary Ide
The final response from Evergreen Lutheran High School was made by quoting August Pieper, "But whoever molests the doctrine of justification stabs the gospel in the heart and is on the way of losing entirely Christian doctrine and personal faith and of falling into the arms of heathenism, even if he ever so much emphasizes justification by faith."
PJL -
"Therefore nothing but a satanic, seductive, and sinister strategy is involved when we are called
upon to yield a bit and to connive at an error for the sake of unity. In this way the devil is trying
cunningly to lead us away from the Word. For if we adopt this course and get together in this matter,
he has already gained ground; and if we were to yield him a fingerbreadth, he would soon have an ell."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House,
1959, III, p. 1411f. Ephesians 6:10-17.
Anonymous at 11:10PM, you fail to admit that the Confessions declare that they are the profession of the Chief Articles of Christian faith. They were not just meant to address doctrines that were at odds with the RCC. Your statement that UOJ isn't explained in the BOC since only Justification by Faith was being contended with the Roman Catholic Church is absurd. UOJ is even more abhorent to the RCC because it distributes forgiveness of sins to the entire unbelieving world - not just those called by God through faith. BOC went so far as to explain the doctrine of Election which they admitted was not under contention but was detailed in order to eliminate issues later.
UOJ is missing from the Lutheran Confessions because it is missing from Scripture.
You refer to the BOC being silent 'on an issue' as though the central doctrine of Scripture is minor. Justification is the central doctrine of which the Scriptures point endlessly that it is by faith alone and the Confessions confirm.
Post a Comment