The Glory Has Departed


Norma Boeckler, Artist-in-Residence

Bethany Lutheran Worship on
Ustream


NT Greek Lessons - Thursdays, 7 PM.

Saved worship files and Greek lessons are at the live worship link.

email: greg.jackson.edlp@gmail.com,
which works as gregjacksonedlp@gmail.com too.

Luther's Sermons, Lenker Series
Book of Concord Selections
Bente's Historical Introductions,
and Martin Chemnitz Press Books

Thursday, March 17, 2016

From 2014 - WELS Discussion about Abusing the Call.
I Do Not Participate at All.

Both of these pastors, joined by two church staffers, sued a man for telling the truth about Ski.
Glende was also involved in the charges of sexual harrassment.
They posed for this gluttony photo when studying under the abusive Mark Driscoll.
Does this sound like Walther studying under Bishop Stephany, STD?



As Beckie pointed out, this CRM related issue isn't necessarily the cause of the new call reporting mechanism. Here's a well-documented summary if you haven't heard: https://vdma.wordpress.com/2014/06/11/two-wels-pastors-and-four-meritless-lawsuits/
Thoughts?
Recently, two WELS Pastors, Tim Glende and James Skorzewski, and two of their staff members filed four almost identical lawsuits against a WELS layman, Jonathan Donnan, a former member of their con...
VDMA.WORDPRESS.COM
LikeLike ·  · 
  • Jeffery Clark and 2 others like this.
  • Melissa Brander Unfortunately not surprised it was handled like this. Our culture does not take sexual harassment allegations seriously and the victim is often blamed or shamed and it is seen as "not that bad" or the woman is told she is "overreacting." Too often it is swept under the rug and not taken seriously in Christian church bodies, not just the WELS but I keep up with other church bodies/Christian organizations and two of them within the past year have had scandals where the leaders were accused of inappropriate actions towards women, varying in degrees of severity, but yet people still stand behind them and say they are still "good people." This is not something that is taken as seriously as it should be. Moving him to a different congregation in a different part of the country does not fix the problem and is a large part of why the Catholic Church has had issues because they too often just moved priests who were accused of pedophilia to a different parish instead of handling the issue. There should be zero tolerance for this kind of behavior in a pastor.
    2 hrs · Like · 5
  • Sherrie Rardin I would have a very hard time trusting any of the people involved in this action. We are taught the first step in obtaining forgiveness is to admit the sin. Seems to me that this was never really done. In something of this nature by someone of this status, that admission should have been to the direct people involved, his entire congregation from the pulpit and his fellow pastors as well as his own family, if applicable. Then, and only then, should he expect the victim and her husband to be able to let it go and move on.
    2 hrs · Like · 5
  • Nick Brander Having been through a negative situation with a previous pastor of the WELS, I don't believe it is our job to have thoughts on this at all. I believe this should have stayed within the affected people, the church leadership and the district leadership. Let me stress that we do not know the full story and we cannot know the full story. For us to form any thoughts would be counter-intuitive and serve no beneficial purpose.
    2 hrs · Like
  • Bryan Lidtke I think it's important to discuss for a variety of reasons, including:
    1) What if this were to happen to you or the pastor at your congregation? It's nice to see what happened in a previous case. 
    2) What if those involved are currently in your congregation or is your pastor? Once again, it's nice to know what happened. 
    3) If this were to stay only among the affected people and the congregation and the district, what happens when there's a disagreement? I mean, I'm pretty sure the Donnans are upset about what has occurred. Since the congregation and the district leadership sided against them, who's allowed to help them?
    4) I think it's pretty easy to know the full story - ask those involved! From my conversations with those involved, this blog post is a factual and accurate summary of what has transpired.
    2 hrs · Edited · Like · 5
  • Sherrie Rardin I respectfully disagree. It was made a public matter by their decision to file not one but four lawsuits and to hold a public meeting about the matter. Pastors, DPs, etc are not infallible. Sometimes it takes sheep standing and reminding the shepherd of the path.
    2 hrs · Like · 6
  • Bryan Lidtke ^ Forgot to mention that. Thanks, Sherrie! As Sherrie said, a public lawsuit in a public court makes things public I would say.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Joe Jewell Exactly. The two aspects that absolutely make this public are the lawsuits filed against the victims (absolutely unbelievable in my mind), which actually did put the entire thing irretrievably on the public record--that was the plaintiffs' poor choice if privacy was the goal--and the fact that he was subsequently placed back into the public ministry. I would agree with Nick that there would be no reason to have a (public) thought on this at all otherwise. However, given those two facts, it's quite right that it be discussed.
    1 hr · Like · 5
  • Nick Brander 1) What has happened in a previous case has little to no relevance in the immediate need to deal with a situation. In specific cases such as these, God's Law and Moral law need no historical precedence

    I'm going to combine 2, 3 and 4) Since we don't know the full story, and asking those involved has certainly not worked well already, is there something that we don't know that swayed the District Presidents choice to grant Pastor Ski CRM status? The district and the pastors involved are certainly not telling us.

    To approach it from the unpopular angle, is there conclusive proof that Ski acted in such a way that could be deemed inappropriate? Not to diminish the claim, as such allegations are always serious allegations, but just as the pastor is not infallible, so to are the congregants.

    Since we know that Ski has received and accepted a call to Texas, it is their prerogative to find out everything they can about the pastor they are calling, and it is not our job to cast the shadow of doubt on someone when we don't know all the facts.

    There is too much conjecture to form an opinion on what happened without taking the risk of forming a harmful opinion in error of the truth. It would not serve us at all to get involved in this.
    1 hr · Like
  • Daniel Baker Actually, per the public testimony issued in a Court of Law:
    1 hr · Like · 3
  • Daniel Baker Q: Okay, so you believe that there were indiscretions by the pastor directly towards Jonathan’s wife that occurred by the pastor, correct?

    A: Yes, which were addressed. And then once he resigned, it was over because he is no longer a pastor. That happened in the middle of April.
    1 hr · Like · 3
  • Bryan Lidtke How has asking those involved not worked well? Not trying to sound like a jerk here, but I'm not sure I understand what you're saying there.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Daniel Baker So the supervising pastor admitted that wrongdoing occurred, and that the issue was "closed" because the perpetrator was removed from the Ministry. However, his readmittance to the Ministry makes this very much worthy of discussion.
    1 hr · Like · 6
  • Nick Brander That the supervising pastor said that there were indiscretions, but Mrs. Dannon says that the supervising pastor was part of it at times and that nothing was done to address him says to me there is something more going on, and that we do not have all the information, and without all the information, it would not become us to form an opinion or make a discussion of it.
    1 hr · Like
  • Nick Brander To put it bluntly, I don't see the need for us to stick our noses into something that we are not involved in.
    1 hr · Like
  • Nick Brander If the Dannons have an issue with the ruling of the District and its President, than it would seem to me that the next appropriate course of action is for them to approach the Council of Presidents
    1 hr · Like
  • Bryan Lidtke They've done that and talked to some other synod officials, as well. Nothing has really been resolved. What's next?
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Daniel Baker We are involved, because our congregations are in fellowship with a pastor who resigned for sexually inappropriate conduct, whose supervising pastor said, under oath, that he resigned for said indiscretions, and yet who was allowed back into the Ministry and transferred elsewhere. Now he has the potential to be transferred to a parish near you. That definitely is our business.
    1 hr · Like · 3
  • Daniel Baker I don't recall "Council of Presidents" being one of Jesus' steps in St. Matthew 18.
    1 hr · Like · 2
  • Beckie Grunewald So what do you hope to achieve by talking about it here? Are there people here with authority to do something?
    1 hr · Like
  • Daniel Baker As for me, I wasn't planning to comment, but the "we should just be quiet and never question Holy Mother" mentality gets me every time. I imagine Bryan started this thread because people were derailing the CRM Status thread with this unsavory topic.
    1 hr · Like · 3
  • Joe Jewell Personally although this may be a "fait accompli" (though I don't necessarily concede that), exposing this case--which I and many, many others feel was handled quite improperly--helps to ensure that either 1) we stand by our practice of reassigning or granting quickie calls to former pastors in similar situations, only this time in the light of day rather than in the hasty way it was done over the objection of many in and out of the district; or 2) it doesn't happen again. 2) is my preferred outcome, personally.

    Finally, secrecy and attempted secrecy are essentially what created the unsavory situation in the first place. Sunlight is an excellent disinfectant. In particular, the nature of the offense (and the lack of repentance that filing the lawsuits demonstrates) means that it absolutely needs to be widely known. Suppose you were considering joining a certain congregation in Texas, or the congregation of the supervising pastor in Wisconsin! This is absolutely and completely relevant, at the minimum, for every woman and every married man. People move around and travel so much these days (both parishioners and called workers). If this is all above-board, let it be known--it is, after all, the PUBLIC ministry.
    1 hr · Edited · Like · 2
  • Bryan Lidtke Yeah, as I said in the OP, this was brought up in the CRM thread and this is off-topic with what was in that thread, so I started one to discuss this in particular.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Sherrie Rardin Beckie, if "authority to do something" is now a criterion for discussion, then there need be no more about anything. I personally believe as WELS members we have a right and a responsibility to go to our pastors about things within our church body as a...See More
    47 mins · Like · 3
  • Cathy Probst I find this extremely disturbing. I hope the Texas' church's professional liability insurance is up to date and paid in full.



  • Beckie Grunewald Sherrie what I mean is that if people just sit here and go "that's horrible" and then continue to talk about the details but that's it, it just becomes gossip. When I told my husband about it, he made a note to talk to his circuit about it, because it seems wrong and unsavory. But even as we have public details of the suit filed we dont have public knowledge of what happened between Ski and anyone else as far as counseling. It is conjecture and speculation.
    55 mins · Edited · Like
  • Bryan Spiff Grefsheim Disgusting, but sadly not surprising. We all fall short, but the district leadership really let their members down. I'll also add that these two "pastors" clearly were absent when they covered 1 Corinthians 6 at the Sem!
    16 mins · Like · 1
  • Steve Spencer There's really no need for any conjecture or speculation. The necessary facts, straight from those involved - 
    10 mins · Like · 3
FACT: Ski was suspended by the DP "for cause," and that cause was sexual impropriety - it matters not of what kind. Period. 
FACT: In almost every case of such a suspension for a sexual cause, regardless of the circumstances, the man is out for good. 
FACT: In a VERY few cases of this nature, the man at the very least must wait 2 years to even apply for CRM status. 
FACT: Then the application must go through the District Presidium AND the ALL the Pastors of that district. They, then have the opportunity to oppose the granting of CRM status. 
FACT: ONLY after the two-years wait, and the approval by the District is the man even eligible to be placed on Call Lists for consideration. 
FACT: In Ski's case, the district 2nd VP strongly objected, as well as a number of other Pastors, including some CPs. 
FACT: In no other case has the two-year rule been waved. 
FACT: In no other case has an objection by a VP and other District Pastors been dismissed. These are the facts. 
  • Now, in this case, it has strenuously been denied by various leaders that there was any "deal" involved, or any "quid pro quo" on anyone's part. I'm certainly willing to accept that. However, as I have pointed out to them, the "appearance of evil" is still quite clear and evident, and enough just cause to re-visit the situation and make public the emails and conversations surrounding the circumstances of the case, especially how it ended with Ski as a Pastor again so soon. If this were the government, or a large business, such communications would be demanded by the press and all those who are concerned for propriety. We're not talking about the sanctity of the "confessional" here, but of how the very public Call process was used in this specific case. Again, there is no speculation about the actual facts. They are what they are. That some leaders are being judged as being less than honest in this case is their own fault, and they hold the remedy - making everything open and above board.
  • Christian Schulz ^ Thanks. 

    I'll add a short question. Are you willing to accept that there wasn't a "deal" because there's no proof or because you personally don't believe there was one? Personally, the only way such a thing could happen like that, after all you correctly mentioned, is if a "deal" took place. And let's talk about the elephant in the room. Ski is majorly into CoWo/CGM. The DP that is now taking care of him is also majorly into CGM. The connections are too obvious. Obviously a couple phone calls were placed after the smoked cleared a little bit and wallah he's all of a sudden above reproach and is magically in a congregation that happens to be into CGM-type worship as well. I digress as I know the accusations of conjecture are coming. But, seriously, the good ol' boy system was at work here and it's too obvious to deny.
    1 hr · Edited · Like
  • Sherrie Rardin I don't think this falls under gossip; at least it does not for me. My husband (a retired WELS pastor) and I have already made an appointment with our pastor to discuss this and two other synod issues that we find disturbing. We fully intend, pending the results of that discussion, to then speak to our DP about our thoughts and concerns. Right now, to me as an adult confirmand, this seems to me to be a case of "good ole boys protecting their own" instead of leading God's sheep. If I am wrong, I want to know it. If not, I want to know that too. I am in the position of deciding to send my youngest child away to residential WELS school. I have to be able to trust that the men (and women) in leadership positions are not looking out for one of their own before my child.
    1 hr · Like · 5
  • Sherrie Rardin Funny that Mr Schulz and I were posting at the same time and used the same phrase.
    1 hr · Like · 3
  • Bryan Lidtke One thing I find interesting is that Pastor Ski is allowed to be a pastor in any district... except for the one where he formerly served. So he's blameless and above reproach in all but one district?
    1 hr · Like · 4
  • Cathy Probst Quite frankly, if the WELS develops the habit of shuttling problem pastors around, then we are no better than the Catholic Church and their priests. And we know what problems they are experiencing now, especially in MN.
    55 mins · Like · 3
  • Christian Schulz The WELS is too small and interconnected to ever shake it's "good ole boy" disease. This is the only way the WELS knows how to operate. It all starts at the prep schools. The popular kids at prep will be the future DPs and presidents of the schools, etc. If they like you you'll be accodomated. If you keep your head down you'll be tolerated. And if you speak out you'll be swiftly blacklisted.
  • Steve Spencer Clarification: It may be that Ski "resigned" rather that was formally suspended by the DP, I frankly don't remember which. It really doesn't matter, however. Why not? Because this is quite common; i.e. for the leaders to "offer" the man to resign rather than having to be suspended.) The real underlying "cause" remains exactly the same. But sometimes we will see the reason listed officially as "for the good of the ministry," or "for personal reasons." Why these wordings are used has never been made quite clear to me in cases where I have inquired, except that there is sometimes concern for the feelings of the wife and children of the man in question. Again, that is understandable and charitable. As to Christian's question: I am willing to accept that no "deal" was involved because that is exactly and directly what a DP told me following a CoP meeting around that time. He would have no reason to tell me this if it were not true, as he knows full well I could find out from other sources. Of course, it could be that he himself was not told the full story either. Again, that is all beside the point. The appearance of impropriety remains, indeed, it has grown since then. It is incumbent upon those entrusted with leadership in the synod to confront this appearance and make public and proper reassurance to both Pastors and laypeople that there is no substance to it - AND to provide the necessary evidence to support their contention. I think a former President put it this way, "Trust, but verify." No, our leaders are not our enemies. However, in this world, with all the nonsense going on in churches, it is essential that we go far above and beyond what may have been done in the past. That's just the way it is.
    41 mins · Like · 2
  • Steve Spencer Final comment before I sign off for the evening. It is good to hear that at least a couple of Pastors are planning to confront their spiritual leaders about this situation. We all need to remember, however, that the point under consideration here; i.e. the Call process in the WELS, and the recent observed change in dealing with CRM status - all of this has been the very private and secret purview of the DPs, and they alone, for many, many decades. Like the "black files" that get passed from DP to DP over the years, this authority is jealously guarded and protected from all prying eyes, and all inquiries. "Why some and not others" with regard to salvation may indeed be "the mother of all heresy," but that same question with regard to Call Lists is "the mother of all power" in the WELS today, and has been for generations. It will not be given up lightly or easily, questions about it will be deflected many times, and answers will be less than satisfying to many. We really cannot and should not expect it to be otherwise. Power over others is the world's greatest, most intoxicating, and most dangerous drug; and it is this same in the Church Militant as it is in the rest of the world. We must be sure of our own motives, and be clear that we are not in this for our own power, or because of jealousy over the authority of the DPs, or even just to stir the pot. Otherwise, we are nothing but "mud-rakes." While none of us are holy and perfect, and even our best motives have the touch of our Old Adam, our purpose must be to uphold honesty, openness, and integrity as much as possible in the visible church, and indeed to protect our church body - and our leaders themselves - from falling into corruption, and so harm the proclamation of the precious Gospel. THAT must be our first and foremost motive. And that's why we need to hold those in power accountable. Sin fin.
    23 mins · Like · 4
    • Rachel Giller Forgive me - I have not read all the comments on this thread. I will repeat what I said a couple of months ago when this was brought up (and why I chose to leave the group for awhile because it was like beating a dead horse over and over and over again!!!). To me - this is not an appropriate post. It is gossip and should not even be on here. The DP is aware of the situation. The President of the Synod is aware of the situation. If you have a problem with it, it is not appropriate to be hashing it out on here. No one that is involved is a member of this group to give their side of the story. You may personally know SOME of the facts, but do you know all of them? Were you in the room when things were being discussed???

      This article was written way back in June. It was discussed then, and I believe that the thread was deleted because it was not a discussion that was uplifting and it was not helping further His kingdom.

      Sorry not very eloquently written, but I don't understand why this topic was brought back up.
      2 hrs · Like · 1
    • Joel Dusek You who don't think this subject should be brought up demonstrate the reason why the WELS bureaucracy is corrupt. If you don't hold your leaders accountable and come up with a perpetual train of excuses, the abuses of authority continue. In this case, you are not sheep of the Good Shepherd or His appointed Pastors, but are simply sheep. Man up!
      1 hr · Like · 1
    • Joe Jewell Rachel Giller: We believe this is an appropriate topic for discussion, based on the facts (not gossip--facts) as publicly known. Most of the extensive set of facts that are in the public domain have been put there by the protagonist's own choice (when ...See More

      vdma.wordpress.com
      WCCA stands for Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (formerly known as CCAP), and is the internet portal for information about Wisconsin court cases.  When someone applies for a job, an apartment, or an...
    • One Response


      1. It would be refreshing to see the NWD take a lesson from The Word and demonstrate what He taught us; Repent, ask for forgiveness, and make a change in the behavior so as not to repeat it. As leaders, they should start acting like the one who came to serve us!
    • Beckie Grunewald Joel, your comments are why I now find this thread distasteful. Not one of us is saying what you imply. We're not holding leaders accountable here. What I see is repeated posts about the "good ole boys" and how that will never change. THAT is gossip. Blogs are nice but they still only represent one side. The facts that we have involve only certain aspects. Making judgments on half the story is not God-pleasing. I find it disheartening that people resort to insulting those among us who are trying to keep this on the right side.
      1 hr · Like
    • Rachel Giller Joe - using the excuse that they are facts and public record does not make it ok to continue to hash it out - GOSSIP. We have an established "chain of command". Obviously because this is public knowledge like I said, the DP knows about this, the President of the Synod knows about this. Who are we to judge??? Yes, we know what the court records say, but we DO NOT know what was said in closed doors between these two Pastors and their leaders. 

      And Joel - I take offense to you saying "In this case, you are not sheep of the Good Shepherd or His appointed Pastors, but are simply sheep." Did not Jesus forgive the tax collectors and prostitutes when they were repentant? If I remember correctly he did. No sin is greater than another, whether it is outward sexual immorality or whether it is an itty bitty sinful thought in the back of your mind that you have never taken action on. It is sinful to slander someone's name - which is happening, because even though we have some of the facts, like Beckie said, "blogs are nice but they still only represent one side". Am I "brushing it under the rug" by not discussing? No, I am leaving it up to MY leaders to handle it. Because I trust them and I have faith in them that they are in their appointed positions, where God wants them doing exactly what they need to do.

      Yes, we are all sinful and yes we fail EVERY SINGLE DAY - but ya know what??? WE ARE FORGIVEN!!!!! That is the beauty of it. Christ died on the cross for this specific reason. God knows that we are going to stumble and fall. Thankfully HE is there to pick us back up and set us on our feet again. And we will fall again - and He will continue to pick us back up. Are we suppose to forgive and continue to gossip about it? No. We are suppose to move on. Just as we should be doing now! Have a blessed day. I now get to take my girls to school and go to work!
      49 mins · Like · 1
    • Sherrie Rardin Steve, the call point might have been a main concern for some. Honestly, it is not for me. The main point for me is that it appears, at least to me right now, to be a case of "do what I say for some and not for others" and not within the letter or the spirit of our own doctrine. That is ONE of the things we intend to speak to our pastor to discuss and get more info. What happened to a pastor should be above reproach in his own actions? That is what my husband was told in school with regard to the office of pastor. I am not saying that they would ever be able to meet it, but as a goal it sure seems a pretty good target at which to aim. Beckie, I understand your point on gossip. Truly I do. However, it does seem to me that, at least on the surface, we have more than half the story here. Whether things are taken out of context in this summary, I intend to give the parties (through my pastor) the chance to share. We know that would not be the first in either the media or a blog. However, I will say on the surface that even in a case with merit ONE person filing charges would be sufficient. FOUR seems pretty ridiculous and excessive and, to me personally, meant to intimidate or bully. Our meeting is tomorrow. I will be happy to report PRIVATELY to anyone who is interested on the results of that meeting. If you want me to let you know, please message me privately.
    • Beckie Grunewald On a side note to Rachel, I also believe in forgiveness, but there are still worldly consequences. In the other thread, I believe, it was mentioned that in some cases CRM status should not be given again ever, and I do agree with that.

      Sherrie, thanks
       for that post. Yes, we seem to have more than half the story, but we don't have the whole story. We probably never will have the whole story.

      I too trust my leaders, because God has placed them there for a reason. Do I believe they are perfect? Of course not. But I have the ultimate faith in my Lord.
      9 mins · Like
    • Bryan Spiff Grefsheim Thank God all of our sins are forgiven, especially mine, but also including those of the pastors in question. That, however is a separate issue. Many called workers have been removed from their office for cause and have still been assured of their forgiveness, but also told that they are no longer qualified to serve in the public ministry. Too often the water gets muddied when we talk about forgiveness and the privilege (not the right) to serve as a minster of the Gospel. 
      I do know what it's like to be forced to stand with a loved one who has been wronged in the church while leadership circles the wagons. It's not fun, it's a lonely place to be, and it's led to many of our people seeking their spiritual leadership elsewhere. Our called workers are held to a higher standard and accountability or more openness in this area would really add to the credibility of our synod for many people. 
      The words that the Holy Spirit led Paul to write to the church in Corinth come to mind. We are not to settle our disputes in the public courts. These workers decided to do that for whatever reason and in the end, they seemed to land on their feet. I hope the victim and her family were able to do the same.
  • Joel Dusek Forgiveness requires repentance, and from the public statements and actions of these pastors, they exhibit no repentance. Perhaps, privately, they have, but they should do so publicly as well. Other pastors should be publicly reproving them as well, which is why the blog/Facebook are useful, to call other pastors to action. If that happens and these pastors repent they are forgiven, but are still unqualified for the Ministry. 
    Otherwise, WELS ends not with a bang but with a whisper.
  • ---

  • Joe Jewell "And maybe that's why I wish the public discussion of Ski would tone down - because in some ways it feeds the beast that wants to dig up dirt on all pastors who resign."

    I disagree with that. It's not the DISCUSSION that feeds the beast. It's the simp
    le fact that he got back into ministry at all--and so quickly. People instinctively know that this should not have happened, especially over the objections of so many. Any increase in doubt or eroding of trust in the process is squarely on the shoulders of the two DPs who engineered the "solution" (as well as, of course, on Ski and Glende themselves).
    19 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Dan Babinec I can see your point, Joe Jewell. I was more just throwing out my personal thoughts than trying to sway anyone to stop discussing it. Again, there's another thread for that, so maybe I shouldn't have even said anything in that context.
    16 mins · Like · 1
  • Joe Jewell To be perfectly honest it's the emphasis on how it "should all be quiet and not discussed" that has made me lose the MOST trust in the process. It can't help but make one thing "wow, if they're hushing this up, what else are they hushing up?"... "Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them."
***

GJ - These innocents should realized that all the members are paying for the abusers, through higher insurance premiums. They not only pay the costs of the settlements, but also the court costs, which were quite high just for the Scott Zerbe case in the Michigan District.

Michigan DP was resentful that he had to check out the abusive history of the pastors as an insurance requirement. He and others like him were the reason why the insurance companies insisted - because the settlements were so expensive.

Rejection of justification by faith,
replacing it with universal absolution without faith,
has consequences.

DP Engelbrecht made it clear that SP Schroeder did make a deal when the SP traveled to the Green Bay area to meet with the congregation and DP.

"As a result, and after consultation with WELS President Mark Schroeder and President Engelbrecht, the pastor made his suspension from ministry more clear by tending a letter of resignation.  That was then reported via the weekly call report.  Although President Schroeder expressed his approval of the plan that was developed for the pastor by the District Presidium that could lead to possible return to pastoral ministry, he felt that the term “suspension” caused both confusion and questions that could be avoided by a standard “resignation”.    The pastor, who thereupon  willfully submitted his resignation, has continued to follow the original plan of discipline/restoration developed for him by the Presidium, recognizing it as a beneficial program for his physical, spiritual, and emotional well-being.   Since all too often when a called worker in our synod resigns there is no program put in place that helps him or her to be restored spiritually, emotionally, and physically, it is hoped that the program developed by the Presidium in this case might serve as a model for dealing with such situations that arise in our synod in the future." DP Engelbrecth, who was supported by VP Zank, who replaced Deputy Doug.

Here is some information about what was going on - yet supported by Engelbrecht..