Friday, September 29, 2017

ELCA Loves UOJ and Church Growth Too -
And Their Seminaries Are Cratering


One of Mark Jeske's Change or Die ELCA speakers
is from the heart of ELCA activism - St. Paul, Minnesota.

Related - The Lutherans are like the NFL.




Watch these three synods evaporate almost as fast -
for the same reasons, UOJ, Church Growth, and radicalism.


The Research and Evaluation Department of the ELCA released a report in March exploring future trends for supply and demand for clergy in 2016.

The report explores data regarding baptized members, congregations, and pastors in the ELCA between 2005 and 2014.
Here are a few numbers from the report:

Between 2005 and 2014:

  • the number of congregations in ELCA has decreased from 10,549 to 9,392
  • baptized membership has gone from 4.85 million to 3.78 million
  • median size of congregation has gone from 296 baptized members to 247 baptized
  • median worship attendees on a Sunday declined from 91 to 70
  • the number of congregations with 350 or more in worship has gone down from 676 to 376
  • the proportion of congregations in rural or small town areas has not changed much – about  48%
  • median income for a congregation has decreased from $151,000 to $117,000.
  • the number of clergy serving congregations has declined from 9,105 to 6,868
  • ELCA M.Div graduates at ELCA seminaries went down from 245 to 209
  • first year enrollments in ELCA seminaries decreased from 310 to 214
In 1988 the average age on the clergy roster was 46-year-old & only 9 % of active clergy were over 60.  In 2013 the average had increased to 54 with 32% active clergy over 60.75 to 80 % of seminary graduates have a geographical preference.


Some posted comments below the article -

  1. Maybe more would consider ministry if they saw the clergy not being treated so poorly.
    REPLY
    • I thought the same thing. I’m blessed to serve loving congregations, but I know there is a lot of dysfunction in our congregations that needs to be addressed in a loving but truthful manner.
      REPLY
    • With incivility on the rise, increasing anxiety regarding decline, and the bullying of pastors (not an issue we take too seriously) this is a most excellent and relevant point.
      REPLY
  2. Where is all that was promised with ELW? The simplification, weakening, and corruption of the liturgy has led directly to a lesser regard for the Sacraments, and so why would we expect vocations to increase, or even remain stable?
    (For what it’s worth, I’m a young millennial, socially liberal, and all for ordaining anyone God calls, whether male or female, gay or straight, cis or trans. I just can’t believe how easy it has been for the ELCA to lose its liturgical roots.)
    REPLY
  3. Let’s concern ourselves with helping our current group of new clergy pay down their massive student debt before recruiting more people to share their burden.
    REPLY
  4. I seriously considered seminary as I felt the call to ministry and met with my synod. If you don’t have the cash to pay for undergrad and seminary they discourage attending due to the overwhelming debt of student loans on top of struggling financially due to a low-paying first call. So now we don’t have enough Pastors because not enough people are going to Seminary. So am I the only one seeing a disconnect here? I am sure I am not the only one in this situation. Praise God for the Lutheran Deaconess Association as they have entrusted me to find my own way financially and will equip me for ministry as I am called. This is another avenue I have chosen in which to become a theologically trained.
    REPLY
  5. By my calculations, we are losing appx. 800 congregations every 9 years, about 90 a year close. At that rate, in a little over 80 years, the ELCA will cease to exist as it is orginized today. We need to begin casting our nets on the other side of the boat or we are going to continue to catch no fish…aka, we will die as a movement. I do believe that we need to re-center ourselves around the means of Grace and tell God’s story in more bold and meaningful ways which relate to the 21st century. (I am a 29 yo 1st call pastor serving a congregation that is struggling.)

[E-Book Download] Why The Reformation? by Emanuel Greenwald - Comfort for Christians



[E-Book Download] Why The Reformation? by Emanuel Greenwald - Comfort for Christians:



"Alec Satin
Writes about Biblical Orthodoxy, the spirit of the age, and living with faith. Loves the old songs.
Follow
Toggle Menu
[E-Book Download] Why The Reformation? by Emanuel Greenwald
3 minute read




A Sensation in the Town
In 1879 a series of spirited talks were given in Lancaster, PA which were sharply critical of the doctrines and character of Martin Luther and of the Reformation. In response, Rev. Greenwald gave seven Sunday Evening Sermons addressing the points raised. The content of these well-attended messages were published later that year under the title, Discourses on Romanism and the Reformation.

About the Author, Rev. Emanuel Greenwald
Emanuel Greenwald, D.D. was born in 1811 near Frederick, Maryland. His devout parents prepared their son for the ministry from an early age. There’s a possibility the Greenwalds were Jewish converts to Lutheranism. Emanuel studied theology under the personal supervision of Rev. David F. Schaeffer.

Rev. Greenwald’s first parish in New Philadelphia, Ohio included country for fifteen miles in each direction. At one point he supplied fourteen preaching points on Sundays and week-days.

In 1842 Dr. Greenwald became the first editor of the Lutheran Standard. He was the president of the English District Synod of Ohio from 1848 to 1850 and held many important positions in Columbus over the following years. In 1854 he accepted a call to Christ Church, Easton, PA, where he served for 12 years. His final parish was Holy Trinity Church of Lancaster, PA where he ministered from 1867 until his death in 1885.1

His best-known works are Order for Family Prayer and its 1883 revision, Jesus our table guest, which includes these words:

May Jesus be the Table Guest in every house! With fervent prayers for the divine blessing upon this humble attempt to glorify His dear name, this little volume is sent forth into our families.

Is The Reformation Over?
In 2015, Pope Frances declared, The Reformation is Over.2 Is the Pope right? Many evangelical Christians don’t see any significant differences between what they consider the “different flavors” of Christianity. For this reason, some background knowledge is needed of what happened back then and why, if only to show respect for those brothers and sisters in the faith who gave their lives to uphold their consciences.

Greenwald’s book may be the best primer available for this purpose. It answers:

Was the Reformation necessary?

What were the essential issues? Do they still apply?

Has the Roman Catholic Church changed in its claims?

Partial Outline
St. Paul’s Church of Rome
Who founded the Church of Rome?
Who was the first Bishop in Rome?
Was Peter ever in Rome?
The Papacy
According to the Roman Catholic Church, what is the office and jurisdiction of the Pope?
What is the Power of the Keys?
How did the Papacy develop over time?
Doctrines of the Church of Rome
How do the Apocryphal Books relate to the Old and New Testaments?
What is the role of oral tradition?
What is original sin?
Are human beings justified by faith plus works?
Is the Mass a sacrifice for sins?
Should we invoke saints in prayer?
Rome a Persecuting Church
What was St Bartholomew’s Eve?
The Huguenots, Waldenses and Vaudois.
Pope Pius IX (1864) pronounces anathemas on all who maintain liberty of the press, of conscience and of free speech
Necessity of the Reformation
How the Gospel as a system of faith and salvation became corrupted.
The despotism of the Papacy in the Dark Ages.
The gross ignorance of the clergy and the people.
The licentiousness of the priests and monks.
Reform Before the Reformation
Strong opposition to the use and worship of images including by Charlemagne, Agobard, and Claudius, Bishop of Turin.
Bernard of Clairvaux’s calling out of drunkenness and other vices of the Popes, bishops, monks and priests in the twelfth century.
Rejection of the hierarchical Papal system by the Catharoi in the eleventh century.
Peter de Bruys efforts against superstition and abuses from 1110 - 1130.
The Albigenses in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
Historical Sketch of the Reformation
Download the eBook
Adobe EPUB eBook

Kindle Book

PDF direct link

Or you can send a request to: lutheranlibrary at runbox dot com"



'via Blog this'

John 18 - English Commentary - The Ironic Chapter


John 18King James Version (KJV)

18 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples.
And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples.

These are the kind of details that come from an eyewitness. The Apostle John gives us a precise location and the reason why Judas would find it easy to take the authorities there. This was important in finding the right person and making the arrest, away from the crowds who might easily have fought and killed a band of armed men taking Him away. KJV "resorted" means - gathered there.

This is the Garden of Gethsemane. Since John is supplementing what we already know from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he offers significant new details.

Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.

Judas not only had the security team from the chief priests and Pharisees, but also a band of men - Roman soldiers. They arrived together for the arrest with plenty of light and weapons - an intimidating group.

Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?
They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.
As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

Jesus knew all that would take place. He took the lead, placing Himself in the front and making Himself the clear leader. They answered with His traditional name - Jesus of Nazareth. However He replied, "I AM." This is the divine Name declared from the Burning Bush, Exodus 3 - not simply "I am he." (John 8 - "Before Abraham was, I AM.") Because of this, the arresting group went back and fell to the ground. The language of John's Gospel shows clearly when Jesus says, "I AM" and also where this distinctive title is omitted.
Lenski quoting Luther: "John did not want this to be left unsaid in order that by means of the actual act he might indicate with certainty who this person is: so that no one is to think that this is only a commonman but a person who with seven letters: I AM - ego eimi - hurls them all back upon the ground, both the cohort and the servants of the high priest, including also Judas, the traitor. This was a peculiar and divine power which Jesus intended to display, not only in order to frighten the Jews, but also to strengthen the disciples." Lenski Commentary on this verse.

His own disciple came with an impressive group of men, with plenty of illumination and weapons, yet they fell backwards at the Name of God.

Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way:
That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.

This illustrates how Jesus placed Himself into the hands of the authorities, Roman and Jewish, in accordance with Isaiah 53. All of the disciples should have been arrested and killed, but Jesus lost none of them at this time, the will of God.

10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

This is especially important during the indictment of Jesus, because He was witnessing about Himself to the Jewish authorities while Peter was denying Him. The name of the servant suggests to me that Malchus became one of the early Christians.

Peter is consistently rash and impulsive, so we have a clear picture of his personality, his weaknesses, and the rebuke of Jesus, literally "throw the sword" back into its sheath. Jesus must continue to be the Lamb of Isaiah 53, which is the Gospel of the Old Testament, a chapter that made no sense until every phrase was fulfilled.

12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him,
13 And led him away to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.
14 Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people.

Jesus offered no resistance but was tied up - no resistance came from Him. They took to Annas first the father-in-law of the High Priest Caiaphas, who predicted ironically that one man should die for his people. The High Priest meant to kill Jesus to save their land, their Temple, their people  The result of Jewish zealotry was that 40 years later, they lost their land - occupied, their Temple - destroyed, and their people - killed, starved, and sold into slavery.

The use of High Priest as a title is like that of Bishop in the Episcopal Church - once a bishop, always a bishop. That also holds true in other offices, secular and ecclesiastical.


15 And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest.
16 But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter.

John's Gospel is concise but spends time and words showing us that he was connected with this household, which is why Peter was let into the area.

17 Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this man's disciples? He saith, I am not.
18 And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and Peter stood with them, and warmed himself.

The servant girl thought Peter was one of the disciples too, since John had him included. Peter said - ouk eimi,
not the same as ego eimi. The Greek verb does not demand the pronoun. I believe Peter's denial was muted but also an ironic contrast with Jesus' clear "I AM."

19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine.
20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.
21 Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said.

This is Jesus' witness to His work. Note from before, in the High Priestly Prayer of Chapter 17,  that the work was already completed. That is - He did everything in accordance with the Father's will so that the crucifixion would take place. We should remember that when everything seems against sincere Christians and the only thanks is bearing the cross.

22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so?
23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?

This is another irony - that Jesus spoke the truth while in the hands of His opponents - as the true High Priest. He was struck in the face, a humiliating insult, for speaking the truth to the man with the title of High Priest.

24 Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.
25 And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his disciples? He denied it, and said, I am not.
26 One of the servants of the high priest, being his kinsman whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with him?
27 Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.

The three-fold denials of Peter frame the confession of Jesus at His indictment. He denied His own Savior while warming himself by the charcoal. When the risen Lord came to him later, Peter was absolved three-times before a similar fire, John 21:9.
Peter's last denial is especially telling, because the relative of the man whose ear was cut off and then healed by Jesus could hardly be wrong. This prompts people today to cluck their tongues about Peter, but the entire story shows how Jesus confessed the truth while facing torture and death, yet died not only for petty sins, but also for great and terrible sins. Satan would gladly toss us into a bottomless crevice for our sins, but the Savior raises us up with mercy, love, forgiveness, and the righteousness of faith.

28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.

This is almost comical, that the troop did not want to be defiled by being inside the Judgement Hall before the Passover, so they sent the true Passover Lamb in for condemnation. Pilate had to go back and forth. This setting is similar to a storyline in a play, because John makes it visually clear and compelling.

29 Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man?
30 They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee.

Their answer is weak and evasive, because Jesus has done no wrong. Moreover, the opponents were terrified of the crowd reactions if they did this in the open. Thus the forces of evil are always secretive, evasive, and eager to slander by implication. The answer is not to be better politicians but to speak the truth of the Gospel at all times, at all places. The politicians assume the tactics of their Father Below and are dragged down to be with their infernal master.

31 Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death:
32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.

The Jewish opponents betrayed their hand when they refused to participate in the death sentence they wanted. Therefore Jesus predictions that He would be killed - found in all the Gospels - was fulfilled.

33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Jesus correctly identified the false implications of being called the King of Jews by His opponents. To Pilate, this would be treason, since he was the ruler of fallen Israel. That would make Jesus his political and military opponent, someone who would have to be destroyed. Therefore, he asked about the truth of the accusation and Jesus responded accordingly, not being evasive but to the point.

Pilate resorted to the accusation often brought against clergy who tell the truth. If everyone is upset, you must have done something terrible.

Jesus' answer is to explain His Kingdom, which is no threat to Pilate. His Kingdom does not follow the ways of Mammon, material wealth and power. Not "from there" evokes His origin - He came "from above" - ano-then.

37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Although Jesus did not fight against the authorities, He witnessed to His mission in this majestic and often overlooked statement. He admitted to being a king.
"To this end was I born" is a reference to His divine origin and Virgin Birth. Rationalists like to say that the Virgin Birth is not taught or mentioned in the Fourth Gospel. That is correct - because the  Virgin Birth is assumed throughout. His Virgin Birth is subordinate to His pre-existence as the Son of God, the Creating Word, John 1. Or, one might say, His Virgin Birth is reflective of His Two Natures, human and divine. 
Jesus came "into this world" from above, as we know from John 3. His entire mission is to speak the truth to the world, and believers hear His voice.
Every passage of the Scriptures repudiates the self-serving Universalism of forgiveness and salvation without faith. Jesus always taught forgiveness through faith in Him, condemnation for all unbelievers, especially the thieves and brigands who do not enter through the Gate - faith in Jesus - John 10.

38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all.
39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

The best way to reject truth is to question whether truth exists. Everyone has an opinion, a perspective. Like all politicians, finding no fault, Pilate lets Jesus be crucified.

Barrabas was a brigand, a term used in John 10:1.