tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post3875520851137904654..comments2023-04-26T04:36:47.052-05:00Comments on Bailing Water: What Now?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger100125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-46674437070532296072007-11-28T22:22:00.000-06:002007-11-28T22:22:00.000-06:00Read The Motley Magpie.Read The Motley Magpie.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-37119925846937538702007-11-16T23:32:00.000-06:002007-11-16T23:32:00.000-06:00anonymous,Working on moving the blog to a discussi...anonymous,<BR/><BR/>Working on moving the blog to a discussion board. So hold tight!<BR/><BR/>I may be moderating comments as I try to save past info.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16191023241749592154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-49708254779609004172007-11-16T23:26:00.000-06:002007-11-16T23:26:00.000-06:00John, What's going on? Why did you start censorin...John, <BR/><BR/>What's going on? Why did you start censoring and deleting posts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-34077439712766966152007-11-16T21:20:00.000-06:002007-11-16T21:20:00.000-06:00Mr. Chruch,As has been pointed out by other blogge...Mr. Chruch,<BR/><BR/>As has been pointed out by other bloggers, we are still waiting for your well-reasoned response to the Small Catechism. As I have mentioned before, those passages say more than "pay the pastor a living wage."<BR/><BR/>In your last post you write:<BR/><BR/>"The fact is that these few commentors, including you, were heavily biased against terminating a pastor from the very start, and would not be swayed against the pastor by any information other than say, the pastor turned out to be a serial killer."<BR/><BR/>Yet I have twice listed the scriptural grounds for removing a man from the office. And neither time did I say that the only ground could be if he were a serial killer. It is ironic that in the same post where you complain about being quoted out of context, you show that you have not paid attention to what I have twice posted.<BR/><BR/>I agree with you, however, that I am very biased about terminating a pastor. That's because scripture is also heavily biased against terminating a pastor. Since Acts 20 makes it clear that God places each pastor over the flock entrusted to his care, the flock has no business getting rid of their God-given shepherd--except, of course, for the grounds I have already mentioned. It is very similar to a marriage. God joins husband and wife together and says: what God has joined together, let man not separate. There are biblical grounds for a divorce, just as there are for terminating a call. But to arbitrarily terminate a call is just as wrong as to arbitrarily seek a divorce.<BR/><BR/>As I have written before, I agree that what your pastor was trying to do was wrong. However, if you were to terminate him, you would have to point out the biblical grounds for such action--something that you failed to do. And then, with those grounds established, you should have terminated him. Cutting his salary was a rather cowardly, non-confrontational way of dealing with the situation. Some might say it was bullying the pastor; I would not disagree with them.<BR/><BR/>After all, I assume that your former pastor is now serving another parish. If he is truly unworthy of the office, then you have just passed the problem along to another congregation. This shows no concern for your brothers and sisters in Christ who are not in your congregation.<BR/><BR/>You also write:<BR/><BR/>"I emailed some other people for them to have a look-see at the conservation thread, and they emailed back declining to comment because they are tired of arguing with people like you who selectively quote. They referred to you as just another "anonymous bully" who has no reputation of fairness and accuracy to maintain. I should never have responded back to such a wimp as you who can't provide a name."<BR/><BR/>The infamous "anonymous others" who are like-minded. Always a red flag when brought up in church. If they feel strongly about the issue, they ought to speak to it themselves.<BR/><BR/>Your continual refusal to address the points actually made and continuing practice of ignoring things that were said (a couple examples of which I have outlined above) have damaged your reputation. You have shown, for all the world to see, that you have no fairness or accuracy in what you write. And for this, I do trust the readers to be able to see that for themselves as they review this thread. I for one rejoice that their survey is unscientific, for we do not use scientific methods when doing theology.<BR/><BR/>I pray that through this discussion, you will once again study the Small Catechism and what it says that hearers owe their pastors. This is not only for your benefit, but also (perhaps more so) for your pastor's benefit. <BR/><BR/>RNNAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-89299932289316033792007-11-16T20:04:00.000-06:002007-11-16T20:04:00.000-06:00Mr. Church,So the readers are the jury, but not th...Mr. Church,<BR/><BR/>So the readers are the jury, but not the ones who commented against you? It is terribly unscientific, but you are the one who brought up the idea. In the end it doesn't matter who on this blog agrees with you and who doesn't. You have not been able to answer the Small Catechism or Scripture regarding your treatment of your former pastor. They carry far more weight than blog comments.<BR/><BR/>No sir, many of us would have been in favor of "terminating" a contemporary worship pushing, Church Growth advocating pastor. What has been pointed out to you several times (though you seem to have missed it) is that while the pastor's theology was not correct, your actions were still wrong. In this respect, you have still not answered numerous questions asked of you and have never answered RNN's quotations from the Catechism. Please do.<BR/><BR/>If you do not like some quoting your words, perhaps you should be more careful about what you say. You have contradicted yourself more than once. <BR/><BR/>It's a bit ironic for you to be calling someone else a bully after you cut your pastor's salary and fired him for not doing what you wanted him to do. <BR/><BR/>mavAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-38407989267239476312007-11-16T18:38:00.000-06:002007-11-16T18:38:00.000-06:00Anonymous, That's an unscientific survey. Besides,...Anonymous, That's an unscientific survey. Besides, this blog as many readers, but only a few commented, and they happened to be misled by your stupid comments.<BR/><BR/>The fact is that these few commentors, including you, were heavily biased against terminating a pastor from the very start, and would not be swayed against the pastor by any information other than say, the pastor turned out to be a serial killer.<BR/><BR/>I emailed some other people for them to have a look-see at the conservation thread, and they emailed back declining to comment because they are tired of arguing with people like you who selectively quote. They referred to you as just another "anonymous bully" who has no reputation of fairness and accuracy to maintain. I should never have responded back to such a wimp as you who can't provide a name.Bruce Churchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997919759731634613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-76070346614197118402007-11-16T17:50:00.000-06:002007-11-16T17:50:00.000-06:00"but the readers are the jury here, so I don't hav..."but the readers are the jury here, so I don't have to convince you"<BR/><BR/>Well, considering that fact that every single reader who has commented here is appalled by what you did to your pastor and what you've said here, it seems that the jury is in and that you've lost your case by a unanimous decision.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-8015426998983280492007-11-16T15:53:00.000-06:002007-11-16T15:53:00.000-06:001 Timothy 5:17-1817The elders who direct the affai...1 Timothy 5:17-18<BR/>17The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,"[b] and "The worker deserves his wages."<BR/><BR/>Notice it doesn't go on to say, "Woe unto you who already give a lot and seek to pad the pastor's wallet."<BR/><BR/>"Perhaps you live in a richer area..." - Mr. Church<BR/><BR/>Nice cop out. I've heard that excuse before. I'd be surprised if I took a look at your church's parking lot on any given Sunday if I would come to the conclusion that your congregation is faithful enough. <BR/><BR/>CLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-73265499165539674172007-11-16T15:30:00.000-06:002007-11-16T15:30:00.000-06:00We consistently pay more than the synod guidelines...We consistently pay more than the synod guidelines suggest, except for that short period when the pastor didn't fulfill Mat 28, and you condemn us? Perhaps you live in a richer area, but our congregants already give a lot, and to get more out of them would require a better excuse than just padding the pastor's wallet.<BR/><BR/>I agree. Having the expectation that a pastor actually do a little evangelism is soooooo abusive.<BR/><BR/>Here are book recommendations for you: "Churches that Abuse," by Enroth, and "Accountable Leadership," by Jossey-Bass.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous, I'll never convince you, but the readers are the jury here, so I don't have to convince you.Bruce Churchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997919759731634613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-71192841583890888882007-11-16T13:38:00.000-06:002007-11-16T13:38:00.000-06:00"About whether this is unfair to a pastor. Yes, it..."About whether this is unfair to a pastor. Yes, it would be if the pastors were paid with peanuts, but have you seen the synod scale for salary and benefits lately?" - Mr. Church<BR/><BR/>I think the "synod scale" is a decent starting point or minimum that pastors should be paid for their level of education and the work they do. Just about every church could do much better. I know that isn't the norm in our synod. I think that's sad. (By the way, I'm not a pastor, and our pastor's salary is close to $70,000, plus roughly another $20,000 for health/dental and other benefits. We're a small congregation of about 150 communicants.)<BR/><BR/>"He was getting 44 grand per year as salary, plus a nice house free, plus health insurance and many other perks. After we docked his his pay, he was getting 40 grand..." - Mr. Church<BR/><BR/>Wow! I'm still young and don't make $44,000 a year yet, but that doesn't mean I rob my pastor. The more you write the more is seems as though God was watching out for your former pastor when he was relieved of the burden of your church. My prayers go out to him, as well as for your new shepherd. It's only a matter of time for him. (By the way, I would highly recommend church members and pastors read the book "Clergy Killers", by Lloyd Rediger.)<BR/><BR/>CLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-59217187812782271892007-11-14T22:20:00.000-06:002007-11-14T22:20:00.000-06:00mthntnConcerning the CG concerns. Let me just str...mthntn<BR/><BR/>Concerning the CG concerns. Let me just stress this from a ministry veteran's standpoint:<BR/><BR/>The problem with CG methodology is that it strives to grow the church instead of the Church. All we can do is try to reach people with the means of grace, Jesus determines what happens after that point. Can we seek better ways to place people in contact with the Holy Spirit's tools, sure?! Who wouldn't want to do that? Can we take any credit for what happens after that, no!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-72325765918482391232007-11-14T17:03:00.000-06:002007-11-14T17:03:00.000-06:00Back on the original topic, I have decided to cont...Back on the original topic, I have decided to continue the blog. I appreciate the open, diverse, and honest opinions. This blog has allowed me an opportunity to struggle with important Scriptural issues. <BR/><BR/>I will try to work with randomdan offline to see if it is possible to format a discussion board. In the meantime I will continue posting as time permits. I do appreciate the suggestions (rnn - I will open a topic on Wauwatosa theology soon).<BR/><BR/>Do feel free to go where the discussion leads. If you have a new topic I will just cut and paste your comment as a new blog post. By all means if you have a "hot" button issue or a "newsworthy" item please post it. <BR/><BR/>I will allow the comments to post automatically. This does help me immensely but beware that spam or trolls may post a comment. So I will monitor the comments as time permits. For the one or two that suggested the blog go on a permanent vacation I guess you can keep posting or not return to this site.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16191023241749592154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-63089299418067979712007-11-14T13:50:00.000-06:002007-11-14T13:50:00.000-06:00Mr. Church,I am glad that you continue to post her...Mr. Church,<BR/><BR/>I am glad that you continue to post here, but find your posts confusing. LM is right, you are placing an incorrect label of church-growth on everyone here opposed to you. It seems to me that you are upset about us pointing out how you are engrossed in church growth language and logic, and so you are trying to turn the tables on us. Of course, your problem is that we are not advocating church growth methods. We are pointing out the logical errors and church growth ideas in your posts.<BR/><BR/>But to be clear: the pastor is placed over a congregation by God to preach the word and administer the sacraments. This is what God has given to the office to do. God does not require or demand results or effectiveness from his pastors. He calls for faithfulness. This means preaching the word correctly and rightly administering the sacraments. Where these are done, God grants faith when and where it pleases him.<BR/><BR/>That is the Lutheran position on what a pastor is and what he is to do. Since it is God who placed him over the congregation, the congregation can remove him from office only for false doctrine, gross sin in his life, or dereliction of duty. <BR/><BR/>Nowhere in here is there a word about membership numbers, attendance, or offerings. God is the one who gives the growth; his pastors scatter the seed or plant or water.<BR/><BR/>There is my position. How is this church growth? Go back through my posts and you will find nothing to contradict this position, but rather this being applied to what you write about your church.<BR/><BR/>You keep bringing up numbers and making reference to God's will that your congregation grow. Those are church growth ideas. <BR/><BR/>It seems that then you refined your position to the pastor being unfaithful to Matt. 28, which resulted in declining numbers. This too is church growth thinking, which holds as a basic truth that faithfulness equals growth in numbers. You will note that nothing of this sort is found in my position, outlined above.<BR/><BR/>So, how am I church growth? Just because I think you acted wrongly towards a pastor does not make me a church growth advocate. As I have written before, your previous pastor was straying from Lutheran theology. I am not arguing that point. What I have been arguing is that you did not apply Lutheran theology to combat him; you instead used church growth logic and the club of the budget to beat him into submission and drive him off.<BR/><BR/>Reread the Catechism quotations on what hearers owe their pastors. If all you find in them is that a pastor should get a living wage, you are missing what is said. Note: obey them, that their work might be a joy and not a burden. Can you honestly reconcile this with lowering a salary to get the pastor to use your chosen methods of evangelism?<BR/><BR/>Your defense that he was still making a living wage misses the point. We don't approach scripture to find out the least that we have to do, so that we can scrape by with as little as possible. That is what you have done with these passages: we were still paying a living wage, so it was all cool.<BR/><BR/>This reminds me of the Yankees and Joe Torre. They wanted to get rid of Torre so they cut his salary. He was forthright and candid enough to call this what it was: an insult. He refused the contract, even though it would have paid him a living wage and then some.<BR/><BR/>The point is, in both cases, the salary was reduced to try to get rid of the guy without firing him. Passive aggressive behavior at its finest. Just as it was for Torre, this was an insult to your pastor. Either you should have shown him from Scripture and the Confessions where he was wrong, and where you had grounds to dismiss him, or you should have lived with the shepherd that God gave you.<BR/><BR/>I hope and pray that you are able to find peace. Such peace will never come from controlling the overseer God has placed over your flock. It will come only as you live under him and receive from his hand God's eternal gifts, delivered in word and sacrament. When you come to see your pastor in this light, attitudes toward pastors change considerably. No longer is he your employee; he is God's man, sent to bring you life and salvation. Then truly it is of no advantage to make his work burdensome.<BR/><BR/>God bless your renewed study of the Catechism and Scripture!<BR/><BR/>RNNAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-26170202703790057262007-11-14T11:51:00.000-06:002007-11-14T11:51:00.000-06:00Bruce,You claim that you compensated your pastor f...Bruce,<BR/><BR/>You claim that you compensated your pastor fairly, but I don't think you ever could have paid him enough to compensate for having to put up with an ignorant jerk like you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-50291959625020497652007-11-14T10:26:00.000-06:002007-11-14T10:26:00.000-06:00"All these objections to what was done at our chur..."All these objections to what was done at our church are fevered rantings of church growth advocates who are wedded to the concept like Amway Salesmen or Jehovah's Witnesses."<BR/><BR/>Bruce, <BR/><BR/>It is hard to keep track of all the anons, but I wouldn't call RNN, UP, and MAV CGM advocates. If you browse through the last few topics you will see that you are mistaken about this. <BR/><BR/>Moreover, your logic is bad. It goes something like this: Bruce Church is against CGM. If you are against Bruce Church, you are a CGM advocate. <BR/><BR/>But CGM isn't the issue here. I don't know what kind of learner you are (auditory, tactile, etc.), but maybe it would help you to re-read RNN and MAV's comments and the portions of the Catechism they refer to out loud. <BR/><BR/>Thanks, <BR/><BR/>LMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-634479884209338122007-11-14T10:07:00.000-06:002007-11-14T10:07:00.000-06:00"we know that the church/pastor were not faithful ..."we know that the church/pastor were not faithful to the Mat 28 commands, so the lack of parishioners and offerings is probably not God's will for our church."<BR/><BR/>Wow, that's not just a quasi-pseudo, could-possibly-be interpreted-right Church Growth kind of saying, that's a full-blown, televangelist-style Church Growth saying.<BR/><BR/>Basically what you're saying is this:<BR/><BR/>1. It's possible for us to know God's hidden will.<BR/><BR/>2. Faithfulness to God's commands equals numerical prosperity.<BR/><BR/>3. Lack of faithfulness to God's commands equals numerical failure.<BR/><BR/>Anyone who calls himself a Lutheran should immediately be able to see the problems with those statements.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-88728218883932174592007-11-13T21:23:00.000-06:002007-11-13T21:23:00.000-06:00"we know that the church/pastor were not faithful ..."we know that the church/pastor were not faithful to the Mat 28 commands"<BR/><BR/>Maybe you should fire yourself as a church member, then. Now, get back to canvassing!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-44876795084286273482007-11-13T21:21:00.000-06:002007-11-13T21:21:00.000-06:00"Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they ar..."Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you."<BR/><BR/>Bruce,<BR/><BR/>What is your answer to this quote from the Small Catechism? It seems to say that the pastors are responsible to God and not to YOU. It also seems to suggest that you should not make your pastors' lives miserable, even if they aren't (sigh) canvassing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-88293191511520023062007-11-13T21:18:00.000-06:002007-11-13T21:18:00.000-06:00"It is true that some of my statements may be foun..."It is true that some of my statements may be found in CG manuals and books, but mainly in regard to the problem and not the proposed solution."<BR/><BR/>Whaaaaaa?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-42736434524159229112007-11-13T21:17:00.000-06:002007-11-13T21:17:00.000-06:00"And this blog is reminding of the statement: Resi..."And this blog is reminding of the statement: Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated."<BR/><BR/>Who's assimliating you into what now?<BR/><BR/>mav<BR/><BR/>P.S. Still waitin' on your answer to the Catechism. Your only answer " we should not obey him when he directs us in in word and by example to continue to not fulfill the Mat 28" is not an answer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-90555894033985984892007-11-13T21:03:00.000-06:002007-11-13T21:03:00.000-06:00Anonymous. It is true that some of my statements m...Anonymous. It is true that some of my statements may be found in CG manuals and books, but mainly in regard to the problem and not the proposed solution. CG has appropriated to itself all methods and evangelism, but I reject that misappropriation for cause. Hence, even some of my solutions would sound CG, but that's is only because CG assimilates everything like the Borg. And this blog is reminding of the statement: Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.Bruce Churchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997919759731634613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-28735206884807244452007-11-13T20:35:00.000-06:002007-11-13T20:35:00.000-06:00Bruce Church wrote:"However, we know that the chur...Bruce Church wrote:<BR/><BR/>"However, we know that the church/pastor were not faithful to the Mat 28 commands, so the lack of parishioners and offerings is probably not God's will for our church."<BR/><BR/>If I'm reading this right, this is like a page out of a church growth textbook!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-88425003213876237812007-11-13T20:31:00.000-06:002007-11-13T20:31:00.000-06:00I touched on the catechism points in my replies al...I touched on the catechism points in my replies already. For example, you noted the Catechism said we owe the pastor a living wage, and I discussed how we over paid him. You said that we need to to obey a pastor, but I said we should not obey him when he directs us in in word and by example to continue to not fulfill the Mat 28. <BR/><BR/>Please don't ask me to answer what I've already answered over and over already.<BR/><BR/>As to money in the offering plate, it is similar to the absence of parishioners in the pews. It makes us review whether we as Christians have been following all of Christ's commands that might have an impact on finances. If we have been faithful, then it is God's will. However, we know that the church/pastor were not faithful to the Mat 28 commands, so the lack of parishioners and offerings is probably not God's will for our church.Bruce Churchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997919759731634613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-65951725711329650712007-11-13T20:07:00.000-06:002007-11-13T20:07:00.000-06:00Bruce said:"All these objections to what was done ...Bruce said:<BR/><BR/>"All these objections to what was done at our church are fevered rantings of church growth advocates who are wedded to the concept like Amway Salesmen or Jehovah's Witnesses."<BR/><BR/>The irony of that comment, made on this blog, is nothing short of amazing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8818242304034182219.post-38652537721689891582007-11-13T20:05:00.000-06:002007-11-13T20:05:00.000-06:00"All these objections to what was done at our chur..."All these objections to what was done at our church are fevered rantings of church growth advocates who are wedded to the concept like Amway Salesmen or Jehovah's Witnesses."<BR/><BR/>No sir. The objections in this lengthy list of comments are from Confessional Lutherans who have asked questions that you have not answered. You still have not addressed RNN's quotes from the Small Catechism. Please do in your next post.<BR/><BR/>You have shown a serious lack of understanding of the doctrine of vocation, the Office of the Holy Ministry, the doctrine of church and ministry, worship, Church Growth Methodology, Scripture, and the Lutheran Confessions. <BR/><BR/>"Too many ministers of the gospel like to the the pleasant tasks of ministry that only deal with the saved, and leave the less pleasant tasks such as evangelism for the laymen." You mean the 'pleasant' task of dealing with people like yourself? Lord have mercy on your current and future pastors!<BR/><BR/>You seem to be an angry, bitter, envious man who relishes exercising power (power of the purse?), even though you have no idea what you are talking about and are in reality just embarrassing yourself. <BR/><BR/>Please prepare and post an answer to the quotes from the Small Catechism. And, if you have time, please tell us why you keep bringing up money.<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/>mavAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com