Veteran Pastor David Buegler Explains To His Congregation

These paragraphs are written as my subjective opinions about the roots and causes of the emerging division within our beloved Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.  The basis for my opinions is formed from my last 30 years interacting with most of the individuals named in this “white paper.”  I have personally corresponded with or talked in person to each of the people mentioned in this paper, offering my advice and opinion. 

Sharing my perspective comes with the request of readers to pray for our church.  You can argue with the conclusions I have drawn but you cannot argue with my heart.  This is simply one person’s opinion. ..I share it with you only for what it is worth. 

I believe it is a shameful waste for our church to expend so much energy fighting among ourselves when we have the greatest treasure this world can ever discover—the pure gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.  This remains the great strength of our church and the reason I am so proud to be a part of her ministry…despite our ugly battle scars.

The ‘60s—A Theological Battle

Let’s start by going back to the 1960s.  Across our synod “theological liberalism” was rearing its ugly head in influential places.  The movement that came over from Europe 30 years earlier and had already infiltrated a lot of mainline Amercan Christianity in the ‘40s and ‘50s was now among us.  It reached a crossroads at the 1969 convention of our Synod with the election as synod president of Dr. Jacob Preus.  

He initiated an investigation of the theology being taught at our St. Louis Seminary.  To make a long story short, much of that seminary’s faculty and student body “walked out” and formed “Seminex”  (Seminary-in-exile).  Among the five professors that stayed to “defend the truth” were two young future stars, Ralph Bohlmann and Robert Preus (brother of Jacob). 

To move the story forward, both were recognized by our church for their leadership and faithfulness. Ralph Bohlmann became president of the St. Louis seminary and Robert Preus became president of the Ft. Wayne seminary.  As time went on only one of them became president of the Synod (Ralph Bohlmann).  At Ft. Wayne a movement began under the leadership of the one who didn’t get the presidency of Synod;  although as the years went by many confessionals supported him.

Enter the “Confessionals”

That movement I will call “confessional.”  It was a step beyond “conservative” because after the seminex split all parties in power were theologically conservative.  This confessional movement took upon itself other features such as “high” liturgical practices, an elevated teaching regarding the role of clergy “over” laity, more emphasis on “sacra-mentalism” than on evangelism and mission, a battle against “church growth” principals, a desire to repeal the 1969 synodical decision to allow women’s suffrage.  It became a movement to legalize our Synod’s long established understanding of “close communion” so as not to allow any pastoral discretion, and a tightening up of our Synod’s long-running understanding of the various levels of how we can fellowship with other Christians. 

Clergy in this movement were marked by wearing clerical collars in most public settings.  Some in this movement held that laity could only receive absolution from clergy and that private confession should be emphasized in the parish and that there should never be a worship service that does not offer Holy Communion.  

People in our Synod (like me) who believed in all the miracles of the Bible, the inerrancy of  Scripture, that God created the world in six 24-hour days, the historicity of Adam and Eve, that Moses parted the Red Sea etc., etc., etc. were now labeled as “moderates or liberals” if they didn’t hold to the “Ft Wayne Confessional” movement.   Partially as a result of his leadership of this movement, Robert Preus was removed from his office as Ft. Wayne president by the Board of Regents with the concurrence of  Synod President Ralph Bohlmann.   The battle was about to get nasty.

Really About Power

This battle would not be about THEOLOGY as the battle had been in the ‘60s and ‘70s, because all parties held to a conservative theological understanding of the Scriptures.  This battle would now be about POWER.  And in our Synod the POWER is in the delegates.  Starting with the 1989 synodical convention in Wichita, Kansas and for every convention since, the POWER battle explained in the above paragraph has more and more divided our church.  In Wichita it was over the role of the laity and an unsuccessful attempt to defeat incumbent President Bohlmann.  In Pittsburgh in 1992 it was over the removal of Robert Preus and a successful attempt to defeat Ralph Bohlmann with a narrow victory by the new president, Al Barry. 

The POWER battle between these two groups heated up with thousands of dollars worth of POLITICAL posturing, mailings to delegates, speaking tours, and videos, all trying to influence delegates to side with the “conservatives” or the “Confessionals.”  (These are my labels for the two sides of this power game.) 

Well, every three years things heat up for election control of Synodical boards, election control of seminary and college Boards of Regents, election control of Synodical officers, because at each triennial convention most officers and boards are elected.  And in the years since the late ‘80s these elections have been worked at for months by POLITICAL camps making use of publications of influence, the internet and parliamentary maneuvering that borders on the silly. 

 The process is further complicated by radical fringes hooking on to one or the other of “two” groups.  Charismatics and liberals (though there are very few of them in our Synod) have hooked on to the “conservatives.”  And liturgical terrorists and apostolic succession-minded clergy have hooked on to the “confessionals.”  

Where the Seminaries Stand

Both of our seminaries are fine institutions for training our pastors and many fine men come into our parishes from both seminaries.  However, at this time the St. Louis seminary is controlled by “conservatives” and the Ft. Wayne seminary is controlled by “confessionals.”  So, needless to say, these influences rub off onto many of the future pastors going out into the church from these respective seminary communities.

July 2001     

Well, let’s move this story up to July 2001.  Our Synod was meeting for its triennial convention in St. Louis.  Once more, the POLITICAL groups were doing their best (much of it by well meaning people) to gain POWER for their position for the next three years.  It became all the more important because only months before the convention President Al Barry was called to his eternal rest.  A vacancy in the office of Synodical president would be settled with the very first election as the delegates gathered.  The conservatives were camped behind a District President from Texas by the name of Gerald Kieschnick.  The confessionals were split between the late Robert Preus’s son, Daniel, and the Ft. Wayne President, Dean Wenthe. 

Well, with that POLITICAL mistake by the confessionals in splitting their early support, President Kieschnick, on the fourth ballot, narrowly won and became the new Synod President.  Pray for him.  He is a wonderful man of God.  In many of the elections that followed the confessionals WON.  Four of the five Vice Presidents were confessional candidates:  Dan Preus, Wallace Schultz, Robert King and William Weinrich.  The only elected Vice President supported by conservatives was Paul Maier.  

The convention went on to enact the legislation of the church united on many items that were THEOLOGICAL in nature and deeply divided on issues that were POLITICAL in nature.   You see, this is the problem in our church.

Following the convention, needless to say, the confessionals were distressed that they lost the presidency.  The conservatives were distressed that they lost the Vice Presidents and the major boards of Synod.  Most assumed it would be an interesting three years of posturing back and forth. 

September 11

And then September 11^th happened.   Just a few days earlier the new officers of Synod had been installed.  New York was attacked, and Mayor Guilianni called a community torn apart to gather at Yankee Stadium for patriotic prayers.  Celebrities (Oprah, Lee Greenwood, etc) Politicians (Bill and Hillary Clinton, etc.) were on the podium for speeches, and then several religious dignitaries were invited by the Mayor to offer prayers (including several non-Christian prayers). 

One of those invited was the Atlantic District President David Benke who is also a parish pastor not far from ground zero in New York.  His parish and District were already deeply involved in ministering to the needs of a city in crisis.  Maybe you saw him that day on television.  Were you angry that he was there?  Or like me, were you proud that our Missouri Synod was giving a clear witness to the Lord Jesus Christ at that civic ceremony that the whole nation was watching?

Confessionals Take Aim

Then the confessionals reacted.  You see, before he participated, Dr. Benke had called Dr. Kieschnick to receive advice and it was agreed that he should go ahead and give a bold witness to Jesus Christ.  This was not a worship service but a civic event.  Our fellowship practice that was re-adopted at the 2001 convention approved our participation in these unusual civic events and recognized that pastoral discretion needs to be allowed, particularly when pastors first consult with their ecclesiastical supervisors. 

But the confessionals were offended.  They considered the Yankee Stadium event a worship service, and therefore for Dr. Benke to participate with Jews, Hindus, etc. was—unionism.  Unless he apologized, they called for his removal from the Synod. 

Charges were filed.  That would have been an interesting battle in itself and would have caused our church to positively discuss the further definition of what a civic event is and what a worship event is.  It could have been dealt with through appropriate channels.  

But then something interesting happened.  The confessionals went after Dr. Kieschnick and their motives now were clearly POLITICAL.  They were upset they lost the election for president, and here was their POWER move to remove the president. Of course, the first Vice President who would then take over was Dan Preus, who had quickly denounced the actions of Dr. Benke.  This is what really escalated this battle—not a legitimate difference of opinion concerning fellowship issues, but a POLITICAL battle for POWER.

Well, what happened next?  The Synod President is the supervisor of the District Presidents.  The matter of what to do with the charges against Dr. Benke should have been heard and dealt with by the President,  but the Synod’s Vice Presidents, by a narrow vote (later backed by Synod’s Commission on Constitutional Matters), decided President Kieshnick should recuse himself from that role since he had originally been the one to approve Dr. Benke’s participation.  Then supervision would fall to the first Vice President Dan Preus.  But remember, Dr. Preus had already given a major speech denouncing Dr. Benke’s participation so he was advised to recuse himself, which he did.  Now the supervision fell to the Second Vice President, Wallace Schultz. 

Rev. Wallace Schultz was also the associate Lutheran Hour Speaker.  His supervisors at the Lutheran Hour Ministries “urged” him to recuse himself because of a “conflict of interest” policy under which he was called by LHM not to participate in any activity that would bring harm to the ministry of the Lutheran Hour.   Dr. Schultz refused to heed that advice, and after months went by, acted to suspend Dr. Benke from his role as District President and called his actions at Yankee Stadium a sin against the  First and Second Commandments, unionism and so on.

Three more actions have occurred.  

• Dr. Benke has appealed the decision of Dr. Schultz.  There is an appeal process. 

• Dr. Schultz has been suspended from his role as Lutheran Hour Speaker.

• Dr. Kieschnick has “called for review” Dr. Schultz’s decision because it goes against the resolutions of Synod in convention, and all Synodical officers are to uphold Synod’s resolutions, based upon their installation vow.

August 2002

And that’s where we are in August, 2002.   Several other complications have occurred.  The Synod’s Board of Directors (controlled by confessionals) early on put a gag order on all parties, including Synod’s communication division, forbidding them to share any of these details.  That’s why we haven’t heard much about the case. 

They were wrong.  This action is not within their power.  Dr. Kieschnick told them they were wrong.  He went ahead and sent a letter out to all pastors to keep us informed.  The Commission on Constitutional Matters recently ruled against the Board of Directors and we are finally getting some news.

The Lutheran Laymen’s League just completed their convention and upheld their Board of Governors and the suspension of Dr. Schultz.  Paul Harvey, Bill O’Reilly, the secular press, etc. has had a field day making fun of this little band of people who are fighting against each other over the Yankee Stadium event.  Little do they all know that the division in our church is much deeper and complex.  And it is not a theological division….it is one of POWER.

Standing Tall for the Historic LCMS

I encourage us here in our congregation to stand tall with our historic Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod principles:

• The Bible is our sole norm for faith and practice.

• The Church belongs to the laity, who call pastors to ad-minister Word and Sacraments publicly on their behalf.

• The Church exists to carry out the Great Commission.

• We need to reach the lost for the cause of Christ and we are not afraid to go into the world with boldness.

• Our role is not to “lord it over one another” but to “serve one another.”

• We don’t have enough energy to waste on fighting one another when the enemy is the devil and unbelief all around us.

• The District and Synod are advisory and are to serve congregations.

It should come as no surprise to anyone who is still reading this document that I am a proud “conservative.”  I have participated in the attempts to influence my church to maintain our historic stand.  I consider the “confessional” stance to be a harmful movement in our midst. 

I fear for the future of our church, and at this point I do not see the possibility for compromise.  There may well be an organizational division within our church in the years ahead.  It won’t happen right away. 

I believe it is largely a clergy division.  I think our lay people are much more united.  I sense no division within our parish and we intend to keep it that way.  I also believe we should use the influence of our significant parish to pray for, support, and encourage our Synodical leaders to deal with the issues at hand according to our agreed-upon means for dissent and MOVE ON with the MISSION of our church.

The world may laugh at us if they want.  I just don’t ever want our Lord to cry over us.  I’m afraid He does just that when we behave so poorly and fail to share His great treasure given to our beloved Synod to offer up to the world around us.  God be with us all.

Rev. David D Buegler is a pastor at St. Paul Lutheran Church in Westlake OH.  For much of the 1990s he served as President of the Ohio District.