 |
||
 |
|
|
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
"A Prayer at Yankee Stadium" Presented by Various Pastoral Conferences, LCMS Rev. Dr. David H. Benke, President May 2002 Page 1 I 2 (Continued from page 1) Many of my questioners over the months have dissected and scrutinized every syllable of my prayer and introduction claiming that I did not give a clear Gospel witness. In some of those cases, the questioners have stumbled badly, giving the impression that it is not possible for a Christian to pray for non-Christians, or I guess even a Missouri Synod Lutheran to pray for other Christians. These folks have lost touch with the objective reconciliation of the Gospel – "for God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD (literally "the cosmos") unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." Does Lutheran prayer only apply to Lutherans? If there's a drought, do we pray for the rain to fall only on the REALLY JUST, that is the Lutherans of the Missouri Synod variety? 4) In what ways does the quotation provided by President Kieschnick from the document, "The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship: A Report on Synodical Discussions" in his statement of September 25, 2001, relate to the context and issues actually being addressed in that document? Read these words from the document, under the category "Cases of Discretion:" "Some of these are civic events. Offering prayers, speaking and reading Scripture at events sponsored by governments, public schools and volunteer organizations would be a problem if the organization in charge restricted a Christian witness." The quotation by President Kieschnick applies directly to Yankee Stadium for two reasons: a) it was a civic event, sponsored by the government of the City of New York through the office of the Mayor b) I presented a witness in Jesus' Name. My Christian witness was NOT restricted. The theology underlying the paragraph "Cases of Discretion" which is referenced is the theology of the Two Kingdoms. It is pertinent and timely. See above, and throughout this response. 5) In what contexts is it, if ever, permissible for us to ask Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, and confessing members of other false religions to pray with us? If so, whose God is being prayed to? I reference question 3 above in response. I simply add that the question is impertinent and actually syncretistic (!) in that it gives credence to polytheism, the belief that there are indeed other gods. Why would the questioners state "Whose God (capitol G!) is being prayed to?" Do the questioners know some other gods out there with which I am not yet acquainted? My prayer, in Jesus' Name, was to the One True God. I did not pray with Muslims, Hindus and Jews at Yankee Stadium. Nor did any Christian who watched the event on television pray with them. I prayed in their presence, or as President Kieschnick has phrased it, in their midst. They were invited, not forced, to listen. Some did not. Some did. That is the way of the Christian witness in the world. Some seed falls on stony ground, some on good soil. Either way, the seed was sown in my prayer. 6) In what way are we able to refer to heathen as "brothers and sisters"? Does not Holy Scripture refer to them as enemies of the Gospel? By their improper invasion of God's Kingdom of the Left under what they perceive to be the auspices of God's Kingdom of Grace, my questioners would by necessity tragically end up restricting Christian witness in the world. Those who question my using the words "brothers and sisters" of non-Christians as I was engaging in my Christian witness understand neither Paul on Mars Hill referencing the fact that we are all indeed "God's offspring," (Acts 17:29) nor apparently the plain universal application of II Corinthians 5:19. When "worship" in the narrow sense, of Divine Service, which is so precious to us in God's Kingdom of the Right, and under which auspices we find the very "axis mundi," the true center of the universe in God's Means of Grace, is imported into the sphere of God's activity in the Kingdom of Power under the auspices of civil religion, the very heart of the Gospel is affected! This is precisely why this false importation or invasion is vigorously opposed in the Lutheran Confessions (Augsburg Confession, Article XVII). In point of fact, in God's Kingdom of the Left Hand, I and all of us faithful lifelong LCMS Lutherans are indeed, as children of Adam, "brothers and sisters" with people of other religions, races and creeds. There is just one human race, and whether some like it or not, we're all part of it. In preparation for witnessing the Name of Jesus, what better place and time to emphasize our common humanity? 7) In what ways did President Benke's participation result in a clear witness that salvation is found only in Jesus Christ? The testimony of thousands might be one way to ascertain this. Several months ago I sent a package of papers weighing eleven pounds to the Board of Directors of the LCMS in testimony of the positive response to my Christian witness. Still, I am not one of those who holds that "majority vote" somehow makes for good theology. This is the reason I oppose the continued use of Synodical Conventions to pass doctrinal resolutions by majority vote. The theology of the Two Kingdoms as well as the "Cases of Discretion" portion of the "Lutheran Understanding of Fellowship" document indicate that the "witness" need not in any and every case be a complete theological exposition, but does need to be explicitly Christian. The false invasion of the Kingdom of the Left by the Kingdom of the Right is what is inherent in this question. The purpose of a Christian witness in the civic arena is not to proselytize, but to…WITNESS. Lutherans are specifically NOT Baptists. A prayer for the healing of wounded humanity in Jesus' Precious Name WAS the witness presented, and it was not only appropriate but the very witness described in the CTCR document. 8) In what ways do the actions of President Benke, and their subsequent support by President Kieschnick, speak to those Christians (e.g. Nuers in Sudan) who are being tortured and martyred because they will not acknowledge that Allah is God? How do we address this very real concern of theirs that we have seriously compromised the faith? This question is extremely poorly written and offensive. It implies that I have in some way acknowledged Allah as God. That is patently false. I did no such thing. An apology is owed me. Secondly, the question implies falsely that I have "compromised the faith." Again, what I have done is WITNESSED the faith in Jesus' Name. Persecuted Christians serve as missionaries in the Atlantic District, from South Asia, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Africa. Their testimonies are contained in letters sent to me that are readily available. They are deeply offended not only by the attacks on me, but also by the lack of basic knowledge of witness in the world apparent in this question. One such missionary left his country of origin at gunpoint, his wife and children still there. He has spoken to me at length about his bafflement at the treatment accorded me, and the low esteem in which the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod apparently holds Christian witness. He knows full well what witness can bring. Another such missionary had a price on his head, a contract, if you will, in his native country. He sees the activities of my accusers as a kind of "cutting the wound," taking a person who is already enduring great pain from a tragic event and putting him through far more pain. He knows full well what witness can bring. Atlantic District congregations and missions hold worship services as citizens of God's Kingdom of Grace in 18 languages at present. NONE of the immigrant members, many of whom have undergone religious persecution, have been offended by my participation at Yankee Stadium. ALL of them took comfort from my prayer. 9) Our Synod has stated in Convention that we can no longer consider the ELCA "to be an orthodox Lutheran church body." What are the implications for the participation of President Benke and President Kieschnick with the highest-ranking ELCA officials in a joint worship service, as well as the Synod's stated desire to address our concerns and our ongoing relationship with the ELCA? There are no implications to the "Occasion for Prayer" attended by President Kieschnick and myself on September 19. It was a once-in-a-lifetime occasion as outlined in the "Cases of Discretion" document. The event followed the greatest attack in our nation's history from outside its borders. I have stated and will continue to state that in New York Lutherans WILL band together in "works of mercy" across denominational borders. Lutheran Disaster Response of New York is just that – LUTHERAN without apology, inter-Lutheran by design. It is seen as the most successful and comprehensive of the faith-based initiatives after September 11. I am proud that Synodical President Kieschnick came to pray with us Lutherans on September 19, 2001. The amount of, for lack of a stronger word, persecution leveled at our Synodical President following his participation in that event, including the placing of doctrinal charges later ruled out of order against him, absolutely belies the directive of the document that ends, "Let Charity Prevail." The Missouri Synod has become a Charity-Free Zone, and that is a crying shame. 10) Given the attention that the events surrounding the terrorist attacks have gained world-wide, in what ways do the actions of President Benke and President Kieschnick send a clear Scriptural and Confessional witness to those church bodies throughout the world with whom we are in fellowship and who look to us for guidance? Church bodies around the world with a solid Lutheran understanding of the Two Kingdoms must indeed rejoice that finally we have gotten beyond our obsession with ourselves and taken our witness out into the world. If they are not at that point, the combination of the availability of our fellowship document already passed at the last Synodical Convention and the available teaching and discussion time requested by President Kieschnick, along with documentation I and others have prepared on the Two Kingdoms and its applicability to civic events, should be most helpful. 11) In what way does the following quotation from Herman Sasse apply to these situations? Where man can no longer bear the truth, he cannot live without the lie. Where man, even when dying, lies to himself and others, the terrible dissolution of his culture is held up as a glorious ascent, and decline is viewed as an advance, the like of which has never been experienced. (Union and Confession, p.1) The quotation from Herman Sasse is most unfortunate. Jesus said, in the appointed Gospel for the Fourth Sunday of Easter, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes unto the Father, but by Me." If a pastor of the LCMS prays in the Name of Jesus, that pastor is on the side of Truth. If that pastor is attacked for so doing, on what side are his attackers? 12) Has President Benke been encouraged to break his word and his public acknowledgment that he previously acted in violation of the Scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions, his stated responsibilities as a District President and his promise to never participate in ecumenical services again? If so, in what ways did the Synodical President, Praesidium and Council of Presidents help him in the keeping of his promise, or aid him in breaking it? I simply refer to my "Response to Charges," as follows (the attachments can be found appended to that document at the Atlantic District Website, www.ad-lcms.org): In 1998 when a grave civic difficulty in work among the poor surfaced in New York City, after consultation with local pastoral leaders I participated in the prayer service for the poor entitled "Lift Up the Poor with the Voices of Faith" at St. Patrick's Cathedral. The distinctive features of this involvement that made it a different type of participation were pointed out to me by then Synodical President A. L. Barry at a meeting held with the Synodical Praesidium (President and five Vice-Presidents) on October 22, 1998. Those differences were: a) the event was held in a church building b) the event was organized not as a civic event but exclusively as a form of worship c) the event featured interfaith officiants who were robed and vested in various types of liturgical attire d) I had not sought prior permission from the Synodical President (but had received it unanimously from local pastoral leaders in New York City and on the Atlantic District Praesidium) An apology was prepared for me by the Office of the Synodical President and presented to me prior to my speaking on October 22, 1998, with the specific provision that action to suspend me from the clergy roster of the LCMS would commence were I not to sign the apology by that evening. After making several important adjustments to the presented apology, I signed an amended version (attachments 5 and 6). Because the apology had been prepared for me, I asked questions regarding its contents throughout the proceedings. The area of biblical and confessional witness, mentioned from the papers of Dr. Barry in the charges submitted on November 12, 2001, by the initial five pastors, surfaced during that question period. Rev. Charles Froehlich, First Vice President of the Atlantic District, who flew out to serve as my witness at Atlantic District expense, offers his observations regarding the Barry papers and their pertinence in Attachment 7. Dr. Barry had declared the case "resolved" on October 22, 1998 (Attachment 8). Subsequently, particularly after the publication of "The Scandal Is In The Specifics" (see above and attachment), questions were raised by one of the five pastors pressing the November 12, 2001 charges about whether the apology was sincere (Attachment 9). I had written to Dr. Barry a strongly worded response regarding such additional charges (Attachment 10). Dr. Barry subsequently declared the case "closed" at the end of 1998 in a written response. I had held that the basis for the sincerity of my apology would be whether I upheld its terms (see attached letter to a questioner, November, 1999). In point of fact I did uphold the terms of the apology rigorously, refraining from participating at another major ecumenical prayer service at St. Patrick's Cathedral at a time of civic crisis (Attachment 11) (in this case an empty chair was actually left in front of the altar signifying the spot I would have filled), and refraining from serving as an officiant at an interLutheran installation, (additional attachment 12) among many such opportunities declined. In conclusion, therefore, a) I have participated appropriately in civic events and programs that included prayer, invocation/benediction, speeches and song through the years at the behest and encouragement of national LCMS leadership (those are referenced on the prior pages of the "Response") b) I understood and understand the grounds for the apology presented to me that I signed following my participation as an officiant at the prayer service for the poor entitled "Lifting Up the Poor with the Voices of Faith" to have to do with a worship service organized and conducted as such with vested interChristian/interfaith officiants in a church building absent Synodical permission c) I have adhered rigorously to the terms of the apology from October 22, 1998 until the present. I did not participate in additional civically important interfaith religious services. I did not compromise the terms of my apology. I did not participate. d) My participation in the civic program at Yankee Stadium did not compromise my apology. My participation at Yankee Stadium was in fact a most appropriate evidence of the proper distinction between the Two Kingdoms. The Synodical President and those supportive of him on the Synodical Praesidium and in the Council of Presidents ought to be thanked for their approval and support. The question implies that my doctrinal supervisors are the Praesidium and Council of Presidents in addition to the Synodical President. I do not believe that to be the case. The Praesidium and Council of Presidents and I are engaged in a collegial relationship. However, the question does NOT include my actual supervisors, the Board of Directors of the Atlantic District, and the Voters' Assembly of St. Peter's Lutheran Church, under whom I serve. Those entities have supported by a 100% margin my participation at Yankee Stadium as an appropriate witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They also ought to be thanked for their approval and support. 13) In the end, have President Benke and President Kieschnick in their elected offices upheld or violated their stated duties, including the "renunciation of unionism and syncretism of every description…" (Article VI:2)? Entering into official fellowship alliances where there is no agreement on truth, or compromising truth merely for the sake of some false unity are abominations. The Gospel must not be distorted for any reason. Our truth including especially the exclusive and world-reconciling claims of the Gospel must be preserved so that we can witness effectively to and in a fallen world. Article VI, 2. of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod's Constitution states that a requirement for membership in the LCMS is "the renunciation of unionism and syncretism of every description." WE DARE NOT APPLY THIS "RENUNCIATION" TO GOD'S KINGDOM OF THE LEFT HAND. The Constitutional Government of the United States of America is, and must be, syncretistic. We, as a nation, acknowledge a God. Every coin says it, every courtroom emblazons it – "In God We Trust." But, we are constitutionally forbidden to establish one religion over another. Therefore, the God of American civil religion is all gods, any god and every god. This is, by definition – syncretism. That's right – virtually all American citizens (with the exclusion of the ultra-rightwing patriots and the Amish) are syncretists. It's in the Constitution! Is one of the requirements therefore for membership in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod renunciation of the Constitutional government of the United States? Article VI.2. of the LCMS Constitution, in order to be of service to us, must either then definitely imply or be amended to read – "renunciation of unionism and syncretism of every description IN THE CHURCH." Here is the bottom line: The issue within God's Kingdom of the Left Hand is not unionism or syncretism, but WITNESS. How do we let our light shine if not out in the world? A tiny light in a pitch-black room illuminates in a way that seems far brighter than a hundred thousand candles in the sunlight. Many have told me that my simple words, "In the Precious Name of Jesus" were the moment of shining light for them on September 23. Many have told me that my witness was a representation of their Lutheran or Christian heritage at a moment of great pain and grief. Lutherans who lost loved ones on September 11 and were present at Yankee Stadium have cried in my arms. Lutherans who escaped death on September 11 have cried in my arms as they remember the horror and seek the solace of the Light who is Christ. I cannot conceive of a public gathering in my adult lifetime in which prayer in Jesus' Name was more necessary nor well received than Yankee Stadium. DO NOT MIX THE KINGDOMS. ENCOURAGE CHRISTIAN WITNESS!!! As I stated at the beginning, we are at a time of crisis in our beloved Synod. I pray that my words have been a clear exposition of Scriptural and Confessional truth, and that they may be received in a spirit of understanding. With prayers for the discernment of the Holy Spirit through the Word of God for all who read this document, In Christ, our Lord, Page 1 I 2 (Please click here for a Microsoft Word version of this document) |
|
|
Home | Who We Are | Calendar | Our School | Prayer for America | Directions | Contact Us | Links |
|