News:


Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Jeremy_Loesch

#1
I've done a few quasi-destination weddings- one in central MD where the couple and I were able to do what we wished with the space.  And it was an old chapel that had been preserved (and modernized with electicity, running water).  There was a harpist who did the music and accompanied me while I sang the Lord's Prayer.  It was nice.  The other destination wedding was in Bentonville AR.  The bride had attended the Univ of Arkansas in Fayetteville and this space was really lovely.  It was just a space and we were able to dress up the table as we needed.  The mother of the bride made a lovely table cross out of wood that we placed on the table.  She also made some green paraments for the table so we made it look like a lovely altar.

When called on by a funeral home to do an 'emergency' service, I most always do so.  My #1 question is, "Was the deceased baptized?"  If the answer is yes, I go from there.  I figure the family is in need and is reaching out for someone/something.  I do look at it as an opportunity to preach a meat and potatoes Law/Gospel sermon and to bring the comfort of God's Church to the situation. 

And in something that I wrote for FL a long time ago, a funeral home called me because a Navy vet was living in San Diego but was going to be buried at a cemetery in Delaware and asked if I would conduct the committal.  I said I could and I would.  On the day of I was the only person there aside from the cemetery workers.  The committal service was a dialogue with myself, though the three cemetery workers prayed the Lord's Prayer with me.  And when the service was concluded the workers told me I could go but I stayed until all the work was done.  I think this man died alone, had outlived his siblings, and I had no idea about a spouse or children or whatnot.  I stayed and made sure that he was planted under the watchful eye of an undershepherd.

Jeremy 

   
#2
Your Turn / Re: "Plain" Reading of Scripture
May 16, 2024, 09:52:30 PM
Quote from: John Mundinger on May 16, 2024, 03:00:58 PM
Quote from: Jeremy_Loesch on May 16, 2024, 02:47:24 PMPeter's analogy works perfectly fine because it perfectly describes how Brian interacts here when he tries to explain God's Word. As Peter said, you just don't like it.

Jeremy

I don't like it for at least three reasons:
1.  It is trivial, relative to the topic.
2.  It presupposes that the coach knows the game better than the quarterback.  That might be correct in football.  But, in this case, it only serves to reveal Pr. Speckard's and, apparently, your bias.  In conversations, we might be able to learn from one another.  But "Scripture says..." is not really an objective standard for resolving differences because, as these conversations demonstrate, "Scripture says..." is really "my hermeneutic says..."
3.  There is a problem with the Eighth.

If I'm allowed to not agree, then I disagree. Peter explains it very well in the following post. It has nothing to do with any particular hermeneutic, exegesis, or eisegesis. And I don't believe it has anything to do with 8th anymore than it has to do with the 10th, 9th, 7th, 6th, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, or 1st. I'm surprised you didn't bring in Matthew 18.

Peter has been interacting with Brian for a long time, and I have been mainly an observer since 2007 or 2008. IMO, Peter knows how Brian treats the Word, and that treatment is something different than what has been handed down. At times Brian is overly literalistic with the Word and at other times his treatment of a particular passage has no connection to that particular passage.

Brian is very knowledgeable about the Word, has studied it for a long time, has the commentaries and followers to prove whatever he wants to prove. I just consider him to be a sophist.

Your not understanding the analogy that Peter laid out is because you don't want to understand it.

Jeremy
#3
Your Turn / Re: "Plain" Reading of Scripture
May 16, 2024, 02:47:24 PM
Peter's analogy works perfectly fine because it perfectly describes how Brian interacts here when he tries to explain God's Word. As Peter said, you just don't like it.

Jeremy
#4
Nice.  Thank you!

Jeremy
#5
How are we supposed to lament?  What are we supposed to lament?  And what lament would be acceptable? 

I think Will's distinction above is correct.  I wish the division in Lutheranism weren't so, but it is.  And my opinion is that the division had to happen.  The two church bodies are following their own paths and those path will not converge.  The ELCA will not allow it nor will Missouri. 

Will brought up something about books and how Augsburg, Fortress, and CPH used to be indistinguishable.  In 2000, a class on the gospel of Mark was offered at Trinity Seminary in Columbus OH, a class that was designed for clergy in the parish.  It was a six week course that cost $75.  Fresh out of seminary I was eager for that class, eager to be back in a classroom setting, eager to see what Trinity Seminary was like.  I registered in person and browsed the bookstore.  It was weird.  New perspectives on this, new perspectives on that, rethinking Paul, rethinking Peter, rethinking all the apostles.  It was 2000 and I knew I wasn't at CSL anymore.  And when I registered for the class I learned that a UMC pastor was going to be teaching the class.  That was something that I learned about ELCA seminaries.  The class was canceled because only two of us registered and six were needed.  I'm not entirely sorry that the class was canceled. 

The two church bodies are where they are.  I don't know what there is to lament at this time. 

Jeremy 
#6
Your Turn / Re: Resurrection of the Body?
May 03, 2024, 03:54:31 PM
Peter, I'd love to read the whole of that poem you wrote about Ginger. My condolences on her death. Perhaps there's a pan-Lutheran monthly newsletter that exists that would publish it?

And on the thread topic, I think the answer is yes. Is it resurrection of the dead, of the body, or of the flesh? Yes. They're all synonymous terms.

Jeremy
#7
Quote from: pearson on May 01, 2024, 10:43:43 PM
Quote from: Jeremy_Loesch on May 01, 2024, 09:55:17 AMAppreciate that, but I don't think that is correct.  The face to face conversations I've taken part in reveal 'group of one' think.  There is far more diversity than is apparent.  Theological diversity?  Yes, there may be some group think, but that is what is to be expected.  Church workers are charged to proclaim the Word. 

I believe I was in Dr. Norman Nagel's class on Holy Baptism when a classmate said in response to a query, "I think such and such."  And Dr. Nagel's jaw dropped, and he probably clutched the lapels of his jacket and got that gleam in his eye then responded: "No one in your congregation cares what you think.  You tell them what the Bible says."

Group think?  Nah.  Unity of thought on God's Holy Word and the doctrine of the church that is drawn from it. 
 

Just a quick reflection on this:

I have sometimes wondered if one of those vast and useless overgeneralizations that seek to find the line of demarcation between the LCMS and the ELCA might not go like this:

The ELCA, very broadly (we can all think of lots of exceptions), views itself as a kind of Community of Enquiry, in which a few Biblical and theological issues are closed and fixed among many other issues that are still open to investigation.  Those Biblical and theological desiderata that are important in the life of the Church are essentially resources for further exploration and doctrinal construction.  The ELCA, again very generally, seeks to be thoughtful and prayerful enquirers into those resources; and the task is never finished.

The LCMS, very broadly (we can all think of lots of exceptions), views itself as a kind of Community of Proclamation, in which most Biblical and theological issues are closed and fixed among a few other issues that are still open to careful investigation.  Those Biblical and theological desiderata that are important in the life of the Church are essentially doctrinal truths to be proclaimed to the world God created and Christ died for, and not simply resources for further exploration and construction.  The LCMS, again very generally, seeks to be thoughtful and prayerful proclaimers of those truths; and the task is never finished.

I suspect that I'm not saying anything that others here (thinking particularly of Pr. Borrasso's dissertation) have already said more cogently.

Tom Pearson

Tom, I appreciate what you have written here and I believe you have given a good distinction. To address the LCMS summation you shared....preaching is a kerygmatic act. My homiletics professors guided me to see preaching as proclamation. The congregation gathers around what is true and the sermon is a moment to proclaim that truth, to address an issue and then proclaim what God's Word has said/is saying.

I do think your summation of the ELCA is also correct but that is from limited conversation and interaction. But I appreciate how you properly distinguished the two bodies.

Jeremy
#8
Quote from: John Mundinger on May 01, 2024, 10:57:35 AM
Quote from: Jeremy_Loesch on May 01, 2024, 09:55:17 AMGroup think?  Nah.  Unity of thought on God's Holy Word and the doctrine of the church that is drawn from it. 


Unity in hermeneutic, i.e. group think

No.  You are free to your opinion.  And thank you for an ELCA perspective on Missouri.  Unity in hermeneutic is just that, unity.  And unity is not the same as uniformity.  The two are vastly different.

Jeremy   
#9
Right on Don!  Such a great class.  Loved every moment with Dr. Nagel.

Jeremy
#10
Quote from: John Mundinger on May 01, 2024, 09:40:55 AM
Quote from: Matthew Borrasso on May 01, 2024, 09:27:46 AM
Quote from: Jeremy_Loesch on May 01, 2024, 09:15:56 AMA perspective on Missouri that I believe is pretty positive:  the church workers are pretty cohesive. 

We had ten colleges/universities, had a number of prep schools.  We now have 6.5 colleges (Waiting for Texas situation to be resolved).  And we have two seminaries.  The church workers pretty much all know each other.  A new graduate from CSL would at least know the professors I had as those professors transition into emeritus roles.  And new graduates may have professors now who were classmates of mine that I graduated with.  So while we are 25 years apart in age, there is some continuity.  I think the same can be said for teachers and DCEs.  A teacher graduate from Seward is placed at a school and about 30 miles away a teacher graduate from Mequon is placed and the two of them played against each other on the basketball court or something like that.  That cohesiveness helps us to 'speak the same language'.  I don't think you find that in other denominations.

It was nice at the recent SED church worker conference to see the workers talking together in the dining area and at the banquet and elsewhere.  There is a cohesiveness that is helpful to daily life and work in the church.

Jeremy 

Having spent a number of years academically in circles outside of our system and synod I can echo Jeremy's thoughts here. There is a remarkable degree of cohesiveness and agreement on many of the major issues that I think we in the synod often take for granted.

My sense is that, pre-Seminex, the emphasis on academics taught church workers how to think about theology.  Post-Seminex the emphasis was more on what to think about theology.  Cohesiveness has always been a consequence of the synod's academic structure.  Cohesiveness also has contributed to "group think".



Appreciate that, but I don't think that is correct.  The face to face conversations I've taken part in reveal 'group of one' think.  There is far more diversity than is apparent.  Theological diversity?  Yes, there may be some group think, but that is what is to be expected.  Church workers are charged to proclaim the Word. 

I believe I was in Dr. Norman Nagel's class on Holy Baptism when a classmate said in response to a query, "I think such and such."  And Dr. Nagel's jaw dropped, and he probably clutched the lapels of his jacket and got that gleam in his eye then responded: "No one in your congregation cares what you think.  You tell them what the Bible says."

Group think?  Nah.  Unity of thought on God's Holy Word and the doctrine of the church that is drawn from it. 

Jeremy 
#11
A perspective on Missouri that I believe is pretty positive:  the church workers are pretty cohesive. 

We had ten colleges/universities, had a number of prep schools.  We now have 6.5 colleges (Waiting for Texas situation to be resolved).  And we have two seminaries.  The church workers pretty much all know each other.  A new graduate from CSL would at least know the professors I had as those professors transition into emeritus roles.  And new graduates may have professors now who were classmates of mine that I graduated with.  So while we are 25 years apart in age, there is some continuity.  I think the same can be said for teachers and DCEs.  A teacher graduate from Seward is placed at a school and about 30 miles away a teacher graduate from Mequon is placed and the two of them played against each other on the basketball court or something like that.  That cohesiveness helps us to 'speak the same language'.  I don't think you find that in other denominations.

It was nice at the recent SED church worker conference to see the workers talking together in the dining area and at the banquet and elsewhere.  There is a cohesiveness that is helpful to daily life and work in the church.

Jeremy   
#12
Quote from: wmattsfield on April 30, 2024, 02:17:27 PM
Quote from: Jeremy_Loesch on April 30, 2024, 12:14:16 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 30, 2024, 11:29:57 AMI think people in any job go through vocational crises when there is a confluence of adverse conditions, but for pastors there is an added spiritual dimension. To say you're sick of driving a truck and want to open a little restaurant instead is one thing. To say you're sick of tending to God's flock, which is no less likely to happen at times, seems much worse. That's why I think a lot of pastors don't seek the help. They feel not only bad but guilty for even needing it.

Peter, I think that touches the topic pretty well.  "This isn't supposed to happen to me." is a phrase I uttered.  I had the thought that I was supposed to know what to do.  A lot of pastors I had known knew what to do.  I should too.

And I think that is where your idea Will, about a district chaplain would be a great idea. Somewhat related, perhaps Missouri should have 50 districts, so that the DP can visit congregations more frequently and so that the DP could actually serve a particular congregation (likely a larger church that has multiple pastors).  But this way the ecclesiastical supervisor could supervise the ecclesial bodies under his care.  (Missouri could have two districts and MD/DE/DC could be one, so 50 districts would not be too unruly.) 

Jeremy

I do think our District does now have - and don't think it was available when you had your struggles - a team in charge of worker care, including being available for Confession and Absolution. Of course, for the team to be effective, church workers have to make use of them. And if we made use of them the way we should, the team would need to be larger, but it's a start.

https://mo.lcms.org/church-worker-care-team/

Glad to see that Wade. 

Jeremy
#13
Quote from: Donald_Kirchner on April 30, 2024, 02:12:27 PMRevpeter,

I trust that this is your comment:

"When I served in Upstate NY synod 1994-2005, The Bishop at the time had each pastor designate someone to be their pastor.  In our first calls (1994-1999) we were also assigned a mentor pastor.  I found both to be extremely helpful."

I like that. It does away with the idea and comment that I've heard now and then over the years: "The District President is my pastor." No, he's the hammer. it has a potential conflict between the confidentiality/seal of the confessional and the Prez's need to take disciplinary action.

Amen Don.  I also liked RevPeter's comment.  It appears to intentionally separate the 'hammer' from the spiritual.

Jeremy
#14
Quote from: peter_speckhard on April 30, 2024, 11:29:57 AMI think people in any job go through vocational crises when there is a confluence of adverse conditions, but for pastors there is an added spiritual dimension. To say you're sick of driving a truck and want to open a little restaurant instead is one thing. To say you're sick of tending to God's flock, which is no less likely to happen at times, seems much worse. That's why I think a lot of pastors don't seek the help. They feel not only bad but guilty for even needing it.

Peter, I think that touches the topic pretty well.  "This isn't supposed to happen to me." is a phrase I uttered.  I had the thought that I was supposed to know what to do.  A lot of pastors I had known knew what to do.  I should too.

And I think that is where your idea Will, about a district chaplain would be a great idea. Somewhat related, perhaps Missouri should have 50 districts, so that the DP can visit congregations more frequently and so that the DP could actually serve a particular congregation (likely a larger church that has multiple pastors).  But this way the ecclesiastical supervisor could supervise the ecclesial bodies under his care.  (Missouri could have two districts and MD/DE/DC could be one, so 50 districts would not be too unruly.) 

Jeremy
#15
Quote from: Charles Austin on April 30, 2024, 10:17:43 AMSo what "faddish ideas" threatened us or did us damage?
Bultmann?
Tillich?
Moltmann?
Kasemann?
Theilicke?
Kung?
Niebuhr?
Liberation Theology?
Textual criticism of scripture?
The church's engagement with "the world."
All those were prominent, but not dominant in my seminary education.
Ecumenism? Not a big influence in your LCMS.


Yes to most of those but not all.  One has to really be discerning when viewing 20th Century Lutheran theology because there were some deviances from historic Christianity.  And I noticed you did not include Bo Giertz or Herman Sasse on your list? 

And about ecumenism, I'll say it out loud: our two churches think differently about what it means to be engaged in ecumenism.  The ELCA is the church that can't say no.  The LCMS is the church that can't say yes.  Perhaps you should say no more often and perhaps we should say yes more often.

Jeremy
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk