Main 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 - Timothy Schenks

Quote from: John_Hannah on June 24, 2019, 01:20:13 PM

John Tiejten was formally aquited by the official appointed by synod to investigate him.

Pr. Gerken's official report to Synod didn't read as a formal acquittal. It was manifest doublespeak from Tietjen (ie. "I said that, but that's not what I meant...") and District VP Gerken wanting everyone to just get along. The Synod-in-Convention declared that Tietjen's position could not be tolerated in the Church of God.
Your Turn / Re: LCMS Election
June 26, 2019, 12:48:32 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on June 26, 2019, 12:14:38 PM
Machine wins in a squeaker.  That's my takeaway. 

And according to Wikipedia... Kieschnick's re-elections were only squeakers too (52% and 53%).
Your Turn / Re: LCMS Election
June 26, 2019, 12:42:26 PM
Quote from: Dan Fienen on June 25, 2019, 10:02:56 PM
Quote from: RDPreus on June 25, 2019, 09:06:03 PM
You were a pastor of a congregation when you served as DP.  That makes the title "bishop" apt.  If a man has no altar or pulpit he is not a bishop.

I'm going to be pedantic. It is your opinion that if a man has no altar or pulpit he is not a bishop. You have argued that and made a case for that, which is fine, but you do not get to define a word for everybody else. Various church bodies have established  what for them constitutes requirements for being a bishop. Other church bodies establish other definitions.

Argue what you think should constitute a bishop, but you do not get to define it for everyone. The most you can say is what you think makes a bishop and what would disqualify.

The Lutheran Confessions recognized the rank of bishops and described their true function as preaching the Gospel, administering the sacraments, and exercising the keys.
Your Turn / Re: LCMS Election
June 26, 2019, 12:34:58 PM
Quote from: Rev Geminn on June 25, 2019, 12:50:38 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on June 25, 2019, 12:23:38 PM
This was all done out in the open. Then were physical cards, reported on here and elsewhere. If it were a secret or closed online email group you might have some sort of quasi-legit gripe. Or if he got addresses not available to the candidates. Or if he gave false info. Or something other than mail a post card to likely supporters reminding them to participate in the nominations process instead of taking for granted that the incumbent would get the most nominations.

Again, I think you're missing the point. There was an access point that was taken advantage of, it calls into question the integrity of the process, it's a bad look for the secretary and the SP. That's all. Do I think it had much of an effect on the election?  No, not at all.

Access Point? Most clergy have a copy of The Lutheran Annual. It can also be purchased at The LCMS church worker roster is also a free public link located on the top of the page at

Your Turn / Re: LCMS Election
June 12, 2019, 03:46:51 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on June 12, 2019, 03:13:25 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on June 12, 2019, 01:04:46 PM

First of all, there is no equation of the Issues, Etc. firings and the Harrison postcards.  Only one is an example of fixing an election.  And that's what the Harrison postcards were meant to do.  We don't know whether they succeeded in the election.  We do have a pretty good idea that they succeeded in skewing the nominations totals, because of when they were sent out, late in the nominations process, and the information with which they were sent out, which was not savory and competed with the information sent out by the Secretary of Synod. 

This remains an example of behavior unbecoming our top leader.

Dave Benke
A worst construction on the postcard thing would be that it was illegitimate campaigning for more nominations, which is a far, far cry from fixing an election, especially since he really only needed more nominations for symbolic purposes. He was going to be on the ballot anyway, and the election hasn't happened yet.

My comparison was under the heading of corrupt/offensive/incompetent/un-leader-like behavior, which definitely describes the Issues, Etc. firing.

Speaking of Harrison and Issues, Etc., a new video:
Your Turn / Re: Close to Closed
February 14, 2018, 04:17:54 AM
Quote from: David Garner on February 13, 2018, 01:14:50 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on February 13, 2018, 01:06:59 PMAs I've stated skatey-eight times here, there is a way to be invitational and yet practice closed communion.  All are welcome to come forward to the altar.  Not all receive the Eucharist.  But all are welcome to be in the blessed procession.

Dave Benke

Indeed, the practice of offering a blessing at the altar is not only welcoming, but appropriate.  As I recall, our Lutheran pastor had two that he offered to non-communicants.  The first was for the baptized, "you were blessed in your baptism . . . "  The second, which I don't recall off-hand, was for the non-baptized, and it was similarly warm, but obviously did not reference baptism. 

Our priest merely says "the grace and peace of our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ be with you" and offers to let the non-communicant venerate the chalice.  Then the non-communicant is also offered to share in the antidoron.  I have never heard of anyone being put off by that practice. 

Part of that is almost certainly that we do not have other Orthodox Christians telling people how unloving our practice is.

Our congregation has a closed Communion Statement, and our pastor also invites anyone to the altar, and also has blessings for the non-communicant Baptized and non-Baptized. I've actually heard him ask people at the rail "Are you Baptized?"
Your Turn / Re: Close to Closed
February 14, 2018, 04:11:07 AM
Quote from: FrPeters on February 12, 2018, 08:21:52 PM
I am not sure that the terminology evolved or that close means anything different than closed.  Either way, the practice (at least officially) has been the same. I would not be surprised if people put a spin on the words but in all the sources I have seen (Missouri sources) there is no distinction -- not from 1969 or before or after.  Perhaps a review of Elert's Eucharist and Fellowship in the First Four Centuries or the new book from CPH on Closed Communion might be helpful but I am not near my library now.  I know that {especially Primitive} Baptists practiced closed communion and among them it meant only members of the congregation; it is even more contentious among them than it is in Missouri.  Don Deffner used close instead of closed but his definition is difficult to distinguish from closed communion.

The gathering for worship in the early church was not a public but a closed assembly, while the celebration of the Eucharist was reserved for the saints with the utmost strictness. Why? Some have explained this as part of the disciplina arcani in which the "initiated" were obliged to conceal the usages of worship from the "uninitiated." The heathen mysteries would in that case furnish the origin and pattern. In these such obligation was settled practice. We find the comparison with these actually already in Tertullian. In the fourth century Baptism and the Eucharist are generally spoken of in the language of the heathen mysteries with the corresponding demand for secrecy. But the attempt to find in this the cause and basis of "closed Communion" in the early church is misguided. By "closed Communion" we mean the restricting of participation to full members of the congregation.

Ehlert, Eucharist and Church Fellowship (Translated by N. Nagel) - Chapter 7 Closed Communion
Your Turn / Re: Donald Trump As the Messenger of God
February 02, 2018, 07:26:13 AM
Quote from: David Garner on February 01, 2018, 08:27:10 AM

Let me be clear about my position.  I don't care if they stay or if they go.  I love the Indonesian people.  We had a friend of my brother's come over for dinner while they were in town, and he was a delightful young man.  We got to talk about music, culture, religion (he is Muslim, we're all Christian), etc.  So I don't want these people to go back to a better part of Indonesia.

I never met an Indonesian but two of my dorm neighbors at Southeast Missouri State University were Malaysian. Kwang Tian Hee and Chung Wei Hung. Both were great guys.
Your Turn / Re: Donald Trump As the Messenger of God
February 02, 2018, 06:52:06 AM
Quote from: MaddogLutheran on January 31, 2018, 09:15:42 AM

Apparently he had his green card revoked after being accused of a fraudulent marriage which allowed him to obtain it decades ago.  While this man MAY have been dealt with unfairly, these journalistic gems make me scream:  THAT'S NOT HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS!  I have to question everything else about the story.

So yes, I need more than a partisan summary to make any such judgments.

Here I thought those were rare, isolated cases.  One of my former managers married a man so he could get a green card. They lived across the country from each other.
Your Turn / Re: Donald Trump As the Messenger of God
February 02, 2018, 05:12:08 AM
Quote from: Dave Benke on January 30, 2018, 04:51:43 PM
Quote from: Charles Austin on January 30, 2018, 03:48:25 PM
All I know is that families who came here years ago seeking a better life and finding it are being broken up, not just because they are "illegal," but because the bureaucracy, 9/11, and agencies of government failed them In their efforts to gain proper status. A New Jersey mayor of the town where some of these in people live praised their hard work and their community spirit. I simply ask: what is to be gained by deporting the fathers of these families?
And the response I get here is: they are illegal, they broke the law. Or: why don't they go back to a better part of Indonesia?

We've danced through this before in a relatively clumsy way (because we were trained to believe that dancing was a sin), but for many on this board, our immigrant forebears came into the country when the words of Emma Lazarus actually meant something, and when the law of the land was "if you're not carrying a disease, welcome to the USA.  By the way, you don't have to bother learning English.  That German dialect will suit you just fine for 40 or 50 years on the farm acreage we're giving you out in the hinterlands." 

So our folks came in when "illegal" was simply not part of the immigrant jargon.  And the large throng were less than fully educated, capable mainly of manual labor, and made their way through the decades, even through a long time when it wasn't necessarily a good thing to be "German."  Or certainly Irish.

Dave Benke

I think they were fairly educated. My great great grandfather owned a Luther Bibel, Kirchengesangbuch, and a Dietrich Katechismus, and he was just a poor farmer.

A Pastor relative of ours wrote about his elementary education in Frohna, Perry County ca. 1850. "My Christian parents brought me up in the fear, nurture, and admonition of the Lord. At the age of five years they sent me to the Christian Day School conducted by Pastor Loeber. Besides reading, writing, and arithmetic, my chief studies were devoted to our Christian religion. Of course, it was all in German. The Bible, Luther's Catechism, and the Hymn Book were the chief text books. Pastor Loeber insisted on a lot of memory work. Dr. Dietrich's comprehensive explanations with numerous proof texts had to be memorized."
Your Turn / Re: Donald Trump As the Messenger of God
February 02, 2018, 05:02:31 AM
Quote from: Charles Austin on January 26, 2018, 04:12:18 PM
And now, I shall try very hard not to make personal reference to or refer to pastor Preus or any of his type. Everyone knows what I think. BTW I do not link Pastor Preus with any other member of the LCMS in this discussion forum. He is not like any of the others here.

I think he's pretty cool and a decent theologian. A retired 1st Vice President of our Missouri District uses Pr. Preus' booklet on Justification for his Bible class whenever he fills in for other pastors.

And his family is from Norway, which I'm sure will enrage Pr. Austin even more.
Your Turn / Re: LCMS kerfuffle
January 12, 2018, 06:25:43 PM
Quote from: John_Hannah on January 12, 2018, 03:23:45 PM
Quote from: Rev Geminn on January 12, 2018, 02:50:09 PM

Congregations Matter is not formerly Jesus First.  I've seen that claim made elsewhere and that's simply not the case as far as I can tell.  Most of JF has moved on and/or retired.  I can say this with a level of certainty since a family member of mine was a mover and shaker in JF.  I sort of see this claim as being on par with the claims that Seminex theology is still a huge threat in Missouri, it's just not true. 

Scott, your are quite right. You do have the credentials, indeed. We can take your word for it.


I won't take his word for it.  I've seen Pastor Charles Mueller, his son Pastor Chuck Mueller, and Pastor Phil Esalla posting on the Congregations Matter Facebook page. One of them retired, although retired pastors are still members of Synod, but none have moved on.
Your Turn / Re: LCMS kerfuffle
January 12, 2018, 01:03:39 PM
I was was a Circuit Lay Delegate at the 2007 Synod Convention in Houston, sitting on the front row maybe 20 feet away from President Kiescnick when that happened. During the election process, someone made a motion that participants of the lawsuit be identified on each slate. President Kieschnick asked if anyone had a list of them. Immediately, the District President (Eastern District) in charge of the elections pulled a list out of his pocket and handed it to him. We all then witnesses a Scarlet Letter process for several votes to come. When someone asked if a motion could be made to stop doing this, the President said that only those who voted in favor of the motion could move to reconsider it. A young "moderate" delegate who I had met during the week made the motion to reconsider the labeling of nominated candidates, and it passed.

That was the same convention where Jesus First slandered Secretary Hartwig trying to get their own candidate elected. They apologized, but not until the elections were over.

Congregations Matter is the organization formerly known as Jesus First, by the way.

We also passed a resolution to have a special restructure convention in two years using the same delegates, but thankfully the Synod President decided that we didn't have to do it. I can remember saying "see you in two years" to President Benke on the way out of the convention hall.

If you have Facebook, I have a few pictures.
Quote from: Mathew Andersen on January 12, 2018, 10:35:22 AM
Quote from: J. Thomas Shelley on January 12, 2018, 10:21:56 AM
Quote from: Mathew Andersen on January 12, 2018, 09:55:00 AM
Open letters seem to be popular these days.  I am not sure why as they seem to do little.

As far as I can tell, they are little more than virtue signalling.  Because, like this one, they tend to involve leaders from a variety of churches or religious groups, they certainly can not offer anything that is useful or unique from one particular denominational perspective.  God is barely mentioned here and the Gospel is absent.  Plus they are always too short to offer a considered or useful solution to whatever problem they address.  So what's the point other than allowing the authors to pat themselves on the back and say "something must be done, this is something.  Ergo we must do this - hey we did it, good for us!"?

I have met five of those signatories in a variety of settings and have found them to be gracious, humble servants of God almost complete devoid of the "leaven of the Pharisees" with which you seem to accuse them.
Don't be stupid.  I did not accuse anyone of "being" anything. They may be gracious individuals.  This letter was not.  One may do pharisaical things on occasion without being a Pharisee and the virtue of ones life in other ways in no way make mistakes and errors less mistaken or erroneous.  That they may be gracious people does not in anyway change my point.  I like President Harrison.  He is one of the most intelligent and kindest pastors I know.  But in signing this letter he pulled a bone headed move.  Neither fact changes the other.

And before anyone jumps in and asks what I disagree about in the letter, although I think I was clear enough before, it's not what the letter says that is the problem, it'e what it leaves out.  It leaves out Christ and anything useful.  It is a spitting in the ocean letter.

Why would the letter mention Christ? This was not a Gospel message. There was at least one non-Christian signer. Natural law.
Your Turn / Re: New LCMS Catechism -- A Question
January 12, 2018, 12:05:57 PM
Re-Examining Paul's Letters, Bo Reicke:

2 Thessalonians A.D. 52 Summer
1 Thessalonians A.D 52/53

Galatians A.D. 55
1 Corinthians A.D. 56 Spring
1 Timothy A.D. 56 Summer/Fall
2 Corinthians A.D. 57 Summer
Romans A.D. 58 Early
Titus A.D. 58

Philemon A.D. 59
Colossians A.D. 59
Ephesians A.D. 59
2 Timothy A.D. 60
Philippians A.D. 61/62
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk