4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

SEPA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod)

SEPA Lutherans Have A Second Chance

The Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is marking the commencement of Bishop Claire Burkat’s second term as bishop.

She and much of SEPA Synod have been jubilant at her reelection on the first ballot (by one vote) at May’s Synod Assembly.

Bishop Burkat refused to recognize one congregation which by SEPA governance was entitled to about five votes (a clergy vote, one male and one female vote, a vote as a predominantly black congregation and a vote as a multilingual congregation.)

The rest of Synod Assembly and the ELCA never questioned the edict and turned a deaf ear to our protests.

Other congregations were muscled out of existence before us, reducing the voting pool. One way to guarantee success is to intimidate or eliminate opposition.

Redeemer is not an authoritarian church and we have no idea how our delegates might have voted at the last four Synod Assemblies that have turned us away with no constitutional authority. Neither does anyone else!

We suspect that Redeemer’s five votes might have made a difference.

Redeemer, now supposedly excommunicated from Lutheran fellowship, remains loyal to the Lutheran Church. Even amid oppression, Redeemer has made a difference in the Lutheran presence in the five-county area. In court in 2009, Synod’s legal representation argued that Redeemer is the first of six churches they plan to close by force.

It would appear that a few congregations have been spared (for the time being) because of Redeemer’s stand.

We hope that in her second term, Bishop Burkat does a better job. This time we hope she leads good people in exercising the values the Lutheran Church teaches — love, compassion, gentleness, kindness, forgiveness, reconciliation, atonement and grace.

Everyone deserves a second chance.

30 Jun 2012

Danger Zone: Trust in the Church

“In God we trust. All others pay cash.”
That’s a fairly common American sentiment.

The Church has a way of warping our innate sense of caution. The old hymn teaches us to “Trust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus.”

The concept of trust in God, foundational to our faith, gets projected onto trust in people, trust in leaders, trust in the hierarchy. People may not be asked to trust church leaders, but there is an expectation that they are worthy of trust. So why not?!

There are good answers to that question.

Why not?

Because Church leaders are people. Church leaders are subject to the same temptations and challenges in life. They are just as capable of self-interest and foolishness. Donning a collar or a fancy robe or hat does not change human nature.

Placing unquestioning trust in Church leaders is all the more dangerous because trust in people becomes intertwined with trust in God. If we challenge people in the Church, are we challenging God?

Recent struggles in the Church suggest that blind trust in Church leadership is no more fruitful than blind trust in politicians. Children have had their lives shattered because they trusted men whom the Church presented as trustworthy. It took decades for Church leaders to come to grips with the problem. There is no reason to mention the expense. The price paid by the victims is so much higher.

Stories that make the news are not isolated. The Church shatters relationships with the faithful in other ways as well. It is just as slow to self-correct. It may even be impossible.

Seth Godin wrote yesterday on the subject of trust. He made a valid observation. Trust grows in times of crisis, when leaders stand by their people, when the going is tough, when it would be easier to run or hide, abandoning the faithful—or to lie.

Indeed, it is in times of crisis that trustworthiness shows its mettle. It is rarely seen in today’s Church.

photo credit: jrodmanjr via photo pin cc
24 Jun 2012

The Story of David and Goliath Endures

This week’s Old Testament lesson is one of the most enduring stories in the Bible. David, a peon in King Saul’s kingdom, takes on Goliath, the huge and well-equipped leader of the Philistine Army.

We all know the story but it never hurts to re-read it. Ever notice how much detail the writer includes about Goliath’s weapons and armor? There is no room for doubt. Goliath was the superior leader in every way. This is followed by a rare comic description of the boy, David, stumbling through the palace, trying to walk a straight line while wearing the armor King Saul has provided.

We all know the story and the outcome. Little David rushes unprotected into battle and slays Goliath with a homemade sling and a pebble picked up from the wadi.

We know that David’s victory catapults him to a prestigious position in Saul’s court that eventually sends Saul into a jealous, mad rage. We know the side story of David’s fast friendship with Saul’s son, Jonathan.

The story endures because we can all empathize. Everyone knows how it feels to face a foe that is larger, better funded, more powerful and attractive to followers. Little children stand before parents, teachers and the many authorities they encounter. They are weak and defenseless. They understand David.

Adults can empathize. They’ve stood before bosses who hold the purse strings and offer security —the more you follow their leadership, the greater likelihood of security.

Athletes know the feeling of facing with dread an opponent of stronger repute.

We all understand the story of David and Goliath.

Especially, we little churches. We — and our members — face the unchecked power of the bigger Church. When positions of power are abused, the result is bullying. The Church is not immune.

Things are changing. Young men in Philadelphia are challenging the Church hierarchy in Philadelphia that looked the other way as Church leaders abused their power. It took decades to muster courage and their fears were realistic.

And then there is little Redeemer, facing the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which stripped them of their property and endowment, and shut the door on their individual participation in the denomination. They’ve fought back while others in the Church have watched from positions of safety.

It’s a different kind of battle. One little pebble is not likely to end this conflict. More than five years after the opening volley, Redeemer is still alive, fulfilling its “missional” purpose and fighting with no war chest or armor — only a web site to speak for them and trust in God.

Will it ever end? Pride, power and a disregard for purpose are the Goliath that stands in the way.

OBJECT LESSON:

Illustrate Saul preparing David for battle. Ask a small child to stand before the congregation. Prepare the child beforehand. Make sure you choose a child who can participate without harming his or her self-image.

Start to dress the child with sports gear (hockey of football) until it becomes apparent that the child can barely move, much less play a sport. Then start to take the gear away. Ask the child how he or she feels without the “armor.” Draw the comparisons to David. Take your pastoral message from there.

22 Jun 2012

The Church: Is bigger better?

The Ambassadors from Redeemer have visited nearly 50 churches since we were locked out of our own church.

We started with congregations near us, close to the city. Most of our early visits were to small congregations.

As we drifted toward the suburbs, we found congregations to be a little larger. But in all our visits we have visited only three or four churches with more than 100 in attendance (all but one on significant holidays).

As a general observation, the larger the church the more similar things are. The liturgy is more set in stone. The hymns choices are more predictable. You have the organ. You have the choir (with paid section leaders, in some cases). The involvement of the people is more standard. People file out of the sanctuary in groups that don’t interact much. The bulletins look alike. The list of activities could be cut and pasted from one to the other.

Smaller churches are unpredictable, more likely to be innovative in their worship, more diverse and more inclusive. They are livelier and more spontaneous. More people are involved — sometimes in unusual ways. There is more going on between the people, even in the worship setting.

(See our Ambassadors Report.)

No wonder most people belong to small churches! That may not be where the money is, but it is where there is a lot of action. And still the attention of church leadership is on bigger congregations — that overall fewer people will join—because most people choose to belong to smaller churches.

How do we grow small churches without forcing them to lose their personality? How do we tap their energy and ideas? Or are we most interested in tapping their assets? That’s a real question. There is an  economic dichotomy in the Church that is the source of a great deal of church conflict. The economic model that the Church aspires to is not the economic model that people support with their hearts or their pocketbooks.

Most of the economy of churches revolves around the ability to pay clergy and support hierarchy, but that’s not necessarily where ministry is most effective.

But that’s how the Church measures success.

07 Jun 2012

The Quickest Way to Church Transformation

Marketing Guru Seth Godin’s blog post this morning is short but speaks volumes to a topic near and dear to the hearts of Church leaders — transformation. What’s the quickest way to achieve transformational goals?

  1. Don’t demand authority.
  2. Eagerly take responsibility.
  3. Relentlessly give credit.

The blog post has only one more sentence, a caveat warning that it is not the easiest way but the quickest.

Contrast this to the way Church leadership often approaches “transformation.”

  1. They demand authority (constitutionally or not).
  2. They relentlessly find fault within congregations and assign blame to volunteer laborers.
  3. They grab credit for any success.

No wonder Church “transformation” so often ends with results that are counterproductive to the mandates of Christianity.

Seth says so much in just a few words. So we won’t add any more.

17 May 2012

SEPA Passes First Balanced Budget in Two Decades

At the recent Assembly of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Bishop Claire Burkat announced with pride that SEPA was adopting its first balanced budget in more than 20 years. It was formed in 1988. That’s almost its entire history.

The practice of budgeting and spending far more than they had any hope of bringing in through voluntary contributions from member churches was a very bad practice that 2×2 believes led to coveting the assets of smaller congregations. Large churches had the benefits of services from staffs they could afford only by relying on small churches giving up everything. This led to neglecting the needs of small congregations. Part time, revolving-door ministries wore down the lay people until they gave in. Several churches were forced into closure with assets going to the synod.

This is presented as good stewardship. We think it is squandering the lay people’s legacy and investments in their neighborhoods.

Constitutionally, there is no requirement that any member church contribute to Synod. There is also no constitutional requirement that congregations must designate assets to the Synod upon closing. Congregations may sell their property at any time and determine how the proceeds are to be spent. This is historic Lutheran polity. There are many stories of congregations voting to close and leaving nothing to their denomination. There is an expectation that remaining assets be used for some charitable purpose in keeping with the congregation’s mission and with the approval of the congregation, but Synods are not to be the determiners. The congregations are.

Bishops and Synod Councils are not given constitutional powers to vote congregations out of the ELCA without serious negotiation. This requires a vote of the congregation. Of course, in SEPA, if the congregation doesn’t vote SEPA’s way — you can always just declare things to be the way you want them to be. Let the people eat cake.

But thinking changed in SEPA. They were passing six-figure deficit budgets and relying on the sale of closed church properties to save the day. They placed the assets in what they called The Mission Fund. They dipped into this fund whenever their deficit budget hit the wall. Declining membership and giving in even the largest churches made this a regular occurrence.

Things have changed. SEPA’s finance committee objected to the practice of including projected sales of properties in their proposed budget. Kudos.

We like to think that Redeemer’s insistence on Lutheran polity helped turn the tide. It is very unfortunate that this new-found wisdom was at the expense of the East Falls faith community (and about six others).

14 May 2012

Redeemer’s Mothers Day

Mothers Day is a memorable day at Redeemer.

There is Mothers Day in 2009 when two Synod Council members visited Redeemer, barely abiding our worship. Before the service was over, they walked to the front of the sanctuary and announced that, from now on, they are “in charge.”

Tracey Beasley and Larry House were quickly surrounded by Redeemer members who, after heated dialogue, sent them packing. Happy Mothers Day.

This Mothers Day, Redeemer Ambassadors gathered in a hospital room of one of our major clergy supporters. We worshiped and prayed together. Later in the day, we met for a Mothers Day party.

This morning we could have used a van. One of our members had to stay behind because our car was full.

That led us to recall Bishop Almquist’s attempt to take control of our property in 1998. A Synod Staff member dangled a ridiculous carrot before the congregation. Turn your property and endowment fund over to us and we will purchase a van for your congregation to travel to another church. We didn’t fall for that obvious ploy. We were sure that once SEPA had Redeemer’s coveted property there would be a reason to renege on a promise that made no sense in the first place.

Oddly, today Redeemer is doing what Synod suggested back in 1998. SEPA has succeeded, for the moment, in locking the congregation out of the Church, and we travel together to other churches on Sunday morning.

No offer of a van this time. Just criticism and law suits. Happy Mothers Day.

13 May 2012

Is the Lutheran Church (ELCA) becoming a cult?

martin%20luther%20sealLutherans are an accepted mainline Christian denomination. They can’t possibly be considered a cult, can they?

There is debate about what constitutes a cult as opposed to a religion. Some authorities refuse to use the word “cult.” Others believe the word appropriately describes religious groups with certain common characteristics.

 

Interestingly, both extremes agree on one point. Cults include religious groups that exist outside the law — including their own governing laws.

 

This was part of the court ruling in the SEPA/Redeemer conflict. The Pennsylvania Court of Appeals ruled in a split decision that the case brought against the congregation by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (SEPA/ELCA) could not be heard because of First Amendment separation of church/state. However a strongly worded dissenting opinion found that if the law is applied, Redeemer’s position is well-grounded.

 

The question for lay church members and all Lutherans is serious. How are we to function when our constitutions cannot be interpreted by the law and when leaders are immune from the law but do not hesitate to use their protected status and the law to attack church members?

 

We predict this will be a continuing problem in the Lutheran church.

 

As this conflict unfolded over a period of about five years, several other cultlike characteristics came to define SEPA’s leadership.

 

cultThe ELCA describes itself, its congregations, synods and agencies as interdependent. There is no hierarchy. Each expression is to be supportive of the other. These characteristics are not necessarily descriptive of every synod or every congregation. However, each characteristic we cite can be documented in the SEPA/Redeemer conflict. The following posts record some of what went on.

Showdown on Midvale Avenue

Our Response to Bishop Burkat

Menu Page: SEPA/Redeemer

 

  • Cults are control-oriented. Bishop Claire Burkat refused to work with Redeemer’s elected leaders, insisting on taking every issue directly to the congregation. This destroys constitutionally mandated congregational leadership structure. Redeemer insisted that she respect the elected leaders of the congregation as spokespeople for the congregation (which is why congregations elect leaders). Bishop Burkat replaced Redeemer’s leadership by decree — without meeting with either the leadership or the congregation to discuss this.
  • Isolation is used as a control tool. The pastor serving Redeemer in 2006 resigned with 10 days notice after a private meeting with the bishop. A year later, the pastor Redeemer hoped to call visited with the Bishop’s office and never returned to Redeemer. This gave Redeemer no clergy vote, voice or influence.
  • Cults make it difficult to leave. Redeemer passed a congregational resolution to withdraw from the ELCA, which is constitutionally allowed. According to the constitution, a request is supposed to activate a 90-day period of negotiation. SEPA responded by informing Redeemer it could not withdraw; it was officially “terminated.” The congregation would no longer have a vote or voice in any gathering of Lutherans.
  • Rights of members are not clearly defined.  Redeemer was told it had no right to appeal until a week before Synod Assembly in 2008. The cycle repeated in 2009. Throughout this process, Redeemer’s requests for appeal guidelines were ignored. The format for the appeal was provided just days before Synod Assembly. At the same time, Redeemer was told they could attend Synod Assembly ONLY for the purpose of the appeal—despite the fact that their delegate registrations had already been accepted.
  • Questioning leadership is discouraged. Redeemer’s attempts to communicate with the synod were ignored.
  • Cults treat the property of members as if it is their own. The whole purpose of the Redeemer conflict was to make Redeemer’s property synod’s property. Today, four years after the courts deeded our property to synod, Bishop Burkat can barely say  the name Redeemer. She calls us “former” Redeemer (although we never voted to close). She refers to our property as the land “once occupied” by “former Redeemer” as if we never purchased it, owned it, and built and cared for the buildings. In her mind our ownership of land seems to have been in trust — waiting for the day she wanted to claim it. Other SEPA congregations take note. If SEPA’s logic applies, you think you own your land. SEPA thinks you occupy THEIR land.
  • Cult leadership exploits vulnerable circumstances, even creating the illusion of crisis, with no attempt to address the problems. Although, SEPA refused to help the congregation find leadership, Redeemer was not in crisis. The church was growing and ready to call new leadership. Many congregations are under the false impression that Synod was financially supporting Redeemer. Other way around!
  • Cult leadership answers to no higher authority. Redeemer requested assistance from Bishop Hanson and the legal offices of the national church but were turned away. An attempt to talk to a Synod Council member (who are supposed to represent the congregations) was rebuffed.
  • Cult leadership employs deception. Synod-appointed trustees introduced themselves to Redeemer as “fact finders” not “trustees.” Redeemer was not informed it was under synodical administration for five months. Bishop Burkat came to a meeting announced for one purpose and had a locksmith hiding in a van behind the property.
  • Cult leaders use fear and intimidation. A Redeemer officer was warned to “get out while the getting is good.” The first resort of Bishop Burkat was a lawsuit naming individual church members personally. Add to this the pastors who “disappeared” after meetings in the bishop’s office. And then there was the Showdown on Midvale Avenue.
  • Cult leaders use character assassination. The story persists, first told by trustees in 2008, that Redeemer members tried to have the bishop arrested. This never happened. That was the beginning of the gossip against Redeemer leaders.
  • The lack of open debate is a sure sign of a cult. SEPA made all rules for the appeal forum. A mere 10 minutes was allotted for discussion, extended at the last minute by the bishop to 20 minutes. All of that 20 minutes was filled with pre-arranged speakers—more than doubling Synod’s presentation time. The first person to reach the microphones with a question was told “time is up.” Redeemer was not allowed to participate in the discussion. In three years, no active pastors have spoken publicly on these issues.
  • Events are controlled.  (See above)
  • The behavior of the leaders is excused no matter how harsh or harmful to members. Eleven volunteer lay members of Redeemer are threatened with the loss of their homes as the result of four years of litigation. No one in SEPA is asking if this harsh treatment of Redeemer church members is necessary or advisable.
  • Dependency on the group leader is encouraged. Analytical thought is discouraged. Redeemer was told in 2006 that they couldn’t do outreach ministry except through synod’s mission office, which would direct and control mission activity. There are no such rules in either the synod’s or the congregation’s constitutions. It is the mission of every congregation to do outreach ministry. Synod cannot possibly control them all! Or maybe they can! Our Ambassador visits reveal a high percentage of congregations have interim, bridge, or mission developer pastors, which report to Synod. There is a reason why Synods demand congregations work with a Synod Mission Office. It’s an underhanded abuse of the constitution. Once a congregation accepts help from a Mission office, they lose property rights. But congregations don’t know that until it’s too late.
  • Practical solutions are excluded in preference of a leader’s wishes. Redeemer has offered numerous compromises for peace and been ignored. There are many ways to resolve this conflict that would be in line with Christian teachings.
  • The use of loaded language. Bishop Burkat opened her only meeting with Redeemer representatives with a tirade using the word “adversarial” repeatedly. Most of the people present had never met the bishop before. The incessant and false re-telling of the “attempt to have the bishop arrested” is another example.
  • Cults promote the illusion of innovation. 2012 Synod Assembly rallying cry: “God is doing something new” without much evidence of any new thinking.
  • Excessive use of guilt. Members are never good enough. Their history is criticized. Their leaders are criticized. Their social connections are faulted. Redeemer knows all about this!
  • Leaders claim no responsibility. Members bear all the blame.
  • And finally . . . . Cults operate in defiance of the teachings of their scriptures. Lutherans should be practicing what we preach . . . love, compassion, reconciliation, forgiveness and atonement. Not in SEPA!

We’ve heard similar stories in at least three other ELCA synods, but we are not suggesting that all ELCA synods and congregations fit the above criteria. But some Lutheran entities have clearly lost their way.

There is cause for concern. We trust there is also hope.

_________________

Characteristics of cults were referenced from http://www.prem-rawat-talk.org/forum/uploads/CultCharacteristics.htm
09 May 2012

Approving Failure—Par for the Church

2×2 has often commented on the Church’s ability to accept — even celebrate — failure. Ministries are allowed to exist in decline for decades, often with the same pastor, as things get worse and revenues dwindle until there is no more money to pay for failure or make long overdue changes.

It is inexplicable, but the Church follows the same pattern over and over. Year after year, budgets must be cut and services slashed, but we stick with the same leadership as if asking for better performance is a betrayal.

SEPA Synod just followed the familiar road. Six years of budget struggles. Six years of expensive law suits (all of which could have been avoided). Six years of decline. And SEPA Synod re-elected leadership on the FIRST ballot.

Were there no options? Was the mess too much for someone else to take on? Are people happy existing in failure? Do all the small churches in SEPA think that they are suddenly going to have more options and better accountability?

Or does everyone feel it’s hopeless—as some have expressed to us?

Redeemer has been denied a voice for four years (an issue we consider still open, since Synod Assembly never addressed our appeal on this issue). We have no voice in the Church by decree of the bishop SEPA reelected.

We will continue to watch from the outside as our ministry continues unrecognized by SEPA but effective all the same.

It doesn’t look like there’s much to celebrate for the next six years as ministry numbers will probably continue to decline across the board. We hope not! But . . . Lutherans have spoken. They like it this way!

04 May 2012

One Last Word from the Church You Love to Hate

The Annual Assembly of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America convenes this Friday.

In 2009, the SEPA Assembly voted to allow Bishop Burkat and SEPA to take Redeemer’s property. The vote was in defiance of their own governing rules. Someone should have challenged the constitutionality right there and then.

But they didn’t. They followed the crowd.

The vote dealt with nothing but property. Bishop Burkat interpreted the vote as permission to do anything she pleased with Redeemer. She had already declared us ineligible to vote with NO constitutional authority. This part of our appeal was ignored by Synod Assembly.

She used the vote about our property to justify a personal and vindictive attack on Redeemer members. Lesson learned: Speak up for what you believe in SEPA/ELCA and have your livelihood threatened. (In East Falls, we call it the SEPA Inquisition.)

SEPA clergy and congregations remain silent. Bullying works.

And so, with no vote of the congregation and no discussion, an entire congregation was excommunicated from the ELCA and SEPA Synod. “Get out and hand us the keys.”

At least the remaining congregations know what will become of them if they dare to challenge leadership. The pattern is well documented. Your clergy will disappear. Your calls and letters will go unanswered. There will be a knock on the door. You’ll be locked out. It’s legal now, because no one spoke up. Any individual in the Church who dares to protest will have their lives turned inside out and upside down.

No one is doing a thing to stop it.

Synod Council has been ineffective at representing the congregations they serve. They fell in line behind the bishop early on. They have been hiding behind her skirts ever since.

Redeemer is still an active worshiping congregation, despite the abuse. We still have faith that Lutherans will speak up. It’s a Lutheran tradition, after all.

Redeemer’s ministry will continue regardless of the strength of SEPA’s backbone.

Redeemer is not closed. We are locked out of God’s House by SEPA Synod — its bishop, its Synod Council, its Synod Assembly and all its congregations and clergy. Shame!

Will  SEPA Synod 2012 make a difference? Probably not.

The people of East Falls will always be the people the Lutherans of SEPA turned away.

02 May 2012