Leadership in the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA)

I remember an encyclical of sorts published about 14 years ago by our synod, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod (SEPA) of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). The message was circulated by Bishop Almquist, who had just been reelected in a very close race. The message quoted a letter from a pastor congratulating him on his reelection.

It read something like this: “We elected you to lead, so lead.”

I considered this at the time to be a kind statement in support of the bishop. But still, it raised lingering questions. Surely, he had many congratulatory notes. What was the bishop trying to tell us in sharing this one?

• Was it on the order of “See here! I’m the bishop and you will listen—and at least one person agrees with me on this!”
• Was it an invitation to the faithful to become engaged? If so, how?
• Why was this personal note of congratulations being distributed to everyone?

Actually, there was something a little unsettling in the sharing. That’s why I remember it 12 years later!

We (the Lutherans of East Falls) didn’t see any leadership during Bishop Almquist’s second term. He had told us on the eve of his reelection that if we didn’t accept the pastor he had chosen for us there would be no pastor for us for a very long time. We had no called pastor for the six years of his second term. We were never sure how to follow a leader who had written us off!

This didn’t help us with the successor bishop who had served under him and who adopted his prejudices.

SEPA refused to provide leadership. They were waiting for us to fail.

We followed our local leaders. That seemed to be threatening to the bishop’s office. They wanted to put their own leaders in charge—leaders they could control, leaders who would replace local leadership, leaders who would accept the philosophy “don’t waste time or resources on congregations that will fail in ten years.”

What does it mean under Lutheran “interdependence” to lead? What does it mean to follow? Are local leaders subservient puppets to the regional office?

The polity of the Lutheran Church gives significant power to the local church—powers that are being tweaked away by constitutional revisions that are in conflict with the founding concepts of the ELCA.

Local leaders, too, have the support of the people who vote for us. As it is now, local leaders can be replaced at the whim of the bishop. All congregational rights can be stripped by edict. There is no place to turn for independent redress of grievances.

Aren’t we all supposed to be following the Good Shepherd?

Doesn’t that guide our leaders and our followers more than selective notes from supporters?

If local leaders are following our regional leaders and we think they are wrong, do we not have an obligation under the Good Shepherd’s leadership to try to set things right? Is this concept not central to all Lutheran thinking and history?

Bishop Almquist served for 12 years. The current bishop, Claire Burkat, is in her second 6-year term. That’s about four fifths of the entire history of the synod and the ELCA. They have pretty much led without challenge—excepting that of the good Lutherans of East Falls and a handful of churches who successfully left the ELCA.

The biggest fault found with us was that we dared to challenge. One mark of good leadership is the ability to deal with opposition with respect and love. We have seen neither.

This sad reality sets the tone for the whole synod. Every pastor and every church can see exactly what will become of any challenge they might make. It’s been ugly beyond most Christians’ imagination.

SEPA rank and file got the message. Follow or perish!

We still don’t know what to expect of our leaders, nor do we know what they expect of us.

Will new leadership in Chicago make a difference?

We hope!

We could always start by following our constitutions and founding documents!