4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

Bishop Hanson

Thank you for your words of support

elca mock logo
Anonymous Lutheran Addresses Redeemer Situation

I received an anonymous letter from a member of a SEPA congregation this week. The writer added a note that she was sending the letter to ELCA Presiding Bishop Hanson and several other church leaders including our local bishop.

She noted that she doubted letters make any difference. True, anonymous letters give the recipient an excuse to blow off any point the writer makes no matter how valid.

We understand the need for anonymity. We live in a Synod that is funding its ministry with seizures of property and lawsuits against laity.

Clergy have no room to criticize. Their universal silence on these issues is a form of anonymity.

We at Redeemer have written many signed letters almost all of which have been ignored. The single exception was the first letter we wrote to Bishop Hanson, probably early 2008. The Bishop glibly dismissed our very serious issues. Lots of God words, no God actions. His attitude trickles down to his staff and clergy. The ELCA legal offices, funded with parishioner offerings, responded to a Redeemer member’s letter with a note that they feel no obligation to get involved. Bishop Burkat has never responded to any of our letters. The people we pay to be there to make sure the congregations are protected spend our offerings protecting themselves.

We are going to reprint this anonymous letter because it has value. This writer took the time to understand the issues — something SEPA clergy, the Synod Council and Synod Assembly and the courts have failed to do. This writer nails the issues. Write on!

Here’s the letter (with minor spelling/grammar edits):

Dear Bishop Hanson,

I belong to Peace Lutheran Church in Bensalem, Pa., which is part of SEPA Synod. I recently attended a charity event in Philadelphia and met a woman from a church in Lansford, Pa. We got into a conversation about Redeemer Lutheran Church and Bishop Claire Burkat and how sad that their church was taken from them and how their valiant fight to regain their spiritual home was knocked down by the Pa Supreme Court, citing “church vs. state.” The woman I sat with told me that her church belongs to the Slovak-Zion Synod and that their Bishop (Rev. Wilma S. Kucharek) was investigated by the authorities for making improper withdrawals from a congregation’s accounts, causing the downfall of a church in New Jersey. She locked them out of their own church, like Burkat, and then sold their properties for a huge sum of money, forcing the congregation to now worship in a rented facility when they already had a mortgage-free church and parsonage of their own. She heard this from some people she knows that had attended a Synod Assembly cruise. Are you even aware of this in Chicago?

What kind of organization allows the taking of church properties that were built and paid for by the members of these congregations without any help from their synods. Just because you have hidden clauses in your constitutions that allow Synod Bishops to abscond with properties does NOT make it morally right. It is actually criminal to take by force another’s possessions for your own profit or gain. These clauses do not appear in the congregation’s constitution (I checked) but appear in the Synod’s constitution. How sneaky. Why didn’t you put this language in the congregations’  constitutions and spell it out more clearly so the average parishioner can understand the language? “That the Synod Bishop may close, at his/her discretion, the congregation’s church, seize their property, sell it, and then distribute the funds as he/she sees fit.” Wouldn’t that be more befitting to a religious organization to be honest and more forthcoming with the followers. You should also point out to the congregation to NOT come to you with their problems because you are an “interdependent” organization.

I am ashamed of how the ELCA has disgraced the Lutheran religion by ignoring Martin Luther’s principles of fair play for all. He would never condone abusing the weak by taking their possessions to further enhance one’s already lofty standing. Greed is a terrible sin. God knows who these bishops are. They can’t fool him with their empty prayers and their false justifications that they are doing this for the overall good of the Synod. These thefts of properties will be seen for what they are by the Lord.

Bishop Hanson, I’m sorry to say, the ELCA is now being run by bureaucrats and lawyers who don’t know what it’s like to honor the Lord by doing what is right in the Lord’s eyes and not the courts. There can be a happy medium but right now there isn’t. By the interdependent nature of the ELCA, you’ve divorced yourselves from your followers (the mass that supports the organization) by taking away their right to a fair an unbiased hearing regarding the closing of their churches. They can’t go to the courts because of the “separation between the church and state.” The Synod assemblies are a joke. The people who sit on these assemblies have no training in judicial matters in order to make proper judgments. They are just parishioners of local churches who volunteer to attend a yearly gathering and are clueless as to what’s going on. They are heavily influenced by the bishops, plus I don’t think that the bishops even need their approval to close a church.

It’s just so wrong that just one person can decide the fate of so many. At least the Catholics can go the Vatican Council in Rome where they have already overturned church closings in places like Cleveland, Ohio, by over-ruling local Bishops. The Lutherans have no such recourse.

Claire Burkat may have sued some members of Redeemer for standing up to her abuses, but she will not be able to sue me.

Signed, Disgusted

Here are a Few More Supporting Points

This writer describes the problems fairly accurately. The interdependent constitutions leave parishioners vulnerable to various self-serving interpretations, putting anyone who raises an issue at risk. Parishioners are the most vulnerable.

The writer also does not mention the founding Articles of Incorporation of ELCA Synods. These foundational documents forbid bishops from taking property and limit the power of the Synod Assembly. The writer is dead right that Synod Assemblies don’t know enough about church law to make decisions. Also, about a third of the Synod Assembly (the clergy) have a built-in bias. They owe their next call to their relationship with the bishop.

The clauses in the Synod constitutions have been altered over the years. The original model Synod Constitution calls for synodical administration to be temporary in nature and with the consent of the congregation. It was intended to help struggling congregations. Tweaks here and there presented to unsuspecting Synod Assemblies have reversed the intent of the constitution and violate the Articles of Incorporation—which was further compromised by Judge Lynn’s order regarding Redeemer, issued without hearing the case. Saint Paul knew what he was talking about when he advised church people to stay out of court!

Consequently, a clause intended to help congregations find their way through difficult times is now used to seize assets and help the synod through troubling times.

In Redeemer’s case, Redeemer appealed the issue of Synodical Administration to the Synod Assembly. The Synod Assembly never voted on the issue we appealed. Synod officials used our appeal to present a question allowing them to take our property (which we had not addressed in our appeal). Like lemmings the Synod Assembly voted on an entirely different issue—and an issue over which they have no constitutional authority. All SEPA Lutherans were victims of bait and switch.

Because of Synod Assemblies unquestioning decision, no Lutheran congregation really owns its own property anymore. A long-standing Lutheran tradition is gone. Your bishop needs only to make a claim on your property and your congregation is toast. There are no standards to be met. If Bishop Burkat needs your property to meet her budget (including her salary) she can claim it.

Back when Redeemer’s money was taken (1998) we were told the money would go to a Mission Fund. It was later reported that Mission Fund money is tapped by the Synod to fill deficits. When our Ambassadors visited Holy Spirit in NE Philadelphia, the week before they closed, their pastor explained that their money would go the the Bishop’s Discretionary Fund. At least that’s more transparent if not nobler. We suspect there is even less control over that fund than the misnamed Mission Fund.

We hope there are more letters written and we encourage you to sign them. Send them our way. As long as they are factually accurate, we will consider publishing them. At least you’ll know your letter has a chance of being read. Right now, the ELCA’s circular files are wide and deep!

The best people to put an end to the travesties of SEPA Synod are SEPA Lutherans. Ask your Synod Assembly to revisit the issues with Redeemer. We are still alive and well. We have grown a base of support during our years of exile and are ready to resume our ministry with our property— if SEPA Lutherans can ever manage to deal with the issues for which they have accepted responsibility.

It should be obvious to SEPA Lutherans that the sad story of Redeemer’s lack of viability was always a crock. Redeemer, even with many of its members in hiding, is stronger today than ever. We reach more people each week than any church in SEPA. We are positioned to restore our endowment to its 1990s high point—before SEPA cast its line over our waters (and they weren’t fishing for men).

There is more economic potential in open churches than in closed churches.

 

Can Lutherans learn from the past as they plan for 2017?

How do you share the grace of God in Christ with someone whose days are filled with messages that they do not measure up and who feel excluded rather than welcomed? How shall we talk about faith in a culture of mistrust and deception? In a world steeped in violence, how do we talk about the cross of Christ as the place that reveals both the depth of God’s love incarnate and where Jesus’ life for others is offered fully?

Bishop Hanson wrote this as part of a message in the recent issue of The Lutheran Magazine. He was looking ahead to the 500th Anniversary of Luther’s brave, death-defying actions, which spurred the Reformation of the Church and laid the groundwork for changes in society that we enjoy today.

Don’t expect such actions from Luther’s heirs.

A recent visit to China sparked Bishop Hanson’s comments. He doesn’t need to travel far to find a culture of mistrust and deception.

We, at Redeemer, who have experienced little but abuse within the ELCA, wonder if Bishop Hanson recognizes that his own people feel unwelcome, unvalued, violated, and deceived. We have learned to distrust the church he leads.

We know we are not alone. There has been a mass departure from the ELCA under Bishop Hanson’s watch.

Similar land grabs continue. Synodical bishops act with the certainty that Bishop Hanson will not require them to honor the intent of the ELCA’s founding documents or constitutions. Dodge’s sheriff  has gone fishing (and not for people)!

The Redeemer travesty has featured personal attacks on lay people with no way within the ELCA to object or defend.

Bishop Hanson, Lutherans are weary of empty words.

We point out once again the decision of the Pa appeal court. It may add up to a win in the short run, but this could come back to bite hard.

The appeal court’s minority opinion determined that if the law were applied, Redeemer’s arguments have merit and deserve to be heard. The majority opinion cited Separation of Church and State, relying on the Church to police its own rules. There is NO mechanism within the ELCA for this. The result: a weak church where everyone can legitimately fear injustice within their own body. Safer perhaps to criticize other cultures!

Redeemer wrote to you for help in 2008, Bishop Hanson. After about ten letters over the course of a year, we gave up. You blew us off, expressing regard for a colleague over concern for a congregation.

You advised both us and Bishop Burkat to talk it out. Today, nearly five years later, there has been no talk, just law suits.

Bishop Hanson, we want peace. We want to work things out within the Church. This is a mandate of scripture (1 Corinthian 6). It’s not going to happen if Church leaders don’t believe the scriptures they preach.

Your sheep need their shepherd. Your bishops need their shepherd.

Help us find answers to the questions you pose. Lead us in our ongoing birthright — the Reformation!

photo credit: Adam Polselli via photopin cc

Head-in-the-Sand Leadership Fosters Bullying in the ELCA

A random click on the computer opened a link to a news story published December 19, 2009, just as the ELCA was beginning to reel over the vote to ordain active homosexuals.

The story was printed in the Washington Times and quotes an ELCA bishop and ELCA Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson, along with several others on both sides of the issue.

The story reported alleged acts of intimidation against dissenting clergy who were contemplating withdrawal. Reading this story two years later is illuminating.

The article reads on the subject of intimidation: “I would deny that completely,” said Bishop Gary Wollersheim of the ELCA’s Northern Illinois Synod. “That’s not happening in northern Illinois. I’m sure that’s not happening anywhere in the country. I have done the exact opposite. I have assured clergy, rostered leaders, that hold different opinions on the decisions that [neither] the synod nor I will discriminate against them in any way. The last thing that I would do as pastor of the synod would [be to] bully somebody or threaten them.”

The story moves on to Presiding Bishop Hanson, the foremost leader in the ELCA. He too denied that intimidation was happening. He went on to question that there was any split in the denomination and deflected responsibility by criticizing the media.

Two years have passed and the split has become obvious. Hundreds of churches have voted to leave the ELCA.

That’s not the only thing Bishop Hanson got wrong!

Bishop Hanson continues to defend the status quo, claiming no authority to deal with parish complaints of misconduct.

Redeemer congregation (sponsors of 2×2) turned to him for help with serious intimidation problems. He responded to our first letter in 2008 by telling us of his high regard for the bishop. He failed to respond to subsequent letters sent monthly over the next ten months. Recently, after a long silence and serious conflict escalation, one of our members wrote again and received the predictable response — the defense of church leadership with no apparent regard for the effects their actions have on laity. 

Perhaps Bishop Hanson and the ELCA bishops do not understand intimidation.

Intimidation is:

  • When a bishop tells a congregation that they must agree to call a recommended pastor or they won’t have a pastor for a very long time. (Redeemer/SEPA 2001)
  • When a bishop insists a congregation vote repeatedly on a call question, hoping the congregation will finally vote the “right” way. (Redeemer/SEPA 2001)
  • When a synod representative visits prospective members and discourages them from joining one congregation in favor of another. (Redeemer/SEPA 1998)
  • When a pastor visits with the bishop’s office and returns to give the congregation 10 days notice by email or never steps foot again in the church. (Redeemer/SEPA 2006 and 2008)
  • When a bishop has a lawyer sitting at her right side (literally) at her first meeting with a congregation. (Redeemer/SEPA 2007)
  • When a bishop calls a meeting without consulting church leaders and arrives with a party of ten others (not announced as coming), including a lawyer and a locksmith positioned out of sight. (Redeemer/SEPA 2008)
  • When a bishop refuses to meet with elected congregational leaders insisting on meeting with the entire congregation. (Redeemer/SEPA, characteristically)
  • When a bishop, with no discussion, has a lawyer inform a congregation by fax that they are officially terminated and have no voice or vote at an upcoming Synod Assembly. (Redeemer/SEPA, 2009)
  • When a bishop goes into court carrying the First Amendment flag of immunity (Separation of Church and State) but proceeds to use the full force of the courts against lay members. (Redeemer/SEPA 2008-present)
  • When a bishop locks faithful members out of the church. (Redeemer/SEPA 2009-present)
  • When a bishop commits the resources of 160 churches to attack lay members of one congregation. (Redeemer/SEPA 2008 to present)
    and furthermore —

When other congregations and pastors share in confidence that they disagree with synod’s actions but no one dares to speak up — they are the bystanders who allow intimidation to reign. 

When a presiding bishop is made aware of such incidents and glibly dismisses them, that’s poor leadership. Most of the items in the above list were shared. 

It is just such apathy that creates the bullying tragedies. We in Pennsylvania are watching the esteemed leaders of our largest state-run school fall because good people failed to pay attention to complaints from the lowly. When will our church get the message? 

It’s time to clean up the Mutual Admiration Society which seems to define the Council of Bishops under Bishop Hanson’s leadership.

Intimidation happens, Bishop Hanson, and it is happening on your watch.

If the ELCA’s recent resolution to fight bullying is to have any teeth, the ELCA must practice what it preaches. 

God’s work; our hands.  

A suggestion: The ELCA should create an ombudsman system which was used in predecessor bodies. If our leaders are not going to listen and respond, the faithful need a forum less cumbersome, less biased and more capable of carefully investigating issues raised by congregations, individual clergy and lay members. Failure to find a way to respond to complaints may lead to the same sort of plight the Roman Catholic Church is experiencing. Let’s learn from that.