During the six years of Bishop Almquist’s term, during which SEPA was all but absent in its relationship with Redeemer, the Rev. Claire Burkat was making a name for herself as an assistant to the bishop.
She had a success of which she was particularly proud. She worked with a failing church and devised a plan. Synod would close the church with its aging members’ cooperation and reopen it weeks later with a new name.
In 2006 in her early days as bishop, Bishop Burkat came to Redeemer eager to replicate the experience which had been so successful (by her reports) before her election. In truth, it was too soon to tell if the mission strategy was actually successful. There were no statistics to support whether or not it was a good idea.
We have checked the current statistics of this congregation. They are not impressive. Membership seems to be under 50. About half the statistics of Redeemer in 2007.
Nevertheless in 2006, the experiment was touted as a promising innovation. Bishop Burkat was eager to replicate it and add another “success” to her résurmé.
The problem was Redeemer was not at all like the congregation that had agreed to pioneer this technique.
Remember, SEPA had walked away from Redeemer six years before and their memory was that the congregation consisted of a dozen old ladies. Their waiting game strategy should have been ripe for implementation, in Bishop Burkat’s view.
Things had changed at Redeemer. The elderly members who had met with Bishop Almquist had in fact gone to their heavenly reward. But there were now three times as many Redeemer members as when Bishop Almquist had released us from synodical administration—and that would soon double. Our members were mostly young families, most of whom had joined within the last ten years. Many were Tanzanian immigrants, but there were other new ethnic backgrounds new to Redeemer’s membership as well. Bishop Burkat even suggested removing the Tanzanian members to create statistics to justify the strong-arm tactics she planned to implement. Some had been members for a decade, some had been born into our community. This was (and is) insulting to Redeemer’s Tanzanian members as it should be to every Lutheran. As one young Tanzanian member noted at the time: SEPA is big on ministry to the Tanzanians — as long as we stay in Tanzania. (The statistics presented to Synod Assembly by the trustees excluded the Tanzanian members.)
Redeemer’s interest in working with SEPA was to build on its success. SEPA wasn’t listening. They knew best.
Closing Redeemer and reopening it under a new name was the only plan they would consider. Why?Their way gave them control of the congregation’s assets.
Here we go again! Mutual discernment at work!
Bishop Burkat made this proposal. She would close the church down, have a grand closing ceremony, and reopen it a few weeks later. Renaming the church was key to this strategy. There should be no confusion that the old church was dead and gone. The new name had to meet with her approval. Oh, and the current members would not be permitted any leadership roles. From where the new leaders were to suddenly emerge to take control of our ministry was not made clear. Meanwhile, Synod would reign with no one to answer to — hardly the Lutheran way.
Of course, this was offensive to a congregation that had worked hard to recover from the mess created by Bishop Almquist — and was succeeding.
The first proposal was the church should close for two weeks. That became six months by the time they saw us in court.
Well, in 2009, Bishop Burkat finally got her way and has control of Redeemer’s property. It has been locked to Redeemer and the community for three and a half years.
Redeemer remains active through 2×2 Foundation, waiting for the day that the Lutherans of SEPA recognize that maybe, just maybe, they were part of a big mistake.
The strategy of replicating one success in a different neighborhood has been disastrous for both East Falls and SEPA. Redeemer bears the popular blame, but SEPA with its selfish policies is responsible. Bishop Burkat defends her actions, citing the process of mutual discernment.
Once again, the definition of mutual discernment is “comply or goodbye.“
2×2’s previous post addressed how the interests of a regional body can hinder mission. Here’s an historical example.
The Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod (SEPA) of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) and its relationship with Redeemer, East Falls, provides many interesting illustrations of how the structure of the ELCA, intended for good, actually impedes creative ministry.
Its attempt to structure itself interdependently quickly becomes crippled by the reality that the regional body is dependent on congregations funding its budget, heavy with salary obligations and an expensive, outdated infrastructure. Meanwhile, congregations must meet their own budgets and support the regional and national bodies.
Years of hard work and “mutual discernment”
Bishop Burkat talks of years of working with our congregation under her leadership and that of her predecessor. She calls the process “mutual discernment.”
Sounds good. Only it didn’t happen quite that way.
There were more years of neglect than of working together.
There were so many hidden agendas that mutual discernment was impossible.
Attempts to ignore the wishes of the congregation were routine.
With interdependence comes the jockeying of self-interest. Congregations may be unaware that the synod has self-interests. They may assume that the synod has their interests at heart.
Meanwhile, the regional body expects the unquestioning deference of congregations.
Mutual Discernment at Work
Redeemer was always a small but self-sufficient congregation. SEPA did not support Redeemer financially as many people have been led to believe. It was the other way around.
When the ELCA was created in the late 1980s, Redeemer had a part-time pastor who also worked in the Synod offices. Redeemer was seen as not likely to ever support a full-time ministry. Any part-time pastor filled the bill in their eyes—a pulse was the primary qualification. They were marking time.
Then Redeemer received a $300,000 endowment. Suddenly, there was an interest in Redeemer. Pastor Wm deHeyman left the synod offices to work more fully with Redeemer. He served Redeemer 11 years. (Synod represents that Redeemer had just short-term pastors. Not true. His predecessor served 7 years.)
Wm deHeyman retired in 1996. His last years were difficult and factions had formed with some rallying around the pastor.
Redeemer looked forward to a new start.
Bishop Roy Almquist proposed that the congregation call one of his staff members, Rev. Robert Matthias, for an 18-month term call as an interim pastor.
Redeemer cooperated whole-heartedly.
This was a tumultuous time at Redeemer for other reasons. There was a series of personal tragedies that impacted congregational life. A tragic death of one family’s child. Another family was wracked with grief when its youngest child was paralyzed in an accidental shooting. A third child and family faced serious issues. The families of four council members were in crisis. During this time, a newer member volunteered to help with the financial books as the treasurer was one of the affected parents. It was soon discovered that the volunteer was embezzling money. The crime was noticed and rectified quickly—within months—but it added to the congregation’s sadness. This incident is sometimes used today to justify SEPA’s interest in Redeemer, but at the time they took no action that indicated they had concern that Redeemer could not rectify this on its own.
What was SEPA’s response in the face of unusual tragic circumstances in a small congregation?
They walked away and left the congregation with no pastor for nearly a year.
Three months into the 18-month term call agreement, Bishop Almquist returned to Redeemer and asked to break the call contract. He had an assignment for Pastor Matthias in Bucks County.
Redeemer cooperated even though it meant its investment in Pastor Matthias was wasted. Naturally, the congregation was hurt. Why was Bucks County more important than the promise SEPA had made with Redeemer?
During this year, Assistant to the Bishop Sue Ericsson was meeting with the council unbeknownst to the congregation. She encouraged the council (half of whom were in personal crisis) to convince the congregation to close. A plan was drafted. If the congregation did not go along, the congregation council would submit resignations providing grounds for SEPA to take over. Mutual discernment was being dictated behind the scenes.
The congregation’s annual meeting, usually held in February, was announced for January.
Three guests were introduced, Pastor Matthias, Gordon Simmons and Rodney Kopp.
Some reports were made. At the point when the budget should have been presented, the congregation council submitted the resolution to close (drafted by synod). This had not been discussed in the congregation who thought they were holding a routine annual meeting. They voted to table the resolution for further study—a reasonable response. A congregation should study an important issue before voting!
On cue, council members placed letters of resignation (drafted by synod) on the table. They were swooped up by Pastor Matthias who announced the meeting was over and the congregation was under synodical administration. While Pastors Simmons and Kopp spoke to angry congregation members who were feeling ambushed (Pastor Kopp used the term “blind-sided”), Pastor Matthias left with the letters of resignation and the church books.
Pastor Mathias was known at the local bank. He and a former Redeemer treasurer visited the bank the next day and conveyed $90,000 to SEPA. SEPA asked our tenants to send payments to them. Mutual discernmentincluded trickery.
But paying the bills was the extent of synodical administration. Redeemer kept its offerings and there was significant money in savings available to the congregation. Activities at the church continued to be run by the congregation.
The congregation felt betrayed by their council and SEPA. The members who resigned ended up leaving, some after long years at Redeemer. SEPA had used them at a time when they were vulnerable.
SEPA refused to share the letters of resignation. We learned three council members had not resigned. Two pastors helped the congregation appoint members to fill vacant seats as is allowed in the constitution. Redeemer’s council continued to meet and run the daily affairs of the church and plan its own worship and mission which included an ambitious summer program, totally lay led.
Redeemer protested the synodical administration for a year.
Several supply pastors led worship, including Rev. Harvey Davis. Our first Tanzanian members joined during this time. Bishop Almquist at last released the synodical administration. But he did not return the money for an additional year. At last, SEPA returned about $82,000, keeping some to cover their legal expenses. The fact that they were able to pay the congregation’s bills without depleting the $90,000 in two years, proves that the congregation was financially viable.
When the synodical administration was lifted, Bishop Almquist asked the congregation to call Rev. Jesse Brown. He was the only candidate presented. Bishop Almquist suggested a one-year term call.
Redeemer cooperated.
Things were fine with Pastor Brown, but at the end of the year he announced that he wanted to cut his hours to just ten per week, the minimum needed for him to retain his ordination credentials.
Redeemer did not wish to regularize a call with a pastor who wanted to provide minimal service. Redeemer agreed to extend the term call, but Bishop Almquist insisted it be regularized—or there would be no pastor for a very long time. Mutual discernment included threats.
Why was this a deal-breaker?
What’s the difference between a term call and a regularized call?
A regularized call can be ended by the pastor at any time with 30 days notice, but if the congregation wants to make a change, they must muster a two-thirds vote against a pastor. This can be very divisive, especially when a pastor is liked—as was Pastor Brown. Redeemer’s concern was his minimal level of commitment and what that meant to Redeemer’s ability to grow in mission. For Redeemer’s lay leaders, it was not enough that a pastor was “liked.” The congregation had to make progress. Redeemer’s leaders were looking wisely into their future. A regularized call would become problematic if Pastor Brown’s outside interests minimized the effect of his ten hours per week. Locking into a regularized call under these circumstances was not in the interest of the congregation, no matter how much the pastor was liked by individual members. In fact, it was likely to be a greater issue if the pastor was liked. The congregation’s leaders would be frustrated with lack of mission progress, while the more minimally committed members of the voting congregation were content. Redeemer was being forced to make a foolish decision that was predicated on the synod’s dismal vision for the congregation, which happened to have a healthy endowment, while they were operating with a deficit.
The congregation council rejected the synod’s proposal. Bishop Almquist asked for a second vote overseen by a staff person. That vote failed, too. Bishop Almquist deemed that the congregation should vote on the call — never explaining the wisdom of asking the congregation to vote for something the church council was against. That vote failed too.
If the vote hadn’t failed, it would have strained relationships between the council and the congregation. This was pointed out to Bishop Almquist, but he insisted on taking the issue to the congregation anyway. He was interested only in getting the vote that served his purpose—finding a call for Jesse Brown.
Bishop Almquist kept his promise. Synod ignored Redeemer for Bishop Almquist’s entire second term.
The congregation worked with Pastor Harvey Davis for three years until the pastor needed to retire. He was influential in attracting several young couples with diverse ethnic backgrounds and our Tanzanian membership continued to grow. Redeemer was becoming multicultural and was making significant innovations successfully. The ministry showed promise despite synodical neglect.
Let’s look a the motivations behind this history that is so often referenced as reason for Bishop Burkat’s actions a decade later.
Why was it important to SEPA that Redeemer’s call be regularized? Term calls are a constitutional option.
The synod’s interest in a regularized call solved some of its problems.
Pastor Brown could retain his status as an ordained pastor while he ran for public office and operated his own business on the side.
His minimal service would solve SEPA’s problem of staffing Redeemer.
Redeemer’s mission and interests were not really considered.
SEPA’s view of Redeemer was that its elderly population would die within 10 years. Minimal ministry would speed the process along. This thinking takes on signficant importance when the targeted congregation has assets and the regional body is operating with deficits. The regularized call gave SEPA more control over Redeemer and the fate it was tacitly seeking.
Declaring synodical administration gave them access to congregational assets.
After SEPA returned Redeemer’s assets, Bishop Almquist issued an appeal letter to all congregations for almost exactly the amount of money returned to Redeemer.
Redeemer had supplied SEPA with an interest-free loan.
Synodical administration had been used as a tool to benefit SEPA. Mission in East Falls was never the objective.
Lasting damage was done to Redeemer. Gossip created an unjustified cloud that hangs over East Falls to this day.
At all times in this conflict, Redeemer cooperated when it was reasonable to do so. It showed initiative, flexibility, and a willingness to accept change — all the things regional bodies look for when striving for transformation. But the congregation knew that Bishop Almquist’s insistence on a regularized call was not in the congregation’s interest.
Redeemer was consistently making choices that pointed them toward new and innovative ministry. SEPA was prescribing solutions that would benefit SEPA.
Many innovators seek to leapfrog over existing solutions, essentially hoping to win by playing the innovation game better. Disruptors win by playing the innovation game differently. [emphasis in original] Disruptions are all about trade-offs. Disruptions typically do offer lower performance along dimensions that historically mattered to mainstream customers. They aren’t bad along these dimensions; they are good enough. But they more than make up for that — in the eyes of their customers — by offering better performance along different dimensions.
This is very applicable to church life. Congregations are bombarded with demands to transform. We are competing to reach a standard that no one has measured. The drama sets congregation against congregation as they vie for attention from their regional body in access to professional services and standing. Transform becomes conform.
Concentrating on growing can be frustrating. It can discourage people who never joined church to work to reach other people’s goals. New members need time to settle and mature.
Sometimes churches are exactly the right size. They can afford their pastor. They can maintain their building. People know each other and are sensitive to one another and their community. They work well together and are confident enough in their sense of mission to welcome new people.
So why can’t we accept congregations the way they are? Is the push to grow important to the mission of the church or is it important to maintaining the three budgets each congregation is expected to support (their own, and those of the regional body and national entity)?
Churches will grow if they are growing for the right reasons. Their way of achieving their mission may not suit church professionals, but it may be good enough—at the moment. It may be great.
Redeemer was good enough. Redeemer was great at what it was doing in mission work — which no one else was doing quite the same way. We were not replicating a model foisted on us from above but we were innovating in ways from which others could learn and which we could afford and had the talent to support.
We don’t know what would have made the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America happy.
We had grown five-fold since Bishop Almquist’s interference in our ministry in the late 1990s. SEPA didn’t know that because SEPA ignored us for a decade. When faced with the facts, they simply refused to count the new members. “White Redeemer must be allowed to die. Black Redeemer — we can put them anywhere.” (Bishop Burkat)
We had achieved diversity, a stated goal of SEPA.
Our members spanned the age ranges and was no longer top heavy with older Christians.
We had several pastors interested in working with us.
We had some money in reserve.
We had lay leaders with diverse talents that complemented those of professional leaders.
We had a ministry plan that had the potential to create ongoing revenue.
We were and are good enough. We might even be great.
But recognizing Redeemer’s unique ministry didn’t meet SEPA’s agenda. They needed us to fail so they could justify taking our property (which their Articles of Incorporation forbid, but who cares).
So they quickly, in a blink of an eye, acknowledged our success but followed it with criticism for not achieving it under their direction. (They were AWOL.)
Since they kicked us out of the ELCA, we’ve visited 52 congregations. We know our ministry is just as active and effective as those who sat in judgement over us. And it is unique. We don’t have a food pantry. We don’t sign up for every charity run. Our kids don’t go to Synod youth events. But we do support ministries in other countries. All our kids and families had an opportunity to attend church camp. We have developed a social media ministry which reaches 1500 people a month. We’ve made a project of connecting with other Lutheran congregations. We have fought to maintain congregational polity, which will someday benefit every other SEPA congregation. We continue to meet for worship and ministry weekly.
If we had tried to be like bigger churches we would not have been able to accomplish the things we did. We did our own thing with our own resources and remained true to our mission. If we had concentrated on emulating bigger congregations we would have failed. All of our resources would have been spent keeping up with the St. Joneses. We found areas of ministry in which we could excel and make a difference.
We were good enough, we like to think, to be welcome in God’s house.
We were not good enough, we know, to be welcome in the ELCA.
I had an uncle who was a Methodist preacher. He often said, only partially jokingly, “Jesus is the answer. Now what is your question?”
There seems to be a similar “go to” response in the Church today. When you don’t know what to do—or when you do know what to do but don’t have the courage to do it, there is an easy answer. Promise to pray.
It’s been tough going for our congregation as members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Bishop Claire Burkat of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod went on the warpath against Redeemer Lutheran in East Falls, Philadelphia, including personal attacks on lay members. Acquiring the assets of Redeemer seems to have been part of the plan to fund massive budget deficits from the very beginning of her first term in 2006.
Large deficits have been routine since the beginning of SEPA back in the late 1980s. Giving and attendance were (and still are) in serious decline. There was no plan for reviving small church ministry beyond neglect and waiting for failure. Several congregations folded rather than swim upstream without the cooperation of SEPA leadership.
The assumption of SEPA leadership is that if they neglect ministry for a decade, ministry will fail to the benefit of Synod coffers. Under Lutheran polity this isn’t a given. Congregations can determine where to donate their assets. But Synods are finding a work-around that guarantees they will benefit. Simply declare the congregations “terminated” before they can have any say. This means that the congregations have NO rights within the Church they have served for decades or centuries. They need not even be consulted! Constitutional checks and balances are ignored.
Redeemer was getting the “10 years of neglect” treatment. But it wasn’t going as Synod planned. Lay leadership grew. Alliances were made with several dedicated pastors. Redeemer was in a promising position, with a five-year commitment of a qualified Lutheran pastor, working under a detailed plan that the congregation had spent six months drafting. In fact, our ministry continues to grow, despite the abuse.
But the efforts of lay people are not valued.
And there was that $275,000 deficit budget approved by Synod Assembly at the same time they voted (against Lutheran rules) to take our property.
And all of this has gone on while the clergy of SEPA Synod have watched.
Our members have approached people who should be in a position to at least open dialog on the issues.
There are fairly specific guidelines for resolution of disputes in the Bible and there are governing documents that could be followed within the Church. But ELCA leaders do not bother. They rely on “wisdom.”
We’ve heard all kinds of excuses.
From Bishop Hanson: Just talk it out. I have great regard for Bishop Burkat.
From a Synod Council member: We have no intention of negotiating with you. (Synod Council is supposed to represent the congregations.)
From deans: Silence
From pastors in a position to help: We have to trust the wisdom of the bishop.
From pastors who visited Redeemer 30 or 40 years ago: We know your history (as if Redeemer was stuck in a time warp).
From pastors who don’t know anything about Redeemer — but voted with the crowd anyway: Sorry! We didn’t know.
Whatever the excuse, it is always accompanied with a sanctimonious, conscience-assuaging promise to pray.
We wonder what these learned church leaders expect to come of prayer.
That someone else—anyone else—will play peacemaker.
That God will suddenly fix everything without any work.
That whatever happens won’t affect them.
That miracles will replace gumption.
That whatever happens, their jobs will be secure.
That they will never be the victims of the type of leadership abuses that have characterized this sad episode (and perhaps others before us).
That life in SEPA will go on as if Redeemer, and Epiphany, and Grace and others never existed—and the list will probably continue to grow.
Lutherans pride themselves on an interdependent structure. That means we are supposed to work together.
Here’s a suggestion:
By all means, keep praying, but recognize that the answer to prayer is probably in getting off your backsides and doing something.
‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do
for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
The Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has been embroiled in trouble, largely of its own making, since 2008. It wasn’t sudden, there was a nearly decade-long prologue of neglect.
During this long period of absence from the ministry of Redeemer Lutheran Church in East Falls, SEPA leaders made unfortunate miscalculations.
SEPA had discouraged professional leadership from serving in East Falls. The strategy they were following—as published at about the same time in a book co-authored by then Synod staff member, Claire Burkat—was to let Redeemer die. SEPA presumed that lay people with no one to tell them what to do would drift rudderless and get tired. One day, the last Lutheran on board would call the Synod and beg for a lifeline.
This may have seemed like the easy way to gain the congregation’s valuable property and substantial financial assets. It is proving to be disastrous—for Redeemer and the entire Synod. It may even trickle UP to the entire ELCA as other Synods (having read the book) attempt to implement the strategy!
The book leaves out the last chapter. It doesn’t always go as planned.
The group of elderly members that Bishop Almquist assumed would soon fail by attrition did not go to their heavenly reward without laying a new foundation for the church they loved. Redeemer grew during SEPA’s years of neglect. By the time Claire Burkat was elected bishop, there was a new group of Lutherans in East Falls, who had no idea they were heirs to SEPA’s prejudice.
Consequently, Bishop Burkat, intent on exercising powers not found in Lutheran governing documents, led SEPA into a financial boondoggle. They lack the leadership skills to retreat. They are relying on the secular courts to resolve Church problems. Courts don’t want the job.
Had Bishop Burkat cared about the people of East Falls and its mission, she would have strategized to protect her sheep as if they were as valuable as the property she coveted. The ministry that was initiated and nurtured with the investments of the laity would not have been shuttered, but would be earning a steady income, paying the congregation’s obligations with no dependence on SEPA and its member churches.
But SEPA had its own problems. It had been living on deficit budgets for most of its 20-year history. In 2008, that deficit was $275,000, approved by a Synod Assembly at a time when giving was down in nearly every congregation. There was no plan for making up this deficit except to close churches and seize assets. Bishop Burkat is insulted at this suggestion. But it was explained to that Assembly that money to make up shortfalls traditionally comes from the Mission Fund—which is the repository for the assets of closed congregations. No other plan for funding this huge deficit was presented.
Bishop Burkat further denies that selling church properties is part of synod’s survival strategy even in the face of evidence that she offered Redeemer’s property for sale to a Lutheran agency without the congregation’s knowledge just prior to the Synod Assembly that approved the huge deficit and voted to take Redeemer’s property.
There WAS (and perhaps IS) a plan to close churches and sell their property.
Bishop Burkat seems amazed that anyone would resist her clandestine takeover, fraught with deceptive maneuvering, and which defies Lutheran polity. Lutheran congregations own their properties and manage their own assets.
Resistance is a right of every congregation. But SEPA found a way to sidestep congregational rights. Declare them “terminated.” Deny them access to the constitutional benefits of church membership. Treat members as enemies.
She has become a victim of her own lust for power.
And it is costing all of SEPA.
If Bishop Burkat had cared about East Falls . . .
Redeemer would be open for worship.
The school Redeemer was about to open as a Christian day school would be operating to the benefit of East Falls and the income of $6000 to $10,000 a month for Redeemer.
Redeemer’s mission capabilities, which have continued to grow despite repression, would also be showing fruitful reward. They are already gaining influence.
The congregation’s expenses would not be burdening all of SEPA. (The price tag is well over $320,000.)
Instead you have locked properties and alienated members and a community that will always be reminded — The Lutherans? Yes, they are the Church that sues its members.
Even if Bishop Burkat did not trust the loyal Lutherans of East Falls, whom she did not know, she could have done something to keep the problems from escalating. She could have tried to raise funds. She could have worked with the people she leads. She did nothing but turn to the courts (which the Bible expressly discourages—1 Corinthians 6).
The Church does not need leaders to do nothing. We need leaders to solve problems. In this, SEPA leadership has failed. Pride and greed have blinded all sense of mission. Hatefulness and vindictiveness have replaced the messages of love and forgiveness. There is no effort to reconcile. SEPA wants to WIN at any cost. Silence the pastors. Call in the lawyers.
The only people who can fix this, the Lutherans of Southeastern Pennsylvania, are content to let the church attack lay people as their preferred management solution. They foolishly do not envision being in the same situation. Our Ambassador visits reveal that there are dozens of congregations in SEPA that are no larger or wealthier than Redeemer. As Redeemer goes, so will they.
The Philadelphia Inquirer has discontinued its religion beat and reassigned its religion reporter to the Philadelphia’s suburbs east of the Delaware River. The Inquirer joins the media trend which leaves many city people wondering if we live in Pennsylvania, New Jersey or Delaware.
There is no area of American life which needs an occasional outside eye more than religion. It’s hard —but more likely—to get the attention of media when things are going smoothly. Otherwise, the media often fail to pay any attention until things are dire. They can be dire for a very long time when no one knows what goes on behind closed church doors. It’s religion—nobody else’s business.
Religion is at the heart of a great deal of world conflict. The lack of empathy within and between religious groups is the root cause of much unrest. It’s not insignificant. It actually changes—and sometimes costs—lives.
Religious leaders exercise authority over people who think they join church to honor and serve God. They consider God to be the ultimate authority in their lives and they are encouraged to believe that. They can then be taken advantage of by their leaders—who revel in separation of church and state.
Religion can be a haven for the unscrupulous. Just fake it ’til you make it and coast unquestioned after ordination.
Religious leaders enjoy autonomy unlike any other arena of American life. Some denominations own all the untaxed land and wealth contributed by their members. Others have internal rules regulating the control of land and wealth. The Bill of Rights guarantees that no laws will hinder their operation —or enforce their rules.
When the courts declare no jurisdiction, the Church itself looks the other way, and the fourth estate finds things too complicated to explain—church members are sitting ducks for all kinds of abuse. Meanwhile, church leaders have proven that they do not mind using the courts (from which they themselves claim immunity) to ensure their autonomy, imperiling any members who dare to challenge their actions.
The resulting lawlessness creates the conditions for a modern Inquisition. The last few years have brought to light the incredible disregard by some religious leaders for both law and doctrine. Predictably, the weakest members of the Church are the easiest victims.
The child sex scandals rocking the Roman Catholic Church took years to come to light. Countless lives are shattered. Settlement expenses are surely contributing to the church/school closings affecting dozens of neighborhoods who trusted the wisdom of their leaders. It may even be a root cause of empty pews on Sunday morning. Who knows!
The situation in the Wild West that is today’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is similar. Our denominational leaders provided a church structure they call interdependence. The belief in the priesthood of all believers, they thought, called for cooperation between levels of the church. Lay Lutherans were proud that this empowered them, but it has become a vague concept that is defined and redefined at whim. Interdependence is interpreted by those with a lust for power as anything they want it to be.
Funny thing! Of the three tiers of church life — congregation, regional body, hierarchy — the higher the authority, the more dependent they are on the people. You’d think they’d make friends!
But no, synodical leaders ignore their own governance prohibiting the conveyance of congregational property without the consent of the property owners. They arrogantly assume that they cannot be stopped by the law or by those elected to oversee their work—a good number of whom rely on synodical leadership for their jobs and many more who simply don’t want to imagine misbehavior by their trusted leaders.
Christians are like that. They are blind and fail to see.
This defines Redeemer’s conflict with the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
Redeemer was not the first victim of SEPA greed. We may be the first to say “no,” which is within a congregation’s rights. In the face of a massive recurring six-figure annual deficit, at a time when support was in steady decline, synodical leaders sought to close small churches so that they could keep operating as usual, guaranteeing their own jobs and salaries above their mission.
Instead of working for mission, church leaders engage in a waiting game. Small churches with valuable assets are neglected by design in hopes that they will fold and leave their assets to the hierarchy. But in Lutheran governance a church voting to close can dispose of their assets as they choose. “There’s got to be a way around this,” runs through leaders’ minds. “We need that money—-uhh—for mission. Let’s create a Mission Fund and feed it with the assets of churches we close. We can use it any way we like. No one will notice.”
Church leaders scramble to make new rules concerning “termination” and “involuntary synodical administration” and lock out the local leaders (literally) while they get their ducks in a row. Anything to protect those assets—for themselves.
Lay people are at risk, especially those who are knowledgeable enough to know the polity of their denomination. They have the least power and voice, especially when the denomination fails to provide clergy to serve them.
Courts have determined that they have no jurisdiction to require church leaders to honor their own governing rules. But two judges dissented, citing the law. There is hope!
Last February, The Inquirer looked into the East Falls land grab attempt in 2008 which has been in the courts ever since. They determined that the story might be too complicated to be told in 16 column inches. Most major newspapers have an online presence with no space restrictions, so that’s an outdated excuse.
Meanwhile, another synodical land grab is being attempted in the metropolitan New York area. Here there is an invocation of a brand new unwritten constitutional status — “permanent synodical administration.” More brazen all the time! This follows a midnight raid to seize church property in New Jersey by the Slovak Zion Synod. There will surely be more. Each unchallenged hierarchical action makes the next one that much easier!
They count on people being to timid or uncommitted to care. They also rely on the resources of every congregation fund the law suits against a congregation and the resources it can muster alone.
The courts have given an answer to the question raised in our headline.
Who is watching the priests and clerics?
In America, it’s up to us lowly Christians—the more lowly, the more likely.
It’s the first Sunday of the month, the week Redeemer members pass our locked church to worship together in a community theater and gather across the street in a neighborhood bar afterwards for fellowship. The bar even added us to their calendar. (God is doing something new!)
We had many things to celebrate and give thanks for today. Two of our members were awarded good jobs and one is starting a business. We were particularly grateful that one of the retired pastors who worships with us regularly was back with us after a four-month rehabilitation after surgery.
We enjoy having our own worship—singing the hymns we choose, praying our own prayers, enjoying our own fellowship. We also enjoy our Ambassador visits on the other Sundays of the month. But there is nothing like being at home.
We know that the only reason to lock our people out our church was to destroy our community. Lesson to church hierarchies: Find another way!
We were reminded in today’s sermon of an ongoing theme of our Australian pastor — that church is not about what we “get out of it.” It is about God and His relationship with us and our response to His love.
There isn’t a church in East Falls that isn’t challenged. Some of the challenges come from the religious apathy of the community. We can’t blame them to some extent. It’s rather dangerous to be a Christian (or at least a Lutheran) in East Falls.
The greatest challenge is from the Church itself, who values property above community. It is too expensive to operate religious schools. Send the kids elsewhere. Rent the buildings.
The people who invested their time and offerings in Redeemer and St. Bridget’s (and perhaps a few other church communities before them) have had their gifts squandered by outside interests. Fallsers gave to contribute to their community. Their gifts were confiscated or devalued by people who thought they had better uses for our resources but haven’t a clue how to serve East Falls.
If only the courts could hand out consciences as easily as property!
There are reports that the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is negotiating the use of Redeemer Church with community leaders. SEPA spent no time considering the use of Redeemer Church with the people who built the church — the Lutherans of East Falls. They continue their attacks on our members in the courts. That should give the people of East Falls some idea of the character of the people with whom they are negotiating. East Falls beware!
At the heart of SEPA’s problems in East Falls is loss of mission — or to use church-speak — the loss of “missional focus.”
If SEPA cares, they should note: Redeemer is still a worshiping community.
Talk to us! You have a better chance of serving East Falls with the Lutherans of East Falls than without us.
As for the excommunicated members of Redeemer, we will serve the Lord.
Redeemer, East Falls is too small to serve its “missional” purpose (“missional” is not a word but church people seem to understand it).
That was the premise used by Bishop Claire Burkat and her coterie. It was never true. It sounded good to the people they needed to convince in order to have their way—which had nothing to do with mission but was all about money and property and synod’s habitual deficit spending.
SEPA’s actions did tons of damage to our people, our congregation and to our neighborhood, but Redeemer’s mission continues to grow. That’s what happens when you work a plan with selfless resilience and flexibility!
One of our projects was to develop our ministry online (since we had no building). We started slowly, doing research and following best practices. The site grew slowly at first, but after about six months, it was apparent there was a foundation for steady growth and an inexhaustible potential.
The site has grown steadily over all. There are day-to-day peaks and valleys, but the weekly and monthly trends reveal steady growth that is picking up.
In the last two weeks a few remarkable things have begun to happen on www.2x2virtualchurch.com.
We now have 100 people who read out posts by email each day. We have an additional 50 unique visitors every day. Our weekly unique readership (not counting those who follow us on Facebook, Twitter or email) hovered between 180 and 275 for the last six weeks. Adding our subscribers or followers to that number puts us at around 1000 readers each week.
Our global reach is picking up. There are a few countries that check in daily—France, Canada, Great Britain, Netherlands, Australia, Kenya, Pakistan, the Philippines and most recently, India. Twice this week our foreign readership outpaced United States readers, at least until the very end of the day when there is often a surge in North American readership.
People are slowly beginning to participate in the discussion, often by email rather than on the site.
Yesterday, we had a request to find a way to have the site translated into Urdu, so Pakistani Christians might have access to our posts.
We invited churches to follow the site. That invitation has led to interesting friendships with four other congregations—two in Kenya, one in Pakistan and one near to us in Philadelphia.
Redeemer was never more able to fulfill its “missional” purpose. We believe our mission and ministry activities measure well with every other congregation in SEPA (large and small) — who now have the benefit of our resources.
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.
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.
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.
Join Bishop Ruby Kinisa as she visits small churches "under cover" to learn what people would never share if they knew they were talking to their bishop.
Undercover Bishop will always be available in PDF form on 2x2virtualchurch.com for FREE.
Print or Kindle copies are available on Amazon.com.
For bulk copies, please contact 2x2: creation@dca.net.
Contact Info
You can reach
Judy Gotwald,
the moderator of 2x2,
at
creation@dca.net
or 215 605 8774
Redeemer’s Prayer
We were all once strangers, the weakest, the outcasts, until someone came to our defense, included us, empowered us, reconciled us (1 Cor. 2; Eph. 2).
2×2 Sections
Where in the World is 2×2?
On Isaiah 30:15b
Be calm. Wait. Wait. Commit your cause to God. He will make it succeed. Look for Him a little at a time. Wait. Wait. But since this waiting seems long to the flesh and appears like death, the flesh always wavers. But keep faith. Patience will overcome wickedness.
—Martin Luther
