« What I Was Writing Against | Main | Pirate Christian Radio is Sailing Circles Around KFUO AM »

Comments

Matt Dubois, Esq.

So is Kieschnick saying - by threatening a lawsuit - that 1 Cor. 6 and its clear direction on lawsuits among believers is not the inspired word of God?

Does the LCMS just pick and choose what scripture it wants to follow?

Aren't we then (we the church) defeated already?

Ryan

You know, when the whole cancellation took place I tried really hard to give the corporate LCMS the benefit of the doubt regarding their reasons for cancelling Issues Etc. It didn't seem likely that it was truly a financial decision, but there seemed to be at least a shred of possibility that there was financial motiviation.

However, if these reports are true, and I believe they are (I have a hard time believe Pr. Wilken would say something pubicly without being sure it was true), it makes it absolutely impossible that this was only a financial decision. If it was, they would be content with the situation as it is since they are no longer spending money on Issues Etc. As long as that was their goal, they have nothing to be unahppy about as far as this situation is concerned. However, the fact that they are willing to spend even more money on a lawsuit pretty much proves how absurd the notion of this being a financial decision is.

Regarding this, I've seen a few references to 1 Cor 6, and it is certainly applicable here. However most people are applying it only to Pres. K and the LCMS. Pr. Wilken and Jeff Schwarz are equally bound by the same passage. I have no doubt in my mind that Pr. Wilken and Jeff Schwarz have done nothing wrong, and should continue to spread the Gospel through the medium of Radio. If the LCSM will not drop their suit, it would be better for Pr. Wilken and Jeff Schwarz to drop the Issues Etc Name. Yes, they would be being wronged and cheated by the LCMS, but 1 Cor 6:7 tells us that this is better than participating in a law suit with fellow Christians, however wrong they may be.

Matt Dubois, Esq.

100% agree, but from listening to Issues, etc. and not having actual knowledge of the lawsuit or response, I was expecting that Pr. Wilken and Jeff Schwarz are well aware of their scriptural response and that they would responnd Biblically.

Again, I agree that we have to look at how we would be better to be wronged than hurt the church, but it may also be the opportunity to attempt to involve additional members of the church in a reconciliation process before simply giving in to the particular legal issue.

Andrew DeLoach, Esq.

I will gladly donate my time to helping them out. If anyone is deserving of the "highly encouraged" pro bono time of an attorney, Issues, Etc. surely is, and they have as much of mine as they need.

Mike Baker

If the leadership sinfully decides to engage in a lawsuit in violation of the often quoted passage in 1 Cor 6... would it be right to resist? Would it be better to surrender the trademark and make a new one that is beyond the reach of LCMS, Inc?

It is easy to talk about the horrible thing that is happening to Issues, etc. I am wondering, what is the right response should the lawsuit take place? How does one repay evil with good in this scenerio?

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you." -Matt 5:38-42

...lol, I'm curious to see how this comment is received. Don't beat me up to hard. I'm just asking the question. :P

Pr. Martin Diers

Apparently, Pope Gerry hasn't heard of the Streisand Effect.

Pr. Martin Diers

@Mike: I have heard this same reasoning used against a fellow pastor who (along with his family) was forcefully evicted from the parsonage by a minority of his congregation who filed fraudulent paperwork with the state to dissolve the congregation. It is one thing to say, "You should not sue a brother in Christ." But what if a brother in Christ sues you, and refuses to deal with you as a brother? Are you indeed not allowed to defend yourself? What then do we say of the Apostle Paul who appealed to Caesar?

The context of the Matt. 5 passage is clearly speaking against "eye for eye, tooth for tooth". It sets up revenge against patient endurance in affliction. Revenge should be so far from our hearts that we are rather willing to bear with the insult, than to strike back and seek revenge.

In this case, Todd and Jeff are not in the least striking back or seeking revenge. If they must defend themselves, I am sure they will do so only so far as is necessary to get LCMS,Inc. off their backs and leave them alone.

rontheranchhand

I agree with Pr Diers, defending oneself is not the same as revenge, which I think is in view in Matt. 5. I am a member of the LCMS, and I think some in leadership are sticking their hand in the pot a bit to far and stirring things up. I hope the laity wake up and smell the smelliness in 2010.

Rev. Lovejoy

I say bring it on. It will do a lot to get Kieschnick elected out of office in a year and a half! Drag it out - motions to postpone, discovery... a good lawyer may be able to drag it out a year or more.

The hubris of Jerry is beyond all human understanding.

Matt Dubois, Esq.

If CHrist is our example, than aren't we willing to be terribly wronged than to defend our rights? At what point do we choose the Bible over the Constitution?

If we focus on how we respond to conflict, treating it as a stewardship opportunity, we can focus on a response that glorifies God, serves others and helps us grow to be Christ-like, whether that be accepting an evil wrong against us or defending ourselves for God's glory, not ours, then we can be at peace that the outcome is under God's control.

Jonathan Schultz

I respectfully disagree with those who say Wilken should back down should LCMS pursue this. Wilken should not initiate anything, but if a suit is brought, he needs to defend himself. To surrender would not only lend Dr. K credibility in the eye of the public, but it would add strength to his tyranny.

And unfortunately, that's the best construction I've been able to come up with.

Mike Baker

Let me just say that I am not wise enough to have an answer on this. I do not envy the horrible possition that my synodical leadership has put these faithful servants of Christ in.

Please do not think that I am endorsing one course of action because I do not know what should be done in this case. Both sides appear to have very good arguements.

...but I thought I would simply pose the question.

Michael Ritzman

The one who brings a lawsuit is the one who feels wronged and seeks justice. In 1Cor 6, when Paul says "Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?" he is addressing the one who is bringing the lawsuit.

When Todd and Jeff were dismissed, did they bring a lawsuit? Did they seek revenge, or did they "turn the other cheek" and go on their way?

So how does Matt 5 apply to this lawsuit? Todd and Jeff do not own the trademark to Issues, Etc. so they cannot give it. As far as I can tell, T&J do not use the LCMS logos, nor do they affiliate themselves with the LCMS (other than being an ordained minister and members of the LCMS and its congregations). And not being able to talk about the LCMS??? Is it okay, in this instance, to reference Acts 4:18-21?

18Then [the sanhedrin] called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 19But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. 20For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard."

21After further threats they let them go. They could not decide how to punish them, because all the people were praising God for what had happened.

Jonathan Schultz

"The one who brings a lawsuit is the one who feels wronged and seeks justice."

This begs the question, how has Wilken and Schwarz wronged Dr. K or the church at large to warrant such a suit?

"In 1Cor 6, when Paul says "Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?" he is addressing the one who is bringing the lawsuit."

Thank you for that, I hadn't considered that before.

Dave Lee

I find this all interesting. In the US gov. liberalism is attempting to silence conservative speech and thought. In our beloved synod, liberalism seeks to silence confessional speech and thought. Liberal thinking always dresses itself in serving the "have nots" and the "lazy" as it pertains to social issues. In the church liberalism dresses itself in "outreach programs". I have noticed that to be conservative socially, one must continually inform himself and study. So also, to be confessional in theology, requires on-going study, faithfulness to the means of grace, and clear concise understanding of "law and Gospel". Liberalism in any arena requires little or no action.

Scott

I agree with Michael Ritzman.

"When Todd and Jeff were dismissed, did they bring a lawsuit? Did they seek revenge, or did they "turn the other cheek" and go on their way?"

I cannot for the life of me fathom what these men are doing that so irks the leadership of our Synod.

The only thing I can think of are those snarky adverts that refer to "LCMS Inc." but that would seem petty reason for a lawsuit.

Rochelle Duke

ERASMUS WILL ALWAYS PROP UP HIS HEAD AGAINST LUTHER'S ISSUES OF THE DAY.

The comments to this entry are closed.

October 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

A Little Leaven

Support This Site

Follow Me on Twitter

  • Twitter

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter