Well, Technically
A young pastor recently received his first call out of the seminary. He was welcomed with great excitement and zeal from the congregation. As he began to get to know his people, he recognized that there was a retired pastor in his midst (not a predecessor) who enjoyed writing and would distribute his writings to others. It seemed he enjoyed passing along his theological wisdom to members of the congregation and to other pastors.
What began to trouble the newly installed is that when he finally sat down to read what was being distributed, it was full of “receptionism” surrounding the Sacrament of the Altar. He went to the pastor concerned about such theology being distributed to his people. The pastor became angry and began to stir controversy within this young pastor’s congregation and refused to stop writing the tracts. Controversy within the congregation aside, the newly installed pastor relied on his Circuit Visitor and then District President for help in getting the “receptionism” talk from being distributed to his people and not taught by this pastor at all. The new pastor was told, “Well, technically he’s not wrong.” Nothing happened.
This got me thinking about many issues within Synod and why we have so many obstacles in our way to truly being “Synod” and walking together. There are grave errors that pastors wholeheartedly and openly cling to, but when it comes to discipline, “Well, technically he’s not wrong,” and the error is allowed to continue. Synod walks further and further apart.
Where have you seen the “Well, technically it’s not wrong” play out?
Internet “Communion.” “Yeah, you really shouldn’t be doing that, but technically he’s not wrong. Jesus even healed people when He wasn’t physically in the same place! After all, it’s his pastoral discretion.” The abomination continues.
Women serving as elders, publicly reading the Scriptures in the Divine Service, vesting and communing pastors and other congregants. “We’re members of the priesthood of all believers. She’s a Commissioned Minister, too, so technically the pastor’s not wrong for allowing it.” Or, “It was only on LWML Sunday. It’s so meaningful when more people are involved! Not only is he not wrong, he’s letting everyone use their gifts! And plus: we’ve always done it that way!”
Open Communion is reported to the Circuit Visitor. When he calls the pastor who is apparently practicing such things, “Yes, she’s Methodist, but you know with all of the things they have going on, she’s been coming here. I don’t want to be a stumbling block to her faith by denying her admittance to the altar. She’s been hurt by the church enough as it is.” Circuit Visitor: “Does she have any desire to join your church or even be under your pastoral care?” Pastor: “No, but we can be a refuge for her for now. She just wants to follow Jesus the way she knows how. I’m letting the Gospel predominate and showing her the love of Jesus.” When that is passed on to others, “Well, technically he’s not wrong. He’s using his pastoral discretion.”
Speaking of Methodists: A Lutheran pastor holds a weekly counseling group on Sundays at the UMC. He does so in the name of “pastoral care” and “outreach.” Forget that they have a woman “pastor” and openly hold that homosexuality is not an abomination to the Lord but is actually blessed by Him! This pastor is called out by a brother for his unionism. Yet, who is it that gets reprimanded? You got it. The faithful brother who called out the unionist because, “Well, technically, he’s not wrong. It’s unhelpful at best.”
The National Youth Gathering. “Technically, it’s not wrong [fill in the error here] because “mass events” aren’t church. And plus: why are you robbing your youth of such a meaningful experience?”
Alternate seminaries. “Technically, it’s not wrong. It’s actually beneficial to the church! We’re providing more accessible routes for ordination” (as if there aren’t enough already).
The “technically, it’s not wrong” problem is why we are so far away from truly walking together in Synod. When men try to be faithful and are reprimanded for their faithfulness instead of seeing errors actually condemned and corrected, the faithful become apathetic and burn out. If the faithful wants to see the process through, he is tied up in a multi-year process to bring up charges, and if he should dare even think about not following their idea of “Matthew 18,” the one in error is let off the hook completely.
At some point we must have men who operate according to the Scriptures and the Confessions first before ever even thinking of citing synodical bylaws. But for far too long several in the post-seminex generation (not all) who vowed to “change Synod from within” rather than leaving have led according to bylaw instead of Confession. They’ll quote bylaw after bylaw from memory but fail to recite even the Small Catechism from memory. “Technically, it’s not wrong,” but we’re also a long way from walking together as a result.
Edit: Nevermind this post. I stand corrected in it all. An anonymous commenter has corrected me. Well, technically…”This sounds like a "you" problem, not a synod problem. All of this stems from a sinful Pride that is common here, thinking that your view is more correct than others. Why do you worry so much about this 'speck?'