by Joseph Beran, 2023
This book bluntly deals with the difficulties of a shrinking and fading church body—in this case the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod. The first three chapters deal explicitly with the multiple downward trends evident and do not pull any punches. It is hard to disagree with the diagnosis. The deficiencies of this work make themselves known in the second part, labeled “Prescription.” This direct, clear, and readable book brings forth the evidence that the LCMS is not ok and there is much that we should be confronting. It is not a rah-rah book cheering the eternal LCMS and promising things will work out in a human way. That is commendable.
The problems of the LCMS parallel the issues with an increasing secularized American culture. Even President Harrison has been beating this drum. The overwhelming critique, though telling, is not a theological one. It is demographic, statistical, and quantitative. The academic approach—rather than the biblical—is black and white, but tends toward sociological analyses and human fixes, rather than trust in God who gives His Word and Spirit. The solution put forth in this work is not ultimately a scriptural one.
The first chapter, “When symptoms appear in the Church,” uses the test case of Covid reactions and restrictions to show how the church and its doctrine do not hold sway as they once did in America. Pastors who did what was expected by germaphobic society and tyrannical government leaders had to accommodate their congregations to the lower esteem of the world. “Churches were forced to reconcile with the fact that liquor stores were deemed ‘more essential’ by many legislators and policy makers than they were” (8). That churches thought they deserved a high place in the world and took their cues from its figureheads and talking heads—was perhaps the root problem. But Rev. Beran does not use the noticeable surface distortions to argue that Covid revealed what our mistaken priorities were all along—and that the conflict with mainstream society brought to the forefront our misguided expectations. The problem was not what the world, enslaved by the fear of death expected—but that pastors had not been preparing their sheep to deal with an unsupportive and antagonistic world and the reality of death as a defeated enemy in Christ’s resurrection. That is my point, but not this book’s.
The cultural analysis is right as far as it goes, but does it not get to the heart of the matter: faith in God’s pure doctrine to stand firm against Satan, death, and of course the world. It is true, however, that
People across society are no longer looking to the church to weigh in on cultural matters … as they did in the past, and even one in five Christians admits to feeling unsure whether pastors are trustworthy. Instead, people will often look for churches that can fit in with their current view of the world so that it becomes reinforced. It is rarely the case that people will go to their pastor asking for clarity on a belief or teaching, but instead will scour the internet looking for the most compelling source of information. If the church is lucky, they will talk with their pastor or teacher as an afterthought about the issue. Rather than asking a pastor or teacher what the church believes about wider cultural talking points, it is more likely that parishioners will seek out a church that doesn’t press them too hard (9).
That rings true to this pastor, yet do we expect an unbelieving world to form faithful Christians for us? It is in reality when pastors don’t do their job well, as witnessed by Covid-era problems of online (dis)communion and canceling church (where the anti-dote for death is supposed to be given in the Gospel with authority). LCMS pastors not doing a good job had their results revealed. Many pastors have done a poorly, simply refusing to challenge their congregations in a serious way, implicitly confirming firming them in their worldliness and fleshly expectations of ease and success. Church, as experienced in its weak practice and teaching, has become a soft and cozy distraction from the world, death, and sin—rather than a direct proclamation of the damning law of God and the life-giving Gospel of Christ to overcome these in the hope of eternal life.
The evidence of “youth sport involvement” is rightfully brought forth as further evidence of the changing priorities of the average American, whether churched or not. The result is that “families are caught between choosing to sabotage the team by not participating or choosing not to be involved with church activities, or sabotaging the church and their child’s faith” (10). This dilemma is well stated, but it comes from the world’s standpoint, which cannot love Christ and His Holy will in its blindness and sin. The true problem is our unstated priorities, which occur well before a particular practice or game: bowing with undivided attention to the social pressure to push and facilitate our children to do activities (essentially works) at all costs, rather than form them under the fear of God by honoring God’s Word as primary and teaching them how to walk as God’s baptized children (the way of faith). Why do Christian feel the need to do worldly activities that are not commanded by the Lord and offer little benefit, yet see as optional the very things the true God commanded? “Bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). This not about sports and other time-consuming extra-circular activities—it is truly a first commandment issue—not a problem with the world or its attitudes. It has never be easy to be a Christian, unless it is devotion to a superficial and complacent perversion of the true Gospel.
The second chapter, “The Effects on the LCMS,” details the demographic slide. It illustrates the denomination siding more with the world than Christ’s Word. I take this as an indictment of the church’s leaders and preachers—not that the world has gotten worse. It was never a good friend to start with, according to Christ: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you” (Jn. 15:18). “In 1960 there were around 85,000 baptisms. In 2013, the most recent year the data covers, the baptisms has fallen below 25,000” (16-17). “An overwhelming majority of our church body’s membership is over the age of 50, which means an overwhelming majority of our church body members will likely have transferred to the Church Triumphant within the next 50 years” (18). The logic is sound and clear—and the problem is that serious.
The problem is not baptisms alone, since it is pointed out that “60% of LCMS-born children are lost to the church community before confirmation” (19). Many were never in it in a doctrinal sense—the rise of people tangentially connected to the church requesting baptisms—without a church they regularly attend—seems significant. Perhaps many of those bringing a child to baptism never intended to take the words of the baptismal rite seriously, with the result that it was an outward act of tradition merely done to please a parent or grandparent. Confirmation as a rite of passage is practically a meme—making it not about forming mature Christians, but the finish line of faith, so that the child can get on with really living without Christ for the flesh. Like baptism for some, due to pastors never saying no or taking a firm stand—essentially effeminate doctrine and practice—it has become a formality, not the further forming of a doctrinally mature Christian.
A serious error, in my opinion, is made in regards to children in the section entitled: “Can’t we just have bigger families.” The economic tropes are listed: that it is harder to support a large family in an urban environment vs. a rural one. Rev. Beran argues against legalism, correctly, but does not see a fundamental evangelical motive in being fruitful and multiplying. No one decides to have a child-it is not like scheduling a pedicure appointment. Children are divine gifts, rather than consumer items—which is how they are increasing seen. The problem goes much deeper than numbers.
The logic behind this statement is shallow, but revelatory: “My estimation is that, at our current rates of loss, if we assume 90% of the women from ages 18-50 in the LCMS are willing to have as many as it takes for our church body to recover from the loss rate of 80%, it would take twelve children each.” As a father who God has blessed with 12 children to raise as Christians presently, I find the implication absurd. A Christian family with 12 kids will be quite counter-cultural by their walk, so that assuming the children in it will be formed in Christ and then fall away at the same rate as a “normal” church family almost indistinguishable from the world is silly. They must be separated from the world by default to live in this way—since it is so against the world’s standards, including the economic and lifestyle ones. I would have to hire multiple drivers (since two parents can barely handle 2-3 kids each doing an organized sport) and have a much larger pocketbook for my children to do even 1 on-going activity each! A lack of children is the symptom of not treasuring God’s Word and gifts—not the cause of worldliness, which has always existed. The one who actually believes that God makes each child personally in His image and bestows Christ’s eternal salvation to every sinner in baptism—and lives that holy calling out with great difficulty—will not be blown to and fro by the silly demands of the world. Those who organize their lives around following God’s Word, rather than just going with the worldly flow, will be different, so applying data from Christians behaving like the world does not make sense. Those who take God’s Word most seriously—in a world that worships wealth and fleshly freedom—also inculcate the faith among the next generation in a way demonstrates that faithfulness to Christ is not extraneous to living in this fading world.
“Institutional decay” is the third and final chapter dealing with the diagnosis. The decline of church workers is documented, as is the average age of pastors. “Pre-seminary enrollment is down 50%”; “50% of the synods current active pastors are 55 years or older”; 457 congregations were calling for a pastor in 2023 and “519 congregations are being served by part-time pastors” (25-26). Interestingly, the deaconess program, which is certainly not as essential as having pastors, shows the least decrease in the offices listed, though it is still significantly down (43%). I agree that these trends are a problem, but they are also symptoms of the devaluing of the office of pastor and other helpers in the church among God’s people.
The Concordia universities are also tackled. They no longer exist primarily to train church workers, but have become by-and-large liberal arts schools. The LCMS’ Concordia system is claimed to “focus on a wider liberal arts education with solidly Lutheran teaching underpinning it” (31). I chuckled at this throw-away attempt to paint all the Concordias as truly Lutheran. The paganism of the now defunct New York and Portland Concordias are well documented—and was appropriately rewarded. This was the first sign that the author’s definition of “solid Lutheran teaching” is amiss.
Despite the fact that the Concordias do not teach a majority of LCMS Lutherans, this is painted as a positive: “The Concordias have an incredible opportunity to be able to teach Lutheran doctrine who might not have been previously reached” (32). That is technically true, but I see little evidence that is actually being done—rather the “market pressures” require not offending some of the most sensitive consumers of college education we have ever seen. The BLM-inspired uprising at Concordia, Mequon, the attempt to silence Dr. Gregory Schulz, and a protesting student assembly fixated upon racial injustice at Concordia River Forest paint a different picture. Even the supposed traditional Concordia, Nebraska, under a previous administration tried (and then promptly forget it) to jump on the world’s racial justice ride: “Concordia University, Nebraska’s Board of Regents on July 15 [2020] approved a resolution that acknowledges the University’s need to become more adept at embracing racial and ethnic diversity to fulfill its God-given mission.” Is this “sold Lutheran teaching? Far from it.
Rev. Beran does acknowledge the concern the Concordias’ “mission drift.” The goal of sinful man’s diversity cannot fit well with the true religion which says that all glory and honor are due to the God revealed in Christ Jesus. Rather than “mission drift,” confirming in Satan’s lies of false doctrine and sinful living would be a stronger way to put it.
The prescription is where the book goes far astray. There is talk of the Gospel and Rev. Beran does address the statistical decline from a churchly and pastoral point of view. “In this new ministry environment that we live in, it may feel like things are coming to an end. It feels like there is not much room for hope. But to think that way would be to ignore the promises of Christ” (36). I would go further, placing blame and indicting more directly, because many have placed their trust in the wrong thing: earthly success right now.
Twin temptations are outlined: “One, we will likely be tempted to either speak so much to cultural questions, issues, and relevant topics, that we start to stray from the teachings of Christ. Or, two, to remove ourselves so far from the culture that we disconnect from it entirely, losing our ability to faithfully give a reason for the hope that we have in Christ” (40). I disagree with the fundamental premise. First, the urge to try to be relevant is unfaithfulness to Christ and His Word, not just a temptation. Second, the latter point sees being of the world culturally as necessary. We should not form our own church language and refuse to interact completely with the world—which would be almost impossible. Yet, must we be somewhat relevant by the world’s standards—regardless if they conflict with Christ’s will? What does that mean for preaching against the sin of homosexuality and abortion in this modern Sodom and Gomorrah? Rev. Beran paints these both as extremes and tries to chart a middle way: not too much faithfulness and do not be completely relevant to the world. It sounds like encouraging luke-warmness—the very reason for most of the problems in the LCMS to date.
This point I find very objectionable: “If we are doing everything in our power to make sure the teachings of the church have not been affected by our secular culture, we may fail to translate the teachings of God in a compelling way that the culture understands” (40). But there is no contradiction between faithfulness to God’s Word and being able to speak to the world’s issues, unless one is a secluded hermit. The striving to retain the life-giving source of the Spirit in pure doctrine is never bad or over done. The suggestion seems to read: don’t be too doctrinal, and be a little worldly, so you can be relatable. But our relating is not in our worship of the world’s ways or being secularized—conforming to the prince of this world—it is in words of power and the Spirit, not human wisdom. A false tension is setup—illustrative of the cause of problems in the LCMS, rather than any real solution: “If we disconnect from the wider culture so that we can better hold to the teachings of God, we are actively neglecting Jesus’ command to ‘Go’ and make disciplines of all nations …” (40-41).
Faithfulness to the Scripture and also being worldly-relatable is presented as tight-lining act. However, it is not that complex to preach to a sinful culture—we need to know and study the world’s errors, but not be worldly in our living and thinking. The real question is: do we believe Christ’s saving Word is enough? Or do we need to make it suit and appeal to an increasing pagan context? Faithfulness of confession and life is not a balance-beam act, it is being willing to speak despite facing rejection, shame, and persecution in the world. “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account” (Matt. 5:10-11). Jesus did not say: “don’t be too serious about my teaching—you don’t want to overdo it; you still want to be relatable to those who hate me.”
“The answer becomes a tension between how the church can faithfully speak the message of the Gospel in such a way that it challenges cultural idols, while at the same time pointing to how faith in Jesus answers many of the of their deepest questions and longing.” But these are not two separate tasks—they are one and in same. We must confront the false gods of self, happiness, and self-esteem, revealing sinners’ need for the forgiveness of Christ. It is a both/and, not an either/or. There is no tension is smashing false idols and uplifting God in the flesh—Christ.
The implication of this book is that we must not be too hard-edged and neglect to be winsome in a worldly sense to those eternally dying and caught in the depravity of sin. That, though, is not loving or more faithful. Preaching the Word is not a complicated task—the problem is the LCMS has avoided the basic and straightforward application of the Scriptures—saying nothing and seeking solace in the numbers that still exist. The solution presented actually sounds like the root of the problem: “The Balance of Ecclesiology and Missiology” (41). It sounds like being fearful of actually being bold—since the world will not accept us as winsome if we confess Christ without an apology. “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:26). It is a task Jesus called simple fishermen to—being faithful as a pastor is not a subtle academic needle to thread.
The Word of God is enough—simply proclaiming it creates and sustains the church. Yet, it is argued that “If you cannot build a relationship with someone who is hearing the Gospel, you are not going to be able to disciple them.” That is a sociological and psychological fact, not a doctrinal one. This is also an odd statement: “Missiology and ecclesiology are simply stronger in their respective lanes, and confusing or neglecting that reality will cause problems” (45). This tension is man-centered and not from the Holy Scriptures.
The questions raised and facets of the impending decline of the LCMS are frankly stated, which is a great service to the church. The book speaks wisely to the use of digital communication and its dangers. Unfortunately, the call of this book ultimately is not to repent of viewing Christ’s Word as a play-toy and indulging in the frivolity that we need to be relevant to those blinded by Satan in our proclamation. Rather, we must stop trying to appear relevant and actually do the simple task Christ gave to do: preach and teach all that He commanded. And we must actually trust that Christ’s salvation is sufficient, fully-formed, and given graciously in the true Gospel. But we are told we must change how the Word is taught (trying to make the catechism more relevant to a world that does not accept the most basic fundamentals of Christianity), rather than just doing what we are supposed to do better. “The catechism was written, by and large, in an era where belief in God was a given” (58). The idea that the unbelieving world should change what the church does is backwards. The problem has never been being too faithful to Christ.
The book offers few concrete proposals, but it does suggest pastors should not be stuck in their ways—but have the same freedom to interact and experiment in a new way as missionaries in a foreign culture. It is asked if we are created “barriers” with our “church buildings, practices, norms, bylaws” (62). And further it is said that the serious, high training of our pastors is a problem, not a blessing: “the world is our oyster when it comes to deciding what we want pastoral formation to look like” (66). That doesn’t sound positive. Alternatives are laid out that include “Adopting Paul’s Model” of mentorship and bi-vocational training (75-76). There is some human wisdom here, but it seem dubious to set as a goal what is not God’s express will. Rather, those who preach should live by the Gospel.
Giving churches and pastors more “flexibility” to learn and conduct public worship is not a serious solution. The Gospel must be what we trust, not our cultural translation of it. While much of the advice detailed in the book is not bad in itself, it advocates perpetuating and doubling-down on the very things that have gotten the LCMS into its current mess. —ed.
Christian News 