This group likes to describe itself using the following terms: "Gospel-Centered", "Mission Driven", and "Future Oriented". While these terms sound good they hide meanings that are anything but good. In a recent mailing to every congregation in the LCMS they touted these terms in contrast to those in our synod holding an historic, Scriptural and Confessional view of what the synod should be.

Please permit me to quote from the Jesus First Leadership (JFL) "Proclaim the Word" brochure and provide some commentary as to the unstated agenda behind the nice-sounding statements:

"Gospel-Centered - President Kieschnick leads the LCMS using these two verses [Hebrews 13:8 and John 3:16-17] as his theme. God made the ultimate sacrifice by sending Jesus to die for us and then raised Christ from the dead so that we will live a new life. We uplift and support Gospel-centered leaders who live as disciples of the One who did not come to condemn, but to save the world."

What Does This Mean?

By stating basic Christian teaching regarding the sacrifice of Christ and the resurrection of Christ, Jesus First Leadership desires to indicate that they are mainstream Lutherans. The fact of the matter is that a good percentage of signatories on the Jesus First Leadership Statements of Affirmation are anything but mainstream. Comprised of mainly "Salt Water District" pastors, teachers and laymen, [Salt Water Districts are those districts normally bordering the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Pacific Ocean often associated with liberal theology and practice] the roster of signatories is a who's who of liberals in the LCMS. There is even an ELCA ordained woman pastor, Ms. Teri Lyn Forbes included in the listing. In fact it is this same Rev. Forbes who is the moderator for a private discussion group for DayStar which works hand-in-hand with JFL. It should be no surprise, then that on the JFL website is the clear statement that, "We advocate no position on women's ordination." Of course the Scriptures do have a position on the ordination of women - they oppose it.

While many well-meaning Lutherans have signed the Statements of Affirmation without realizing their implications, the signatory list is filled with many involved in the Chrismatic Movement and its LCMS organization "Renewal In Missouri". This organization seeks to expand the practice of speaking in tongues, faith healings, alleged gifts of direct prophesy from God, and other so-called Charismatic miraculous signs through out our synod. Moreover, some who are signatories of Jesus First Leadership also hold membership in Voices/Visions. Voices/Visions is a group of men and women in the LCMS advocating overtly for women's ordination in direct opposition to biblical instruction to the contrary. Likewise, some JFL members also hold membership in DayStar, yet another group advocating for women's ordination. All three of these political action organizations in our synod are strong proponents for the precepts of the Church Growth Movement. (More on the Church Growth Movement later.) Moreover, writings on the JFL/DayStar websites indicate that more than a few signatories are strongly committed toopposing our synod's adherence to the ancient and Scriptural practice of the Church known as close or closed communion.

Please notice the false comparison made in this paragraph. JFL seeks to.... "uplift and support Gospel-centered leaders who live as disciples of the One who did not come to condemn, but to save the world." The leaders of JFL are trying to imply that those in our synod faithful to the Scriptures and the Confessions are only interested in condemning the world, while JFL is interested in saving souls. This is utterly untrue! Every LCMS pastor I know (whether or not they are in JFL or not) desires in his heart of hearts to reach the lost for Jesus Christ. Time and again this kind of false division is utilized to achieve the political ends of JFL.

Please permit another quote from "Proclaim the Word"

"The Word of God is foundational to the life of God's people and Jesus First advocates that it be shared also with those outside the church. While others may think they must only protect and preserve the Gospel 2 Timothy 4:2 clearly states 'Proclaim the Word....We are called to use our talents, not hide and protect them. Jesus First supports those leaders in the church who hear the passage, 'Let us fix our eyes on Jesus,' and who then embrace the freedom of the Gospel to lead the church and proclaim Jesus Christ to all people."

What Does This Mean?

Again this is an appeal to sound mainstream by indicating they are in favor of proclaiming the Gospel to the lost. Well, who isn't? Again the implication that those who wish to "protect and preserve" and those who are accused of wanting to "hide and protect" our talents are standing in the way of Gospel proclamation. There is no Gospel to proclaim outside of the doctrines of the Church! That Jesus Christ came to save sinners is a doctrine! That our Lord rose from the dead is a doctrine! That Jesus Christ died on the cross in payment for sin is a doctrine! Jesus First/DayStar/Voices Visions insists on trying to drive a wedge between the holding and defending of pure doctrine (one of the two marks of the Church) and proclaiming the Gospel. No such division can possibly exist! To proclaim pure doctrine is to proclaim the Gospel. What is truly being implied here is that pure doctrine is getting in the way of Gospel proclamation and that, of course, is simply untrue!

Another claim of "Proclaim the Word" from Jesus First is that they are Mission-Driven:

"Jesus First advocates the proclamation of the Gospel to all people (Matthew 28). Jesus First also advocates continued dialog with all Christian denominations. Our theology is a gift from God that needs to be shared with unbelievers and people who can learn from our rich theological history."

What Does This Mean?

The obvious implication here is that conservative, Confessional Lutheran pastors and laypeople are not mission-driven. This is, of course, totally false. JFL has long advocated reestablishing theological dialog with the ELCA, a church body that our synod in convention in 2001 declared to be, "No longer an orthodox Lutheran body." While we agree that dialog between Christians is a good thing, there are other more orthodox Lutheran bodies with whom we share far more in common and with whom far greater potential for agreement exists other than the ELCA. In a day of tight budgets perhaps we should be less enamored of the ELCA, which has departed the orthodox faith of Confessional Lutheranism, and spend our time, money and energy with groups that are at least headed in the right direction.

Another problem with JF/DayStar/Voices Visions, is that they tend to confuse the means of grace with Church Growth concepts. When asked, "How do we best proclaim the Gospel?" The unanimous choice of most JFL/DS/VV folks is to implement Church Growth methods. When you ask the same question to Confessional Lutherans you will hear that we should employ the means of grace: Preach the Word of God in all its truth and purity, and administer the Sacraments in accord with Christ's institution. We don't "sell" Christianity like McDonald's sells hamburgers! Marketing techniques and sociological findings are no substitute for the Word and Sacraments.

The Church's job description is not the Great Commission! Rather the Church's job description is to employ the means of grace to equip the saints so that as a result the well-equipped saints will proclaim the Gospel to the lost and erring. Some JFL supporters also misunderstand the nature of worship itself insisting that worship be primarily evangelistic toward unbelievers. It should be evident that the only people who can worship are believers! Unbelievers have no clue either whom they should worship or how. But JF/DS/VV often insists that worship is primarily evangelistic. The carrying out of the Great Commission is the result of employing the means of grace! But often the worship of God's people is impoverished to reach a few unbelievers in attendance who have no ability to worship at all!

Jesus First also claims that they are "Future-Oriented":

"It is time for us to place our trust in God, not the politics of power struggles that have dominated the LCMS in the past year."

What Does This Mean?

First, notice again the implication: If Jesus First is Future-Oriented, then the rest of us must be Past-Oriented. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. Additionally, they disparage the rich treasures of our past - a synod rooted deeply in biblical/Confessional theology - and declare our synod to be some kind of spiritual dinosaur.

Second, the claim that the politics of power struggles on the part of someone other than Jesus First/DayStar/Voices Visions seems to be a case of the proverbial pot calling the kettle black! On the Jesus First website their position regarding politics has been made very clear:

"We agree that the use of the political systems we have in place is the most effective way to bring about change."

"One of the primary goals of Jesus First is to support the election of gospel-centered, mission-minded and future-oriented delegates to the next synodical convention..."

"The Convention Team has people stepping forward in every district of Synod...to help congregations and circuits understand the importance of sending delegates to conventions who know the issues and who are prepared to vote independently of the current power structure..."

From the DayStar website (with whom Jesus First works in concert):

"My prayer is that the 2001 synodical convention will be the long-awaited response to what happened in New Orleans in 1973." (The 1973 New Orleans convention was the turning point which sought to reestablish the authority of God's Word in our synod's St. Louis Seminary faculty. How strange that JF/DS/VV would prefer that such actions be overturned.)

It seems that JF/DS/VV are no strangers to political power struggles and the reaction they are now receiving in that arena is only a response to their own past actions.

Jesus First also writes in "Proclaim the Word":

"Jesus First advocates that all the elected officers of the Synod need to serve the Lord rather than use politically-motivated agendas. The Fourth Commandment clearly states that we are to honor those, such as our Synod President, who have been given authority to lead the church with his vision and to exercise ecclesiastical supervision of all officers, boards, and districts. We are eager for the whole Board of Directors, all vice presidents and elected officials to support our Synod President and remove all unnecessary confusion in the Synod and the greater Christian community of our purpose and mission."

What Does This Mean?

It is interesting to note that Jesus First is putting forth a proposed overture to the 2004 synodical convention which says in part:

"BE IT RESOLVED that we again direct all members of Synod to avoid centralization of power within the Synodical structure"

While seemingly desiring the diversification of power in the synod (so the synod can't tell us what to do), now, since the man they overtly and politically worked to elect is synodical president it seems that centralized power is just fine. President Kieschnick recently has appointed 3 of 5 members of the synod's Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM). Since those appointments have occurred, there has been a sudden reversal of CCM opinions, the net result of which is an untouchable, unaccountable synodical president. The President of the LCMS has such centralized power in his office that until and unless he is not reelected at the 2004 synodical convention, he may do as he pleases, approve whatever he will approve, and do so without any timely accountability whatsoever. If President Kieschnick chose to do so, he could approved or even ordain a woman to the pastoral office in the LCMS and he would not be accountable for such actions until the next synodical convention. In the Bylaws of the LCMS the lines of ecclesiastical supervision are quite clear with respect to synodical workers. They read:

"An individual member of the Synod who is serving an agency other than a congregation or District...Shall hold membership through the District designated by that person...but shall be subject to the ecclesiastical supervision of the President of the geographical District in which the agency is located...Except as is expressly otherwise provided in this section, a member shall be under the ecclesiastical supervision of the President of the District through which synodical membership is held." (Synodical Handbook, Bylaw 2.41, d and h)

President Kieschnick requested membership in the Missouri District upon election to the synodical presidency, but due to an unConstitutional CCM opinion, the Constitutionally guaranteed ecclesiastical supervision of the synodical president has been made inoperative and the power, decisions and acts of our synodical president are unchecked.

Additionally, the above paragraph indicates that we allegedly are to follow the synodical president's lead regardless of where his personal vision of what the synod should be will lead us. The president of synod has no call to make up his own vision and take the synod where ever he wishes! In the Lutheran Agenda, a sacred oath is taken by the President-elect:

"Do you solemnly promise that you will perform the duties of your office in accordance with these Confessions, or Symbols, and in accordance with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod to the glory of Christ, our Lord, and in service to his holy Church? R: I do." (Lutheran Agenda, p. 353)

Whatever personal vision a synodical president may hold, it must always be in conformity with the Scriptures and the Confessions. That is our "Grandfather's Synod", but JFL would have us centralize power in this office such that the occupant of that office cannot be accountable for any and all so-called visions he may determine to inflict on the synod. According to JFL we should just blindly follow our elected leader, no matter what. This the Fourth Commandment does not say.

Finally, "Proclaim The Word" concludes:

"We thank God for those people who already support the President's vision of a mission- focused, future-oriented church."

What Does This Mean?

Clearly, without any confusion, JFL and their colleagues are declaring President Kieschnick to be one of their own. In JFL's view, President Kieschnick is exactly the kind of president they want running the synod with complete power. There can be only one reason for this: They want a president who will further their own agenda.

Jesus First Leadership is not the mainstream of our synod! Their agenda (as determined by their own writings and actions) includes acceptance of Charismatic practices, more open communion, consideration of the ordination of women, greater cooperation and conversation with the ELCA, more - not less - centralized power, the greater implementation of Church Growth concepts and practices, overt political action, and a lowered standard for interdenominational and even inter-faith fellowship. Should this agenda be followed, the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod cannot and will not remain faithful to orthodox Lutheranism.

It's high time that Jesus First Leadership, DayStar, and Voices Visions realize what a tiny minority of our synod they are. If you are a signatory of JFL or a member of DayStar or Voices Visions, we urge your immediate reconsideration of your affiliation. If you are not aligned with these groups it is time to become involved in the workings of our synod to reverse the attempted hijacking of our synod that these groups are attempting.