Recently the internet was treated to an interview by “Unite Leadership Collective” with former LCMS President Jerry Kieschnick, which can be viewed here, if you have the stomach for it. There have already been some incisive replies to it on Facebook. There are just a couple things I’d like to add.

Rev. Kieschnick is alarmed that the numbers in the Synod have decreased so dramatically, and he lays the blame for this at the feet of the usual suspects, among whom of course Gottesdienst is a chief representative. This has been dealt with a thousand times. It assumes that declining numbers are an indication that we must be doing something wrong. This has been thoroughly debunked by Rev. Heath Curtis’s statistical analysis. Such reasoning comes from a ‘theology of glory’ perspective that leaves Jesus’ own practice suspect, considering the fact that many left Jesus after his bread of life discourse (John 6:66), and for that matter, the fact that all his disciples forsook him and fled when he was arrested (Matt 26:56). To use numbers to gauge faithfulness is a classic error when it comes to the church.

But Kieschnick doubles down, and in his laundry list of grievances a preponderance of his complaints deals with the very kind of thing Gottesdienst promotes. He doesn’t mention us by name, but he might as well have done so. His watershed name for these complaints is what he calls “the Romanization of the liturgy,” under which he lists chanting (though here he concedes it can be done well), genuflecting, and prostrating (oh my!). He adds ‘requiring private confession’ (which sounds like a false claim, probably what he thinks healthy encouragement is), goes on to disparage crucifixes, and recoils at the idea of calling a pastor “Father.”

We’ve heard these screeds before. He doesn’t engage the salutary reasons we and others (including, in some cases, Luther himself) teach and do these things; he simply shakes his head and scoffs (If you, dear reader, would like to revisit those reasons yourself, might I suggest my little book Why?: A Layman’s Guide to the Liturgy).

Further, Kieschnick’s complaints carry the implication that the liturgical types he disparages (i.e., types like us) are tyrannically imposing their authority on poor helpless congregations, arrogating to themselves authority Christ gave to every Christian, especially regarding the work of evangelism. But the truth is that the tireless efforts of so many of us to teach on the Gospel, the Sacraments, the Ministry, and the Church itself have been bearing fruit. Members of our churches are routinely expressing avid support for the genuine Lutheran teachings we have brought them. Kieschnick’s opposition is in the end a thinly disguised disdain for the Office of the Ministry.

But we shouldn’t be surprised about this, because he also indicates his true proclivities toward the end of this interview, when he opposes closed communion in no uncertain terms, and recommends using the office of Prophetess. He doesn’t go into detail, but given the cultural milieu, one can hardly miss the nod towards women’s ordination. He tries to come off as a dyed-in-the-wool old-fashioned Missouri Synod Lutheran, but in the end his true colors show.

What I find most remarkable is his additional complaint: “We often act like we don’t really believe there is hell," and his use of this to emphasize the need for evangelism. Since he brought up the subject of what people act like they don’t really believe, I’m inclined to reply that by these complaints he seems to be among those that often act like they don’t really believe that Jesus is truly present in our worship. Let’s talk about what we really believe, shall we? Do you believe, sir, that you are really in the presence of the Incarnate One when you’re at the altar celebrating? One thing is clear: if you have a problem with genuflecting there, you certainly haven’t convinced me that you do. Or again, if you are really prepared to be so dismissive of the church’s long-standing historic liturgy and its accompanying careful rubrical instructions (as your charge that people like us are guilty of “worshiping worship” clearly implies), perhaps it hasn’t occurred to you that the reason for careful attention to the liturgy and its rubrics, and efforts to maintain solemnity and reverence when serving at the altar is that, sir, we do believe there is a hell, as well as a heaven, and we also believe that the church’s attention to right worship arises from an acute awareness that it is here, in the church’s pure worship, where the Incarnate One is truly present with His gifts, that men are snatched from hell and planted in heaven by the grace of God. You do believe that, don’t you?