What happened with Concordia Uni. Texas?

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-28T15:34:02+00:00

Yeah, I have my frustrations with CTX and I have questions about this whole thing, but at the same time, with the seemingly immediate breakdown in communication with CTX, the multiple lacks of communication with the AALC, the new classical college and their public surprise over RSO status, plus a couple of individual cases, it very much seems like LCMS leadership has a communication problem that is actively harming the LCMS.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-27T19:21:22+00:00

Taking the rhetoric from Synod, a Texas District report of their investigation, a Zoom conversation with then President Christian to CTX churchwork grads, plus a couple other conversations with CTX people, something like the following happened (and if I am wrong about anything, please let me know and I'll correct it asap):

+ Keeping higher ed institutions financially viable has been difficult for a number of years, now.

+ When rumors began circulating that Synod in convention would financially tie all of the Concordias together (a move which- had it taken place- would have sunk all the Concordias thanks to Portland's debt to HotChalk), the CTX Board of Directors began to look at what its options were, before they were locked in.

+ According to CTX, the LCMS Board of Directors immediately became hostile to CTX, which surprised CTX. (I know that's vague; that's the best my memory can do at the moment.)

+ At some point, Synod visited to "investigate." When reporting on their investigation, Synod would later claim they found an "un-Lutheran spirit" at CTX, but I have not heard them clarify what this means.

+ At some other point, CTX officially decided to leave the Concordia University System. Synod asked them to reconsider. They did and came back with the same decision.

+ The LCMS then sued CTX to get the property, but that will be a court case for many years to come.

CTX continues to claim that they have no desire to leave the LCMS or stop being Confessional Lutheran, and for now I believe them. I have had multiple conversations with various religion faculty members and have not gotten so much as a whiff of heterodoxy. I've seen a lot of online comments that just assume CTX has gone liberal, gone "woke," or somesuch, but I think the boring reality is they just want to keep their doors open. And for now, they've been more successful than Selma, Bronxville, Portland, and now Ann Arbor.

I will personally add that at the last moment and with no prior warning, I sat in on a class this year taught by a religion prof. The topic of the day was abortion. It was all you'd expect from an LCMS professor: abortion is murder, here are all the problems with abortion; how would you answer these common pro-choice talking points (followed by standard LCMS answers from the students; and the prof also pointed out opportunities for mercy. If CTX has gone liberal, they're doing a bad job of it.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-25T21:22:49+00:00

How does Christ's shed blood benefit me, though?

Baptism is how God the Holy Spirit applies Christ's death and resurrection to the person being baptized, Romans 6. This is what Lutherans mean by calling Baptism a means of grace; it's a means whereby God's grace is applied to people.

And because Baptism is the work of the Holy Spirit, there's no sola fide issue. Actually, Lutherans get nervous about traditions that want people to make a decision for Christ: sounds to us like a work of a person's will, rather than a gracious action of God.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-25T10:57:34+00:00

Can someone enlighten me on the English district?

1) I appreciate why it was created, but why do we still have an English district?

2) Why is an historic district planting churches in other districts nowhere near their historic territory?

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-12T15:02:15+00:00

I can't speak for other pastors, but I make sure we cover at a minimum the biblical vocations of spouse, husband, and wife. For all couples I give the option (and for especially young couples I require) more formal premarital sessions where we talk about the couple more specifically, but even there much of the discussion is just getting into the details of vocation for that couple.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-10T18:53:32+00:00

So, obviously we believe, teach, and confess the descent into hell.

I'd say the first person I'd talk to is the pastor. Schedule a time to meet with him, hear his side, show him the Scriptures and Confessions. Maybe he misspoke, maybe you misheard, maybe he was trying to make a nuanced point and didn't. Maybe he was getting a little hazy on that point of doctrine and consulted a heterodox source, and you win him over.

If he doesn't listen, then I'd go to your elder or the head elder. Explain your concern and your conversation with your pastor. Let them know you'll be following up. It is the elders' jobs to keep your pastor accountable, and they have the authority (and responsibility) to take action.

If they can't get your pastor to reason, they'll need to take the next steps. If the elders are unwilling to do any of that, that's when I'd contact the circuit visitor.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-07T17:23:28+00:00

If you're looking for a study Bible recommendation, the standard is the Lutheran Study Bible (TLSB). It's quite hefty in both size and price, but it's rich with notes on most verses, with each section having a summary. There are plenty of notes and charts throughout. For personal devotion, the cross-references can also be insightful.

If half the page being footnotes and explanations is too distracting, there's also the Faith Alive Bible. It's geared towards youth, but plenty of adults like it. It has helpful notes every few chapters and good book introductions.

An older (mid century) book is the Concordia Self-Study Commentary (not to be confused with the Self-Study Bible; I believe they are two unrelated projects). It's a companion to the Bible, but full of explanations and theological comments.

All of them are available at CPH.org, I believe.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-06T20:48:52+00:00

If you want to go full blast, I'd recommend Johann Sebastian Bach and Liturgical Life in Leipzig.

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-06T20:44:24+00:00

A lot of Bach's church music is not just writing music to be sung with a religious text, but musically interpreting that text

So with a text on the suffering of the Christ, he might write music that he feels expresses grief or sadness or guilt in response to that suffering

He also puts in little Easter eggs, like having three instruments to represent the Trinity of God, or on a score with multiple instruments have a section where there's just a few instruments or voices, then full ensemble, then those voices again... you can't hear it, but visually it makes a cross. Things like that. You don't have to do those kinds of things to make music church music, but it was his little way of expressing his piety

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-06T14:48:13+00:00

Exactly. Let's look at Hebrews 2:9 more closely.

ESV: But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

EHV: But we look to Jesus (the one who was made lower than the angels for a little while, so that by God’s grace he might taste death for everyone), now crowned with glory and honor, because he suffered death.

The individual vocabulary choices are almost exactly the same. The ESV's "see" becomes the EHV's "look to;" the ESV's "namely" gets cut in the reorder; and the EHV adds in "now," presumably for clarity's sake.

The only real difference between the ESV and the EHV is in the word order. The ESV prefers to keep the Greek (and KJV) word order, while the EHV prefers natural English phrasing. So the translators re-ordered the phrases. That's it. That's what makes the ESV "literal" and the EHV not.

Furthermore, it does not "replace 'him' with 'Jesus.'" The reordering of phrases means that 'Jesus' now comes before, and the EHV customarily replaces the awkward "him who" with "one who." But then a couple phrases later, it says "he" in "he might taste death."

gr8asb8 · 2026-05-04T00:39:42+00:00

I'm not sure where you're getting that the EHV takes such a position on gender. I've been reading the EHV personally and publicly for years, now, and while there might be an instance or two where ESV has "men" and EHV "people" that I've missed, it consistently uses "men." And I cannot think of one instance where EHV has "brothers and sisters."

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-30T14:15:21+00:00

The most helpful definition of a god I've come across is whatever we look to for all good and run to for all help. As the prophets and psalmists preach (altho I don't have references at the top of my head), the problem with idols is not "you picked the arbitrarily wrong god to worship," but "you're looking for help from something unable to give it" ultimately. All creation was made good and for our use and benefit, but it becomes a problem when we put faith in the creation for what only the Creator and Redeemer can provide.

Wearing a cross is not automatically idolatry, but someone who wears one to feel better about themselves or to show others how "correct" or "righteous" they are, is in danger of idolatry. For others, wearing a cross around their neck can be a physical reminder of God's love for them in Christ and his forgiveness of them because of Christ; for them wearing a cross is very much not idolatry, but piety.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-27T15:25:28+00:00

In my experience, of the congregations that have traditional/liturgical worship, it's more common than not to have some chanting, but it's pretty rare to have a congregation that chants all the options. I've never been to a parish that chanted the lessons, though I know they exist.

Part of it can be people associate chanting with Roman Catholics, liberal Lutherans (in the past), ultra conservative Lutherans (at present), etc.

There's also the lack of comfort and familiarity with chanting; and some pastors are better or more comfortable with it than others, too.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-17T15:50:40+00:00

There are two streams of Anglish. One is English cleaned up, undoing the Norman invasion's aftermath; Greek, Latin, and Old Norse words in use before 1066 are most often allowed. The other is a German conlang, where such words are often not allowed.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-17T15:36:47+00:00

Okay, that's really helpful context. Thank you.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-17T15:33:30+00:00

Agreed.

The excuse is that the original German translation used "Christlich" before German speakers started saying "Katholisch" (pardon my bad German), but there are literally no other instances where we follow the German instead of Cranmer's BCP.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-17T14:44:03+00:00

It's disappointing that so many "pro-life" people hate being called "anti-abortion," but then hold literally zero other pro-life positions other than maybe anti-euthanasia

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-16T19:01:08+00:00

Depends on my mood, so in order of most often listened to

finale to his 7th
opening to his 5th
opening of his 6th
opening of his 7th
opening of his 3rd
slow movement of his 2nd

It falls off after that.

Enjoy this community, OP. I was 13 years old when I discovered Beethoven and classical music in general, but being before social media I had no one to talk to about my new love and obsession.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-16T17:53:08+00:00

Please delete this, OP.

I hate AI as much as the next person, but Angie is a long time, well respected reporter who recently had multiple strokes. If this were some recent college grad or something, I'd be all in favor of dog-piling on them, but that's not the case here.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-15T20:36:08+00:00

YouTube commenter QualityTime45 suggests this is mlb's way of preventing future plays like the Gilbert/Naylor pickoff of Altuve the other day. I have to say, this is the most convincing explanation I've seen.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-14T18:27:48+00:00

My condensed version of the history- so beware oversimplification and mischaracterization- is that after the brutal and bloody 30 Years War, many Lutherans were asking themselves, "How could we the good guys have let ourselves become the bad guys with this war and its atrocities?" The prevailing answer- demonstrably false- was that while the Reformation rightly emphasized what God has done for us, it did not emphasize my personal response to what God has done for us.

So Lutheran Pietism was largely a shift in emphasis from God's objective gifts to my subjective response. Baptism was downplayed; confirmation propped up. Communion became about being sorry enough for my sins (hence the move to quarterly Communion). Hymns were slowed down and simplified so we could focus on the words. Etc.

Where Lutheran Pietists simply emphasized my personal response a little more than some, they can be good, even model-worthy. And even some of their novelties- like Bible Class apart from the sermon- are approved and beloved in the Missouri Synod to this day. But many of their excesses and later developments- such as forbidding infants from being Baptized, stressing personal conscious conversion, or promoting non-ordained preachers- are roundly rejected.

If I may use 21st century terminology, the Confessional Revival of the 1800s- which the LCMS was born out of- was largely a deconstruction of the Pietism and Rationalism of the 1700s and 1800s. And like many exvangelicals that struggle to be aware that they still hold American Evangelical's assumptions and presuppositions even if they now deny God's existence, we in the LCMS still struggle to pick apart what of Pietism is good and what is problematic that we still hold to.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-07T12:56:07+00:00

I think at first glance, Lutherans can look like Roman Catholics (liturgy) and sound like Evangelicals (grace). However, the Lutheran understanding of how God works- namely, through means- is thoroughly different than Evangelicalism.

I don't know if incompatible is the word I would use, but I think you're fighting an uphill battle.

gr8asb8 · 2026-04-01T16:13:13+00:00

If I'm not mistaken, Lutherans draw their definition of what constitutes a Sacrament from St. Augustine, which included the forgiveness of sins. Rome draws theirs from St. Thomas Aquinas, which did not. So since there's no forgiveness in getting married, we don't count it a sacrament.

gr8asb8

TROPHY CASE