Our local Lutheran 65 year old parson has been suspended for almost two years. It happened when four teen age girls accused him of improper embraces, touches and kisses. Police was involved and it was decided to take two of the cases to court. The parson had a good lawyer and he was cleared of breaking the law both in the local and the state supreme court. As a result the parson is demanding that his suspension be terminated.
A number of church members threaten to leave the church if the pastor returns, and the local church board does not want him back. But the parson and his supporters demand of the bishop that he declares the parson has the legal right to his job since he has been cleared even by the State Supreme Court.
This has left the bishop in a dilemma. Finally a week ago he wrote the parson a letter requesting him to report for work in connection with the bishop's office. The parson refuses claiming he now has been cleared and has the legal rights of serving in his local church until he retires.
Last Friday evening he held a meeting in the church. The media reports that 200 of his supporters were present and that a majority of them voted to support him in his claims.
At the same time 400 people have signed a petition requesting the young energetic and spiritual interim pastor be installed as their permanent parson. Yet the old parson states he will still demand his rights, even if he has to take the case to court. He also claims he had the full rights of kissing and caressing. . . and that this was part of his pastoral care - and of his own personal needs.
It is understood that the parson received a full salary during his suspension. The lawyer of the State Lutheran Church has stated that the bishop has the full legal rights to transfer a parson to a different job.
Would you support the bishop or the parson?
Neither deserves support from any Seventh-day Adventist.
The Bishop is Bishop of a “daughter” of the Harlot of Revelation. They are no longer a “Protestant” Faith upholding the Biblical Standards and have long since closed the organizational probation. They clearly rejected the great warning message of the second angel during the 1840’s and walked away from their protestant heritage. And Lutheranism is deeply rooted as the old official church of Norway and Iceland just as Roman Catholicism has been the official church of so many other countries of yesteryear.
Clearly the pastor is far too concerned about his “own needs” to fulfill his duties as an “anointed of the Lord” and since he is apostate, his anointing is clearly not of the Lord. He is clearly willing to abrogate ecclesiastical authority and step across the “protestant reformation” of Luther, breach the wall of separation and seek civil redress to an ecclesiastical issue. Will the Bishop have the backbone to face the crisis “head on”? Unlikely!!!
I would point out the Bishop’s compromise was nothing more than a replication of “Pontius Pilate” in Jerusalem, a compromise that will not satisfy either side and lead to an irreparable breach as the 200 set up their own congregational organization, which the Bishop will inevitably accept back into the Lutheran fold in time.
Now, I will point out that if the un-anointed pastor elects civil authority, it would behoove the Seventh-day Adventist organization to pursue an amicus brief, assuming the Bishop elects to assert “ecclesiastical authority”, and support the separation of church and state, not officially recognized in Norway or Iceland.
But, I doubt we will show such fortitude and simply rest on our laurels so as not to agitate civil authority.
Yup, I declare us “wimps”!!! There is little boldness in Adventism today…but rest assured, it will get VERY MUCH BETTER in time (and I am not suggesting the Wilson administration has the needed boldness).
I do know that I do not want to support Lutheranism, except as the opportunity arises to assert the separation of church and state, if the wayward pastor elects civil authority.
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter