Look, I don't care what happens in the LCMS election because it is not my church, but I *do* care about the slander I am suddenly seeing all over the place about my friend Joel Biermann. Accusations of him abandoning the law-gospel distinction, wanting to compromise with the Reformed, and numerous other things are showing up again from over a decade ago. These are the same accusations that were leveled against me at the time (and from many of the same people).
Biermann fought against the reductionistic approach to law and gospel, which dominated the latter half of the twentieth century, before almost anyone. He was promoting virtue ethics at a time when the discipline was nearly entirely abandoned among Lutherans (Meilaender being almost the only exception).
When I entered the Lutheran world from outside, many were skeptical simply because I was not one of them. The mere fact that I had not always been Lutheran disqualified me from having anything to say about Lutheran theology. You know who didn't care about that at all? Joel Biermann. Because his concern has never been German culture or church politics, but has always been answering the question, "What is God's truth?"
At one time, I was essentially blackballed from a lot of Lutheran spaces for speaking against certain ideas that were deemed untouchable at the time (completely unknowingly, as I was a twenty-something who was totally clueless about inter-Lutheran politics). I had a book review editor of a Lutheran journal consistently block any positive reviews of my books for publication, and had multiple pastors and professors call churches to tell them to disinvite me when I was given an opportunity to speak at conferences. I was told that if I tried to publish anything with CPH, one of the members of the CDCR would make sure that nothing I wrote would pass doctrinal review.
But Biermann did not care about any of this. In fact, when I was something of a pariah to many in the LCMS, he wrote the foreword to my book on the topic that caused this (Hands of Faith). This is because he always cared about what is true, rather than what is popular or what is politically expedient.
The tide has turned on sanctification issues since then; arguing against law-gospel reductionism and encouraging virtue formation are no longer viewed as some radical fringe ideas (and they shouldn't be, since they have been a core element of the Lutheran tradition since its inception). Much of that is due to Biermann's work.
Do I agree with him about everything? Of course not. He's not as classical as I am philosophically, and he's more open on liturgical issues than I am. That doesn't make me any less grateful for him.
Biermann is a man of conviction who is willing to take positions that are unpopular if he believes them to derive from Scripture and align with our Confessions. There are too few men who are willing to do the same.
I don't care who you vote for. Give your reasons for why you want everyone to vote for the other candidate, but don't misrepresent a faithful man when doing so.
The Biermann candidacy is a Rorschach test. Many groups see in him a vehicle for their goals: the old guard Kieschick crowd, the supporters of revivalistic theology, Lutherans for Racial Justice, the terminally afflicted with HDS (Harrison derangement syndrome), the supporters of a build-your-own-pastor short-term seminary training, etc. Several of these factions overlap.
I don't think Biermann himself supports any of these causes, but, like it or not, these ARE his supporters.
Unless you're an brain-wormed partisan, "Iran is an evil regime," "this preventive war was stupid and should never have been launched," and "this peace deal is a US humiliation" are three perfectly true things you should be able to believe at the same time.
So now we have the MOU, it's clearly a Witkoff Special - they took the deal that Iran was offering with almost no modifications.
Clearly someone was told 'deal Sunday, any cost' - I wonder if it was because oil is running short or because Trump wanted a birthday present.
@Jakethecrazy19@__smule__ Oh, I don't doubt it. I also know that I had classmates at sem who were inclined that way and Biermann helped convince them to adjust their views.
@Jakethecrazy19@__smule__ I mean that if a church is practicing open communion and votes for Biermann, they might be more open to listening if Biermann then tells them that open communion is not a faithful practice
@Jakethecrazy19@__smule__ Might help convince churches if the candidate they support is the one telling them that closed communion is the way to be faithful
there’s a kernel of truth here in that most Union soldiers didn’t really care about slavery until they got down to the South and saw it firsthand, at which point they had to be regularly stopped from lynching the Plantation owners
@Jakethecrazy19 That's exactly how I voted in 2020 (in Michigan, but similar concept). I wanted Trump gone from politics, but I didn't want Democrats to have the presidency and both houses of congress
From 1966 to 2025 we dropped sterile flies over South America that ate screwworm and thus prevented them from spreading, but the le epic efficient cracked coders at DOGE thought this was a silly waste of the ~0 dollars it cost us.