Report of the Bishop

Report of the Bishop
Synod Assembly 2025

1700 Years

Nicaea, the very name of which speaks victory, was the second city of Bithynia, only twenty English miles from the imperial residence of Nicomedia, and easily accessible by sea and land from all parts of the empire. It is now a miserable Turkish village, Is-nik, where nothing but a rude picture in the solitary church of St. Mary remains to the memory of the event which has given the place a name in the history of the world (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church III, §120).

I write this report on the 1700th anniversary of the convening of the First Council of Nicæa. As far as anniversaries go, that is an impressive number. Seventeen hundred years after that council, we still recite and confess the creed that first took form in the deliberations held in that city. The great nineteenth century church historian Philip Schaff poetically invokes the name of the place, alluding to the Greek etymology of the name Nicæa, νίκη (niké), or victory — I suspect the city was named for the Greek goddess of victory not the tennis shoe nor the missile system — juxtaposing its former prominence and place in history with its “miserable” condition in his day.

I had hoped that this year would be one in which I might highlight the history of the council, not out of antiquarian interests — though I do have those — but that we might rediscover and reaffirm the faith we confess, rekindle the faith that is in us by the work of the Holy Spirit, and contemplate things eternal in awe and adoration. The first half of this calendar year has passed with only two things worthy of mention on this front: LARCUM and an STS retreat.

LARCUM (the Lutheran-Anglican-Roman Catholic-United Methodist Conference of WV) was held only last week in Charleston. Clergy and laity of the four traditions gathered in lecture and conversation under the scholarly leadership of teachers representing each of the traditions. This was a time of lively learning, each presenter exploring the theme Nicæa at 1700 in a different way. Though each lectured for three hours, the manner of their respective pedagogies varied from a straight historical recounting to highly interactive small group conversations. If I had the talent for it, I would write a screenplay for a miniseries on the council because it is truly that good of a story.

LARCUM planning and administration demands a good bit of work, especially in the lead-up to the event. Is it worth the resources that this synod puts into it? I believe so. I assume that most of those who have attended in the past would concur. Consider this an encouragement to attend yourself. LARCUM 2026 will be held 18-20 May 2026 in Charleston on the theme Deliver Us from the Evil One: LARCUM Takes on the Tempter.

In addition to participation in LARCUM planning, I presented on the Canons of the First Council of Nicæa for the Susquehanna Chapter of the Society of the Holy Trinity. Twenty canons (rules/policies) were adopted by the same council that also gave us the first form of the creed. These canons reveal the challenges faced by the church at that time, challenges as political as they were spiritual. While many of the specific issues addressed in the canons are peculiar to their day, the patterns found in them (and in the context of their formulation) are just as relevant today and could prove instructive for us (were we to spend a little time reflecting upon them). I am always happy to respond to requests from congregations, clusters, conferences, etc. in this regard.

The formal opening of the council was made by the stately entrance of the emperor, which Eusebius in his panegyrical flattery thus describes: “After all the bishops had entered the central building of the royal palace, on the sides of which very many seats were prepared, each took his place with becoming modesty, and silently awaited the arrival of the emperor. The court officers entered one after another, though only such as professed faith in Christ. The moment the approach of the emperor was announced by a given signal, they all rose from their seats, and the emperor appeared like a heavenly messenger of God, covered with gold and gems, a glorious presence, very tall and slender, full of beauty, strength, and majesty. With this external adornment he united the spiritual ornament of the fear of God, modesty, and humility, which could be seen in his downcast eyes, his blushing face, the motion of his body, and his walk. When he reached the golden throne prepared for him, he stopped, and sat not down till the bishops gave him the sign. And after him they all resumed their seats”

How great the contrast between this position of the church and the time of her persecution but scarcely passed! What a revolution of opinion in bishops who had once feared the Roman emperor as the worst enemy of the church, and who now greeted the same emperor in his half barbarous attire as an angel of God from heaven, and gave him, though not yet even baptized, the honorary presidency of the highest assembly of the church! (loc. cit.)

Why should we care about Nicæa? We might be tempted to ask questions about the relationship of church and state. We might simply marvel at Eusebius’ prose and that of Schaff. First and foremost, the question should be: Why did the council think it important that it issue a doctrinal definition and adopt twenty canons?

We know why Constantine, the emperor, thought it important. He summoned the bishops to the council, personally addressing the assembly with these words:

It was my highest wish, my friends, that I might be permitted to enjoy your assembly. I must thank God that, in addition to all other blessings, he has shown me this highest one of all: to see you all gathered here in harmony and with one mind. May no malicious enemy rob us of this happiness, and after the tyranny of the enemy of Christ [Licinius and his army] is conquered by the help of the Redeemer, the wicked demon shall not persecute the divine law with new blasphemies. Discord in the church I consider more fearful and painful than any other war. As soon as I by the help of God had overcome my enemies, I believed that nothing more was now necessary than to give thanks to God in common joy with those whom I had liberated. But when I heard of your division, I was convinced that this matter should by no means be neglected, and in the desire to assist by my service, I have summoned you without delay. I shall, however, feel my desire fulfilled only when I see the minds of all united in that peaceful harmony which you, as the anointed of God, must preach to others. Delay not therefore, my friends, delay not, servants of God; put away all causes of strife, and loose all knots of discord by the laws of peace. Thus shall you accomplish the work most pleasing to God, and confer upon me, your fellow servant, an exceeding great joy (loc. cit.).

The Arian controversy had rocked the church and disturbed the peace of the empire. Though it is not usually mentioned, there were other issues from petty to serious that also generated conflict. Behind it all, however, was the recent Diocletianic Persecution, eight years of torment that gave rise to its other name, The Great Persecution. Only fourteen years had passed since Galerius’ Edict of Toleration (Edict of Serdica), and the wounds were fresh.

Some, as confessors, still bore in their body the marks of Christ from the times of persecution: Paphnutius of the Upper Thebaid, Potamon of Heraklea, whose right eye had been put out, and Paul of Neo-Caesarea, who had been tortured with red hot iron under Licinius, and crippled in both his hands (loc. cit.).

As Fr. Ben Wyatt frames it, the question of Nicæa, the question behind the creed, is this: What did we die for? Given the rapidity with which imperial law could change, I wonder if the question might also have been: What might we die for again?

I am grateful for Wyatt’s framing of the question (a gift of LARCUM). I had not looked at it that way. I had always fixated upon the subtleties of Trinitarian, Anti-Trinitarian, and Ante-Trinitarian formulations, but Wyatt breaths not only life but a sense of urgency into my recollection of this council so long past. I am driven to ask: Is it too late to make something of this anniversary year? I hope not.

This church (i.e., the Lutheran movement) confesses three creeds, stating in the Formula of Concord,

Immediately after the time of the apostles — in fact, while they were still alive — false teachers and heretics invaded the church. Against them the early church prepared symbola, that is, short, explicit confessions, which were regarded as the unanimous, universal, Christian creed and confessions of the orthodox and true church of Christ, namely, the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. We pledge ourselves to these and thereby reject all heresies and teachings that have been introduced into the church of God contrary to them (FC EP, The Comprehensive Summary, Rule, and Norm…:3 [Kolb-Wengert ed.]).

When our clergy are ordained and installed, they are asked:

The church in which you are to be ordained confesses that the holy scriptures are the word of God and are the norm of its faith and life. We accept, teach, and confess the Apostles’, the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds. We also acknowledge the Lutheran confessions as true witnesses and faithful expositions of the holy scriptures. Will you therefore preach and teach in accordance with the holy scriptures and these creeds and confessions?

And all have answered, “I will, and I ask God to help me.”

When we are baptized and confirmed (and also in prayer), we confess the Apostles’ Creed. At worship, we confess also the Nicene Creed (and occasionally the Athanasian Creed). It is we who confess because it is we who believe these things together. We believe these things together not only among ourselves in this time and place but also in unity with those who went through the Diocletianic Persecution, confessing at Nicæa: in this faith we have died, and in this faith we will die again. Other creeds we do not confess, at least not now. Might we adopt additional creeds? It is a theoretical possibility, but none should dare do so on his or her own authority, lest we no longer speak as we. Until we confess as we, other creeds are private opinion, having no place in our common worship, our common prayer, and our common teaching.

What’s a Synod for?

By constitutional requirement, I must report on the state of the synod. What do we even mean by synod? Bishop Dunkin, early in his tenure, frequently pointed to the Greek etymology of the term: συν- (together) and ὁδός (way or road), or on the way together. Studying American Lutheran ecclesiastical history and having recently completed my service on the Commission for a Renewed Lutheran Church, I’m no longer convinced that synod in the ELCA is really about being on the road together. Unlike the Ministerium of Pennsylvania and so many other synodical polities that developed in America over the course of one hundred and fifty years, our congregations have not come together volitionally to form a supracongregational council by which we might collaborate to pursue the common good and our common interests as we discern them. Constitutionally, we are synod because provision 10.01.01 of the Bylaws of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America says we are synod. Congregations are not really members of the synod. Under ELCA polity, a synod exists as a mediating structure between the Churchwide Organization and the membership (the membership being natural persons, not congregations). The natural person is a member of the ELCA by virtue of being a member of a congregation, but even congregations and synods, from a membership perspective, are nothing more than organizational boxes into which the members are sorted. In terms of function, synods execute the duties assigned to them by the Churchwide Assembly through the Constitution, Bylaws, and Continuing Resolutions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, including enforcement of defined policies. While the synod may pursue other works, as long as they are not proscribed in the CBCR/ELCA, its primary function, according our polity, is more like middle management than anything akin to the synods of the General Synod, General Council, or even the United Lutheran Church in America. For those in the American Lutheran Church line, a comparison could also be made with the supracongregational polities that existed prior to the 1930 Constitution of the American Lutheran Church in America.

With this recognition and understanding of our polity, I will not claim the work of the congregations and our related ministries as the work of the synod. There is some amazing, salutary stuff happening in our congregations and related ministries. Were I to recount these things here, it might sound as if it were the synod’s work. Now, in many cases, the synod has nudged, suggested, and supported in a variety of ways. This is the essential work of the synod, but this work, though essential with respect to the synod, is ancillary with respect to the congregations and related ministries. In other cases, the synod has simply stayed out of the way. When something good is happening, when someone is doing the job well, get out of the way. Praise them, encourage them, and get out of the way. In this essential/ancillary work, Synod Council, D.E.M. Sherri Schafer, deans, and committee members deserve kudos.

Let us own that 99% of the institutionalized Gospel ministry takes place in congregations and other ministries of Word & Sacrament. Where is the Word of God preached? Where does baptism take place? Where is the Lord’s Supper shared? Where is the absolution declared? The synod may hold a periodic worship service. I may supply preach, make some hospital and shut-in calls, hear the odd confession, and engage in the care of souls, but it is the pastors, deacons, and licentiates in the field who discharge the public ministry of the Word. Let us also own that the mutual conversation and consolation of the saints takes place daily outside the institutionalized Gospel ministry.

Synod supports this, but this support is not sexy. It is not even interesting most of the time. Nevertheless it is useful. Often, we never see this work because it does not (and should not) take center stage. That place belongs solely to Jesus and the proclamation of his redeeming work.

Nuts & Bolts

Let me offer a few quick points.

While we have several congregations without pastors under regular letter of call, we have only one in an active search process.
While most vacant congregations have some sort of arrangement for regular pastoral service, three do not.
It has come to my attention that one congregation went over a year without the Lord’s Supper. This is unacceptable, and it is partially my fault. I will be spending time in the next few months checking up on our congregations that do not have pastors under letter of call.
Synod Mutual Ministry Committee will be taking up staffing issues.
Executive Committee and Synod Council have already embarked upon a new approach to capital management.
The development of the Synodical Lay Worship Leadership program beyond the reader license has stalled and requires renewed investment of energy.
Currently, we do not have any seminarians in the pipeline.
The synod curates information on educational events that may be of potential interest to both clergy and laity of the synod. They are listed on the synod website. You are encouraged to take advantage of them and spread the word in our respective congregations.
At this point, we have fewer than two hundred subscribers to The Bishop’s Road Show (a.k.a. Synod News). The open rate is under 70%. Every congregation is encouraged to have at least one member subscribe so that information of interest might be shared.

Synod Assembly

Reviewing my reports of these past few years, three of five included extended discussions about Synod Assembly. Here we are again, but this time not in my report. We will be taking time in this assembly to talk about Synod Assembly, especially around the question of duration. I refer you to materials that are being prepared and will be posted in the Pre-Assembly Bulletin of Reports prior to the assembly.

Evangelism as Work of Love

Finally, love one another. It’s not always easy, but it is Our Lord’s command. It strikes me that this command is important to evangelism. We share with those we love. We share our food. We share our treasure. We share the Gospel, or do we? All too often we hoard this supreme treasure. Hoarding is not an act of love. It is not love of God for there is no trust in it. It is not love of neighbor, for we deprive our neighbor of the blessings lavished upon us by God. Having a treasure beyond human imagination, being rich in faith, the work of love is to share what has been given to us. To share the Gospel with the other is to love the other. If we do not believe that we have been given something that we do not deserve and could never earn, if we do not believe that we are richer for it, if we do not believe that our neighbor would benefit from possession of this same Gospel, then I do not know what we are about. If these things, however, are true, how should we love?

✠Riegel
The Seventeen-Hundredth Anniversary of the Convening of the First Council of Nicæa
20 May 2025

Feedback

Was this helpful?