A Wider Vision of the Church in Siberia - Synod Assembly

This past weekend I was fortunate to have the opportunity to attend the 20^th annual synod assembly of the ELCUSFE in Omsk. Just over 20 delegates from the “largest Lutheran synod in the world”¹ considered both practical and theological issues; the positive tone of the assembly was set by Bishop Otto Schaude and reinforced by a wonderful facility, excellent weather and common worship.

I should probably apologize – the above sounds more like a press release
than a blog entry. At the same time, it is a sincere reflection of the events of the weekend.

But now, back to the beginning - as soon as I arrived in Omsk, I was reminded of the great variety of congregational life in Lutheran churches in the region. A few congregations are working more or less like a “normal” congregation would – they have a pastor, a building, and are striving to be the best stewards of what they've been given and to build up ministries that meet the needs of their congregations and the wider community. A few have something in common with new mission starts in the U.S. - they are building their congregations from the ground up and are, as a rule, small, yet experiencing a fruitful spiritual life. A third group of congregations are in the process of re-development, moving from German to Russian or trying to overcoming some other significant challenge. These congregations tend to be very small and a bit depressed. But even having the opportunity to be together and to realize that we're not in that boat alone was quite helpful.Events of particular interest for me included a theological presentation by Dr. Jürgen Schuster from the Bad Liebenzell mission. Missionaries from this evangelical mission organization have been working in the Ural region for quite some time, and the influence of their missiological approach and piety have certainly been felt throughout the years. At the same time, it has been my experience that our sense of mission has serious differences, so I cannot say that I was the most unbiased of listeners when Dr. Schuster began. It was to my great pleasure that my prejudices were found to be false. Dr. Schuster's presentation itself was very helpful; even if the information presented was not particularly new for me (much of the same ground had been covered in a Missiology class taught by Dr.Richard Bliese then at LSTC, by focusing on the book of Acts (and in particular on the events leading up to and surrounding the “Apostolic Council” in Acts 15), we were all reminded that the church has always had to think about its relationship to culture. This has been important because for all of my years here I've been a participant in the process of trying to understand how Lutheranism applies to the Russian context. In particular, I've been a big proponent of doing what I can to help the church “russify,” as opposed to remaining so very close to its German (Finnish, etc.) roots. Now, after 10 years, I'm a little bit uncertain. The more I think about it, and especially the more I see the everyday life of congregations here, the more I realize that the Lutheran church needs to retain a certain degree of distance from the culture if it is going to find an audience here. What I mean is this – if the church were to strive to be “typically Russian,” then it would clearly do this in a less successful way than the bigger, stronger, more experienced churches in this regard (especially the Orthodox, but also Baptist and Charismatic, in their own way) will. Instead, the Lutheran church will find its place here if it realizes that it's “target” is not to be in the broad center of the culture, but around the culture's margins, among those who either do not wish to or cannot participate in the dominant culture. This is not to say that I want the church to remain an ethnic ghetto - not by any means! Instead, though, I hope that the Lutheran church can become a spiritual home for those who do not see the church as addressing their situation. A relatively successful example of such an attempt is the ministry of the Probst (Dean) of the Far East, Manfred Brockmann.Pastor Brockmann will have been in Russia 20 years by this time next year. In his particular context of Vladivostok, he's been able to support a congregational ministry that uses culture (for example, they have a very large program of German culture events every year as well as a very active ministry of free, classical music concerts) as a means to demonstrate a different way of being church than is common in wider society. St. Paul's in Vladivostok is a unique congregation with an experience that is not likely to be repeatable elsewhere. At the same time, despite all my respect for the Eastern Orthodox tradition, by looking at their work I become even more convinced that we cannot and should not try to become a second Orthodox church.

The youth choir from the congregation in Omsk singing at closing worship. 

It is not only our German-rooted church that is going through this struggle. This weekend I also had the opportunity to meet the Probst of the Finnish-rooted Ingrian church, Juha Saari. Like me, he is a long-time missionary in Russia, and we both easily agreed that we would like to do what we can so that the Lutheran congregations in the region would come together. It seems that I have yet to mention the fact that there are actually four (!!!) different Lutheran church bodies in Novosibirsk and a 5th is also represented in the region. Many of the congregations are small and struggling, while their divisions sometimes reflect either “foreign” conflicts (“liberal” Lutherans vs. LCMS vs. WELS) or battles over personal leadership. It is my hope, then, that we can do a lot of work together both on a local and a region-wide level. Already later this week I'll be joining one of the deacons of the local Ingrian congregation on a visit to a children's Tuberculosis center, and Probst Saari has already invited me to a seminar for ministers of their church that will take place early next year.

Closing worship led by Synod President, Pastor Evgeny Philipov

This contact with the Finnish-tradition church brings me back again to the central question of our synod assembly – the church and culture. As the Finnish Lutherans have enculturated, they've decided not to follow the practice of some of their western partners and have rejected women as preachers and pastors. At synod assembly, though, one of our differences from the surrounding dominant culture was highlighted when two women (former students I know from seminars I taught) were blessed as preachers for their congregation in Krasnoturinsk. I have full confidence that these women will be engaged in the very important ministry in making Christ known to their neighbors, even if it is not "culturally correct."  


The synod assembly highlighted for me both the opportunities and challenges that come with a wider vision for the church, a vision that will make us question again the ways we interact with surrounding cultures. 
_ _ _ _ _
1 Only geographically the largest, of course.  Blue dots on the map below represent ELCUSFO congregations that had delegates at the synod assembly.

Synod assembly delegates and guests

Same Old Russia

In one of my earlier posts (“Another Russia”), I wrote about the ways that Siberia seems to be different from European Russia. I was trying to be clever with the title - “Another Russia” is also a name of an opposition political party. Yet, the past few weeks have shown me that there is some reason to doubt that “another Russia” will arise anytime in the near future.


The immediate reason that caused me to think about this was my experience of buying train tickets earlier this week. I'll be attending the ELCUSFE (Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Urals, Siberia and Far East) synod assembly this weekend, and in order to do that I need to travel between two of Siberia's largest cities, Novosibirisk and Omsk. At the ticket office I was confused about the time of departure and arrival until I clarified with the ticket agent that the times printed on the ticket are not local but “Moscow time.” “What does Moscow have to do with anything?” you ask. So do I. It's a bit hard for me to imagine a ticket from Denver to Seattle that would show arrival and departure in “Eastern Standard Time.”....


The focus of this country's political and economic life around the capital has been something I've enjoyed talking about with my new acquaintances here. For fun (and because I also sort of believe it), I've been arguing a political position that reflects my states'-rights-flavored upbringing. “We're living in the Russian federation,” I say, “which assumes that the central government has limited powers. What do the bureaucrats in Moscow” (=Washington) “know about what's best in Novosibirsk” (=Fallon County...ok, there are more people that live within a 3 minute walk of my apartment than in Fallon County, but you get the picture), “anyway?”


While I really do think that the people of this vast land would be better off if they had stronger local democratic institutions, it's not that I see this as a panacea. It probably wasn't in Moscow, after all, that the decision was made to improve the conditions of the neighborhood by first laying down a nice, brick sidewalk...and then, a month later, to tear part of that sidewalk up in order to make another improvement (adding street lights). I know that if I were a citizen of this country, I'd feel a large degree of ambiguity about this use of tax dollars – even really nice improvements to quality of life are done in such a way that it is hard to be completely happy.


And this brings me directly to the topic of national politics. In the last weeks, we first learned that there will be no real alternative to the party that unilaterally holds power in the central government

Posters with Prokhorov were everywhere for a couple of weeks...

 (“United Russia”); this became clear when the intriguing but short-lived political career of oligarch and New Jersey Nets' owner Mikhail Prokhorov came to an end. The most common explanation of why he was not given the chance to head an opposition political party was because he became too independent of the Kremlin “sponsors” who originally supported him.




After that, it became clear that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin would be running for President again. Despite many reports in the press that support the idea that Mr. Putin is overwhelmingly popular, I personally know few Russians who sincerely consider Putin's candidacy a happy surprise. While many respect his accomplishments in his first terms in office, at the same time many sense that stagnation has set in since then. (Comparisons with the time of Brezhnev are everywhere, including here.) While for a time there was some question about whether President Medvedev might not actually be taking the country on a different course that might help the country deal with some of its most chronic ills (corruption and the lack of rule of law being primary), now his entire terms is seen as a buying of time before Mr. Putin could officially take the lead again. Yet, as with previous elections, in the months leading up to the vote there is a wave of pseudo-activity on the political front. Earlier this year a group gathered around Putin's personal leadership in the “People's Front;” this group is using every trick in the book (“the book,” by the way, seems to include many chapters from the experiences of the ruling elite in the Soviet times, while at the same time also making use of modern, western political technology) in order to exclude any possibility of doubt that Mr. Putin will be in power until 2024. Important aspects of the plan apparently include a popularism (see the “People's Front” sign below) and nostalgia for the country's imperial past (see the following article on Putin's proposal to create a “Eurasian Union” of former Soviet states).

"The People's Program" of the "People's Front" with a description of how the people support everything good  (utilities control, entryway renovations, road repair, school repair, schools, and pedestrian streets, new kindergartens, accessible public transport, playgrounds, modern clinics, new jobs, accessible housing).... I'd assume that they have billboards elsewhere explaining how "the people" will make these things appear. 

The Russian question to ask about this situation - “what is to be done?” The assumed answer - “nothing.” 


The Lutheran question to ask about this situation - “what does this mean?” The assumed answer - “we are to fear and love God...”; in this particular case, though, the conclusion of the answer will not be found in the text of the catechism. Instead, it will be found as our people strive to act on the basis of our faith for the good of our neighbors.

Celebrating Harvest and Remembering Famine

Harvest Sunday was celebrated in early October this year; were it not for the unseasonably warm fall temperatures, we might have had to buy imported vegetables to decorate the church. Instead, though, most of the women brought a sack of goods from their gardens (the last of this year's harvest – the rest having been either consumed, canned, or stored away) to bring color and to share with one another.

Harvest Sunday has always been a day when I've taken the opportunity to talk about the bounty of creation, about the wide variety of reasons we have for giving thanks, and about the importance of the stewardship of that which we have been given.

This year, though, the sermon text¹ for the day pushed me in another direction. The reading, from the prophet Isaiah, started like this:

Share your food with the hungry and open your homes to the homeless poor. Give clothes to those who have nothing to wear, and do not refuse to help your own relatives.²

On the one hand, this text speaks clearly to the people in the congregation, since they are all too familiar with most of the the social ills that were facing the chosen people at the time of their return from Babylonian exile. On the other hand, what was I to say to the congregation when they themselves have very few resources? Could I really encourage them toward more generosity when, in fact, this particular congregation shows an already impressive level of stewardship when compared with other congregations in our church?

Yet, the text kept challenging me:

If you put an end to oppression, to every gesture of contempt, and to every evil word; if you give food to the hungry and satisfy those who are in need, then the darkness around you will turn to the brightness of noon. And I will always guide you and satisfy you with good things. I will keep you strong and well. You will be like a garden that has plenty of water, like a spring of water that never goes dry.³

And so, I tried to use the opportunity to counter the popularly held notion here that “no good deed goes unpunished,” and I asked those gathered to think realistically about the ways they could extend their care to those around them, to apply their faith in a practical manner to the problems of society.

I used an example that my son, Matvey, suggested. Last year as we traveled around St. Petersburg, he would ask me about the people we would see sleeping on the street or begging for money. He wanted to help them, and we discussed how we might do that. Giving money might not be the best thing, I said, since those who beg here are frequently not allowed to keep the money themselves, but are instead being misused by others. Matvey thought that it might be a good idea to give them food instead, and our experience was that he was right. Instead of taking one apple or pastry with us when we left home, then, we'd take two – one for Matvey and the other for someone begging on the street. I thought that we could do the same thing in the congregation that day – we'd share the fruits on the table with one another, but we'd also take some as we left church – we would distribute it to those in need that we'd meet on the way home (and since all of us take public transport, all of us would see the needy).

I left a bag of fruit out in the prayer house courtyard, then, for folks to take. I didn't know how they would respond, though, until I saw that all the fruit was gone even before everyone had left.

I was surprised and happy that the experiment had worked out so well. Yet, as frequently happens here, I found that there was more to the story.

I got a hint of that on my way back home. On the bus I stood next to one of the older (yet also one of the feistier) members of the congregation, Sister Valentina. She told me that Harvest festival was always important to her, since she knew what it was like to go hungry. She had very vivid memories of that day in the fall of 1941 when, as a little girl of 7, her family was told that they would have 2 hours to pack, that they would were being deported. Valentina was the oldest of 4 children, and her efforts were key to the family's survival in the next years, especially since her father was exiled to another, still harsher climate than the Siberian steppe that was home for Valentina, her mom and siblings. She told me that she never learned to read because she was immediately engaged in helping to feed the family. At that age, that meant searching for whatever might be edible - berries, mushrooms, roots. No less important was going through the fields after harvest time, giving her a personal understanding of the Old Testament's command that “when you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be left for the alien, the orphan, and the widow, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all your undertakings.”⁴

As a result of the deportation from the Volga River region in 1941, 200,000-300,000 German Russians met their deaths. Valentina, despite the suffering she has gone through, survived and helped others to survive. With many similar stories among the elderly women in the congregation, it is no surprise that they are willing to feed the hungry, having once been hungry themselves.

Can a small, poor, and mostly elderly congregation solve Russia's social problems? Certainly not. But I pray that God will give us year-round the thankful and generous hearts he gave us at Harvest, so that we might know the joy of having a connection between our faith and our living, and that we might feel that we truly are “like a garden that has plenty of water, like a spring of water that never goes dry.”

1 The lectionary here is based on a German system; there are two readings (one Gospel and the other from elsewhere in Scripture) for every Sunday in addition to a sermon text. While the two readings remain the same from year to year, the sermon texts are based on a 6 year cycle. I must admit that in my years here I've really missed our Revised Common Lectionary for a number of reasons: 1. there is always both and OT and a NT reading 2. there is flexibility when it comes to choosing which of the 3 texts works best for the sermon on a given Sunday (meaning I can't even wiggle out of preaching on Lamentations this coming Sunday!). 3. there is such a wealth of resources for those using the RCL for preaching. 

2 Isa. 58.7. Good News translation; used here since in this case the text most closely parallels the Russian translation.

3 Isa. 58.9b-11. GNT.

4 Deut. 24.19 NRSV.