Distinguished List of Fuller Grads in WELS

No, this is not contemporary worship. It is blended worship. We blend the amps with the snare set, the charismatic songs, and
the Dare-To-Succeed sermon series.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Why Is the Lutheran Church a Two-Headed Calf?":

WELS is so bad that no one can deny how Fuller-centric it is.

Actually, basically everybody can.

***

GJ - OK, Rev. Mouse. You asked for the list. Here it is:

David Valleskey, former president of Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, attended Fuller Seminary and bragged about it in his worship bulletin at Apostles.

Frosty Bivens, seminary professor, bragged about studying at Fuller and following CG methods at a circuit meeting in Midland, Michigan.

Larry Olson earned a D.Min. at Fuller Seminary, qualifying him to teach at Martin Luther College in New Ulm.

Norm Berg studied at Fuller Seminary, enlightening him for his work as Mission Board Chairman. He admitted that in a letter to me.

Joel Gerlach, former seminary professor, admitted studying at Fuller in his letter to Herman Otten.

Reuel Schulz was known for studying at Fuller.

Fuller Seminary sent out a letter to all WELS pastors, listing all the leaders of the sect trained at Pasadena. That caused enormous consternation but nothing else.

Wally Oelhaven and Fred Adrian both had hissy fits when I dared to criticize the Church Growth Movement in a conference paper. I thought they would explode. They admitted studying at Fuller, but that did not change their theology, they claimed. Wally promoted CG (especially the cloned tomes of Werning) every chance he got. Adrian supervised the vicar who went to the state prison.

James Huebner, Paul Kelm, and Larry Olson were trained as Parish Consultants at Fuller Seminary, according to Huebner.

One might assume from their public drooling about Church Growth that Robert Hartman and Ron Roth attended Fuller. A WELS pastor said that was true of the current head of the mission board.

I understand all the foreign missionaries were either sent to Fuller or forced to study Fuller material.

I copied hundreds of Church Growth quotations from WELS into Megatron, my quotation database.

Lutheran Parish Resources was started in Columbus by VP Paul Kuske and DP Robert Mueller to promote the Church Growth Movement. The Michigan District started two stealth CG congregations, both miserable failures. Kuske started Pilgrim Community Church (HA!) and Mueller started Crossroads Community Church. Kuske's flopped in record time. Crossroads is a non-Lutheran congregation now (HA! HA!). (Read your church history boys. The generic Protestant Lutheran congregations of the 19th century turned Congregationalist or worse in a few years.)

WELS started TELL specifically to promote the Church Growth Movement. That little rag morphed into the Mission Counselor's Newsletter, which was even more fanatical in its support of Fuller doctrine and methods.

Currently there is the Church and Change Apostasy Unit in WELS, cheerfully promoting women's ordination and false doctrine, with the blessings of the Wayne Mueller family, father and son. Is it an exaggeration to say Church and Change is devoted to Church Growth? The 2005 conference was canceled, amid showers of tears--from the Moose Report to the hallowed halls of the Sausage Factory--but scheduled again for 2007 and 2009. Will the WELS pastors have the guts to gut the monster? No. Leonard Sweet will return in triumph.

An ELCA pastor sent this bit of wisdom:

As someone who was forced to listen to Leonard Sweet for four hours, WELS was lucky that his presentation was dropped. He is all smoke and mirrors even from a liberal perspective.

The Marks of the Church

Augustine Refuting a Heretic
Joe Abrahamson has left a new comment on your post "From Michael Schottey":

Greg,
Among the many great and wholesomely thought provoking theological issues you raise and consider, you had to write:

"[GJ - Definitely. The Fuller grads would not give their lives for the Faith, but they will kill and lie to preserve the errors of Church Growth.]"

I'm saddened by this remark. Donatism marks true Christianity by a person's willingness to give his life for the faith. Lutheranism marks the Church by the right preaching of the Gospel and the right administration of the Sacraments. (AC VII:1)

Please adjust your sights by the marks of the Church, so that your view of who might be willing to give his life for his faith does not interfere with God's own external means of Grace.

***

GJ - I do not see the connection. The question was whether I thought the Church Growth people were like the Pope, would rather see the whole world condemned that give up their errors. Would I say the same about Fuller grads?

That was supposed to elicit a "No" from me. The CGM WELS/ELS/CLC/LCMS/ELCA leaders do not give a fig about whether they destroy the true Church. They have their political buddies, their ecumenical embraces, and most of all - the loot. Their tentacles are wrapped around every fund in Lutheranism right now.

As you know from the archives, confirmands used to swear they would give up their lives rather than the truths of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. That was a regular part of confirmation.

The Church began with martyrs. "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church." More accurately, "The more you mow us down, the faster we grow." Now the visible church makes martyrs, as you know. That is a sure sign of apostasy.

Ichabod locutus est, causa finita est.

Joe Abrahamson Responds about Confessional Subscription

Joe Abrahamson has left a new comment on your post "Why Is the Lutheran Church a Two-Headed Calf?":

Greg,
I think the article is "Are We bound only to what the Confessions Teach?" (found in Our Great Heritage Vol. 1, p. 434-6)

According to the note in Our Great Heritage the article was printed in The Northwestern Lutheran (vol. 60, 1973; p. 353 and written by Arnold Koelpin.

It is a poorly written article that allows way too many interpretations.

My best construction on the article is that it was meant to address such issues as Abortion and Homosexuality which are not covered in the Book of Concord.

But the unfortunate conclusion that is left to the general reader is not a Confessional Lutheran response. The emphasis on what Scripture Alone teaches allows the reader to inject his own interpretation of Scriptures to be considered true over and against the Lutheran Confessions.

The article states:

"Practically speaking, what does this mean for us? To appeal to a common subscription to the Lutheran Confessions in support of unity may be evasive of the truth." (p. 435) I wonder which Confessional Lutheran subscribing with a quia subscription could ever argue in this way. If the Lutheran Confessions are a correct interpretation of the Scriptures (in a quia subscription, then there is no second-guessing what might be meant on a theological issue.

But if the subscription is quatenus "in so far as the Confessions agree with Scripture" then this article in Our Great Heritage would be more accurate. Perhaps the author (Koelpin) thought that all his readers were more likely to have a limited subscription to the Lutheran Confessions. If that is the case, this would be very sad, and very telling about what the author believed the readership in the WELS would consider normal.

The article goes even further by defining the so-called "Historical Subscription" to the Lutheran Confessions in a way that makes it normative for WELS. The article mis-quotes the Formula of Concord with the words:
"As the Formula of Concord states, these other writings (creeds and confessions) are 'mere witnesses and expositions of the faith, setting forth how at various times the holy Scriptures were understood in the church of God by contemporaries with reference to the controverted articles, and how contrary teachings were rejected and condemned." (p. 435)

The quotation from the Formula of Concord is from the Epitome (par. 8).

But Koelpin's selective quotation ignores the previous paragraphs which set down as the standard of judgment in all controversies the three ecumenical creeds: the Apostles' Creed, The Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed (sec. 3); The first Unaltered Augsburg Confession, the Apology, The Smalcald Articles with the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope (sec. 4); and the Small and Large Catechisms of Dr. Martin Luther (sec 5).

Most of the problems (heresies) of Christianity have already been dealt with in the Lutheran Confessions. Especially and specifically the inerrancy of the Church and the Pope (who ever is considered by the congregations to be the head of the Church or Synod). The Means of Grace through the Divinely Instituted Ministry is established in these documents over and against any modern Church Growth attempt at replacing the Means of Grace. And almost any internal theological issues facing the synods of our contemporary period are already discussed and solved in the Lutheran Confessions.

I suspect that Donatism has reared its ugly head again. And the so-called Lutherans are looking for other marks of the Church than the "Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments rightly administered." (AC VII:1)

Sorry this is so long. I just felt a need to blather.

Joe Abrahamson

***

GJ - Thanks Joe. (He is an ELS pastor.) If pastors start signing their names to intelligent comments, I may have to shut this thing down. The drama will be gone.

I remembered correctly. I would have posted a citation, but the books were given away, pulped, or used as kindling in my fireplace. They were very dry, so they burn well.

My problem with the decaying remnants of the Synodical Conference is this - adoration of recent documents, which are used as the norma normans of the sect. For example, I was talking to Jeb Schaefer (former editor, NWL). We were discussing the growth of women in authority over men in WELS. He said, "Have you read Whitey's essay on ritual law?" The clear implication of his question was that an essay by the former seminary president was the canon for judging all such issues. Once a seminary professor makes his solemn declaration, especially in in WLQ, the issue is settled for all time. Church Growth theology is fabulous (Valleskey). The Reformed only downplay the Means of Grace (Valleskey). The New Testament says nothing against the ordination of women (Brug).

Many in the LCMS think the Theses on Justification are the last word on justification. Thus they supplant the clarity and force of the Book of Concord. Anyone who criticizes them is abgeschnitten, cut off from the Kingdom.

Webber Uses Church of Rome Gambit: UOJ Always Taught by Lutherans

Alone in his room at the Off-Ramp Inn, the UOJ Stormtrooper wonders if it is all worth it.

Jay Webber, M.Div. Ft. Wayne, has pasted some quotations on LutherQuest (sic), trying to prove that Lutherans have always believed in justification without faith.

Roman Catholics use the same arguments. The Church, they claim, has always taught the Assumption of Mary, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and the infallibility of the pope.

Has the Lutheran Church always taught Receptionism? The error of Receptionism is based on the same fundamental problem of UOJ, denying the efficacy of the Word. The Christian Church has always taught the efficacy of the Word and justification by faith.

Notice that Webber has not quoted from the Book of Concord. The problem with the stray Luther quotations is manifold. One is the translation, which can always be debated. More importantly, Lutherans do not subscribe to the Weimar Edition or the Corpus Reformatorum. They subscribe to the Book of Concord. Otherwise pastors would be praying to Mary because Luther prayed to Mary in his otherwise fine commentary on the Magnificat.

Justification in the Bible and in the Book of Concord = justification by faith.

Another problem with Webber's argument is his failure to offer the other side of the question. That is a logical fallacy called special pleading. The UOJ Stormtroopers quote the same sources over and over, then quote one another, creating an impression of unanimity. In Thy Strong Word I mustered every UOJ statement I could find, and that has convinced more than one pastor that forgiveness without faith is a base falsehood. They were appalled at the UOJ position when it was laid bare.

I am suprised Webber did not quote the ELS statement on UOJ: the whole world is saved, too, a natural consequence of everyone being forgiven.

Robert Preus
Robert Preus, PhD, taught Webber, so let us pay attention to Dr. Preus instead of Master Webber:

From Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant (second edition):

However, Preus clarified the true meaning of justification in his final book, Justification and Rome, which was published posthumously. Preus wrote this definitive comment:

"But the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner takes place when the Holy Spirit brings him to faith through Baptism and the Word of the Gospel. Our sins were imputed to Christ at His suffering and death, imputed objectively after He, by His active and passive obedience, fulfilled and procured all righteousness for us. But the imputation of His righteousness to us takes place when we are brought to faith."

Preus immediately followed the statement above with a quotation from Quenstedt, one of his favorite orthodox Lutheran authors:

It is not just the same thing to say, “Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us” and to say “Christ is our righteousness.” For the imputation did not take place when Christ became our righteousness. The righteousness of Christ is the effect of His office. The imputation is the application of the effect of His office. The one, however, does not do away with the other. Christ is our righteousness effectively when He justifies us. His righteousness is ours objectively because our faith rests in Him. His righteousness is ours formally in that His righteousness is imputed to us.

Preus also quoted Abraham Calov with approval:

Although Christ has acquired for us the remission of sins, justification, and sonship, God just the same does not justify us prior to our faith. Nor do we become God's children in Christ in such a way that justification in the mind of God takes place before we believe.

Justification by faith, in the original sense, was taught in the official catechism of the Missouri Synod, and then was gradually changed:

#305 Why do you say in this article: I believe in the Forgiveness of Sins? Because I hold with certainty that by my own powers or through my own works I cannot be justified before God, but that the forgiveness of sins is given me out of grace through faith in Jesus Christ. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also true justification. Psalm 130:3-4; Psalm 143:2; Isaiah 64:6; Job 25:4-6 (Q. 124).

Let Us Prey...Upon the Means of Grace Lutherans

UOJ Stormtroopers Revealed a Weak Spot
When One of Them Turned Disco

This is beginning to sound like the big arguments about 7 years ago, when Gregory Jackson and his disciples were shooting off their cannons against OJ on this board. That was a stressful time on this board; it led to LQ becoming a "private posting" board, and it also led to a number of posters being banned from LQ.

Methinks that it's not that hard for sinful, human beings to take a doctrine, like justification, and read into it more than what Scripture clearly says about it.

Boettden
Full Name: Dennis Boettcher, LCMS pastor
E-mail Address: pastordb@charter.net

***

GJ - How many people say "Methinks"? Here is a recent Ichabod post:

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Reasons for WELS-LCMS-ELS Apostasy":

Methinks you frequently stumble into a position that is dangerously close to Osiander, cf.

Try reading "The Fire and the Staff" by Klemet Preus for a clear explanation.

Notice that these UOJ Stormtroopers had to ban people from their precious website because UOJ was questioned? They were understandably stressed out from being challenged and knocked off their memorized positions.

Their defense of UOJ this round is:

1. Read our posts.
2. Read the official declarations of our Holy Mother LCMS.

Perhaps someone has quoted Luther on LutherQuest (sic). I doubt it.

From Michael Schottey

Golden Ardie Award Winner

Michael Schottey has left a new comment on your post "Justification by Faith - Lutheran Layman":

Rev. Jackson,

Its been a while, allow me to put myself out for public ridicule.

I have read your site for a while now, and although I have taken a elongated vacation from my own blogging and even commenting on "Bailing Water" et al. I have continued to read and absorb.

People like to say general statements like "You break the 8th commandment" or "what about your tone?" and its a knee jerk reaction that they're not ready to defend. Allow me.

I have never doubted nor contended against your love for the Word, nor of our Lord, nor of the sheep being led astray.

But what of the lost shepherds?

There is certainly a difference between Pastors "in error" and false preachers. Luther said that the Pope would rather see the whole world condemned that lose the errors of the mass. Are you really ready to say the same about the Fuller graduates? [GJ - Definitely. The Fuller grads would not give their lives for the Faith, but they will kill and lie to preserve the errors of Church Growth.]

My problem is not with your "defensor fidei" role. My problem is twofold.

1) Many of your anecdotes are, in essence, old hat. Yes, you come up with new and interesting news...but then you continue to harp on it again and again. For all you know the sins that you mention have been confessed and absolved. I understand that you want the information in the daylight, where all may be seen. But the weakness is in the blog atmosphere. I would suggest creating a document with all your evidence and leaving a link to it along the side of the site...that way people can easily find it and the men being implicated can as well. Because...

2) The purpose of the law is to show men their own sins...not simply to bring them to the minds of others. The goal should be to the repentance of all men, shepherds included.

***

GJ - Many of my observations are breaking news, as a matter of fact, and they have had an impact on WELS. I like Michael because he signs his name, unlike Rev. Mouse and a few others, such as Pseudo-Mike. Some effects of this blog:

1. Church and Change is no longer linked from the WELS.net website.
2. The WELS pastor in Corona, California deleted his praise of Leonard Sweet.
3. The Moose Report denied supporting Leonard Sweet, disingenuously, but at least she did show some sense of shame and returned to her quilting. Alleluia.
4. The effort to close Michigan Lutheran Seminary failed, and this blog helped a little.
5. WELS laity and pastors are waking up to the fraud of forgiveness without faith, without the Word, without the Means of Grace - Universal Objective Justification, the favorite false doctrine of the Church Growth Movement.

As for #2, Michael needs to study the Large Catechism, which can be found in the Book of Concord. WELS is not bound to the Book of Concord, but that is another story.

Egregious public sin should be rebuked in public to warn others. For instance, when District President Ed Werner went to state prison for molesting girls in his own congregation, that should have been a news item in FIC - False-teachers in Collusion . Ditto When Scott Zerbe went to state prison. Ditto when Al Just went to prison for murdering his wife and Tabor did not go for murdering his. Repentance, Michael? Some WELS pastors still insist Al is innocent, that his wife really did die from rolling over on a steak knife in bed a zillion times. Mrs. Ichabod is not convinced. Neither am I. Neither was the jury. Tabor was a chief suspect in his wife's murder but was allowed to move to a new call out of the state.
The police chief regretted never nailing Tabor. The pastor's mistress went to prison, but he did not.

Floyd Stolzenburg was forced to resign from the LCMS ministerium, but WELS put him on the fast track to become a WELS pastor, thanks to the Michigan District, DP Robert Mueller and VP Paul Kuske. (I might add, plus the timid silence of all the pastors, a truly mute chorus.) Stolzenburg had a rich WELS buddy and a passion for spreading false doctrine. "Just the man we need in Columbus," they shouted. You may think I am making this up, but one WELS bigshot came to Columbus and suggested FS was the ideal man to run the new evangelism program. FS was recommened by VP Paul Kuske to become the pastor of Emanuel Lutheran, Columbus, after being turned away from many other calls (various denominations) that he pursued, according to his old LCMS DP. The LCMS DP said he was very unhappy that WELS took on Floyd.

So you see, Michael, that is not old news but a continuing carbuncle in the Body of Christ. Floyd even connected himself with the Little Sect on the Prairie, sponsoring Roger Kovaciny in the Ukraine with Jay Webber. Someone got a Schwan grant to match what Flody's congregation gave to Thoughts of Faith for a new church building. I wonder what the faithful would have said about the origins of that money. When I began featuring the Kovaciny-Stolzeburg-ELS connection in my doctrinal bulletins (pre-Ichabod), the references to Kovaciny at Emanuel's website disappeared. Coincidence?

Meanwhile, those WELS and ELS leaders--so concerned about the 8th Commandment--have spent the last 30 years slandering anyone who got in their way. The pastor to the Love Shack staff was called "brain-damaged" for questioning the Church Growth Movement in his essay. The former seminary president was called "senile" by the same bunch. I see no evidence of repentance.

The result of these methods is to confirm false teachers and adulterous pastors in their sin. They know the synod will back them and undermine their critics. The bigger the scandal, the more likely WELS will cover it up and attack anyone who asks about it. Moreover, faithful pastors are discouraged from doing their jobs and silenced.

When people post on the Internet about the homosexual predators of the Catholic priesthood and their enabling leaders, I answer, "True, but the Lutherans are not better, and their ministers can marry." In fact, one of the worst offenders in the Catholic hierarchy, Archbishop Weakland, was sought out by WELS to be a featured, public speaker for Wisconsin Lutheran College. Explain that one.

People have suggestions about how I can write even more material for free, but I have to make a living. I am a tent-maker, like Paul. I doubt whether anyone else has provided as much raw data on the Internet as I have. The links are on this page for very large websites full of quotations, histories, and opinions. My name, address, and phone number are attached to all my material. For some reason, the Church Growth fanatics choose to remain anonymous.