Apparently, this is the Before photo for Lorial makeup.
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Mouse Remains A Daily Communicant at Ichabod":
The idea of taking your neighbors words in the kindest possible way has, in the Lutheran Churches, become a belief that there is Doctrine and then there's Application of Doctrine. This is how they can destroy what it means to be Justified In Christ changing the Holy Spirit's faith into their man made faith (the withered outstretched and empty hand) with the Doctrine of UOJ and then defer to Subjective Justification to exclaim that it still takes faith.
With this duo they're able to say that growing the Church is purely a work of the Holy Ghost through the Means of Grace and then with the application of that doctrine contradict God and list the ways in which we can remove the barriers that keep the gospel from being effective.
The Northwest District of the WELS used this same approach when dealing with using women in the congregation to read the liturgy.
Here's a quote from District President Jon Buchholz [Arizona-Las Vegas-California District] promoting this understanding when he was included in a discussion coming from my contention that Pastor Schewe, WELS Des Moines Washington, was wrong to have the women in the congregation read the Liturgy. Pastor Schewe began the reading and then had all the women read the next section of the liturgy then all the men in a round robin style.
Pastor Buchholz:
"Second, to the specific issue of women in the church, remember that there are principles and there are applications of principles. The principles are always inviolate. Some applications of principles are always inviolate. Other applications of principles may vary depending upon a whole passel of factors, including but not limited to: strength or weakness of faith; cultural sensitivities; customs of the people, and church etc. (An example might be the way Luther dealt with the radicals at Wittenberg who wanted to take the Reformation too quickly. He backed off and moved slowly, allowing the word to do its work in people’s hearts before he instituted things like Communion in both kinds—certainly a biblical practic e.)
In asserting that Pastor Schewe was wrong to allow women to read sections of Scripture antiphonally, you want to be careful that you don’t turn the application of a principle into the principle itself. The principle that women are not to teach or have authority over a man is inviolate. Some applications of that principle, e.g., women pastors, women teaching men in Bible study, etc., are inviolate. However there is quite a stretch between women teaching (i.e., expounding, explaining, clarifying and elucidating Scripture) and reading Scripture antiphonally and collectively without giving instruction. (This doesn’t mean that Scripture itself is not instructive; that power to instruct inheres in the word. And, as you well know, the power and efficacy of the word to instruct is n ot made more or less effective whether it’s read by a woman or a man.)
Another question that may well be raised is whether a practice is wrong (i.e. inherently sinful) or merely ill-advised under the circumstances. Since in this case in point you’re dealing with an application—not the principle itself—there are a number of criteria that are to be evaluated to ascertain the benefit or detriment of an application. Does it pander to or foster a particular false belief? Is it an accommodation to worldly practice and mindset? Is it edifying? And so forth ."
WELS has fostered an understanding of doctrine which allows their practice to be detached from their doctrine.
In Christ,
Brett Meyer
***
GJ - Missouri has done the same while bragging about it. When I knew seminarians at Our Lady of Sorrows in St. Louis, about 15 years ago, they said, "We are orthodox in doctrine but loose in application."
Mequon has had women leading the worship service. The Little Sect on the Prairie did the same at their copper-top chapel. When some in the ELS objected, the response was, "Maybe it was a mistake if some of you have a problem with it."
Once I told John Lawrenz about St. Paul in German Village having members who phoned my women members, saying, "Transfer to our church so you can vote." That upset him the first time. A little later he was on the opposite side of the issue and said, "I didn't know you were sensitive about that issue." He made it sound like a medical condition.
Paul Kuske was openly sarcastic about adiaphora, saying maybe it hurt the "weak in faith," so that could be a problem. His adiaphora at Pilgrim Community Church included the name Lutheran, their deliberately deceiving people about its identification when phoning to invite them, the Creeds, hymns, and the liturgy.
---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Women Liturgists in WELS? Why Not?":
As proof that false doctrine grows like a weed:
August 18, 2006
From: HTLC Board of Elders
Stan Bauer
Tad Doviak
Monte Ewald
Dave Fulton
Kevin Nack
Dan Smith
Mark Tacke
To: Brett Meyer
Dear Brett,
You originally e-mailed the Board of Elders regarding the question of antiphonal worship at Holy Trinity.
After prayerful consideration and study of the Word in this matter we believe that antiphonal worship is a proclamation or reading of God's inspired word and is not considered to be 'teaching' the congregation.
***
KJV 1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
WELS Constantly Being Revised Version - But I do not suffer anyone to question how we are changing things, but the man must be in silence.
