Charles has left a new comment on your post "WELS Leaders Against the Efficacy of the Word":
Kelm:
"A last word on sound doctrine is in place. Sound doctrine must be distinguished from tradition, praxis and preference. The liturgy, translation of the Bible, vestments and organizational policies of the church are not equatable with sound doctrine."
Rev. Paul Kelm, "How to Make Sound Doctrine Sound Good to Mission Prospects," p. 3.
Jackson--Are you suggesting that sound doctrine demands a specific style (praxis, liturgy, organizational policy etc.) of worship and church? Are you saying that the above quote is wrong in and of itself, or only because you know what Kelm means by it?
***
GJ - First of all, the title gives away the agenda - How To Make Sound Doctrine Sound Good To Mission Prospects. Calvinists make the Word of God appealing and reasonable.
Secondly, there is Kelm's well known Calvinistic bent, such as raving about Josh McDowell's Lord, Liar, Lunatic argument.
Lastly, there is the common WELS tactic of hiding behind adiaphora (implicit above) while getting it exactly wrong, and invoking the Mystical Incantation of Wauwatosa - the Gospel creates its own forms.
Here is a question, Charles - Can you find an unqualified Lutheran statement in anything written by Kelm?
---
Charles has left a new comment on your post "How Can I Question Paul Calvin Kelm":
With all due respect to your call, education and age I must insist that there's no need to get defensive. I'm on your side. But you didn't answer reasonable and valid questions.
I don't like Kelm--I think he's a Liar and a Lunatic. But can I find an unqualified Lutheran statement in anything written by Kelm? Probably, yes; That is why he's so dangerous. Satan and friends always mix truth with lies, making it difficult to differentiate.
When you get down to details about things, (like worship practice etc.) being able to illuminate exactly how or where the heretic mixes truth and falsehood goes along way in exposing the heretic for who he is.
Now, by my lights the Kelm quote in question is not wrong, though the paper (I read it) as a whole is hideous. Sound doctrine is not equatable with tradition, praxis, preference, vestments, organizational policy, liturgy etc. The Western Rite is not prescribed in Scripture. People throughout the world may well worship God in a million different ways and still adhere to sound doctrine.
But I'm not an expert on Lutheranism, and you are an authority. I put my questions to you again:
Are you suggesting that sound doctrine demands a specific style (praxis, liturgy, organizational policy etc.) of worship and church? Are you saying that the above quote is wrong in and of itself, or only because WE know what Kelm means by it?
***
GJ - The biggest problem is not Kelm but hundreds of clergy and thousands of laity letting him get away with it. One pastor, now deceased, said he heard Kelm at a WELS gathering through the PA system. He kept thinking, "They will murder him for all that false doctrine." The pastor got into the main auditorium and people were cheering what Kelm said.
For decades the only thought condemned as false doctrine was hinting that Holy Mother WELS might be wrong about something. The Shrinkers wrapped themselves in synodical infallibility and had a blast with it.
Obviously, Kelm delivered that particular thought as a Trojan Horse.
One of the tragic notions peddled in WELS is this: "That could be understood correctly," with could drawn out into three syllables. That one often alternates with "That is a gray area of Scripture," with gray drawn out with philosophical gravity.
Most statements in my favorite Roman Catholic dogmatics book are correct by themselves, but they are not correct in the context of Roman theology. So I see Kelm using the satis est* of the Augsburg Confession to make the world safe for Calvinism, which he adores.
Picking one statement and saying, "Isn't that correct?" is disingenuous, but I appreciate the chance to say a little more.
*Article VII: Of the Church.
1] Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered.
2] And to the true unity of the Church it is enough [satis est] to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and 3] the administration of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. 4] As Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph. 4:5-6.
