Someone thought I was being too harsh when I said all divorced pastors should be removed from pastoral work, and that includes being booted upstairs as a consultant, mission counselor, or evangelism expert.
The writer claimed that some pastors are left by their wives, etc. Arguing from an exception is always going to promote weak principles. In fact, that is how so many divorced pastors kept their jobs--and often their mistresses--by making themselves the victims. Wives may be completely at fault at times (I doubt it), but the Bible still says "husband of but one wife," and not "one wife at a time."
What did divorced pastors do for WELS in Columbus? Floyd Luther Stolzenburg was promoted as a Church Growth expert and treated as a WELS pastor, even though he was kicked out as a Missouri pastor and never a member of WELS. The only cause he favored was himself and his false doctrine. Ditto Roger Zehms, another divorced pastor, but friends with Wayne Mueller. So he could promote CG too, even though he had no call, except one "directly from the Holy Spirit," as he said at one LPR meeting - explaining why he and Floyd answered to no one. Marc Schroeder divorced his first wife and married his girlfriend, but they were both children of WELS professors so that made it Scriptural. Marc loved Church Growth, got kicked out of WELS, and joined Missouri with his congregation. The Donor, as he was called, was also divorced. All were "Scriptural" divorces - the most common use of "Scriptural" in Columbus WELS churches.
A WELS member wrote: "I remember Columbus having all these divorced pastors. It seems to me these guys are always the ones that promoted the church growth issues. They talk about love but are unloving."
Marvin Schwan did a lot for WELS and Missouri, showing them how little a ton of money can do. Marvin divorced his wife and married his manager's wife. Marvin's second wife became a Lutheran, apparently proving money is a Means of Grace. But when he died, she became a Roman Catholic again, proving money is not as powerful a means as WELS/ELS once thought.
Christian News has another fine example of what I mean. A group photo shows Herman Otten grinning with David Menton (CLC - sic) and Phil Giessler (ex-LCMS). Giessler was carrying on an affair when he was the overpaid head of God's Word to the Nation Bible Society. What was supposed to be a revision of the Beck Bible turned into a Marvin Schwan funded bonanza for a few people, especially Phil. He was getting staggering sums.
At one point Giessler's long-suffering wife told her LCMS husband to choose between her and the mistress. He chose his mistress and his putative son with that woman. Rev. Phil announced his own ex-communication because he was unrepentant. His Bible empire went on life support.
Giessler was divorced for cause and joined a Pietistic ministerium. They did not allow divorced pastors, so they did not list him. But he served a church on their list. His second wife, who was his former mistress, got tired of living on very little (no Schwan loot) and left him, telling him, "He isn't your son after all."
Rev. Phil got married a third time, rising in Otten's esteem with each marriage. Otten even said on the phone once, "Phil is here with his wife." I said, "His third?" Herman said, "Third? Why do you say third?" I went through the history, as told to me by Otten and recorded somewhat in his tabloid. Herman said, "Oh yes. You are right. She is a nice person."
Otten contended that Phil was such a good teacher of the Bible. Readers can imagine what I said in response.
I wrote before - conservatives have lost credibility in America because they are just as loose as their Leftist counterparts, and conservatives excuse the worst behavior because "he is a nice guy" or something similar. Luther argued that men who abandon their families should be arrested. I doubt whether Luther would address Phil as "Dr." The latest CN article identifies Dr. Phil as a "Bible scholar." That must mean someone who makes a choice living from a book he never reads.
Pietism breeds legalism and antinomianism. A CLC (sic) layman like Menton will denounce people for publishing in CN, because the LCMS is evil and Otten is still in it. However, CLC (sic) pastors can publish in CN if they limit themselves to letters. And Menton can publish in CN because...well, just because. Now Menton is involved in an unionistic Creation museum. And the trouble with the LCMS is - they tolerate unionistic activities!
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "More on Divorced Pastors - Why Pietists Cannot Be ...":
"Floyd Luther Stolzenburg was promoted as a Church Growth expert and treated as a WELS pastor, even though he was kicked out as a Missouri pastor and never a member of WELS."
How many children did Floyd have?
***
GJ - Pro-life pastors Jay Webber and Roger Kovaciny could answer how many children Floyd fathered. They worked with and supported Floyd, taking money from his Masonic church for their projects. Maybe VP Paul Kuske and Doctrinal Pussycat Robert Mueller would offer some facts. Both claimed to know all about Floyd before installing him as a CG guru for WELS without Floyd belonging to WELS - a synod devoted to fellowship principles.
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "More on Divorced Pastors - Why Pietists Cannot Be ...":
Hey Dr. Jackson do you agree that this is high tech gossip against your fellow christians (sic). It is not very pastor like.
***
GJ - No I do not agree. A divorce is a public matter, with legal documents filed for anyone to see - unless sealed by the court. WELS/ELS officials have shamed themselves by promoting and defending men who should be in prison instead of a pulpit. The alleged shepherds watching over the flock, the District Pussycats, are wolves in sheep's clothing. They are very harsh - but only with the people who find out the truth.
You will never hear from a WELS DP that one of their own went to the state prison for offenses against children in his own congregation, that two WELS church workers murdered their wives. But oh do they have a creative streak when it comes to making up stories about people who threaten to unfeather their nests. Woe unto those who cross DP Hategood and VP Corruption.
---
Bruce Church has left a new comment on your post "More on Divorced Pastors - Why Pietists Cannot Be ...":
Dr. Jackson,
I know that you've pointed out that antinomianism runs rampant in the UOJ-lovin' synods, but perhaps it never occurred to your readers what antinomianism actually looks like in real life, or that the behavior some commentators engage in is actually various forms of antinomianism. For instance, the guy who wrote that you engage in high tech gossip is really just throwing out a red herring. In other words, he's trying to undercut and silence anyone who would try to apply the law to, or just plain point out, egregious situations in the synods.
Antinomianists undercut critics even though they must realize that someone has to raise a stink or else the situation in the Church would become intolerable in short order. Imagine what it would be like if public ministers knew they could have three or even four wives and no one would say anything
contrariwise.
Antinomianism (anti-law-ism) entails a person, or persons, making a lot of excuses why the law does not apply to him (or them), or to someone he or they like, as well as castigating, name-calling, or even slandering people who publicly object to public behavior that does not conform to the Scriptures, all in order to get critics to back off.
A favorite of antinomianists is to misapply Mat 07:01: "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." However, verse five of that chapter shows that what is meant is hypocritical judging. Notice Jesus does say to eventually take the speck out of the brother's eye, not to ignore it forever, but first tend to one's own sin. Since Dr. Jackson is still married to his first wife, he can fire away at public ministers who've had more than one (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Tit. 1:6).
Antinominists may resort to other red herrings, like saying a person is not in fellowship with the WELS, or another synod, and therefore it is none of his business. Another red herring is charging a critic with violation of the 8th Commandment, or a violation
of Matthew 18 where one is supposed to go to the brother privately first. Both the 8th Commandment and Matthew 18 pertain to dealing with private sins privately, but the Ministry of the Word is public for the most part, and public sin and
false teaching must be rebuked publicly.
