but not the last.
Freddy Finkelstein has already written on this topic. I started this post last night, went to sleep, and woke up to two comments he posted to "Awww - Ain't That Sweet!" I will kelm them below, to keep this thread a little organized.
Pietism began with Spener's program, which included two poison pills for Lutheran doctrine:
1. Love is more important than doctrine.
2. Conventicles, or cell groups, are needed to promote the fruits of Christianity.
Although he denied it, Spener borrowed conventicles from Labadie, who was previously a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest. Catholic spirituality encourages small group intensity, whether in a Marian society or other methods of small group prayer. Jesuits were organized and trained to exercise power in society. The cell group moves the Christian Church away from the Biblical Means of Grace to prayer as THE Means of Grace.
A standard anecdote from Lutherans under this spell will be told like this, as a "witness" to everyone. - I was worried about my son and his friends, because a lot of bad things happen in those fishing shacks in the winter. So I prayed about it. And God sent a storm and blew the shack down. (Triumphant smile.) Nothing is said about parental discipline or the likelihood of moving to another, better engineered shack.
Cell group members are superior, because the real Church for them is the conventicle. The Sunday service is an administrative necessity for offerings and recruiting, but it contains too many unwashed traditionalists to satisfy the Pietist. The cell groupie performs and works, while the Biblical Means of Grace service is one where we receive Christ and his forgiveness.
Unionism does not just set aside doctrinal discernment. The Pietists make doctrinal discernment a sin, because that leads to criticism of other denominations. Therefore, all denominations engaged in cell groups are good and worthy of emulation. On the doctrinal side, this leads to Pentecostalism and Romanism, because tongue-speaking and Marian excesses mine the emotions so effectively at first. Today's cell groupies will fall into three categories in the future: Roman Catholics, Pentecostals, and burnt-out atheists.
Pietists are works-salesmen and law-mongers. The first thing from a Shrinker is "Look at the numbers God has accomplished through me." Their heresiarch Rick Warren teaches them, "Faith is not enough. You need transforming love, too." The Shrinker
Pietists speak of love, but forcing love is like forcing a smile, not effective. The cell groupies are really full of hatred for and anger against:
- Traditional Means of Grace worship services.
- Lutheran hymns, music, liturgy, and creeds.
- Real Law and Gospel sermons.
They tolerate false doctrine. In fact, they are giddy with excitement over the latest heresies. But they do not tolerate anyone who questions them. They may love-bomb them for a time, a typical cell group approach, but they shun them for life when their tender mercies fail. Shunning is not enough - they make sure their opponents cease to exist. Ask any minister who has dealt with charismatics. The Shrinkers are exactly the same, especially lethal when elevated to positions of authority (chairwoman of the missionary society, etc).
Pietists teach indifference toward the Book of Concord and the Means of Grace. They talk about Jesus and grace all the time but take away the Instruments of Grace (media gratiae). They deny the efficacy of God's Word but never stop blabbing about their word.
Cells are effective. The entire Soviet Union was organized around Communist cells. A Soviet is a cell, so the USSR was a union of social cells. The political officer made it his duty to murder any opponents of Marxist-Lenist socialism. The SEALs work in cells too. They are ferociously dedicated to helping one another, and their various teams are united in a common cause. Pietistic cells promote the unionism, Reformed doctrine, and destroying Lutheran doctrine. They have worked their way up the ranks in the Synodical Conference and hold positions of authority in all the synods, ELCA too.
The people opposing the WELS Synod President are Pietists. Read their favorite authors - all Reformed, Pentecostal, or secular business people. Read the websites of their favorite conferences - Drive, Dirt, Exponential, Catalyst, Radicalis, Mars Hill, Granger Community Church, Northpoint, Leonard Sweet, Rick Warren, and Craig Groeschel. Check out their favorite training centers - Fuller Seminary, Trinity in Deerfield, Willow Creek.
Look at the State of Wisconsin Doctrinal Pussycats. They have one thing in common. They are getalong-goalong guys. They look pleasant, friendly, and harmless. However, they do not like their Pietism challenged.
A lot of charges will be invented by the Pietists in the next year or two. Their favorite will probably be "loveless."
"Therefore, do not speak to me of love or friendship when anything is to be detracted from the Word or the faith; for we are told that not love but the Word brings eternal life, God's grace, and all heavenly treasures." What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1411f. Ephesians 6:10-17.
"In like manner we will also do to our princes and priests; when they attack our manner of life, we should suffer it and show love for hatred, good for evil; but when they attack our doctrine, God's honor is attacked, then love and patience should cease and we should not keep silent, but also say: I honor my Father, and you dishonor me; yet I do not inquire whether you dishonor me, for I do not seek my own honor." Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 176. Fifth Sunday in Lent John 8:46-59.
"Doctrine is our only light. It alone enlightens and directs us and shows us the way to heaven. If it is shaken in one quarter (in une parte), it will necessarily be shaken in its entirety (in totum). Where that happens, love cannot help us at all." What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, I, p. 414. Galatians 5:10.
"But this tender mercy is to be exercised only toward Christians and among Christians, for toward those who reject and persecute the Gospel we must act differently; here I am not permitted to let my love be merciful so as to tolerate and endure false doctrine. When faith and doctrine are concerned and endangered, neither love nor patience are in order. Then it is my duty to contend in earnest and not to yield a hairbreadth." What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, II, p. 637f.
"It is self-evident that if the perfectio, or sufficientia, of Scripture be surrendered , the Scripture principle is given up. If a deficiency in the Bible must be supplied from some outside source, the Christian Church is eo ipso moved off its foundation, the Word of the Apostles and Prophets, and based on the Ego of the alleged supplementers." Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950, I, p. 319.
"We have no intention of yielding aught of the eternal, immutable truth of God for the sake of temporal peace, tranquility, and unity (which, moreover, is not in our power to do). Nor would such peace and unity, since it is devised against the truth and for its suppression, have any permanency. Still less are we inclined to adorn and conceal a corruption of the pure doctrine and manifest, condemned errors. But we entertain heartfelt pleasure and love for, and are on our part sincerely inclined and anxious to advance, that unity according to our utmost power, by which His glory remains to God uninjured, nothing of the divine truth of the Holy Gospel is surrendered, no room is given to the least error, poor sinners are brought to true, genuine repentance, raised up by faith, confirmed in new obedience, and thus justified and eternally saved alone through the sole merit of Christ." (Closing of Formula of Concord, Trigl. p. 1095) Francis Pieper, The Difference Between Orthodox And Heterodox Churches, and Supplement, Coos Bay, Oregon: St. Paul's Lutheran Church, 1981, p. 65.
"When a theologian is asked to yield and make concessions in order that peace may at last be established in the Church, but refuses to do so even in a single point of doctrine, such an action looks to human reason like intolerable stubbornness, yea, like downright malice. That is the reason why such theologians are loved and praised by few men during their lifetime. Most men rather revile them as disturbers of the peace, yea, as destroyers of the kingdom of God. They are regarded as men worthy of contempt. But in the end it becomes manifest that this very determined, inexorable tenacity in clinging to the pure teaching of the divine Word by no means tears down the Church; on the contrary, it is just this which, in the midst of greatest dissension, builds up the Church and ultimately brings about genuine peace. Therefore, woe to the Church which has no men of this stripe, men who stand as watchmen on the walls of Zion, C. F. W. Walther, The Proper Distinction between Law and Gospel, trans., W. H. T. Dau, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1928, p. 28.
---
Freddy Finkelstein has left a new comment on your post "Awww - Ain't That Sweet!":
After having spent nearly thirty years in the throes of pop-church Evangelicalism, of thinking their thoughts, of saying their words, of engaging in their false practices, and of wallowing with them in their doctrinal muck, it is easy for me to spot the dominance of this dying movement's influence in the words of the two authors quoted by Dr. Jackson at the head of this blog entry. In the case of the anonymous author from St. Marcus, the trifecta of smiling evangelical epithets is offered: (1) "my heart is wounded," (2) "you Pharisee," (3) but "I'm praying for you."
(1) The heart-wound is apparently inflicted as this individual is jolted by reality out of a dream that the Church Militant is a peaceful place. The reality is, it isn't. We are at war. The war is continuous. The war is waged among the Visible Church as much as it is anywhere else, as sinful man, continuously restless and lacking contentment with the Word of God in all of its finality, seeks to add to or subtract from it, as he gives in to the enticements of the World and seeks to follow in its ways, or as he otherwise falls prey to the wiles of the Devil. The Bible tells us in Romans 16 that man's motive in departing from pure Scripture teaching is ultimately to serve his own belly. God is not served by such innovation. In point of fact, the war that the Church wages is over Scripture teaching itself; its struggle is to keep it pure and unalloyed. Satan is content to settle either for half-truth's or full lies. Both serve his purpose equally well – to cause man to direct his eternal hope away from the objective promises of Christ to some other god, and to rob mankind of his Salvation. Yet, our job is not to battle Satan by working to grow the Church, as he works to shrink the Church through false teaching and dubious practices. Jesus Christ has fought that battle for us, and has vanquished Satan; rather, it is the Holy Spirit, working through the pure Word of God, alone, Who grows the church. If we cherish the Holy Spirit and His work, we must battle to keep the Word pure.
The claim, "you wounded my heart," is a safe accusation for an Evangelical accuser to make because it is entirely unverifiable "emotional schlock," (as cw, above, so aptly puts it). Unity among pop-church Evangelicals has very little to do with doctrinal agreement, but, rather, nearly entirely with peaceful association regardless of one's precise doctrinal stance. Divisiveness, rather than measured by pop-church Evangelicals against the teachings of Scripture (which are negotiable to varying degrees among them), is measured relative to "social oneness" – which is interpreted by them as "spiritual oneness." Pointing out the false teachings of others is to manifest something other than "oneness," dashing hopes (however false) and crushing spirits – the "unforgivable sin" of pop-church Evangelicalism.
(2) Thus the claim "you wounded my heart," naturally leads to its corollary accusation, "you Pharisee." Pharisees are big-meanies. They are unfair. Therefore they are wrong-spirited. Besides, they are the enemies of Jesus. Since the claim, "you wounded my heart," is fundamentally unverifiable and meaningless (as everybody well-knows), it is a safe accusation to make, requiring very little proof or explanation – and because it is anti-Jesus, it has the utmost “gravitas” and is taken seriously on the face of the accusation. In the mind of the pop-church Evangelical, heart-wounding is an act of disunity, it is therefore against Jesus, so the label "Pharisee" applies.
(3) Such accusations are usually followed by some form of reprimand. In this case, we read: What is it that bolsters Pharisees like I once was to pride themselves in defending their small lifeless congregations while at the same time feeling the need to lash out at and label larger congregations as being Ichabod for thriving? Could it be that these attacks issue forth from a place of unacknowledged (if even realized) fear because of not being as sure as they profess themselves to be that their numbers are small solely because they are God’s chosen "remnant", or because of whatever other supposed scriptural reason that they can come up with? Here we have the classic "we're big and you're small, so you're just jealous" reprimand. Regardless of the specific accusation, to solidify the moral superiority of the accuser, such reprimands are almost always followed by the classic and infuriating, "I'm praying for you." I recently had an acquaintance, offended by my confessionalism, say this to me. I ignored it, of course, but I might just as well have said, "Well, as long as you're announcing it, why don't you just elevate yourself in the center of the congregation and make a show of it?"
Interestingly, the anonymous St. Marcus author claims to be offended. And I agree – he has been offended. Yet, the source of his offense, as admitted openly by him, is not a direct telling of reality, but a false understanding of the Doctrine of the Church. The Unity he expects in the Visible Church, is manifest only in the Church Universal, invisible among the Church Militant yet fully enjoyed among the Church Triumphant. The source of offense is not the messenger of truth in this case, but the teacher he sits under who has poorly catechized him.
Otherwise, in the case of the Canadian Clergyman, Brett Meyer has offered enough research to suggest what sources have been informing his thinking in matters of doctrine and practice. I'll only add the following: the signature line at the bottom of his email, a quote from Sir Francis Bacon, pretty well sums up his entire theme. It says, If we are to achieve results never before accomplished, we must expect to employ methods never before attempted. Such is intended as a reference to the mission of the Church. Much like the Babylonians, it extols the heights of achievement humankind can reach and makes them Man’s objective. For a true Lutheran, such a statement ought to be as repugnant as the Tower the Babylonians constructed. Such a statement is rank anthropocentrism, and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
Freddy Finkelstein
State of Wisconsin DPs - WELS
