Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Time of Gath Discussed on Facebook:
Ad Ichabodem Fallacy Surfaces



Parlow, Jeske, Kelm, Patterson. Church and Change - Big hug!


Kelmed from Facebook
Displaying all 25 posts by 13 people.
Post #1
Joe Jewell (Oxford University) wroteon September 7, 2009 at 9:15pm
Anyone have comments on this? It certainly surprised me!

http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=15614

Time of Grace is a now a "a Recognized Service Organization of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod"... I looked this up and part of what that involves is:

"RSO agrees (a) to foster the mission and ministry of the Synod, (b) to engage in programs in harmony with the Synod and (c) not to act contrary to the doctrine and practices of the Synod as outlined in the LCMS Constitution and Bylaws, the LCMS Board of Directors’ Policies and the LCMS Convention Resolutions that apply."

https://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/Service%20Opportunities/RSO%20Agreement.pdf

Can a WELS pastor really place his ministry under the authority of "LCMS doctrine and practices" and "LCMS Convention Resolutions" and stay a WELS pastor?
Post #2
Joe Jewell (Oxford University) wroteon September 7, 2009 at 9:24pm
To add: yes, I have emailed Pastor Jeske about this.
Post #3
Michael Schottey (Martin Luther) wroteon September 8, 2009 at 12:17pm
I would not be comfortable with my pastor serving on the board of an LCMS church. I don't see how this is different. It is certainly not an extraneous "non-ministry" like Thrivent.
Post #4
Brent Peterson (Wisconsin Lutheran) wroteon September 8, 2009 at 2:29pm
Hmmm. I would not expect this. All in all, the LCMS and the WELS do mission and outreach quite well, but I don't understand why Time of Grace would need to align itself with the LCMS's Recognized Service Organization.
Post #5
Levi Powers (Wisc La Crosse) wroteon September 8, 2009 at 3:42pm
What can be done about this? Should we do something about this? This action of Time of Grace certainly sends mixed messages and may lead to some confusion.
Post #6
Benjamin Tomczak (Dallas / Fort Worth, TX) wroteon September 9, 2009 at 1:02pm
Joe, et al ~

Thanks for posting this.

My thoughts (when I found out about it last week) were two-fold:

1) What exactly is going on here? How strict is this agreement (apparently the LC-MS has already waived the absolute requirement of having LC-MS members on the board, according to some other blogs I perused)? What does being an RSO mean?

2) Then, when I found out what an RSO is, I asked, "Am I being overly sensitive, or is this a violation of the 'Keep away from them' (Romans 16) and 'Work together for the truth' (2 John) principles?" It's hard for me to see how, at the very least, this isn't confusing.

It's hard to see how a WELS ministry wouldn't be "acting contrary to" the doctrines and practices of the LC-MS, unless that is read to meant, "Don't propagandize about the differences," or "Don't talk about the actual differences, just dwell on those things about which we agree." Either of which are still pretty unacceptable. Both of which seem to be "acting contrary to" the doctrines and practices of the WELS.

After digging into it a little bit (isn't the RSO Manual a fun read?) I passed it up the line, that is, contacted my District President (my District's overseer of doctrine and practice) who contacted that District's President (Pastor Jeske's overseer of doctrine and practice) and the Synod President (our Synod's overseer of doctrine and practice).

Without getting into details, the people who need to know about these things in order to find out what's going on and to work on this situation know what they need to know and are working on them.
Post #7
Silas Pieper (Milwaukee, WI) wroteon September 9, 2009 at 3:39pm
hmm... seems we have some Icabod crazies...
Post #8
Michael Schottey (Martin Luther) wroteon September 9, 2009 at 4:16pm
Yep, me (the MLC grad) and Rev Tomczak are "Ichabod Crazies" and not simply worried about a WELS pastor becoming closely affiliated with (and taking an oath to be bound in practice to) the LCMS.

Ad Hominem much?
Post #9
Phil Eich (Martin Luther) wroteon September 9, 2009 at 5:49pm
As long as we're in the crazy vein: Icabod (sic).
Post #10
Michael Schottey (Martin Luther) wroteon September 10, 2009 at 7:24am
Phil...you so crazy!
Post #11
Kurt Kolander (Wisconsin Lutheran) wroteon September 11, 2009 at 12:29pm
Its been awhile since my last church history class, so can someone quickly summarize the doctrinal differences between LCMS and the WELS?
Post #12
Joe Jewell (Oxford University) wroteon September 11, 2009 at 3:03pm
1) Doctrine of church and ministry

LCMS = Pastor is the only true and complete form of a mediate divine call, and the local congregation is the basic and true form of the church. Synod is not church.
WELS = Divine call can take many forms: pastors, teachers, professors, administrators, others. Synod is church.

2) Church fellowship

LCMS = Altar (communion) and pulpit (preaching) fellowship require a common confession, worship and prayer do not.
WELS = All forms of joint worship and prayer constitute church fellowship and require a common confession.

3) Male/female roles

LCMS = Only the pastoral office is exclusively reserved for men. Congregational officers and presidents (and even Elders in some LCMS congregations, although that is controversial) can be women.
WELS = Offices that involve leadership over mixed groups are to be filled by men. However, a female could theoretically commune a group of all females.
ELS = Same as WELS, except some controversy on that last point about women communing women.

I might add that historically the WELS has shown a greater tendency to insist upon the inerrancy of Scripture, but that is related to all three of the above.

A good book on this topic is "A Tale of Two Synods" by your very own Prof. Braun of WLC.
Post #13
Kurt Kolander (Wisconsin Lutheran) wroteon September 12, 2009 at 8:45am
Thanks for the refresher. I believe I studied Dr. Braun's work when at WLC, but the details had escaped my memory.

I know that this comment will get a lot of flak, but the above listed differences seem so practice based and minimally doctrine. To explain
(because I am sure that I am probably losely using those terms), these appear to be discrepancies concerning the practice and outward image of the physical church on earth. They do not, in my opinion, have a direct effect on the actual message of the Law and Gospel.

This is just my observation regarding the two synods division based on Joe's response to my post. If there is more to these divisions, then my observations are invalid.

Post #14
Paul T. McCain (Concordia Publishing House) wroteon September 13, 2009 at 5:01pm
I've deleted my post. It is not my place on this Facebook Group to discuss doctrine with WELS folks. That is for another time, and place.
Post #15
Joe Jewell (Oxford University) wroteon September 13, 2009 at 5:03pm
I think your judgment is correct on that, and I have deleted my response to your post as well.

To anyone else reading this board, I've revised my statement on LCMS/inerrancy from that above to the narrower:

"The LCMS has shown a greater tendency to tolerate without discipline within their ranks those who do *not* teach the inerrancy of Scripture".
Post #16
Luke Gieschen (Martin Luther) wroteon September 13, 2009 at 5:09pm
Could someone please back up both the WELS and LCMS stances with scripture? I understand the points of the differences, I just can't connect their basis scripturally as I am not as well versed as I could be.
Post #17
Benjamin Tomczak (Dallas / Fort Worth, TX) wroteon September 15, 2009 at 12:55pm
Two places you can go to read the WELS confession on these doctrines and teachings of Scripture:

1) "This We Believe" -- http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2601&collectionID=783

2) "Doctrinal Statements of the WELS" -- http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2601&collectionID=795

Both can be downloaded and read there. You'll find copious Scriptural references to track down and study on all three topics -- Church and Ministry, Fellowship, and the Roles of Men and Women.

Post #18
Luke Gieschen (Martin Luther) wroteon September 16, 2009 at 2:46pm
Thanks.
Post #19
Jay Ramos (Yale) wroteon September 24, 2009 at 8:47pm
Pastor Tomczak (or others),

Is there some kind of timeframe in which we can expect a statement or other action from those who are working on this?

I would hope that the statement addresses the reason for becoming an RSO and why this is or is not acceptable.
Post #20
Benjamin Tomczak (Dallas / Fort Worth, TX) wroteon September 25, 2009 at 7:24am
Jay ~

Honestly, I don't know how long things will take to be taken care of and dealt with. The Bible doesn't give us a "timeframe" just an action frame (Matthew 18:15ff). It could be days, it could be weeks, it could be months, depending on what and who is involved.

Post #21
Jeffrey Sonntag (Martin Luther) wroteon October 7, 2009 at 10:46pm
Has anyone contacted Time of Grace and asked them about this personally. Do they know what this website says about them? Just wondering.
Post #22
Joe Jewell (Oxford University) wroteon October 11, 2009 at 6:11pm
I emailed Mark Jeske right before I started this thread a month ago. He says [I'm paraphrasing; I didn't ask his permission to quote him] essentially that RSO status doesn't really mean what the LCMS RSO website says it does, and that he feels it simply means that LCMS has vetted his program and considers it OK for LCMS people to watch. Pastor Jeske says that becoming an LCMS RSO doesn't actually give LCMS any authority over Time of Grace.

That seems like (putting the Lutheran "best construction" on this) an exceptionally naive take on an agreement "not to act contrary to the doctrine and practices of the Synod as outlined in the LCMS Constitution and Bylaws, the LCMS Board of Directors’ Policies and the LCMS Convention Resolutions". I have never in the past known Mark Jeske to be that naive.

They are aware of what the LCMS website says about Time of Grace's official affiliation (I sent him the same link I posted to start this thread, and I doubt it was a surprise in any event) and OK with it.

For what it's worth, the LCMS pastor in my hometown (who is equally surprised that a WELS entity would affiliate with LCMS in this way) tells me that it is quite a process to get RSO status--it involves lots of paperwork and approval at the district/synodical level. He and other area LCMS congregations have been going through the process to get RSO status for some joint work that they do, and it is apparently not at all trivial.
Post #23
Samuel Jeske (Martin Luther) wrote6 hours ago
I understand your concern, joe. But I agree with Kolander. This is really minor. Can we, in this financial time of crisis, afford to argue amongnst each other about the differences in the invisible church? Amongst the Lutheran Church? So you slap a LCMS label on a WELS box of cereal. Does that mean the "WELS" truth will taste different? Does that suddenly mean he's preaching heresy? Does that mean that the Holy Spirit no longer works through him?

Naive? That seems pretty straight forward. Is not their truth our truth? Yeah there are the differences in clergy, but did not Jesus die for them too? Are they suddenly not allowed to watch Time of Grace because of some denominational acronym? No.

Why are we arguing about how the truth of God's love enters the homes of people? God is reaching people through this ministry. Has anyone here attended St. Marcus? Has anyone here ever watched Time of Grace? If so, do you hear heresy in what he says? No. You don't. The differences you've listed seem trivial to argue about. Are we not commanded to go into ALL the world and preach the good news, the truth, to ALLl creation? So if the truth comes in a LCMS box are you saying it no longer is truth? You mentioned earlier that it scares you. Why? ELS works hand in hand with the WELS. Why can't LCMS? Aren't we all called for the same work?
Post #24
Jeffrey Sonntag (Martin Luther) wroteabout an hour ago
The reason that LCMS and Wisconsin Synod don't work together is because they are not in fellowship because they don't agree on all the teachings of the Bible. The WELS and ELS ARE in fellowship and therefore they do joint tasks.

As for the differences, how about we come at this from a logical reasoning. The WELS and LC-MS don't teach the same things. They are similar but not the same. If we just get rid of the doctrine of fellowship and say "If we are pretty close in our teachings and beliefs that's good enough, where do you stop?'' Do you stop with the ELCA or do you stop with Presbyterians or do you stop with Catholics or do you stop with anyone who says they believe in Jesus or ... etc.

There is a reason that we don't work together with other Synod's with whom we are not in fellowship with, and that is because we are not the same. St. Paul specifically says in Romans 16:17 "I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them."
Post #25
Samuel Jeske (Martin Luther) wrote26 minutes ago
I understand that. My point is if LCMS sees Time of Grace and says, "Hey, here's a television show that we can watch and would like to use and doesnt clash with our doctrine," does this suddenly mean that the pastor preaching for Time of Grace is LCMS? LCMS is a wide division of Lutherans. Some are extremely liberal like their friends in ELCA, others are more conservative like us WELS. Every synod has its issues. Believe it or not even the WELS has its own problems.

Paul was right in what he said. And i agree. But do we stay away from all Christians who do not fall under the WELS umbrella? Do we immediatley assume that we are always right and judge others because we are WELS? Do they not read the same Bible passage and apply that towards us? Most likely. If anything this thread of whether or not Mark Jeske is LCMS is an obstacle and a cause of division. Time of Grace has more viewers on a Sunday morning than the WELS does members on a Sunday morning. What does that say? Do you think just Lutherans watch this show?

Lets look at the facts. Does Time of Grace teach anything that goes against WELS doctrine? No. So why do we raise our eyebrows if LCMS WANTS to use a WELS based television show? Why are we getting mad about this? If anything this is something to rejoice about. LCMS using a WELS doctrinated show? So why do we bicker? Why do we waste time fighting amongst ourselves? Right now the WELS has plenty of bigger issues that could use a facebook thread on before we start questioning the intentions of a 20 year WELS pastor veteran.

Where we draw the line is where denominations no longer let scripture interpret itself. Does not Time of Grace do that?

Time of Grace was approached by LCMS asking if their material could be used. They have no control over the doctrine of Time of Grace which has and always will be WELS. It is simply material that they intend to use. Period. Time of Grace is WELS affiliated. LCMS has ZERO control over them doctrinally.

Let us remember that we are first servants of Christ and remember our jobs as Christians are to spread the truth. Time of Grace IS spreading the truth. Does anyone else feel this thread is the least of our concerns?

Writing Makes a Precise Mind








You wrote Liberalism: Its Cause and Cure?


Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Brief Autobiography":

Fascinating! I didn't realize when I first stumbled onto your site here that you're the same Jackson who wrote the book on LIBERALISM, which I devoured about 15 or so years ago after a Lutheran friend gave it to me as a gift (I even visited some WLS churches as a result!).

Kudos to you for not kowtowing to the PC that has infected way too many denominations. Keep fighting the Good Fight.

Appreciatively,

Discerner

***

GJ - It's good to hear from readers. Another reader of Liberalism left the LCA, etc. When I was still in the LCA, I was given boxes of books left behind by a Missouri pastor who left the ministry. One two-volume set was edited by John W. Montgomery. One of the authors was an LCA pastor I knew, so I paid special attention to it. That certainly started me on the way toward leaving the LCA.

Given the Church Growth obsession of the Mischke administration, it is astounding that any criticism of the fad escaped the editorial gaze.
But alas, the CG network has flourished in WELS ever since. They now own the offering-supported college and seminary. There is no anti-CG lobbying group, but WELS CG has:
  1. The Love Shack Staff
  2. FIC, the Quarterly, and the ELS periodicals

  3. New Ulm and Mequon
  4. Wisconsin Lutheran College, managed by CrossWalk in Phoenix
  5. Pope John the Malefactor
  6. Church and Chicanery
  7. Pots of Pietism
  8. CEO
  9. Time of Gath
  10. Prayer Warriors Institute
  11. and introducing Men of the Word.
This apostasy has grown because dozens of pastors said and did nothing for decades. Worse, many of them agreed with the criticism of CG and even supplied material and ideas for articles, adding, "You should really write about..." One WELS pastor told Selma S. that he was staying quiet so he could get a teaching job. He stayed quiet and got the job he wanted. Roger Zehms, Floyd Luther Stolzenburg, and Paul Kuske got Pilgrim Community Church going in Columbus, 20 years ago. Thanks to the silence of so many, that trend has continued and a similar but later effort (CrossWalk, Phoenix) is now running Wisconsin Lutheran College, with the college president and two board members from CW.

I was told that the Arizona-California-Las Vegas District of WELS was on CrossWalk like a hobo on a hotdog. Obviously not. The Disciples denomination was still having meetings about Jim Jones when the massacre took place in Jonestown. As Luther said, murdering souls is far more dangerous.

I have a letter from an ELS pastor, 1996, thanking me for fighting against CG in the ELS and WELS. Paul McCain's example is instructive. I have several letters from him, thanking me for fighting CG. "I hope it does not infect the ELS," he wrote on November 4, 1991, from his first and only parish. Nine years of Barry-McCain did nothing but bless the CGism and unionism of Missouri. The ELS is thoroughly infected, even under the watchful eye of its Doctrinal Board. Every synod has a doctrinal board, staffed with clerical capons, to ensure the safe and peaceful growth of apostasy.

Writing makes a precise mind because an orderly argument must be formed out of many complicated issues. Patterson's janisarries were howling yesterday, so I must have done well. Nevertheless, I am an abject failure on this topic. I have written against WELS-ELS-LCMS CG since 1988 or so. In 21 years, every slimy appendage of CG doctrine has extended itself into church institutions. Where are the DPs? Cheering for Church Growth.

Reformed doctrine is bad enough, separating the Holy Spirit from the Word, denying the efficacy of the Word, mocking the Sacraments. But Fuller's agenda is far worse than than, and conservative Lutherans have embraced it through extensive training at Pasadena, Willow Creek, and Trinity Deerfield.
The conservative Lutherans all celebrated the 300th anniversary of Paul Gerhardt, a pastor who actually resisted Reformed doctrine. I wanted to attend those LCMS-WELS-ELS seminary chapel services, to see if anyone was laughing out loud.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Writing Makes a Precise Mind": CG. . . I respectfully take issue with you on this post. I do not believe that the ELS gas a Church Growth mentality. It has some other mentalities, I admit, but I don't see Church Growth as part of the program.
I see the ELS as not being oriented to the serious study of theology and of being susceptible, to some degree, towards unthinking right-wing politics. Also, I wish that you would discontinue the use of the mocking title which you give to the President of the ELS, John Moldstad. Other than that, I don't have anything to say because I don't know the people that you write about.

The Lincoln Town Car is so cool. I wish you many months of driving pleasure. Norman Teigen ELS layman (Disclaimer: Although I should probably be so labeled, I am not a spokesperson for the ELS. No one in the ELS listens to me anyway, so it is probably just as well.)

***

GJ - Norman Teigen is a good example of how CG advances. It cannot be true so it is not true. And yet, the Little Sect on the Prairie has its own Emerging Church, with their ELS pastor, Nathan Krause, as a featured speaker at Church and Change.

The Teigen family experience is instructive. When B. Teigen wrote correctly that the Synodical Conference erred in teaching the Receptionist heresy, the ELS leadership pounded him. The WELS/ELS people still claim, "We do not know the exact moment." I wonder what they would have said at the Last Supper when Christ spoke - This is My Body. As disciples, they would have said, "But we don't know the moment." Or they might have said, tentatively, "It depends on what the meaning of is is."

Moldstad earned his title, Pope John the Malefactor. As someone in the ELS observed, the synod has not yet recovered from his explusion of pastors and the exodus of congregations. Moldstad mocked the divine call and all the congregations when he threatened River Heights with, "Fire the pastor or I will expell you from the ELS." I would kneel before him and kiss his papal ring if he would only acknowledge the efficacy of the Word alone and act accordingly with his CG pastors. As a novelist observed, it is my job to "laugh mankind out of their favorite follies and vices." And - "It is much easier to make good men wise, than to make bad men good." (Fielding)

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Writing Makes a Precise Mind": Rev. Jackson, I, too am an ELS layman and I find what you say about the ELS to be right on. Mr. Teigen obviously has his head in the sand. I see the ELS as being hell bent into Church and Change, what with the example of Rev. Nathan Krause and Abiding Shepherd Lutheran Church.

The last convention of the ELS pretended not to know what pastor and congregation were being discussed when an issue regarding the use of the historic liturgies in mission congregations was brought to the floor. There are relatively many confessional/liturgical pastors/congregations in the ELS. Most of them are NOT in the state of MN, sad to say. It's probable that NONE of them are in the state of MN. It's so very sad to see the synod that took a stand in 1917, separating from the Norwegian Synod, now going the way of the apostates that they supposedly left behind. It's certainly difficult for a layman to know where to turn. It is my fervent prayer that the pastors and congregations of the ELS cease any leaning to C&C and return to the historic liturgies, and that they stress the Means of Grace. ELS congregations must also cease promoting the farce that is Time of Grace. ELS congregations must first and foremost take care of the feeding of the sheep and lambs of their flocks and hold their shepherds to that task.

***

GJ - It is a sin to "name names" in synod discussions. That way the real issues can be dodged. However, the Shrinkers name names all the time. When John Lawrenz was outraged by Harold Sauer's moderate and edifying essay, he complained about Sauer "naming names" while running the retired pastor into the ground. Oh yes, Sauer was not there "to defend himself," another complaint from Shrinkers, but only if they are the alleged victims. People have told me about meetings they attended where I was named and obviously not there to defend myself. The key tactic is to turn CG criticism into the most horrible sin ever committed and the author/speaker into the most egregious sinner since Judas Iscariot.