SP Schroeder Noticed by LCMS Blog

Great Example of What a Synodical Presidential Address Ought to Be from WELS President Mark Schroeder, by Pr. Rossow

The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) President Mark Schroeder delivered a wonderful address to their convention last summer. He seamlessly interwove doctrine and practice. Right doctrine in this address is not some sort of boundary or some set of right words added to a program to make it work. For Schroeder true biblical doctrine is in, with and under all that the redeemed say and do.

Here is an excerpt from the address which asserts that our work is not a matter of slick programs with God’s word sprinkled on top but our work is simply a matter of proclaiming God’s word sans programs.

The book of Acts tells us repeatedly that, as God’s people proclaimed the gospel, “the Word of the Lord grew.” As the Holy Spirit worked, the Word grew in the hearts of people. It grew to fill the empire. It grew to span the centuries…
What we do conclude from that? First, we are reminded wherein the success of our mission lies. If we were left to our own strength, our own wisdom, our own resources, the task would be daunting. We would surely either be compelled to retreat from that task or be doomed to failure. But the strength of our mission and our witness does not depend on us, on our own cleverness, our own will power, or on our abilities. Its effectiveness is not to be found in slick programs or in effective marketing strategies. The strength and success of our mission is found in one place: in the power and faithfulness and love of a God, whose Spirit works through the preaching of his Word and the administration of his sacraments. (p. 3)

A while back I complained that President Kieschnick’s address to the district onventions was the opposite approach. Instead of a unified presentation of doctrine and life he spent the first fifteen minutes rattling off confessional truisms to try and convince the synod that he is orthodox. “Me thinks thou dost protest too much.” More to the point, a good synodical president does not need to prove his orthodoxy; he simply is orthodox in word and deed. This is what we mean by churchliness and this is an outstanding trait of Matt Harrison who is the clear confessional alternative to President Kieschnick for president of the LCMS.

Unlike the leadership of the LCMS, President Schroeder judges synodical success by the measure of faithfulness and not the measure of numbers. Here is another excerpt from President Schroeder’s address:

As our synod carries out its mission of sharing the gospel with the lost and caring for the souls of the found, we dare never forget that our success will not be measured in terms of numbers or statistics. Ours is a theology not of glory—striving for mere outward achievement or measurable accomplishments for their own sake. Our success will be measured only by our faithfulness—to God, to his effective and powerful Word, and to the work he has called us to do.
Rather than a theology of glory, ours is a theology of the cross. Our theology centers on a message that came to us wholly and completely because of the love of Christ. It proclaims a message that calls sinners to repentance, directs them to the cross, and that assures them that in Christ and his love all of their sins find full forgiveness.

Admittedly, the theology of the cross is not attractive in our postmodern, self-gratifying world. Unlike the theology of glory, the theology of the cross makes no promises of instant relief for the ills of life in a sinful world. It does not beckon people with the lure of financial or personal or professional success. It does not seek validation of its success in terms of numbers. It does not offer a practical “how to” manual to achieve temporal happiness or to mine the depths of human potential. The message of the cross cannot be packaged to be palatable and cannot be soft-pedaled to be acceptable. It is a message that this world does not understand and does not desire.

In fact, our message—if we are faithful to it—will always be regarded as utter foolishness, just as Paul reminds us, “The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing.” (1 Cor 1:18)  (pp. 3-4)

This address sounds like the addresses of the synodical president’s (sic) of old. You can get a taste for those traditional and faithful presidential addresses in Rev. Harrision’s new book, which of course demonstrates that Rev. Harrison is at home with this Biblical approach to leading a synod and further qualifies him for the LCMS presidency.

We recommend you read the entirety of President Schroeder’s address. You can do so by clicking here.

***

GJ - Faithfulness to the Word is success - so reads the conclusion of Walther's Law and Gospel, quoting Luther. Oh wait, Reformation Day is over. Forget him for another year. Sorry.

I am pleased that Missouri has a leader to emulate - Schroeder. Sadly, Barry and McCain simply prepared the way for Kieschnick.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "SP Schroeder Noticed by LCMS Blog":

Dear Greg,

I appreciate the words of the synod president as I was present and felt very good about his presentation. However, I also believe the WELS is in denial about many areas of ministry and wants to blame that on church growth or a host of other excuses. My school is struggling and as a member I see no serious effort by the pastors, principal, or lay leadership to address the problems. How do I balance my concerns against your feelings that I might be focused on measurements? I just don't feel like we have the right effort and yes, I do realize that God is directing all things to His glory. I am however having a real problem with the lack of urgency and action that I see from our called workers and some of our lay leaders.

***

GJ - I can understand the dismay. WELS was in complete denial 20 years ago. Someone like Kelm could publish a Reformed paper, teach Reformed doctrine in WLC, and still be hired as a Perish Assistant at headquarters. As someone said about a mere Circuit Pastor, "The Holy Spirit put him in that office. If I question his decisions, I am questioning the Holy Spirit." I might add - and no one questions Holy Mother WELS, either.

One synod leader told me, "Even the best pastors do no visiting." I think that is the heart of the problem. The executive model has killed the pastoral model. A home-going pastor does make for a church-going congregation.

District Popes have also used their imaginary prestige to meddle with congregations and destroy the divine call. Tis strange how a man has a "divine call" to be a Fuller-trained consultant, a kindergarten teacher has a "divine call" to tell kids to draw within the lines, but the parish pastor is just a robot wound up to do the bidding of the DP. If the DP wants to get even because a pastor has discovered a praesidium pal in adultery, may God have mercy on that man's soul - because the DP won't. And I don't mean the adulterer.

The WELS method has been, at least since the days of heresiarch Ted Hartwig, to prosecute the person who tries to deal with false doctrine. WELS can always invent evidence that the wrong process was used, or the right one used in the wrong way, to incur the wrath of the officials against who? - not the false teacher, but the one who dares mention such a thing. God cannot bring about the fruits of the Gospel, when the Word of God is mocked at every step.

Second Installment - Justification by Faith

"

Dr. Walter E. Lammerts has a doctorate in genetics, and is well known as a prominent breeder of roses. He reportedly produced 46 new varieties of roses between 1940 and 1981 including the famous Queen Elizabeth. Twenty-five percent of his roses were chosen by the All-American Rose Selection for the years top rose variations. As a result of his efforts the American Rose Society created an entirely new class of rose known as the Grandiflora.

It would not be inappropriate to state that Walter Lammerts is one of the fathers of the modern creation science movement. He was the first president of the Creation Research Society (the first creationist organization in the U.S.), which was founded by 10 scientists in 1964. Dr Lammerts was also the editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly (CRSQ) from 1964 to 1968. Most notably, he was an active researcher for several decades in biological and geological sciences, and much of his work was published in the CRSQ." Creation Wiki

Efficacy of the Word

November 13, 2009

"For let me tell you this, even though you know it perfectly and be already master in all things, still you are daily in the dominion of the devil, who ceases neither day nor night to steal unawares upon you, to kindle in your heart unbelief and wicked thoughts against the foregoing and all the commandments. Therefore you must always have God's Word in your heart, upon your lips, and in your ears. But where the heart is idle, and the Word does not sound, he breaks in and has done the damage before we are aware. On the other hand, such is the efficacy of the Word, whenever it is seriously contemplated, heard, and used, that it is bound never to be without fruit, but always awakens new understanding, pleasure, and devoutness, and produces a pure heart and pure thoughts. For these words are not inoperative or dead, but creative, living words."

The Large Catechism, #100, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 609. Tappert, p. 378f. Heiser, p. 175f. 

            Efficacy is the most neglected characteristic of God’s Word today, although it was central to Luther, the Concordists, the orthodox Lutherans of Europe, and the General Council in America.  The efficacy of the Word was defined by WELS theologian Adolph Hoenecke: “The Word never without the Spirit, the Spirit never without the Word – that is sound doctrine.” Encapsulating the Scriptures and Confessions, that plain and simple formula means God Word and Spirit cannot be divorced from each other. If God’s Word is taught in its purity, without the adulteration of man’s wisdom, that Word will have its effect, whether to save or damn, illuminate or darken, convert or harden. Moreover, the timing of God’s work and will is not ours to judge. The efficacy of the Word is the point of contention in discussing the topic of justification. Enthusiasm—separating the Holy Spirit from the Word—lies behind every error in teaching justification, whether that error is advanced by Roman Catholics, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, or synodical Lutherans. [A synodical Lutheran honors and protects the visible church, the synod. A confessional Lutheran values the Scriptures and Confessions above all.]

Starting a book with the authority and inerrancy of the Scriptures would allow many points of agreement with traditional Protestants and with Rome. Evangelicals are keen to sponsor inerrancy conferences. My wife and I attended one in Chicago, where Robert Preus and Kurt Marquart were in attendance. One of the best descriptions of the Scriptures is from Pope Pius XII – “The Scriptures are like Christ, having a divine and a human nature, but without error.” (Paraphrased from memory. Cited in Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant.) Tragically, Lutherans have been far too eager to concentrate on points of agreement rather than areas of discord. Abusing and neglecting the efficacy of the Word has made it easy for synodical Lutherans to engage in unionistic efforts without pangs of conscience. Compromise unites, while doctrine divides – the sheep from the goats.

            The doctrine of Creation embarrasses synodical Lutherans because they must believe, teach, and confess the efficacy of the Word to allow Creation its rightful place. Modern Evangelicals, influenced by Harold Ockenga, are only too happy to surrender Creation to the theory of Evolution, that 19^th century insight that gave us eugenics, genocide, and abortion. Roman Catholics can teach evolution with a good conscience because the Vatican has approved man’s ascent from apes (now revised as “descent” by the animal rights advocates). No one should be shocked that the “conservative” pastors who gladly embrace Church Growth are just as willing to abandon Creation:

"Don't let the world paint us into a corner of antiquarianism on subjects like a six-day creation or verbal inspiration." Rev. Paul Kelm, WELS, "How to Make Sound Doctrine Sound Good to Mission Prospects," p. 13. 

"The evangelical believes that Christianity is intellectually defensible but the Christian cannot be obscurantist in scientific questions pertaining to the creation, the age of man, the universality of the flood and other moot Biblical questions." Rev. Harold J. Ockenga, 12-8-57, news release quoted in William E. Ashbrook, Evangelicalism, The New Neutralism, Columbus: Calvary Bible Church, 1963, p. 8.

"Thus, the Teaching of the Church leaves the doctrine of Evolution an open question, as long as it confines its speculations to the development, from other living matter already in existence, of the human body. (That souls are immediately created by God is a view which the Catholic faith imposes on us.) In the present state of scientific and theological opinion, this question may be legitimately canvassed by research, and by discussion between experts on both sides."  Encyclical of Pius XII, Humani generis, August, 1950, #36. Cited in Remy Collin, Evolution, New York: Hawthorn Books, 1959, p. 117.

"Many Catholics hold what is known as 'moderate evolutionism,' that is, the theory that the human body evolved to a certain point from animals, and then God intervened directly and breathed into this living, animal body a human soul and so produced the first man and the first woman.  Such a theory does not seem to be contrary to Catholic teaching, and Catholics are free to hold it." Kenneth Baker, S.J., Fundamentals of Catholicism, 3 vols., San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1982, II, p. 142.

Therefore, these leaders of compromise and retreat, Rome and Kelm and Ockenga, urge their disciples to look upon Creation as a burden, a terrible cross to bear. They are saying that we can make the revealed doctrine of God sound better if we process it, add sweeteners, and remove the splinters of the cross.

            Synodical Lutherans will allow the doctrine of Creation to remain in the background, if no one insists on the Six-Day Creation. Are they embarrassed by God getting His work done in six 24-hour days, resting on the seventh? No, they are secretly scandalized by God working exclusively through the Word, because that Biblical doctrine denies them their glory, their agenda, their expensive programs of adulterating God’s Word. In short, the doctrine of Creation threatens their income and worldly honors, such as the Church Growth Hall of Shame.

Doctrine of Creation – Conversion – Efficacy

            Before man existed, God fashioned the entire universe through the creating Word – the Son of God. When God spoke through the Logos (the Word), His will was immediately carried out, not in billions of years to allow for random events of infinite complexity. This issue is not antiquarian but essential to justification by faith.

KJV Galatians 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. 15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature [new creation].

KJV 2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature [new creation]: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

KJV Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

KJV Ephesians 4:24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

KJV Colossians 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: 11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

The universe was created by the Word, and every believer is a new creation through the Word. But UOJ advocates would have us understand that God works without the Word in declaring the entire world absolved, free from sin, extending this Enthusiastic decree to the residents of Hell.

Christ unifies Creation and the new creation. The Fourth Gospel begins with phrases so simple that they serve well to introduce anyone to a new language. Each of the three clauses seems to be the ringing of a solemn bell—the Word, the Word, the Word—tolling the eternal Godhead of Christ Jesus, the foundation of the Christian faith, the cornerstone of the City of God.

A.    In the beginning was the Word – The Incarnation, Virgin Birth, and Two Natures are implicit in the revelation of the pre-existence of Christ, five words in Greek, six in English. Jesus, the Word, has existed from the beginning, and therefore must be God. He is also man, having Two Natures, divine and human, in one person, Christ. Far from being absent in John’s Gospel, the Virgin Birth is assumed, since it is consistent with the Two Natures united in one person.

B.    And the Word was with God – The Father/Son relationship, so clearly revealed in John’s Gospel, illuminates every passage of the Old Testament where God commands, speaks, and sends forth His Word. God speaks and the speaking is accomplished through the Word, the Son of God, co-equal in majesty.

C.    And the Word was God – On the first day of Greek class, the slowest student, using a jimmy, can determine that all denials of the divinity of Christ are utterly rejected in a few words of child-like simplicity.

     The Genesis commands, “and God said,” are the work of the Logos in John. The creating Word—He was in the beginning with God.

Sasse on the Holy Spirit

Missouri made a point of treating Herman Sasse like dirt.

New Lutheran Quote of the Day

What the Word of God is no longer trusted to do is achieved with the psychological techniques of such modern evangelization. There is of course talk of the Holy Spirit, but one no longer knows who He is. It seems He can be measured and quantified. - Hermann Sasse, *We Confess: The Church* p. 23.

***

GJ - The quotation above is from Weedon's blog. A good source of Sasse wisdom is the Sassedotalist blog.

LCMS Seminaries Discussing Future, Issuing Official Denials

This should be taken seriously since:

1) Even though they deny the idea of merging the seminaries is coming from official channels, then why was there an official summit discussing it at Ft. Wayne?

2) The LCMS HQ denied that they were going to sell KFUO-FM, and then a few months later it was sold. Kieschnick cares nothing for honesty.

3) there are only about 88 students in each seminary class taking the MDiv residency route. That hardly justifies having two seminaries, esp. when the cost is $18k and going up.

[GJ - Official denials draw attention to actual plans. The Boomers went to seminary for almost nothing, but they lavish offering money on themselves while forcing students into permanent debt. The congregations, pastors, and districts should be ashamed, but they are not.]

Helpful Information on the Status of the Seminaries in a Note from President Meyer to CSL Students
November 12th, 2009 Post by Pastor Tim Rossow

Dear Students,

A short e-mail to thank you for a good quarter! After the recession’s stomach punch last year, I’m thankful…

* That our Seminary is operating in the black;
* That there’s a good spirit/Spirit to move the Savior’s mission forward through us;
* That we’re looking at topics that will impact our futures in ministry, especially “Life Together.”

This is a unique place in the world and church, and I’m thankful for your positive contributions these past ten weeks.

As you have opportunity, please share the thanks of our Seminary community for the support (prayer support, encouraging words, and financial support) that so greatly helps us in our work of formation and mission.

And should the question come up about the future of LCMS seminaries…

Contrary to rumor, there is no offer from Washington University to buy our campus.

* There is no proposal “on the table” to close or consolidate seminary campuses. Yes, there is talk about such possibilities but it is not been put forward through established channels, not “on the table” but in the shadows.
* In the next weeks I will send you an e-mail report about the recent Summit in Ft. Wayne on the future of theological education.
* My time in the President’s Forum on December 2nd will be given to the rumors and realities about seminary futures.

I hope that you will enjoy a restful break. Jesus led His disciples away from ministry into times of rest, and I invite you to get away with Him and your loved ones to a quiet place that you may rest (Mark 6:31).

Last but not least, coming from a guy who in some ways gets more scared the older I get: Please drive safely!

Dale A. Meyer

Comments (4) Leave a comment

1.
sumbody
November 12th, 2009 at 11:19 | #1


Really in the Black. I am a doubting Thomas! Did Thrivent come thru again? I would like to see the books .
2.
Jack
November 12th, 2009 at 11:50 | #2


If the seminary is in the black, it likely means the students are in a deep, crimson red.

For the most part, when I was on campus (2005-2009), past letters informing students of the seminary operating in the black were never heavily celebrated, because those of us living on campus saw the bill for around $5,000 that arrived in each of our mailboxes every ten weeks.

It’s good that finances are somewhat tamed now in light of the recent economic problems, but I understand that tuition was to be raised by 3% starting with the new academic year. I suppose that means the recession for students goes on, because the tuition grants only cover around 40-50% of the charges.

Please keep all of this in your prayers!

Ordination as a Sacrament

Melanchthon was a hyper-European.
He would be banned today by LutherQuest (sic).

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Luther and Ordination":

Why don't we call ordination a sacrament? Because the author of the Formula insists it isn't:


Martin Chemnitz, Ministry, Word, and Sacrament: An Enchiridion

Q. 222

Q: "But why is ordination of ministers of the church not a Sacrament, though the Apostles laid hands on those called to the ministry and through that laying on of hands necessary gifts were conferred on ministers? (1 Ti.4:14; 2 Ti 1:6)

A: No doubt the legitimate call and ordination of ministers of the church is established by the Word of God and confirmed with the promise of divine blessing; and that affords very sweet comfort. But ordination does not have this promise, that he who wants to obtain the grace of God and eternal salvation must be invested with the holy priesthood. For also many who have prophesied will hear this fearful sentence of Christ on that day: I never knew you; depart from Me, etc. (Mt. 7:23). And besides, the laying on of hands has no express command in the Word of God, but the apostles used that ceremony as a thing indifferent, for the sake of public prayers.

And unction, which the papists practice in ordaining elders, has neither any command nor promise in the Scripture of the New Testament; but, contrary to the Word of God, it reduces the ministry of the New Testament to the shadows of Levitical ceremonies. Since, then, the ordination of ministers of the church lacks both the element and the promise of grace, both of which are required for the essence of a Sacrament in the New Testament, it neither is nor can be called a true sacrament.

---

7] The adversaries understand priesthood not of the ministry of the Word, and administering the Sacraments to others, but they understand it as referring to sacrifice; as though in the New Testament there ought to be a priesthood like the Levitical, to sacrifice for the people, and merit the remission of sins for others. 8] We teach that the sacrifice of Christ dying on the cross has been sufficient for the sins of the whole world, and that there is no need, besides, of other sacrifices, as though this were not sufficient for our sins. Men, accordingly, are justified not because of any other sacrifices, but because of this one sacrifice of Christ, if they believe that they have been redeemed by this sacrifice. 9] They are accordingly called priests, not in order to make any sacrifices for the people as in the Law, so that by these they may merit remission of sins for the people; but they are called to teach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments to the people. 10] Nor do we have another priesthood like the Levitical, 11] as the Epistle to the Hebrews sufficiently teaches. But if ordination be understood as applying to the ministry of the Word, we are not unwilling to call ordination a sacrament. For the ministry of the Word has God's command and glorious promises, Rom. 1:16: The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. Likewise, Is. 55:11: So shall My Word be that goeth forth out of My mouth; it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please. Augsburg Apology

***

GJ - I don't want to go all Iowa Synod on the readers, but I can see both viewpoints. Of course, Chemnitz' fine book is not the ruled norm while the Apology is.

I find it rather dense to argue against a position taken by the Apology. By itself, Melanchthon's defense of the Augsburg Confession would be one of the great theological works in history.

But of course, the Synodical Conference has consistently taught a position against Luther - ever since Pieper, with the stage set by CFW Walther himself. The ELS has made the Book of Concord null and void while raising a Walther sermon to the level of Holy Writ. The Methodists did the same with Wesley's sermon collection - with predictable results.

I suggest people read the Apology's clear and compelling witness about justification by faith.

If more Zinzendorfs keep showing up, people will start reading the Book of Concord again.

***

PS - "Not unwilling" is a litotes, something not taught in the synodical education process, apparently. Here is a Mormon link to help out someone in need of rhetoric lessons.

The litotes is a way of insisting on something in a modest, understated way. If someone mentioned that I had over 3,200 posts, I could say, "I was not unaware of the total."

Or I might post, "Dealing with the evasions and confusions of the UOJ crowd is no small task." Does that mean it is a small effort or a Herculean labor?

---

LCMS Pastor Art Bolstad sent this:

"Ordination and installation look a lot alike, in a sense, both make a
man the pastor of sheep (the Greek word for "pastor" literally means
"shepherd". However, there is a difference.

When a man decides he should study to be a pastor, he is doing something
approved by God (1 Timothy 3:1). Notice the focus here on the desires
of the man. There is no call mentioned only his "desires". Notice too
that "desire" is not the same as achievement. In other words, just
because a man desires to be a pastor, does not mean that he will ever
actually be one.

In John 10:1-5 Jesus talks about the difference between a shepherd who
comes in through the door of the sheepfold and a thief who comes in over
the fence. Then in John 10:7 He says that He Himself is the door.
Ordination is the door through which the sub-shepherd meets His sheep.
A man attempting to "shepherd" sheep on his own (without going through
Jesus (the door) or not being ordained) is described in John 10:12-13 as
a hireling, and worthless.

Ordination places a man in an office created by God (administered by His
Church), the office of Pastor. In ordination a man accepts the
responsibility of being a shepherd for the sheep which God sends him.
Ordination itself does not imply that there are (or even will be) sheep
to be shepherded. Ordination is, if you will, between God and a man.
That ordination brings with it God's direction and blessings is
commented on in 1 Timothy 4:14). Both 1 Timothy 4:14 and 1 Timothy 5:22
say that ordination is given by other previously ordained pastors.
Ordination then is going through Christ as the door in John 10.

On the other hand, installation is when a pastor receives sheep to be
cared for. No one would want to be installed without the promise of
God's blessing on the man being installed, nor would the people
receiving the pastor want one who proposes to operate without God's
blessings. The choosing of a particular pastor is done by the
congregation (Acts 14:23).

Consider the parallel to the anointing of David. David was anointed
King as a young man but did not become King for around 20 years. Thus
there was a distinction between entering the office and entering the
application of the office. 1 Samuel 16:3; 2 Samuel 5:4. Also David
became King by the choice of the people even though he had been anointed
by Samuel some 15 years earlier.

Installation and ordination, as was commented above, are the activities
of 2 different sets of Gods representatives. Installation is a
congregational activity while ordination is a pastor's activity. The
meaning of each is different, they involve different sets of God's
representatives, and both are documented and prescribed in Scripture."

Close Down The Surrendered Fort and Our Lady of Perpetual Sorrows, aka, The Two Concordias?

Both schools are on double secret probation.

Tim Rossow - <--Mequon grads, left click on the link
As I read the opening editorial in the most recent Concordia Journal (page 10 or 346 here) from the St. Louis Seminary I was pleased to find the president, Dale Meyer, defending residency seminary education. He writes a stirring description of life for seminarians in an urban setting at the St. Louis campus and it is worth the read.

This is quite ironic (or maybe purposeful) since just last week President Kieschnick met with President Meyer and President Wenthe in Ft. Wayne to noodle the idea of closing down the seminaries and instead remaking pastoral education to be done in some sort of drive-by style combination of on-line courses and a few seminars at one of the Concordias, colleges that is, not seminaries.
Kudos to President Meyer. We have been critical of the seminaries, joining in with our cartoonist Scott Blazek in referring to the seminary professors as dust bunnies. In this editorial however, President Meyer takes an excellent stand on a timely issue. We would appreciate Dale Meyer being a little more direct. He never mentions the threat of closing down the seminaries but clearly this is a defense of on-site, residency based seminary education.

This is an important issue. How would you like your doctor to perform surgery on you based on a few on-line courses? If your MD messes up you only pay for it temporally. How would you like your pastor to operate on your soul based on a few on-line courses? If your M Div messes up you pay for it for eternity. (M Div refers to the Master of Divinity degree awarded to seminary graduates.)

There were some troubling aspects to the editorial. President Meyer announced a new program of joint work with the adjacent Fontbonne College. That is fine except that it is a Roman Catholic school To his credit President Meyer is quick to point out that the sharing is only in non-theological areas. That’s good but I just can’t imagine Martin Luther or C. F. W. Walther proposing any sort of joint work with a Roman Catholic college.

One of the proposals is the seminarians take some business courses at Fontbonne. I think it is good for seminarians to learn the basics of goal setting and how to create and manage a program in the parish where helpful to the Gospel but this is the least of our problems. Our problems in the LCMS are not of a practical, business nature but of a theological nature.

Thank you President Meyer for defending residency seminary training. Keep it up. We encourage you to be a little more direct but this is certainly a start toward the “dust bunnies” rising up and hopefully becoming a herd of stampeding “jackelopes” running over the proposals to close the seminaries, stampeding the BRTFSG proposals, and ultimately trampling the non-Lutheran Ablaze movement.

Note: For those of you unfamiliar with the “jackelope,” it ain’t no dust bunny! It is a mythic character, the product of some early photo-shop work that combined a jack-rabbit with an antelope. It was a fearsome looking character. It was seen on countless vacaton (sic) postcards mailed home from the great west back in the 60’s and 70’s.  I think you can still find them in various tourist traps out west.

***

GJ - Do you remember how long ago I said Missouri would close the Ft. Wayne seminary? Nevertheless, The Surrendered Fort went ahead with a multi-million dollar expansion of the library.

St. Louis bought the entire college adjacent to it, later selling it for a loss. St. Louis has enjoyed princely donations from the Schwan Foundation. They built the Chapel of St. Timothy and Titus and Marvin with a princely donation from him. St. Louis also spent millions on the cafeteria and dorms.

Wisconsin, Missouri, and the Little Sect on the Prairie should have viewed St. Marvin of Schwan as a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, since all three have been in dire straits after enjoying an avalanche of money poured over their heads.

Incompetent leadership stretches back to the Bohlmann years (at least). The Shrinkers and women's ordination buffs got their start during The Terror, as the Bohlmann administration is fondly remembered. One faculty member of Missouri ordered something from me, but made sure I mailed it to his home address - not the school - during those years.

Nine years of Barry and McCain gave Pentecostals, Shrinkers, and unionists a playground larded with fat financials. Barry led boldly and decisively - in every direction. I met Kent Hunter (DMin, Fuller Seminary) on his way into the Purple Palace, where he taught the DPs and Barry how to grow the synod. The statistics, as Hunter and Werning taught me in their books, tell the story. Missouri has been in steep decline ever since.

There is the argument for the Church Growth Movement in graphics too horrifying to deny. There too is the bitter fruit of UOJ. The old Synodical Conference began with Pietism and Enthusiasm, aided by  healthy flirtations with orthodoxy. Over time, all three synods have returned to their Pietistic roots.

Zinzendorf is a good example to remember - for bad results. With the best of intentions, he devoted his life to helping others at Herrnhut and supporting missions. His son got another settlement going that was so bad the guys could have starred in Party in Fire Island Pines.

Dale Meyer is defending his hyper-expensive residential seminary? How charming. The seminary posted a video of Meyer interviewing heresiarch Leonard Sweet, the Missouri leader looking like a devoted puppy ready to spring into Sweet's lap and nibble his ear. For that alone, St. Louis should be closed.

Our Lady of Sorrows gave Paul Calvin Kelm a DMin in Church Growth. For that alone, St. Louis should be closed.

Our Zinzendorf

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Another Hoo-Hah from UOJ":

Justification is not difficult.

"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and [all] are justified freely by the redemption that came through Christ Jesus."

All sinned... all justified.

The passage cannot mean: "All have sinned.... and some with faith are justified." Or "when they have faith they are justified." Such renderings just plain change the clear Word.

Part of the problem with this whole discussion is that there is a confusion of dogmatic loci (spheres). UOJ belongs in the locus on "Basis of Salvation" and JBF belongs in the locus on "Order of Salvation."

It is the Pietists who would love the emphasis on faith. Historically, that's all they wanted to talk about. Pietists find their comfort and security in their faith. Read Timothy Verinus Vol. 1 Ch. 5 (and note that the "double justification" mentioned there is NOT a reference to UOJ.)

Also, the Greek word for preach is "khrusso" - "to proclaim." Preaching is a proclamation, an announcement of what God has done. In order for a proclamation to be made, there must be an objective truth to proclaim. The Gospel is an announcement of what God has done for the world in Christ. What has he done? Forgiven all their sins. That is why the risen Lord Jesus said (Luke 24) that "repentance for the forgiveness of sins" be proclaimed in his name.

Both sides here are talking past each other. True, UOJ could be wrongly used to support some idea of universalism, but JBF could also wrongly be used to promote the idea that some condition must be met in man before God forgives him. (Then we're back to the intuitu fidei controversy...)

Just because some people (apparently) misuse the phrase doesn't mean that the phrase is inherently wrong. UOJ is properly taught to emphasize the truth that our salvation is entirely God's own work -- "extra hominum", as our Lutheran forefathers put it -- and is emphasized to guard against man taking any tiny bit of credit for his salvation. (read Koberle, Ch. 3, on this)

***

GJ - I am glad our Zinzendorf posted this, so people could see how the UOJ Pietists operate. The posturing reminds me of several people, but I will not venture to guess which one it is. Zinzendorf came to America, using a false name. All...all the Shrinkers and Pietists use the same name - Anonymous.

He wants to build his castle on all, without citing the actual passage. Let me quote one of their favorite UOJ passages:

KJV Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

This means that judgment came to all men, through Adam, so also the free gift of salvation comes to all men for justification. Of course, the Gospel of salvation comes to all men, because the Atonement is universal. However, the UOJ magic is lost in the next verse - "shall many be made righteous." No one can turn many into all. Our Zinzendorf is a false teacher, an Enthusiast, a liar who uses the Word of God to overturn the Scriptures - maladroitly, of course.

Zinzie has to reword verse 19 to refute it - a lame Straw Man fallacy. The plain meaning of the passage trumps the faux-intellectual version of Z.

"It is the Pietists who would love the emphasis on faith. Historically, that's all they wanted to talk about."

Guilt by association! Faith talk - why that be Pietistic. "Historically..." - more unwarranted assumptions from a gasbag. The Pietists were obsessed with visible results - Shrinkers of their day, just as divisive and destructive as the Shrinkers of our day.

"What has he done? Forgiven all their sins."

Begging the question! The Scriptures clearly say - He has paid for their sins, quite different from pronouncing absolution on Hottentots and Hindoos (I like the old spellings, like Eskimaux.)

"Both sides here are talking past each other."

Reu correctly identified the marks of a unionist as including the desire to erase doctrinal differences. La-dee-dah. There are no real differences here, not in substance. A few more Latin references, from me, and vague citations of deep books read, by me, and a blueprint of Toad Hall, by me, and all questions will be resolved.

Lenski wrote in his Romans commentary:

If a world justification were intended, the word employed would have to be dikaioma. Paul even adds zoe, for this justifying action admits "to life" everlasting, which only those receive who "receive the gift of the righteousness" by faith although Christ won it for all men. Romans, 5:18, p. 379.

---

L P has left a new comment on your post "Our Zinzendorf":

Why is it that UOJers love to chop off Scripture?

Here is the actual quote in context:

Romans 3:

23For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;


The often leave out verse 25.

LPC

***

GJ - The UOJ Stormtroopers do not comprehend the Means of Grace, so they cannot harmonize their Enthusiasm with hundreds of Scriptural passages. Why do they chop verses? They are Antinomians who imagine the Law is obsolete, so whatever they do to advance their cause is meet, right, and salutary, at all times and places.

Luther and Ordination

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Worship and Lectionaries - Also Worth a Post on Lu...":

Luther sagt:
"Let everyone, therefore, who knows himself to be a Christian, be assured of this, that we are all equally priests, that is to say, we have the same power in respect to the Word and the sacraments. However, no one may make use of this power except by the consent of the community or by the call of a superior. (For what is the common property of all, no individual may arrogate to himself, unless he is called.) And therefore this “sacrament” of ordination, if it is anything at all, is nothing else than a certain rite whereby one is called to the ministry of the church. Furthermore, the priesthood is properly nothing but the ministry of the Word—the Word, I say; not the law, but the gospel. And the diaconate is the ministry, not of reading the Gospel or the Epistle, as is the present practice, but of distributing the church’s aid to the poor, so that the priests may be relieved of the burden of temporal matters and may give themselves more freely to prayer and the Word. For this was the purpose of the institution of the diaconate, as we read in Acts 5 [6:1–6]."

Note also AC XIV: Ordination maketh not the pastor. The divine call maketh the pastor.

***

GJ - I wonder why some want to insist "ordination is not a sacrament." The Book of Concord disagrees with that claim. I find Lutherans staking a claim on one little part of the plant and calling it the entire Church, something Krauth observed about the sectarians.

If "the call makes the pastor," then almost everyone in WELS is a pastor. Everyone gets a call, even the kindergarten teacher.

WELS and the ELS enablers did their best to enforce a Reformed view of the pastoral ministry. The worst Shrinkers are the ones who are quick to correct anyone who fails to use their terms their way, but they are happy to dream away in Fuller Fantasy land.

The WELS view of the ministry can be called Papo-Babtist. They are eager to be little popes in their parish, but their doctrine is Babtist lite.

Another Hoo-Hah from UOJ

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Justification Book, First Installment":

Pastor GJ or Brett, can you explain this example of justification that a WELS pastor has used many times:

"The supermarket is giving away free turkeys for everyone. However, you have to go to(drive or walk) the supermarket to receive the turkey".

I know that their are others in the WELS that understand this as the proper teaching. Correct me if I am wrong, but I read Luther's works all the time and I just do not see how the example is fully orthodox.

In Christ,
from WELS chuch lady

***

GJ - "All analogies limp," as Gawa taught us at Mequon. This analogy stumbles and falls. The comparison is very J. P. Meyer-ish. Synergism (Reformed doctrine ) is exemplified by "God has done this, so you must do that." Some Reformed teachers say, "You must complete the transaction." What is the Means of Poultry in this example?

The Word of God teaches that God conveys Christ to us through the Holy Spirit working in the Means of Grace (the invisible Word of preaching and teaching, the visible Word of Baptism and Holy Communion) - to plant faith in our hearts and to nurture that faith. WELS is thoroughly Pietistic, so many are in the dark about the Means of Grace.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Another Hoo-Hah from UOJ":

What is so difficult about justification that MLC and Mequon graduates do not get it? I fail to see how they can go on and on about UOJ, and then get it wrong. Is the quality of the instructors, the students, what?

***

GJ - One little window in their souls was provided in the October issue of FIC. Bivens, one of several Shrinkers published in that issue, was denouncing sodomy while MLC students were posting their version of the gay video from Fire Island Pines - and defending their version!

Bivens:

"Look at the passages

Genesis 19:5-8 and Jude 7 confirm that the Sodomites were guilty of homosexuality. Both references, in their original Hebrew and Greek, use idiomatic language to identify and describe homosexual sin, and it pays to be aware of this. Those who deny that homosexuality was involved seek linguistic loopholes from the idiomatic language. Nevertheless, biblical language dictionaries confirm that homosexuality prevailed in Sodom and its surrounding towns.

Ezekiel 16:49,50 does not explicitly mention sodomy or homosexuality as the cause of divine judgment on these lost cities but tells us that they were guilty of additional immoralities. Arrogance and social injustice are highlighted. Second Peter 2:6,7 leaves the nature of their ungodliness unspecified.

Letting all of these passages speak leads us to conclude that Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of homosexuality; arrogance; violence; inhospitality; and a self-centered apathy toward others, especially the poor and needy. These cities impenitently spurned God’s grace in a number of ways and invited divine judgment.

People who have already made up their minds that homosexuality is morally acceptable desire to understand the biblical testimony differently. Invariably, modern defenders of homosexuality conclude that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their violent and greedy behavior. They interpret Genesis 19 as condemning homosexual rape, which would be parallel to heterosexual rape. These texts are said not to apply to consensual homosexual activities. These defenders say that “loving, committed, same-sex relationships” are approved.

Advocates of homosexuality also say that Jude’s words “strange flesh” (the idiomatic expression he uses in the King James Version for sexual perversion) refer not to homosexuality but to the desire to have sexual relations with angels. It takes some exegetical mind-bending to arrive at this conclusion, but powerful presuppositions are able to pave the way for these advocates.

Look for balanced conclusions

You ask if God’s severe judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah teaches us that homosexuality is a worse sin than others and perhaps qualifies as unforgivable. Here is where other Bible sections guide us to a balanced conclusion. In Matthew 11:20-24, Jesus denounces other cities for being unrepentant despite the miracles he performed among them. While he does not excuse or deny the guilt of Sodom, he makes it clear that others may sin even more grievously and pay a greater price on the Last Day. First Corinthians 6:9-11 confirms that homosexuality is a serious sin that calls for divine judgment, but it also affirms that it is fully forgivable and that many former homosexuals enjoy new life and heavenly citizenship through faith in Christ. In Romans 1:21-27, Paul uses homosexuality as an example of how God may deal with hardened sinners and use sexual perversions as a judgment. But other passages remind us that homosexuality, like other sin, is forgivable despite deserving God’s anger and punishment.

For a balanced biblical perspective on this important subject, I hope that all interested readers will take the time to examine the Bible sections mentioned above and walk away with a renewed appreciation of the seriousness of all sin and the greatness of God’s love in Christ.

Contributing editor Forrest Bivens, a professor at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, Mequon, Wisconsin, is a member at Calvary, Thiensville.

Author:
Forrest L. Bivens


Subscribe to FIC

This monthly magazine, sent to almost 50,000 subscribers, addresses important issues facing Christians today.
Order online
Search the Archive
Begin by entering a topic. Then press "GO".
"

Offer from ELS Pastor A. Ring

Alexander Ring has left a new comment on your post "A. Ring on the Lectionary":

I find it hard to object to free publicity. I will even make the offer to send a .pdf version of the paper to anyone interested; it will have the Hebrew and Greek intact and make dealing with the footnotes an appendices a little easier. You can email me at akring@me.com.

Veterans Day Salute

Edmund Fitzgerald - 34 Years Ago - November 10, 1975

Northwestern Mutual Life owned the ore ship, and Fitzgerald, a Yale graduate, was the former president of NML. Gordon Lightfoot's song dramatized the loss and remains a favorite folk song of many.

Worship and Lectionaries - Also Worth a Post on Luther's Birthday

The Church of Rome has a message for Lutherans.Guess what, Groeschel and Ski are preaching on the same topic again: Mind Your Own Business. Craig Groeschel should stop borrowing Ski's ideas.
Or is it the other way around?

Hymnal hypocrisy among WELS and ELS Synodical Lutherans - Both sects hold themselves above ELCA, yet both hymnals use ELCA material extensively. Look at the credits.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A. Ring on the Lectionary":

No-one has responded to this posting on the modern synodical "Lutheran" periscopes followed via ALL the modern synodical hymnals.

I needed no convincing of what this posted material provides necessary proof of..

The very great gaps of necessary Scriptural doctrine/content that LUTHERANS are no longer given opportunity of learning of, through the public lessons, is dismaying.

Even if the "problematical" sections of Scripture highlighted were never preached upon, their inclusion in the Scriptural lessons read for the Day, would have opportunity via the Holy Spirit's leading, to impart their truth.

But how can the Holy Spirit, do His work concerning those parts of Scripture now stripped from being read in the Lessons of the Day ?!

Many necessary sections of the Scriptures in the One Year Series are now cut out - quite purposefully - from the 3 year Lectionary Series.....

Perhaps you may dismiss this as unimportant, and that's why you did not respond to this posting ?

I want to say to you, you are wrong to be unperturbed by these omissions, and dismiss them as unimportant...

We are living in a day when so many of the doctrinal points highlighted in the article above NEED TO BE KNOWN BY US.

What that article does not say is that these omissions are altogether user-friendly to the all-pervasive modern ecumenical agenda so vigorously persued not only by ROME, but also by all who are kowtowing to her agenda within our Lutheran synods in our day.

A very long time ago, I purchased a copy of each one of these new hymnals produced by ELCA, MISSOURI, WELS, & ELS; and ALL of them, in varying degrees, are found sorely wanting ...AND, NOT ONLY on account of the periscopes they use.....

This is a very big subject with immense consequences.

Compare the wording of the Orders of Service contained in the 1941 The Lutheran Hymnal (TLH) and which, thankfully, Pastor Jackson still, and quite unapologetically, uses for his own independent orthodox Lutheran BETHANY CHURCH services.

Compare TLH with any one of ALL of the other above-mentioned modern "Lutheran" synodical hymnals....and when you have done so, you will hang your head before God in shame...that so many of us have allowed the synodical beaurocrats and "expert theologians" to rob us of our Scriptural heritage with what is now served up to us by them...via these hymnals that are Lutheran in name alone..

I'm not saying the TLH is "perfect"...I have a collection of old and sound hymnals earlier than the 1941 TLH...which, and in some of their hymn renderings,these ARE better.

But the 1941 joint synodicaly produced TLH is far far better in every way than anything else now available in our day, and the point is, the TLH is still available in our day. For now anyway.

If anyone would like to pursue a comparison on some of these hymnals, please say so, for I for one, will be most happy to contribute in whatever small way I can to any such a discussion....(I am most familiar with CWALH/WELS problems)

Should we think only of ourselves ? Perhaps, individually - past grounding we personally have in the Scriptures - we possibly are ABLE to cope with the gross onslaught (the watering down of doctrine contained in ALL the new "modernized hymnals"),but should we think only of ourselves ?

WHAT OF OUR POSTERITY ? Our own grandchildren ? Shall we let them down ? Or shall be be true to our Lutheran Confessions ?

Are we prepared help in whatever ways we can for the ongoing possibility of their salvation, and that the GLORY OF GOD, IN HIS SON, OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST...maybe known by them, too ?

May we be found faithful...in however the small the ways open to us. In Jesus' name, Amen.

Orthodox Lutheran
KJV DEUTERONOMY 12:16
Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them.

***

GJ - I was appalled at the way WELS pastors accepted and purchased Lutheran Christian Worship, with its feminist Creeds, dreadful hymn selection, and Roman Catholic lectionary. Let's not forget the prep work in establishing the NIV as the only possible WELS Bible (Missouri did that too).

All that happened during the Mischke-Gurgle Terror, when pastors knew how easily they could be forced out for lifting an eyebrow about the apostate agenda. WELS pastors talked tough while trembling in their rabbit warrens.

A large number of WELS pastors were trained by James P. Tiefel, GA Pope, who considered the hymnal his project to be run his way. He revealed himself as a unionist a long time ago. His affection for Church Growth is more covert. The result is a series of Sunday clown acts by his students.

Justification Book, First Installment

Doctrine of the Word – Authority, Clarity, Efficacy

“Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ’s sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Romans 3 and 4.”

Augsburg Confession, IV. #1. Of Justification. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 45. Tappert, p. 30. Heiser, p. 12f.

Thesis

            Luther’s birthday, November 10, 2009, should remind people that the Reformation began with the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone, apart from the works of the Law, not with the justification of Hottentots and Hindus – as imagined by the Pietists of the old Synodical Conference. Justification by faith is clearly taught in the Scriptures, Luther, the Book of Concord, the post-Concord Lutheran theologians, and the General Council. Forgiveness without faith has been covertly taught since the days of George Christian Knapp, whose influential Halle lectures were in print in German and English before the Stephanites landed in Perry County, Missouri. Knapp’s translator coined the double-justification terms owned by the Synodical Conference today:

From Knapp’s Lectures on Christian Theology, translated by Leonard Woods, Jr., New York, 1833. The LCMS was organized in 1847, the Stephan ships landing in 1839.

§ 113. UNIVERSALITY OF JUSTIFICATION. 817

It is universal as the atonement itself; vid. § 111, II. If the atonement extends to the whole human race, justification must also be universal; i. e. all must be able to obtain the actual forgiveness of their sins and blessedness, on account of the atonement of Christ. But in order to obviate mistakes, some points may require explanation. Justification, then, is universal,

(1) In respect to the persons to be pardoned.

All men, according to the Bible, may partake of this benefit. It was designed for all; vid. especially Rom. 3: 23. 5: 15 (§ 111),

318 ART. X. § 113. UNIVERSALITY OP JUSTIFICATION

in opposition to Jewish exclusiveness. It is bestowed however conditionally ; certain conditions are prescribed which are indispensable. Those who do not comply with these conditions, are excluded from the enjoyment of the benefit. Justification and forgiveness are not, therefore, universal in effect (actu); and this solely through the fault of men.*

Another conclusion from the universality of justification is, that every one may be sure of his forgiveness. This certainty, however, must not be founded upon inward/ee/ing-s, which are frequently deceptive ; but upon an actual compliance with the conditions on which God will forgive sins. If any one finds in himself the signs of true faith, of sincere love to God and Christ, of a renewed heart, and of a virtuous Christian disposition, he is justified. Rom. 8: 16, " The holy, Christian temper wrought in us by God, gives us the clearest and surest proof, that we are the children of God." 1 John 3: 7. 2 Pet. 1: 9, 10. This certainty is in the highest degree necessary to our tranquility and happiness. 1 Tim. 1: 16. ICor. 6: 11. 1 John 5: 18—20.

(2) In respect to sins and the punishment of sin.

(a) As to sins; the position that all sins, without exception, are forgiven for Christ's sake, is proved partly from the power and efficacy of the atonement of Christ, which is extended to all sins (vid. § 111, and the texts there cited) ; and partly from the texts which promise forgiveness of all sins, even the greatest and blackest, to those who comply with the prescribed conditions of pardon. Ezek. 18: 21, 22. Ps. 103: 3. 1 Cor. 6: 11. Ephes. 2: 5. 1 Tim. I: 15. The sin against the Holy Ghost cannot be regarded as an exception ; vid. § 84.

(6) As to the punishment of sin ; the answer to the question whether the pardoned are exempt from all the punishments of sin, whether therefore justification is plena et perfecta, may be learned from § 111, II. The natural and physical evils which result from past sins, indeed, remain ; but they are mitigated and rendered more tolerable, and are divested of the terror of punishment….

* [Translator - This is very conveniently expressed by the terms objective and subjective justification. Objective justification is the act of God, by which he proffers pardon to all through Christ; subjective, is the act of man, by which he accepts the pardon freely offered in the Gospel. The former is universal, the latter not.]

Readers will notice that the translator’s summary of Knapp’s theology is the classic double-justification scheme of the Synodical Conference, in print before the Stephanite expedition landed in New Orleans. This almost-forgotten Halle Pietist was not even an orthodox Trinitarian, but a skeptic whose writing enthused an early Unitarian author, the grandfather of poet T. S. Eliot and co-founder of Washington University in St. Louis, where Herman Otten earned a degree:

To this effect I will quote the authority of George Christian Knapp an eminent Trinitarian writer, whose " Lectures on Christian Theology," as translated by Leonard Woods, Jr., are a standard work with Trinitarian believers. After a full and learned discussion of the whole subject, he distinctly admits that it is " impossible to prove the agreement of the earliest Christian writers with the common Orthodox doctrine as established in the fourth century." Vol. I. pp. 294, 299, &c. William G. Eliot, Discourses on the Doctrines of Christianity, Boston, American Unitarian Society, 1875, p. 95.

I will argue that the Synodical Conference gradually absorbed and disseminated Universal Objective Justification (UOJ), in spite of occasional objections and refutations of this strange, dangerous and borrowed opinion. In a bizarre twist, the Synodical Conference took over the double-justification scheme of Knapp’s English translation and made Objective Justification their golden calf. The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, and Evangelical Lutheran Synod have endorsed and promoted this alien and anti-Christian UOJ concept—derived from Enthusiasm—

with the expected results. From the beehive of Enthusiasm the Synodical Conference has gathered a bumper crop of Enthusiastic honey: Pentecostalism, Church Growthism, unionism, women’s ordination, and Entertainment Evangelism.

Lutheran Reformation, Justification by Faith

            In contrast, the Reformation taught the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith, clearly and consistently. UOJ Enthusiasts often quote this statement before they launch their attack on the justification by faith:

"This article concerning justification by faith (as the Apology says) is the chief article in the entire Christian doctrine, without which no poor conscience can have any firm consolation, or can truly know the riches of the grace of Christ, as Dr. Luther also has written: If this only article remains pure on the battlefield, the Christian Church also remains pure, and in goodly harmony and without any sects; but if it does not remain pure, it is not possible that any error or fanatical spirit can be resisted. (Tom. 5, Jena, p. 159.) And concerning this article especially Paul says that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump."

Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration, III. #6, Righteousness of Faith before God, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 917. Tappert, p. 540. Heiser, p. 250. The Apology statement cited is found here – Apology IV, #1, Concordia Triglotta, p. 121; Tappert, p. 107; Heiser, p. 32.

And yet, these UOJ Enthusiasts never find this concise and significant confession:

"Now we will show that faith [and nothing else]  justifies."

Apology of the Augsburg Confession, IV. #69. Of Justification. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 141. Tappert, p. 116. Heiser, p. 37.

            The Book of Concord often refers to the Gospel as the treasure of the Scriptures. Melanchthon, Luther, and the Concordists agree in their use of this term and its application to justification by faith. Blind guides of doctrine do not see this or teach it, but overlook, overturn, and hide what they cannot comprehend:

"For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us. Therefore sanctifying is nothing else than bringing us to Christ to receive this good, to which we could not attain ourselves."

            The Large Catechism, The Creed, Article III, #38, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 689. Tappert, p. 415. Heiser, p. 194.

"It is a faithful saying that Christ has accomplished everything, has removed sin and overcome every enemy, so that through Him we are lords over all things. But the treasure lies yet in one pile; it is not yet distributed nor invested. Consequently, if we are to possess it, the Holy Spirit must come and teach our hearts to believe and say: I, too, am one of those who are to have this treasure. When we feel that God has thus helped us and given the treasure to us, everything goes well, and it cannot be otherwise than that man's heart rejoices in God and lifts itself up, saying: Dear Father, if it is Thy will to show toward me such great love and faithfulness, which I cannot fully fathom, then will I also love Thee with all my heart and be joyful, and cheerfully do what pleases Thee. Thus, the heart does not now look at God with evil eyes, does not imagine He will cast us into hell, as it did before the Holy Spirit came...."

Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, III, p. 279. Pentecost Sunday. John 14:23-31.

"Faith is that my whole heart takes to itself this treasure. It is not my doing, not my presenting or giving, not my work or preparation, but that a heart comforts itself, and is perfectly confident with respect to this, namely, that God makes a present and gift to us, and not we to Him, that He sheds upon us every treasure of grace in Christ."

Apology of the Augsburg Confession, IV. #48. Of Justification. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 135. Heiser, p. 36.

"These treasures are offered us by the Holy Ghost in the promise of the holy Gospel; and faith alone is the only means by which we lay hold upon, accept, and apply, and appropriate them to ourselves. This faith is a gift of God, by which we truly learn to know Christ, our Redeemer, in the Word of the Gospel, and trust in Him, that for the sake of His obedience alone we have the forgiveness of sins by grace, are regarded as godly and righteous by God the Father, and are eternally saved."

Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration, III. #10. Of the Righteousness of Faith before God. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 919. Tappert, p. 541. Heiser, p. 250.

           

Let's Discuss the Walter Maier II Paper

L P has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Fans Are Church Growth Disciples":


DK suggested a discussion on the Maier paper, I will be interested in participating in that.

Here is the link: http://www.wlsessays.net/files/MaierJustification.pdf


LPC

UOJ Cat Did not Get the Memo

"The Hottentots and Hindus are all absolved of sin. Everyone in Hell has the status of a guilt-free saint. You--in the corner, frowning--are getting the Left Foot of Fellowship. Questions?
Don't miss Exponential or Drive '10 this year."

SP-in-Waiting in October FIC

Church and Change/Church Growth contributor count in the Reformation issue of FIC!
1. James Aderman, a founder of Church and Change.
2. Frosty Bivens, an alumnus of Fuller.
3. James Matek, WLCFS CEO, Patterson buddy.
4. Kudu Don Patterson, C and C leader, listserve Koolaid drinker.
5. John Braun, editor and enabler of these Shrinkers.

Shout out to Texas Church Lady - which one is the UOJ article? I cannot stand reading FIC  fluff more than a few seconds at a time. A WELS pastor recently admitted to a member that he only reads SP Schroeder's articles. Time to close it down and just send around the Fuller Church Growth Bulletin to keep the Schwaermer happy - much cheaper solution.

Not only hopscotch

As soon as he laid eyes on that verse, his mind was made up. He was convinced that God wanted him to stay right there and learn how to share his burdens with others. The Word of God held him there for me. After I arrived, we had a wonderful time sharing Scripture and praying together.

God helped James that day, and a school girl playing hopscotch was a key player in God’s plan. She could never have intended the consequence her sketchings would have. She was just playing hopscotch. But while she wrote out that verse, God was smiling as he thought of James standing there that evening. The apostle Paul described what happened that day. He wrote, “[Jesus] works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Ephesians 1:11). James found that out, didn’t he? The artwork of a little girl led his troubled soul to Jesus.

I think about that hopscotch game a lot now. I wonder what unintended consequences will result from my “hopscotch” games. What blessings will God make of what I leave behind? What word spoken to a stranger through the gap between gas pumps or at the mall? What cell phone text shot off to a friend? What e-mail with embedded Scripture or spiritual thoughts will bounce around the world? From now on, I think I will plant a few more Bible verses in places where others can hear or read them.

I can’t wait to get to heaven and see how many great and wonderful unintended consequences Jesus made out of my life. How about you?

Children's sermon by contributing editor Kudu Don Patterson, pastor at Holy Word, Austin, Texas.

***

GJ - Notice how the FIC editors are Church and Change leaders? Aderman is a founder of the Chicaneries, famous for shrinking his congregation and closing the school, and also serves as a FIC contributing editor. How convenient - for them. WELS pays money to promote Reformed doctrine - in the seminary and college, in FIC, in world missions, and in American missions. The mission counselors are paid to spread Church Growthism, open communion, unionism, etc. And why not? That is how they got their jobs in the first place.

The head of WELS technology is a Willow Creek disciple.