Thursday, April 29, 2010

Tea for Two: Quiche-Niks on the Run;
Steadfast Blog


Not my Photoshop. I think Mollie Z. created this.
A comment claims she published what was sent.



Tea Party insurgence ripples through Missouri Synod election

By TIM TOWNSEND
c. 2010 St. Louis Post-Dispatch

ST. LOUIS (RNS) When the nominations for president of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod were tallied and released earlier this month, a collective gasp went up from Lutherans who pay attention to things like presidential nominations.

It wasn't just that nine-year incumbent Rev. Gerald Kieschnick, 67, received 755 nominations, but that the Rev. Matthew Harrison, 48, received nearly double that amount: 1,332.

Harrison, executive director of the church's World Relief and Human Care office, has the support of a group called the Brothers of John the Steadfast whose mission is, in part, to "defend and promote the orthodox Christian faith which is taught in the Lutheran Confessions..."

The group's website (www.steadfastlutherans.org) is one of the voices in the conservative wing of the synod that's unhappy with Kieschnick, and the group's analysis said Kieschnick's 755 nominations were the lowest number ever received by a sitting president.

"The nomination numbers were encouraging," said the Rev. Timothy Rossow, pastor of Bethany Lutheran Church in Naperville, Ill., who heads the Brothers of John the Steadfast.

Some observers say the movement reflected in Rossow's group is made up of as many as one-third of the denomination's 2.4 million members. Others say it's much smaller, though loud and influential.

Theological and doctrinal conservatives within the St. Louis-based Missouri Synod call themselves "confessional Lutherans." They are traditionalists who stress a strict adherence to the Book of Concord, the 16th-century work that defined the central doctrines of Lutheranism.

Confessionalists are critical of what they call Kieschnick's postmodern approach to the church. They say that for the last decade, Kieschnick has taken a nondenominational, evangelical megachurch approach, and in the process has diluted Martin Luther's theology.

"My vision for the LCMS is that the gift that God has given us --that we believe, teach and confess on the basis of holy Scripture -- is a treasure," Kieschnick said. "That treasure is not intended to be hoarded. It's intended to be shared with the world."

Dale Meyer, president of the Missouri Synod's Concordia Seminary, said Harrison "has more conservative supporters, who are active in the blogosphere."

"Rev. Harrison is seen as more confessional, adhering to the teachings and practices of the Lutheran confession," Meyer said.

"President Kieschnick is a very conservative person, but he is a little bit more influenced by the
evangelical stream in the church."

Church delegates will cast their votes at the synod's trienniel convention in Houston in July.

Missouri Synod presidents have no term limits. If re-elected, Kieschnick will serve his fourth three-year term. But in the current American political landscape, "incumbent" is a dirty word.

"The incumbency factor is out there with some people," Meyer said.

On steadfastlutherans.org, Harrison supporters are counting on people in the pews seeking a change at the top of the church.

"Another thing that I think helps us this year is the general climate in our country of being dismayed with incumbents," Neal Breitbarth wrote.

Rossow said Harrison's large number of nominations -- the most ever for a nonincumbent, according to steadfastlutherans.org -- reminded him of another grass-roots effort seeking change.

"There's definitely a sort of Tea Party feel to these numbers," he said.

"President Kieschnick tends to reflect a broader, wider tent that can also suggest tolerance and openness. It's openness for the sake of being open, and that's where the Tea Party groundswell against him may kick in."

One of the largest pieces of business for delegates in Houston will be a proposed sweeping restructuring of the entire denomination that would consolidate some of the church's boards and commissions. "This is not," Kieschnick said, "a consolidation of power."

But Rossow and others see the proposed restructuring as exactly that. The proposals, he said, "centralize power in the synod office. That's not necessarily bigger government, but it's certainly stronger government."

Like all important elections, the presidential contest in Houston this July will determine the immediate direction that Missouri Synod Lutherans will take.

"There's a strong grass-roots movement that the synod can do much better in its life all the way around," Harrison said. "There's a strong sense of desire for a change of course."

Not surprisingly, Kieschnick sees things differently.

The fact that so few churches cast ballots, he said, means that people are largely satisfied with the job he's done, and out of that sense of satisfaction, they simply figure not voting will ensure the status quo.

"I've been a part of this church long enough to know that if someone in office is doing a very poor job, we'd have more than 30 percent of them weighing in," he said. "Call it apathy or satisfaction, but they see no need to make a change."

(Tim Townsend writes for The St. Louis Post-Dispatch in St. Louis,
Mo.)

***

GJ - Quiche-nik is the Gurgle of the LCMS. He has pursued all the fads of the Church Growth Movement, spent everyone's money, and blessed the most outrageous and sacrilegious "evangelism efforts."

What Barry and McCain planted, Quiche-Nik watered, but Satan has given the increase. Look up all the LCMS congregations that are also members of the Willow Creek Association. Problem? Not for the Quiche-Niks. Land-o-Goshen! I found St. John in Ellisville. McCain and Barry had no problem with the congregation being members of two denominations at once. Neither does the current SP.

People used to claim that the conservatives took over the LCMS again. More accurately, the Reformed doctrine of Neo-Pietism took over WELS, Missouri, and the Little Sect on the Prairie.

I have been following the challenger, Harrison, for some time. He seems to have had a lot more practical experience than Quiche-Nik or Bohlmann.



Cruz: UOJ Splits the Verses To Fake the Message


UOJ busted.


L P has left a new comment on your post "LPC on Shunning":

Dear All,

This quote from the BOC is astounding ...
It is certain that sins are forgiven for the sake of Christ, as Propitiator, Rom. 3, 25: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation. Moreover, Paul adds: through faith. Therefore this Propitiator thus benefits us, when by faith we apprehend the mercy promised in Him, and set it against the wrath and judgment of God." "The wrath of God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that, for His sake, the Father may become reconciled to us. But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith. Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for Christ's sake."

UOJers argue that Rom 3:24 is their verse. Yet the thorough examination of the verse along with Rom 3:25, shows that they ignore what the BoC says about justification through faith.

This setting aside on what the BoC says on Rom 3:25 is quite irresponsible.

What can be said but that there is coercion of the UOJ teaching upon the Sacred text and the BoC?

Church Lady,

I do have the Althaus book, I will go back to it. Thanks for the reminder.

LPC

***

GJ - The era of Pietism is being studied for its effect upon UOJ. I have found nothing promoting forgiveness without faith before the Pietistic era. Several are working on this.

---


F. Schleiermacher (haze maker in German)
Wickedpedia has a good summary about him: "Schleiermacher was born in Breslau in the Prussian Province of Silesia, the son of a Prussian army chaplain in the Reformed Church. He was educated in a Moravian school at Niesky in Upper Lusatia, and at Barby near Halle. However, pietistic Moravian theology failed to satisfy his increasing doubts, and his father reluctantly gave him permission to enter the University of Halle, which had already abandoned pietism and adopted the rationalist spirit of Friedrich August Wolf and Johann Salomo Semler. As a theology student Schleiermacher pursued an independent course of reading and neglected the study of the Old Testament and Oriental languages. However, he did attend the lectures of Semler, where he became acquainted with the techniques of historical criticism of the New Testament, and of Johann Augustus Eberhard, from whom he acquired a love of the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. At the same time he studied the writings of Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi, and began to apply ideas from the Greek philosophers to a reconstruction of Kant's system."

Marquart on Schleiermacher:

Not to be discounted in the acculturating distortion of “objective justification” is the pervasive influence of Schleiermacher and his multitude of followers. Hoenecke put it like this:


According to Schleiermacher there is only a universal [allgemeinen] eternal decision [Ratschluss] of justification, which in turn is nothing else than the decision to send Christ, and in the end is nothing else than the decision to create the human race, insofar, that is, as only in Christ is human nature completed. In the decision of the Redemption is implied [liegt, lies] according to Schleiermacher already that mankind [die Menschen] are pleasing to God in His Son; there is no need for an individual temporal act of justification upon each individual [einzelnen] human being. It is necessary only that the individual human being become aware of this, that in God’s decision of the Redemption in Christ he has already been justified and made pleasing to God (III:355, my translation).

***

GJ - WELS Church Lady went German theology on me, so I had to bring up Halle theologian Schleiermacher, the most important theologian for all of modern Protestant theology. UOJ led him into Universalism, just as it did for Tholuck (Hoenecke's professor at Halle). Knapp, as the last of the believers, laid the foundation. Tholuck and Schleiermacher built on it. Some people think UOJ did not survive the 20th century, except in the Syn Conference. But it did survive! - in Karl Barth (theologian of Fuller Seminary, thus CGM) and Paul Tillich - both shameless adulterers. UOJ has a mangy pedigree.


LPC on Shunning


Why faith gets a bum rap?


I noticed that Dr. Ichabod blog about how faith becomes a four letter word here.

Yes, I wondered about this phenomenon of making faith a foul word.

I came from a Charismatic background and I know how the concept of faith has been abused in that circle. For example, faith is seen as a force. Prosperity teachers spoke of faith that way. It is like an infused stuff. Since they have been influenced heavily by Arminian Evangelicalism, Charismatics in general believe that everyone has faith, even the pagans and it is just a matter of exercising it or not. It can be turned on or off. Though my Charismatic friends may affirm it is a gift, it is not really in practice.

Take now a look at Pieper said about faith:

"I would eliminate faith as a requirement that makes justification true. That would be making faith a work of mine." Franz August Otto Pieper, A Final Word, http://www.franzpieper.com/
This is the type of overstating the case that gives faith a bad rap.

Really Dr. Pieper? What about Mk 16:16? Peiper makes a non-sequitur fallacy, aside from what Dr. Maier pointed out in his paper - a tertium non datur fallacy too.

Indeed faith is a requirement, a condition! However, it is a condition that God meets for you the sinner by creating it in you through the Word and/or Sacraments. He does not give this gift without using means. It does not drop from the sky and zaps you neither is it something inside you such that you must pedal in your own steam to generate it. Like the Gospel - faith is EXTRA NOS. From the outside it comes to you. That is the payload of the Gospel (sorry for my little unsactified way of saying it).

So a few observations I make from say Eph 2:8-9 and Heb 12:2
  1. It is a gift from God not internal to us.
  2. It is not a work, you cannot work it such that you can produce it.
  3. The author of your faith in the Gospel is Jesus
  4. It cannot boast and if it can, then it is not the faith spoken of by the Bible.

I think what was happening during Walther's time and Pieper's time was that they have been surrounded by revivalism which uses faith like a tool and they wanted to correct this abuse. However, this wrong should have been corrected through the the Scripture of which the BoC expounds well specially on faith. It cannot be corrected by going off the other way.

Oops I criticized Dr. Pieper, a UOJ proponent. That is a no no.

One thing I notice with Pentecostal preachers and pastors. The moment you question the pastor, immediately the pastor gets offended and also his members too get offended with him and so watch out. They will no longer be your friend. You will be shunned like the plague. What can I say? Words like "immature and insecure" come to my mind.

I notice this type of behaviour is present amongst UOJ pastors too. They are quick to say that the anti-UOJers are wrong, they are quick to fly off with remarks of heresy and false doctrine etc. It is a type of bullying if you ask me. So what happens? Instead of people getting closer to the truth, having dialogue, the situation becomes a political play on people's affections.

My case in point is Dr. Maier's paper. That paper was written in a scholarly manner and I have found it to be well argued and well researched. His exegesis was not even peculiar. Yet did anyone take his thesis and work with it? Nope.

Is the Christian served well in this way? I doubt it.