Learn Shrinkage from ELCA's Bishop Hanson: LCMS, WELS, ELS Can Work With Them

Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson is growing two new denominations at once:
NALC and LCMC.

Bishop Hanson sits in the ELCA tree
Merry, merry king of the bush is he
Laugh, Bishop Hanson! Laugh, Bishop Hanson!
Gay your life must be.

ELCA NEWS SERVICE

October 11, 2010

ELCA Presiding Bishop Announces New Churchwide Organization Design for 2011
10-267-JB
     CHICAGO (ELCA) -- The Church Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) took action Oct. 8 to affirm the concept for a new design of the ELCA churchwide organization in 2011, said the Rev. Mark S. Hanson, ELCA presiding bishop, in an Oct. 11 announcement to churchwide staff.  The council authorized the officers of the churchwide organization to take the necessary personnel actions and to implement the new design beginning Feb. 1, 2011, the start of the next fiscal year.
     The council deleted continuing resolutions in the ELCA Constitution related to churchwide units and adopted new continuing resolutions to implement the design and establish lines of responsibility, Hanson reported.
     The council also expressed appreciation to the staff of the churchwide organization, saying they would "hold in prayer" employees personally affected by a reduction in staff prompted by the new design.
     "This new design positions the churchwide organization to make a vital and vibrant contribution to the ministries of this church and the work of partners throughout the world," Hanson told the ELCA News Service.  "The new design also assumes that financial support will continue for these vital ministries -- and enable us to engage in these ministries in a more flexible and forward way."
     Council members took the action during a special meeting held by conference call, most of which was in executive session because of personnel implications. 
     Currently there are 16 unincorporated units and sections, and three offices in the churchwide organization.  Under the council-approved design, there will be three churchwide units and three offices, according to Hanson's written proposal to the council.  Separately incorporated ministries continue.
      Implementation of the new design will mean the 358-member churchwide staff -- including 270 here at the churchwide office -- will decrease by approximately 65 employees or 60 full-time equivalents, Hanson said.  In addition because nearly half of ELCA Global Mission's mission support budget covers costs for mission personnel, unit reductions will affect up to five mission personnel currently in service, said the Rev. Rafael Malpica Padilla, executive director.
     Staff directly affected by the new design are being notified Oct. 11 about their positions. 
     "The churchwide staff most directly affected by these decisions have served this church with distinction.  Even as we pray for new opportunities for their service, we will build on the good work they have done," Hanson said.
     Hanson appointed a seven-member design team of churchwide staff in June to evaluate and propose changes in the churchwide organization "in light of the changing mission and ministry needs of this church and the resources available to the churchwide organization," he wrote.  In particular Hanson said the action was precipitated by a significant drop in mission support income -- funds from ELCA congregations to the churchwide organization and shared by the church's 65 synods.
     "In 2008 after adjusting for inflation, the value of mission support income had declined by half since the founding of this church in 1988," Hanson wrote to the council. "From 2008 to 2011, estimated churchwide mission support dropped from $65.3 million to $48 million."  The work of the design team is based on an estimated range of $45 million to $48 million in annual mission support income for the next three years, Hanson said.
     The design team consulted with the ELCA Conference of Bishops and its executive committee; committees of the Church Council; churchwide leaders and staff; the Living into the Future Together (LIFT) Task Force, appointed to study the ELCA and make recommendations for its future; and outside consultants.
     Additional action regarding the new design will be considered by the Church Council at its November 12-14 meeting and by the ELCA Churchwide Assembly in August 2011.
     Hanson said the design team focused on two churchwide organization priorities: accompanying congregations as growing center of evangelical mission; and building the ELCA's capacity for evangelical witness and service in the world to alleviate poverty, and to work for justice and peace.
     He wrote that goals of the design team were to design an organization that "effectively and efficiently" works with ministry partners, maximizes resources through efficient operational infrastructure, better communicates and interprets effectiveness and efficiency of the church's response to the world, increases collaboration and accountability, and reflects the church's core values.
Interdependent relationships key to churchwide organization design
     "Achieving the priorities of this church is dependent upon strong interdependent relationships between congregations, synods, the churchwide organization and the agencies and institutions of this church," Hanson wrote in his proposal summary. "These interdependent relationships will extend the mission capacity of this church, promote accountability and provide for the best stewardship of the resources of this church."  He added that it will be a churchwide organization priority to help build such relationships with and among mission partners.
     Three units created by the new churchwide design are Congregational and Synodical Mission; Global Mission; and Mission Advancement.  The continuing resolutions adopted by the council describe the functions of each unit:
+ Congregational and Synodical Mission Unit: The Congregational and Synodical Mission unit shall foster and facilitate the work of synods, congregations, and partners in making congregations vital centers for mission and in creating coalitions and networks to promote justice and peace. Its work includes creating and revitalizing congregations; leadership development; providing worship and liturgical resources; enhancing discipleship; supporting multicultural ministries and the commitment of this church to inclusivity; fostering relationships with educational partners; facilitating the engagement of this church in advocacy; and related activities that serve the evangelical mission of synods and congregations.
+ Global Mission Unit: The Global Mission unit shall provide integrated support of this church's work in other countries and be the means through which churches in other countries engage in mission to this church and society. The Global Mission unit shall build capacity and provide support for mission in the following areas:
     a. Global Community: maintaining church-to-church relationships and mutual endeavors for evangelical witness, leadership development, sharing of mission personnel and collaborative work.
     b. Mission Formation and Relationships: mutual learning and growth with companion churches, and ELCA synods and congregations in the accompaniment model for mission, companion synod relationships, young adults in global mission, relationships with independent Lutheran organizations related to global mission, and mission efforts for full communion partners.
     c. Diakonia: meeting human need and working collaboratively with partners toward the flourishing of human community through engagement in international development and disaster response.
+ Mission Advancement Unit: The service unit of the churchwide organization is the Mission Advancement unit, which shall be responsible for coordinating this church's communication, marketing, public relations, mission funding, major gifts, planned gifts and constituent data management. It also shall oversee the work of the following:
     a. The Lutheran magazine
     b. The ELCA Foundation
     Hanson announced that the Congregational and Synodical Mission Unit will be headed by the Rev. Stephen P. Bouman, currently executive director, ELCA Evangelical Outreach and Congregational Mission.  He also said Malpica Padilla, currently executive director, ELCA Global Mission, will lead the Global Mission Unit, and the Rev. Howard E. Wennes, who has served as acting president of California Lutheran University, Thousand Oaks, and is a former bishop of the ELCA Grand Canyon Synod, will be interim executive director of the Mission Advancement Unit.
     The Office of the Presiding Bishop will assume responsibility for theological discernment, including justice for women and studies. Most of its other functions are unchanged, as are most functions of the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the Treasurer.

---

LCMC News:      New Open Events Page

LCMC Welcomes 320 new congregations since August 19, 2009

LCMC reaches new milestone of 500 congregations

 

---

NALC

What About Bob?

Dr. Robert Preus taught UOJ earlier in his career but continued to study the topic.

Tepid Lutherans Rydecki and Webber have studiously avoided the big question, just as Paul T. McCain has - "What about Bob?"

Webber and McCain earned their MDivs at The Surrendered Fort, where Church Growth was taught side by side with Lutheran orthodoxy. Kincaid Smith, ELS, got his DMin in Church Growth around that time.

Robert Preus' final book had justification in its title, so why are his former students not answering the question - "What about Bob?" They avoid it, just as they avoid all issues while endlessly repeating their talking point.

Dr. Robert Preus repudiated UOJ in his final book:

From Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant (second edition):

However, Preus clarified the true meaning of justification in his final book, Justification and Rome, which was published posthumously. Preus wrote this definitive comment:

"But the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner takes place when the Holy Spirit brings him to faith through Baptism and the Word of the Gospel. Our sins were imputed to Christ at His suffering and death, imputed objectively after He, by His active and passive obedience, fulfilled and procured all righteousness for us. But the imputation of His righteousness to us takes place when we are brought to faith."

Preus immediately followed the statement above with a quotation from Quenstedt, one of his favorite orthodox Lutheran authors:

It is not just the same thing to say, “Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us” and to say “Christ is our righteousness.” For the imputation did not take place when Christ became our righteousness. The righteousness of Christ is the effect of His office. The imputation is the application of the effect of His office. The one, however, does not do away with the other. Christ is our righteousness effectively when He justifies us. His righteousness is ours objectively because our faith rests in Him. His righteousness is ours formally in that His righteousness is imputed to us.

Preus also quoted Abraham Calov with approval:

"Although Christ has acquired for us the remission of sins, justification, and sonship, God just the same does not justify us prior to our faith. Nor do we become God's children in Christ in such a way that justification in the mind of God takes place before we believe." 

How much clearer could this be?

Trepid Lutherans Very Luther-Like - See His Hymn

"Ichabod is really messed up about UOJ, right Jay?
Yes, I sure hope we are not too late to register."


The Trepid Lutherans (especially Webber and Rydecki) remind me of Luther's great hymn:


"O Lord, Look Down from Heaven, Behold"
by Martin Luther, 1483-1546

1. O Lord, look down from heaven, behold
And let Thy pity waken:
How few are we within Thy Fold,
Thy saints by men forsaken!
True faith seems quenched on every hand,
Men suffer not Thy Word to stand;
Dark times have us o'ertaken.

2. With fraud which they themselves invent
Thy truth they have confounded;
Their hearts are not with one consent
On Thy pure doctrine grounded.
While they parade with outward show,
They lead the people to and fro,
In error's maze astounded.

3. May God root out all heresy
And of false teachers rid us
Who proudly say: "Now, where is he
That shall our speech forbid us?
By right or might we shall prevail;
What we determine cannot fail;
We own no lord and master."

4. Therefore saith God, "I must arise,
The poor My help are needing;
To Me ascend My people's cries,
And I have heard their pleading.
For them My saving Word shall fight
And fearlessly and sharply smite,
The poor with might defending."

5. As silver tried by fire is pure
From all adulteration,
So through God's Word shall men endure
Each trial and temptation.
Its light beams brighter through the cross,
And, purified from human dross,
It shines through every nation.

6. Thy truth defend, O God, and stay
This evil generation;
And from the error of their way
Keep Thine own congregation.
The wicked everywhere abound
And would Thy little flock confound;
But Thou art our Salvation.

Hymn 260
The Lutheran Hymnal
Text: Ps. 12
Author: Martin Luther, 1523
Translated by: composite
Titled: "Ach Gott vom Himmel, sieh darein"
Tune: "Ach Gott vom Himmel"
1st Published in: Enchiridion
Town: Erfurt, 1524

They disavow two justifications, but talk about two justifications, with an emphasis on declaring the entire world forgiven of its sin - without faith.

They are not "apt to teach."

I enjoy watching them flail and flounder in public, since their false doctrine can no longer be kept in hiding and revealed only to the initiates of their Gnostic sect.

Sloppy language comes from sloppy and erroneous thinking. We do not need to invent new words and import strange analogies to understand justification by faith. They imagine themselves profound while leading people to and fro, but they are profoundly wrong.


---
Daniel Baker has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Refuted by a Single Quotation":

The problem seems to be, after viewing a number of "UOJ" apologists on Intrepid Lutherans now, that when you get to the heart of the matter (namely, the ridiculous quotes like "all are declared righteous" and "guilt-free saints in hell"), the professors of this terminology admit that these statements are radical and not confessional or biblical (like Jay Webber just did), and are only rationalized through heavy mental exercise. What's more, they clearly admit that the terminology of "objective" and "subjective" justification is not in any way, shape, or form biblical and confessional. Finally, they assert (like Samuel Thrace did) that the difference between "UOJ" and unlimited atonement is so minuscule, that those who raise qualms with "UOJ" are virtually idiots.

In light of these revelations, I simply ask: Why persist in this admittedly unbiblical/unconfessional language, when we could simply use the words of Scripture/the Confessions - particularly since our viewpoints are (apparently) virtually the same anyways?

It seems to me that the only possible answers are !) there truly is difference between "UOJ" and universal atonement, or more likely 2) adherents of this terminology are unwilling to admit that WELS and its early theologians uses/used questionable terminology - because WELS can NEVER be wrong.

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Refuted by a Single Quotation":

Daniel is getting close to a critical yet difficult realization. The repeated use of "sloppy language" and "poor wording" that is in itself consistent in teaching from one generation to another, from one (W)ELS theologian to another, can no longer be attributed to clumsy writing, poor theological training or idiocy. The words used to frame the entire doctrine of UOJ are precise and consistent from one public (W)ELS confession to another as demonstrated with quotes from Zarling, Buchholz, Becker and the (W)ELS This We Believe etc.

Anyone who states that the (W)ELS doesn't teach fogiveness before faith here the (W)ELS doctrinal book of public confession, Our Great Heritage, states, "And yet many Lutherans still labor under the delusion that God does not forgive us unless we believe. Instead of seeing faith as nothing more than the spiritual hand with which we make the forgiveness of God our own, they see it as a reason why God forgives us. They believe that Christ has indeed provided forgiveness for all men, that God is willing to forgive them, but before he really forgives he first of all demands that we should be sorry for our sins and that we should have faith. Just have faith they say, and then God will forgive you. All the right words are there. The only thing wrong is that the words are in the wrong order. God does not forgive us IF we have faith. He has forgiven us long ago when he raised his Son from the dead." (p. 59)"

Justification by Faith Alone - A Catechism

Design by Norma Boeckler

Q - Why study justification by faith?
A - Luther wrote that attacks against the Christian faith fall into three categories:

Against the divinity of Christ.

Against the humanity of Christ.

Against justification by faith.

Q - What is justification?
A - Justification is God's gracious declaration that an individual is forgiven all his sin through faith.

Q - Is there another justification?
A - No. The word justification and the verb to justify are used in the Scriptures only in the sense of justification by faith. Unless one is inventing new meanings, justification simply means justification by faith.

Q - Why do some people talk about a General Justification, an Objective Justification, or a Universal Justification?
A - All three terms come from Calvinistic influence in Lutheran Pietism. Following Knapp and others, Synodical Conference Lutherans began to speak of two justifications - one objective, the other subjective.

Q - What does General, Objective, or Universal Objective Justification claim?
A - The terms are used to claim falsely that God absolved the entire world, without the Word, without the Means of Grace, without faith - when Christ died on the cross, or alternately when He rose from the dead.

Q - Where is this definition found?
A - The Synodical Conference Brief Statement, 1932: "Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ, Rom. 5:19; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 4:25..."

Q - What are the implications of Universal Objective Justification?
A - Every single person is a guilt-free saint, including Hitler, Mao, Stalin, the Hottentots, Hindu, Muslim, and those who died in the Flood.

Q - How is Universal Objective Justification different from Universalism, the opinion that everyone is saved?
A - In spite of claims to the contrary, the Wisconsin Synod has already had a campaign where posters said to the public, "You are saved - just like me." That is Universalism, universal salvation.

Q - What do the Scriptures and Confessions teach about the crucifixion of Christ?
A - They speak with one voice that Christ died for the sins of the world, so that no one would be tempted to think that any work was required of man to satisfy God.

Q - Why is faith denounced as a work among UOJ adherents?
A - They take their argument back to Calvinism, where the strict Calvinists disagreed with Arminians, who viewed faith a a virtue in man and also as their part of the transaction, fulfilling what God started.

Q - Why is this a false accusation among Lutherans?
A - The Book of Concord teaches in harmony with the Scriptures that faith is trust in the Word, a trust caused by the Holy Spirit working in the Word. Christ Himself extolled faith in individuals and rebuked His disciples' lack of faith - "O ye of little faith!"

Q - How is an individual justified by faith?
A - He becomes aware of his sinful nature and his inability to save himself through the preaching of the Law. Jesus identified this as convicting the world of its sin, "because they believe not on Me." John 16:8. The Holy Spirit works through the Promises of God in the Word to create and sustain faith, which receives the Gospel message of forgiveness and all its blessings.

KJV John 16:8 And when He is come, He will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 Of sin, because they believe not on Me; 10 Of righteousness, because I go to My Father, and ye see Me no more; 11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

Q - How does this grace of God come to people?
A - God has given us the Means of Grace to convey His forgiveness to us.

Q - What are the Means of Grace?
A - We use this term to designate the invisible Word of preaching and teaching, the visible Word of Holy Baptism and Holy Communion.

Q - Does the Holy Spirit ever work apart from the Word of God?
A - No, that is the essence of Enthusiasm, divorcing the Holy Spirit from the Word. Enthusiasm is the basis for all false doctrine, all false religion.

Q - Where can this work of the Holy Spirit through the Word be found?
A - Isaiah 55:8-10

KJV Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 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, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Q - How can UOJ be defined as false doctrine?
A -

First, UOJ speaks of grace (universal forgiveness) without the Means of Grace.

Second, UOJ attacks the ministry of the Word through Enthusiasm and the substitution of gimmicks and marketing.

Third, UOJ confuses the atoning death of Christ with justification by faith.

Fourth, UOJ neutralizes the concept of sin, starting with their extolling of unbelief and ending with their absolving of any and all crimes - without repentance or faith.

Q - Was not Jesus "raised for our justification," showing that His resurrection is the absolution of the world, as C. F. W. Walther preached?
A - The Romans passage is about justification by faith, as the context shows:

KJV Romans 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. 23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

Abraham is the father of faith in the entire chapter, which transitions from 4:25 to this declaration:

KJV Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Q - Why do UOJ advocates use reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5 to prove the universal absolution?
A - Calvin's rationalism has had a lasting, damaging effect on Lutherans via Pietism. One proof of that impact is the transition of Pietism to pure rationalism in one generation, at Halle University, the home of Pietism, and in denominations like the ELCA.

Human reason tells them that if Christ became sin on the cross, then man became righteous at the same moment, although they disagree about the timing of their illusion. Some make it the moment of His death, because He said "It is finished." Some make the Moment of Absolution His resurrection, because Walther said so.

Q - What has UOJ done for the Synodical Conference?
A - By creating an inroad for Pietism, Enthusiasm, and Unionism, UOJ has justified beating a path to Fuller Seminary, Willow Creek, Mars Hill, and Life Church. Those disgusted with Entertainment Evangelism have felt comfortable in joining Rome or Eastern Orthodoxy for Entertaining Worship.

Q - What has UOJ done for the Sunday service?
A - The Pietism of UOJ destroys the liturgy, preaching, hymn singing, and the confessions.

UOJ Refuted by a Single Quotation

Cover design by Norma Boeckler

twissted_sisster has left a new comment on your post "Justification by Faith Quotations":

"Christ did indeed suffer for the whole world; but how many are there who believe and cherish this fact? Therefore, although the work of redemption itself has been accomplished, it still cannot help and benefit a man unless he believes it and experiences its saving power in his heart."
- - - - - - - - -

In these words, Martin Luther goes right to the heart of the matter. Here he has simply and clearly refuted UOJ. Enough said.

God's Creation - Time Lapse Photography

Many more time lapse videos are here.

Big, Dumb Question - Why Is Any Synod Working in Any Fashion with ELCA - Whether Through Thrivent or LWR or Any Joint Ministry?

Rogue Lutheran and Father Hollywoood Team Up To Clobber the Fuller New Agers

I appreciate all the worthwhile posts from Rogue Lutheran, Church Mouse, and Extra Nos. The comments from Joseph Schmidt, Brett Meyer, Bored, Tom, and Twissted Sisster are also valuable.

Read the Post, See the Video from Rogue Lutheran

This is of consequence to  Lutherans because they have outsourced leadership to Fuller. The leadership has moved onto the ‘broad path’.

Fuller is a proxy for Theosophy--among the modern day evangelists are Leonard Sweet, Stanford Research Institute , & Institute of Noetic (Gnosis) Sciences. Emergent is Theosophy with a face lift. 

The unique doctrines of the Lutheran church are means of grace, the efficacious word, God Alone, Scripture Alone, Faith Alone. 

The most important is Justification by Faith Alone (JBFA), reprised and articulated 500 years ago from Scripture by Dr. Martin Luther. 

Justification by Faith Alone has that pesky thing called ‘Freedom’ built into it.

The bar for a Lutheran pastor is very high, given Lutheran church history.

Mind Like Water - Going Down the Drain

Church Mouse scores again.


From Church Mouse:

Blanchard endorses a book Mind Like Water by Jim Ballard who says in the acknowledgment section that he wishes to acknowledge the great line of masters for their guidance and inspiration. And who count among Ballard’s “line of masters”? … “Jesus Christ, Bhagavan Krishna, Mahavatar Babaji, Lahiri Mahasaya, Swami Sri Yukteswas and Paramahansa Yogananda.”

Does Mind Like Water ring any bells?  The WELS Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary features a course by the same name.  Could the book be on the reading list?

***

GJ - Their Willow Creek addict technology guy gives lectures around the synod called "Mind Like Water." I am sure there is no connection at all. Just thinking it is a violation of the Eighth Commandment and Matthew 18.

Luther on Justification by Faith

Do you remember me?
Quia subscription to the Kokomo Statements? Bah!


Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "The Nineteenth Sunday after Trinity":

Bored, here's one of Luther's confession concerning this. I believe it shines God's Light on this issue and leaves no room for UOJ to breathe.

36. Abraham and every other patriarch, you will observe, recognized God's testament or covenant. It was delivered to them just as much as to us, although not at that time read and proclaimed to the world as after Christ's ascension They obtained the very same thing that we and all God's children obtain, and through the very same faith. The grace, the blessing, the testament, the faith--all are the same; the Father is one and the same God of us all.

37. Note, Paul everywhere teaches justification, not by works, but solely by faith; and not as a process, but instantaneous. The testament includes in itself everything--justification, salvation, the inheritance and great blessing. Through faith it is instantaneously enjoyed, not in part, but all. Truly is it plain, then, that faith alone affords such blessings of God, justification and salvation--immediately and not in process as must be the case with works--and constitutes us children and heirs who voluntarily discharge their duties, not presuming to become godly and worthy by a servile spirit. No merit is needed; faith secures all gratuitously-- more than anyone can merit. The believer performs his works gratuitously, being already in possession of all the Cain-like saints vainly seek through works and never find--justification and divine inheritance, or grace.
http://www.trinitylutheranms.org/MartinLuther/MLSermons/Galatians4_1_7.html

Two Good Reasons To Discuss Justification Publicly

Drama queens think it harmful to discuss doctrine and practice in the open.

I.

Justification by faith needs to be discussed at great length, in the open, because false teachers have obscured this teaching for many decades. An open discussion is divisive - it divides the sheep from the goats.

II.

Doctrinal discussions keep us sharp about what we believe and drive us back to the Scriptures. The Pietists want love to be the basis for unity, but that formula creates doctrinal indifference, unionism, and apostasy. The goal of love at the expense of the truth is the ultimate destroyer. As one historian noted on the phone, the pattern has been clear for centuries - Pietism, Rationalism, Unitarianism.

Columbus, Ohio was my post-doc in theology. The clergy kept defending Church Growth and I kept studying Luther and the Book of Concord.

Justification by Faith Quotations

Martin Chemnitz, Senior Theologian, Book of Concord.

Appendix Two: Quotations - Justification by Faith Alone

Treasure Distributed

"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 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.

 No Forgiveness Outside the Church

"But outside of this Christian Church, where the Gospel is not, there is no forgiveness, as also there can be no holiness [sanctification]. Therefore all who seek and wish to merit holiness [sanctification], not through the Gospel and forgiveness of sin, but by their works, have expelled and severed themselves [from this Church]."

            The Large Catechism, The Creed, Article III, #56, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 693. Tappert, p. 418.

Lenski

"The danger is that by use of the term 'subjective justification' we may lose the objective divine act of God by which He declares the individual sinner righteous ex pistews pistin in the instant faith (embracing Christ) is wrought in him, leaving only the one divine declaration regarding the whole world of sinners, calling this an actus simplex, the only forensic act of God, and expanding this to mean that God declared every sinner free from guilt when Christ was raised from the dead, so many millions even before they were born, irrespective of faith, apart from and without faith." This surely wipes out 'justification by faith alone.' Only his faith is reckoned to him for righteousness."

R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of Romans, Augsburg Publishing House:  Minneapolis, 1963, p. 85. Romans 1:17.

“But this must be noted: Christ died 1900 years ago, on a certain day, at a certain hour in time. But this counts for all time: for the entire future time, for all the prior time. For by Christ’s death ‘all died,’ Adam and all his descendants. The effect covered all. It is literally true: ‘the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.’ His death availed for Adam. All in the Old Testament who believed were saved by that death just as all are in the New Testament who believe.”

            R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of Second Corinthians, Columbus: Wartburg Press, 1957, p. 1033. 2 Corinthians 5:15.

I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord, who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned creature, purchased and won [delivered] me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil, not with gold or silver, but with His holy, precious blood and with His innocent suffering and death, in order that I may be [wholly] His own, and live under Him in His kingdom, and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, even as He is risen from the dead, lives and reigns to all eternity. This is most certainly true.”

            Martin Luther, The Small Catechism, Explanation of the Second Article of the Creed, II. 4. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis; Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 545.

Justification, Apology

"This faith, encouraging and consoling in these fears, receives remission of sins, justifies and quickens. For this consolation is a new and spiritual life [a new birth and a new life]. These things are plain and clear, and can be understood by the pious, and have testimonies of the Church [as is to be seen in the conversion of Paul and Augustine]. The adversaries nowhere can say how the Holy Ghost is given. They imagine that the Sacraments confer the Holy Ghost ex opere operato, without a good emotion in the recipient, as though, indeed, the gift of the Holy Ghost were an idle matter."

            Article IV., Justification, Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 139. Tappert, p. 115.

"Now, that faith signifies, not only a knowledge of the history, but such faith as assents to the promise, Paul plainly testifies when says, Romans 4:16: 'Therefore it is of faith, to the end the promise might be sure.' For he judges that the promise cannot be received unless by faith. Wherefore he puts them together as things that belong to one another, and connects promise and faith."

            Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article IV, Justification, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 135. Tappert, p. 114. Romans 4:16.

"But as the Confutation condemns us for having assigned these two parts to repentance, we must show that [not we, but] Scripture expresses these as the chief parts in repentance and conversion. For Christ says, Matthew 11:28: Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Here there are two members. The labor and the burden signify the contrition, anxiety, and terrors of sin and of death. To come to Christ is to believe that sins are remitted for Christ's sake; when we believe, our hearts are quickened by the Holy Ghost through the Word of Christ. Here, therefore, there are these two chief parts, contrition and faith."

            Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article XII (V), #44, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 263. Tappert, p. 187. Matthew 11:28.

Chytraeus, Concordist

"How is a person justified before God? This occurs solely by faith in the Son of God, Jesus Christ; that is, freely, not because of any works or merits of one's own but only because of the one Mediator, Jesus Christ, who became the sacrificial victim and propitiation on our behalf. By this sacrifice, man obtained forgiveness of sins and became righteous; that is, God-pleasing and acceptable. His righteousness was imputed to man for Christ's sake, and man becomes an heir of eternal life when he believes with certainty that God gives him these blessings for the sake of His Son."

            David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 105.

"Christian righteousness is the forgiveness of sin, the imputation of the righteousness of Christ and acceptance to eternal life. It is free, not the result of any virtues or works but is given solely because of Christ, the Mediator, and apprehended by faith alone."

            David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 106.

"Scripture therefore uses these words, 'We are justified by faith,' to teach both: 1) What the reason (or merit) for justification is, or what the blessings of Christ are; to wit, that through and for the sake of Christ alone we are granted forgiveness of sins, righteousness and eternal life; and 2. How

these should be applied or transferred to us; namely, by embracing the promise and relying on Christ by faith alone."

            David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 107.

Curia Confession

"It must be admitted that when our Lutheran Confessions speak of justification they speak almost exclusively of that facet of justification we usually call 'subjective' justification, which has also been called 'special' or 'personal' justification. But the Confessions also show us that the basis for this justification is the justification that precedes faith."

            Rick Nicholas Curia, The Significant History of the Doctrine of Objective or Universal Justification, Alpine, California: California Pastoral Conference, WELS. January 24-25, 1983. p. 13.

Norwegian UOJ

"The chief differences between the contestants [Norwegians and Augustana] seems to have been in the essence rather than in the effect of Absolution. Both agreed that the Gospel offered the forgiveness of sins, but the one side held that it was given only to those who in faith received it, while the other side said that it was given also to unbelievers, though they did not accept it. Both agreed that unbelievers received no benefit from such an absolution."

J. Magnus Rohne, Norwegian Lutheranism up to 1872, New York, Macmillan, p. 231. Rick Nicholas Curia, The Significant History of the Doctrine of Objective or Universal Justification, Alpine, California: California Pastoral Conference, WELS. January 24-25, 1983. p. 20. [This is important for understanding the early Robert Preus, who supported UOJ.]

Formula, Free Will

"Against both these parties the pure teachers of the Augsburg Confession have taught and contended that by the fall of our first parents man was so corrupted that in divine things pertaining to our conversion and the salvation of our souls he is by nature blind, that, when the Word of God is preached, he neither does nor can understand it, but regards it as foolishness; also, that he does not of himself draw nigh to God, but is and remains an enemy of God, until he is converted, becomes a believer [is endowed with faith], is regenerated and renewed, by the power of the Holy Ghost through the Word when preached and heard, out of pure grace, without any cooperation of his own."

Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration, II. 5. Free Will, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 881.

"The second argument is that 'God desires all men to be saved' (1 Timothy 2:4), and He gave His Son for us men and created man for eternal life. Likewise: All things exist for man, and he himself exists for God that he may enjoy Him, etc. These points and others like them can be refuted as easily as the first one. For these verses must always be understood as pertaining to the elect only, as the apostle says in 2 Timothy 2:10 'everything for the sake of the elect.' For in an absolute sense Christ did not die for all, because He says: 'This is My blood which is poured out for you' and 'for many'--He does not say: for all--'for the forgiveness of sins.' (Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28)

Martin Luther, Luther's Works, 25 p. 375. 2 Timothy 2:10; 1 Timothy 2:4; Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28

"In like manner Moses must precede and teach people to feel their sins in order that grace may be sweet and welcome to them. Therefore all is in vain, however friendly and lovely Christ may be pictured, if man is not first humbled by a knowledge of himself and he possesses no longing for Christ, as Mary's Song says, 'The hungry he hath filled with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away,' Luke 1:53."

Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 149. Matthew 15:21-28; Luke 1:53.

Luther - Not the Sins of Unbelievers

"The apostle says 'our,' 'our sins;' not his own sin, not the sins of unbelievers. Purification is not for, and cannot profit, him who does not believe. Nor did Christ effect the cleansing by our free-will, our reason or power, our works, our contrition or repentance, these all being worthless in the sight of God; he effects it by himself. And how? By taking our sins upon himself on the holy cross, as Isaiah 53:6 tells us."

Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, VI, p. 180. Hebrews 1:1-12; Hebrews 1:3;

"Christ is speaking here not of the word of the law, but of the Gospel, which is a discourse about Christ, who died for our sins, etc. For God did not wish to impart Christ to the world in any other way; he had to embody him in the Word and thus distributed him, and present him to everybody; otherwise Christ would have existed for himself alone and remained unknown to us; he would have thus died for himself. But since the Word places before us Christ, it thus places us before Him who has triumphed over death, sin, and Satan. Therefore, he who grasps and retains Christ, has thus also eternal deliverance from death. Consequently it is a Word of life, and it is true, that whoever keeps the Word shall never see death."

Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 177. John 8:46-59.

Requires Faith

"To this incline your ears, and be persuaded that God speaks through men and forgives you your sins; this, of course, requires faith."

Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed. John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 200.

 "If I do not believe it, I will not receive its benefits; but that neither renders it false nor proves that anything is lacking in Christ."

Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 258. Easter, Third Sermon. Mark 16:1-8.

Luther Sermon, Treasure

"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 HS came...."

Martin Luther, 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.

"All who are born into the world of man and woman are sinful under God's anger and curse, condemned to death. For all are conceived and born in sin as Scripture testifies (Psalm 51:5): 'Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.'"

Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, The House Postils, 3 vols., ed., Eugene Klug, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996, II, p. 26. Easter Tuesday. Luke 24:13-35; Psalm 51:5.

"Christ did indeed suffer for the whole world; but how many are there who believe and cherish this fact? Therefore, although the work of redemption itself has been accomplished, it still cannot help and benefit a man unless he believes it and experiences its saving power in his heart."

Martin Luther, What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, II, p. 705f. Smalcald, 1537.

LCMS Catechism, 1905

"#305. Why do you say in this article: I believe in the Forgiveness of Sins? Because I hold with certainty that by my own powers or through my own works I cannot be justified before God, but that the forgiveness of sins is given me out of grace through faith in Jesus Christ. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also true justification. Psalm 130:3-4; Psalm 143:2; Isaiah 64:6; Job 25:4-6 (Q. 124)."

Kleiner Katechismus, trans. Pastor Vernon Harley, LCMS, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1901, p. 164ff.

"#306. What is justification? Justification is that activity (Handlung) of God by which He out of pure grace and mercy for the sake of Christ's merits forgives the sins of a poor sinner who truly believes in Jesus Christ and receives him to everlasting life."

Kleiner Katechismus, trans. Pastor Vernon Harley, LCMS, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1901, p. 164ff.

Augustine on Justification

bored has left a new comment on your post "How Is ELCA Different from WELS or Missouri or th...":

Another question for you: Do you agree with Augustine's understanding of Romans 5:18 (From His Anti-Pelagian writings: On the merits of Forgiveness of Sins, and on the baptism of Infants, chapter 19)

"Hence the terms “all men” and “all men.” For not they who are generated through Adam are actually the very same as those who are regenerated through Christ; but yet the language of the apostle is strictly correct, because as none partakes of carnal generation except through Adam, so no one shares in the spiritual except through Christ. For if any could be generated in the flesh, yet not by Adam; and if in like manner any could be generated in the Spirit, and not by Christ; clearly “all” could not be spoken of either in the one class or in the other. But these “all” the apostle afterwards describes as “many;” for obviously, under certain circumstances, the “all” may be but a few. The carnal generation, however, embraces “many,” and the spiritual generation also includes “many;” although the “many” of the spiritual are less numerous than the “many” of the carnal. But as the one embraces all men whatever, so the other includes all righteous men; because as in the former case none can be a man without the carnal generation, so in the other class no one can be a righteous man without the spiritual generation; in both instances, therefore, there are” many:” “For as by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”

***

GJ - Luther said the same thing, although I have lost track of the citation for the moment.

I agree. All have sinned, through Adam. All who are justified are justified through Christ.

The UOJ boys start with the official synod line and search for ways to crowbar Scripture and Confessions into their double justification template. Now that Knapp is identified as a pre-Walther double justification advocate, the UOJ clan wants to stretch their opinion over the previously identified OJ and SJ.

They always talked double justification before. That is how mind-control cults work: re-education must take place every few months.

Recent Comments on UOJ

WELS UOJ pastor - "The Book of Concord is old-fashioned and irrelevant."


klange (http://klange.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Learn from Church and Change, Girls - An Open Let...":

The Intrepids have revealed the true nature of WELS - a mind-control cult.

Stated another way, the doctrine of many WELS leaders is all mixed up and set like concrete.

---

samuelthrace has left a new comment on your post "Learn from Church and Change, Girls - An Open Let...":

Brett--

Those quotes only apply if you're talking about teachings that matter. The difference between UOJ and universal atonement is so slight that it is laughable that anyone would actually care about it. This argument is all about determining who the smartest theologian in the room is and has no real consequence for Christian faith and life.

---



Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Learn from Church and Change, Girls - An Open Let...":

Samuelthrace, I've pulled these quotes from past Ichabod discussions concerning the importance of being faithful to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions in regard to doctrine.

"Doctrinal indifference is at once the root of unionism and its fruit. Whoever accepts, in theory as well as in practice, the absolute authority of the Scriptures and their unambiguousness with reference to all fundamental doctrines, must be opposed to every form of unionism."
M. Reu, In the Interest of Lutheran Unity, Columbus: The Lutheran Book Concern, 1940, p. 20.

"Therefore nothing but a satanic, seductive, and sinister strategy is involved when we are called upon to yield a bit and to connive at an error for the sake of unity. In this way the devil is trying cunningly to lead us away from the Word. For if we adopt this course and get together in this matter, he has already gained ground; and if we were to yield him a fingerbreadth, he would soon have an ell."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1411f. Ephesians 6:10-17.

"Therefore, do not speak to me of love or friendship when anything is to be detracted from the Word or the faith; for we are told that not love but the Word brings eternal life, God's grace, and all heavenly treasures." 19 " In matters concerning faith we must be invincible, unbending, and very stubborn; indeed, if possible, harder than adamant. But in matters concerning love we should be softer and more pliant than any reed and leaf and should gladly accommodate ourselves to everything." 20 "Doctrine is our only light. It alone enlightens and directs us and shows us the way to heaven. If it is shaken in one quarter (in una parte), it will necessarily be shaken in its entirety (in totum). Where that happens, love cannot help us at all." 21 " But this tender mercy is to be exercised only toward Christians and among Christians, for toward those who reject and persecute the Gospel we must act differently; here I am not permitted to let my love be merciful so as to tolerate and endure false doctrine. When faith and doctrine are concerned and endangered, neither love nor patience are in order. Then it is my duty to contend in earnest and not to yield a hairbreadth." What Luther Says, II, 637f.

"However, if anything is undertaken against the Word, faith, and the honor of God, we are in no wise to preserve silence, are to bear it far less patiently. Then we should offer stubborn resistance."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1308. Sermon, 1523.

---


Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Invisible J. P. Meyer Quotation":

I for one, in witnessing the struggle for God's pure doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone, am encouraged in spirit by the public confession and statements, faithful to Christ, made by men and women such as Bored, LPC, Tom Wyeth, WELS Church Lady, Scott E. Jungen and others.

May Christ, by his gracious love and mercy, continue to give you each the strength and wisdom to continue in the one true faith, contending for the truth, rebuking false teachings, defending the pure Word unto life everlasting.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer


---


bored has left a new comment on your post "Invisible J. P. Meyer Quotation":

Garret,

The terms are not confusing, if you do some home work. The material is all easily available at Ichabod. Read how people describe UOJ and you'll see that the two options written by Tom seem to be pretty precise and succinct description of Justification a) of Jackson, Brett Meyer, Maier and others b) of UOJ proponents.

I was once told by a College professor to 'embrace ambiguity'. Interestingly this professor also said that 'definitions are roadblocks'. But in action, that Professor only 'embraced' ambiguity when it suited his best interest, and only decried definitions when he painted himself into a corner with his own words. Rydecki is playing the same game by refusing to provide a definition and refusing to defend the WELS definition for UOJ. As soon as the face of the argument was shaved, he ran like a scared rabbit. For UOJ to be defended, entities must be multiplied beyond necessity. (flipping Occam's statement.)

Garret, if Pastors use a term that isn't in the Scriptures, isn't in the writings of the early Church Fathers, isn't in the Lutheran Confessions, then the onus is on them to provide and defend a definition. What Tom was doing, I think, was to demand a definition, and to hold people responsible for what their words actually mean.

True or false?
A man without faith is either innocent or he is not innocent.

---

Tom has left a new comment on your post "Invisible J. P. Meyer Quotation":

I posted this comment at Intrepid (sic) Lutherans, and have posted it here for posterity:

Pastor Rydecki,

As a brother in Christ I must say: Your dodging of questions and control of information is disquieting. The Wisconsin Synod needs to have its senses sharpened, not dulled.

I find it impossible to understand why you would run from a conversation about Justification. If your position is so easily defendable (and so obviously true) why wouldn't you take my comment as an opportunity to clarify the issue of Objective Justification?

If you don't like my points a) and b), please say why. Without bias, those two points remain the clearest and most succinct summaries of the pro and anti Objective Justification arguments. Having read much of what you've written on this blog, I respect your mind enough to say that you are capable of it. You're no dummy.

Why the subterfuge? Why the deceit? If you want me to Prove, in no uncertain terms that my two statement a) and b) are fair and valid summaries, I will do so.

I fear you have been coerced into abandoning discernment by people who can legitimately threaten your job. Let me encourage you that IF this is the case, by forging ahead and practicing discernment (which WILL include questioning the WELS doctrinal positions) you will store up treasures for yourself.

You need to quit thinking about the WELS and begin thinking about the invisible church. If you truly believe your Pastoral Call is from God, then the WELS is merely a cosmic fart. If you lose your job, are shunned, become a Barista, or are physically harmed for your application of 1 John 4:1, you will be better for it.

Again

a)Is Christ's righteousness universally available but imputed individually only through faith?

or

b) Are all people declared Righteous, and the benefits of the Righteousness imputed through faith?

 ---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "The Insipid Lutherans Shut Themselves Down":

Bored states, "(I know if Brett reads this he will say: "If they say they believe UOJ then they are definitionally, unfaithful. Brett, I agree in a sense, but I think the Holy Spirit works for our good in spite of our own failings. There are many good pastors who defend UOJ.)"

I think you may be psychic.

To defend my position as accurately described by Bored I present the following:

1. UOJ is a false doctrine, irrespective of the confessors intentions, because of what it teaches.

2. To believe and confess a false gospel displaces and rejects the true Gospel as they are not compatible. Pastors who teach a false gospel are leading those who believe it to reject the true Gospel.

3. Confessing a false gospel is condemned by Christ as Paul says in Galatians 1:8, "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

4. Since preaching a false gospel is accursed, if they preach the false gospel of UOJ they are accursed by God. Does the fact that a pastor may have good intentions when teaching a false gospel have anything to do with it's damning effect on those who trust his false teaching? How then can they still be good pastors??

5. A good pastor will consider and listen to God's Word (read, mark, learn and inwardly digest) and the Confessions instead of continuing to defend the defenseless false gospel of UOJ for the sake of Holy Mother Synod. 


---


Pastor Rydecki just posted, "You arbitrarily define Objective Justification with the quote that supposedly came from J.P. Meyer. I say "supposedly," because Pastor Jon Buchholz was unable to find the exact source of that quote when he presented his 2005 paper at the WELS synod convention. Nevertheless he addressed it:

"When God reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, He individually pronounced forgiveness to each individual sinner whether that sinner ever comes to faith or not." When we wish to speak about objective justification, we must use objective terminology. This statement is a muddle of objective and personal terms. When God reconciled the world [objective] . . . he individually [a specific or personal term] pronounced forgiveness [as shown in the body of the essay, the word “forgive” in Scripture is overwhelmingly used to describe the personal remission of sins received through repentance and faith worked by the means of grace] to each individual [another specific term] sinner. (all brackets in the original)

And so, yes, I join Pastor Buchholz in rejecting the statement you quoted as Scripturally inaccurate, and also as an inaccurate representation of Objective Justification. "

It would seem that you haven't studied Pastor Buchholz' 2005 essay, or rather I would hope you haven't as that's the only excuse that will allow such an outrageous contention as you've publicly stated above.

Pastor Buchholz states in that same essay, ""God has declared the entire world righteous." This statement is true, as we understand it to mean that God has rendered a verdict of "not-guilty" toward the entire world. It is also true—and must be taught—that the righteousness of Christ now stands in place of the world’s sin; this is the whole point of what Jesus did for us at Calvary. However, once again we’re wresting a term out of its usual context. In Scripture the term "righteous" usually refers to believers."
Page 9
Note that he contradicts his Universalist statement by saying "In Scripture the term "righteous" usually refers to believers."  By doing so not only does he contradict his previous statement but he confirms that, in fact, he intentionally meant to make the statement (it wasn't just sloppy theological language).  He also states the following in his essay:

"God has forgiven the whole world. God has forgiven everyone his sins." This statement is absolutely true! This is the heart of the gospel, and it must be preached and taught as the foundation of our faith. But here’s where the caveat comes in: In Scripture, the word "forgive" is used almost

exclusively in a personal, not a universal sense. The Bible doesn’t make the statement, "God has forgiven the world."

"God has forgiven all sins, but the unbeliever rejects God’s forgiveness." Again, this statement is true—and Luther employed similar terminology to press the point of Christ’s completed work of salvation.16 But we must also recognize that Scripture doesn’t speak this way."

"Since the term objective justification is found neither in Scripture nor in the Lutheran confessions, we can understand the term correctly as referring to the justification of the entire world."

Pastor Rydecki you're telling lies to these people who are reading your blog.  Intentional or not, informed or not you are lying about what Buccholz teaches and the literally vast majority of (W)ELSians who are in a position to teach, instruct are doing the exact same thing when they continue to promote UOJ in any of the versions in which the (W)ELS is currently promoting. 

Our foes, O God, are in Thy hand,
Thou knowest their endeavor;
But only give us strength to stand,
And let us waver never,
Though reason strives with faith, and still
It fears to wholly trust Thy will,
And sees not Thy salvation.

Freddy and Pastor Spencer - do you also stand with the confession that is being made in the name of the Intrepid Lutherans today, both in word and deed?

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

---


WELS church lady has left a new comment on your post "The Insipid Lutherans Shut Themselves Down":

"My Church and Others" A Summary Of The Teachings Of The Evangelical Lutheran Church By John Theodore Mueller!

"We Believe (a) that God does not recieve men on the basis of their own works; (b) but without the deeds of the Law, by grace alone, on account of the perfect merit of Christ, He justifies them, that is, He reguards as rightesous all those who believe that for Christ's sake their sins are forgiven: (c) that by this doctrine alone Christ is given the honor due Him, and through it alone sinners recieve the abiding comfort that God is surely gracious to them; (d) that the Christian religion is centered in the precious doctrine that we obtain forgiveness of sins without the works of our own, solely by the grace of God, for Christ's sake through faith."

This was written in 1926 and published in St. Louis. (BEFORE the Brief Statement of 1932) Later printings were revised in the Other Demoinations section as statics and mergers occured. Yet, the Teaching section remain unabridged. I have a 1968 edition. I am pressed for time, but our friend J T Mueller was dead set against those Modernists and Universalists. Now these two groups are not around any more?(Nope) UJ, OJ, UOJ and associated court language were not visible in this book.

"We reject as unscriptural the following teachings": (here is one exmple for you ichabodians)

3. That God does not offer and communicate the spiritual blessings purchased by Christ alone through the means of grace, but also immediately, without the means of grace:

UOJ falls into that immediately category. Again, in the words of Joe Krohn, there are skads of takes on the teaching. Thsi book was far, FAR better than "This We believe."

In Christ,
from WELS church lady

---


Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "The Insipid Lutherans Shut Themselves Down":

I posted this on Intrepids last night and it wasn't approved and thus not posted this morning. I reposted it this morning and as yet it hasn't been approved. I'm posting it here so that, if by chance, Lisette reads Ichabod I can provide a clarification to the statement I made that she didn't understand.

Lisette, to clarify my earlier point in response to Marcus, the (W)ELS uses Romans 5:18 to prove their doctrine of Objective Justification - that the whole unbelieving world has been declared justified but not saved. In Romans 5:18 Christ declares that the justification Romans 5:18 speaks of is that which saves, "justification that brings life for all men." So either the (W)ELS confession on the central doctrine of Christian faith teaches there is another Justification which doesn't save or it is changing the clear Words of Christ in Romans 5:18 to match their doctrine. It would be teaching another kind of justification if there is one that doesn't save as the (W)ELS confesses. Thus there are two justifications in the doctrine of UOJ. I hope this helps to clarify my previous statements.

From the (W)ELS This We Believe:
"the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men" (Romans 5:18)."

---

bored has left a new comment on your post "The Insipid Lutherans Shut Themselves Down":

One such discussion

Schottey said...
I think it is sad that this discussion went beyond:

"We treat of the forgiveness of sins in two ways. First, how it is achieved and won. Second, how it is distributed and given to us."(Luther)

Then, Professor Manthey brought it back around to reality with the banquet analogy.

The people who try to pretend UOJ is any different from atonement try to pin doctrines on the WELS that they do not teach--trying to take statements about UOJ/Atonement as the WELS saying any are saved apart from faith.
That is not, nor has ever been true.
October 8, 2010 8:20 AM

Tom Wyeth said...
Schottey: The WELS statements on Justification have said that "all people have been declared righteous/saints" but then in many WELS churches we are taught that justification happens through faith only. This incongruity makes it reasonable and fair to ask which is it:

a)Is Christ's righteousness 'available' to everyone, and imputed individually through faith alone?

or

b) Are all people declared Righteous, and the benefits of the Righteousness imputed through faith?

These are two divergent understandings of the most important doctrine of Christianity. Which is correct? Walther, Pieper, and many WELS theologians argue for viewpoint b) very clearly. Do you believe a) or b)?
October 8, 2010 8:52 AM

Schottey said...
The fact that Christ's righteousness is available to everyone is based in the truth that Christ's sacrifice was for everyone. The guilt and punishment for sin was paid by Christ for everyone. Yet, none are saved apart from faith.

It is not incongruous to talk about forgiveness in both ways. To say so calls scripture and the writings of Luther and the Concordians incongruous.

If you would like to further discuss this, go back up to posts by Pastor Rydecki, Pastor Manthey, or one of mine and pretend that I am responding to you again.
October 8, 2010 9:01 AM

Tom Wyeth said...
Schottey:
You responded to me, but you avoided the question. This question is for everyone, by the way so I'll repeat it here: Pick one of the following.

a)Is Christ's righteousness 'available' to everyone, and imputed individually through faith alone?

or

b) Are all people declared Righteous, and the benefits of the Righteousness imputed through faith? I think I've fairly assessed both views in a) and b. Position a) promotes universal payment for sins (atonement) and individual justification through faith alone. b) promotes Objective and Subjective Justification.

Without being snarky, could you tell us which you believe in, Schottey? If you think  my representation of each viewpoint is fair, why can't you answer the question?
October 8, 2010 9:56 AM

***


GJ - If UOJ is in harmony with the Book of Concord and the Bible, why do Stormtrooper heads explode when someone teaches justification by faith in agreement with Luther, the Word, and the Confessions?

Why do Stormtroopers condemn me if we have the same standards? Obviously, we do not.

Why do Stormtroopers evade the most basic questions?

How Is ELCA Different from WELS or Missouri or the Little Sect on the Prairie?

From Faithful Service:

For more information about the mission and ministry at Rushford Lutheran Church please call (507) 864-7152 or e-mail rlc@acegroup.cc

Pastor's Thoughts

Our congregation will vote in just a few days after you have received this newsletter.  I hope the voting result will show a congregation that has put aside differences and has decided to move ahead with unity; however, I fear it will show, once again, a split in our congregation of how we understand the Bible.  Let me share with you my journey in that understanding.

I grew up in a Lutheran Church that taught us God's Word is the light unto our feet to guide us in our daily living.  The Holy Scriptures provided the teachings by which we were to live out our daily calling as Christians in the world.  When I was ordained into the American Lutheran Church, I took a vow to abide by and uphold the teachings of the church.  To preach, teach, or live contrary to my ordination vows would be heresy.  In October, 1980, the ALC put out a social statement titled, “Human Sexuality and Sexual Behavior,” in which it stated, This church regards the practice of homosexual erotic behavior as contrary to God's intent for his children.  It rejects the contention that homosexual behavior is simply another form of sexual behavior equally valid with the dominant male/female pattern.  The social statement also addressed the issue of abortion: We view abortion as a fundamentally inappropriate means of birth control.  Indeed, willful abortion—the sacrifice of a fetal life—is always an offense against God and the human spirit.

The Lutheran Church in America also put out similar statements at that time.  After the merger of the ALC, LCA, and the AELC (Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches—a breakaway group from the LCMS), both of these social statements have been reversed.  How could things change so quickly in just twenty years?  The answer is in the leadership of the ELCA.  Herbert Chilstrom was voted in as the first presiding bishop of the ELCA.  It soon became apparent that Chilstrom wanted changes made.  He did not view abortion as something against God's will but rather a woman's choice.  He did not regard the practice of homosexuality as something contrary to God's will but as a normal sexual lifestyle.  Chilstrom then set up committees, or taskforces, to work at overturning the recent social statements.

I watched and listened to what was going on, thinking these things won't happen.  Most of the other pastors thought as I did, that these changes will never happen.  I didn't realize the power of the bishop or the way politics is played out in the church.  When you can put on the task force who you want, you can stack it to say whatever you want it to say.  This is what has happened with all the social statements that have come out of the ELCA.  In just a few years the statement on abortion was overturned and last year the social statement on sexuality was adopted, overturning those made thirty years earlier.

The question remains, however, as to why have our presiding bishops and many of our pastors taken these positions that are opposite to what the church has always taught?  They are part of a group of theologians who have a new theology to which they adhere.  It is called revision theology.  They believe that the only basic truth we need to get from the Bible is that God loves us and Jesus is the Son of God and saves us from our sins.  Everything else in the Bible is not binding on our faith.

Social justice is very important to revision theologians.  Since they view homosexuality as a social justice issue, the teachings in the Bible against homosexuality become irrelevant.  Since God is love and everybody is loved by somebody, and certainly by God, then everybody will be saved.  Universal salvation is a strong teaching among revision theologians, even though the Bible teaches us otherwise.

After the churchwide assembly in August of 2009, I was still with the ELCA.  I was dazed but somehow I believed that this could be corrected.  Groups like WordAlone and CORE have been working within the ELCAfor many years to try and get the ELCA back to the center.  They have failed and now recommend leaving the ELCA.  Last fall I attended a conference at Roseville Lutheran Church in the cities put on by WordAlone.  There I met Dr.  [David] Preus  and Dr. Crumley , the two presidents of the predecessor church bodies.  Dr. Preus was with the ALC and Dr. Crumley was with the LCA.  Both have been working hard to correct the direction the ELCA has taken.  They said that if they knew the ELCA was going to go in the direction it has, they would never have gone through with the merger.  They are deeply saddened as to what has happened in their church.

What would Jesus do?  I think Jesus would call Bishop Mark Hanson and the Chicago council hypocrites.  He would speak to them like he did to the Pharisees.  They take the Word of God and change it for their own traditions and like to puff themselves up, ignoring the advice of the Council of Bishops and others who advised them not to change the 2/3 rule for the Churchwide Assembly vote.

I, too, was in denial for years about what was going on in the ELCA and where it was headed.  I must stop.  I must be true to my faith.  I must, as the Bible teaches us, put God first.  I must love God above all else.  Salvation is not from the ELCA—it is from God alone.  Some of you will vote to stay in the ELCA because of friendship.  That is the wrong reason.  Your friends cannot save you.  What do you believe in your heart?  When making choices about faith and life, morality and ethics, where do you place the importance of the Bible?  By their own admission and writings the ELCA doesn't place the Bible as the most important anymore.  First and most important is our individual experience they say.  How do you feel about this?  What is your experience?  Second in importance is science.  We must let scientists inform our faith.  Third is philosophy.  As if faith is a matter of the mind and reason.

Fourth is the Bible.  THE BIBLE COMES IN FOURTH AS TO HOW THE ELCA MAKES DECISIONS ABOUT MATTERS OF FAITH AND DAILY LIVING!

People should vote to stay in the ELCA if you agree with the new theological interpretations; if you agree the leadership of the church can manipulate and control church policies and doctrines; if you agree that the cross of Christ is now emptied of its power because there is no one to save because everyone will go to heaven; if you agree that human nature has changed and Jesus didn't have it all right.  I will cling to the cross; I will trust in God's Word as it is revealed in Holy Scripture.

It's so sad because the ELCA has many wonderful ministry programs.  To have such inept leadership that would jeopardize the ministries of the church to further their own theological and social agendas is appalling.  It is both futile and foolish, as well as contrary to its duties and rights, for a Christian congregation to subject itself to the opinions of human leaders who depart from the Word of God.

Go with the LCMC (Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ).  Contrary to what some are saying, we will lose nothing except those above us who are trying to control the church.  There will still be a youth group, a women's organization, a men's club and so forth.  I have chosen to go with LCMC.  If the vote goes to stay with the ELCA, I will resign as soon as I receive a call from a LCMC church.  I hope that doesn't happen.  I would like to stay and continue to be your pastor, teaching and preaching the gospel as I was taught, helping you to be faithful followers of Jesus Christ.

Shalom,

Roger

Pastor Roger Michaelson 

***

GJ - In 1987, I saw them setting up homosexual quotas for every component of ELCA, so the final result had to be the current situation. I published a chapter about homosexual activism in "Out of the Depths of ELCA," 1987, published and reprinted in Christian News.


How did become a shock in 2009, 22 years after merger, two decades of activism aimed in one direction only? How many bishops resigned in disgust during that time? Not one.


Likewise, WELS and Missouri and the ELS will follow, because the issue is control and suppression of the truth, not following the Word and the Confessions.