Swedes lived in Moline and had their college a mile away, Augustana, in Rock Island.
WELS has imitated the decline of the old Augustana Synod.
Rev. Paul A. Rydecki said...
If the postcard isn't read, how does anyone receive the postcard and know that there's an Easter service with a yummy breakfast before or after? If they mean that a long, wordy treatise on doctrine isn't read, then they may well be right. But a short invitation itself does not have to be devoid of truth and honesty. The question is, to what are we inviting people? To an event that will cater to the old man or to a proclamation of God's truth? Granted, an unbeliever only has an old man, but that does not mean that the old man must be coaxed into falling into this "trap" where we actually mean to kill him (if only he knew...).
I've heard it said, "No unbeliever goes to church for the right reasons." I used to believe that. Now I see the error in it. True, no unbeliever goes to church out of love for Christ. But some go because their conscience convicts them and tells them there is a God and they've offended him, and they'd better find out who he is before it's too late. Is that a "wrong reason" for going to church? Absolutely not. In fact, those are precisely the unbelievers whom the Lord has prepared to hear his Law and Gospel.
Now what? Shall we, instead of honestly portraying what the Church has to offer, persuade them to come in for other, non-spiritual reasons? Then we are promoting ourselves, not Christ. This idea that we should somehow "trick" people into exposing themselves to the Means of Grace (Ha! They fell for it! They came for breakfast and exciting, upbeat music, but mixed in with all that we're going to give them Jesus! Surprise!) is really deceptive and dishonest.
The idea that we shouldn't "pepper" our mailings with religious messages (i.e., the Word of God and the proclamation of Christ) because the world will perceive it as "cultish" is really scary. I don't know where that comes from. Should we be content to let the cults promote their doctrine freely while we shrink back from presenting doctrine for fear of appearing "cultish," relying instead on what a friendly bunch of people we have in our congregation? May this never be.
***
GJ - The conversation reminds me of many tea and crumpets discussions in WELS. Someone quoted Jester as saying "So much for pre-evangelism," as if a quip from John Jeske threw the Shrinkers back, like the soldiers when Jesus said, "I AM."
In fact, J. P. Meyer has an excellent passage about this "baiting the hook" concept. He rebuked it quite sternly as adulterating the Word of God. WELS pays attention to Meyer only where he is wrong. There is no discernment.
The Word of God must be used for rebuking, but the pastors refuse to rebuke. If they start to rebuke, they pull back because of the Satanic blowback from the Shrinkers.
One Intrepid told me he was booted in the backside for days, because of one mild Intrepid post. After that, Rydecki reversed himself on UOJ and Lindee laid down a bank of fog, aided and abetted by Thoughts of No-Faith Webber.
The comments are rigorously policed and edited. Notice how they appear, disappear, and stop.
So far I am reminded of the statement about the Italians in war. "They are worth two divisions on our side if they go with our opponents. They are like four divisions against us if they are our allies."
The UCC is the model for mainline churches going Unitarian -
without really admitting it.
The Unitarians lead the way in radicalism,
closely followed by the UCC, with the mainlines
(ELCA, WELS, LCMS, ELS, CLCs) close behind.
--
LPC has left a new comment on your post "Intrepid Thoughts":
The problem with some so called "Intrepid Lutherans" or so called "Steadfast Lutherans" is that they rebuke false doctrines but promote one of their own, like UOJ.
LPC
