Sermons Are Not for Whining and Guilting

Ben Wink has left a new comment on your post "Nominated for Worst Sermon Ever. Worse Than Ski an...":

There seems to be an element of whining here as well. I believe that no one ever said that the life of the minister was supposed to be easy.

How can one encourage activity in the church when your own pastor belittles the work volunteers can do? Picking weeds and shoveling is nothing a PASTOR should do. What self-respecting minister of the Word would do that? Oh no. But you over there...the maroon that didn't learn Greek...grab a weedwhacker! Everyone's a minister...except when there's gardening to do because I can't be bothered with it, I'm saving souls.

Guilt through the Gospel. That should be a training series title. I heard it so often in quickly conceived half-hearted sermonettes from MLC, the high school after high school.

Where does it end? "You didn't buy an Easter lily. So our church is that much less beautiful in celebration of Christ's resurrection. So visitors are effected that much less by our flowered decorations on the altar. So they seem to doubt the Easter message because of the lack of lilies. So you've caused that person to fall away from the message that would've saved them from hell. I hope you're happy, soul-damner! I don't have time to bring flowers, I'm saving souls!"

Sounds ridiculous right? Is it that far off from what some congregations hear everyday? What should motivate a Christian? The Word in Law and Gospel motivates. Christ motivates. The Holy Spirit motivates. The Means of Grace motivate. Pulpit whinings turn people off. The only thing missing was asking for a handout at the end, because that would have sadly made it even more typical.

***

GJ - I heard a sermon like that in homiletics at the Sausage Factory, when I was there.

The senior said:

"Do you know why our congregation is not growing? It is because you are not out there witnesses. Statistics show that the churches that grow do so because the members are out witnessing..."

I knew that was straight out of the Shrinker books. Balge was appalled and said so. Of course, his own colleagues were teaching it.

I believe the speaker is the one who left Lutherdom altogether and opened a storefront church for healing.

I know that many of the students in 1987 were being brain-washed by Valleskey and others. After the year was over, a full week was devoted to CG propaganda. Soon after, I was expected to attend Kelm's School of Enthusiasm.

Holy Baptism

bored has left a new comment on your post "Come On, WELS - I Have the Graphics You Need To Co...":

Howdy Brett.

If you wanna go on record saying the WELS, LCMS etc are not Christian churches I suppose that's up to you.

Since you're not claiming that these churches are devoid of Christians perhaps you ought to consider your choice of words. There are plenty of churches of every denomination in which true justification is being taught (despite however much the pastor thinks he believes UOJ). To those churches, the "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" attitude will look arrogant and ridiculous, because it is, and because their experience with the WELS (for example) is something far different than yours: you see far more of the seedy and heterodox "intelligencia" who work tirelessly to corrupt truth than do ten average welsmen.

Jesus spoke in a totally different way to the woman at the well than he did to the pharisees. We sinners can take note of that, and add on several more tons of humility because we each are corrupt. It is possible to be kind without degrading the substance of what you're saying. And being charitable and sensitive is not attempting to usurp the Efficacy from the Word.

It's neither charitable nor accurate to say that there are no Christian Churches in the WELS or LCMS or the Roman Church. Better than telling a Roman Catholic or WELsian that technically they aren't Christian, would be to gently show them how their church departs from Scripture.

Save the edicts and the ire for the people who are trying to make antichristian churches of the very very many Christian churches.


***

GJ - These matters are worth debating.

Ichabod is devoted to discussing apostasy, and the Synodical Conference parts are apostate, including the micro-mini splinters. Even the ELS is little more than a splinter, consisting of a dead ice-cream maker, his endowed mini-college, and a few elderly parishes.

Although WELS is officially a UOJ sect, I know from various contacts that church workers reject and repudiate it, just as they reject and repudiate the Church Shrinkage Movement. Wisconsin deviancy is proven by the fact that the Wisconsin Sect persecutes faithful pastors, teachers, and members. The Krohn and Techlin excommunications are two obvious examples, but there are many more.

I have also documented WELS church workers murdering and molesting, a worship professor engaged in drunk driving, and other notorious crimes. Does anyone think I Google the Net for WELS crimes? No, people report the facts and help me document them.

The only proper way to address the problems is to apply the Word in the context of the Lutheran Confessions. That is done in various ways.

Many can only serve as faithful church workers where they are, but they are happy to see their ideas and insights in print. For various reasons, they cannot be out in the open as I am. In the past I used Christian News, which all the synods use, too. But they did not want me to use Christian News to tell the truth.

They really worked overtime to silence me, and the effort continues, poisoning the well. The idea is to make anything associated with me or this blog so toxic that it is dismissed out of hand. The weakness of this gambit is the abundance of Internet evidence. The poor slobs cannot help bragging and posting, so I have the facts in their own words, Tweets, and blogs.

If Brett seems harsh, it may be from his attempts to make up for all the silent Lutherans. Brett's words may remind Lutherans of how little they have done. He went to various clergy to address their perversion of justification. He set up the video services, which have been denounced repeated by... (the pope? ELCA? the UUA? the Babtists?) the "conservative" Lutherans. Doing something positive, even on a modest scale, makes them angry, bitter, and jealous.

But that is the problem with opposing falsehood. The meek compromiser seems to be the harbinger of peace, but he is really the worst trouble-maker, kicking the problems away for a moment, allowing them to return in worse form later.

No one shuns the get-along-go-along guy. They like him and clap him on the back.

Church and Change opponents volunteered me to go to two different C and C conferences. If I had been nearby, I would have gone, for the entertainment value alone. But why did they not go? And if they did, why did they not scream to heaven above? I know the Changers howled in unison, just like a pack of wolves, every time I identified their tactics when I was in WELS. They still snarl, growl, and bite where they can.

Brett Meyer went to Emmaus Conference. He could have excused himself, told me he was too busy. He might have said, "I tried their parishes and gave up." Instead, he helped in the purchase and distribution of 60 books on justification by faith. He spent the time talking to everyone who care to spend the time. Many laity were shocked at the perversion of justification being taught in their synods.

Perhaps if Harrison, Schroeder, and Pope John spent less time denouncing this blog and more time in study and teaching, their members would know more than "Holy Mother Synod is infallible." Harrison, truly the big dog of the three (in money, members, schools) had a chance to have a long discussion with Brett. Instead, Harrison exchanged a few words, glanced at one book, and walked away. Out of touch with the laity, he chose to stay out of touch.

Oh, those danish roll and coffee Thrivent-funded meetings - so much more comfortable, albeit fattening!

If the day came, when people like Brett were in the majority, or at least represented a significant group, the false doctrine would be beaten back and adulterous millionaires would be on the run.

But that has not happened yet, so a few of us will make up for the rest, signing our names, accepting the consequences.

Harrison, Schroeder, Pope John - you are rebuking the wrong people.

WELS Excommunicated Rick Tecklin, Joe and Lisa Krohn, For Supporting the Alleged Position of WELS

Responses to Rick Techlin's Excommunication:

1. Scott E. Jungen

   Rick,
   As tempting as it is to say what I want, I won’t. The Lord’s blessing to you.
   Scott E. Jungen
   
   
2. on July 9, 2011 at 12:24 am Daniel Baker

   I am very sad to hear this, Rick. I am still behind you 100%. If there is any way in which I can be of assistance to you, please let me know.
   
   
3. on July 9, 2011 at 11:26 am Aaron Palmer

   There is no justice in this, not even basic fairness. I’ve actually spent most of my career as a historian studying justice and law (often its abuses). Even the 1740 South Carolina Slave Code stated the following: “Natural justice forbids that any person of what condition soever be condemned unheard.” Yet this congregation and this district appeals board have done so, violating a principle that even slave owners felt compelled to write into law. I am ashamed of my synod and most especially the wolves in sheep’s clothing who have perpetrated this travesty.
   Lord’s blessings to your and your family in these difficult times. I wish I had the power to do more than just offer encouragement.
   Dr. Aaron Palmer
   
   
4. on July 9, 2011 at 11:44 am Joe Krohn

   Dear Rick…May the Lord go with you as well. You are in our prayers. This is all so troublesome. Your situation will need to be dealt with. The dispute can not go on between you, the pastors who are communing you and the leadership of the district in which you reside. In Christ, Joe
   
   
5. on July 9, 2011 at 12:08 pm Tony Kubek Jr

   Dear Rick,
   Those holding positions in our circuit, the Northern Wisconsin District and the synod level have abdicated their responsibility to preserve doctrinal purity. They have lost their credibility among some they are to serve. As enablers, those who allow the issues surrounding your situation to continue unresolved should be held accountable.
   Tony Kubek Jr
   
   
6. on July 9, 2011 at 4:03 pm CS

   ‘As enablers, those who allow the issues surrounding your situation to continue unresolved should be held accountable.’
   Doesn’t that go straight to the top of the synod? To whom shall the case be appealed? A word or two directly from Pres. Schroeder is in order. To me alot is riding on this situation and that of the Krohn family in Texas. These being the two most prominent cases since you both graciously keep the rest of us informed via your blogs. How many other similar cases are out there now flying under the radar that we are not aware of, I wonder? To me, there is alot riding on the on the outcome that eventually must be addressed in some sort of a higher appeal. I think the synod leaders know the division and split that will be brought about should a definitive answer and so-called resolution be brought about. Although I’m not hopeful for anything to be resolved by the Synod in convention at the end of the month, these and matters like these should be top priority in my humble opinion. I’m just a one girl, but one girl whose entire family are life-long WELS members who have supported this synod in countless ways. Sad to say it but I am on the brink of removing my membership from the WELS. Not that I want to leave, but sadly ~ it has left me.
   
   
7. on July 11, 2011 at 11:49 am Aaron Palmer

   I received an interesting phone call this morning from a member of Trinity Lutheran in Neenah (Pastor Englebrecht’s congregation) who I will not identify. He was none too happy about my comments in support of Mr. Techlin and seems to think that I am a “piece of work” to use his exact words. Thanks for the pleasant conversation Mr. X. No morning is complete without a good berating through my cell phone!
   Dr. Aaron Palmer
   
   
8. on July 11, 2011 at 12:42 pm Joe Krohn

   With God all things are possible and it is my prayer that WELS will take a hard look at the bad doctrines that are leading the synod away from the Confessions, but more importantly the Scriptures. In reality I am not at all confident in our situation based on what has happened to Rick. Our issue is much deeper seeded with an unrelenting, long and sordid past surrounding it. It is my honor to go with those who have gone down before me standing on the truth of the Word.
   Joe Krohn
   
   
9. on July 11, 2011 at 9:13 pm Scott E. Jungen

   Dr. Palmer,
   When they squeal, you know you’re on the right path! From what I’ve read from you, you are a “piece of work,” a good one! Rick, hang in there!
   Scott E. Jungen
   
   
10. on July 12, 2011 at 10:34 am Matthew Vik

    I pray that those of you commenting please contact the other individuals as well in keeping with the 8th Commandment.
    thank you.
    
    
11. on July 12, 2011 at 2:59 pm Aaron Palmer

    Mr. Vik,
    I will allow Luther to respond to this talking point about the eighth commandment. I say talking point because I have heard almost the exact statement you have made over and over again regarding this and other similar issues:
    

    
    

    “All this has been said regarding secret sins. But where the sin is quite public so that the judge and everybody know it, you can without any sin avoid him and let him go, because he has brought himself into disgrace, and you may also publicly testify concerning him. For when a matter is public in the light of day, there can be no slandering or false judging or testifying; as, when we now reprove the Pope with his doctrine, which is publicly set forth in books and proclaimed in all the world. For where the sin is public, the reproof also must be public, that every one may learn to guard against it.” (Luther’s Large Catechism, 8th Commandment, Paragraph 284, http://www.bookofconcord.org / Concordia Triglotta).
    
    I do not think any of us are commenting here or elsewhere out of an evil desire to be vicious or spiteful, but stern words are sometimes needed. Do not mistake indignation for malice.
    Dr. Aaron Palmer
    
    
12. on July 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm Daniel Baker

    Matthew,
    I hope that you are not using the 8th commandment as a veil for indefensible doctrine and practice. I also pray that you think the best of your brethren (cf. 1 Corinthians 13:7) and assume that we already have contacted the individuals accused of these heinous crimes.

Antinomianism Comes from Univeral Objective Justification.Just Ask ELCA, Jungkuntz, Kelm

rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "Come On, WELS - I Have the Graphics You Need To Co...":

The term Legalistic Antinomian may seem to be a paradox. It is accurate because it describes the logical outcome of straying away from the Means of Grace and the Lutheran Confessions. The Legalism comes from the Pharisaical use of the Law. The Antinomianism comes from always trying to find loopholes in the Law.

rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "Nominated for Worst Sermon Ever. Worse Than Ski an...":

These wrong use of the law admonitions are a dime-a-dozen in the cesspool known as American Evangelicalism. This is what you get when you have lazy pastors who leave evangelism visits up to a visitation committee. This is what you get when you have an expensive expansion program and you cannot get warm bodies fast enough to fill up the coffers. This is what you get when your doctrine of vocation is faulted and you preach that everyone is a minister. The final result is unduly binding the consciences of the laity. I would not be able to stay for the entire sermon. I would be in the men's room retching.

Reading J. P. Meyer Again.Fatal UOJ Flaws

Do not overlook $50 to 60 million a year from Thrivent, just for the Missouri Synod.

Northwestern Publishing House has re-issued the infamous J. P. Meyer commentary on Second Corinthians, Ministers of Christ.
I will publish a review soon.

The book has all the weaknesses of lecture notes being published.

I wanted to see how the Panning-improved version read. He was supposed to sand down the rough parts, the controversial passages, but there is little evidence of that.

The book proves that the UOJ Enthusiasts will never comprehend their errors, because Meyer-Panning places UOJ next to justification by faith and sees only UOJ.

Meyer quoted Luther, Gerhard, and Calov--all justification by faith theologians--and pulled UOJ out of them, like a magician who finds coins in ears and scarves in his capacious cloak.

I used to pull coins out of ears, a trick I learned from my mother. (Simply palm a coin and pretend to tug on the ear-lobe. The child sees what he is told he is seeing.) An engineer's son kept each coin and placed it carefully on the table, watching the pile grow. That trick was slowly impoverishing me.

The problem is basic and obvious. The UOJ fanatics turn every Atonement passage and term into justification.

Justification in the New Testament means God's declaration of forgiveness. That is also true of the Book of Concord, Luther, Melanchthon, Chytraeus, Chemnitz, Gerhard, and Calov.

Many advocates of UOJ have conceded this fact - that justification in those instances is exactly what R. C. H. Lenski said - justification by faith. But that does not deter the UOJ Enthusiasts.

Circular Reasoning
Assumptions lead to conclusions, and conclusions can easily create assumptions. Whether we call it circular reasoning, begging the question, or special pleading, using assumptions to prove a conclusion is a logical fallacy.

For example, some clergy were debating which Gospel was written first. I believe the issue cannot be solved and is irrelevant anyway. John is clearly last because the Fourth Gospel assumes knowledge of the others.

To prove his case, one pastor said, "Matthew and Luke had to have a document before them." I kept questioning them. Why assume that document? Yes, there is historical evidence for Matthew being first, but most of history has vanished from war and neglect. Before books became the norm, which happened in modern times, people used their memories to contain entire works of literature.

One possible answer to their problem is this:

1. Matthew was first, the Jewish Gospel, modeled after the Five Books of Moses.
   
2. Luke was second, a Gentile Gospel for non-Jews.
   
3. Mark wrote a harmony of the two, with only two brief passages being unique to Mark: the seed growing secretly and the great robeless escape.
   
4. John wrote his unifying Gospel, assuming the reader's knowledge of the previous Gospels, but adding essential material.
   

The standard academic solution today is:

1. Mark was first, supposedly lacking the Virgin Birth.
   
2. Matthew and Luke used Mark as the outline, adding material from the mysterious and never-found Q document.
   
3. John was written 300 years later! That is a farce, since a scrap of John's Gospel was found dating the actual written version to 100 AD or earlier.
   

Syn Conference Assumptions There are so many Syn Conference assumptions, which pre-determine the conclusion of any argument. Here are just a few:

1. Walther was the great orthodox Lutheran hero, who saved the Saxon migration from destruction, created the Missouri Synod, led the Synodical Conference, and never even broke wind his entire life.
   
2. Walther was infallible so questioning anything related to him or his life means automatic excommunication.
   
3. The Wauwatosa professors (WELS) were trained by the Walther disciples, so they could not be wrong about anything. In fact, they improved on everything.
   
4. Every Atonement passage in the Bible is really a UOJ passage, but the early writers (like Paul) did not realize it yet, because the issues had not been raised until much later.
   
5. No American Lutheran leader, apart from the Walther circle, could possibly be right about anything, because that individual was not part of the Walther circle.
   
6. The LCMS, WELS, and ELS are always correct in doctrine and practice, no matter what they teach and practice.
   
7. The LCMS, WELS, and ELS dedicate themselves to strict fellowship practices, even while romping with ELCA homosexuals, lesbians, and high-church atheists. They do so to help, improve, and ejucate ELCA.
   
8. The papacy is the very Antichrist, unless Missouri, WELS, or the ELS wants papists to lecture them.
   
9. ELCA is just pathetic, unless Missouri, WELS, or ELS wants to work with them.
   
10. Christian News is disgusting, unless the synod leaders want to flatter Otten into spinning and spiking the news for them.
    

Robert Preus quoted this with approval, but Rolf claims his father never departed from Norwegian Pietism.

Come On, WELS - I Have the Graphics You Need To Counter This Antichrist Nonsense.You Don't Believe the Pope Is the Antichrist!

Roman Catholic homosexual Archbishop Weakland and his prieststaught the Word of God at Wisconsin Lutheran College, WELS.
Bishop James Shannon walked in procession with the Little Sect faculty and spoke at their religious assembly.
Come on, WELS/ELS. You are just as ecumenical as ELCA.More about Bishop Shannon here.
" If and when the Pope accepts Shannon's resignation as Auxiliary Bishop of St. Paul and as pastor of St. Helena's Church in Minneapolis, he will remain a bishop—but without portfolio."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,941693,00.html#ixzz1S3e9yIhk

Michele Bachmann's Church Says the Pope Is the Antichrist

By Joshua Green

Jul 13 2011, 4:25 PM ET 240

The Iowa front-runner for the GOP nomination was a longstanding member of a strict Lutheran synod with controversial views of Catholicism

Michele Bachmann is practically synonymous with political controversy, and if the 2008 presidential election is any guide, the conservative Lutheran church she belonged to for many years is likely to add another chapter due to the nature of its beliefs--such as its assertion, explained and footnoted on this website, that the Roman Catholic Pope is the Antichrist.

Bachmann was a longtime member of the Salem Evangelical Lutheran Church in Stillwater, Minn., which belongs to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), a council of churches founded in 1850 that today comprises about 400,000 people. WELS is the most conservative of the major Lutheran church organizations, known for its strict adherence to the writings of Martin Luther, the German theologian who broke with the Catholic Church and launched the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century. This includes endorsing Luther's statements about the papacy. From the WELS "Doctrinal Statement on the Antichrist": 

Since Scripture teaches that the Antichrist would be revealed and gives the marks by which the Antichrist is to be recognized, and since this prophecy has been clearly fulfilled in the history and development of the Roman Papacy, it is Scripture which reveals that the Papacy is the Antichrist.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama's relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright nearly derailed his quest for the Democratic nomination after video surfaced of Wright's extreme pronouncements. Similarly, the views of Bachmann's church toward the papacy--which are well outside the mainstream of modern political discourse--could pose a problem as she pursues the Republican nomination.

Seeking to better understand WELS theology and how voters should regard it, I called the Rev. Marcus Birkholz of Salem Lutheran Church in Stillwater. When I identified myself, he hung up. Turning the other cheek, I called WELS and had slightly better luck. While I didn't get to speak to a pastor, as I'd hoped, Joel Hochmuth, the communications director, did his best to oblige. On the matter of the Antichrist, he said, "Some people have this vision of a little devil running around with horns and red pointy ears. Luther was clear that by 'Antichrist' [he meant] anybody who puts himself up in place of Christ. Luther never bought the idea of the Pope being God's voice in today's world. He believed Scripture is God's word." Hochmuth hastened to add that despite the lengthy doctrinal statement, the belief that the Pope is the Antichrist "has never been one of our driving principles."

Hochmuth also revealed that Bachmann is no longer a member of the WELS congregation. "I do know that she has requested a release of her membership," he said, adding that she took the unusual step of formally requesting that release in writing. "She has not been an active member of our fellowship during the last year." Hochmuth wouldn't speculate on whether her presidential ambitions factored in this decision -- the nation's 70 million Catholics (who lean Republican) might not respond kindly to the Pope-as-Antichrist stuff -- but he did emphasize that "it's not something you're going to hear preached from our pulpits every Sunday."

Nevertheless, the statement alarmed prominent Catholics. "Clearly, that is anti-Catholic," said Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a national organization devoted to protecting Catholic civil rights. "This kind of hatred is reminiscent of Bob Jones. I believe [Bachmann] has in the past condemned anti-Catholicism. But there's no question -- all you have to do is read it -- that they clearly have anti-Catholic statements up there." Donohue said he would refrain from making any judgments until he heard from Bachmann, who he said must address the matter promptly. "We never went after Obama for sitting there for 20 years listening to Rev. 'Goddam America' Wright. I don't want to give him a pass, but I saw no bigotry on Obama's part. Similarly, I have see none on Bachmann's part. But it's clear that the [synod]'s teachings are noxious and it's important for her to speak to the issue. Obama had to answer for Wright, McCain had to answer for [the Rev. John] Hagee, and this is something that Bachmann has to answer for."

For context, I spoke to theologians familiar with Lutheran church history, who generally agreed with Hochmuth's characterization of Luther's views on the Antichrist. Some suggested that it would be useful to think of WELS as sitting well to the right of the two other major Lutheran organizations in America, the liberal Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (4.5 million members) and the conservative Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (2.4 million). "The Wisconsin Synod is a relatively small, conservative church body," Terrence P. Reynolds, the chair of the Theology Department at Georgetown University and a Wisconsin Synod member, told me. "They believe that the Christian Church's task, and their role, is to proclaim the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ. For some church bodies, the understanding of the pure gospel can be largely limited to the proclamation that we are 'saved by Christ'; for others it can involve a rich and substantial context of doctrinal understandings that surround that claim. The WELS understanding of the pure Gospel would fit well in the latter category."

This strict adherence to doctrine, and an awareness of how sharply it conflicts with modern societal norms, probably accounts for the church's nine-page statement on the Antichrist. Hochmuth's protestations notwithstanding, the church's position on the Pope and the Antichrist is perfectly clear -- those who consider themselves strict Lutherans cannot simply dismiss Luther's teachings -- even as its discomfort with that conclusion is plain to anyone who reads the full statement. For instance, it goes out of its way to make clear its position that it considers Roman Catholics to be Christians (a point Hochmuth made to me, as well).

In fact, the only person really disputing any of this is Bachmann herself. Confronted during a candidate's debate in 2006, she denied her church's position on the Pope:

Pat Kessler, WCCO (debate moderator): We'll start with Senator Bachmann. Religion and politics that has crept into this campaign over and over again. The Minneapolis-based Star Tribune reports today, Senator, that the church you belong to is affiliated with the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, which, it says, regards the Roman Catholic pope as the Anti-Christ. Is this true, do you share the views of your church, and why should any Catholic in the Sixth District vote for you if it is true?

Bachmann: Well that's a false statement that was made, and I spoke with my pastor earlier today about that as well, and he was absolutely appalled that someone would put that out. It's abhorrent, it's religious bigotry. I love Catholics, I'm a Christian, and my church does not believe that the Pope is the Anti-Christ, that's absolutely false.

Bachmann's campaign did not respond to emails and phone calls seeking comment.

Reynolds, of Georgetown University, says that this view of the papacy, alarming though it may be to the modern political world, has, over the centuries, shaped the rise of Protestantism. "The discussion of the papacy arose during the vitriolic exchanges Luther had with the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation," he explained. "Luther thought [the Scripture] proclaimed clearly that we are saved by grace and that faith alone is what justifies us before God; for Luther those claims were the fundamental teaching of the Scripture and should be the focus of the Church's proclamation." 

But the Roman Catholic Church insisted that faith alone was insufficient, and that good works dictated and overseen by the church were necessary for salvation. "As the debates continued," Reynolds said, "Luther became more and more frustrated with Rome's rejection of justification by grace alone through faith and began to link the Church's intransigence on this matter with Scriptural references to the Antichrist. According to the Scripture, anyone who seeks to undermine the purity of the Gospel and the clear teaching of Scripture in the name of the Gospel--or anyone who becomes anti-Gospel--is the Antichrist.  So Luther made the claim** that the Pope is the Antichrist, insofar as the Pope insists upon obedience to his office and on work righteousness, both of which demean the atoning work of Christ."

That's the theological basis for the WELS claim. It may be up to Bachmann to furnish a political one.
--
**For anyone interested in further reading, Reynolds says the claim that the Pope is the Antichrist appears in the Lutheran Confessions, in the Smalcald Articles, where it is declared that "This teaching shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ, because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God " (Smalcald Articles, Part II, Article IV; Of the Papacy).