 |
Cascione's unhinged rant is posted below.
The fact remains, a large number of LCMS pastors have joined Dr. Robert Preus in rejecting UOJ and in teaching justification by faith.
***
<http://www.Lutherquest.org> www.Lutherquest.org
November 13, 2012
Will Suspended WELS Pastor Answer:
"Which is First, Faith or Forgiveness?"
Pastor Paul Rydecki has replied to Pastor Suspended for False Doctrine by
WELS but Honored in LCMS, an article by Jack Cascione published in Christian
News. Rydecki was suspended from the WELS clergy roster when he refused to
give clear answers to questions about his position on the Doctrine of
Objective Justification
Rydecki informed CN editor Herman Otten that he was misrepresented and
slandered in articles by Rev. Mark Bartling and Cascione.
Rather than respond directly, Rydecki sent an unsigned article to Otten that
was forwarded to Bartling and Cascione. The fact that the article is
unsigned means the writer, whoever he is, doesn't want to be exposed as the
author. Perhaps Rydecki wrote it. However, it appears to have the style of
Dr. Greg Jackson and was probably sent to Otten by Rydecki as his own reply.
[GJ - Hoho. I write my own articles in my own name. As I noted above, a
Missouri Synod pastor wrote it.]
In any case, it is not clear who wrote it. We assume this article is
Rydecki's defense of his position. If the article has a problem, Rydecki
has deniability.
[GJ - Cascione never bothers with the facts. He can construct his own truth
from his delusions.]
Instead of all the cloak and dagger mystic typical of those who criticize
the Doctrine of Objective Justification, why doesn't Rydecki answer this
simple question? "According to the Gospel, which is first, faith or
forgiveness? In other words, what is the manner in which God saves sinners?
Does He forgive the world and then give people faith through His word, or
does He give people faith through His word and then forgive them?
Every church body must deal with its own challenges. However, the Wisconsin
Synod is also plagued with Missouri issues that constantly spill over into
its congregations. In his effort to resist the LCMS Church Growth Movement,
that has strongly influenced the WELS, Rydecki picked up a few LCMS bugs,
namely Sacerdotalism, the Sacrament of Ordination, and problems with the
Doctrine of Objective Justification. [GJ - Pop quiz for Jack. Is ordination a
sacrament anywhere in the Book of Concord?]
 |
| No peeking! |
Rydecki is intelligent, highly educated, and brighter than most of his
critics, as his skills in translating, publishing, and marketing 16th
century theological books from the original Latin testify. He is not your
average WELS pastor. However, if the paper he sent to Otten does indeed
represent Rydecki's position, he is as confused and unfit for the pastoral
office as he is brilliant. In other words, he is a few doctrines short of
the whole catechism. After reading his paper, the question is, "Why did
WELS wait so long to suspend him from their clergy roster?"
Rather than present clarity, Rydecki uses his intellect to obfuscate what he
really believes about the Doctrine of Justification. Why doesn't he simply
tell us what he believes? Does God give people faith through His word
before He forgives them, or does God forgive the world before He gives
people faith through His word?
Rydecki Defines the Issues
Rather than give our own definition of Objective and Subjective
justification, the following is Rydecki's definition, which in our opinion
is fairly accurate. "This writer understands Objective Justification as
Jesus' death and resurrection as giving full payment for all the sins of all
people in the world [who are therefore declared righteous in Christ], and
"Subjective Justification" meaning that only those who by the Holy Spirit
and God's grace [through the word of God] have faith and believe in Jesus as
Savior and Lord receive the forgiveness of sins and eternal life." (We
added the words in brackets.)
There is no question that the Bible teaches Objective Justification. Yes,
it is human terminology not found in the Bible. We also do not find terms
such as real presence, catechetics, Trinity, creationism, and baptismal
regeneration, etc. but the Bible still teaches them.
Examples of Objective Justification (God declaring people righteous before
they repent or ask for forgiveness) include Adam and Eve, Christmas, the
paralytic, Christ's absolution from the cross "Father forgive them," Christ
dying for His enemies in Romans 5:10, and more. These are just a few
statements about God forgiving people before they have faith. Any laymen
sitting in church has heard these read from the lectern. If we apply
Rydecki's view to Christmas, the only people who were forgiven at Jesus'
birth were Mary, Joseph, and the shepherds.
The LCMS Led WELS to False Doctrine of Objective Justification
More than 20 times in his unsigned paper Rydecki says the Doctrine of
Objective Justification contradicts the Bible and the Lutheran Confessions.
His paper is directed at what he calls the LCMS problem with Objective
Justification. He blames the WELS problem with Objective Justification on
C. F. W. Walther, Franz Pieper, and the Brief Statement. Rydecki
understands that the WELS and the LCMS are tied at the hip on the Doctrine
of Objective Justification. He cleverly attacks the LCMS documents on
Justification, such as the May 1983 LCMS CTCR Report, and thus to avoid
being accused of false doctrine in the WELS. The LCMS is in no position to
address matters of false doctrine. At their recent convocation of Lutheran
theologians in Peach Tree, Georgia, (paid by Thrivent) the keynote speaker
was Anglican evolutionist, Alister McGraf. More than 120 Lutheran
theologians and leaders attended. Rydecki also understands that the more
WELS involves itself with contemporary worship the less likely WELS lay
people will be interested in defending correct doctrine.
Doctrinal Errors in Rydecki's Reply
Once a theologian rejects Objective Justification he inevitably aligns
himself with an array of Reformed doctrinal errors which is also evident in
the paper Rydecki sent to Herman Otten. The following are quotations from
Rydecki's unsigned paper in bold italic:
The biblical doctrine of Justification is changed by inventing the concept
"Objective Justification," which is not in the Bible and therefore was not
referred to during the Reformation or in the Book of Concord.
The payment of an expiation or atonement is not effective in achieving its
purpose until the sinner's faith is generated by the Holy Spirit to accept
the transaction that God made on his behalf (John 1:10-12). Only upon
conversion does God issue the proclamation that a given person is justified
before the Divine Tribunal. Notice Rydecki's appeal to Reformed decision
theology "to accept the transaction." How does an unbeliever accept what he
doesn't believe? Rydecki credits this acceptance before conversion to the
Holy Ghost. This is blatant Catholic doctrine revived after Luther's death
by Osiander and condemned in Article III of the Formula of Concord. The
point is that no one receives the Holy Ghost to accept anything before
faith. The Holy Ghost only calls people by the Gospel, as we confess in
Luther's explanation to the Third Article of the Apostles' Creed in the
Small Catechism.
This Scripture in Romans [4:25] reveals the necessity of faith [and] does
not prove that God declared the whole world righteous, but it is adopted as
one of the three proofs of Objective Justification in the Brief Statement.
In order to deny Objective Justification Rydecki states Romans 4:25 teaches
that Christ was raised from the dead for believers and not unbelievers. In
other words "God so loved the world" but not as much as He loved the
believers. The problem is that all Christians were born enemies of God.
How did we become believers if Christ didn't rise from the dead for us when
we were unbelievers?
If those who crucified him had thereby been reconciled with God, why did
their hostility continue after Easter Sunday? However, the Bible says, To
wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not
imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of
reconciliation 2Co 5:19. If Rydecki is correct, Christ did not reconcile
His enemies, which must include the whole world. Therefore, according to
Rydecki, the world's continued hatred of Christ means that either Christ
failed to reconcile the world to Himself, or we are only reconciled after we
become believers. This is the Reformed view of a limited atonement, which
teaches that Christ died only for the believers or those that God knew would
eventually come to faith.
Even true believers are desperately wicked (Jer. 17, 9; Rom.7,19) although
their reconciliation began immediately when they are converted. This
statement reaffirms that Rydecki has adopted the Reformed view of a limited
atonement.
Thesis 34 [from the LCMS CTCR 1983] provides a good statement, but creates a
basic contradiction when it states that "It is contrary to Scripture and the
pure Gospel to teach: That God's verdict of justification of forgiveness is
a conditional verdict which specifies that justification occurs only when a
person believes." On what biblical basis can the LCMS provide scriptures
that show that this is true doctrine? Instead of saying the WELS has no
Biblical basis for Objective Justification; Rydecki says the LCMS has no
Biblical basis for Objective Justification. Actually, Rydecki denies every
verse that teaches Objective Justification and then says the LCMS does not
have any verses. What about Christ's words from the cross, "Father forgive
them, for they know not what they do"? Or David's statement that people
should fear God because He forgives. If God didn't forgive, there wouldn't
be any reason to fear God. "But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou
mayest be feared" Psa. 130:4. Of course, Rydecki rejects all of this.
Thesis 38 [from the LCMS CTCR 1983] But who can really understand what
appears to be "word games" and "theological talk" when it is stated that
"although faith does not cause justification," but if that is true, then how
can it be said that "the lack of faith does not cause damnation"? Do our
theological statements really need to be confusing or at least require
serious explanations or questioning? In our previous article we predicted
that Rydecki would have to make faith a cause of salvation instead of God's
grace by divine election, and here he does it. This is like the snake
eating its tail. If faith is the cause of salvation, then how does anyone
get faith? Rydecki has the believer generating his own faith, who becomes a
participant in his own salvation. Thus all the Baptists say they brought
Jesus into their hearts and Rydecki says Amen!
If "Objective Justification" is an official doctrine of the LCMS as
indicated in the CTCR report, then why are there not Bible studies
proclaiming it, and why do not CPH publications and LCMS materials promote
it instead of it appearing in an isolated document by the CTCR in May, 1983?
This is a good question. Most of Rydecki's congregation has left the WELS
and now believes (sic) in Rydeckism, an odd mix of Sacerdotalism and
limited-atonement Reformed theology. The LCMS will simply ignore all of
this, even though Rydecki's main support group is in the LCMS. However, the
WELS is too small to ignore it. How will they explain why they suspended
Rydecki without bracing up their membership with some solid Bible study
material on this issue?
Rydecki No Theologian [Me Jack big theologian.]
The entire paper Rydecki sent to Otten is convoluted and confused. I once
asked Dr. Robert Preus, "Is theology art or science?" To keep his answer
brief, he said it was both.
Rydecki is void of the theologian's art. The Bible uses many of the same
terms in different contexts. If you can't tell the difference in context
you can never be a theologian. For example, the Bible uses the words such
as law, gospel, reconcile, repent, and more in the broad or the narrow
sense. The Bible also uses the same words in different contexts with
different meanings such as sanctify, sanctification, heaven, spirit,
covenant, and more. If a theologian can't follow the change in context he
will inevitably confuse Law and Gospel, as Rydecki does. The conclusion is
that Rydecki is a very bright guy, but he is not a theologian. I've met
great grandmothers who think more clearly than he does.
[GJ - Tempted, temped. I will say nothing.]
What is the Layman to Do?
I think of the laypeople who will read this. Some will say "What difference
does it make?" Others will says, "Who can understand it?" Others will say,
"Why should I take the time to figure it out?" Others will say, "If this is
what my church really teaches, I will go somewhere else." Of course they
would never take this hypocritical attitude with a prescription from their
doctor; prescriptions they can neither pronounce, nor understand, nor know
how they are made, nor know how they work. They just accept it because the
doctor says so. So mister "who cares," "can't understand," "no time," "I'm
out of here," layman, my advice is repent and do not endanger your soul.
God has given you His precious gift of the Gospel. Paul says the Berians (sic)
were "more noble." They checked the Scriptures to see if these things were
so. The saving Gospel of Jesus Christ is worthy of our study. From my view
lay people in the WELS should ask why it took so long for the WELS to
suspend Rydecki. Too many laypeople were misled by Rydecki's false
doctrine. On the other hand, WELS is one of the few Lutheran church bodies
in the world who would stand up for the Doctrine of Objective Justification
as they are doing. False teachers have always plagued the church. Paul
says, For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are
approved may be made manifest among you 1Co 11:19. Lay people in the WELS
should be encouraged that their church body bares the cross of teaching
correct doctrine. If WELS had not taken a stand, then who would?
Therefore, we should all repent. There but by the grace of God are any of
us saved.[GJ - Could someone parse that absurd sentence?]
 |
| "For all the saints from Sodom now in Hell, We think our UOJ is just plain swell..." |
Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to
continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into
the kingdom of God. Act 14:22
