Wednesday, February 1, 2012

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - Presiding Bishop and HOD President Face off over TEC Budget

This an allegory for Jefferts-Schori's leadership.


VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - Presiding Bishop and HOD President Face off over TEC Budget:


Presiding Bishop and HOD President Face off over TEC Budget
Litigation costs are forcing church's hand in how it will spend money now and in the future

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
January 31, 2012

A power struggle and simmering rivalry which has been going on for a number of years between Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori and House of Deputies president Bonnie Anderson erupted this past week when the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church met in Maryland where the two parties offered different visions of the mission of the church.

Executive Council received two different budget proposals from its Executive Committee with one setting the diocesan asking at the current level of 19 percent, and requiring cuts of almost $6 million from the $140 million 2010-2012 budget adopted by the General Convention. This is the position favored by PB Jefferts Schori.

The other lowers the diocesan asking to 15 percent and requires cuts of almost $21 million from the current budget. HOD President Anderson favors the 15 percent asking.

Both budgets were ultimately scuttled and a third budget was sent to Program, Budget & Finance.

"We have created something different and unique. There are increased funds for justice ministry in this budget that we will present to PB&F," Said Jefferts Schori at a press conference.

Anderson ripped the national church's current spending habits, "Let's reduce the amount that we ask dioceses to send to the Church Center. Let's study the best use of the building at 815 Second Avenue with an eye to freeing up for mission the $7.7 million dollars that is earmarked for facilities cost and debt repayment during the next triennium. Let's expect that dioceses and their networks know best how to build up God's church and support ministry where it is most effective. And as we change the budget, let's acknowledge that we also need to change our models of accountability and responsibility to be mutual and respectful of the entire people of God, not just those with ecclesial power."

VOL reporter Mary Ann Mueller confronted the Presiding Bishop with this charge at a press conference following to which Jefferts Schori retorted, "I believe that all members of The Episcopal Church have ecclesial power meant to be used in service of God's mission."

Bishop and Mrs. Robinson.
He divorced his wife.


Behind Anderson's charges are the horrendous millions of dollars being spent on lawsuits to reclaim churches that have fled TEC's grip. TEC mortgaged 815 2nd Ave., for $60 million to continue the lawsuits and now must earmark millions for repayments. The reason for all this goes back to the consecration of the libidinous homosexual Bishop of New Hampshire Gene Robinson whose behavior brought about the tear in the Episcopal Church resulting in the formation of the Anglican Church in North America. Sin has consequences and it is catching up with The Episcopal Church big time. Aspects of mission are being downgraded for payments that MUST be made. Banks offer no mercy.

Chief Operating Office Bishop Stacy Sauls commented, "This meeting, as you might imagine, is the source of no small amount of anxiety for the staff as we consider the budget... Managers and team leaders are engaged in conversations about how to take whatever budget comes from General Convention and dream, create, adapt, and act. But I do ask you to be sensitive to their legitimate needs in this time."

He also asked for "a serious discussion of far-reaching structural reform leaving nothing off the table and no question unasked."

INTERPRETATION: The money is not coming in to cover all the crazy stuff TEC wants to pass and sponsor which the world and most of the laity in the Episcopal Church ignore. Canon lawyer A. S. Haley noted those challenges calling them "significant and substantial."

Kirk Hadaway, the church official in charge of congregational research, and Matthew Price of the Church Pension Fund raised the alarm saying that 72% of Episcopal congregations were in financial stress as of 2010 (compared to 58% of other denominations for the same year) -- the highest level in the past decade, by far... The question is how long will it be before the other 28% succumb and find they can barely raise enough funds to keep the doors open and salaries paid.

In order to get her way, Jefferts Schori blindsided the HOD president by going directly to the House of Deputies through the House of Bishops with a video of her plans and her take on the budget.

This so incensed Anderson that she fired back a public letter in which she said that the Office of Communications email sent to all the bishops had mischaracterized her response to the video's release and asked the bishops to forward the video message to their diocese's deputies.

She noted angrily, "In my nearly 25 years as a deputy, I don't ever recall the Presiding Bishop speaking directly to the House of Deputies outside of a joint session or without giving the House due notice, while at General Convention. I don't ever recall a Presiding Bishop corresponding directly with deputies outside of the General Convention, without the knowledge of, or in collaboration with the President.

"I was surprised because I thought that the Presiding Bishop, her staff, and I had worked through some important issues of internal communications last fall. I had talked with both Bishop Sauls and the Presiding Bishop and asked that we proceed in a more collegial and cooperative manner. I thought we had agreed to do so.

"But while the General Convention Office was holding the video, it was released by the Office of Communications to the whole church just hours before the Presiding Bishop and I were scheduled to arrive in Baltimore where we could have resolved the situation in person.

"I told her that I am concerned about the use of church wide resources to lobby General Convention on only one side of a legislative issue.

"Despite this productive conversation, upon direction from the Presiding Bishop, the Office of Communications sent the second email, this time to bishops, that mischaracterized my request that the video be held, thus putting me in a difficult position and making it necessary to spell all of this out."

Canon lawyer and former Eau Claire bishop William Wantland told VOL that Jefferts Schori's actions were "sneaky but legal." There is no limitation on a Diocesan Bishop speaking to the Diocesan Deputies, he said.

In the end money, or the lack of it, will determine the course of action TEC will take. The two women, who both share a liberal theological worldview will find that whatever they decide, events will overtake them and determine the course of TEC's long spiral downward.

END


'via Blog this'

Dwight Moody: the evangelist who nearly wasn’t « Churchmouse Campanologist



Dwight Moody: the evangelist who nearly wasn’t « Churchmouse Campanologist:

"Moody’s visits to the UK made news in Sweden. Swedish pietists invited him to travel there but he never did. Nonetheless, the Swedish Mission Friends looked forward to reading his sermons and sang Sankey’s hymns. Swedes who emigrated to Chicago attended Moody’s church."

'via Blog this'

GJ - I highly recommend this series. Moody was very important. I grew up listening to WDLM radio from Chicago, a city with a large Swedish population.

Augustana began as a Pietistic mission, but became confessional, as the name suggests. I look forward to future installments.

All Time Favorite Post Is...Drumroll

Tim Glende loved this photo so much that it remained his Facebook profile picture for a long time.
That is not his wife or daughter, but Katy Perry, the ex-wife of Russell Brand.
Tim wrote so many anonymous comments on this blog that I began
to call him A. Nony Mouse.
Tim began a blog with that name, but erased it.

The all-time favorite post, since June of 2010, is...


The Rev. A. Nony Mouse Hates These Sayings But Loves To Plagiarize Groeschel.


5,224 views so far. But nobody reads this blog.


What did the toxic but anonymous bully complain about in the latest fake blog eructation?


Quotations! He hates those collections of quotations.


He probably hates how appropriate they are, how the Word of God condemns his life, his false doctrine, his slaughter of the sheep.

One of Tim's Boys: Engaging, Articulate, Well-Informed,
A Gentleman to The CORE

Mequon graduates provide medical opinions,
before anyone asks for one.
Their wives help out, too.
Anonymous said... I was thinking about it the other day and following the UOJ debate over at that Steadfast Lutheran blog: Does anyone think Jackson might have an undiagnosed form of autism? Aspergers perhaps? My wife works with kids like that in special ed. program in south Milwaukee and he seems to display a lot of the characteristics. For one thing, he has a hard time interacting with people on an emotional level. His humor is stuff that only he thinks is funny. I often times go his page and look at all his odd photo-shop stuff and think "I don't get it. Is this supposed to be funny? I mean, I can't even figure out what he's trying to portray here." It would also explain his relationship with his parishners. He seems to have never figured out that they uniformly disliked him. Secondly, people with Aspergers typically can't understand written works on an intuitive level. They are really good at memorizing facts, but they don't see the big picture. Case-in-point: Jackson builds up great deposits of quotes in his posts, but he doesn't really understands how to interpret them. I mean, looking at his "scholarship," I get why he could get into Notre Dame but then took 15 years to graduate. He can memorize facts, but he has no comprehension of how they work together or even that different words have nuance and can mean different things in different contexts. He probably aced the GRE, but then couldn't comprehend most of the course material. He's told some stories about his relationship with Yoder that seem to hint at that. Anyways, just an idea. Aspergers in a person of his generation would probably not have been diagnosed so it sort of makes sense.


***


GJ - A typical WELS tactic is to start with  falsehoods and spin tales from that. A little research would turn up my basic bio, which means I finished college, seminary, and a master's at Yale in 7 years, a PhD program at Notre Dame in 7 years. If you add an MA in education, 15 years would be the time involved in earning six degrees rather than one. That by itself would show the Glende pal (or Glende himself) to be an ignorant, hate-filled misanthrope. My diagnosis is - alcoholism, addiction to porn, and extreme laziness.


Northwestern Publishing House wants me to review their books, so WELS must think I can read and comprehend theological content. I wonder if the writer has ever been asked to review a book from a publisher. Has he ever written a book or essay? Has he ever signed his name to a comment?


Northwestern Publishing House also sells Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant. That meant studying the doctrine of Roman Catholicism, Lutheran orthodoxy, and Protestantism while providing a useful guide for all three. WELS sold cartons of the books years ago, and the book continues to sell. I am surprised that so many genius-level Mequon graduates never wrote anything like it. Glende's Uncle Brug recommended it to his classes, the last I heard.


At one point all the doctrinal books at NPH were written by non-WELS authors. How does one explain that fact to us supposed Asperger patients?


We have trouble relating to Lutheran pastors who copy Groeschel sermons verbatim, not comprehending that they have left the Lutheran Church by doing so.


The latest comment on Glende's anonymous blog simply means that the Time of Wrath/Church and Chicanery forces are feeling the hurt from being exposed. More people are questioning their honesty, morality, decency, and doctrine. 


The Hochmuth scandal, which Glende wants to cover up with PR, is just the tip of septic tank in WELS. Ask an insider. I have.

Jack Kilcrease, Paul McCain, and Rolf Preus:
Anti-Means of Grace Triple Threat

Two years in the parish and he still calls
himself a pastor - just like Walther.



Comment Link: http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=4190#comment-279717
Author: Rev. Paul T. McCain
Comment:
I see that the Jackson disciples have been hard at work here spreading the Gospel according to Jackson.


People should know that Greg Jackson is a false teacher. He was, at one point, a Lutheran pastor, but he is no longer. He was expelled from several Lutheran church bodies. [GJ - Note his lies about working with Herman Otten. Same old liar - Paul McCain. He was already in legal trouble in the 1990s with Larry Darby for trashing Larry, one of the more generous donors to his alma mater, Concordia Seminary, Ft. Wayne.]


He now claims to have a "church" on the Internet, providing "worship services" and even communion, via  streaming video on the Internet, from a spare bedroom in his house. Meyer and Cruz are two of his "members" ... things are so bad that Jackson even coaches these people to hold elements up to the computer screen while he "consecrates" them. [GJ - Another delusion from McCain. He was recently forced to apologize to Norman Teigen for the vicious lies published on his crypto-Roman blog. He also said the congregation was named after my dead daughter, another false assertion. Why was this charmer banned from the ALPB's online forum?]


The best advice anyone could give to people who may be tempted to engage in conversation with Jackson or his small group of fanatic disciples is simply this: Mark and avoid them. Jackson and his followers are wolves in sheep's clothing, deceived and deceiving others.


We should have nothing to do with them, other than to rebuke them sharply and warn others.


I believe that the BJS site is doing no good service in providing a platform for these deniers of the Biblical and Lutheran doctrine of justification.

---

Jack Kilcrease, Roman Catholic employee,
is Paul McCain's expert on UOJ.

Carl Vehse strikes me as having a similar attitude.
Vehse knew all about Bishop Stephan's adultery,
like the Walther brothers and the rest of the Saxon Pietists.
Syphillis was the deal-breaker.


Dr. Jack Kilcrease has left a new comment on your post "Investigating Universal Objective Justification":


You write:


"Jack Kilcrease--trained by ELCA, employed by Roman Catholics to teach religion to papists--gave away his profound ignorance of Lutheran theology by his repeated references to "the doctrine of Objective Justification." David Scaer and Paul McCain think he is the bomb. The Lutheran Reformers avoided such terminology as "the doctrine of..." There is only one doctrine, a unified truth - in harmony with the entire witness of the Sacred Scriptures. Writing about "doctrines" in the plural suggests a modular view of Christianity, where some units can be changed, others dropped, and still others added."


SD V states:
"These two doctrines, we believe and confess, should ever and ever be diligently inculcated in the Church of God even to the end of the world"


Interesting how they use the word "doctrine" to describe separate articles of the faith (law and gospel).


What about Ep Rule and Norm section?:


"To this direction, as above announced, all doctrines are to be conformed, and what is, contrary thereto is to be rejected and condemned, as opposed to the unanimous declaration of our faith."


Again, interesting how here the body of doctrine is call (sic) "doctrines." Very interesting indeed. 

***

GJ - "To avoid" is not synonymous with "to never use." Poor Jack is so busy dazzling McCain and Scaer than he has lost his grip on the English language. Like the others, Kilcrease constantly makes a fool of himself by constantly going back to the absolution of the world, which is not taught in the Scriptures, never affirmed in the Book of Concord, and never taught with seriousness before Halle University's rancid Pietism began to take effect.

The double-justification language of OJ and SJ, lovingly stroked by the trio, is from the Calvinist Woods translation of the rationalist-Pietist Knapp's textbook.  Walther later approved of the language and F. Pieper canonized it. 

---

OJ trembled on Melanchthon's lips,
Rolf would have us believe.
No, this confesses exactly what Robert Preus wrote in
Justification and Rome.

LaughQuest has this gem from Rolf Preus:

As AC IV makes clear, the faith through which we are justified is the faith that believes that Christ suffered for us and that for his sake our sin is forgiven and righteousness and eternal life are given to us. To believe that for Christ's sake our sin is forgiven is to believe in objective justification. 

“I haven’t seen a clear Scripture passage that states that God ever absolved the world of sin, or that the sins of the world have been remitted – although they have certainly all been paid for!” 

Romans 4, 25 clearly teaches that God absolved the world of sin.

***

GJ - Romans 4 is a chapter on Abraham as the father of faith, climaxing with believers being justified by faith. World absolution is definitely not taught in Romans 4 or 5.


---

Author: Dr. Jack Kilcrease
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=4190#comment-279752
Comment:
<a href="#comment-279742" rel="nofollow">@Jim Pierce  #225 </a>


Apt analogy with the oneness penecostals.  I've had the same experience.


I think everyone can see why I warned against engaging with the Jackson sect.  Discussions and debates with them are highly fruitless since they simply endlessly accuse one of holding positions that they do not.

---

Comment Link: http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=4190#comment-279771
Author: Rev. Paul T. McCain
Comment:
Jack, you are entirely correct. Engagement is futile. There is such a thing as invincible ignorance and Jackson and his disciples are prime examples of it.

---

Gibbon - "They fought without discipline and ran without shame."


---


Dr. Jack Kilcrease has left a new comment on your post "Jack Kilcrease, Paul McCain, and Rolf Preus: Anti-...":


Actually, I believe it is you who has missed the point. I am aware the the term "avoid" need not mean "never." The point is that you haven't provided any evidence that the Reformers, Confessors, or the Lutheran scholastics "avoided" the use of doctrine as a pural or talk of individual doctrines. My use of the Formula of Concord was intentional: If it was their MO to "avoid" such a practice (as you assert), they would have tried not to use such terminology in central confessonal document. But of course they show no such aversion and very casually use the term "doctrine" for individual articles of the faith. Certainly they want to define doctrine as a coherence body (corpus doctrina), but that does not mean that they avoided talk of individual articles of the faith as doctrines.


Actually, if you've read Preus or Richard Muller's scholarship on the period of Reformed and Lutheran scholasticism, you would know that the loci-method actually tended to isolate individual doctrines within given treatises designated as "common places." As Preus and Muller note, the development of each doctine is self-contained. This would suggest that both Lutherans and Reformed folks often thought of and developed individual doctrines on their own, even if they thought the the given doctrine had a larger meaning within the corpus doctrina. Hence, the arrangment of these doctrines within larger systematic theologies of the period tends to be arbitrary. For this reason, I do not think you have much of a basis for making your claim.


Now, I know you probably won't publish this. But I thought that I would clarify my point any way.


I wish you all the best and that God may bless you in spite of your theological errors.


***


GJ - Jack, you need an account on LaughQuest. You would no longer feel like an outcast. Maybe McCain can recommend you - while denying that he did.


---


"Enjoy our nuanced blend of Evolution and creation,
Roman liturgy and Arminian content,
on sale now at CPH."




bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Jack Kilcrease, Paul McCain, and Rolf Preus: Anti-...":

Now that UOJ and McCain's evolution pandering to kids has been outed, he says everyone ought to mark and avoid the Ichablog. It's rather like the mafia telling people not to talk to the FBI and cops so they can get back to their business as normal, taking in money from people who think they are orthodox Lutherans.

David R. Barnhart: Komen Drops Funding for Planned Parenthood



David R. Barnhart: Komen Drops Funding for Planned Parenthood:

"Abiding Word Ministries has previously reported Susan G Komen's support for Planned Parenthood.
Therefore we are pleased to report that funding has stopped.

http://www.thechurchreport.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=siteContent.default&objectID=148289"

'via Blog this'

Investigating Universal Objective Justification


Comment Link: http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=4190#comment-279655
Author: Joe Krohn

Comment:


In January of 2011, a WELS pastor preached that our sins were forgiven before we were born; before we heard the Word of God; before our Baptisms.  He stated during discussions that before we do anything, God has forgiven us.  We challenged this teaching.  We received many of the same ruinations that are prevalent here in defense of UOJ.  So you see this is a big problem.  It will eventually go one of two ways.  Either it will morph into full fledged universalism, or go back to the way Scripture and the Confessions speak of one Justification (the promise of forgiveness) that comes through faith, by Grace for Christ’s sake; as it has been since the fall of man in the garden.


The key to understanding justification is where the righteousness of Christ resides and how it is distributed.  It is on Christ objectively FOR (not on) the world and becomes OURS (imputation) through faith by a hearing of the Word of God by the power of the Holy Spirit.


BTW…we were excommunicated for our confession and told we were in need of repentance.  When we asked what commandment we broke, we were given no answer and told it was a fellowship issue.  Excommunication is reserved for the unwillingness to repent for breaking the Law of God…the Ten Commandments.

***

GJ - The Unsteady Lutheran Enthusiasts ended up with a good discussion on their hands, because a wide variety defended the historical Christian faith instead of bowing to the UOJ bullies.


Jack Kilcrease--trained by ELCA,  employed by Roman Catholics to teach religion to papists--gave away his profound ignorance of Lutheran theology by his repeated references to "the doctrine of Objective Justification." David Scaer and Paul McCain think he is the bomb.


The Lutheran Reformers avoided such terminology as "the doctrine of..." There is only one doctrine, a unified truth - in harmony with the entire witness of the Sacred Scriptures. Writing about "doctrines" in the plural suggests a modular view of Christianity, where some units can be changed, others dropped, and still others added.


That is exactly what happened in the aftermath of the Reformation. Calvinist influence merged the atonement with justification, first with Samuel Huber, who was rebuked and sent packing. Huber would be a Synod President today in the LCMS, WELS, or ELS.


The second wave of Calvinism came in the form of Spener's union efforts. The merging of atonement and justification came in the form of double justification, first taught by Georg Christian Knapp and later by F. Schleiermacher. Knapp, Schleiermacher, and Tholuck (Hoenecke's mentor)--all three at Halle--were pivotal figures in Protestant theology.

Ottomar Fuerbringer, Father of 
Ludwig Fuerbringer, Father of
Fibby
Missouri Lutherans know how significant the Fuerbringer family was. Ottomar came over with the syphilitic bishop and married the widow of C. F. W. Walther's brother. Ludwig Fuerbringer was born of that union, became the senior pastor at Frankenmuth, after his father, and later professor and president of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis. Ludwig's son Fibby was the president of the seminary who turned the campus over to the liberals, leading to Tietjen and Seminex (the first gay Lutheran seminary, chaired by Jungkuntz, from WELS).


Ottomar Fuerbringer was trained as a pastor but could not get a call in Europe because he was a Pietist. The Lutheran Church in the German states was rationalistic, with little or no tolerance for "Pietists and mystics," the disparaging terms used for believers. "Old Lutheran" is a term used in America for those who rejected the extremes of revivalism - no liturgy, no creeds, transforming people's lives with the Law.


The "Old Lutherans" were not orthodox - they were cell group Pietists who kept the worship forms of the Lutheran Church while adopting the fantasy that the cell groups were the real church.


Pietism is unionism, which draws people away from Lutheran doctrine, so anyone in a cell group church is headed out of the Lutheran fold, even though the individual may remain a Lutheran in name only.


Doctrinal indifference and disparaging the Means of Grace will always lead to Unitarian-Universalism or to Pentecostalism. Many WELS pastors have gone charismatic (ironic, eh?) while others like Jungkuntz and Gerke have gone Unitarian-Universalist.



Tuesday, January 31, 2012

More Ugliness from the UOJ Squadron


LutherQuest (sic)

Mike,
I don’t know Pastor Rydecki personally, but some of what I’ve read by him makes me sad. For instance, recently on Steadfast Lutherans he made the following comments in regard to OJ.
He wrote:

quote:
“The remission of sins is not proclaimed to the sinner as a past reality for all which must be appropriated individually. Instead, remission of sins is promised to the sinner on the basis of the satisfaction Christ made for sin. Christ with his perfect righteousness and satisfaction is the object of faith.”

And:

quote:
“I haven’t seen a clear Scripture passage that states that God ever absolved the world of sin, or that the sins of the world have been remitted – although they have certainly all been paid for!”

They might as well have given the award to Dr. Jackson. This is no different than what Jackson teaches.

In the first quote he denies that the sins of the entire world have been remitted [forgiven] objectively, and he says that it is the Atonement that is the object of faith.

In the second quote he says he knows of no Scripture passage stating that God has absolved the sins of the entire world.

First, the object of our faith is not something like; “Jesus died for me and if I believe that, God will credit it to me as righteousness”. It sounds very pious to say that; "Christ with his perfect righteousness and satisfaction is the object of faith”, but our faith is not merely in the Atonement. The object of our faith is God’s promise that He laid all of our sin upon Christ, damned Christ for them, and absolved Christ of them. The payment has not only been made, but has been accepted. The unmerciful servant was forgiven. This was not contingent upon his believing it. And, although he did not believe it, and was put in prison, the forgiveness was real.

Second, I know of no clearer passage of Scripture which states this than that which says; “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world”.



***

GJ - The post used an award given to another pastor as an excuse to make some nasty guilt-by-association remarks. Rev. Rydecki's statements, as quoted, agree with the Book of Concord and the Scriptures. Those are the two norms.

I always put (sic) after LutherQuest because they have no comprehension of Luther's doctrine, his Biblical exegesis, or the the Confessions.

The LQ errors were addressed by Luther and in the next generation by P. Leyser and the Wittenberg faculty ( against Samuel Huber).

"Behold the Lamb of God" is not the absolution of the entire world.

LQ is full of nastiness. It is a skunk patch, as one pastor described it. Paul McCain could not get away with his tactics on a serious website, so he posts on LQ now. The UOJ Stormtroopers attack one another too.

The award mentioned in the post has nothing to do with me. I never read their Gottesdienst periodical or blog or whatever else they have. I have never met Rydecki. As far as I can tell,. the award was for setting up a discussion blog, something LQ has failed to accomplish.

One prominent ELS member said, "I read LQ for laughs."

A Lutheran observer said, "Are they all crazy or just stupid. I cannot believe what they post."


---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "More Ugliness from the UOJ Squadron":

Dave Schumacher wrote on Lutherquest: "First, the object of our faith is not something like; “Jesus died for me and if I believe that, God will credit it to me as righteousness”."

Christ declared in Romans 3:22, "Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:"

Jim Pierce and Jack Kilcrease made the same confessions attacking Christ in the BJS thread.

***

GJ - The value of those discussions is bringing out what they really believe and also what they reject with a passion. Buchholz claimed that no one taught Universalism in WELS, even though he sent me the link to his Universalistic convention essay, which ELS Stormtrooper Jay Webber commended.

John Shep ran Thoughts of Faith, ELS, and joined ELCA.
Jay Webber defended Roger Kovaciny being the bagman for Floyd Luther Stolzenburg's Masonic church.
UOJ is so flexible when it comes to the Ten Commandments.

Churchmouse Campanologist

No wonder people are depressed.


Churchmouse Campanologist:

"Mainline Protestant denominations can also create problems with their interpretations of the Bible, depriving people of deriving much-needed comfort and reassurance from it. Some Catholic theologians are also guilty of this.

Unfortunately, pietist churches might not be helping, either. One of the comments on Johnson’s post reveals that some churchgoers blame the person suffering from depression as being unrepentant and too inactive in the life of the church. If only they would DO something, they would feel better."

'via Blog this'

Some Means of Grace Writers Are Trying To Steady the Steadfast Enthusiasts



With all due respect, they don’t confuse me. They used to, but it was Robert Preus’ book “Justification and Rome” that was foundational in getting me to think and teach in terms that the Book of Concord uses to describe Justification.

Are you sure I’m really free not to use them? The terms “heresy” and “heretic” have flown around a little too loosely when this topic comes up.

Walther’s admonition is one to take to heart: “Bear this in mind, dear friends . . . it is your duty not only to believe as the Church believes, but also to speak in harmony with the Christian Church.” (Law and Gospel, 276-277) The vocabulary of the church I swore to uphold is the Book of Concord. So, thank you for the affirmation that I am free not to use the terms “Objective” and “Subjective” when teaching the doctrine of Justification! Not everyone feels that way.
Rev. James Schulz

---

If I may respond from the Anti-UOJer side of things.

We know the answer to those questions and the answer proves UOJ is a concept filled with fallacy.
In fact, when you ask “Can I be saved”? According to C F W Walther, your question is ill formed, you should not be even asking if you “can be saved”. Because YOU ARE ALREADY even before you believe whatever it is you want to believe.

Here is a quote from http://www.franzpieper.com/ quoting Walther.

C.F.W. Walther wrote in 1868: “…you often hear pastors preach, ‘You are saved if you believe.’ What they should be saying is, ‘You are saved so that you might believe.“

Jack says that UOJ is not Christianized Universalism.

Don’t you guys in the US have a saying, if anything walks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck it is a duck? See Mk 16:16.
LPC

---



The forgiveness exists *in Christ*, because it is Christ who earned that forgiveness by His perfect life and atoning death. That forgiveness becomes ours when we become one with Christ through Baptism/faith. What we believe in is Christ; what becomes ours is His merit.

Just because the forgiveness exists in *Christ*, it does not follow that I was forgiven (or righteous) before I was born (much less the world). The world stands condemned already because it has not believed on the name of God’s one and only Son. However, people are not condemned only for rejecting the Gospel (certainly this is a condemnable offense, but not the only offense). People are condemned because they are sinful. Otherwise, it places one in the peculiar position of explaining the eternal state of the millions and millions of people who never had an opportunity to hear the Holy Gospel.
Dan Baker

---


To UOJers
We won’t go around in circles if you can provide Scriptural evidence for your UOJ theory.
I even grant to you that subjective Justification is not the issue here, because you have the fallacious advantage and the sophistic mechanism to agree with JBFAers when we speak about JBFA, so that is not the issue.

The issue and the foremost one is the declaration of the whole world as righteous ALREADY on account of the Jesus death (and to some on account of his resurrection, as per F. Pieper)
The issue is this…1932 Brief Statement Article 17.

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

Does Romans 4:25 teach it? No, it is part of a larger context where faith is mentioned.
Does Romans 5:19 teach it? No, again see above.

Does 2 Cor 5:18-21 teach it? No, for firstly in 1 Cor 5:17, it speaks of those in Christ. Secondly, v.19 does not say that righteousness has been imputed, rather our sin has been imputed to Christ, v.19 speaks of the Atonement.

So the problem with UOJ is that it thinks when God imputed the sins of the world to Christ, right there it also meant the whole world has been declared righteous already., i.e. the righteousness of Christ was imputed to the World already.

Now, according to UOJ teaching, one must only have to believe this.

Even your precious idol C. F. W. Walther said this and I quote:
“For God has already forgiven you your sins 1800 years ago when He in Christ absolved all men by raising Him after He first had gone into bitter death for them. Only one thing remains on your part so that you also possess the gift. This one thing is—faith. And this brings me to the second part of today’s Easter message, in which I now would show you that every man who wants to be saved must accept by faith the general absolution, pronounced 1800 years ago, as an absolution spoken individually to him.”

C. F. W. Walther, The Word of His Grace, Sermon Selections, “Christ’s Resurrection—The World’s Absolution” Lake Mills: Graphic Publishing Company, 1978, p. 233. Mark 16:1-8.

So Walther teaches, Word of Faith, believe you have been absolved already and so you are. Believe you are not absolved then so you are not. You are what you believe.

Kenneth Hagin and his followers said something similar to this in regards to healing. Your healing already happened at the Cross, believe you are healed and so you will be, believe you are not healed and so you would not. If you do not get healed, your problem is your faith.

Jack [Kilcrease] specializes in missing the point. The issue is not your precious UOJ does not teach, our issue is WHAT IT DOES TEACH!
I hope you get it.
LPC

---


@Daniel Baker #103
Yes Daniel,
UOJ has a mistaken, even a warped view of faith as taught by Jesus and the Apostles. They think that when one mentions faith, one is a synergist.

This was the blunder of Walther. Remember he struggled with his assurance of salvation when Bishop Stephan found him. Though Walther did not eliminate faith all together, because that would be too obvious a Scriptural teaching, what he did promote made faith superfluous.

Did Jesus or the Apostles shy away from using that word?

In fact, Jesus said strong things to people about faith. See Luke 7:50, Luke 18:42
LPC

---


@Jim Pierce #101
Mr. Pierce,
I was a UOJ advocate in my early years in Lutheranism. I thought it was another way of saying the atonement not until I discovered that they were equating the atonement with justification.
In logic, this is called a category mistake, hence a fallacy.

You said But, it is certainly possible that I don’t understand what it means to say that Christ “paid for the sins of the world” and yet, all sins are not forgiven in Christ

The first procedure is to distinguish the Atonement from Justification, that is the first consideration. Just follow the procedure in high school maths, two names are not necessarily the same, i.e. an identity, unless you have evidence that they are so. Equality is to be proven not assumed.

In UOJ, they reverse the process, Equality is assumed and not proven.

The mistake of UOJers is to collapse Atonement with Justification, they assume this and they proceed to see what their assumption wishes to see.

Calvinism does this too, they collapse the Atonement with Justification but they go to the right side of that assumption, concluding that Atonement is Limited because they see Justification is limited, because they are one and the same thing. In UOJ it pulls the quality left ward, concluding that Justification is universal because Atonement is.

Thus UOJ is functional universalism despite the protestation of Jack Kilcrease that it is not.
UOJ makes one progress in its ambiguity and so it even makes one hate even the mention of faith, or pooh poohs faith, yet Jesus considered this something that He gets excited about, for after all, He is the author of faith.

Walther even said the preacher does not even have to mention faith at all in his preaching as if it is wrong if the preacher mentions it. Thus Walther went against the Apostles. For example, when the eunuch wanted to be baptized in Acts, what did Philip say? Did he say, great, lets do it. No. See Acts 8:36-38.
LPC

---


http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=4190#comment-278343
Jack,

When Jackson speaks of Justification as communicating salvation, is he speaking Biblically or historically? He is speaking biblically. Which should take precedence in theological discussion, Scripture or philosophy?
Show us from Scripture that the Biblical writers equated Atonement with Justification. Is there any place in Scripture when Atonement is mentioned, God has declared the whole world already righteous, without faith, prior to faith or even prior to being born?

Few attempts were made from Waltherians like you to address challenge from Scripture citing Romans 4:25 but they miserably fail because no reputable exegete would sign his name and say that was the justification of the world, except perhaps from LC-M-ess.

The terminology and concept of UOJ whether originated, borrowed or stolen was foreign to Scripture and the Confessions. One thing for sure, it did not come from orthodox old Lutheran Concordians. In fact you have to cite 19th century of how the word justification is taken differently.

Your argument against this does not work in your favor but actually digs you in a hole because you are admitting it did not come from Scripture nor from the Concordian writers themselves.

UOJ was promoted by your fathers below – C F W Walther , originated by Samuel Huber and aided by the Halle Pietists.

C F W Walther was really like Calvin, he borrowed ideas and stamped them as if it was his own. He wanted to be peculiar and genius. This is the sad mark of Calvinism. Guess what Huber was a Reformed pastor turned Lutheran but he never got rid of his philosophical paradigm. Walther was the same, he was Pietistic and he never got rid of the separation of the Means of Grace with Justification.

In UOJ every one starts off as already forgiven since the Cross. You get unforgiven if you do not believe you are forgiven and you are forgiven if you believe you already are.

What is this but Word of Faith theology.

Mr. Pierce,

You often quote what St John the Baptist said about Jesus the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world and so, no more sin.

Yet in John 5:34 this is what Jesus said…

I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

In UOJ therefore, faith in justification IS justification.

Yet in Scripture, as said by Jesus, faith IN Him is Jusitfication.

This is a world of difference.

LPC

---


Daniel Baker makes an important objection to the teaching of UOJ.

Dr. Kilcrease states, “When a preacher says things that are conditional, he is always speaking law-words. When a preacher says “if you believe, you will be forgiven.” Or “just believe” this is law, even if he’s talking about salvation. These words will not create faith because they are conditional law-statements.” And, “Other doctrinal formulations turn gospel-statements into law statements: “If you believe, then you are saved.”
This is contrary to Scripture where Christ declares in Acts 16:31, “And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”

UOJ teaches that Christ is using the Law here but He is not. Christ is declaring the Gospel.

But according to UOJ Christ was declaring the Law when he declared in Romans 10:9, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

This is not a teaching faithful to Scripture and the Confessions. Dr. Kilcrease and the doctrine of UOJ confess that Christ’s statements above are Law because they attribute faith as a work of man. Since faith is solely the gracious work of the Holy Ghost who only works through the Word purely taught the declarations are pure Gospel.

Brett Meyer

---


@Dr. Jack Kilcrease #104
Dr. Kilcrease,

“A number of points need to be clarified for all of us. So let’s break it down. First, here’s rules of preaching: When a preacher says things that are conditional, he is always speaking law-words. When a preacher says “if you believe, you will be forgiven.” Or “just believe” this is law, even if he’s talking about salvation. These words will not create faith because they are conditional law-statements. The human mind under sin hears these words, it will then try to work itself into faith, convince itself that it has achieved it, and feel good at having done a good work. The only statements that create faith are gospel-statements which promise Christ and his benefits unconditionally. The point is using the terminology of objective justification is that they safe-guards the preacher being able to make unconditional gospel-statements. Other doctrinal formulations turn gospel-statements into law statements: ‘If you believe, then you are saved.’”

Thank you for the attempted clarification. However, when contrasted to the actual examples and preaching of the Apostles, I think it falls short. I would be interested in hearing your response to the citations and argument I asserted in my previous post. The “human minds” of the crowd St. Peter preached to in Acts 10 didn’t try to “work themselves” into faith; to the contrary, St. Peter said “believe in Christ and you will receive forgiveness,” and lo, while he was still speaking they received the Holy Spirit (and thus forgiveness)!
“Also, to clear the air, objective justification does not teach the following things:

1. That everyone is automatically saved. (pronouncing and receiving are different things. This is fairly obvious).
2. That God’s forgiveness is not mediated through the means of grace. (God’s declaration though already actualized as objective and universal in eternity, is mediated through the means of grace, and communicated to faith. It is not communicated apart from them- this is a key distinction).
3. That faith is unnecessary for the reception of Christ and his benefits. (Again, reception and communication are different than actualization).

So, if the conversation is going to go forward and not just go in circles, those who reject Objective justification need to stop asserting that some how we are claiming these things. We have repeated stated that we do not hold these things and neither, in light of our description of what OJ is can you really claim that these things are the implication of our claim.”

I do not recall asserting that Universal Justification advocates make any of these claims. Whether or not the doctrine of Objective Justification lends credibility to any of these three points is another matter entirely, but we can agree that the doctrine does not, as currently posited, advocate any of the three enumerated points.
Daniel Baker

---


Hi, Jim! Please don’t take any of my words as a “charge” against you or anyone. This is a good and important discussion.

I haven’t seen a clear Scripture passage that states that God ever absolved the world of sin, or that the sins of the world have been remitted – although they have certainly all been paid for! I think it’s the modern failure to distinguish between the payment and the absolution (based on the payment) that has muddied the waters. And to speak of absolution apart from the Means of Grace is simply not known in the Scriptures. If we stick to the language of Scripture, we’ll be fine. “God so loved the world…” Great! “Christ bore the sins of the world.” Wonderful! “He is the propitiation for…the sins of the world.” Wonderful! “God pronounced absolution upon the world.” Where is that written?

The forensic nature of justification is, in fact, opposed to objective justification, as explained by Chemnitz. In order for God to justify any sinner (much less all sinners collectively!), he must see a “foreign righteousness” in them as the basis for his absolution (since they have no righteousness of their own). In other words, it is only by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ that the sinner is justified. Scripture clearly states that the righteousness of Christ is only imputed to faith.

I do appreciate the Marquart quotes, as I think very highly of him and so many things he has written and said. I don’t think he was entirely consistent with his own explanations, though, when it comes to objective justification. In one place, he defined the objective components of justification as “the grace of God, the merit of Christ and the promise of mercy for Christ’s sake.” Fine so far. But elsewhere, he adds this bit about the world’s absolution itself (apart from the means of grace) as part of the objective components of justification, with this absolution being a “perfected, past and present reality.” I think that’s going too far, and it’s not what Ap. IV explains, either.

Whenever our Confessions use the phrase (in English) “are forgiven,” it’s a present passive verb (in the Latin), not a perfect tense, not a past tense, not a stative verb (the same goes for Romans 3:24 in the Greek!). Why does God forgive sins? For the sake of Christ! When does God forgive sins? “…when they believe that they are received into favor and that their sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake” (AC:IV). Forgiveness is indeed a present-tense, forensic gift we receive from God.

And only in the following sense is it also a past reality. It is a past reality for those who have been baptized and brought to faith by the Gospel. This is what Paul says, for example, in Col. 2:11-14 (to which Ambrose is referring in his statement quoted in the Confessions), where he places our “being made alive” and our forgiveness at the time when we received the “circumcision done by Christ,” that is, in our Baptism. Baptism is such a glorious thing that it sends us back to the cross and to the tomb with Christ, and then, of course, out of the tomb as well. This is why the Apology so often equates justification with regeneration, and why Paul also places our justification in connection with our baptism in Titus 3 and Romans 6.

The fact is, we have all the objective truth necessary for our faith to rest securely in the plain reading of the Scriptures without adding all of our philosophical elaborations.

If we want a concise but thorough Lutheran definition of “justification,” I think this one from Chemnitz is the best I’ve ever seen, and I don’t think we can simply dismiss it as “merely referring to subjective justification.” This is how the 16th Century Lutherans understood justification in the “article of justification”:

The meaning of the word “justify” in this article is judicial, namely, that the sinner, accused by the Law of God, convicted, and subjected to the sentence of eternal damnation, fleeing in faith to the throne of grace, is absolved for Christ’s sake, reckoned and declared righteous, received into grace, and accepted to eternal life. (Chemnitz’ Examination of the Council of Trent, Vol. 1, p.474)
Paul Rydecki



---
Team Jeske - they are the wolves.
They start their meetings, "Let us prey."


GoPack has left a new comment on your post "Some Means of Grace Writers Are Trying To Steady t...":

"Session Title: Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing-The Pathological Antagonists in our Midst

Presenter: John Johnson [one of the founders of Church and Chicanery]

This session is designed to help you recognize wolves, understand what drives their hunger, and learn how to keep them from forming a “pack” at your work or church. These wolves, sometimes known as “clergy killers,” have an underlying agenda to discredit and take down a leader. They always claim the best intentions, but build coalitions against the leader behind his back. Therefore, having authentic Christian brothers around you is even more critical today than ever before. Learn to protect yourself and your brothers. The Kingdom of God is at stake." http://www.menofhisword.org/?page_id=113

AKA watch out for anyone who doesn't agree with our approach to ministry!




Abraham - The Father of All Them That Believe

KJV Romans 4:3 For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God,
and it was counted unto him for righteousness.




Romans 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

3 For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: 15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. 19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb:

20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

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.

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.

King James Version

Monday, January 30, 2012

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - PHILADELPHIA: Fr. Moyer Denied Pathway to Papal-driven Ordinariate



VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - PHILADELPHIA: Fr. Moyer Denied Pathway to Papal-driven Ordinariate:


"Moyer's fortunes have been tied to those of TAC Australian Archbishop John Hepworth as Moyer was consecrated a bishop in the TAC in 2006 by Hepworth, a move that many Episcopalians and Anglicans seriously questioned and actively discouraged."

'via Blog this'

Two Discount Options on Lulu.
Note the Deadlines

Until February 3rd, 2012
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/martinchemnitzpress

Until January 31st, tomorrow.
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/martinchemnitzpress

This is where to order.

My 2012 project is to move all titles to Amazon and increase the e-book selection. I also have help from additional editors and contributors.

St. Paul Obliterates the UOJ Arguments

Michelangelo's Conversion of St. Paul

St. Paul Comments on Justification by Faith

Michelangelo - The Conversion of St. Paul.

Pietism in America today: the Emergents and the Purpose Driven Church « Churchmouse Campanologist




Pietism in America today: the Emergents and the Purpose Driven Church « Churchmouse Campanologist: "A couple of weeks ago, news appeared in the blogosphere that the well-known Baptist pastor John Piper and the Roman Catholic Lectio Divina proponent Beth Moore appeared recently at the Passion 2012 Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. (H/T: Anna Wood)"

'via Blog this'

***

GJ - The Jeske group (Church and Change) is deliberately pursuing this fad, and no one will stand up to them. The reason? - C and C already controls the schools, the magazine, and the Synod President.

The Real Presence



The Real Presence of Christ in Holy Communion is effected by the Holy Spirit at work in the Word.

All of God's work takes place exclusively through His Word, and the Holy Spirit never works apart from the Word.

Justification, the declaration of our forgiveness, takes place through the Word of the Gospel. This forgiveness is received in faith.

WELS Church Lady Defeats Jack Kilcrease with One Quotation



WELS church lady has left a new comment on your post "The Purpose of Web Discussions - Censorship - Acco...":


Galatians Chapter 3:

8"And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, IN THEE SHALL ALL NATIONS BE BLESSED."

14"That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."

22"But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." 23"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed." 24"Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith."

25"But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." 26"For ye are all the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ."

In Christ,
Rebecca

***

GJ - I quoted from Robert Preus' final book and poor Jack Kilcrease used that as an excuse to make some more mocking comments. He did not deal with the content of the quotations because he could not.

I posted Rebecca's citation on Steadfast Enthusiasts. They cannot act like men, so they will have to be schooled by a woman.

I appreciate the discernment of the laity. The clergy have a burden in getting past the training they have had. Theories are proposed--which are bad enough--but worst of all is the pressure to conform when everyone is repeating the same fallacies.

UOJ was so foreign to me that I thought they were using "Objective Justification" as a synonym for the atonement. Laity alerted me to the facts and kept me working on the topic.

---

LPC has left a new comment on your post "WELS Church Lady Defeats Jack Kilcrease with One Q...":

We do well to refer to that blog site as Steadfast Enthusiasts or Steadfast Universalists or Steadfast Waltherians.

LPC

Walther the Divider

Walther divided Lutherans
and worked to create his own myth.


I keep reading early LCMS history. I have a pile of books I am sending to another researcher. The official LCMS books remind me of Mormon and Roman Catholic devotionals. Nevertheless, history has a way of leaving behind crucial details.

One detail is the incredible closeness of the pioneers and how they protected themselves from scandal and prison by keeping the secrets. C. F. W. Walther's brother married one Buenger sister and Ferdinand married another one. Walther's brother died and Ferdinand took his call in St. Louis. Ludwig Fuerbringer's father married the Walther widow, which made Ferdinand his uncle. The Buenger family was directly involved in the kidnapping of Walther's niece and nephew, which was illegal. The mother was kept in prison for a time, thanks to the Walther brothers. She is the mother of the Walther/Fuerbringer brides.

Walther left early to escape arrest warrants for the kidnapping. Mrs. Buenger was also involved in the Walther-led riot against Bishop Stephan. The Missouri devotionals lie about Stephan's adultery being discovered suddenly in a confession and acted up with great haste and bravery by Ferdinand. Zion on the Mississippi concedes that everyone knew Stephan was an adulterer in Europe. The bishop brought his mistress over, but not his wife and children (except his healthy son). The big riot was not caused by adultery exposed but by an outbreak of syphilis in the Saxon group.

Ludwig wrote two books about the origins of the LCMS, but skipped over the first years. He did reveal that the valuable chalice used at Uncle Ferdinand's congregation was a personal gift to Bishop Stephan. That means Walther gloried in using a stolen chalice for Holy Communion. Of course, Missouri denies this fact, but there it is in Fuerbringer's book.

On the basis of a four-year degree from Leipzig, Walther made himself the one and only theologian of Synodical Conference, the Field Marshal of the Lutheran Church of North America. Everyone had to agree with his rationalistic-Pietistic opinions. America was so far gone into the Olde Church Growth Movement (revivalism) that Walther seemed Lutheran to many, in comparison. Many good things were done by the Missouri Synod to advance Luther and Lutheran theology, but it was not as glorious as people pretend.

Walther kept Lutherans apart by denouncing everyone outside his franchise as false teachers. He broke up the Old Synodical Conference, driving away many different groups instead of allowing unifying discussions.

---

LPC has left a new comment on your post "Walther the Divider":

Walther kept Lutherans apart by denouncing everyone outside his franchise as false teachers. He broke up the Old Synodical Conference, driving away many different groups instead of allowing unifying discussions

This is typical of a cultic person. He persecuted those who did not agree with him and bad mouthed them. People did not agree with him because he was wrong but rather than admitting and receiving the correction, he branded those who corrected him as false teachers. He had prided himself as the champion of pure doctrine. This is what a cultic person does.

You know how I have believed that he was responsible for the fragmentation of American Lutheranism.

He was given too much power by his people and he was a legend in his own mind.

LPC

***

GJ - Yes, Dr. Cruz. You can see the Walther template at work among the Unsteady Lutherans. An ELCA trained "Lutheran" writes from the Roman Catholic college where he teaches religion, and he declares, "Do not listen to Meyer and Jackson."

Walther was ruthless from the beginning. His unethical, bizarre behavior began with the kidnapping of his niece and nephew from his father's parsonage. He involved his future mother-in-law in the felonies, and she was put in prison. But Mrs. Buenger was not allowed to sail with the Saxons because that might have hurt their image. One can imagine their image. They were attacked in the press at home and in St. Louis.

Walther resigned his call when he left for America, but he still called himself the pastor of that parish when he pledged obedience to Bishop Stephan and again, when he forced Stephan out with a riot five months later. A man is not the pastor of that church when he has resigned his call. Walther was not a Waltherian.

Walther defrauded the bishop by stealing back the landed given to Stephan. That was another felony. He changed the title while secretly plotting to remove Stephan, using the Buenger family once again. Did he confront the bishop? No, he avoided the bishop, although the cover story was that he suddenly knew about the adultery from a confession offered up by two women. The defense of his action is even more perverted than violating the seal of the confessional. He did not violate any confidentiality because "everyone knew Stephan was an adulterer." I suppose leaving Europe with a mistress and without a wife was one clue. Perhaps Stephan's trial and house arrest in Dresden were additional clues. Living with his mistress at the spa, in the same room? Late night walks with young ladies? Cell group meetings in odd places? Groups in Dresden and in St. Louis?

Walther took over leadership of the Saxons at the Altenburg debate and by accepting his brother's congregational call after his co-felon died. Both happened at about the same time.

Walther's ruthlessness and dishonesty have been duplicated many times over by Synodical Conference leaders. Lying is considered good management. Bullying people and threatening pastors is considered good form, especially when overlooking the gross immorality of special pals and big donors.