Luther Said Much the Same Thing - False Doctrine Is Far More Evil Than Carnal Sin

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Can Any Pope Be a Believing Christian? - No: Impos...":

If the clergy in the Lutheran synods do not take a public stand against UOJ as their call into the Public Office of the Ministry requires, then they’re no better than Joel Hochmuth in the ongoing spiritual abuse of the laity they are responsible for. DP Pastor Jon Buchholz did everyone a favor by clearly showing that UOJ is incompatible and contrary to Christ’s central and chief doctrine of one Justification solely By Faith alone in Christ. He publicly anathematized Christ’s doctrine of Justification by labeling faithful Pastor Paul Rydecki as a heretic for rejecting the false gospel of UOJ.

A comparison of the tolerance for UOJ in the Lutheran synods with the recent, putrid Joel Hochmuth case (at the time he was the (W)ELS Director of Communications) is supremely accurate. Hochmuth was convicted as a computer pedophile who sat at synod headquarters watching children being violently abused and raped by homosexual men. The Lutheran synods are full of silent clergy who watch as their Synod and clergy abuse men, women and children in their churches – by teaching and allowing to be taught the faith destroying false gospel of UOJ which separates the confessor from Christ and eternal salvation. How many souls are gnashing their teeth in eternal torment because they embraced (W)ELS UOJ at the expense of the Holy Spirit’s faith in Christ alone? Many in the Lutheran synods sit by and either condone UOJ or reject it - but still silently watch as men and women in their fellowship use it to privately and publicly manipulate the laity, with the effect of tearing them away from Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the comfort and peace of the Holy Spirit and eternal life.

Right now is the time to stand up and be publicly counted as a faithful Christian, by the grace and mercy of God, who is willing to carry the cross of Christ, teach and defend pure doctrine and right practice as Scripture clearly teaches and the Christian Book of Concord faithfully explains. Test the Spirits and identify the posturing clergy, hold them accountable for what they teach, confess and condone. Study the doctrine of UOJ as the synods teach the various versions of it and compare it, not to some professors class notes, but to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. Now is not the time for equivocation and ambiguity in doctrinal matters and neither is it the time to entertain those who have become masters of both.

---

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Luther Said Much the Same Thing - False Doctrine I...":

Ichabod -

In your Luther pic, a nun asks:

"How can a man from 500 years ago speak so clearly to me today?"

If one but believes the Scripture and the Romans 12 gifts; it is not difficult to understand that some of Luther's gifts were prophecy and exhortation.

Consequently, if modern day Lutherans actually believed in these gifts to the church, they would happily accept Luther's preached word about "justification by faith alone." Instead they go astray and worship their false god of universal objective justification.

Sadly, Lutheran church big wheels lead the people astray. They no longer believe that Luther could be one of those of whom Scripture speaks:

"Consider your leaders; those who spoke to you the Word of God; consider the outcome of their life; and imitate their faith." [Hebrews - RSV - as I recall it]

Can Any Pope Be a Believing Christian? - No: Impossible

Ichabod, ” Buchholz was UOJ all the way, so I am not going to credit him with any scruples or doctrinal knowledge. He is simply one more example of someone eager to posture for a time, and even more eager to switch sides when convenient.”

Posturing in the Lutheran Synods, some do it with the intent to mislead, others out of respect for their egos and still others out of pure ignorance and apathy. Pastor Spencer published a post yesterday stating that the Roman Catholic office of Pope will contain The Antichrist Scripture speaks of in the last days. The body of the article was accurate as it briefly detailed the reasons the Lutheran Confessions make the same determination regarding the Pope. The problem that I had with it was in the last paragraph where Pastor Spencer writes contrary to the evidence he just presented and which Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions confirm. He equivocates and states that not every Pope is an antichrist and that they may even be Christian believers who will be saved eternally. Scripture teaches that a Christian is someone who has been received into God’s grace as His own dear child and saved eternally. I posted a comment disagreeing with his false statement and initially it was graciously allowed to be posted. That changed this morning when my statement was kilcreased. I post it here so that people may see the horrendous problem with Pastor Spencer’s false teaching.

Pastor Spencer states, "This does not mean that any particular individual Pope is the Antichrist, or even an antichrist in the wider sense of the term, or that these men cannot also be Christian believers and thus saved and in heaven with God for eternity."

I believe that this statement requires more explanation. As it stands it is nonsensical. The very position which the Popes take as the "Vicar of Christ" requires full agreement with the Council of Trent as they continually reconfirm it's teachings. The Council of Trent anathematizes Justification by Faith Alone and by that rejects Christ and the chief and central article of Christ's doctrine. The Council of Trent also places the standing Pope as the mediator between God and man which clearly subverts and perverts Christ and His position as sole Mediator. What this means is that every Pope who is faithful to the Catholic Church's official teachings is an antichrist just as those outside of the Catholic Church who replace Christ's doctrine of one Justification solely by Faith in Christ Alone are also antichrists. Any confession which changes the singular doctrine of Christ removes Christ from it and He is not a part of it. Therefore anyone who perverts the central article of Justification is not a Christian and therefore is not saved. This is most certainly true for antichrists. The only way for someone in an unChristian church body (a church body who's official teaching perverts the central article of one Justification solely by Faith in Christ Alone, given by God's grace alone through the Means of Grace alone) to be a Christian is for them to be hypocrites within their denomination. For instance the only way a member of the Catholic Church could be a Christian and saved eternally would be that he is a hypocrite and truly believes contrary to the official teaching of the Catholic Church and trust in Christ alone, forsaking his own false works righteousness, for the forgiveness of sins and salvation. Same goes for members of all other denominations where the official teaching perverts Christ's doctrine of Justification - they must be hypocrites within their denomination.

Martin Luther in his “The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests,” states, “For we must believe and be sure of this, that baptism does not belong to us but to Christ, that the gospel does not belong to us but to Christ, that the office of preaching does not belong to us but to Christ, that the sacrament (of the Lord’s Supper) does not belong to us but to Christ, that the keys, or forgiveness and retention of sins, do not belong to us but to Christ. In summary, the offices and sacraments do not belong to us but to Christ, for he has ordained all this and left it behind as a legacy in the church to be exercised and used to the end of the world; and he does not lie or deceive us. Therefore, we cannot make anything else out of it but must act according to his command and hold to it. However, if we alter it or improve on it, then it is invalid and Christ is no longer present, nor is his ordinance.”

Thanks for allowing me to comment. Brett Meyer

http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2012/10/the-roman-papacy-is-antichrist-spoken.html

Pastor Spencer’s false statement highlights a heinous problem caused by the toleration of the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification (aka: General Justification, Objective Justification, Universal Justification). UOJ teaches that the entire world was imputed Christ’s righteousness for the forgiveness of their sins regardless of the Holy Spirit graciously working Godly contrition and Faith in Christ alone through the Means of Grace. In fact UOJ teaches Christ’s righteousness must have been imputed to the whole world before and without faith otherwise faith would have nothing to cling to. First, this highlights that the false gospel of UOJ replaces Christ as the object of the Holy Spirit’s faith with the Forgiveness of Sins being the object of faith. Certainly this is an Antichristian gospel. Secondly it means that even The Antichrist and all of the minor antichrists have been imputed Christ’s righteousness and by that received the “non-imputation” (forgiveness) of sins. UOJ makes the Antichrist a child of God having been declared by God to have been given the inheritance of Christ. Therefore it is a fruit of UOJ to say that antichrist’s can be believing children of God and saved eternally – regardless of their doctrinal position which is contrary to Christ if they believe they have been declared forgiven by God they are saved eternally since their sins have already been forgiven.

Posturing. It is transparent when faithful Christians subject what is being taught to Scripture and the Christian Book of Concord. No wonder few take an public stand against the Antichrists in the Lutheran Synods who are actively anathematizing Christ’s Church while the laity suffer under clergy induced sleep. The glory of the (W)ELS.

***

GJ - I do not look at the Intrepid blog anymore, unless forced to do so. I am disappointed but not surprised by their weak response, during this Reformation month, to the suspension of Pastor Paul Rydecki for teaching justification by faith.

Anyone who becomes pope has already pledged himself to the infallibility of the office. In fact, ever since Pope Pius IX made papal infallibility a teaching of Rome, the dogma has been extended to more occasions and clergy as the world marched toward the End Times.

Now - any bishop, cardinal or priest who teaches in harmony with the pope is infallible. Therefore, the clergy are godlike when they agree with a man elected by a group of like-minded men. That is the spirit of the Antichrist, to set himself in the temple (St. Peter's) as a god. Spencer should be reading 2 Thessalonians and some Vatican publications, plus my Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant, where more documents are listed.

Secondly, every pope teaches justification by works, the opposite of the Gospel - just as UOJ is the opposite of the Gospel. That alone makes him an Antichrist and not a believer.

So any given pope may not be THE Antichrist, but his office is chief and greatest office of all Antichrists. So Benedict may be regarded by all Protestants as only the Antichrist-Elect.

All false teachers, who set themselves up in the same way--like Jon Buchholz--are little Antichrists. They share in the terrible, divisive, soul-murdering work of their Father Below. They may lack in the global reach and political power of the big guy in Rome, but they are no less complicit in his work.

---

LPC has left a new comment on your post "Can Any Pope Be a Believing Christian? - No: Impos...":

As it stands it is nonsensical.

Amen.

Rev. Spencer's statement is really political because theologically it has no substance.

LPC

***

GJ - Let's not be too hard on Holy Father Antichrist - that is the message I get. People are offended that the papacy is the Antichrist, because Aunt Charlotte is a Roman Catholic. So is Uncle Fritz. Are you saying my aunt and uncle, who still give me presents, belong to the Church of the Antichrist?

Where else can one find such beautiful rituals and solemn ceremonies, ancient customs and treasured dogmas - all designed to replace the Gospel with the Law, Christ with Mary, and Satan with God?

Real Women Speak Out: How Student Loans Have Affected Me | Fox Business. When Will Lutherans Deal with Their Punitive Seminary Loan Situations?

Real Women Speak Out: How Student Loans Have Affected Me | Fox Business:

You can’t help but notice the dire chatter surrounding student loans these days.

In fact, student loans are one of the hottest topics here at LearnVest, whether in LV Discussions, your comments or stories we write. Some are calling it the newest lending crisis, equal in scope to the subprime mortgages that torpedoed the economy in 2008.

No wonder–a record one in five households now holds student debt. Increasingly, this debt burden is altering lives, and not in the way students imagined when they first took out the loans. Enrollment in graduate programs has dropped, as students face mounting undergraduate loans. 44% of graduates are delaying buying a home, and 23% will delay having children because of their debt burden.

Defaults on student loans are at a record 13.4%, and there’s no clean slate in sight–student loans are rarely dischargeable in bankruptcy.

One NYU professor has even said that student loans are immoral.

This is a topic you’re passionate about. According to a nationwide survey conducted by LearnVest and Chase Blueprint, more than half of you have student loan debt, and you owe an average of $41,000. A quarter of you have more than five loans outstanding, and more than a third of you don’t think your student loans were worth it.

We wanted to show the faces behind these statistics, so we reached out to five LearnVest readers to share their own stories of naiveté, guilt and–in some cases–acceptance and triumph.

Do you recognize your own story in theirs?

Rebecca Harris, law student

Debt: $160,498

I came out of undergrad with almost $40,000 in student loans, and decided to go straight into law school. I wasn’t worried about taking on more debt because law schools all but guarantee that their graduates get jobs. The reality is that those numbers were inflated and manipulated. Students from my school who graduated two years ago are just now starting to get real jobs or picking up temporary work.

I’ve been adding to my loans for three years, and I now have an outstanding balance of $160,498 in federal loans (find out why federal loans are better than private), and I haven’t been able to pay down any while in school. My school requires 25 hours per week in legal clinics in addition to classes, reading and work, so there is little to no time for an extra job.

I feel extremely stressed out and overwhelmed. Recently I’ve been wondering if this is the right career for me after all, after getting a taste through clinic work. I want to find something that doesn’t make me stressed and anxious, and is more fulfilling. I’ve been researching other options, like working in HR or taking a management job that doesn’t require a law degree but would still make use of it.

Tiffany, public sector professional

Debt: $97,000

Even with a half-tuition scholarship, help from my parents and graduating early, I graduated from Boston University with $70,000 in student loan debt, then embarked on a career in the public sector in New York, starting at $30,000.

About two years ago, my boyfriend asked what the pay-off date for my loans was, and I had no idea. I read all the fine print and repayment terms and found I would be paying for nearly 30 years at the rate I was going! It felt like getting hit over the head with a ton of bricks.

I have since calculated my monthly payments so I will be paid off no later than December 2020. I allocate more to the higher-interest loans and take advantage of incentives such as lower interest if you enroll in auto-payment. I have a credit card that sends my cash-back bonuses straight to my private student loans.

“Even paying $100 a month while in school would have saved me $1,200 in accrued interest.”

I am grateful that the loans allowed me to go to the school of my choice. I just wish I understood capitalized interest and the terms of repayment better. I would have made an effort to pay at least something on my loans while in school. Even $100 a month, which would have been feasible with my college job, would have saved me $1,200 in accrued interest.

Now I’m back in school for my master’s in public administration and I’m looking at another $60,000 in debt, but this time with more knowledge. I chose a program that allowed me to continue working full-time and have paid off over $15,000 of my debt while in school. At work, I have been promoted, now earning between $50,000 and $60,000, and will graduate with my master’s in a much better position, both professionally and financially, than if I had attended a full-time program.

Diane Bitler, receptionist

Debt: $80,000

When I took out my student loans, I was young and did not have any clue about money, like the difference between lenders and good versus bad APR. My parents were new to the process as well and had no qualms about taking loans out. I wish my counselors guided me more, but instead I was encouraged to apply to any bank for loans.

I majored in Political Science at SUNY Albany. I chose my major at 17, and by the time I realized it didn’t appeal to me, I was a junior and it was too late to switch majors. Still, I figured I would graduate and find a job in six months (the time before receiving the loan bill). In reality, I graduated, and could only find part-time or extremely low paying jobs, none of which were enough to support myself and pay student loans.

For a long time I felt like a failure because I had no means of paying these loans. I tried the late payment rehabilitation program, but was two payments away when my work hours were cut and I could no longer afford it. My lenders continue to raise my interest and tack on late fees, which now accounts for the majority of my debt. Because my mom co-signed my loans, she’s been getting collection calls and harassment letters about garnishing her wages. Her credit is ruined along with mine.

“I’ve ruined my mom’s credit as well as mine.”

I went to a free financial counseling center in NYC, which helped me figure out how much I owe and to whom, but I am still at a loss as how to deal with these lenders. I’m trying to find a way to consolidate all my loans into just one bill.

I finally left Manhattan and moved to Virginia to find work. Now I earn $10 an hour, roughly $21,000 a year. I feel trapped. I could pay these off if I became a millionaire. Otherwise, I will be paying them until I die. I just wish I could file bankruptcy and start fresh.

I don’t understand how this could be done to the future of America.

Lily Engle, sales professional

Debt: $0

When I graduated in May 2009, I had a solid amount of student loan debt. While I know that $15,000 definitely isn’t that high, it was still a considerable sum to wrap my head around, and it lit a fire under my butt to find a job.

I work in sales, which isn’t my dream job (I had been hoping to find something in development or fundraising for a non-profit), but it has proven to be extremely rewarding and pays twice as much. So my happiness at work is one positive that came out of my student loans.

If I didn’t have these loans, I may have been more frivolous with my spending after college and would not have been able to create an emergency “savings cushion” like I have now. My loans helped me learn to budget and think about money differently. When paying down my debt, I always paid far more than the monthly minimum. As a trade-off, I chose to live somewhere where my rent was lower than the max I could afford. I also planned my budgets and spending around my salary, not my bonuses.

“My loans have helped me learn to budget and think about money differently.”

When I received my end-of-year bonus in March 2012, I used the entire thing to pay off the remaining $8,000. Because I didn’t incorporate my expected bonus into my budget, it wasn’t painful to say goodbye to it. I saved big on interest–I would have ended up paying an additional $800 or so over the life of the loan had I just kept on paying as usual, which would have taken me until 2015.

(Find out why she saved by paying earlier.)

Because of my loans, I can really appreciate the value of my education. Compromising on my education to avoid borrowing may have left me jobless post-graduation and given me no choice but to remain financially dependent upon my family. And being sure to pay my loans each month has given me good credit and solid financial footing as I prepare to take on additional financial responsibilities like homeownership or a family (eventually!).

Virginia Bosch, actor

Debt: $110,000

I was recently asked to fill out a survey from my private university, including the question: “If you could do it all over again, would you choose this school?” I answered, “Yes for the experience, but not for the money.”

I’ve wanted to be an actress since I was a little girl, but I also wanted to go to a school that let me explore other options and grow personally, so I chose to get a BA in the arts instead of going to a conservatory program. My university had the best theater program in the country … and was also named the most expensive college in the state. Originally we had more aid from the school and my parents were planning on paying more upfront. But since the market crashed when I was in college, our situation changed and the amount of aid the school gave me drastically dropped by the time I graduated (this was all told to my parents, not me).  So my parents took out more loans. I graduated in 2009 with $12,000 in federal and private student loans in my name, and over $100,000 in my parents’ names.

My goal is still to be an actress, but I’ve built up a swarm of freelance flexible jobs. I tried a steady administration job, but was miserable. So now I am currently an actor/babysitter/teaching artist/administrative temp/superstar errand-runner. (Find out more ways to make income on the side.) My income ranges between $1,000 to $2,600 a month. I’m back on track to paying my loans, and starting to formulate a financial plan.

When I graduated, the words “consolidation” and “interest rate” were foreign to me, despite the fact that I had borrowed so much money. When applying to college, I would have loved someone to sit me down and explain the ins and outs of loans. $50,000 in debt is very impractical as an actress. At my current rate, I will be able to pay off my portion of loans within the next five years, but I plan on taking on as much of the $100,000 in loans in my parents’ names as possible, even though they say they are willing to pay for my education.

Originally, my loans only produced guilt that I chose an expensive education, guilt that my parents were helping me, and primarily, guilt that I was pursuing my passion when I had this debt. I have been making peace with this, especially since guilt doesn’t pay the loans. And I’m so grateful for my parents’ support.

If You’re in Student Loan Debt or Considering Taking It on:

One good rule of thumb is to never take out more student loans than your anticipated first year’s salary. But we bet, now that you’ve read other women’s stories, you have more questions of your own about how to handle student loans responsibly.

We answer them all in LearnVest’s Knowledge Center. First, understand how student loans work with our complete guide. If you need loans, use our easy checklist to figure out how, and what type, to take out in the first place.

If you’re paying off student loans, use our checklist on how to pay them off, which runs through all the strategies and resources available to you to get a handle on your payments. If you’re struggling, read about your options here.

Want More?

By the Numbers: The Student Loan Crisis

Take Control of Your Money With Our Free Bootcamp

8 Things to Know Before Applying for Financial Aid

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/10/29/real-women-speak-out-how-student-loans-have-affected-me/#ixzz2B4GtTJcq

'via Blog this'

Denominations Are Dead: Evangelicals Agree That the System Cannot Be Fixed. Holy Mother Church Has Self-Destructed

Yesterday I was talking to someone with similar connections to mainline denominations, including my hometown. We had a name in common. I said, "He is the reason I became a Lutheran." The minister speaking had a chance at that man's library, when he retired. He could take any book he wanted. "The trouble was," he said, "all the books were as shallow as he was. But he was known for being a good speaker."

We outlined some individual skirmishes. The Disciples of Christ, who are big in a swath from Illinois to Texas, would not ordain homosexuals. So they partnered with the United Church of Christ, who ordained homosexuals far earlier than anyone else. Any Disciple candidate who wanted to out himself could get ordained in the UCC and serve in the Disciples, because ordination was mutually accepted, based on their agreement.

And the Disciples refused to entertain even a watered-down inerrancy statement ("an option") because "it was credal. We have no creeds but the bobble." Para-church groups formed to battle this and they finally said, "Why are we bothering?" They dissolved their group within the Disciples and loosely affiliated after that time, leaving the Disciples as a group.

That will obviously be the trend from now on. Before the 2009 ELCA meeting I kept holding up the Episcopal Church as an example where serving bishops were taking their dioceses out of the The Episcopalian Church (TEC) as a whole. I never expected ELCA bishops to do the same, and not one serving bishop ever tried. But the retired ELCA bishops did join the movement out of ELCA after 2009 (ordination of homosexuals approved). At last count, six retired ELCA bishops were organizing NALC, a group parallel to the older LCMC.

The local ELCA church lost 2/3rds of its Sunday attendance after 2009. An LCMC congregation formed from the exiles.

ELCA began shrinking by 20%. Naturally, the ELCA bishop Mark Hanson and TEC's bishop Katie Schori, went to work to ensure their dominance and control - at any cost.

My friends in blogging and writing - ChurchMouse, California, and Rogue Lutheran - have all dealt with this phenomenon - Diaprax. Every issue becomes a process, a way of resolving it so the leaders get their way.

The denominations do not fear political action - they welcome it. The ambush is already prepared for each and every attempt. "Sure let's have a meeting where this is discussed." They identify the dissenters and pick them off, one by one. Some are frightened away. Others are bribed - I have names. The persistent are targeted in various ways.

The persistent are going to be a minority. I noticed from a profile (Keirsey - free test) that Idealists are a minority. An Idealist is going to address issues according to principle rather than by what's-good-for-me. The persistent buckle and surrender - or they are driven away and shunned.

Look at the dullards and belly-servers who are SynCon DPs and SPs. And their history! No matter what the name of the man, the last 50 years have shown their eagerness to work with ELCA (or predecessors) for money and the warm glow of approval from apostates.

They are the apostasy enablers.

No one is more dangerous than the pastor or synodocat who pretends to oppose error and flips when it matters most.

Jon Buchholz is a good example of someone who agreed to sign the secret petition about Mark Jeske. He was known for being a DP "concerned" about the situation, stymied like poor helpless Mark Schroeder because the Gang of Four protected Jeske.

The only resolution at the convention, once the process took over, was one in favor of Jeske. And who spoke in support of that groveling, sycophantic motion? Jon Buchholz, California-Arizona DP, WELS, the Jedi Knight of Orthodoxy (in his mind).

As Henry  of Navarre once said, "The kingdom of France is worth a Mass" when he was forced to abandon his Protestant faith.

Buchholz was UOJ all the way, so I am not going to credit him with any scruples or doctrinal knowledge. He is simply one more example of someone eager to posture for a time, and even more eager to switch sides when convenient.

SP Schroeder and DP Buchholz are now adoring members of JELS:

JELS - the Jeske Emergent Legalistic Sect. 

Any questions? You are fired.

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - AUCKLAND: ABC Says Majority of Anglican Communion Will Never Accept SS Marriage.Gay Activism Has Already Ruined Lutherdom Because LCMS-WELS-ELS Leaders Work with ELCA - No Problem!

WELS rewards these apostates,
because false doctrine unites.

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - AUCKLAND: ABC Says Majority of Anglican Communion Will Never Accept SS Marriage:

AUCKLAND, NZ: Archbishop of Canterbury Says Majority of Anglican Communion Will Never Accept Same Sex Marriage

By David W. Virtue in Auckland, NZ 
www.virtueonline.org 
October 26, 2102

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams told more than 2000 Anglicans gathered for the ACC-15 welcoming ceremony at Telstra Pacific Center that the vast majority of Anglicans will never come to terms with same sex marriage. He added that while some will recognize "public partnerships" they are not sure marriage is right.

The opening fanfare of the 15th the Anglican Consultative Council's brought the Archbishop of Canterbury on a Pacific tour that included Papua New Guinea in his final swan song before he departs as leader of the Anglican Communion. It also brought together the Anglican Communion's most liberal glitterati that include US Presiding bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, Southern Africa Archbishop Thabo Makgoba and other Anglican leaders from across the globe. 

However the Ugandans took a decision about two years ago not to participate in the Anglican Instruments, so they are not present. Kenya, on the other hand has sent three representatives. The Province of Nigeria is represented by New Zealand born CANA/ACNA Bishop Julian Dobbs. Notably absent are representatives of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (GAFCON) primates and numerous archbishops of the Global South who are shunning this event having made clear that they will have nothing to do with the left leaning ACC that has ignored their concerns over the drift of several branches of Western Anglicanism that have wandered away from gospel imperatives, endorsing a variety of sexualities that have no biblical base, and caused profound eruptions in the communion.

The multi-cultural event held mainly in Maori saw an aging group of mostly white people listening to a mostly Maori service. The civic welcome opened in the native Maori language and Maori hakas brought smiles and laughter from the audience in the opening moves by Maori Anglicans. Marching in procession behind them were young New Zealanders carrying signs representing Central Africa, Congo, The Episcopal Church, Hong Kong, Indian Ocean, Japan, Kenya, Korea Melanesia, Mexico, Burma (Myanmar), Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, North India, Rwanda, Philippines, Scottish Episcopal Church, SE Asia, Southern Cone of America, South India, Southern Africa, Sudan, Wales, West Africa, Sudan, West Africa, West Indies, Aotearoa (New Zealand).

A panel of four archbishops of the Communion that included Dr. Williams, Thabo Makgoba of Southern Africa, NZ Archbishop Winston Halapua of the Tikanga Pasefika, which includes the Diocese of Polynesia, and US Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori fielded questions in a lively give and take with Anglican youth.

In response to a question by one young Anglican student on the issue of same sex marriage, Williams replied, that the short answer is that the Anglican Church has quite a lot to say about this issue but it's not always the same thing. 

"For the vast majority of Anglicans in the world the idea of same-sex marriage is not one they can come to terms with. Even those who want to say that some kind of recognized public partnership for people of the same sex is a good thing, even they are not too sure whether calling it marriage is right if 'marriage' is something with all the symbolic and theological focus that it's had in the Bible and in history."

Williams said the disagreements must focus people on "another set of very delicate and difficult issues" around the fact that Christians "have been rejecting and even violent towards people with same-sex attraction and we have a lot of repenting to do there."

Jefferts Schori acknowledged "many people have found it difficult to hear what the Episcopal Church has said about these issues through its General Convention."

"Our understanding as a whole church is that people with same-sex attraction seek the same ability in life to live in a covenanted relationship with another person whom they love, that that can be a good thing, that human beings were not created to live alone - that is what Genesis says - and that therefore the church's task is to help all human beings live in holy relationships that can show the love of God to a world much in need of it," she said.

The Episcopal Church has been having this conversation for 50 years and we do not all agree, added the Presiding Bishop.

"Where we differ is what that [covenanted relationship] looks like, and that's where the conversation is having its most creative possibility. I doubt that we will ever all agree about what that covenanted or holy relationship will look like and what the boundaries are but, if we are unable to have the conversation, we are going to do violence to human beings who need not to live alone."

Calling the question "a pastoral matter," Makgoba said there is pain on all sides of the issue, adding "what is important is to respect the dignity of each person as created in God."

"As one of my predecessors once said about this: 'the Holy Spirit is not yet finished with us on this matter,'" he noted.

New Zealand Aotearoa Archbishop Winston Halapua of Polynesia said NZ is on a journey with this pastoral matter. "It is painful that the church is divided over this. What is important is to respect the dignity of all people involved. The Holy Spirit has not yet finished with us on this matter."

Asked by one young Anglican if it was fun being leader of the church, Williams replied, "It is unavoidable to take some decisions in the name of the whole church and you know that they are going to hurt people very badly and you just have to be aware of the need to stay with the people that it hurts, and do the best you can," Williams said, adding that that reality about decision-making is not limited to the church and its bishops.

Asked whether it is fun being the leader of the Anglican Communion, Williams replied, "It depends which day of the week you ask me."

He went on to make a distinction between something being fun versus being joyful.

"And when I thank God for calling me to this job, which I do sometimes - sometimes through gritted teeth - I say thank you for the joy, the unexpected joy, even when it's not exactly fun," he noted.

Another young person raised the issue of women priests and added that some parts of the communion do not have priests. Archbishop Makgoba replied that the Anglican Church should have women priests, "All are created in God's image. God has no favorites, God has called us all of us to serve. We have had women priests for 20 years in Southern Africa."

Dr. Williams said attitudes have changed very rapidly and agreed with his two fellow bishops that while "we rightly celebrate the way in which women's ordained ministry has become part of the life of so many bits of the Anglican Communion," all of society must pay attention to the larger issue of the "dignity and security of women."

The question, he explained, of "whether we live in a society that degrades women, a society that doesn't allow women to be safe, a society which turns its face away from violence against women" is going to be "very much on our agenda during the weeks ahead."

Questioned on why the [Anglican] Church seems to be declining and why should young people join the Anglican Church, Jefferts Schori said the Anglican tradition has a lot to offer. "We should not accept answers handed down, but to wrestle with in Holy Scripture.

The New Zealand archbishop said, "You are the church today, challenge us."

Dr. Williams responded saying, "Christ died to take away your sins not your mind. The Christian faith puts before us an imaginative blazing of what to means to be a human being. He pours out his love and it explodes our humanity. It is not dull. Christianity gives us a vision of what it means to be a human being, it also promises to let us enter into the profundity of God's mystery. Our Anglican tradition tries to keep in play as many things as possible. Don't treat the bible as an infallible book of rules. We get help from tradition and we need to make the most of if it by using your mind. We must ask the hard questions. The Bible, tradition and reason bring together to play to our natural skill and humanity God has put into our persons. Our humanity then explodes."

The ACC is one of the four instruments of communion, the others being the archbishop of Canterbury (who serves as president of the ACC), the Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops, and the Primates Meeting. The ACC was formed in 1969 and includes clergy and lay people, as well as bishops, among its delegates. The membership includes from one to three persons from each of the Anglican Communion's 38 provinces. Where there are three members, there is a bishop, a priest and a lay person. Where fewer members are appointed, preference is given to lay membership. 

The Episcopal Church is represented by Josephine Hicks of North Carolina; the Rev. Gay Jennings of Ohio; and Bishop Ian Douglas of Connecticut.

Jefferts Schori is attending the meeting in her role as a member of the Anglican Communion Standing Committee, which met here prior to the start of the ACC meeting. Douglas is also a member of the Standing Committee. 

Many orthodox Anglicans believe that the ACC has taken on international ecclesiastical and metro political power under former Archbishop George Carey that it was never intended for it to have. They also believe that it has been co-opted and paid for by The Episcopal Church which is the single biggest contributor to the ACC.

END

'via Blog this'

Tales from the Crypt - By Dimestore Liam

Dimestore Liam has left a new comment on your post "Mequon Connection in Jeske Exit":

Wow, I know a lot of those guys... I had no Idea the WELS had gotten so much crazier since my exit in 1992! Mark Jeske played in a "Christian Rock" band with a guy I knew, I met him at the '85 Youth Rally; Tom Jeske was my tutor at MLS that Fall... R.e. Mequon '78, Mark Porinsky was my Pastor from 1979-1985; Kenneth Jahnke was the emissary who had to explain why I was kicked out of St. Mark's, Flat Rock MI & then why Pastor Gore & I were 86d from the WELS a couple of years later, poor guy...

As for Mark Freier, I got in a shoving match with him in the chapel at HVLHS in 1987 because he was mis-quoting scripture in his sermon and I stood up and called him a liar, hahaha... He jumped down from the pulpit and took a swing at me. That wasn't the last time I had a run-in with him, either. That guy is a complete lunatic! Oh yeah, I also just finished reading Mark Braun's "A Tale Of Two Synods" immediately before getting online this morning, which is how I ended up on this website again...

***

GJ - Freier's "Emergent Church" in South Lyons, Michigan is now a Covenant congregation. Like Kelm starting an ELCA church, Bob Mueller and Paul Kuske started a Covenant parish - with three WELS pastors getting it going.

Freier emerged as a consultant being paid about $50,000 to advise Parlow's congregation in how to make a faster exit from Lutherdom.

Freier bragged on his website that he would perform a marriage for anyone, any religion - atheist, Hindu, you name it.

Mark Freier will coach you to success.

Dimestore Welcomes the Un-WELS-come

Dimestore Liam has left a new comment on your post "Intrepid Lutherans - Pastor Paul Rydecki Suspended...":

Pastor Rydecki- Welcome to the ranks of those thrown out of the WELS! In 1992, the self-described "Brethren" of the WELS here in Michigan did essentially the same thing to Pastor John Gore (and got rid of me at the same time simply because I defended my pastor & mentor) that has now been done to you. I won't go into extensive detail here, but the excuse they used was similar in that they called us "crypto-Catholics" for believing what we had been taught from childhood as Lutheran doctrine. If you are interested in more detail, you can contact me at DimestoreLiam@live.com - God bless you & god luck!

***

GJ - Not to downplay the nastiness of Missouri, but WELS has a well deserved reputation for vindictive, mean-spirited, personal vendettas. John Seifert had a personal grudge against Marc Schroeder (son of Salty) in Columbus, Ohio. Therefore, Seifert kicked out Schroeder and Prince of Peace (now LCMS) for the very unionism that he (Seifert) supported as a member of the WELS Synodical Council. I offered my advice and quotations to Schroeder and his friends, but they did not show any gratitude.

This is WELS, the land of the rotten,
Grudges there are ne'er forgotten, look away, look away, lookaway UOJ.

The issue with John Gore was the Word consecrating the elements. Imagine teaching what is clearly taught in the Scriptures and Confessions. That will never do, said WELS, so they ousted Gore and Dimestore.

WELS is consistent. They mock the efficacy of the Word, so they are are lost in confusion about the efficacious Word consecrating the elements. Because they mock the Word, they elect Jim Huebner as their VP, to replace Wayne Mueller, since both mock the Word in their solemn declarations.

The Cloud of Witnesses - Justification by Faith

The arguments in favor of universal absolution are being tossed about like the buildings and ships caught in that storm with the disarming name - Sandy. Let's look at each one.

Romans 4:25 - Pietists like Rambach and Webber enjoy turning the resurrection of Christ into justification without faith, but the slogan Raised for Our Justification! has a tinny sound when the entire chapter is examined, especially in light of Genesis 15 and Galatians 3.

John 1:29 - Luther treats Behold, the Lamb of God in great detail in his Galatians Commentary. The UOJ Hive should study that commentary some day, perhaps place it in the WELS Essays Files for contrast. Luther treats the verses extensively as an atonement passage, because it concerns the atonement and not world absolution without faith.

Ambrose - Poor Ambrose. He was not the world's greatest theologian, but he wrote a fine passage about justification by faith. The UOJ Keystone Kops love to quote one part of that paragraph, but not the entire paragraph in context. No one with any reading comprehension can mine UOJ from the Apology of the Augsburg Confession.Stop slandering Ambrose: he should not be associated with Bishop Stephan's pimp.

Samuel Huber versus Hunnius and Leyser - The first UOJ stylist in the Lutheran realm was Samuel Huber, who changed from Calvinism to Luther's doctrine, joining the Wittenberg faculty when the ink was barely dry on the Book of Concord. Huber began teaching the universal righteousness of mankind, getting all Buchholzy and attacking the Lutherans. Hunnius and Leyser, with impeccable orthodox credentials, crushed the false doctrine of Huber and sent him empty away. To this day Huber sounds hauntingly like Walther, Pieper, JP Meyer, Sig Becker, and David Valleskey.

Robert Preus - The UOJ Stormtroopers stopped mentioning Robert Preus when I repeatedly quoted their authority in his last book. Preus wrote perfectly dreadful stuff in favor of UOJ earlier, in the 1980s, and he also supported the Church Growth Movement at Concordia Seminary, Ft. Wayne. But his last book, even when edited by his sons, contains many excellent passages overturning UOJ, and they come from the orthodox theologians, not from the UOJ Pietists.

Now these pitiful false teachers of UOJ cling to their New NIV paraphrases and hope they can fool the sheep into buying Murdoch's latest pornographic offering.

The Church and Changers are hotter than Georgia asphalt for the New NIV.