WILDOMAR — There are 12 enrollment-based CIF-Southern Section playoff divisions for basketball. The smallest is Division 6 for schools with enrollments ranging from 19 to 99.
Sitting atop the first CIF D-6 basketball poll of 2013 was Wildomar Cal Lutheran. It is not a typo.
Entering this week, the C-Hawks are 10-3 and 4-0 in the Arrowhead League, where they have won 17 consecutive games dating to February 2011.
Last year’s team played in the CIF D-6 championship game, won its first-round game in the Southern California regionals, went 12-0 in league and is without question the best team ever to come through Cal Lutheran, according to coach and athletic director Dave Peter.
This year’s team is not far behind.
“Between this year’s team and last year’s team, they are the top two teams we’ve had at our school,” said Peter, now in his 14th year at Cal Lutheran. “It would be fun to have a video game simulation.”
There are two primary holdovers from last season’s senior-dominated roster and both are primarily responsible for the C-Hawks’ historic run: Robert Riesenberg, a 5-foot-9 senior guard, and Ryan Smith, a 6-10 senior center. Riesenberg was the league’s MVP as a junior while Smith was named the league’s best defensive player. They both were first team all-CIF D-6 selections.
“What he doesn’t have in size as a 5-9 player, he’s going to make up on the court with his intensity,” Peter said of Riesenberg, who is averaging 14.8 points, 4.2 assists, 4.3 steals and shooting 39 percent on 3-pointers this season. “He’s a great outside shooter. He’ll pick your pocket, even if you don’t want him to. He’s a very feisty floor general and just understands the game.”
“He’s probably the most competitive kid I’ve had in any sport. He wants to compete and he wants to win. … I don’t practice against the guys anymore because I got sick and tired of him stealing it from me.”
As for Smith, Peter said he has improved tremendously over the past year, gaining strength and stamina while improving his footwork and mid-range jumper. Smith is being recruited by NCAA Division I schools, including Top 25 ranked Minnesota.
“I’d be willing to say he’s 20 times better this year,” Peter said. “He worked his butt off in the weightroom. He had not played much travel ball prior to last year. I think that was huge for him. Every single day he was playing basketball.”
For three years, Smith also played football for Peter as “a 6-8 tight end/D-end.” But not this past fall.
“Last year after basketball season, I went to him and said, ‘Look, you just can’t play football,’” Peter said. “‘You’re going to be 6-10 and your future is in basketball.’ He’s the first kid in my 14 years of coaching football that I ever said don’t play football.”
Smith, who said he gets his height from his mother, who is 6-foot and his father, who is 6-5, took an official visit to Santa Clara in the fall and is receiving attention from Cal Baptist, a Division II school, as well as the D-I schools — the University of San Diego, Idaho, Montana and the Golden Gophers, Peter said.
“They’re looking for a big man,” Peter said. “In this class, big men are few and far between, especially guys that can actually run the floor, shoot and pass.”
Both Smith and Riesenberg are from North San Diego County; Smith from Escondido, Riesenberg from Fallbrook. They both attended Lutheran middle schools and have been commuting to the tiny Wildomar campus since they were freshmen. Both agree that last year’s team was better. For now.
“There was better team chemistry last year,” Riesenberg said. “This year, we’re getting better. Every game we learn something new about ourselves.”
Smith is averaging 16.8 points, 13 rebounds, 4.8 blocks and shooting 57 percent from the field. In a recent league victory over Anza Hamilton, Smith had his first career triple-double with 26 points, 18 rebounds and 10 blocked shots.
“He’s improved more than any other player on our entire team,” Riesenberg said, before giving his buddy a little ribbing. “He’s able to jump now. Last year he couldn’t even dunk. This year he can throw it down, drop-step and throw it down. He’s gotten bigger, stronger, faster; everything has improved.”
Last season, the C-Hawks lost in the CIF D-6 title game to La Canada Renaissance Academy, 67-45. Renaissance has been moved up in divisions, leaving an opening for Cal Lutheran to perhaps exceed the heights reached by last year’s team.
“I definitely think we can win the championship this year,” Riesenberg said. “Just because Renaissance is out and I don’t see any other team that is as good as them.”
Peter is a little more cautious, even questioning the legitimacy of the No. 1 ranking.
“Honestly, there are probably six teams that can win it all,” he said. “Whether it’s No. 1 or No. 6 or 8 or 9. Whoever can stay healthy and put a run together. Being No. 1 is a nice pat on the back. It’s just a number and doesn’t really matter.”
2 COMMENTS:
1) cults tend to centralize power in the hands of a single individual or small group that is considered beyond question
2) they treat all questions about the group and its beliefs as intolerable challenges to the group's authority and authenticity
3) they demean all those who do not share their beliefs and sow fear and mistrust amongst their believers about all such people
4) they typically cut off all or most opportunities for members to interact freely with those outside the group
5) they take revenge upon those who choose to leave the group in ways which include cutting them off from all relationships with those who remain inside, confiscation of material goods and even physical harm
From "The Thin Line between Religions and Cults"
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/brad_hirschfield/2009/04/the_bright_line_between_religions_and_cults.html
+ Pr. Jim Schulz
Oh, and by the way...I have been a non-WELS signer now since 2011. I am in good company. :)
I will become more active again...It's time to shed the slide down the slippery slope..and let others know not to go down it.
Tim Niedfeldt
Point is, yes, you aren't even allowed to have your name next to someone who presents topics for discussion that may differ from the WELS' doctrine. If the WELS would ever be consistent, MLC should then, logically, stop hosting free conferences. WELS pastors should never present papers at any free conferences. I guess it's okay if they're live streamed and hosted at physical locations but once it's a blog it's criminal. It's also okay when it's Mark Jeske teaching alongside those outside of WELS' fellowship on how to do Ministry at the Change or Die conference (http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2011/03/change-or-die-issues-etc-comments.html). They also should ask their brother in the ELS, Pastor Joseph Abrahamson, to stop contributing on Brothers of John the Steadfast (steadfastlutherans.org) or any WELS/ELS pastor from ever contributing a single comment on any forum where there are also people outside of WELS' fellowship. This is scary stuff if you really think about it. My mind keeps going back to the first comment on this thread. Well, at least DPs are actually examining the pastors in their District. Too bad it's not with Chemnitz's Enchiridion and too bad it's not to weed out those who are killing souls with the third use of the Law. Instead, it's to weed out those who teach along with the whole Catholic and Apostolic Church that sinners are justified and considered righteous by God, freely, by faith alone (Ap IV, 88-89) Witch hunt indeed, witch hunt indeed...
Christian Schulz
"The Holy See of Milwaukee"
Fellow laymen, ensure your pastor is preaching the Scriptures and upholding the Confessions. There is more at stake than congregational identification; our pastors have a unique responsibility for our souls and will be held accountable by God. Support these good pastors through your prayers and your voices.
Spenglergeist.
Joel Dusek
Aurora, Colorado
The book by Ronald Enroth, "Churches that Abuse", should be updated with this recent development.
LPC
1. An insecure leadership or governing authority who for some reason feel threatened. A historical example would be the Puritan ministry in 1690s Salem after the colony had lost its charter.
2. The perception (and only perception) of some secret, internal enemy that is blamed for all that is wrong with society (or in this case church). This enemy is organized, there is never just one, and there is some leader. At Salem, former minister George Burroughs was thought to be the leader or a secret society of witches.
3. An inquisition of some sort, meaning an effort to uncover members of this secret organization. Guilt or innocence is never the issue at these "trials". The point is to get the accused (who is already presumed guilty) to name names.
4. Overreach. Eventually, the witch hunt goes too far, and slowly the absurdity and flat out wrongness of it all becomes apparent. It usually takes some very brave souls to stand up to it, often to go down for it, for the thing to end. Giles Corey was pressed to death at Salem for refusing to offer a plea before the witch hunting court. His brave stand was a turning point. Guilty people do not die for principle.
It seems that Intrepid Lutherans have now become the "enemy within" as John Demos calls the victims of witch hunts. Let us hope that the absurdity of an inquisitorial witch hunt in WELS will become quickly apparent and that a rising swell out outrage will shame the powers that be into stepping back from the cliff.
Dr. Aaron Palmer
I can't see how, as a matter of principle, the actions of the WELS Council of Presidents can be faulted.
It seems only natural that the WELS would wish to assure itself that those who participate on this forum do not share in the opinions and positions of the person who was recently removed from the WELS.
And if they do, would they not also be duty bound to leave the WELS and find their church fellowship elsewhere?
I have been hearing this argument over and over. It is based on logical fallacy and faulty assumptions.
This silly notion of blog fellowship is rooted in a classic fallacy: Pastor Rydecki believes X. Pastor Rydecki is a member of Intrepid Lutherans. Therefore, all Intrepid Lutherans believe X. It would be like saying, Thrivent gives financial support to WELS. Thrivent gives financial support to ELCA. Therefore, WELS and ELCA are in full doctrinal agreement. The fallacy isn't even then applied consistently.
Moreover, why is it so difficult for people to read the original statement that we endorsed when we signed onto Intrepid Lutherans. It clearly explains what a signature here means and what it does not mean. So why is it logical to assume anything different? You are talking about pure "guilt" by association here, which was actually one of the strongest forms of evidence used against so-called witches in the early modern period.
I agree that the COP's job is to oversee doctrine and practice in WELS. I wish they would in fact! I would like someone, for example, to explain to me why it has allowed questionable (the kindest word I can use) practices adapted from heterodox sects to freely flourish in WELS. I hear the LCMS has the same problem. Seems like selective prosecution to me.
Dr. Aaron Palmer
Christian Schulz
"Owing to the Lutheran emphasis on justification and faith, it is natural that among us doctrinal presentation receives emphasis for the purpose of preaching the gospel. . . . by this term I understand such adhering to orthodoxy where the stress is shifted from faith to correct faith. . . . Such adherence to orthodoxy is primarily of an intellectual kind and functions by demanding and with an admixture of consciousness of one’s own being in the right or having everything right.
This bravado of orthodoxy feeds on the factious spirit which opposes the ecumenical spirit. For that reason it gets caught up in words instead of living in the facts. The result is traditionalism which has lost the spirit of the words, the spirit of the gospel. All of this is of a legalistic nature and opposes the gospel, and shows that in the course of doctrinal controversy the adherence to orthodoxy has deserted the basis of the gospel."
+ Pr. Jim Schulz
In regards to justification and Fr. Rydecki, again, the Lutheran Confessions are all (including the Scriptures of course) the pastors subscribe and swear to, as I hope you are aware. Not other booklets produced in the 90s or 30s, etc. So according to the WELS' doctrine, Article II of their constitution, Fr. Rydecki has done absolutely nothing heretical.
So with these two anecdotes, it should be be shown that neither of these men have violated WELS' doctrine according to Article II of their own/previous constitution. If the WELS wants to be honest they should include This We Believe in Article II of the constitution and get on that stat. Same with their old, and now ex cathedra, theses on fellowship.
Christian Schulz
To all readers, especially those engaged in this current discussion -
Many times over the past several months, I have said that I will not allow this blog to become absorbed in the justification debate going on in the WELS. I have said this to proponents on both sides and to various of our synod's leaders.
Upon further consideration, I have come to believe that I was wrong. I was being stubborn and arrogant. Who am I, after all? I do not "own" Intrepid Lutherans. It does not belong to me. If people want to debate this issue and want to do so on this blog, they should have the right to do so. While I may not think it is as important as, say, the translation issue, others may feel different. This is, after all, a "discussion forum," not a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pastor Spencer. I for one am not beyond admitting when I make a mistake or act arrogantly and prideful. This was not always the case in my younger days. I hope I have grown and matured in this regard, at least somewhat.
In addition, I believe I am following the thinking of Gamaliel, which God the Holy Spirit inspired St. Luke to record in Acts 5:33-42. Let Pastor Rydecki thoroughly explain exactly what he believes, and what he does not, and why. Let others argue and debate with him as much as they want. If his ideas are truly opposed to the Gospel of Christ, they will come to nothing. However, perhaps in the process we can all learn something, deepen our understanding, explain God's plan of salvation even better, and grow in our faith. Thus, I see it as a win-win situation. Again, if people don't want to debate this or even hear about it or see it on this blog, they will "vote" with their keyboards and wallets, and we will go out of business post haste!
Oh, and no one has asked me to step aside and allow this discussion, and I have not received any pressure or "advice" from either side. This is my own decision. For myself, I still hope to remain on the good Lutheran middle path, and serve mainly as a referee.
One thing: I urge both sides to keep your comments civil and brotherly. You can be firm, make strong statements, and even be strident and passionate. However, there is a big difference between a heretic and a damned heretic! If I see any comments which declare people on either side as "going to hell" or words to that effect, and I can reach the delete button first, they will not see the light of day. I hope my fellow moderators will follow me in this. Marquis of Queensberry debate rules, if you please.
OK, go to your corners and come out punching. And may God defend the right!
Pastor Spencer
Justification is by faith alone.
nnuf said.
Cf. Formula of Concord - Solid Declaration III:25
+ Pr. Jim Schulz
Rod Dietsche
In the spirit of fraternal admonishment,
Joe
So, to the IL signers, show your colours when they come around to ask you through your pastors whether or not you stand or oppose Pr. Paul Rydecki on Justification. It is not Pr. Rydecki who is forcing this, it is the COPs, so OK fair enough. I am quite glad that it is not Pr. Rydecki who is forcing the issue for it shows he has no interest in being divisive, but just to articulate his faith, his conviction, as to what he believes the Scripture teaches.
IMO, I do not think any IL can be in the middle here; at least if we read the statement made by the COPs as documented in this post. It appears an IL signer is required to state where he/she stands.
By not showing where you stand, by default you have announced your colour - it is yellow. Thus, let them know. This is a great opportunity to make your confession known.
LPC
So, to the IL signers, show your colours when they come around to ask you through your pastors whether or not you stand or oppose Pr. Paul Rydecki on Justification. It is not Pr. Rydecki who is forcing this, it is the COPs, so OK fair enough. I am quite glad that it is not Pr. Rydecki who is forcing the issue for it shows he has no interest in being divisive, but just to articulate his faith, his conviction, as to what he believes the Scripture teaches.
IMO, I do not think any IL can be in the middle here; at least if we read the statement made by the COPs as documented in this post. It appears an IL signer is required to state where he/she stands.
By not showing where you stand, by default you have announced your colour - it is yellow. Thus, let them know. This is a great opportunity to make your confession known.
LPC
What does this mean, to laity, who signed, those deemed non members?
What exactly, is being done & what are those who stand fast & firm, in for?
Heidi Stoeberl
I'm not sure, frankly, what this means. I have spoken to the synod President about this. It is my understanding that each District President will handle this in his own way.
I can say this much: I have had dozens of contacts from Pastors around the synod who have said they are not going to change the way they preach and teach, namely, that we justified freely by grace and saved by faith in Jesus given by the Means of Grace. To a man, they have deemed this debate "an argument over words." Ovbiously, Pastor Rydecki does not see it that way, and neither does the CoP. So, exactly how this will play out in the end - God alone knows. Again, I say, let Pastor Rydecki explain his position thoroughly and completely, and let the Pastors and people "test the spirits." (First John 4:1)
Thank you.
Pastor Spencer