Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Many Assertions - No Support

Hunnius found only justification by faith in
70 years of Lutheran doctrinal writing.
But Boisclair knows better.

David Boisclair has left a new comment on your post "Trying To Understand the UOJ Errors":

As always the tactic here is to accuse the opposition of the same sins that one commits. To accuse us who teach the biblical doctrine of Objective Justification (2 Cor. 5:18-21) with Synergism as this posting implies is the very false doctrine of those who deny Objective Justification. Faith becomes a work that completes Christ's perfect righteousness. Also, the denial of the doctrine of Objective Justification leads one to the Limited Atonement of the Calvinists. The vilifying of those who teach Objective Justification simply tries to undercut their biblical arguments by name calling. That is not the only tactic used. The others are guilt by association as well as setting up straw men. The denial of Objective Justification is heresy and apostasy pure and simple.

---



David Boisclair has left a new comment on your post "Trying To Understand the UOJ Errors":

The problem with the doctrine that is pushed here is that it is purely and simply a confusion of Justification and Sanctification. Justification does not happen within man but outside man while sanctification happens within man. This website equates regeneration with Justification, which is a confusion of Justification and Sanctification. The lie is that we who believe, teach, and confess Objective Justification deny justification by faith, or more precisely justification by grace through faith. When we are accused of that, a straw man has been set up, which is an egregious error of logic.

---

Daryl Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Many Assertions - No Support":

This website is not alone. Apparently the Confessions confuse Justification and Sanctification as well: "However, since the word regeneratio, regeneration, is sometimes employed for the word iustificatio, justification, it is necessary that this word be properly explained, in order that the renewal which follows justification of faith may not be confounded with the justification of faith, but that they may be properly distinguished from one another. For, in the first place, the word regeneratio, that is, regeneration, is used so as to comprise at the same time the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake alone, and the succeeding renewal which the Holy Ghost works in those who are justified by faith. Then, again, it is [sometimes] used pro remissione peccatorum et adoptione in filios Dei, that is, so as to mean only the remission of sins, and that we are adopted as sons of God. And in this latter sense the word is much and often used in the Apology, where it is written: Iustificatio est regeneratio, that is, Justification before God is regeneration." (FCSD III:18,19 Conc. Trigl. p921)

***

GJ - Don't confuse him, Daryl.

More on Wedding Hymns - Ben Wink



Ben Wink has left a new comment on your post "The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us":

When going over what we wanted for our wedding service, my wife and I never gave a second thought to having hymns sung. We understood that this was above all else a worship service with the focus on the Lord and the Means of Grace. We made sure that the hymn stanzas were in the worship bulletin and the hymn numbers were clearly marked if someone wished to follow along in the hymnal instead. We wished to use the wedding service as a testimony to the Christian faith we both shared. We wanted others to know how the Lord would be the foundation of the life and home we would share together. What better way than to use traditional Lutheran hymns to display that?

We didn't force anyone to sing along. If someone was uncomfortable, at the very least they could read the stanzas. Perhaps these comforting Christian words could create an opening for the Holy Spirit. With the numerous weddings I've attended, if you don't know what the soloist is singing, you pay even less attention and you don't even have the words printed in front of you. Just having a soloist by definition guarantees no congregational participation in worship. At least we encouraged our guests in the congregation to participate and could read along.

Hymns have a place in all worship services and are a rich liturgical tradition. To omit hymns being sung by the congregation just for the sake of making people unfamiliar with liturgy comfortable is a sad line of thinking. Why stop there? Omit hymns at all instances where the congregation is made up of guests then. Don't have them at funerals or Easter or even Christmas.

Weddings are a worship service. The Lord is the focus. I don't know what one would be expecting entering a church for a service, but we never gave a second thought to having hymns sung at our wedding.


Some Hymns for Weddings


narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "Comments on Contemptible Worship - CoWo For Short":

"There is a difference between offending someone through the preaching of law and gospel and making the experience of Lutheran worship unpleasant by forcing someone to experience hymn singing for the first time at a wedding." (Please note the use of the word "experience" twice in this sentence) Please respond, Joel, as to what would be an appropriate time to introduce someone to the "experience" of Lutheran hymnody. Would it be on Friendship Sunday, where we omit the Lord's Supper to avoid causing offense?

"There are wedding songs not found in our hymnal that do a really good job of proclaiming a correct understanding of Christian marriage." Could you provide some examples, Joel, of appropriate wedding hymns not found in a Lutheran hymnal?

Here are some marriage hymns found in my obsolete TLH that will each be posted separately:

"Lord, Who at Cana's Wedding-Feast"
by St. 1, 3, Adelaide Thrupp, 19th century
St. 2, Godfrey Thring, 1823-1903

1. Lord, who at Cana's wedding-feast
Didst as a guest appear,
Thou dearer far than earthly guest,
Voucesafe Thy presence here.
For holy Thou indeed dost prove
The marriage-vow to be,
Proclaiming it a type of love
Between the Church and Thee.

2. This holy vow that man can make,
The golden thread in life,
The bond that none may dare to break,
That bindeth man and wife,
Which, blest by Thee, whate'er betides,
No evil shall destroy,
Through care-worn days each care divides,
And doubles every joy.

3. On those who now before Thee kneel,
O Lord, Thy blessing pour,
That each may wake the other's zeal
To love Thee more and more.
Oh, grant them here in peace to live,
In purity and love,
And, this world leaving, to receive
A crown of life above.

Hymn #620
The Lutheran Hymnal
Text: John 2: 1-11
Author: St. 1, 3, Adelaide Thrupp, 1853
St. 2, Gogfrey Thring, 1882
Composer: Gottfried W. Fink, 1842
Tune: "Bethlehem"

"O Father, All Creating"
by John Ellerton, 1826-1893
1. O Father, all creating,
Whose wisdom, love, and power
First bound two lives together
In Eden's primal hour,
Today to these Thy children
Thine earliest gifts renew,--
A home by Thee made happy,
A love by Thee kept true.

2. O Savior, Guest most bounteous
Of old in Galilee,
Voucesafe today Thy presence
With these who call on Thee.
Their store of earthly gladness
Transform to heavenly wine
And teach them, in the testing,
To know the gift is Thine.

3. O Spirit of the Father,
Breathe on them from above,
So mighty in Thy pureness,
So tender in Thy love,
That, guarded by Thy presence,
From sin and strife kept free,
Their lives may own Thy guidance,
Their hearts be ruled by Thee.

4. Except Thou build it, Father,
The house is built in vain;
Except Thou, Savior, bless it,
The joy will turn to pain.
But naught can break the marriage
Of hearts in Thee made one,
And love Thy Spirit hallows
Is endless love begun. Amen.

---

narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "Comments on Contemptible Worship - CoWo For Short":

"O Father, All Creating"
by John Ellerton, 1826-1893

1. O Father, all creating,
Whose wisdom, love, and power
First bound two lives together
In Eden's primal hour,
Today to these Thy children
Thine earliest gifts renew,--
A home by Thee made happy,
A love by Thee kept true.

2. O Savior, Guest most bounteous
Of old in Galilee,
Voucesafe today Thy presence
With these who call on Thee.
Their store of earthly gladness
Transform to heavenly wine
And teach them, in the testing,
To know the gift is Thine.

3. O Spirit of the Father,
Breathe on them from above,
So mighty in Thy pureness,
So tender in Thy love,
That, guarded by Thy presence,
From sin and strife kept free,
Their lives may own Thy guidance,
Their hearts be ruled by Thee.

4. Except Thou build it, Father,
The house is built in vain;
Except Thou, Savior, bless it,
The joy will turn to pain.
But naught can break the marriage
Of hearts in Thee made one,
And love Thy Spirit hallows
Is endless love begun. Amen.

Hymn #621
The Lutheran Hymnal
Text: Ps. 127: 1
Author: John Ellerton, 1876
Tune: "Eden"
1st Published in: Sacred Hymns and Tunes
Town: Boston, 1880

---

narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "Comments on Contemptible Worship - CoWo For Short":

"The Voice that Breathed o'er Eden"
by John Keble, 1792-1866

1. The voice that breathed o'er Eden,
That earliest wedding-day,
The primal marriage blessing,--
It hath not passed away.
Still in the pure espousal
Of Christian man and maid
The Triune God is with us,
The threefold grace is said.

2. Be present, loving Father,
To give away this bride
As Thou gav'st Eve to Adam,
A helpmeet at his side.
Be present, Son of Mary,
To join their loving hands
As Thou didst bind two natures
In Thine eternal bands.

3. Be present, Holiest Spirit,
To bless them as they kneel,
As Thou for Christ, the Bridegroom,
The heavenly Spouse dost seal.
Oh, spread Thy pure wing o'er them,
Let no ill power find place
When onward to Thine altar
Their hallowed path they trace.

4. To cast their crowns before Thee
In humble sacrifice,
Till to the home of gladness
With Christ's own Bride they rise.
To Father, Son, and Spirit,
Eternal One and Three,
As was and is forever,
All praise and glory be.

Hymn #622
The Lutheran Hymnal
Text: Eccl. 4:12
Author: John Keble, 1857, ab., alt.
Tune: "Eden"
1st Published in: Sacred Hymns and Tunes
Town: Boston, 1880


***

GJ - Many hymns are appropriate for a wedding. The graphics were done for some Gerhardt hymns, so I posted them.

Comments on Contemptible Worship - CoWo For Short



Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us":

Lutheran clergy apostasy is to blame. In fine Methodist form the WELS, ELS, LCMS etc have placed the focus on Excellence. In a fraudulent feign towards honoring the Word they throw dung at it by following the Church Growth fads of promoting excellence throughout the Divine Service - now called Worship since the focus has been changed from God serving us to us serving God. The Choirs were used in this way by replacing congregational singing with the Choir singing the hymns with the congregation joining on the refrains. Then came the Choir singing the entire hymn - such excellence and at the same time diminishing Uncle Bob's faithful attempt to keep a tune while focusing on the doctrinal content in the words and Word. The apostate clergy's vultures are simply coming home to roost - and to feast upon the carcasses the false doctrine and practice leave behind.

---

Joel has left a new comment on your post "The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us":

Brett, that's as may be. However, have you ever been to a wedding where most of the congregation is silent during a hymn and the few who are trying to sing are mumbling? Not an experience I would want to experience again. In that case, yes, it would be better to have one singer who knows what he/she is doing singing a wedding solo that glorifies God and teaches about marriage than to have a roomful of people who will forever associate this miserable experience with hymn singing.

---

narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us":

Following this logic, hymns should also not be sung at funerals. A truly orthodox Lutheran wedding or funeral WILL offend many people. Since the CG guys are so big on reaching the lost, why do they shun the opportunity for the "outside world" to hear Law and Gospel in its purity, both in preaching and hymnody? These same CG-types will rebuke us for not being like JW's by knocking on every door in town.

Whether a believer or not (no, not saved 2,000 years ago), every person in that church for a funeral is thinking about him/herself being in that box one day. What better time for Law and Gospel to be preached and sung? At an orthodox Lutheran funeral or wedding, there will be many there who will hear Law and Gospel in its purity for the first time.

Let's leave the generic Methobapticostal funerals and weddings to the Methobapticostals. Is a wedding a bad time to draw the analogy of a man and wife to that of Christ and His Church? Who cares if only three people are singing the hymn or if someone is offended? Save the party tunes for the reception following the wedding service, where everyone knows Kool and the Gang's "Celebration" by heart. I believe Christ himself offended many in His earthly ministry. "You are the Synagogue of Satan," "Your father is the devil," "No one comes to the Father but through me," and "The tax collector went home justified," are some examples that come to mind.

I recall one funeral from years ago that was a suicide. Our Lutheran pastor was adamantly chewed out by several people following the service for not saying the young adult was automatically in Heaven. I don't want to start the debate about what happens to people who commit suicide, but the pastor told those people the young adult was not baptized and never made a confession of faith to him, so he could not state with confidence where the deceased went. I remember him being nearly to the point of exhaustion from the verbal abuse. I believe that's what Jesus meant by bearing one's cross, i.e., being hated by this world. However, in his sermon, he preached the Law in its condemnation and Gospel in its beauty, and I wondered how many people there had heard it for the first time in their lives. He was very clear about how to get to Heaven. It wasn't by just being a good person, and it wasn't about making a decision. That's how the Holy Ghost works, through His Word.

Yes, we sang a few of those old and "non-relevant" Lutheran hymns acapella at the funeral home. As most of the people there were not members of our parish, it probably sounded hokey to some of them. I still remember how beautiful those hymns sounded; and I couldn't carry a tune for a million dollars.

---

narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us":

See, it's about what kind of "experience" we give the people. 'Nuff said.

---

Joel has left a new comment on your post "The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us":

Narrow Minded,

There is a difference between offending someone through the preaching of law and gospel and making the experience of Lutheran worship unpleasant by forcing someone to experience hymn singing for the first time at a wedding.

There are also more options for solo singing at a wedding than "Celebration." There are wedding songs not found in our hymnal that do a really good job of proclaiming a correct understanding of Christian marriage. I would rather have people attending a wedding hear a song that teaches correct doctrine than having the message completely lost when they tune out during a congregational hymn being attempted at a wedding.

Funerals are a different matter all together (sic). (All: "Funerals are a different matter.") People come to funerals expecting to sing. Of course, that's as long as it's one of the stand by funeral hymns like "Abide with Me," "Amazing Grace," "I'm but a Stranger Here," or "How Great Thou Art." I have tried without much success to convince families that there are better hymns than those to convey the message of Scripture. However, it's tough to get over the "It was sung at Grandpa's funeral" mentality. I'll tell ya, though, there's NOTHING like singing "I Know that My Redeemer Lives" at a funeral! I can ususally (sic) convince a family that that's a good choice if the person's funeral is taking place around Easter.

Why I Will Never Need To Quit Teaching English

Email:

Does Kelly's Tough Stances Help or Hurt Recruiting?
BleacherReport.com

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1676960-do-brian-kelly-and-jimbo-fishers-tough-stances-help-or-hurt-recruiting?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=notre-dame-football

They does hurt - lots.

They fixed the actual web post.

The Fault Does Not Lie in the Stars, But in Us



Joel has left a new comment on your post "Praise Banditry Is a House of Cards Waiting To Fal...":

You asked: "What is wrong with having two or three appropriate hymns during a wedding?"

Answer: It's because NO ONE sings at weddings. The biggest worry that my sainted mother-in-law had about the wedding service that my wife and I had was that we were going to have congregational singing. She thought it wouldn't work. I told her that it would. It did work because we had our wedding on the Sunday of Labor Day weekend and we had a good number of pastors attending the service.

Later on, I found out why she was nervous about congregational singing at a wedding. I encouraged every couple to have congregational singing at their weddings. Occasionally a couple would agree to it and I'd pick a couple of hymns that I considered to be pretty easy to sing and pretty well-known. Whenever the time came for congregational singing, you know what happened? ALMOST COMPLETE SILENCE. It took me way too long to figure out why that is. It's really a no-brainer: A wedding service is the only kind of worship service a good number of people who are sitting there attend. They don't know any hymns.

I've given up on congregational singing at weddings. I do insist, however, that all solo songs must be Christian songs.

***

GJ - Joel Lillo-of-the-Valley, your circuit has done its best to quash Lutheran worship, so you only have yourselves to blame. You are a prime defender of the entertainment seeker service.

The ministers who surrender to popular fads at weddings could be ones who insist on a worship service in a worship facility, instead of a justice of the peace ceremony in a church.

Chess players devalue the pawn at the beginning of the game. Then they give up a knight. Oh well. A bishop. No big deal. I have the queen. The queen is almighty. But later those players are extremely powerful, especially when used in combinations.

Church Growth ejected the Means of Grace in favor of sentimentality and marketing.

Long ago, I shook my head when I visited the Pentecostal church. The stage was filled with band instruments and microphone stands. The women who sang wore beehive hairdos and Lawrence Welk prom dresses. Now I can see the same thing at many SynCon congregations.

Lenski: "Resist the beginnings."


Praise Banditry Allows Congregation To Sing One Verse



quercuscontramalum (http://quercuscontramalum.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Praise Banditry Is a House of Cards Waiting To Fal...":

You mention one of the obvious errors of praize bands: they remove the congregation. I had the occasion to attend a 'blended service' [purity 'blended' with WHAT??] and the congregation sang exactly one refrain of the final hymn.

I'm not exaggerating. Imagine a room full of Lutherans NOT being allowed to sing during a service! The agony!

Instead of a congregation declaring the works of the Lord and proclaiming the Gospel to their neighbor through song, instead of one generation teaching the next using music and word tied together, it was a bar band muddling and pounding over a SATB group overreaching their talent like butter margarine spread over too much toast.

Trying To Understand the UOJ Errors



"From Luther's Small Catechism" is a lie.
This is really from the bottom of the UOJ sermon barrel,
the very bottom.

I had a friendly exchange with a WELS pastor, leading me to go over the reasons why people fall into the error of Universal Objective Justification. The following may be a product of my imagination alone, because no one has explained it, beyond saying, "I drank the Kool-Aid."

The constant drumbeat against faith is one reason that UOJ is tolerated among the SynCon pastors. The fanatical leaders, who are either illiterate or apostate, define faith as a work or the merit of man, yet end up treating faith as a decision - a decision to accept universal salvation (JP Meyer). 

But faith is trust in God's Promises in Christ, excluding all three definitions above. Lack of faith is the foundational sin, as Jesus Himself taught in John 16:8f.

Therefore, a misunderstanding of faith contributes mightily to the UOJ mindset.

A second cause is misunderstanding the Roman Catholic context of Luther's words. The products of today's SynCon seminaries do not understand Roman, Calvinist, or Lutheran doctrine. The reason? - the faculty members are in-bred political hacks, ticket-punchers who know their cush jobs could end in two shakes of a lamb's tail.

So let's review the context. Luther wrote largely for an audience saturated in Medieval Catholicism. Even today, Catholics teach that Jesus died to atone for the sins of the world. But one must parse their doctrinal texts. These sins are forgiven but not paid for. Aha. Repentance consists of acts of contrition and reparation.
Reparation is one of those long Latinate words for repayment. Catholics always add works to faith to earn forgiveness and rejoice in this remission of sins being held back until all accounts are settled in Purgatory, a mini-Hell for the semi-saved.

Luther's words - "Jesus is all forgiveness" - are not an endorsement of UOJ, but an antidote to that papal trick of faith plus works (fides formata). Luther always wrote that there is no forgiveness apart from faith. Either he contradicted himself a few times or the UOJ Storm-Brownies are liars.

Again - "Your sins are already forgiven." Lord's Prayer. Small Catechism - This classic is a textbook for Christian believers of all ages, not an evangelism tract for unbelievers. This phrasing is also appropriate for an age where Protestantism tells us to make a decision for Christ or to complete the transaction (do you part) since God has already done his part. Those who trust in Christ alone for salvation are forgiven all their sins, both great and small, the conquered sins and the persistent sins.

Luther is one of the few who does not imply that there is some requirement apart from faith in Christ. The SynCons include loyalty to Holy Mother Sect, payment of dues, and a quia subscription to the WELS Essay Files, aka, the Holy of Holies. Hyperbole? No. They excommunicate those who teach justification by faith (Kokomo, Rydecki, et al) and promote those who teach Groeschel, Sweet, and Driscoll (Jeske, Glende, Kelm, Valleskey, Werning, Hunter). Missouri and the Little Sect on the Prairie are just as bad.

The Protestant questions:

  1. Am I sorry enough?
  2. Have I asked Jesus into my heart?
  3. Have I surrendered all to Him?
  4. Have I suffered enough?
  5. Have I paid back my victims?
  6. Have I done enough?
  7. Have I joined a cell group?
  8. Have I spoken in tongues, danced in the Spirit, or fallen off a chair laughing?

are obliterated by Luther's language. He was a great student of the meaning of words, so he paraphrased what the Bible clearly taught, such as using alone with justified by faith alone apart from works.

The reason for alternative wording is the effort by false teachers to insert a wedge into the Biblical text - to make it say something else, something clearly done with the WELS NNIV, where suddenly "all" are justified in Romans 3. Does anyone notice this NNIV is the beloved paraphrase of the Protestant Left?

One example of the wedge is the issue of works. Luther taught consistently that good works follow faith. George Major turned that into good works are a requirement of salvation. Countering that maladroitly, his opponent Amsdorf said good works were injurious to salvation. The Formula of Concord had to repair the damage of two errors.

Paul answered potential errors by raising them in his letters. Should we sin more than grace may abound? Heaven forbid!

But, just as people pixelate the Biblical text, using one phrase--out of context--to prove a point, so false teachers pixelate the Book of Concord. They carefully avoid the Augsburg Confession and the Apology, because both are eloquent expressions of justification by faith alone.

And they land on Luther's estate analogy, which is not in the Book of Concord. How convenient, to avoid the message of Luther, the Book of Concord, and the post-Concord age of orthodoxy to focus on an allegory. Forgiveness of sin is like a man inheriting an estate and not knowing about it. But their favorite analogy is not strong enough bear up under the stress of UOJ deadweight.

Before you say, "Oh! Oh! Oh! I found UOJ in Luther!" ask yourself if the estate has been left to every single person on earth. That is what UOJ teaches. DP Buchholz assured the WELS convention that everyone is already forgiven, saved, period, end of story. He pretends to reject the Babtists, but he sits with the Rick Warren clone at every conference now, Jeff Gunn.

All the WELS/LCMS/ELS favorites are either stealth Babtists (Warren, Stanley, Stetzer) or far out Leftists (Sweet, Jeske).

Cannot Deal with the Efficacy of the Word, the Means of Grace, the Spirit/Word Bond

One test will earn a giant FAIL for all UOJ Enthusiasts.

Can they incorporate the Biblical concepts of the efficacy of the Word, the Means of Grace, and the Spirit/Word bond in their meandering tirades against the Gospel?

This analogy is also in the Book of Concord.