Terrible Advice from WELS Circuit Pastor Steve Spencer

"Tell us how you really feel, Anonymous WELS Pastor."

From The Polluted WELS Blog

tlcsvaz@orthodoxlutheran.info said...
Matthias -

Two things briefly:

1.) If you are a WELS Pastor, have you discussed your assessment with your CP, DP, and SP? I'm not suggesting any "18 & 8" violation, but one of the things that is important in WELS is for those with concerns to actually speak the leadership. This is the only chance for them to see that maybe, just maybe there are indeed real problems in our synod. If you are a layperson, have you confronted your Pastor(s) with your observations? Here again, this is an important and honest first step.

2.) This is not meant as a criticism, just an observation, but it would also help if you weren't semi-anonymous or using a pseudonym. As long as the vast majority of WELS critics are nameless and faceless, their statements will carry no weight at all. Of course, even if they are known - as the Intrepids were - they will carry only very little weight. Still, going public would seem to be the Biblical way to go. Just saying.
July 9, 2014 at 8:07 AM

[GJ - Confidential to Steve Spencer - Sign your name when advising against anonymity. That might mean more to the recipient.]

 ***

GJ - Given the Intrepid Lutherans track record of non-support for one of their own, this is the worst advice anyone could  give.

Pastor Paul Rydecki did all this, and DP Jon-Boy Buchholz kicked him out while promising the entire congregation that he (DP Jon-Boy) would continue discussing the topic of justification by faith. Next, Jon-Boy kicked out the congregation for rejecting UOJ and licked his canines at the conference, bragging how he was foreclosing on the congregation's mortgage.

Soon Jon-Boy was so far up Jeff Gunn's wazoo that he could see the bottom of Mark Jeske's feet. But I am sure the reports of Jeff sitting on Jon's lap at conferences are pure hyperbole.

The Intrepid Lutheran blog got interesting, so Steve Spencer quit the blog he started, saying it was not doing any good. He pronounced a pox on UOJ and JFBA. Very little has been posted since then, but there are two new posts by laymen.

The WELS Circuit Pastors are considered finger puppets of the District Pope. If they cease being finger-puppets, the DP gets rid of them by fiat.

The DPs and CPs know what is going on in WELS - and deny it when covering up, or laugh about it. Spencer must have jumped off the bus from Our Lady of Perpetual Obligation Convent School when he wrote that advice.

Sensible Advice
Your blog is great. Great title, great posts. Real discussion.

Make serious plans for life outside of WELS. You cannot continue in the cult when its corruption is so obvious.They will find you and kick you out. The WELS leaders will never stop unleashing their vindictiveness and venom on you and your family.

I have always said - clergy should have a second vocation. It is far better to work on the side and carry on with an independent congregation. And there are various options, certainly not in the ELS, but  in other places.

St. Paul made tents on the side, so he would not be a burden to his congregations. Clergy have worthless educations for getting another job, but they often have special skills they can use in the workplace. It is best to prepare beforehand and not wait until the force-you-out meeting happens with DP, his syncophant CP, or both - Dumb and Dumber.

If you want a friend in WELS, buy a dog. The WELS clergy are the worst back-stabbers on this planet. They will walk with a fiend to a cliff, then push him off and blame him for falling. Job's Comforters are still around. Those who suddenly become friendly and sympathetic are simply synod-minders, running to the DP so they can make a good impression.

May God strengthen you in leaving Plato's Cave. The view outside is much better.

Add caption

Add caption

Reliable.

Infallible.

---

Zank supported Ski's CRM and call - elected DP to replace Deputy Doug Engelbrecht.

000

Engelbrecht supported:
plagiarism,
 Ski,
Glende,
excommunicating a member for telling the truth,
and suing a member for telling the truth.
Mark Schroeder supported Deputy Doug.

Polluted WELS - Questions and Answers

Some Questions and Answers

Thanks to all who offered their advice and counsel on my previous post. In the comments, some of you asked some questions of me. Here are some answers:

Are you a pastor or a layman?

I am a WELS pastor. The only thing I've ever wanted to do is to be a Lutheran pastor. I took my ordination vows seriously. But I've found that the WELS doesn't have much tolerance for Lutheran pastors who take their vows seriously.

Why do you publish anonymously?

Because I'm a coward. And because I have a family to feed. I can guarantee you that if I attached my name to this blog, I would be kicked out of the ministry within a month. If you're a contemporary worship guy or if you have the right last name, you can get drunk at work, sexually harass your co-workers, and sue your members and be just fine. If you're a Confessional Lutheran without any connections, you can be removed for any reason or no reason at all.

Why don't you voice your concerns to and through the proper channels?

Here's a true story. I once told my DP that there were some vocal members of my congregation agitating for contemporary worship. His response consisted of two sentences: "Yes, I know, they've already talked to me about you. Have you ever thought of pursuing other lines of work?"

I got the message.

---

 Vernon Knepprath said...

Matthias,

If all you ever wanted to be was a Confessional Lutheran pastor, there is no reason for a synodical affiliation to get in the way. There are independent Confessional Lutheran pastors out there. Here is just one example:
http://notalone-saints.blogspot.com/

The way things are going, as you pointed out so well in your blog, there will be a growing need for more independent Confessional Lutheran pastors. Perhaps it is time to set up a network to serve this need, if there isn't one already. I suspect there are more like you out there.

Vernon

July 9, 2014 at 3:19 PM

Comment deleted

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 9, 2014 at 3:41 PM

 Anonymous said...

The CLC (Church of the Lutheran Confession as opposed to Concordia Lutheran Conference) and Protest'ant Conference might be two church bodies to consider down the road if you have not already done so.

July 9, 2014 at 4:00 PM

 Matthias Flach said...

Does anyone have any experience with the CLC? My impression is that they are very conservative, but not necessarily Confessional.

July 9, 2014 at 4:12 PM

 Matthias Flach said...

(Yes, there's a difference.)

July 9, 2014 at 4:12 PM

 Anonymous said...

I was a member of a CLC congregation for about ten years after I kicked myself out of my WELS congregation over Church Growth nonsense before I even knew there was a term for it. It brought back fond memories of all my best recollections of the WELS before the stuff hit the fan. Individual congregations may vary, but my impression is that the CLC takes confessionalism seriously. Check out Ascension Tacoma's site (lutherantacoma.com) and tell me which WELS pastor holds a Bible class to teach Greek to interested members, or who posts all the public domain tunes in TLH. Michael Eichstadt of Messiah, Hales Corners, is the SP. I would recommend contacting him.

July 9, 2014 at 4:33 PM

 Matthias Flach said...

By the way, this article describes what I'm talking about when I say that there's a difference between conservatives and confessionals:

http://hopelutheranfremont.org/motley/v3n1_a4.htm

July 9, 2014 at 4:57 PM

 Daniel Baker said...

From what I've investigated, CLC is basically conservative but not Confessional as has been stated (just like the WELS).

I actually agree with what someone said in an earlier comment about finding a local Confessional parish and sticking with it. I use LutheranLiturgy.org for that. A cursory search will demonstrate that the bulk of the parishes on there are LCMS. Also, after running a recent poll on Confessional Lutheran Memes, it was discovered that the vast majority of the followers of that page are LCMS. Most people in the Confessional Lutheran Fellowship group on Facebook are LCMS as well. Make of those facts what you will.

July 9, 2014 at 5:04 PM

 Anonymous said...

I feel you brother. I'm an anonymous coward too. I'm just trying to make my flock as Lutheran as possible before the day comes when I pissed off the DP too much and lose my WELS pension. They can keep it.
I just want to feed this flock. If I get kicked out now many will just assume the WELS is right. I have gotten some out of the blindness of synodalotry and into the Scriptures and Confessions, but I want to stick around and save as many as I can. So I'm keeping my head down and tending to my flock.
May the risen Lord Jesus, the Good Shepherd (and Samaritan) strengthen you and me with his Word and body and blood to be bold and unafraid to confess and suffer.

July 9, 2014 at 5:42 PM

 OCP said...

Matthias and 5:42 Anonymous,

My opinion is that there is more of us out there than you would think. You know how, in a congregation, there are always a handful of people who will complain about something very loudly, and when that happens, it's easy to overestimate their number. The ones who are supportive are often mature enough to refrain from gossip so they're pretty quiet, and it's easy to underestimate their number.

I think there is some of that in our Synod. There are the big name "celebrities," and many of them are the ones pushing Evangelicalism on our Synod. They have some very vocal supporters, so it's easy to overestimate their numbers. Because their supporters are so vocal, that can sometimes influence elections, and can influence those who get elected.

But like Nixon, I tend to think that there is a silent majority, who humbly and quietly serve their flock. They are not very vocal (and can too easily be "shouted down"), but they aren't really supportive of the creeping Evangelicalism. But because they are all so quiet, many of them (us?) feel like we're alone. They (we?) feel like we're standing against the tide, but there are more of us out there than we realize.

I think if there was some sort of a "leader" for our side of the aisle, we'd see how many our numbers are. But even that is difficult, because the silent majority doesn't feel right "campaigning" for a DP, or SP. So it's only the other side that does the talking.

This is my hope. Maybe it's optimistic to the point of being naive, but that's what I think. I believe that the Church Growth stuff, the Evangelicalism creeping into our Synod, I believe that these are fads, whose days are limited. As just one guy in a tiny corner of the Synod, I will so what I can to effect that. But more importantly, I will fulfill the duties of my call, and teach my congregation.

Anyway, that's what I do.

OCP

July 9, 2014 at 6:59 PM

Rumors of Rain. Snow Is Part of the Equation

Isaiah 55:8-11 King James Version

8 For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, saith the Lord.

9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.

10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:

11 So shall My Word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Why do autumn leaves, left on the ground, disappear over winter?
Decomposition continues all winter, under the blanket of snow.

Others are enjoying rain today - or suffering from it - while we wait for the promised storms. My hometown area has flooded on both sides of the Mississippi.

America has lost its way because people are no longer close to Creation and the soil. Denominational leaders would rather sit down at the local Starbucks or the Velvet Lounge than stick a shovel in the soil that feeds them.

We think of rain in relation to good crops and abundant flowers, but snow is equally valuable. 

The blanket of snow, formed by the interlocking crystals:

• Keeps everything warm underneath. 
• Promotes winter decomposition because of  the bacteria that work and multiply in the cold, with plenty of moisture available to them.
• Melts in the spring to give all new growth a burst of life.

Bird life continues throughout the winter, because insects leave their larvae in the bark of trees and hidden in bushes. Blue jays tuck away their own supplies of acorns, which contribute to the growth of oak forests.

Springtail or snow flea.

Springtails work on decomposition all winter. Some ask, "Springtails? What are they?" That is the problem. There are more springtails on earth than people, but most people do not know these tiny insects exist.

Wikipedia:

In sheer numbers, they are reputed to be one of the most abundant of all macroscopic animals, with estimates of 100,000 individuals per cubic meter of topsoil,^[21]

Springtails contribute to symbiosis in their ceaseless labors. Each creature contributes to the food chain, eating and being eaten, predator and prey. 

Earthworms start small with a high protein diet of bacteria, which are mostly protein. From that diet they build their bodies, which are all muscle. Hard-nosed, they can burrow through anything. With tiny pebbles in their tiny gizzards, they grind up the soil they devour and make it finer. Their calciferous glands make the soil sweeter. Their kidneys add to the nitrogen compounds available to plants.

What Now? Asks Polluted WELS Blogger

Check out - Seven Signs WELS is a cult.

So what now?

http://pollutedwels.blogspot.com/2014/07/so-what-now.html

I'm frustrated and confused.

• It's clear that the WELS is drifting further and further away from true Lutheranism.
• It's clear that the WELS is drifting closer and closer to generic Protestantism.
• It's clear that WELS leaders are unable or unwilling to exercise discipline against those who introduce and promote false doctrine and practice.
• It's clear that the WELS is hostile to those who cling to true Lutheran doctrine and practice.
• It's clear that the WELS cares more about outward peace than true unity.
• It's clear that the WELS is decidedly anti-sacramental.
• It's clear that I could continue this list ad naseum. 

What's not clear, though, is what to do now. Stay and fight a losing fight? Leave? Is there even a church body in which one can actually be a true Confessional Lutheran? If so, where is it? These aren't idle questions. I am truly struggling and I truly need your help.

---

Anonymous said...

I would suggest ELDoNA. :-) :-D

July 8, 2014 at 7:57 PM

 Daniel Baker said...

ELDoNA or LCMS are your best bets. WELS is beyond all hope.

July 8, 2014 at 7:58 PM

 Anonymous said...

Do not cast pearls before swine. While the dust off your shoes as you leave. WELS is done. It is no longer Lutheran.

July 8, 2014 at 7:59 PM

 Matthias Flach said...

I appreciate your suggestions. At times I have looked longingly at both ELDoNA and LCMS, but I'm not convinced either is a good option. Regarding ELDoNA, I'm not sure I'm convinced that their position on justification is the correct one. Regarding LCMS, it's true that they are slightly more tolerant of Confessional Lutheranism than WELS, but they are also plagued by every error of the WELS and even more.

July 8, 2014 at 8:17 PM

 Vernon Knepprath said...

Regarding justification, consider this. The teaching of justification is being changed with time:

Catechetical Helps, Erwin Kurth, Concordia, 1961, 1970. “This, then, is the central teaching of the Bible that all who believe receive forgiveness of sins and are justified before God, not by works, but by grace, for Christ’s sake, through faith.”

This We Believe, Gurgle, Northwestern Publishing House, 2006. “We believe that God has justified all sinners, that is, he has declared them righteous for the sake of Christ. This is the central message of Scripture upon which the very existence of the church depends.”

... or this

Doctor Martin Luther’s Small Catechism, Edited by C. Gausewitz, Northwestern Publishing House, 1956.
261. To whom does God forgive sins? “God forgives sins to me and all believers.”

Doctor Martin Luther’s Small Catechism, NIV Edition, originally edited by C. Gausewitz, Northwestern Publishing House, 2nd Printing 1989.
261. To whom does God forgive sins? “God forgives sins to me and all believers.”

Luther’s Catechism, David P. Kuske, Northwestern Publishing House, 1982.
253. How many people did God declare righteous? “God declared all people righteous (Objective Justification).”

Are all of these statements with regard to justification in harmony? If not (and I think not), why are they being changed? More importantly, how can they be changed and still be faithful to Scripture?

Consider the 'Means of Grace'. The Means of Grace are the Word and the Sacraments. The Holy Spirit works through the Means of Grace. The gifts of the Holy Spirit, offered through the Means of Grace are faith and forgiveness. If all are forgiven, then what purpose does the "Means of Grace" serve?

July 8, 2014 at 9:01 PM

 OCP said...

I don't know that there are better options out there. Matthias, I agree with your assessment of ELDoNA and LCMS, so I don't see those as realistic alternatives.

I'm not sure that WELS is quite to the level of hopelessness you fear. Yes, there are issues, but we should expect issues within any visible church. We should expect that the devil will work even harder among us than in the world, so I'm not surprised when there are issues, and I don't see any greener pastures over any other fences. I don't see overt doctrinal issues within WELS, and I do within every other visible church I've seen. My answer has been to continue to talk, continue to listen, continue to struggle, continue to work to address the issues that plague us. I will do what I can in the church at large, but I can have real effect in my own congregation. I teach, train, instruct, educate, as much as possible. I address these issues proactively in my own congregation, and within the Synod as much as I am able.

It may not be a perfect answer, but in a sinful world, I believe it's the best I can do. Come quickly Lord Jesus!

July 8, 2014 at 9:10 PM

 Daniel Baker said...

I think the LCMS is more than a little tolerant of Confessionals. The main advantage they have, though, is the fact that there is the quantity of Confessional Lutherans in their midst, whereas the number is almost nonexistent in the WELS (at least per their fruit, which is the only standard of measure we can use anymore, since even the CoWo fanatics claim to be "Confessional" in some sense.

The simple fact is that I don't know of a single WELS parish that looks like the description of a Lutheran parish given by the Lutheran Confessions - one abiding by the historic celebration of the Mass in all its glory, retaining all the propers, lections, vestments, and other like things, one that regularly offers private confession, one that faithfully makes use of, teaches, and urges toward the Means of Grace, etc.).

As for the ELDoNA, I agree with them on justification, so obviously I find that attractive. God does not declare the everyone righteous outside of faith. But I won't get into a UOJ debate here.

Grace alone,
NIV alone,
But without faith -
WELS mottto, Mequon training.

Brett Meyer said...

You ask 'so what now?'

It would seem that the only people willing to comment, and stand by those comments without Kilcreasing them, are in agreement with the stated condition of the WELS.

The one thing a few of us contend is that the WELS holds to a false gospel as taught in their doctrine of Universal Objective Justification. No better time than the present to discuss and establish whether or not that doctrine is in harmony with Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.

Not only is it a supreme endeavor to confess, discuss and defend the chief article of Justification whenever possible, but it also serves to clarify your options when considering 'So what now?'

If WELS is wrong about their doctrine of UOJ, and I contend that it is, then the LCMS and ELS are also wrong and the majority of churches in their fellowship which adhere to it would be out of consideration for 'So what now?'. Individual confessional churches who teach Christ's chief article faithfully and who are affiliated with those synods would be a consideration as well as independent confessional churches and ELDONA.

As I mentioned to a friend this morning, the doctrine of Justification is the most important topic of confession, discussion and contention in the history of the world. Why not address it here where individuals have already stated their God given desire to adhere to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions?

I appreciate the opportunity to comment.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

July 9, 2014 at 6:50 AM

tlcsvaz@orthodoxlutheran.info said...

Matthias -

Two things briefly:

1.) If you are a WELS Pastor, have you discussed your assessment with your CP, DP, and SP? I'm not suggesting any "18 & 8" violation, but one of the things that is important in WELS is for those with concerns to actually speak the leadership. This is the only chance for them to see that maybe, just maybe there are indeed real problems in our synod. If you are a layperson, have you confronted your Pastor(s) with your observations? Here again, this is an important and honest first step.

2.) This is not meant as a criticism, just an observation, but it would also help if you weren't semi-anonymous or using a pseudonym. As long as the vast majority of WELS critics are nameless and faceless, their statements will carry no weight at all. Of course, even if they are known - as the Intrepids were - they will carry only very little weight. Still, going public would seem to be the Biblical way to go. Just saying.

July 9, 2014 at 8:07 AM

 Brett Meyer said...

Anonymous asks, "What does the atonement accomplish in your view, Brett?"

The atonement was Christ's complete and full payment for the world's sins. The sins of the whole world were laid upon Christ as the perfect and sinless sacrifice and He paid the all sufficient price for them. Therefore all righteousness resides in Christ alone.

He alone is the propitiation for sins through the gracious gift of the Holy Spirit's faith in Christ alone. He alone is Mediator between the Father's wrath over sin and sinful man through the gracious gift of faith, Christ's righteousness.

The doctrine of Universal Objective Justification teaches that Christ has propitiated the sins of the whole unbelieving world (been apprehended as their propitiation) such that God has declared the unbelieving world justified, guiltless and forgiven all sin. All without the gracious, Holy Spirit worked gift, of faith in Christ alone worked solely through the Means of Grace by which Scripture teaches man can obtain Christ as Propitiation and Mediator.

Scripture:
John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God

Romans 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Romans 4:16 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,

Romans 3:25-26 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

A person cannot, at the same time, be both declared justified by God and declared condemned by God.

Thanks for your question.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

Dependencies and Companion Plants. Creation Explains Relationships

Garlic is a companion plant for roses,
and carrots love tomatoes.

Evolution must be a great theory, because the evolution establishment refuses to let Creation be taught in any tax-payer supported institution. They have concluded, against the evidence, that global warming is a terrifying threat, and contrary evidence (with data supplied) is also banned. Many scientists reject global warming as fraud, but the dominant opinion continues to fool people.

I would never want to argue Creation from the facts or logic. That does not make me anti-factual or illogical. Creation is a mystery, just as evolution is. The difference is clear - the Word of God teaches Creation and the Spirit confirms this mystery to be God's truth. Believers realize this, but unbelievers scoff at such a notion, as they must, because they are blind to the Word of God.

The basics of Creation can be observed.

Gardeners have found that in soil, just as in business and marriages, opposites make the best companions. Andy Rooney made a list of people who always arrive early at the airport, always fill the icecube trays, and always replace the TP, versus the opposites. That includes balancing the checkbook and other behaviors. Some men are As and some are Bs. The same is true of women, some being As, others Bs. And As always marry Bs.

Kevin Leman did the same with birth order, which explains this behavior. First-born children are perfections, driven, neatniks, and often highly critical. The baby of the family is lovable, fun, and the least likely to earn straight As. Middle children are normal.

First-born children tend to marry the baby of the family or the middle child. People seldom marry the same birth order.

In business. opposite personalities make great partners, but they often do not work in harmony and split up.

Creation explains that God has built mutual dependencies into every aspect of life. They are not so surprising in marriage and in business when they are so common in nature.

Garlic is a stinky bulb. Leave some in a hot car, as I did once, if you want to find out how stinky. They are just the opposite of roses, yet they are so good for roses that rosarians routinely plant them around their favorite flowers.

But garlic does not do so well with onions. Why? They are the same family.

The same family will trade diseases all too easily. Tobacco mulch on tomato plants caused wilt - common to both nightshades.

Opposites strengthen each other. The deep growing tap-rooted dandelion herb does very well in shallow-rooted grass. Likewise, dandelion plots - grown for wine - are invaded by grass. They love their opposites. Scott's Lawn and Garden is grateful - America will never eradicate the dandelion from lawns.

Carrots are a root crop that gets along well with tomatoes, a berry crop. Gardeners study companion planting and make sure they do not have an incestuous plot, with all the kissing cousins planted together.

We take symbiotic relationships for granted in nature. Large animals tolerate birds that pluck insects from their tender hides, or morsels from their teeth. Didn't we first learn about lichens and mosses, which hardly spend time thinking about the meaning of life.

Science classes present symbiotic relationships in pairs, but everything in Creation is wrapped up together.

The rain is coming tonight, which illustrates how well that works. Gardeners love the rain, because their work is leveraged and fulfilled by rain.

Somewhat good chart - but where are the earthworms?

This is a brief summary of rain and how it affects the garden:

1. The rain provides moisture, but also usable nitrogen compounds that green up the lawn instantly and give life to the plants.
2. Rain will run off the soil and carry large amounts away, unless the soil is porous but also good at storing moisture.
3. Rain, rot, and soil creature support one another. 
4. Decomposition requires moisture, and soil creatures speed it up through a complex set of relationships where everything is eaten by creatures who are also eaten, until the mix is filled with tunnels for rainwater, earthworm castings, and humus. 
5. Rain builds up the soil population, and the soil creatures hold the rain in the soil.
6. When rain penetrates the soil better, plants thrive and send their roots deeper, which softens the soil and brings minerals up from the lower levels.
7. The build-up of organic matter (humus) means the soil holds more moisture for a longer period of time and has better structure.
8. When the soil teems with life, birds are attracted to the food supply and eat a lot of the destructive insects.

Classic Ichabod - UOJ in Karl Barth, Fuller Seminary's Favorite Theologue

Charlotte Kirschbaum was the Commie babe who bedded Barth in his own home, moving in shamelessly. Many Barthians claim she was a major contributor to the gaseous Church Dogmatics that Barth claimed as his own. Note the Church Growth parallels with adultery, apostasy, and plagiarism.

Karth Barth was so cute in his Swiss Army uniform - I had to post this photo for laughs. It looks like a scene from Laugh In.

My friend from Yale explored Barth's love for Marxism and his known affinities with the red cause. Barth-Kirschbaum is the official theologian for Fuller Seminary, where most of the leaders of WELS, Missouri, the ELS, and ELCA have attended.

Here ve haff da luffly Barth family, Karl mit Charlotte, und Kinder, und Frau Barth way over on da outside right. Das machen me schniffle ein bischen. Zo touching und varm. Der kleine Hans hat two mommies - eine Hausfrau und eine va-va-voom Commie. [Translated into German to keep the caption G-rated. Mrs. I is laughing her head off.]

Carl Braaten, the son of missionaries, latched onto Leftist theologians, incorporating Barth-Kirschbaum and Tillich (another adulterer) into Lutheran theology. Barth's $1,000 set now sells for $99. Tillich is a has-been, known chiefly for his promiscuity and sadistic fetishes.

Note the catchy subtitle, which came from an orthodox Lutheran.
The UOJ dimwits use that phrase in all their essays attacking justification by faith.

Carl  Braaten, Justification, 1990:

We cannot hold a universalism of the unitarian kind. People are not too good to be damned. There is no necessity for God to save everybody nor to reject anyone. God is not bound by anything outside of himself. He is not bound to give the devil his due. If we take into account God's love, he would have all to be saved. If we reckon with his freedom, he has the power to save whomsoever he pleases. This does not lead to a dogmatic universalism. But it does mean that we leave open the possibility that within the power of God's freedom and love, all people may indeed be saved in the end. This follows as a possibility from the fact that God is free from all external factors in making up his mind. (p. 139)

...

Then Why Evangelize? (heading, Braaten, p. 140)

...

Barth's doctrine is radically objective. [Bratten now quotes Barth-Kirschbaum verbatim.]

There is not one for whose sin and death he did not die, whose sin and death he did not remove and obliterate on the cross...There is not one who is not adequately and perfectly and finally justified in Him. There is not one whose sin is not forgiven sin in Him, whose death is not a death which has been put to death in Him...There is not one for whom he has not done everything in His death and received everything in His resurrection from the dead. (Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV, 1, 638)

In the face of literally hundreds of such beautiful passages, evangelicals understandably ask, Then what is the point of evangelism? If the heathen are already saved in Christ, and nothing more needs to be added, then where is the urgency in world evangelization? (Braaten, p. 140)


Universalism-Denying
The parallels with WELS, Jon Buchholz, Jay Webber, and Don Patterson are obvious. They deny they are Universalists while confessing the basics of Universalism. Texas WELS even featured an essay where someone read from the Universalist creed and said, "See - we are not Univesalists." The truth hurts.

The language is borrowed the Halle's Knapp, because Halle was pivotal in the transition from a Biblical Pietistic school to a Rationalistic university.

Earlier, Samuel Huber taught the same way, but the Wittenberg theologians crushed him like a bug. The same kind of Enthusiasm came back via Pietism, since that movement was allergic to orthodox confessions but overly fond of unionism. Spener was the first union theologian, but not the last.

UOJ makes anything possible (except rejection of UOJ). Take money from unrepentant adulterers? No problem? Plagiarize the false doctrine of Fuller Seminary? That is spoiling the Egyptians. Engage in child porn file swapping? You are forgiven because you are sorry you got caught again.

---

From Wikipedia and George Hunsinger:

Relationship with Charlotte von Kirschbaum

When Barth first met Charlotte von Kirschbaum in 1924 he had already been married for 12 years to his wife, Nelly, with whom he had also had five children.^[14] In 1929, von Kirschbaum, with Barth's consent, moved into the Barth family household. This arrangement–described by one scholar as "convoluted, extremely painful for all concerned, yet not without integrity and joys"–lasted for 35 years.^[15]

A kind of household of three relationship developed between Barth, von Kirschbaum and Barth's wife, Nelly. The long-standing situation was not without its difficulties. "Lollo",^[16] as Barth called the 13-year-younger von Kirschbaum, once wrote to Barth's sister Gertrud Lindt in 1935, where she expressed her concern about the precarious situation:

"The alienation between Karl and Nelly has reached a degree which could hardly increase. This has certainly become accentuated by my existence."^[17]

The relationship caused great offence among many of Barth's friends, as well as his own mother.^[18] Barth's children suffered from the stress of the relationship.^[18] Barth and von Kirschbaum took semester break vacations together.^[18] While Nelly supplied the household and the children, von Kirschbaum and Barth shared an academic relationship. Barth has fallen victim to criticism for his relationship with Charlotte von Kirschbaum. One critic has written: "Part of any realistic response to the subject of Barth and von Kirschbaum must be anger."^[19] Hunsinger summarizes the influence of von Kirschbaum on Barth's work: "As his unique student, critic, researcher, adviser, collaborator, companion, assistant, spokesperson, and confidant, Charlotte von Kirschbaum was indispensable to him. He could not have been what he was, or have done what he did, without her."

1. ^ George Hunsinger's review of S. Seliger, Charlotte von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth: A Study in Biography and the History of Theology.
2. ^ Hunsinger
3. ^ Eberhard Busch, Karl Barths Lebenslauf, München: Kaiser, 177ff.
4. ^ Karl Barth: Gesamtausgabe, Teil V. Briefe. Karl Barth – Eduard Thurneysen: Briefwechsel Bd. 3, 1930–1935: einschließlich des Briefwechsels zwischen Charlotte von Kirschbaum und Eduard Thurneysen, eds. Caren Algner; Zürich: TVZ, Theologischer Verlag, 2000, p. 839.
5. ^ ^a b c Busch, Karl Barths Lebenslauf, 199 = Karl Barth: His Life from Letters and Autobiographical Texts (Fortress Press, 1976), 185-6.
6. ^ S. Seliger, Charlotte von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth; quoted in K. Sonderegger's review.

---

http://www3.ptsem.edu/Content.aspx?id=1933&menu_id=72

	Hazel Thompson McCord Professor of Systematic Theology Department of Theology 102 Hodge Hall Phone: 609.252.2114 Fax: 609.497.7728 Email: george.hunsinger@ptsem.edu (Presbyterian)
Profile
George Hunsinger is Princeton Theological Seminary’s Hazel Thompson McCord Professor of Systematic Theology. He earned his B.D. from Harvard University Divinity School and his M.A., M.Phil., and Ph.D. from Yale University. He served as director of the Seminary’s Center for Barth Studies from 1997 to 2001. He has broad interests in the history and theology of the Reformed tradition and in “generous orthodoxy” as a way beyond the modern liberal/conservative impasse in theology and church. An ordained Presbyterian minister, he was a major contributor to the new Presbyterian catechism. He teaches courses on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit in the Reformed tradition, the theology of the Lord’s Supper, the theology of John Calvin, and classical and recent Reformed theology. He is the founder of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture. --- http://www.theopedia.com/George_Hunsinger George Hunsinger is an ordained Presbyterian minister and theologian. He is currently the Hazel Thompson McCord Professor of Systematic Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary in Princeton, NJ. Hunsinger was the director of the Center for Barth Studies at Princeton from 1997 - 2001. Hunsinger received a BD from Harvard University Divinity School and an MA, MPhil, and PhD from Yale University. His work has focused primarily on the theology of Karl Barth. Hunsinger was the recipient of the 2010 Karl Barth Prize and joins previous prize recipients Eberhard Jüngel, Hans Küng, John W. de Gruchy, Johannes Rau, Bruce McCormack, and others. Hunsinger has also been associated with the postliberal movement and is an authoritative interpreter of Hans Frei. He has a long history of anti-war and human rights activism and is also an open critic of the war in Iraq. Since 2003 he has been active in the Ecumenical movement through the Faith and Order commission and recently completed a book on The Eucharist and Ecumenism: Let Us Keep the Feast, published by Cambridge University Press in 2008. --- http://libweb.ptsem.edu/collections/barth/reviews/CharlotteKirschbaum.aspx?menu=296&subText=468&disclaimer=668 Charlotte von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth: A Study in Biography and the History of Theology Suzanne Selinger, Charlotte von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth: A Study in Biography and the History of Theology (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998), viii + 206pp. $29.00 Reviewed by: George Hunsinger When Charlotte von Kirschbaum first heard Karl Barth lecture in 1924, she was 24 years old, financially almost destitute, and in poor health. Deeply religious and a voracious reader with a keen interest in theology, she had already devoured Barth's 1919 Römerbrief, at the recommendation of her pastor, shortly after it had appeared, and then avidly kept up with Barth's work through the journal Zwischen den Zeiten. At a time when only a tiny fraction of the general population, virtually all male, went on for a university education, she had been trained for a career as a Krankenschwester or Protestant nurse. It was George Merz, her pastor, who first recognized her intellectual gifts. After guiding her through confirmation in the Lutheran church, Merz included her in the intellectual circle he had gathered around him in Munich, which included Thomas Mann. It was also Merz, by then editor of Zwischen den Zeiten and godfather to one of Barth's children, who had taken her with him to that lecture, and who introduced her to Barth afterwards. Barth invited them both for a visit to his summer retreat, the Bergli, in the mountains overlooking Lake Zurich. Merz and von Kirschbaum went to the Bergli that summer and returned the next. Von Kirschbaum made a very good impression. She was drawn into the circle of theological friends who spent their summers at the chalet. Pastor Eduard Thurneysen, Barth's closest friend, and Gerty Pestalozzi, owner with her husband of the Bergli, took an interest in furthering her education. (Becoming a Krankenschwester had required no special academic training or higher degrees.) Ruedi Pestalozzi, Gerty's husband and a wealthy businessman, paid for her to receive secretarial training, after which she became a welfare officer at Siemans, a large electronics firm in Nuremburg. In October 1925 Barth switched university teaching appointments from Göttingen to Münster. His wife and family remained behind until a suitable residence could be found. In February 1926 von Kirschbaum visited Barth for a month in Münster, shortly before his family was to join him, but while he was still living alone. Barth's situation at this time is worth noting. He was 39 years old, had been married to Nelly (then aged 32) for nearly 13 years, and had five young children. The marriage, not a particularly happy one, had by his own account left him feeling resigned to loneliness. After his parents had prevented him in 1910 from marrying Rösy Münger, whom he deeply loved and never forgot -- and who died in 1925 -- he had submitted in 1911 to an engagement and then in 1913 to a marriage, with Nelly, that had in essence been arranged by his mother. (Barth always carried a photograph of Rösy with him for the rest of his life, sometimes wept when looking at it, and would continue over the years to visit her grave.) Although we do not know exactly what happened between Barth and Charlotte von Kirschbaum in that fateful encounter of 1926, we do know that from that point on they were in love with each other, that Barth immediately gave her manuscript after manuscript for advice and correction, and that she committed herself henceforth to doing everything she possibly could to advance his theological work. After spending a sabbatical at the Bergli in the summer term of 1929, with von Kirschbaum at his side as his aide, Barth announced in October that she would be moving into the family household to be a member of it. This arrangement -- convoluted, extremely painful for all concerned, yet not without integrity and joys -- lasted for nearly 35 years until 1964 when von Kirschbaum had to be admitted to a nursing home with Alzheimer's disease. These were exactly the years of Barth's most productive intellectual life. As his unique student, critic, researcher, advisor, collaborator, companion, assistant, spokesperson, and confidant, Charlotte von Kirschbaum was indispensable to him. He could not have been what he was, or have done what he did, without her. The reverse would also seem to have been true. Von Kirschbaum was a strong, noble and unconventional woman who made her own choices and willingly bore their great costs. The costs of the arrangement with Barth were many, not least a total rejection by most of her own family, and a thousand constant humiliations from church, society, and the larger Barth clan (not excluding Barth's mother, who eventually tempered her harsh disapproval). Many real exits opened up along the way (such as a proposal of marriage from the philosopher Heinrich Scholz), but she never took any of them. What she once wrote in particular to a friend would seem to hold true of her whole life: "It is very clear to me that Karl had to act in this way, and that comforts me whatever the consequences." From her first encounter with his theology in her youth to the very end of her life, she felt gripped by a sense of the greatness of Barth's contribution, an excitement that she once described simply with the words, "This is it!" During one of Barth's last visits to her in the nursing home, she said, "We had some good times together, didn't we?" We may well wonder also where Nelly Barth was in the midst of all this. There is undoubtedly much we will never know. But we do know that in her own way she never ceased to believe in her husband and his work. We know that the two of them experienced a reconciliation after Charlotte departed the household, that she and Karl both visited her at the nursing home on Sundays, that she continued those visits after Karl died in 1968, and that when Charlotte herself died in 1975, Nelly honored Karl's wishes by having Charlotte buried in the Barth family grave. Nelly herself died in 1976. Visitors to the Basel Hörnli cemetery today can see the names of all three together engraved one by one on the same stone. The book by Suzanne Selinger is not the first to cover this territory, nor will it be the last. As a study in the history of theology, it succeeds reasonably well. The sections on how Barth and von Kirschbaum respectively viewed male/female relationships as bearing the image of God are interesting and worth reading. As a biographical study, however, the book seems less successful. The author seethes with so much resentment toward Karl Barth that as I closed the book I had an image of him as St. Sebastian. At the level of adjectives, he takes a lot of hits. Unfortunately, Charlotte von Kirschbaum fares little better. The author unwittingly undermines her purposes of sympathy and compassion -- unless one can persuade oneself that it is not demeaning to scorn the life that Charlotte von Kirschbaum actually chose for herself and openly affirmed, as opposed to one that could not have been and never was. --- http://www.psupress.org/books/titles/0-271-01824-0.html --- http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1465536?uid=3739536&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=47698978832417