WELS versus ELDONA - Differences

WELS is the only sect where the incoming seminary students are hazed, lied to, and taught to lie to each other.

Hilarious Opinions from WELS Phil Gurgle - 2009

The dark side of WELS seems to be shrinking. Update - I was dead wrong about the shrinkage. SP Mark Schroeder is Church and Change's best friend.


"Phil Gurgel is serving the 2008-2009 school year as the WELS Vicar to Mexico. Originally from Mequon, Wisconsin, he currently resides in Torreón, Coahuila, a city in northern Mexico. He serves at the mission congregation, "Cordero de Dios" (Lamb of God)." Phil is the son of Richard Gurgel, Mequon professor and Church and Chicanery activist. Update: Phil Gurgel is now pastor of St. John, Newark, Delaware Insiders tell me his father's essay had to be "heavily edited" to make it fit for publication. The thistle falleth not far from the thistle plant.


Someone suggested I read some Facebook discussion posts. There is a WELS group and an outreach discussion thread within that group.

One person innocently began discussing Craig Groeschel, the Okie phenom whose sermons are copied by Ski and others in WELS. Groeschel works with Babtist Andy Stanley.

Various WELS people were making good points about evangelism, outreach, and the Means of Grace, when Phil Gurgel wrote:

Don´t be sucked into the thinking of people such as Gregory Jackson or others who state that anything that isn´t preaching the Word, any pre-evangelism whatsoever, is placing the emphasis upon ourselves rather than the means of grace. While we are nothing more than God´s tools in the process of bringing the means of Grace to others, that ought not mean that we be lazy in going about creating relationships with others (or doing such things that are helpful for creating an environment that supports and encourages the formation of relationships), as often along with having a relationship comes many opportunities to serve as God´s tools for bringing his means of Grace to souls.

Above is a perfect straw man fallacy. Phil denounces a statement which was never made, then glides into an excuse for following the Schwaermer with awe and devotion. Someone who disagrees with C & C unionism is "divisive," according to Phil.

People wrote some additional good posts, without rolling in the mud with Phil Gurgel, when he started over:

And sorry, I don´t buy that this doesn´t have anything to do with worship wars. You brought up the sermon issue, which clearly falls in with that. And you are falling into line with Gregory Jackson in making accusations and taking various pastor´s actions in the worst possible way, rather than putting the best construction on the actions of these pastors (go talk to them about your concerns, I think you´ll come away from the talks with a different perspective on why they do the things they do than you do now).

When Phil Gurgel was asked to address the actual topic, he responded:

1) So I am assuming then that these people made it perfectly clear in your discussions with them that they don´t believe in the efficacy of Scripture.

2) I looked at the first post when you made it, and I thought about why it would be brought up, and I wondered that because I:

A) Knew that you know about said quote appearing on a "Church and Change" member´s blog.

B) Your distaste for said person´s worship and outreach approaches (a pastor), and your belief that he is leading our church body into sin and error.

C) Know about how GJ, whose extremely divisive blog it appears you have been following rather closely lately , has been talking about this very quote recently (somewhat off topic, it was interesting, how "Corky" Koelpin´s article also appeared on the Synod Ed board immediately after GJ posted it on his blog. Funny that with all the talk about how these pastors are poor stewards of time for being at meetings with the heterodox, I have lately been seeing so many talking points taken from someone else whose teachings are also heterodox.)

I guess I thought originally that it would make sense that you would publish the quote, and then when the negative of said post was stated, you would insinuate that a WELS pastor agrees with it and therefore doesn´t believe in the efficacy of the means of grace (in my experience, he does believe in it) (and once again, I´m not saying that I think that everything that he does would be wise for other pastors to adopt, or at all, but I hesitate to call what God doesn´t point to as being sinful, as sin).

And lo and behold, my worries about the original post (which I chose not to post, to see if you would hopefully take it in another less divisive direction) came to fruition. This is why I spoke up as I did at this point, because such divisiveness among brothers is not a positive.

Going back to your desired direction for the thread, I have stated what I thought about our synod´s outreach. We as a synod do quite frequently get lazy in our roles as God´s tools. We don´t always do a good job at establishing relationships, relationships which present us with opportunities for evangelism. I feel we as a synod could do a lot better at that.

Here is more of Phil Gurgel's wisdom:

Is it possible that we could learn some things, even from the Groeschel´s of the world in ways of forming relationships? I think so. Outreach is something guys like Groeschel are very talented in. Yes, they tell people what their itching ears want to hear and that certainly is a large aspect of their success, but they are also very good at forming situations where they have open doors to telling people their garbage theology. Where they fail, is in their evangelism, and I see no WELS pastor imitating them in that (which seems to be the accusation of some).

Joe Jewell wrote from Oxford University:

"...they are also very good at forming situations where they have open doors to telling people their garbage theology..."

This is an interesting comment, which brings to mind several thoughts:

The proponents of Groeschel, Stanley, Stetzer, etc. in the WELS--are any of them willing to go on record as saying that their theology is "garbage"? Do they really believe that? I've never seen even a hint of it if they do. What I see is more akin to fawning adoration ("Ooh! Let's get photos with these guys!!") than any kind of cool or evaluative criticism.

When I read Ski's blog I read comments describing his WORSHIP with them as "awesome", the SERMON "one of the best I've heard"... this isn't outreach he's praising! It's straight up theology. Isn't it? If worship and the sermon aren't, what is?

I really don't think he was down there to learn "Facebook as an outreach tool, or Twitter, or texting"... those are things that can be learned from any number of secular or (yes) even confessional Lutheran sources--isn't the existence of this group proof enough of that?

Finally, the whole idea that we ought to adapt for our own use methods which have been--by your own description--developed specifically to deliver "garbage theology" seems quite misguided. Sure, it might be possible for me to rig up my sink's garbage disposal to function (sort of) as a food processor. I'll bet I could blend the heck out of some smoothies with a motor that powerful. But would that really be a good idea? I suppose if I put enough time into cleaning it I could claim it was sanitary, but would you come to be nourished at my home if the invitation said "come eat food I made in my garbage disposal--and don't worry, I cleaned it first"?

That doesn't sound very appetizing to me.

Joe Jewell wrote to Phil Gurgel:

Finally, I wholeheartedly disagree with you that C&Cers need to "stop posting ambiguous and potentially confusing blog posts"... I generally find the blog posts written in unadorned and simple English and not at all confusing (maybe you meant "confused"? I would agree that they are that). I am frankly grateful that the posts are made--what many of these pastors are beginning to do (and treat as a matter of course) is so far outside of what acceptable WELS practice has historically been that it is *absolutely imperative* that it be done in the full light of day and with every detail available for the examination of concerned people, and I would argue especially concerned laymen, the central ministerium having trended a bit insular in recent decades (cf. John 3:19-21).

I am condensing the discussion, but no one up to this point wanted to join Phil in attacking me. They ignored Phil's irrelevant comments. However, Phil responded immediately to Joe with this:

I can see that my posting only encourages you guys to make more and more judgmental posts, most on things that are nothing more than simple adiaphora. I won´t be part of further divisive discussion in this thread.

I will say though before I sign off on this discussion that it is quite hypocritical that this "mark and avoid" discussion is coming from people who are actively involved in reading and participating in Gregory Jackson´s blog (a heterodox teacher himself). Apparently the rule applies only to pastors who don´t share a love for 16th century tunes.

Joe Jewell responded to Phil:

Jackson is roughly the equivalent of a tabloid newspaper in the Lutheran world, as nearly as I can tell. He reports a lot of things, and quite frankly I would take all of them with a huge grain of salt until backed up with other sources. (But you know what? Sometimes they *are* backed up. He seems to be pretty good at collating outside sources.)

Still, NPH sells his books, for goodness sake! The man *is* at least a confessional Lutheran perspective, even if he was thrown out of WELS. Would I worship with him, or take his advice for how my church ought to be run? No. Of course not. But then, I wouldn't do those things with the Schwaermer, either (and certainly wouldn't pay them for the privilege), so I guess my standards for such things are rather different than those prevailing within C&C.

And fundamentally speaking, the man is a (biased, as they all are) news source (maybe more properly a news compiler) not a source of theology. The Wall Street Journal reports on finance and business; Greg Jackson reports on Lutheranism.

I'm not sure what you mean by "actively involved in reading and participating in" though. Is that an elaborate way of saying "reading"? I do read his blog along with a fairly long list of other Lutheran blogs, but I've certainly never posted or communicated with the man.

By that standard, I'm much more "actively involved in reading and participating in" the New York Times, my local newspaper, the Economist, the aforementioned WSJ, and probably a dozen other news sources (with which I might also frequently disagree)... because I've left comments on their threads or stories, or had letters to the editor published, which are not things that I've done at Ichabod.

Still, this all strikes me as a red herring. No one in the WELS pays Gregory Jackson money to teach them about how to "do church", and no one rants and raves about his sermons or the "awesomeness" of their worship with him.

Michael Schottey added:

The irony is that you continue to attack the character rather than the content. You've questioned motive numerous times and are the only one referring to the "worship wars" as you call them. You've turned a discussion about outreach into a debate about sources--sources you apparently read as well. (Not to mention a good deal of WELS pastors)

You have referenced Jackson in this discussion more times than I could visit his site in a year. You seem to discredit everything in which he could be conceived as the source. I suggest you go back and read the Koelpin paper et al. and take them for what they are and not continue your ad hominem attacks.

And I agree with Joe...you should have a huge problem with NPH for selling his books, and MLC for having all of them in their library. Thy Strong Word is a very good book and our church would be a lot better off if our people bought that book instead of "Purpose Driven..."

I responded to Joe:

Joe, you have your facts wrong. I resigned from WELS because I was disgusted with their constant and persistent support for a known adulterer--to the point of endorsing him for a new ministerial position--and even more with their advocacy of false doctrine: Valleskey, Kelm, Olson, Huebner, Bivens, Oelhaven, et al. A lot of WELS pastors and laity read Ichabod and thank me for discussing the doctrinal issues. I have yet to see a serious argument supporting Church and Change.

Joe was decent enough to retract his false statement:

Ah, sorry about that--quite honestly I have no idea of the circumstances under which you left, so I took Phil's words at face value. Apologies.

Michael Schottey responded to Phil:

The irony is that you continue to attack the character rather than the content. You've questioned motive numerous times and are the only one referring to the "worship wars" as you call them. You've turned a discussion about outreach into a debate about sources--sources you apparently read as well. (Not to mention a good deal of WELS pastors)

You have referenced Jackson in this discussion more times than I could visit his site in a year. You seem to discredit everything in which he could be conceived as the source. I suggest you go back and read the Koelpin paper et al. and take them for what they are and not continue your ad hominem attacks.

And I agree with Joe...you should have a huge problem with NPH for selling his books, and MLC for having all of them in their library. Thy Strong Word is a very good book and our church would be a lot better off if our people bought that book instead of "Purpose Driven..."

When Phil Gurgel was asked by Jessica Hill about WELS pastors worshiping with Babtists, Phil wrote (in reference to Ski's blog, which is still posted for all to read):

Jessica, the blog post was not clear about whether he actually participated in the worship at the conference or not. There is no doubt that he was there to witness what their worship was like (not a sin), but what remains in doubt from his blog posts was whether he participated with them (sinful).

Joe, I never said why GJ left our synod. What I did state, is that the doctrine of our church (and what Scripture teaches) is not in agreement with his beliefs. (We are not in fellowship with his current e-church, and for good reason). (This, however, is not the thread to discuss that though, such a thread would be better in the WELS theology group).

GJ, I am no C & C guy, but it is truly disturbing to see people call things that are neither commanded nor forbidden by God sins. Our Lutheran traditions certainly serve a wonderful purpose, and we have a wealth of great things handed down to us from our Lutheran forefathers. But those traditions are not papal law, and if someone uses a different style of music, that is not in and of itself sinful. One can question the "wisdom" of such things and the C & C people should not be held up as role models for all pastors, nor should they be held up as villains (or false teachers). There is a big leap between "unwise" and "wrong". I have gone to a number of the services a couple of years ago, and I have to say that despite what some people are saying, Christ was always front and center during the service. I didn´t always like the sermon styles (I found some of the service themes to be rather cheesy and contrived), but there was no doubt that they were centered on Christ and the Word, and not on the pastor. I don´t desire to debate this further with you. You are firmly convinced that these people are false prophets, and I doubt my words will change your mind (especially considering my last name).

I would encourage, however, as this is a WELS page. While we are open to open minded discussion with those outside of our fellowship, one thing we do not encourage is someone approaching a discussion here with a closed mind and solely seeking to change the minds of those on the board. As Romans 16:17-18 says "I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. 18 For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people." If you come here trying to push an agenda contrary to the teachings of the church (and specificially the Bible), that will not be tolerated. (Please reserve such topics to the WELS Theology or WELS pastor boards or your blog, thanks).

So I asked Phil Gurgel:

Phil, please parse these sentences for everyone: "The final Main Session with Andy Stanley was just phenomenal. We began with awesome worship."

(http://web.me.com/pastorski/Site/Day_5.html)

A Church and Change board member, Ski, bragged about worshiping with Babtist Andy Stanley, but you explained it away. Next you invoked Romans 16:17-18. Where is the consistency? You are smooth but not convincing.

Phil Gurgel says he is not a Church and Change guy, and I almost believe him. The seminary Gurgel is a C & C activist. Ex-SP Gurgel joined the staff of Kudu Don Patterson, who also denies being with C & C. Patterson led a session at a C & C conference and posts on their listserve, etc.

Diablo, a Lutheran layman wrote to me about the Gurgel exchange: "Taking doctrine aside for one moment, what did the Gurgels do for WELS? It is broke."

Phil Gurgel sent me a message:

Subject: Guilt by Association

I found your comment about guilt by association interesting, as so much of your blog is exactly that, "guilt by association". I guess that speaks to the content of your blog, in your own words "a fallacy" and someone posting with "nothing worthwhile to say". I´ll be sure to pass along that quote to anyone I know who might read your "guilt by association" posts on your blog. Thanks.

As far as my lack of understanding of basic Lutheran doctrine. I noticed you provided no examples, but just merely stated it as fact (I believe we call such accusations "ad hominem"). And if you are going to call me out for public error, you probably should actually point out my error, otherwise it´s just simply slander (but then again, that area of your conscience seems to have long ago become calloused). For someone who likes to "back up" his claims, you provided no such evidence in your post. I would also say that basic "Lutheran doctrine" encompasses the understanding of Law and Gospel. While it is a life time struggle to apply them correctly, the Law condemns me. As a sinner I am worthy of death. The Gospel heals me, as Jesus´death clothed me in righteousness and made me new without any merit of my own. Those are the basics, and I fail to see how I don´t understand them and believe in them wholeheartedly (with faith that the Holy Spirit has worked in my soul). I´ll let God judge me and my faith, and not you sir. (Whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved!)

I would wait for an apology, but I don´t feel one is likely to come. So, I´ll just end it here.

God bless you,
Phil

Joe Jewell wrote:

Phil, we've had this discussion once before, remember? (Followed by a short but apparently necessary review of the Large Catechism's position on public error.) It was only "unclear" if English words don't mean what they mean:

"We began with awesome worship." [Description of awesome worship, including rapper, ensues. Or Enthuses, if you like.]

Following the 8th commandment, the most positive construction on that would be that the C&Cers are sorry and promise never to sit at the feet of the Schwaermer again. Is that likely, do you think?

***

GJ - My conclusions? Phil Gurgel represents a frantic, fading fad in WELS. The Chicaneries will fight for their causes at the convention this month, but the discussion on Facebook is a good indication of current attitudes.

Phil Gurgel kept trying to make the discussion revolve around Ichabod (bad, bad) and me (worse, worse). No one wanted to join him in dancing on my grave.

After trying to hijack an intelligent, thoughtful thread various times, Phil expected me to apologize to him.

Phil was obviously angry that everyone got to read the Koeplin essay from Ichabod, that it has spread from there. So Chicaneries can say, "If you mention Koeplin, you have read Ichabod, you worthless sinner."

Koeplin's essay was right on target about everything ex-SP Gurgel did. Koeplin died soon after, trashed by the Shrinkers. SP Gurgel did his best to ruin WELS and now works with VP Patterson. That is God's judgment against WELS for allowing Gurgel-Mueller and the Shrinkers to run the synod.

---

Phil Gurgel (Mexico) wrote:
You are not in fellowship with the WELS. You have been marked as a false teacher. So identifying you as such is no different than identifying the pope (Luther´s example), or a baptist pastor as being a false teacher. (This was the entire point that Luther was making above), that the public sinner who has been judged as a false teacher, can be testified about in order to help people mark him for what he is.

I have studied the Large Catechism, and it will continue to be part of my ongoing study of the BOC. However, is it safe to assume that you were in agreement with Joe´s understanding of Luther´s words on the eight commandment? It sure appears to me that those words that were pulled out of their context and made to say something that is not at all Biblical nor Luther´s intention in writing them. Perhaps we all could use a better study of the BOC and the Large Catechism! And with that, I encourage us to either 1) move this discussion to a different forum (WELS theology would be fitting) or 2) leave the discussion at this point because it is clearly that all those involved have clearly made up their minds on the issue as it currently stands.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Can Church and Chicaneries Discuss Doctrine Withou...":

Phil Gurgel is a prime example of an unreal, irrelevant, non-relational, talking head of self-confusion and self-delusion.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Can Church and Chicaneries Discuss Doctrine Withou...":

Anyone who supports a divisive movement like CGM seeks to support a failing synod at the expense of the Word of God. Way to go Phil.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Can Church and Chicaneries Discuss Doctrine Withou...":

With leaders like Phil Gurgel polluting the WELS, I see why WELS is in decline. Drink at your own risk!

Why are WELS leaders illiterate?
It is well known that their teachers are required to give high grades
to the worst students - if they are the children of important officials.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Can Church and Chicaneries Discuss Doctrine Withou...":

The thing that comes to mind when I read what Phil Gurgel wrote:

"Thou doth protest too much"

Frantic is right; but smooth is also right. I can't believe the slippery way Phil misdirects the focus of a conversation and subtly (subtly, mind you!) misuses language for his own end.

When I read someone like Phil Gurgel I'm reminded of seeing the Clinton White House in action--they pulled the same sort of verbal stunts to distract and mislead. The only difference is that the Clinton Administration was a bunch of very intelligent people, all who (I assume) passed 9th grade English class.

Phil Gurgel, in spite his smoothness, has the compositional ability of a lesser great ape.

If I were a on a college accreditation board and read some of what Phil Gurgel wrote I would seriously consider revoking MLC's accreditation. This guy has a college degree??? Review the following Phil Gurgel quote as an example:

"C)Know about how GJ, whose extremely divisive blog it appears you have been following rather closely lately , has been talking about this very quote recently (somewhat off topic, it was interesting, how "Corky" Koelpin´s article also appeared on the Synod Ed board immediately after GJ posted it on his blog."

I'm really not trying to tear Phil Gurgel down--I don't know him--but I have to be realistic. Someone who writes this way probably shouldn't have been awarded a degree. I dun bin larned by mi teecher. I is a collig gradutate! Now I reckon on been a parson"

"...Cluttered writing indicates cluttered thinking."

That's a quote--Strunk and White maybe?

The WELS Pod-Pastors use this terrible accusation.

Heather Cook Was Installed, Even While Being Drunk, And Having an Alcohol and Pot DUI Arrest Before. Episcopals May Be Worse Than WELS, Rewarding Drunk Clergy

Cook's enablers were Presiding Bishop Schori
and her local bishop.
They installed a drunk Heather Cook as suffragan bishop.
I started counting WELS DUI - clergy - plenty. Nothing done:
DP. Mequon professor. The CORE. Ukraine missionary.

Former Episcopal Bishop Heather Cook sentenced to seven years in drunk-driving death of cyclist

Former Episcopal Bishop Heather Cook was sentenced Tuesday to seven years in prison for killing a cyclist in a drunken crash in Baltimore two days after Christmas.

The sentence came at the end of a two-hour hearing in which the wife, mother and sisters-in-law of Thomas Palermo directed their grief and anger at the disgraced clergywoman.

Prosecutors said Cook was far above the legal limit for alcohol and sending a text message as she drove her Subaru Forester in Roland Park on the afternoon of Dec. 27. She struck and killed Palermo, a 41-year-old software engineer and father of two young children, as he enjoyed a ride.

She left the scene twice, a fact that weighed on judge Timothy J. Doory.

"Your leaving the scene at that time was more than irresponsibility, it was a decision," Doory said.

Cook, 59, pleaded guilty last month to automobile manslaughter, leaving the scene of an accident and other violations.

Rodricks: A powerful and punishing finale in the Heather Cook case

Patricia Palermo told the court that she had asked God many times why he let her son die — until she had a revelation.

"God didn't do this," she said. "Heather Cook killed Tom."

A sheriff's deputy placed cuffs around Cook's wrists, and she was led out of the courtroom past benches packed with members of Palermo's family. Many had called on Doory to order the maximum sentence of 20 years.

After the sentencing, some expressed disappointment.

"While no amount of prison time would ever seem sufficient, we feel the court today could have sent a stronger signal that our community takes driving while under the influence and driving while distracted seriously," said Alisa Rock, one of Palermo's sisters-in-law.

Cook sat for most of the hearing with her face set and brow slightly furrowed. But when Palmero's mother took the stand to speak only feet away from her, she began to break down.

When Cook had her chance to speak, she drew herself slowly to her feet and asked the judge if she could turn to address the family directly. She paused for a few moments before she began.

"I am so sorry for the grief and the agony I have caused," she said. "This is my fault. I accept complete responsibility."

Then Cook turned back to Doory.

"I believe God is working through this, and I accept your judgment," she told him.

Her lawyer, David Irwin, and the prosector, Kurt Bjorklund, drew contrasting portraits of the woman who was drunk when she got behind the wheel of her car on Dec. 27.

A supporter described how Cook had successfully grown a parish in York, Pa., attracting so many new worshippers that the church had to build new facilities. Last year she was elected bishop suffragan, the number-two job in the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland.

But Cook also had problems with alcohol.

Bjorklund asked Doory to consider a drunk-driving charge Cook received on the Eastern Shore in 2010. In many cases, he said, such an arrest serves as a wake-up call, leading people to change their behavior — but not for Cook.

"It meant nothing to her, that initial arrest," he said.

Irwin said his client did not have any support to help her battle her alcohol addiction after that case. He said she stayed sober for a year before she relapsed.

"Alcoholism is a disease," Iriwn said. "I'm afraid most alcoholics don't get it the first time."

The Palermo family, who lived in the Anneslie neighborhood of Towson, spent the morning of Dec. 27 hiking at Gunpowder Falls. Thomas Palermo stopped to help a inexperienced kayaker who was having trouble, his wife, Rachel Rock Palermo, recalled in a letter to the court.

Later, he went out for a bike ride. A software engineer at Johns Hopkins Hospital, he had a side business building bike frames.

He was cycling down Roland Avenue in Roland Park when Cook veered into the bike lane, killing him almost instantly.

Her car was badly damaged, but Cook drove on.

Irwin said she was unaware of the seriousness of the accident — "she's confused, she's inebriated, she's texting" — but when she realized a person was involved she returned to the scene and found chaos already unfolding.

Cook left the scene a second time, to take her golden retriever home before turning herself in.

"She made sure her dog was OK, but didn't care about another human," Bjorklund said.

Cook admitted to police that she had caused the accident and submitted to a Breathalyzer — blowing a blood alcohol level of 0.22, almost three times the legal limit.

In the following hours, the news of Thomas Palermo's death began to reach his family.

"The world as I knew it was completely changed," Patricia Palermo said.

Rachel Palermo didn't tell her two young children that night that their father had been killed, she wrote. She put them to bed that night and waited until morning.

"The pain on my daughter's face is etched in my mind," she wrote. Her son hit her and ran away.

State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced charges against Cook shortly after taking office in January.

Irwin revealed in court that any civil liability in the case has also been resolved. A lawyer for the Palermo family confirmed a resolution but declined to provide details.

Doory said he hoped the sentencing could mark an ending for Cook and Palermo's family alike.

"No one need think about the legal aspects of this case again," he said.

But the testimony in court Tuesday made it clear that moving on will not be easy.

Rachel Palermo has been dealing with life as a single mother. She had no full-time job when her husband was killed, and his health insurance expired. Her three sisters said they have stepped in to try to share her burdens.

In the letter, Rachel Palermo said she was still having trouble coming to terms with her situation.

"I'm having a hard time believing this is my life now," she wrote.

iduncan@baltsun.com

***

GJ - Episcopal clergy are known for their alcoholism, but so are WELS pastors, professors, and leaders. Alcoholism was encouraged at Northwestern College, with future pastors working at bars and serving their underage classmates. Nothing is different at Martin Luther College, another Germanic bar town. Most importantly, falling down drunks are considered cool and worthy to be class president or pope at their hazing ceremony at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary.

DP Patterson is known for women's retreats where they take a poll on which newcomer will puke her guts out first. No wonder Patterson was willing to take on one of the Booze Brothers.

WELS bought a bar for Glende and Ski. Doesn't this all make sense?

Patterson denied his involvement in Church and Change
but called disgraced Church and Change board member Ski.
But justification by faith means - The Left Foot of Fellowship.

Sources for the Eight-Volume Luther Sermons Edited by Lenker. Nowhere Does Luther Say "All Are Justified," Contrary to WELS Prof John Brug

That is even more true of his sermons.

Another source for all the Lenker sermons - 8 volumes - can be found here in several languages -

http://www.martinluthersermons.com/

I have the same Luther sermons, Lenker edition, posted here -

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/04/sermons-of-martin-luther-lenker-edition.html

Some of Luther's sermons are also posted here - 

Our Redeemer Lutheran Church

Here are the printed sermons, including the House Postils

Pastor Paul Rydecki is a fountain of newly publishedworks on Lutheran Orthodoxy.

Pastor Paul Rydecki also has some of Luther's sermons posted 
on his congregation's website - here.

Project Gutenberg - various digital editions of the sermons and commentaries.

The Error of Modern Missouri - Arguing from the Confessions rather than from Walther

The Error of Modern Missouri

Its Inception, Development and Refutation

Authored by Friedrich A Schmidt, Frederick W Stellhorn
Introduction by Conrad H L Schuette, Richard C H Lenksi
Contributions by H A Allwardt, H Ernst
Edited by George H Schodde
Translated by C B Ghodes, W E Tressel, Richard C H Lenski
Edition: 1

This volume, first printed in 1897, was occasioned by the 1880s schism in American Lutheranism. It presents three lengthy treatises on the subject of predestination defending the mainstream Lutheran "intuitu fidei" (Latin: in view of faith) perspective over against a revived deterministic view held by some Lutherans.

The Missouri Synod headed by CFW Walther believed the Bible taught an absolute "single election", which is Augustine's deterministic (and some say, fatalistic) view, but only affecting the saints, a view held by some theologians early in the Reformation.

The Ohio Synod believed the Bible taught an election that preserved some of man's responsibility and freedom in matters of salvation, whether they be saved or damned (Lutheran Scholasticism's view since the 1600s). Using his foreknowledge, God identified and elected those who naturally would resist at times, but would overall cooperate willingly with God's Gospel grace, and have faith at the end of their mortal lives. In other words, none are saved against their will.

F. W. Stellhorn

The first treatise, by Dr. F. W. Stellhorn (translated from the German by R.C.H. Lenski), has three parts: 1) a dogmatic-historical introduction, 2) what the Formula of Concord and the Old Lutheran theologians say, and 3) a debunking the Missouri Synod's doctrine called the election of grace.

The second treatise is by Dr. F.A. Schmidt, titled "Intuitu Fidei." It is translated by Lenski and C.B. Ghodes. Its three parts are: 1) explicating the doctrine of "intuitu fidei," 2) whether the Old Lutheran theologians departed from the Lutheran confessions when they taught "intuitu fidei," and 3) whether "intuitu fidei" is taught in the Book of Concord.

The third treatise is a testimony against the false doctrine of predestination recently introduced by the Missouri Synod, translated by Lenski and W.E. Tressel. The treatise begins with theses prepared by H.A. Allwardt and Prof. H. Ernst, and a discussion of those theses by pastors who left the Missouri Synod over that doctrine. Appended is a history of controversy by H. A. Allward.

Yes, there is another copy out there, even a free one in parts but -

Most monitors or tablets don't have great  resolution, so reading 802 pages on them can be a bear. If you don't wear glasses, you will after reading 802 pages on a kindle or tablet. The book however has print that's as sharp as a tack because printers print out at high resolution - often 1200 dpi.

If one is going to read a lot of pages of anything and make notes and underline, a book is the only way to go. At $20, that's only 2.5 cents a page, which is cheaper than printing it out at home. The print in the proof is surprisingly sharp, better than in the library original it was scanned from, since the letters are darker and the pages whiter.

***

GJ - Fox Valley called this Inuitu Fidei, the Faith of the Eskimo, a funny reflection on their reactionary opposition to anything against the Great Walther, not to mention their obsession with pretending to know something.

I confess to never reading this entire book, but it is a classic benchmark in the history of the LCMS. I would rather start with St. Paul, the Reformation leaders, Concordists, and post-Concordists, but the LCMS-ELS-WELS grows misty-eyed about the Good Olde Synodical Conference. 

Stellhorn came over with the Perryville sex cult, so we can see that a division developed.

As I understand it, Lenski's family was pushed out by Waltherian fundamentalists.

Walther referred doubters to his own work, but this one has hundreds of quotations from the European Lutherans, who were real scholars, not just college graduates like Stephan's disciple and disciplinarian.

This book is a bargain, so it is well worth  buying for those who want to study the history. We know that the LCMS and tourist sites deceive everyone about the sex cult origin of their synod. This is, at the very least, another look at the original debates by those who took part in them.

Walther himself was a bully who had to have things his way. Missouri was keen on driving away anyone who disagreed with Walther, as the CFW sycophants took over. They lost the Lenski family and a universally acknowledged New Testament scholar. They divided Lutherdom, which is now united around justification without faith - a sad, tragic victory for Stephan's waterboy.

Progress on The Faith of Jesus: Against the Faithless Lutherans.

"The Faith of Jesus" must sound heretical to the UOJ clowns teaching in various Lutheran seminaries.

Too bad the phrase is found in the Greek text and the KJV.

Many important edits have been made so far. October was going to be so calm and relaxed for editing but the month turned into some taxing career changes (fun, too).

Table of Contents - done.
Obvious boo-boos - fixed.
Much better format.
Making quotations in the text clearer - working on it.

Some of you slow readers are worried that your suggestions will not be done in time. Relax, I plan on additional fixes after the first printing is done. I have an email folder just for those, and go through them as I continue to edit.

If you have some immediate concerns, please send them now. bethanylutheranworship@gmail.com

Call Off the Reformation - "All Are Justified, That Is All You Need To Know for Reformation." WELS Joins Mainline Apostates in Universalism

Herman Otten loves Brug's UOJ dogma.

WELS Seminary Professor John Brug said at a Reformation service -

"All are justified. That's all you need to know for Reformation."

Where did he get this?

Not the classic NIV, as they call it -

His text was Romans 3:23-25.


Old NIV

22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 

24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 

25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-- 

New NIV

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all [GJ - the second all is missing in the Greek text, missing in the KJV, missing in the old NIV] are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement,[i]through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

Forrest Bivens, above, is another champion of UOJ.

He famously bragged about going to Fuller Seminary at the Midland Circuit Meeting,

then denied ever going there.

Valleskey did the same in reverse, denying his Fuller studies,

later bragging about it to CLC Pastor David Koenig -

Horst Gutsche's good friend.

—

King James Version
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 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;

The Wind Beneath Our Cardboard

Autumn Leaves by Norma Boeckler

Others are busy tossing cardboard away, which is recycled. One company does not create any new pulp; instead, it grabs waste cardboard and creates new/old product.

We are using neighborhood and a local business' cardboard to carpet the future wild garden. We did not calculate the lift of the gentlest zephyr blowing through the yard. Cardboard scattered leaving big gaps. Now most of it is weighted down with bird baths and large branches, awaiting the autumn leaves that have not fallen in any number. We may leave bags on top for weight besides dumping them on the cardboard.

Leaves can be delightfully soggy and heavy, but wind can also dry them out and scatter them.

Bees love bee balm.

Bird Food Party
I threw a bird food party to get the population higher. I put out some seed from the barrel, plus peanuts in the shell, and a block of seed. This morning I saw birds sitting on the rustic fence. Yesterday I found robins feeding in the worm-rich sunny garden, where weeds, wood mulch, newspapers, and straw have rotted into a layer of compost mixed by earthworms.

The wild garden will be very good for birds, bees, butterflies, and hummingbirds. The grass will turn into compost and weeds will be kept down by the New Improved Jackson Mulch - cardboard plus leaves plus wood mulch.

This large area of the backyard will store water better by having such a deep layer of organic matter where it once had only sparse grass.

I believe clumping plants like bee balm will work out well. I also plan to have milkweed, Butterfly Weed, raspberries, and blackberries in the Wild Garden.

My main annual will be giant sunflowers. Our daughter-in-law grew enormous ones in planters in her front yard. "Where did you get the seeds?"

"Walmart."

I was trying to order giant mammoth striped Russian sunflowers from the famous seed companies, and there they were at Walmart.

Morning Glory planted itself on the fence.
Cow Vetch is in another section.