Friday, December 11, 2015

Great Product Placement - But Is It Christian? - LCMS


Pastor Caleb Adams

Star Wars Week 1: A New Hope


||
November 29, 2015
Posted by Ichabod the Glory Has Departed at 10:36 PM
Labels: , ,

Hating Someone Out of the Vicarage and Blocking Him from the Ministry -
WELS Of Course.
LCMS and ELS - Same Thing

Do you really want to waste your money
sending junior to live and party with a bunch of drunks,
only to see the alcoholic and abusive "names"
given the best calls and protected from their felonies and incompetence?


This really started when Don Tilbury got off the bus to see the WELS seminary as a prospective student. A WELS seminary student in a speedo ran up and grabbed him - a sexual assault. When he objected to a faculty staffer, he was told. "You are too thin-skinned."

This is another indication of the depth of the Lavender Mafia in WELS. Cross-dressing is just the tip of the iceberg.

And no one, but no one, is allowed to question GA, their secret hazing ritual at the Sausage Factory. Two men that I know questioned GA, talking to Dean John Brenner. They did not stay at the seminary. I have no additional details. I know their names and realize they were told to "talk to someone about it." That is the first step in being hated out of WELS. Thank God if you have been extended the Left Foot of Fellowship by these thugs. The ELS is no better, but they claim to be oh so holy and confessional while licking the boots that keep them in line.

I was going to write a post on WELS as an abusive cult, but the summary of the vicarage year reveals far more than I could explain in a simple post.

The WELS chosen ones, often called "names" are spoiled brats protected by the system. Sausage Factory President Wendland is a "name." Helwig (vicarage supervisor or bishop) is a "name." Like Fibby in the LCMS, and Moldstad in the ELS, they get their jobs because of DNA, not ability.

I find Helwig's behavior to have been abusive, paranoid, hate-filled, jealous, and typical of WELS "names." The chosen ones get grades they do not deserve, on orders from above. No matter what they do, dealing in drugs or stealing cars, a tap on the wrist is administered with great gentleness.

But the average WELS pastor engages in similar behavior, too, because it is part of the cult, playing really dirty, nasty tricks on their so-called brothers in the ministry and bragging about what they did.

---

Donald Tilbury 1202 Doris St. Watertown, WI 53098

November 6, 2012

To: Pastor Thomas A. Westra, Pastor Peter L. Unnasch, Pastor John W. Covach, Mr. Philip F. Becker, Dr. Arthur A. Eggert, Pastor Eric S. Hartzell, Mr. John C. Postelli, Mr. Kurt N. Schmidt, Pastor Paul T. Prange, Pastor David N. Rutschow, President Paul O. Wendland, Pastor Mark G. Schroeder

Dear Governing Board, As a former student of WLS I would like for the following topic to be discussed and possibly implemented into the policies of Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. The proposal of a Student Appeal Process would be beneficial for both the seminary and the students. The Student Appeal process would provide a just process by which opposing views may be expressed and equitable decisions made by relating to students grievances, conduct, grades, etc. in accord with God’s word and promises.

I am only writing this out of concern for the student’s welfare. I was told back in March of 2012 to move on with my life after an unfortunate resignation during my Vicar year. I had asked numerous times if there was anything I could work on or improve upon with no reply. I had asked numerous times if I could continue to study for the public ministry before I was given a single reply as to why I could not serve. That reply was this, “Consider the qualifications presented in 1 Timothy 3 and the Ten Commandments.”

I have asked numerous times for anything I could work on. I have asked numerous times for specific reasons as to why I cannot serve in the public ministry. I was given a broad sweeping statement that covers everything from monogamy to idol worship. I have studied seven years for the ministry only to be given an unclear answer as to why I cannot continue in my pursuit of the public ministry. Even Chairman Thomas Westra commented to me in an email that he knew of no appeal process.

All universities have an appeal process because they understand that:
 Procedural errors can occur that affect the outcome of the cases,
 New evidence has been discovered, and/or
 Abuse of discretion on the part of faculty does occur.

No man is perfect and mistakes do happen an example could be taken from my own meeting with the seminary in February of this year. My motives were brought into consideration as to why I was voicing my concerns but not a single one of the five Pastors there stood up and said we can’t judge his heart only God can look at his heart (1 Samuel 16:7). Romans 3:23 clearly teaches that “all have sinned…” Mistakes and sins do happen but Matthew 5:24 also teaches us to leave our gifts at the altar and to reconcile with our brother and sister. Implementing an appeals process for grievances and complaints could help the reconciliation process by having an unbiased third party mediate and give fair judgment concerning issues that arise.

Paul and John Mark also teach us something concerning the ministry. On the second journey Paul wanted nothing to do with John Mark and refused to take him along. They parted ways but John Mark wasn’t barred from the ministry on one man’s opinion, keeping in mind this was the apostle Paul.

The appeal process would also help determine a student’s eligibility with unbiased views and judgments. This would be a learning process that could benefit both faculty and staff and students as well. How? Accountability. Not only would it make both faculty and staff accountable for words and actions but it would also hold students accountable in their words and actions in their course of dealing with situations that may arise. In doing so, the students could carry this sense of accountability towards others into their ministry.

I look forward to hearing from you soon as you discuss this possible and beneficial topic. God’s blessings, Donald Tilbury

---


Let me see - Church and Change leader. Check.
Pastor arrested for soliciting a prostitute. Check.
Self-appointed minister to Sodomites. Check.


From Tom Westra - Appeals Are Inappropriate and Disorderly



---

 Note that Wendland's letter said this about Don Tilbury in 2011

From: Wendland, Paul

Sent: Fri 5/13/2011 12:03 PM

To: Juniors; Middlers; Seniors; Vicars Subject: __ and Donald Tilbury

Dear Brothers:

Donald Tilbury, likewise, has also resigned his call for personal reasons. In keeping his confidence I do not wish to say more than this. But I can say that I fully support his decision which he made in the interests of his congregation, his family, and in a firm hope that God holds his future in his loving hands. Please keep Donald and Karissa in your prayers and give them your loving support and encouragement. Again I want to emphasize that this is not a termination "for cause". There was no great moral lapse that precipitated it. Again I also want to emphasize that it was not an action done in haste or without careful discussions and counsel.

---

Donald Tilbury's 2011 Resignation from the Vicarage Assignment

1 Donald Tilbury 1202 Doris St. Watertown, WI 53098

September 16, 2011

To: Pastor Thomas A. Westra, Pastor Peter L. Unnasch, Pastor John W. Covach, Mr. Philip F. Becker, Dr. Arthur A. Eggert, Pastor Eric S. Hartzell, Mr. John C. Postelli, Mr. Kurt N. Schmidt, Pastor Paul T. Prange(Advisory), Pastor David N. Rutschow(Advisory), Pastor Mark G. Schroeder CC: President Paul O. Wendland, Pastor Steve Helwig

Dear Governing Board, It is with great regret and remorse that I write this letter to you. My dealings with the Seminary President have been unpleasant at best. His attitude and professional conduct has been quite unhelpful and frankly rather unsettling to say in the least.

My name is Donald Tilbury and I resigned my Vicar call in May 2011. The reason for doing so began in August of 2010 when I first received my Vicar call. The work down in Omaha included 3 congregations—our own congregation of 586 members and two other congregations that we would service once a month. It was busy and this largely affected my tutoring. He needed a second pastor and not a vicar.

I saw my bishop once a week for 15 minutes. In those 15 minutes, we would talk about that week’s agenda and go over sermon reviews. However, by December sermon reviews and critiques were done by text messaging and never more than two sentences. In eight months I wrote 20 new sermons and preached 29-35 times. The first month I preached four times; only once at my home congregation. I taught BIC for 4-5 months and catechism for 4 months. I also developed a hymnology course for the 7- 8 th graders while teaching religion class.

The first month I was also pressured into performing a wedding ceremony for the following summer. I told my bishop that I was not allowed to, but he said that was fine he would find another pastor to sign the certificate the next day or later that week. He continued to pressure me into this until he finally found someone else to perform the ceremony and I would only do the sermon. This set off a very awkward relationship with my bishop from the start.

I also was asked to develop a prospect list using Access and set up online confirmation class for two students in Iowa. There is a WELS tech blog concerning the online catechism class and a website that I used for our prospect list.

I was happily married at the end of December and came back to work two weeks later. At the end of January my bishop texted me that he would like to meet with me, even though I was sick with mono, I meet with my bishop. My bishop yelled at me. He accused me of trying to “outshine him in the ministry” (He asked me to do a prospect newsletter and used this as his example). He accused me of 2 undermining his ministry (The board of evangelism had asked me to check out what the other congregations were doing about college ministry. I emailed one Pastor and asked what they were doing. He used this and said I was going around his back by not first sending the email to him). He attacked my wife, asking me if I was trying to impress her with my “peacock feathers.” He then proceeded to blame my marriage accusingly asking if everything was all right between the two of us. He then brought up the fact that I did not agree with the historical options that Prof. Jeske had in his People’s Bible Commentary and told me that made him mad that I would disagree with a well-respected church father.

He somewhat apologized for the whole thing saying he was under a lot of stress lately because he was strung out with Advent, three congregation, six kids, and a wife who recently yelled at him for never being home. After that though, the Vicar-Bishop relationship was awkward as I was terrified of what might set him off. He did not apologize for attacking my marriage and he told me he had the right to do so because the seminary had given him permission to look out after my marriage.

It seemed we would avoid each other at work as he never said more than a few words to me at church during our two services and even less during the week. Even at the end of February when my wife miscarried, I received almost no encouragement or support. He told me it was a shame and that his wife miscarried once too. He never checked up on us after that. Communication was sparse for the following months.

Until finally at the beginning of May he texted me again and said he wanted to meet my wife and me. I asked why my wife had to be there and his reply was this; “because I want her there to share her thoughts with me personally as God would have her do and because I want her to hear what I have to say not only to you but also to her.”

The tone was negative because my wife had just told me about the WINGS (Women in Gods Service) that occurred just before Pastor’s text. My wife had made a comment about shortening the time and talent sheets in the aid of restructuring the women’s group. Pastor’s wife loudly rebuked her in front of the group telling her if she had a problem with the time and talent sheets she should take it up with pastor.

The following morning Pastor met with me in my office. He started telling me how inappropriate my wife’s behavior was at the meeting (though the ladies at the meeting liked her idea). If she had a problem with the time and talent sheets being too long it should be taken up with him. He then proceeded to accusingly question my marriage again and asked me if I had anything to say. I told him that I was thinking of resigning because of his attacks on my wife and upon me.

He started apologizing profusely and said that I should call my wife so we could meet sooner. After my wife arrived, he asked me if he had any false doctrine in his ministry. We said no. We brought up the January conversation in which he yelled at me. He did not deny his accusations nor did he apologize for them but rather defended them. He also apologized if he had turned me off from the ministry. He gave me the weekend off to think about resigning, telling us that we were a young couple and that we had our lives ahead of us. He said he would call President Wendland and let him know what was going on. I also emailed my advisor, who was in China, concerning the events. 3

President Wendland’s first words as I was prayfully considering my resignation were, “he *Pastor+ has a good reputation and has produced many good vicars.” Well, the fact that my bishop only had one previous vicar told me that President Wendland had not even looked into the situation. In the same conversation, he told me that in his day vicars would never question their bishops about anything, already implying that just by questioning my bishop I was in the wrong. He also accused me of false doctrine bringing up the fact that I disagreed with Jeske in his People’s Bible commentary. I explained that it was the historical options that Jeske presented as fact and not anything with doctrine. He also brought up the previous conventions and got angry when I said I didn’t like certain presentations telling me that these were well respected men in the WELS. President Wendland then told me I had a lot of opinions. I asked him then if I should lie when people ask my opinion to which he did not respond.

I do not understand why I was being attacked for having an opinion on certain presentations. If a student can’t ask questions or bring up historical options that he learned in class, what is the point of class or learning? The next day I received a phone call from a fellow Vicar in the district asking me if it was true. I asked what he was talking about. The Vicar replied that his bishop received an email saying that I had resigned from the ministry. The causes were trying to divide the church, undermining Pastor Helwig’s ministry, having a wife who was a danger to my ministry, and abandoning the catechism class.

I called President Wendland concerning those emails. I also told him that I would resign from my position as Vicar since the Vicar-Bishop relationship was already destroyed since it was not a learning environment. As it was not God pleasing that my bishop would tell these things to others.

President Wendland said he was coming down to meet with us since another Vicar in the district was resigning. At first I did refuse to meet with them because of President Wendland’s attitude and previous phone calls. My advisor later called me from China and talked me into meeting with both of them.

A mother of one of the catechism students emailed my wife, saying that her daughter was told during Monday morning catechism class by Pastor Helwig that Vicar would not be returning to the seminary. This was before my resignation was announced on Wednesday.1

 We met with President Wendland on Wednesday. I told him what I done during the year and about the January meeting with Pastor. President Wendland asked me how certain I was of my resignation to which I replied, “I’m tired”. He didn’t comment nor question anything that had occurred between my bishop and me. We then drove over and met with Pastor Helwig. Pastor Helwig apologized for the lack of communication on his part. I apologized for an email I sent out in February to the fellow Vicars in the district concerning my January meeting asking them for advice on what I should do. Then forgiveness was announced concerning these two issues. Larry (Name changed for protection) mentioned on the way home from school yesterday that Donald decided not to return to the seminary. I am sorry to hear that as I thought he gave a good sermon and presented himself well at our Lenten worship. 4

However, right after that President Wendland told us that he would not look into the email that was going around the district about my resignation because he didn’t have time. He also brought up our miscarriage which is still inappropriate as to why that pertained to that meeting. There was no option laid out for us other than resignation and how it should be labeled. It was labeled as “personal reasons” even though I disagreed with that at the time. We also talked about moving expenses and how they would be covered either by the seminary or by the congregation. My wife and I felt horrible after that meeting since it seemed as if he left the blame on us at the end of the meeting for getting married, having a miscarriage, and even coming down with mono (This was later confirmed in an email). He did not explain how these events affected the outcome or the situation

My bishop assumed responsibility for poor communication and the resulting situation. Why did President Wendland bring up our miscarriage and say that event had skewed our viewpoint of the ministry? I don’t know how a miscarriage can skew one’s view of the ministry. My wife and I were recovering from that yes, but it did not affect my workload or my ministry. It felt rather like a inappropriate attack that seemed like an easy scapegoat instead of dealing with the main situation at hand (I only took two days off from mono until the fever broke and rearranged my day off to take my wife to the hospital. I wrote a sermon during the two days off since I had to preach that weekend. I also preached the day my wife miscarried).

A week or so later a member asked me out to dinner and while discussing my resignation he said that Pastor told him I resigned because I was posting malicious things about him on facebook and was changing my sermons in the pulpit. Both were untrue and my facebook page was brought up for inspection where nothing about the situation, pastor or members was even posted.

I told President Wendland of the events that took place and instead of taking any action in the matter I was told to “drop it” to “just leave” because he wasn’t going to deal with it and that I should just leave Omaha as fast as I could. Instead of dealing with a sin he looked away and did not even investigate it. It was at this point that he told me that because I resigned I lost my rights as well. My connection with the seminary had been severed and anything else would almost be considered a favor from the seminary in these matters.

Reimbursement for moving was a horrendous event. After the seminary decided (and I thank them) to fill in for the role of the congregation and reimburse us for the moving expenses, communication seemed to die down. I asked what was going to be reimbursed multiple times for almost two months because I did not receive any specific details as what was going to be covered. I received a very angry phone call from President Wendland, telling me I was ungrateful, that he had already told me the specifics (though he never reiterated them ) even threatening to take away the moving expenses entirely. My reply was this.

President Wendland, First off, let me apologize if I at any moment expressed ungratefulness for what the seminary has done for my wife and I. That was not our intention. 5 Our intention was to get clarity for what was said in Omaha and what is being done. We perceived after that meeting that the move would be covered. I'm sorry if we misunderstood. I guess the thing that has been bothering me is the responses I get from asking questions. I know I need some work on phrasing but please let me explain. I've never written a letter of resignation before. I know it was rejected, however nobody has gone through the letter with me and said....this could be better or change this sentence or maybe this could be phrased better or that gives off the wrong tone. Instead, I received unacceptable or that's not what we talked about. I got no feedback as to what I could change or suggestions for improvement in making the letter acceptable. Or even with the moving expenses. I asked a question. I'm not trying to be ungrateful, I am grateful. I was just wanting to find out if anything changed from what we perceived to be said in Omaha to what was being done. Also, I don't think the need to ask if I would like reimbursement taken away was necessary in the conversation. I found it threatening and intimidating. I know that was not your intent but I was hurt with your comments that I was ungrateful or playing the injured party. A lot of people got hurt during this. It's unfortunate and I find it quite saddening. Once again i apologize if any of my emails were short, curt or carried a bad tone, that was not my intent. I apologize if this one offends you but I would rather have this read and to let you know how I feel than to fester anything against you or the seminary. If I have not said it, let me. Thank you for what you and the seminary have done for us, my wife and I both appreciate your time in working with us. God's blessings on your work, Donald In response to my email

Wendland sent this: Dear Donald, I gave you an answer and a clarification in our phone conversation. We are being extremely generous with you. More so than I have with any other vicar--to the point where I feel guilty of showing favoritism. I don't know what more I can tell you. As for your resignation letter, I would be happy to discuss it with you, but not by email. 6 Paul

No apology for judging my heart and once again no reiteration of what was going to be covered. Rather I was left to feel guilty for inquiring for budget purposes. I have gone through all my emails and still have found no list of specifics that would have been covered. (I was reimbursed and I am grateful and thankful for it).

President Wendland may have also shared confidential medical information to my bishop without my knowledge or even consent. The only reason I know this is because my bishop told my wife in a conversation. Pastor Helwig named President Wendland as his source to my wife. My psychiatrist has told me to take legal action concerning this matter, but I am still hopeful that the governing board will perform an appropriate investigation.

I’ve received no encouragement from President Wendland but rather a brief, curt and hurtful tone. He has repeatedly told me to get counseling using this as a means to attack me rather than following up to see if I have been seeking help. I find this inappropriate because I have already been seeing a psychiatrist who has told me my actions have not been erratic and that my mental health is quite sane (He is more than willing to vouch for my mental health if the governing board would so desire).

I have been told to “own up” to the events that occurred in Omaha by President Wendland such as getting married, having a miscarriage, and coming down with mono. He has not given any more specifics as to how these items affected my ministry or what I need to “own up” in each of them. If I need to “own up” to these events, I would like to know how they affected my ministry or my relationship with my bishop since it did not affect the ministry or my workload. I missed two days of work after coming down with mono. I had switched my day off after my wife miscarried. I was still putting in 60 hour work weeks after I got married.

In a recent email I have received from President Wendland it is quite clear that he has not heard our complaints concerning the rumors my bishop was still spreading about my resignation.

Dear Brother Donald,

I know you think that I and others have done you wrong. I am mystified however over some of your recent actions and I am at somewhat at a loss over how to help you and Karissa. Your approach seems to move from apology through defensiveness to hostility and back again. I accept your apology of course. You are forgiven. I look forward to seeing even more fruits of repentance. Also, I don‟t wish to get into a grand discussion via email. It is not appropriate to this situation. If you want, I would welcome a personal, face to face conversation—but only if you think it would help. Since total silence may not be helpful here, let me 7 just review what I have seen in your behavior and why I am worried about you.
1. You resigned your call of your own volition. This was an action that you were determined to carry out—almost to the point of refusing to meet with your bishop before you left. This was one of the reasons for my Omaha trip. Let it be said, however, that once you resigned, your relationship with the seminary, the congregation and the circuit was severed—again, by your own choice. I still wanted to continue to work with you and Karissa out of Christian love. Yet it was clearly time to help you move on to a different phase of your life wherever that road might lead. I understood that Karissa planned to attend school in Madison for one, perhaps two years and I thought that would be a good time for healing.

2. Before you left, mutual confession for things done wrong was solicited from you and your bishop. Mutual forgiveness was given. I thought that was the end of the matter so far as you two were concerned. I said no more about it to anyone except your advisor and as a bare report to the faculty. Your bishop has told me that he has said nothing either. It was his right to announce what had happened to his congregation. That was the end, I thought, so far as the congregation was concerned. There was no more rumor spreading on either my part or his. What happens on Facebook among friends, well, no one can control that! But I want you to be assured: we were not guilty of fostering any demeaning talk about you, your vicarage, or your marriage.

3. You send letters to your former circuit in which you want, you say, to set the record straight. In so doing, I fear you only caused a lot of people to scratch their heads. For a vicar who resigned to take such an action was strange in itself, but it seemed even more strange because no one knew much if anything of what you were talking about. It grieves me to say this but you probably started more rumors by sending the letters. You certainly didn't squelch any.

 4. You send a fairly disrespectful letter to your advisor in which you accuse me of breaking confidence on medical matters. (I believe you also tell him that the time is not right for you to meet personally with him in another or maybe the same letter. I know that Prof Geiger, with my encouragement, has been seeking to make contact). Anyway you copy me with the disrespectful letter. I am at a loss to know what you are talking about. Since I don‟t know what to say, and since I‟m finding your behavior increasingly hard to fathom, I simply keep silence since I don‟t want to stir you up further.

5. You send a letter to the board, not copying me, in which you repeat the accusation. It‟s hard for me to see what you hoped to accomplish by such an action. I‟m glad you see now that it was not the best sort of action to take. It might help if, after reading this, you would write the same people retracting what you have said. Otherwise people may be left with the incorrect impression that I break medical confidences.

6. You send me an email, finally addressing me directly. It is mostly apology, but repeats the accusation that I have committed illegal, unethical actions.

8 I want you to know that I did not say anything to Pastor Steve Helwig about your being on anti-depressants. Since I was not a party to the conversation between Karissa and Pastor Helwig, I cannot comment further on what was said in it or where that information came from. It really doesn‟t matter. I can say that I did not even know that you were on Welbutrin until you mentioned it in the letter you sent to your advisor. Just ask yourself, where would I have gotten such information? You didn‟t tell me (if you did, I have no memory of it, nothing in any of my notes). Your advisor said nothing to me. In fact, he didn‟t know anything about it either. Your doctor certainly wouldn‟t have told me. As for our phone call on reimbursement, I do recall feeling frustration with you. It sounded as if you were unhappy about what I thought was the seminary‟s generosity. If I misread that—I am sorry. If I talked tough with you when you didn‟t need warning but rather encouragement, I apologize for that too. Phone calls—like emails—are apt not to go well. I want you to know that after we talked, I spoke to Brian Treichel and told him to be fair and generous with you in helping you out. I hope that he was. My talking about your miscarriage was not intended to hurt as I know you know. Maybe it would help if I also clarified this point: I did not intend it to be a summation of why things got to where they were—as if that could explain it. I merely acknowledged that it happened because I thought of it as one possible factor—along with poor communication (for which your bishop apologized), the excitement and stress of a recent marriage in mid vicar year, the need to retool a bishop-vicar relationship because of it, and your both coming down with mono at a very stressful and ministry packed time of the year. I do not believe and no one has suggested that all the problems that happened during your vicar year were to be laid at your door. I only said, “You do „own‟ some things, even if you are not responsible for everything.” As for legality and policy on confidences: we share many things with bishops, and they with us. Any student that is here at the seminary understands that he will be under the pastoral care of the faculty. That includes adjunct faculty like bishops. We discuss confidential matters concerning students at every faculty meeting. We are tasked by our church body with recommending people to the public ministry. That is one of the key purposes for the seminary‟s existence. Unless I did the evaluation entirely by myself, I see no way that we could carry out our mission if we did not talk about how our students are coming along— both happy things, and areas also where we think they need improvement. I‟d be happy to make that more explicit with students, but I‟d be surprised if they didn‟t already know. There are some matters— internet porn, drunken driving offenses, medical information—that advisors keep strictly to themselves or I keep strictly to myself unless I/they have a signed waiver. Over and above this I will say that the faculty exercises great care in all our discussions. Every care is given not to damage reputations.

9 Don, I think that anyone looking at the above sequence of your actions would conclude that you are behaving erratically. I have encouraged you to seek help from professional counselors. I would encourage you to move on with life and not look backwards or dwell on unhappier times. I would be happy to meet with you personally if you think that such a meeting will help. Since you have called me out for unethical behavior to the governing board, I‟m sure you can understand that I would only meet with you in the presence of other witnesses on the faculty such as your advisor or dean Brenner. But that should not impede a loving conversation between Christian friends. I really do pray for you and Karissa, Donald. I have held you before the throne of grace not a few times in the past couple of weeks. It seems from what you have written that God is answering my prayers. This makes my heart happy. I want most for you to be in a place where you as a couple can move forward with your life into God‟s future. I hope you do not read these words as if they have been written in anger. This is not the case. I am writing out of sincere love and concern for you.

Your brother in Christ, Paul

Yes, I did write letters to my circuit pastors because President Wendland made no action to stop the rumors my bishop was telling members. Numerous times have I told President Wendland what those rumors are but to no avail. His email is quite clear about not listening as he plays it off as friend’s postings on facebook.

Yes, I did send a letter to my advisor at the seminary concerning President Wendland’s actions only because President Wendland had stopped communication with me until the above email. What else was I to do if there is no communication? Yes I did delay meeting with my advisor for a week because of a teen outing my wife and I were planning, but I did schedule and meet with my advisor.

Yes, I did send a letter to the board not copying President Wendland because he already had heard my complaints once before. He has ignored my complaints and told me to keep quiet about the situation. I will still hold that in my wife’s conversation with my bishop, President Wendland was named as the above source of confidential medical information.

I will still hold that President Wendland has ignored sin committed by my bishop after our meeting by continuously ignoring our concerns and complaints concerning the spread of rumors by my bishop and an email that was sent out . I will still hold President Wendland accountable for personal attacks on my mental health. I will still hold President Wendland accountable for not looking into the situation properly from the beginning. I leave this letter in the hands of the governing board to decide what actions to take. The purpose of this letter is so that the above matters can be properly resolved. What I have realized from 10 this situation is the lack of procedures that a seminary student can take since there is no structure to voice complaints to. I pray that the governing board would lay out a plan of action that seminary students may take for situations to be properly investigated.

God’s blessings,

Donald Tilbury




Posted by Ichabod the Glory Has Departed at 2:05 PM
Labels: , , ,

From a WELS Layman - Dismay at the Love Letter Cover-up

WELS Pastor Wall is being protected by the circuit pastor. Why?
Who protects the WELS children?


"Now I can join the odious Don Patterson Crime Family."

Good Morning Pastor Jackson,

I have had a busy week, so I am a bit behind  reading the posts on Ichabod. 

Initially, I was surprised to learn that Guenther called you. Then I realized that this was another lame attempt at damage control. 

These water carriers for the abusers in the WELS have got to get with the program. I guess that a fool never learns. 

Guenther’s comments to you cause me to stifle my gag reflex. First, there is the appearance of being friendly. Then, the obligatory inquisition about the source of information. 

The real knee slapper is his alleged concern about you. 

They have to teach these guys to be better liars when they are at the Sausage Factory. A little exposure to the dictionary of logical fallacies might help also.


In Christ,

WELS Layman in Another Area of the Country



As of today, Joel Hochmuth is still working for WELS,
according to his LinkedIn account.
He is in the slammer for massive homosexual porn
file swapping - young boys...
He had hundreds of files in his office at WELS Headquarters.
SP Mark Schroeder absolved him in public and claimed,
"We never knew."

Joel Hochmuth was caught long before the FBI raided WELS Headquarters. The previous time he was giving counseling for his addiction.

Did any supervisor or counselor in WELS report this? They had a duty to report this child abuse,
as as DP John Steinbrenner and Circuit Pastor Guenther do now.

Jim-Bob Huebner, First VP of WELS.

Posted by Ichabod the Glory Has Departed at 12:14 PM
Labels: , , ,

From Alex Satin's Blog - Quoting Liberalism, Its Cause and Cure

Liberal Christianity

 Dec 10, 2015  2c. Spiritual haywire, Free Christian Books2 comments
Liberal Christian Tim Keller
Cover image of Tim Keller, well-known Reformed preacher. Does he promote Liberal Christianity? Read the post. Then you decide.

Marks of Liberal Christianity

L
iberal Christianity:
  • Stresses man’s reason.
  • Fits Scripture to secular science.
  • Considers Genesis 1 – 11 fable and discounts these chapters as poetry.
  • Uses modern thinking to understand the Bible, instead of the other way around.
  • Emphasises the social gospel.
  • Uses generic “love” as the measure of all things.
Liberal Christians often promote mystic meditation – sorcery – under the guise of Christian spirituality. The source of these practices are quite often the (sic) Spiritual exercises of the infamous Jesuit butcher Ignatius of Loyola. They have no place in the life of any believing Christian.
Liberal Christianity departs from the historic faith once delivered to the saints. It is another gospel.
H
ow do Liberal Christians become this way? The most reasonableexplanation is this:
If we measure success by numbers rather than by purity of doctrine, then the Scriptures must be altered, diluted, and perverted to have the greatest possible appeal at the moment. The smallest points of doctrine will grow in significance, as (Christians)1 wander away from the truth in search of error’s success.
The power of the Word of God…comes from the Word alone. We do not need to make the Word reasonable, appealing or relevant. The Trinity, incarnation, virgin birth, atonement, and resurrection of Christ are beyond human reason, absurd to the world, yet transcending everthing the world can imagine.
Adding reason to the Word, the fundamental weakness of Roman Catholicism and sectarians alike, must eventually lead to placing reason above the Word. The saying is true, as C.P. Krauth said,Young Arminian2, old Socinian3. In other words, the person who adds reason to the Word in his youth will become a Unitarian4 in his old age.
Liberal Christianity Tim Keller
Modernism is the name for liberal Christianity in this 1922 cartoon. Image credit to Clare Spark Blog.
Every denomination which has given reason a place along with Scripture has succumbed to Unitarianism as well, from the Reformed5, who formerly taught inerrancy, to the Roman Catholics, who once condemned evolution and the historical-critical method of studying Scripture.
-Gregory L. Jackson. Liberalism: Its Cause and Cure, p226. Free Christian book in pdf format.
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached…such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 3,4,13-15)
  1. Original reads “Lutheran”. Jackson writes primarily to Confessional Lutherans. ↩
  2. Arminian – A follower of the teachings of Jacobus Arminius who taught that man has free will to choose God. ↩
  3. Socinian – The belief that Jesus was only human, not divine. Socinians deny the trinity. ↩
  4. Unitarian – One who denies the trinity, the divinity of Jesus, and often believes all will be saved. Unitarians are not Christian. ↩
  5. Jackson uses the term “Reformed” to refer to all non-Lutheran Protestant Christians.
---

Glenn E. Chatfield says:
10 Dec 2015 at 9:01 am
I think Keller is definitely on the liberal side of the spectrum, and I have warned about some of his teachings for quite some time now.
Reply
  • Alec Satin says:
    10 Dec 2015 at 9:47 am
    This is to your credit, Glenn.

    To many Presbyterians and neo-Reformed, he is a sacred cow. I have been warned more than once that I break the 9th Commandment for naming him as one who has done great damage. No doubt you get these warnings as well. The evidence is clear for those who have eyes to see – and care to look.
Posted by Ichabod the Glory Has Departed at 11:48 AM
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)