Saturday, July 9, 2016

Biggest Lutheran Scandal of All -
Millions Spent To Teach and Publish Anti-Christian Propaganda

This is photographic proof that dogs are smarter than most Lutherans.


I did some random searching on Google this morning, wondering about some classmates from the distant past. Several of them should be retired, I thought, but they are active in two synodical posts (ELCiC) and in a newly endowed position at a Roman Catholic seminary. The first two were in my Canadian seminary class, the other classmate a priest from Notre Dame. The priest told me, the last time we wrote, "I still have your Luther set that you gave me. I read it every year."

I gave the same set to Jay Webber, because it was out of print and he coveted it. Probably Father Ken has read his set more than Jay has. One cannot detect any impact of Luther's works on Webber's highly-subsidized writings.

Searching led me into various scandals, one in ELCA that was never explained. Googling took me to the same person on Facebook and LinkedIn, but the conflicting dates (ELCA vs. the bishop) and utter silence left me baffled. I often post updates - where are they now? - which Natalie Pratt enjoyed. But how does one update a mystery unsolved?



The Big Scandal
The pratfalls of various church officials are common enough to made them daily fodder, and those are the ones that escape the sanitizing and deceptive actions of their Damage Control Committee.

But the biggest scandal of all is the enormous amount of money scarfed up from members, foundations, gift annuities, and Thrivent and spent to promote false doctrine.

Denominations can be defined by a phrase or a reputation:

  • Episcopalians are broadminded, so the clergy can easily include Billy Graham Evangelicals and almost-in-Rome priests.
  • Methodists are "conservative but irenic." 
  • Liberal Baptists are social activists and devotees of Walter Rauschenbusch.
  • Southern Babtists practice repeated immersions as a substitute for Holy Communion.
  • Roman Catholics provide the Mass, the ultimate being their public Papal Masses, designed to make Protestants weep that they lack this unique form of entertainment.
Lutherans are clearly defined by the Chief Article, for several reasons. 
  1. Luther always taught Justification by Faith.
  2. Melanchthon and the Book of Concord taught the same and used the phrase.
  3. Chemnitz and the Concordists confirmed Justification by Faith as the Chief Article.
  4. Gerhard, who worked with Chemnitz, also taught the Chief Article.
  5. The Scriptures teach Justification by Faith with great clarity, and this is recognized by most denominations, even when they observe it in the breach - Rome, ELCA, WELS, the ELS, LCMS, and CLC (sic).

Luther said, "It takes seven lies to cover up one lie," so WELS has about 60 essays in their precious repository - all teaching against Justification by Faith, two of them explicitly using the phrase Chief Article while promoting their cowardly Universalism - Mark Zarlng and F. Bivens plagiarizing Zarling.

The LCMS, ELS, WELS, and CLC (sic) are united with ELCA in teaching that grace means everyone in the world is already righteous (Objective Justification) and that one only needs to make a decision for UOJ to be really, truly, absolutely, positively forgiven. That almost sounds like the Roman Catholic fides formata, faith formed by love, works required forgiveness - "Yes, you are forgiven, but there is one more thing you must do." Yes but = No.


Books and professors are selected to make sure that Universalism triumphs. This erosion has taken place slowly over time, lest the narcotic effect of a manufactured peace be disturbed.

One pastor wrote me:

"Well, I will say this, you certainly can bring out the “crazy” in folks! I don’t know what it is, why you are so disliked. People feel somehow threatened by you and feel they must attack and get rid of you. Like Pit Bulls you just have a nasty reputation."

Many pastors remind me of the chihuahuas in one yard. These tiny dogs are so fierce that one sticks his tiny muzzle out of a hole in the fence to bark at Sassy and me. Sassy is so indifferent she does not even growl back.

A large dog tried to follow us, time after time. I pointed my walking stick at him and said, "Go back home!" The next time he wandered into our yard, he spotted me and headed home, before I could say a word.

My favorite ankle-biters are the tiny ones who got through their gate and tried to gang up on Sassy, whose three legs make her very uncertain in close quarters. I held the staff over my head and yelled, "Go back! Go back to Mordor where you belong!" They stopped, ran back, barked some more, ran back even farther, turned to bark, then retreated.  I had Mormon missionaries depart the same way, acting fierce while yelling at me, but backing up all the way and disappearing slowly in their impotent rage.

Titus 1 KJV

Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;
14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

I used to wonder, how can their mouths be stopped, these UOJ fanatics and Church Growth maniacs?
But now I know. They have retreated. They no longer write bitter diatribes to me, promoting their precious dogma. They are so aware of their falsehoods that they continue to wear the fleece of gentle shepherds while scattering and slaughtering the sheep. But they are no longer so bold in repudiating the Word of God.

Paul McCain called himself the Andreae of the LCMS.
No, he is more like the Gollum of Lutherdom.
Andreae taught justification by faith -
McCain and his Godfather, SP Harris, teach against the Chief Article.

Friday, July 8, 2016

SP Mark Schroeder Wanted a Group To Support Him,
But He Did Not Want Them to Think Too Hard



I wonder where this President Schroeder has gone...




OK, Mr. Lindee, you've touched a nerve.Re: Pres....
INTREPIDLUTHERANS.COM
Like   
  • 4 people like this.
  • Joe Jewell It's just curious that by almost any observable measure I can think of (new mission starts with questionable worship and an allergy to the word "Lutheran"; wholehearted embrace of NIV2011 and watered-down language in the name of outreach, and advocacy thereof by synodical types, most egregiously various professors; video screens everywhere; proliferation of the various "traveling praise band" acts which serve to spread CoWo around the synod; worship conferences which feature the same) the practices against which President Schroeder spoke in 2009 are more frequent, more accepted, and seen in more places now than they were six years ago.

    I like what President Schroeder said in 2009 both in content and in tenor, and like many here, I've told him that personally on more than one occasion. I just think he has been fairly quiet since then (and I've told him that, too), and that this reticence has not been beneficial for the WELS. If that counts as an "issue with President Schroeder", there it is.
    4 hrs · Edited · Like · 8
  • Andrew Rusch I'm curious. Does WELS have an equivalent to Higher things in the LCMS?
    2 hrs · Like · 1
  • Jeffery Clark Not really. Starting one has been discussed in the past, but the discussions generally fizzle with not much being decided.
    1 hr · Like
  • Seth Bode Has President Schroeder wholeheartedly embraced NIV11?
  • Jason Sturgill I've been out of the loop. What's the latest with the NIV'11? I thought Schroeder recommended that we look at other options.
  • Jeffery Clark The synod in convention voted to adopt an eclectic approach, cherry-picking the best from different translations. In practice, everything *new* out of NPH has used the NIV11. The new hymnal project is using the NIV11. The new catechism isn't done yet, but I doubt it'll depart from the NIV11 too much. So despite the synod convention's vote and President Schroeder's suggestion, we have de facto NIV11.
    17 mins · Edited · Like
  • Jason Sturgill So he lied.
  • Christian Schulz That sounds WELS all right. Oops, I'm former WELS. My comments are nullified despite our mutual claim the Confessions. My apologies to the members of this group who are deeply offended when non-WELS folk comment.
  • Jason Sturgill Sometimes I wonder if WELS is worth saving. I have always defended it. I don't think I can anymore. We don't have good leadership.
    19 mins · Like · 2
  • Christian Schulz I hate to sound antagonistic, but that's just going to be default for anything I post. You're right, Jason Sturgill, that's why many have left. There's been years of promise, years of statements like Pres. Schroeder's with absolutely no action and nothing but compliance. It's over. WELS is going where it has chosen to go. It's time to step back, grasp the Confessions and laugh, not in a comedic way, but in a nervous, anxious laugh about where it's headed. Nothing changes no matter the movement, the tact, or the people behind reforming WELS back to Confessional Lutheranism. It's over. At least go to a Synod or Diocese that lets you be Lutheran without repercussion. I think it's fair to say we've all tried and it's failed. How many more years will we bitch until we realize it's time to leave? I mean, seriously.

    Anyhoo, I'll get back to my corner and let you all continue in the years of "discussion" which produces no real results. Like I said, the WELS is on a train and it's not intending to stop. Remember, we gotta "change or die." So when you present, to them, the "die" side, there's no room for discussion. The WELS has already boarded the train despite the "good," spineless, and "powerless" pastors who oppose.
    3 mins · Edited · Like
  • Joe Jewell Seth Bode--President Schroeder wrote an open letter in May 2013 opposing the adoption of NIV2011, six weeks before the Synod Convention that year (in it, he cited from the ELS and LCMS rejections of the NIV2011--passages that a seminary professor had accused me of "misleading the room" with when I shared them verbatim with a roomful of pastors, teachers, and laymen a year before). 

    It was a decent letter but about, oh, 18-24+ months too late, given that the Translation Evaluation Committee had been laying the groundwork for the NIV2011 since 2009 and vigorously promoting it since 2011. Where was he then? The 2011 Convention was highly skeptical of the TEC's shoddy work when it became clear that they had ignored their mandate to "find the best translation" and narrowed the scope of their work to "is NIV2011 acceptable" while ignoring better options. President Schroeder needed to get on top of that then, if not before.

    So no, he didn't personally support NIV2011. But he also did not make use of his public position very effectively and in fact (it seemed to me) only did so at all reluctantly.