Forget Wikipedia - Someone Needs To Revise the ELDONA Propaganda Videos on YouTube

ELDONA's Wiki Entry Has Serious Errors of Omission. Their Videos Are Fake History


Pastor Heiser admitted to learning how the evil of Objective Justification in 2000, when he admired and sold Thy Strong Word on his website. We often talked about OJ, which he certainly knew, because he supported OJ at the earlier independent church conference he attended in Norfolk, Nebraska. Heiser's comment about Balmer at the conference was, "He denies Objective Justification!"

2006 A.D. - ELDONA was founded, after Heiser was vested in his LCMS retirement fund. I had asked him if anything was going on, a handy honesty test. He said "No," but I had already found his new domain - eldona.org - on one of my searches. Nothing was going on, but he registered a domain name of his nascent archdiocese.

All the ELDONA pastors (except one) were graduates of Ft. Wayne, an OJ seminary. They adored the ravings of David Scaer, the avid castigator of Justification by Faith and the Walter A. Maier patriarchs, I, II, and III.

As I wrote before, at some point Heiser was deliriously happy about fellowship with the Rolf Preus Synod, comprised of Rolf plus a few pastors also kicked out of the Little Sect on the Prairie, united by a common dislike of Pope John the Malefactor. When Heiser made it clear that he had no problems with OJ, I gave up on him. Likewise, he stopped phoning me for advice, money-raising help. book-selling, etc.

 Heiser posed with Rolf's OJ posse for his Salem, Malone and ELDONA group. He said they would get rid of Rolf in time, and they did.

2013 A.D. - ELDONA had a sudden and convenient passion for Justification by Faith - after Pastor Paul Rydecki found his mind clarified by discussions among the WELSian Intrepid Lutherans. The Rolf Synod angrily responded and left the alliance. One ELDONUT was angry with me about the sudden change of doctrine, which is odd, given the shun button pushed by Heiser years earlier.

2019 A.D. - As a group, ELDONA has videotaped themselves lying about their doctrinal history.



The Right Reverend Bishop James Milhouse Heiser was not "fully cognizant of the extent of this heresy OJ being taught - until Rydecki was kicked out of WELS for denying it. (16.57)

Orwell's 1984 - ATP, aka The ELDONA Ministry of Truth - is busy manufacturing its history, just as the Walther Perryville cult did - after they robbed and kicked out their bishop.

Once the senior generation dies off or becomes equally forgetful, the residue can build some shrines to The Great Heiser.

 

Heiser spoke at Higher Things, the  OJ Jungendbund of the LCMS. Klemet Preus (RIP) was president of that group - and was known for his OJ fanaticism, no less than his brothers Rolf and Dan Preus.

Bishop Heiser - What Did He Know and When Did He Know It? The Internet Is Brutally Honest

 Bishop and Seminary President James Rodham Heiser, STM, posed in the library of St. Ignatius School of Theology, Malone. No students.

 For more, see ELDONA - Home of the Whopper

In a video series on YouTube, Heiser claimed that he "was not cognizant" of Objective Justification until Paul Rydecki was given the Left Foot of Fellowship by WELS in 2012, for the crime of teaching the Chief Article, Justification by Faith.

Heiser complained about Balmer "denying Objective Justification" at the Norfolk conference, long before 2012, and Heiser said he saw the light when he read Thy Strong Word in 2000, liking it enough to sell it with the books he offered.

But here is an interesting highlight, established in the precious WELS Essay File, the Holy of Holies for that sect, in an essay written by a seminary professor - Cherney.

In 2008 there also was published a doctrinal statement of the Association of Confessional Lutheran Churches (ACLC). This group, led by Rev. Rolf Preus, consists of six pastors and eight congregations that left the ELS in one way or another in the past two years over the doctrine of the ministry. (Cherney, p. 1)

But the ACLC and Rolf Preus divorced, as recorded here:

Let me clue you in, Mr. Ames. The ACLC did not break off fellowship talks with ELDoNA. ELDoNA broke off fellowship talks with us. Why? Because of my paper, “Making a Clear Confession in Muddy Waters,” that I gave in January of 2009. ELDoNA took strong exception to my insistence that there are indeed orthodox pastors and congregations in the LCMS with whom we may express altar and pulpit fellowship without insisting that they first either condemn or leave the LCMS. I was the impediment to the ACLC and ELDoNA establishing fellowship with each other.
I resigned from the ACLC in March. The ACLC declared fellowship with ELDoNA at their meeting in April. Once I was gone, the impediment was removed. (Rolf Preus on LutherQuest sic)

 As I mentioned, more than once, Heiser told me they would "get rid of Rolf," as if he were the Oracle of Malone - and they did.

The Right Reverend would have us believe that he went through Ft. Wayne's seminary program (OJ and Church Growth), some graduate school there, partnered with notorious OJ salesman Rolf Preus, contining with the rest of the ACLC pastors. The remnants of the Rolf Synod could not believe that ELDONA was suddenly in favor of Justification by Faith.

As told to me, Heiser promoted fellowship with Rolf and his come-outters from the Little Sect on the Prairie, even though he knew Rolf was 100% OJ, except for fleeting moments of JBFA. The rest of them were OJ too, and they were shocked at the arrival of Rydecki and JBFA. The pivoting was quick and unexpected, so they went back to Pope John the Malefactor, who knows little more that OJ.

I can only conclude that Rolf and his ACLC (aka Rolf Synod) were not very astute about Heiser's doctrine, if they failed to detect glimmerings of JBFA. Also, Heiser was not even conscious if the went through Ft. Wayne with no knowledge of OJ from Scaer and Robert Preus, Rolf Preus, and the ELS.

 "Oh, what a tangled web we weave,
when first we practice to deceive."
Sir Walter Scott

Ichabod Reader Amused by Philip Hale's Book on Objective Justification. Does Heiser Know Hale? Did This Ever Come Up at The Fort?

According to Bishop James Rodham Heiser, he was not "cognizant" of Objective Justification until Paul Rydecki was kicked out of WELS in 2012. However, Heiser's favorite professor at Fort Wayne, David Scaer, is and was obsessed with OJ and settling that issue once and for all - Surviving the Storms.

Philip Hale graduated from "The Fort," where all the professors (except Walter A. Maier II) taught Objective Justification, following Pieper, Walther, Calvin, and the Jehovah's Witnesses. 

I have read with amusement the book by Philip Hale Aspects of Forgiveness: The Basis for Justification and its Modern Denial.

Chapter 18, "Justified for the sake of Faith, not Christ" is one of my favorites, full of fallacies and straw man arguments and Walther quotes! A brief sampling of excepts:

"Though, if justification is only tied to faith, there is no other aspect, rendering it incomplete without man’s involvement." p. 137 (Except no one that believes the Bible teaches that faith is in any way a work of man or that faith completes salvation - which are both false OJ claims.)

"But today, faith is what makes forgiveness real for many Protestants, so that ‘‘ faith itself becomes with them a meritorious human work.’’ p. 137

(UOJists to the crowd at Pentecost and the jailer at Philippi - don’t you know, you are already saved (and forgiven and justified and a saint)?!? Just believe it! The Bible to the same audience - "repent, be baptized, believe and you will be saved." The irony is that the faith that God creates in us IS what leads to our forgiveness, “repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” Acts 2:38)

"Justification by faith is a simplistic slogan. 'The expression, ‘we become righteous through faith,’ is a metonymy; that is, the container is here named in place of the content.'" (Hale quoting Walther)

"The traditional Lutheran phrasing is shorthand, but what was formerly assumed no longer can be, due to new errors." p. 137 

(Instead of correcting the errors by teaching what the Bible actually says, the UOJ gang feels that they need to protect the Bible and the Gospel by claiming that all are already justified - that will show them!)

"The phrase 'justified by faith alone’ is, at best, incomplete. It can be defined to not require the death of Christ, let alone His resurrection." 

(I don’t even know how to respond to this, complete nonsense.)

"In fact, the word ‘‘ justify’’ need not always be articulated, any more than the word ‘‘faith’’ is needed to actually bestow justification and faith in Christ. ‘‘ We do not say that one by necessity always has to use the expression: ‘the world is justified in Christ’ . . . for we know very well that this article of faith can be explained and represented completely and correctly by other words.’’ 

(This may be my favorite quote and it is Walther and ingenious! Since the UOJ camp cannot find one single verse in the entire Bible that says “the world is justified in Christ” or “God justifies the world” or “God forgave the world”, just use a quote from Walther that says no problem, you can use other phrases and words because that is all there is....pure gold)

---

Does this read like a correction against those influenced by Calvin? Judge for yourself - do not rely on Hale to think for you.

 Does this read like a correction against those influenced by Calvin? Judge for yourself - do not rely on Walther to think for you.

 Imputation (counting) is the Greek word used for Abraham in Genesis 15:6 (LXX) and again in Romans 4. When are we counted forgiven? Before birth (Edward Preuss)? At the resurrection of Christ? (Halle's Rambach, Stephan, and Walther) 

Walter A. Maier Family versus the Blood-Guilt of the Preus Clan.Lights Out in LCMS-WELS: The UOJ Cabal Has Won

The Preus brothers beat WAM II like a rented mule,
for teaching the doctrine of The Lutheran Hour - and Luther.

 Robert Preus and Justification, 1981. Published on LutherQuest.


Older Lutherans recall that Walter A. Maier was not only a superstar among Lutherans, for his speaking on The Lutheran Hour, but also honored among Evangelicals, with special recognition at Billy Graham's Center Museum.

 Mrs. Ichabod and I visited the display about Maier, attended events at the Billy Graham Center, and I taught there once.

The Story of Walter A. Maier (Tobias Communications, The extraordinary father of Paul Maier, Dr. Walter A. Maier, was the founding speaker of The Lutheran Hour radio broadcast. He was also a seminary professor who wrote 31 books, edited a popular journal, and filled a dozen other roles. Billy Graham called him "the greatest combination of preacher and scholar that America has produced." "Rich, fascinating reading ... this book surely will have an impact on peoples of all faiths and nationalities." - Seattle Post-Intelligencer "Thorough ... of great interest, inspiring. Walter A. Maier was a Sunday institution in the lives of millions of Americans." - The Pittsburgh Press

Walter Maier and Wheaton College

Walter A. Maier II was the most likely president of the synod when the Preus brothers, Jack and Robert, launched a vicious attack on him for not teaching Objective Justification. The winner was Ralph Bohlmann, who became the LCMS president. The seminary took away WAM II's ability to teach Romans.

Some ELDONA details are here.

Here is some exculpatory posted by Rolf Preus.

This Rolf contribution defies the facts of the WAM II case.

Jack did this with a letter sent to all the pastors of LCMS, as I recall, and Robert followed up later with stuff like this -

Robert:

Many of our readers know that our seminary, and one professor in particular, has been recently criticized for undermining this comforting and clear teaching of objective justification. The criticism and garbled accounts of the situation have become so widespread lately that I must now comment on the matter in this issue of the "Newsletter.

For over 15 years now Professor Walter A. Maier, Jr., has been teaching a course in the book of Romans, and, although he states he has always presented the doctrine of objective justification as taught in our synod (e.g. in the "Brief Statement"), he has taught in class that some of the key passages used in our church to support the doctrine actually do not speak to the subject at all. As a result some within the seminary community and some outside concluded that Dr. Maier did not in fact believe, teach, and confess the article of objective justification. A few – very few – complaints were brought against Dr. Maier and against the seminary for letting this go on.

The Preus mob pounded WAM II into the ground like a tent stake. I may not get all the dates and crimes in perfect order, because I was not in the LCMS at that time. 

Notice how ominous the charge appears in red. There is no effort to address what WAM II taught, only to claim that he has departed from the political document called the Brief Statement 1932. The Brief Statement of 1932 never had canonical status but here it is raised above the Scriptures to have super-canonical status, supplanting the clear message of the Scriptures and the Book of Concord.

Observe how Robert Preus' description of Objective Justification is a confused mess of garbage, highlighted by one of the most absurd statements ever - from Edward Preuss, who left the St. Louis Seminary to became a major Roman Catholic leader and editor. But the Stormtroopers still love Edward Preuss'

Justification of a Sinner essay/booklet. The phrase - justification of a sinner - is one of those clues that a Stormtrooper is clearing his throat.

 "We were justified before we were even born." What?

• UOJ Gave the LCMS a Headstart on Women's Ordination and Church Growth, 
• With a Side Helping of Pentecostalism and Union with the Future ELCA - 
• Thank You, Preus Brothers and Buddy Ralph Bohlmann

Some background is worth considering. CFW Walther was not a Biblical theologian. He started with theses and simply stated them as the truth, citing Scripture passages whether they were fitting or not.

Jack and Robert Preus were better educated than Walther, but they were not Biblical scholars. Robert did his work on the late Lutheran scholastic period, which was influenced by Pietism.

Walter A. Maier and WAM II were both Biblical scholars.

 We met WAM II (left) at the Rutz funeral. He is a jolly guy with a lot of genius relatives. WAM III earned a doctorate from Harvard, like his grandfather did.

Ralph Bohlmann earned his PhD in church history at Yale and was part of the conservative minority when the Seminex crisis saw most of the faculty and students leave Concordia Seminary, St. Louis. When he became LCMS president in 1981, after the Preus attack against WAM II, he began leading the synod toward women's ordination, working with the LCA/ALC. Church Growth itself grew by leaps and bounds, and Pentecostalism continued.

Did Robert Preus Repent of the Mob Attack on WAMII?

Rolf Preus gives the impression that Justification by Faith is the false doctrine warned against in Matthew 7:15-23. If so, he should be more explicit. His father, Robert Preus, provided the best quotations against Objective Justification:

The LCMS - under Matt the Fatt - Has Made UOJ Official Doctrine:

Time To Unite with ELCA and Certify Herman Otten

 "Do you disagree with our dogmatics book?" jowls shaking in rage, eyes blazing with blood-lust.

 So you see, doctrine is always developing and making progress. This is the first LCMS Small Catechism - and the biggest - with UOJ taught.

Rolf Preus - The LCMS Should Be More Bloodthirsty on UOJ - Like WELS!

 Rolf Preus has stupidly repeated Romans 4:25 as if the verse and chapter are all about Justification without Faith.

Rolf is here to help you blokes with doctrinal problems.

Heiser and Rolf Preus have both been ambivalent about the Chief Article.
Here they are studying and worshiping together.
Every Ft. Wayne grad is a bishop or a pope.

Author Message   Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 9776 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 9:38 am:       The Book of Concord was published in 1580. Pastor Rolf David Preus   Joe Krohn (Jekster) Advanced Member Username: Jekster Post Number: 569 Registered: 4-2011 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 9:56 am:       "If they color their translation by what they confess about scripture, EHV will be the most accurate English translation ever published." Mr. Gorman; if a translation is colored by one's confession, it's hardly accurate. It's more like the tail wagging the dog.   Steve Ames (Sames) Senior Member Username: Sames Post Number: 1635 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 2:42 pm:       Daniel Gorman: “WELS translators have only one scriptural confession, the 1584 Book of Concord. If they color their translation by what they confess about scripture, EHV will be the most accurate English translation ever published.” Mr. Gorman, then the translation would be a failure. However, perhaps you are thinking the EHV is faithfully translating the content of Scripture which is what the Book of Concord confesses? As the translators in the below referenced article states: “The Formula of Concord is not sectarian. It is catholic and ecumenical because it promotes the unity of the church by faithfully confessing the content of Scripture.” A “Lutheran” Translation?? Pitfalls and Potential http://wartburgproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2015 /05/A_Lutheran_Translation-Pitfalls_and_Potentials .pdf It would be sectarian or would at the very least be perceived as sectarian. … If we can produce a product that would find some acceptance among other Lutherans and other denominations, rather than being sectarian, the project might instead establish some common ground. But the main reason that our translation is not sectarian is that our translators are not sectarians. They are confessional Lutherans. They understand that while it might be sectarian to translate the Bible, “Jesus said this is my true body,” it is not sectarian to confess, “This is the true body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” The translators understand the difference between presenting a Lutheran understanding of Scripture in a confessional statement and importing that interpretation into the words of a translation. What determines whether or not a translation is sectarian is not how many people produced it or how many people use it but how faithful it is to the divinely intended meaning of Scripture. The Vulgate, which was used by millions of people for centuries and was the Bible which nourished Luther, was sectarian when it translated the first gospel promise, “She [Mary] will crush the serpent’s head.” When Luther revised the Vulgate and translated, “He [Christ] will crush the serpent’s head,” his one-man translation was not sectarian but truly catholic. The Formula of Concord is not sectarian. It is catholic and ecumenical because it promotes the unity of the church by faithfully confessing the content of Scripture. The same would be true of a translation made by confessional Lutherans. A translation made by confessional Lutherans would not be “a Lutheran translation” which introduced a Lutheran bias into the text. It would be a translation by Lutherans which honestly set forth the meaning of the text. …   Daniel Gorman (Heinrich) Senior Member Username: Heinrich Post Number: 3698 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 4:11 pm:       Steve Ames: "However, perhaps you are thinking the EHV is faithfully translating the content of Scripture which is what the Book of Concord confesses?" No person is a blank slate. If the Book of Concord doesn't color the WELS translation, something else will. If the WELS translators were to discover a passage that disagrees with the Book of Concord, I believe they would humbly and prayerfully examine the text very closely to determine where they had erred. If they were unable to find their mistake, they would abandon their translation project (or their confession). Finishing the Wartburg Project is, therefore, prima facie evidence that the Book of Concord has colored the WELS translation.   Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 9778 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 5:23 pm:       Does anyone know where I can get copies of An American Translation at a reasonable price? Pastor Rolf David Preus   Steve Ames (Sames) Senior Member Username: Sames Post Number: 1636 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 6:04 pm:       Daniel Gorman: “If the Book of Concord doesn't color the WELS translation, something else will.” If you must have something in your words to “color” the EHV translation it would be the belief that the Bible is God’s inspired inerrant Word as taught by what WELS folks call the Wauwatosa Theology. The Wauwatosa Theology is the view that the Scriptures should be historically and grammatically interpreted on the basis of the original Hebrew and Greek texts, with no dogmatic or ecclesiastical presuppositions. Daniel, you appear to be making the Book of Concord a dogmatic presupposition. Daniel Gorman: “If the WELS translators were to discover a passage that disagrees with the Book of Concord,” What you are suggesting would have been very disturbing to the early WELS fathers known as the Northwestern Lutherans who lead the Wisconsin Synod's break with the Prussian Union mission societies who had been providing support. Nowhere does the use of the Bible by the Book of Concord misuse or contradict the true meaning of God’s Word. Just where can one image any Bible passage that disagrees with the Book of Concord or where the Book of Concord disagrees with any Bible passage? Just for clarity, translation project is complete.   Steven Thomas Karp (Steven_karp) New member Username: Steven_karp Post Number: 21 Registered: 5-2015 Posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2018 - 7:44 pm:       I checked on Amazon, and "Good" used copies of "An American Translation"can be had in the $10 range. Is That reasonable? By the way, you might have to poke around a bit since Amazon has different editions in different places.   Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 9779 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 12:38 am:       Thanks for the information. I'll check it out. Pastor Rolf David Preus   Daniel Gorman (Heinrich) Senior Member Username: Heinrich Post Number: 3699 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 6:05 am:       Steve Ames: "Daniel, you appear to be making the Book of Concord a dogmatic presupposition." My only presupposition is that scripture "is the only true standard by which all teachers and doctrines are to be judged." FC;SD;OF THE COMPREHENSIVE SUMMARY, FOUNDATION, RULE, AND STANDARD Steve Ames: "Just where can one image any Bible passage that disagrees with the Book of Concord or where the Book of Concord disagrees with any Bible passage?" A few years ago, I thought I had at long last found an inconsistency between scripture and the BOC. But there was no inconsistency! I had erred by relying an incorrect English translation of the BOC. I am not aware of any doctrinal conflict between the bible and the Book of Concord in their original languages. Steve Ames: "Just for clarity, translation project is complete." If the WELS translators did find an apparent inconsistency between the bible and the BOC in the course of their work, I am confident they recognized and corrected their error. The WELS translators would not publish a bible that contradicts their confession. "Since now, in the sight of God and of all Christendom [the entire Church of Christ], we wish to testify to those now living and those who shall come after us that this declaration herewith presented concerning all the controverted articles aforementioned and explained, and no other, is our faith, doctrine, and confession, in which we are also willing, by God’s grace, to appear with intrepid hearts before the judgment-seat of Jesus Christ, and give an account of it; and that we will neither privately nor publicly speak or write anything contrary to it. . ." FC,SD,XII   Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 9780 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 10:47 am:       The Scripture alone principle does not disallow adopting a scripturally based norm of doctrine such as the Creeds and the Lutheran Confessions. The doctrinally binding authority of these confessions derives from the Scriptures alone. Inasmuch as they are already normed by the norming norm (the Holy Scriptures), they, as the normed norm serve as a sound guide in the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. Does this make the Lutheran Confessions "a dogmatic presupposition"? No, it makes the Lutheran Confessions a dogmatic conclusion, which then becomes a guide for us Lutherans as we interpret the Bible. Mr. Gorman correctly notes, "No person is a blank slate. If the Book of Concord doesn't color the WELS translation, something else will." The problem with the Wauwatosa theologians is that with their arrogant dismissal of the theological method of centuries of Lutherans as "father's theology," it bequeathed to the Wisconsin Synod a father's theology of its own, saddling them with a sectarian view of church and ministry that has caused them no end of trouble. Rejecting the "fathers' theology" of the seventeenth century and adopting its own "fathers' theology" of the early twentieth century, the WELS finds itself in an untenable position on matters (such as the plain meaning of AC V and AC XIV) that were settled among us Lutherans for hundreds of years before anybody had heard of Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. Pastor Rolf David Preus   Steve Schmidt (Sschmidt) Intermediate Member Username: Sschmidt Post Number: 285 Registered: 3-2017 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 11:40 am:       I thought the WELS rejected Wauwatosa theology in 1929? I'm missing something.   Steve Schmidt (Sschmidt) Intermediate Member Username: Sschmidt Post Number: 286 Registered: 3-2017 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 11:53 am:       https://pastorjameskellerman.blogspot.com/2011/08/ wauwawhat-part-three.html Also, does anybody know why August Pieper was, according to the above blog, "the Darth Vader of the Wisconsin Synod?"   Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 9782 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 12:03 pm:       No, the WELS celebrates the Wauwatosa Theology. It did take some time before it was incorporated into their official statements. While the Wauwatosans taught their new teaching on church and ministry one hundred years ago, the WELS didn't formally adopt it until 1969. For years, the WELS and the LCMS had pretty much the same practice. In fact, some said that Missouri's practice followed Wisconsin's doctrine and Wisconsin's practice followed Missouri's doctrine. The Wauwatosa take on sola Scriptura has definitely affected Wisconsin's use of the Lutheran Confessions as a norm. While formally subscribing unconditionally, in practice they do not always follow the Confessional paradigm. This becomes very apparent on church and ministry. On the other hand, Wisconsin's opposition to unionism is stronger than Missouri's, and the WELS seems to be more willing to stand up against cultural norms than is Missouri. On hermeneutical issues, the WELS stays with the historic Lutheran position on such things as rectilinear messianic prophecy, whereas Missouri has caved into the Reformed influence on this. I don't want my criticism of the Wauwatosans misunderstood. They were excellent theologians. The WELS has a high regard for the Holy Scriptures and does a good job of training their pastors. Pastor Rolf David Preus   Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 9783 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - 12:06 pm:       Also, the WELS affirmation of objective justification and its willingness to stand firm on this is commendable. While Missouri appears incapable of disciplining those who deny it, the WELS has done so to their credit. I speak specifically of a former WELS pastor who is now a member of ELDoNA, an erring sect that broke away from Missouri, rejecting Missouri's teaching on the ministry and justification. Pastor Rolf David Preus