Letter to WELS, From the Attorney Whom DP Englebrecht Refused To MeetJanuary, 2011

January 20, 2011 A.D.
WELS Conference of Presidents (COP) c/o Synod President Mark Schroeder Synod President Schroeder Mark.Schroeder@sab.wels.net
cc: District President Engelbrecht nwdpwels@sab.wels.net
Current Circuit Pastor Raasch pastor.raasch@mountoliveappleton.com
Former Circuit Pastor Suhr pastor.suhr@stjohn-appleton.org
Pastor Glende glende@new.rr.com
Pastor Skorzewski pastorski@gotocore.com
Pastor Sievert dsievert@newbc.rr.com
Pastor Frey (five concerned area pastors) kfrey@choiceonemail.com Mr. Gary Thoma (Church President) garythoma@hotmail.com

RE: St. Peter Evangelical Lutheran Church; Appleton/Freedom, WI

Dear WELS and WELS Conference of Presidents:

I write this letter because I continue to be concerned about what has been happening at my congregation, St. Peter Evangelical Lutheran Church in Freedom, WI, and continue to be unable to resolve my doctrinal differences with Pastor Glende. A little over a year ago, I sent a 29-page letter dated November 1, 2009 to all my pastors and my Church Council expressing some of my concerns. However, during our attempts to resolve the doctrinal differences reiterated by that letter, it became apparent that I disagree doctrinally not only with Pastor Glende and my Church Council, but also District President Engelbrecht, and other leaders in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS).

This letter is an update and a continuation, therefore, one should read the November 1, 2009 "Letter to Council and Pastors" before this letter.1

The first part of this letter is a procedural history since November 2009. The purpose of this history is to show that I have exhausted all the procedural steps that I was required to follow, thereby justifying this letter. After years of effort, these issues have not been appropriately addressed, therefore, I believe that this letter is the only current remaining option. The second part of this letter deals with the doctrinal issues. The purpose of this doctrinal section is to outline the issues and to explain briefly why I disagree doctrinally with my pastors. The third part of this letter is about fellowship doctrine and practice.

Part I: Procedural History (since November 2009)
After only seven months, on November 1, 2009, Pastor Chris Christenson preached his last sermon at St. Peter Congregation. On November 4, I e-mailed the 29-page letter to my pastors, Church Council, and District President Engelbrecht. On December 1, 2009, my family and I met with Pastor Christenson to inquire why he was leaving after only a few months at St. Peter. It is not normal practice for a pastor to be placed on a call list after only a few months at a new congregation, but Pastor Christenson did express good reasons to leave.2

Call Meeting
On December 14, 2009, St. Peter Congregation held a voters' meeting to amend Pastor Glende's job description to read "lead pastor," and call an "associate pastor" to replace Pastor Christenson. I moved to table the call because I believed that there were important issues that the congregation needed to address before ratifying Pastor Glende as "lead pastor" and extending an "associate call." I respectfully noted my November 2009 letter, but did not cite any specifics from that letter. Nonetheless, Pastor Glende, Pastor Skorzewski, the Church Council, and District President Engelbrecht had received this letter, and were all present at the meeting.

Another layman asked whether there were additional actions or steps that needed to be taken before we issued a new call, and Pastor Glende replied, "If we had to do things, if there was anything that needed to take place before we could call again, then District President Engelbrecht wouldn't allow us to issue a call." District President Engelbrecht did provide our congregation with a call list of five candidates that he believed were suitable to be an associate pastor.

The argument against the motion was that neither Pastor Glende, nor our Church Council, nor District President Engelbrecht believed that any additional steps needed to be taken. District President Engelbrecht did attend and participate in our call meeting. When he was not speaking, he sat in the back, and chatted with Pastor Skorzewski.3


All of my previous motions at St. Peter had also faced considerable opposition from Pastor Glende and others, and as a result they received no support. Thus, it is worth noting that this motion (to table the associate call and study the issues at St. Peter Congregation) did receive a hesitant second and a smattering of timid ayes. It would seem that the loss of Pastor Christenson after only a few months was enough to make some people consider it worthwhile to pause and question.4 

Would my motion to table the associate call and study these issues have passed if District President Engelbrecht had not lent his presence, name, and the considerable authority of his office to the effort to defeat my motion? Only God knows, but I do know that this was the best opportunity to convince our congregation to look into these issues, and District President Engelbrecht helped quash it.

December 17, 2009 Meeting with Pastor Glende

Before this meeting, I had said that I would like to invite Circuit Pastor Suhr. Pastor Glende responded, that it would be inappropriate for Pastor Suhr to attend this meeting, and Pastor Suhr would "be invited to a meeting any the time [sic] when the circuit pastor would be asked."5 (Circuit Pastor Suhr had previously contacted Pastor Glende about plagiarism. Soon after that conversation, Pastor Glende had informed Circuit Pastor Suhr that he could no longer be his circuit pastor).

On December 17, 2009, I met with Pastor Glende and our head elder. I asked Pastor Glende why Circuit Pastor Suhr was not his Circuit Pastor. Pastor Glende explained that Pastor Suhr has a "different philosophy of ministry," is "not objective," and is unable to "have an open honest opinion" of Pastor Glende's ministry at St. Peter. Therefore, Pastor Suhr could not be Pastor Glende's circuit pastor. Pastor Glende said that District Secretary Szep was his circuit pastor, and that District President Engelbrecht approved this arrangement.

Regarding our recent call meeting, Pastor Glende told me that my motion to table the calling of
an "associate pastor" and to study the issues at St. Peter was disrespectful and a violation of God's word.

During the call meeting, President Denny had told me, I was not allowed to move to table the call, and that that meeting was only about who we were going to call, not whether we were going to call, or any other issues. Pastor Glende said that I violated God's word by not withdrawing my motion. God's word says: "Respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord." (1 Thessalonians 5:12). "Show proper respect to everyone." (1 Peter 2:17). "The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor." (1 Timothy 5:17). Pastor Glende emphasized that those are God's words; and if I disagree, then I am disagreeing with God.

It is my position that people can be respectful, and still be allowed an opportunity to voice disagreement. Besides, when can one move to table a call, if not at the call meeting?

I asked Pastor Glende if we could again discuss the doctrinal issues, but Pastor Glende said that he rejected that there is any false doctrine at St. Peter, and if there were false doctrine, then St. Peter's other called workers would say so. (Pastor Glende cited our use of strange creeds as an example of mere adiaphora). He also said again, if I am not being fed at St. Peter, then I should respectfully consider joining another WELS congregation. Pastor Glende gave me the Church Council's unanimous response to my letter, and told me to read it after our meeting. We did not discuss this official response at the December 17, 2009 meeting.

In its letter, the Church Council asserted that my November 1, 2009 letter reflected "a gross misstatement about and misunderstanding of the ministry of St. Peter."6

Meeting with St. Peter Church Council

On January 31, 2010, I met with the Church Council of St. Peter. They immediately chastised me for bringing my father, and not coming alone. They did not allow me to record the proceedings. I did not know who half the men in the room were. No one introduced themselves.

President Denny went through the Church Council's letter point by point. After each point, I was then prompted to agree with the Church Council's position that there is nothing wrong at St. Peter. The Church Council's letter lists eleven points which they used to assert that there was nothing wrong with the doctrine and practice at St. Peter. For example, on "the matter of plagiarism" the Church Council said "that Pastor Glende and all pastors, at St. Peter and other WELS congregations, have every right to use outside resources in the preparation and preaching of their sermons."7

When we came to this point, I agreed with the bare words of that statement. President Denny thanked me for my agreement, and moved on to the next point. I had to interject, and assert that just because pastors can "use outside resources" does not mean they can plagiarize.8 Another member of the Church Council asserted that Pastor Glende did not plagiarize, and that my example of plagiarism was bogus because Pastor Glende did not copy everything exactly-word-for-word from beginning-to-end. Neither Pastor Glende nor anyone on the council objected to this false definition of plagiarism. In fact, Pastor Glende noted his agreement with all of the Council's positions.

Pastor Glende also claimed that it was ok to plagiarize because Craig Groeschel, a false teacher, gave him permission.

Regarding the issue of whether from our perspective God needs our service, and St. Peter Congregation's heavy use of the lyrics "show me Lord, the service you will need," I was told that my complaint was procedurally out of order.9 This song was published in Let All the People Praise You by Northwestern Publishing House, therefore, I had no right to complain to St. Peter Congregation about its heavy use at St. Peter Congregation. Rather, I should complain to the Synod. No one openly agreed with my position that God does not need our service.

After I cited Acts 20:28-31, one member of the council did come to express reservation about our use of strange and novel creeds. (While the council continued to maintain that the "use of such creeds is an adiaphoran"; since this meeting, I have observed that we have used only the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds along with the Lutheran explanations as our public confessions. This has been an improvement).

Another member of the council expressed reservation about Pastor Glende’s doctrinal assertion that Christians can choose to believe God's Word. Therefore, Pastor Glende agreed to contact a seminary professor in order to verify this doctrine.

This meeting lasted almost three hours, and no outward agreement was reached on any point between me and the Council. At the end of the meeting, I asked President Denny what the next step was, and he said that I needed to follow the procedure he gave me:

[The next] meeting could be held involving Pastor Glende, yourself, and St. Peter Church Council, and also any outside parties the church would invite to listen to both sides of this issues. They might include but, not limited to, our congregation's circuit pastor, Pastor Glende's circuit pastor, District President Engelbrecht, Pastor Ash, and Pastor Ski.10
 
I would not be allowed to bring anyone to this meeting that the Church Council did not invite.

Meeting with the District Presidium and Other Communications

On March 5, 2010, I and five concerned area WELS pastors11 met with the District Presidium of the Northern Wisconsin District. At this meeting, I pleaded with the Presidium to restore Circuit Pastor Suhr as Circuit Pastor for both Pastor Glende and St. Peter congregation so that someone with theological training could help resolve the doctrinal issues at St. Peter. This was Circuit Pastor Suhr's calling. I informed them that Pastor Glende had chosen District Secretary Szep as his personal Circuit Pastor, that the Church Council was also referring to Secretary Szep as "Pastor Glende's circuit pastor,"12 and that Pastor Glende told Circuit Pastor Suhr that he was no longer his Circuit Pastor. Circuit Pastor Suhr was also at this meeting with the Presidium.

Regarding this issue, as far as I know, the District President did nothing to help Pastor Suhr in fulfilling his calling as St. Peter's and Pastor Glende's Circuit Pastor. Pastor Suhr has also informed me that he believes District President Engelbrecht and the Presidium did nothing.

On April 5, 2010, Church Council president Denny sent me the following e-mail:

Dear Rick,

On March 15th, The Church Council discussed your e-mail and has made their decision regarding your request for the next meeting. As laid out in my e-mail to you dated 12/17/2009, after you met with the council, "A meeting could be held involving Pastor Glende, yourself, and St. Peter Church Council, and also any outside parties the church would invite to listen to both sides of this issues."

Your paper dated November 1st, 2009 and distributed to numerous people and synod officials on November 4th via e-mail has been viewed and discussed at numerous times over the past 4 months. You met with Pastor Glende and Dave Dalke on December 17th at which time the Council response to your concerns was presented to you. This document was also shared with everyone you sent your letter to. Over the last few months, we have had the chance to discuss our response with several of the people on the list and no one, not one, has responded that our answers to your requests were in error. The discussion of your paper and the Council's response on January 31st, centered around the fact that the your request was based on personal preference and opinion, not on scriptural proof of false doctrine. At no time, have we been given scriptural proof that false doctrine is being taught at St. Peter. In light of these facts, we have concluded and unanimously voted that there is not need for any further meeting.

In regards to your question regarding decision theology, Pastor Glende spoke with one of the professors who teaches Dogmatics at the Seminary (Doctrine class) for clarification and insight. He said, "in light of faith, I as a child of God express faith that is God given by choosing to listen and believe." Some of the passages discussed as proof passages of this fact are: Psalm 56:3-4,11; Joshua 24:15; and James 1:22-25 (Note: A member of the council also has followed up with the professor to verify this information.)

The Church Council realizes that you are entitled to your personal opinion and preferences. Rick, we thank you for sharing them with us and for expressing your concerns. Thank you also for listening to us share our response on the matter. But, now that the Church Council has discussed your concerns, addressed them with a response from the leaders of your church, and has reached a final decision in this case and on these points, we ask that you recognize that this is the decision of the church. We prayerfully ask that you consider these matters in an attitude of Christian love and fellowship.

Sincerely, Tom Denney Chairman St. Peter Lutheran Church and School13
end of St. Peter letter

Please note that Mr. Denny says that the leaders of St. Peter have "reached a final decision in this case and on these points."

I then wrote to Mr. Denny requesting the name of the seminary professor of dogmatics so that I too could follow up to discuss this doctrine with the professor. I made this request because if I am wrong about whether Christians can choose to believe God's Word, then I would like to understand why. On April 19, 2010, President Denny responded:

Rick, 

I am only reading your e-mail today, as I was out of town until today. Excuse me, for not responding quicker. 

In the March 15 Council meeting the decision was made by the Council that the member of the Council would also make the contact with the professor at Seminary. That has been done with the same conclusion that was made when Pastor Glende made the initial contact. 

You will not receive the name of the professor out of respect for him.

It was the Council's decision that any further contact with him could very easily put his responses in a negative light. We have seen this done in the past. We will not be a party to that.

I have been very patient regarding this entire matter since its beginning. You have exhausted that. I encouraged our Called Workers and the Church Council to deal with this entire matter in Christian love, with one of our brothers.

You have all the information you need to make the decision to become an involved member of your congregation, and accept the decisions made by the church body, as we have always asked. Or, make a decision to become involved and have your membership at another WELS congregation.

Rick, whatever decision you make, please know that the membership and Called Workers of St. Peter will always support you in that decision.

Tom Denney Chairman St. Peter Lutheran Church and School14
 end of Tom Denney note

Please note, that based on what I believe to be doctrinal disagreement, I am again refused an opportunity to discuss the doctrine, but instead am again told to consider joining another WELS congregation.

Then in May 2010, I received a letter written by District President Engelbrecht in response to my letter and the March 5, 2010 meeting involving the District Presidium, the five concerned area WELS pastors, and me.

District President Engelbrecht's letter excused plagiarism because lots of pastors do it, defended

as orthodox the assertion that in the light of faith Christians can choose to believe God's word, made no mention of my plea to support Pastor Suhr's calling as Circuit Pastor, and concluded by saying that I needed to solve the problems at St. Peter without the Presidium's involvement because they were internal congregational matters.15

2010 Northern Wisconsin District Convention

I received District President Engelbrecht's undated letter in May 2010. The Northern Wisconsin District Convention would convene on June 13, 2010, and would choose a District President and other District Officers.

Therefore, on June 11, 2010, I published an article entitled "WELS Northern WI District Doctrinal Issues." This article identified four doctrinal issues in the Northern Wisconsin District:

1. Exceptionalism

2. Lack of trust in the means of grace

3. Post conversion decision theology, and

4. Unionism16

For example in this article, I stated that the false doctrine that Christians (after conversion) can choose to believe God's Wordcauses at least four problems: First, sermons to Christians become motivational speeches instead of proclamations of the life-giving Word of God. Second, it creates two "gospels," one for believers and one for unbelievers. Third, it causes us to view God's Word as a tool we use to improve ourselves, instead of as a life-line that we cling to in desperation and faith. And fourth, it causes people to base their faith and salvation on their daily choices instead of on the firm promise of God.17

This article was also published in full on other popular blogs, including the Intrepid Lutherans. Unfortunately, District President Engelbrecht and the entire Presidium were reelected without any discussion on the floor of the June 2010 convention. [GJ Note - Not a single WELS pastor or layman said anything at the convention to suggest anything was rotten in the state of Dennmark. The Intrepids must have had trepidations.]

After the district elections, the June 2010 Convention also redistricted the local congregational circuits. Even though St. John (Circuit Pastor Suhr's congregation) and St. Peter (Pastor Glende's congregation) are only a few miles apart, they are no longer in the same circuit. Instead, St. Peter (Freedom) is now in a circuit with Mt. Olive (Appleton) and Immanuel (Greenville). Also included in this circuit is Fox Valley Lutheran High School (Appleton).18
 
Since the average WELS circuit is currently nine congregations, three congregations in one circuit seems unusually small.19

Also, the geography of some Fox River Valley circuits does seem a bit jumbled.
20 21

Therefore, I think, this was a gerrymander. As a result of this redistricting, Pastor Suhr is no longer St. Peter Congregation's Circuit Pastor.

Two Last Attempts to Meet

In July of 2010, the five concerned area WELS pastors scheduled a meeting for August 2, 2010, and invited my pastors, the District Presidium, and me. However, the meeting was cancelled (sic) because District President Engelbrecht refused to attend for the following reasons:
1 Some members of the Presidium could not be present on August 2.
2 Pastors must receive permission from the District President before inviting the District President to a meeting.
3 The issues raised were previously raised, and further discussion would lead to mere frustration.
4 The Presidium was concerned about the format and choosing of participants.22

Instead, a meeting among the five concerned area pastors and only the District Presidium was then scheduled for September 23, 2010. The five concerned area pastors invited me to attend. However, District President Engelbrecht strongly requested that I not attend because he did not want to give me the impression that I would be allowed to raise issues with the Presidium.

According to the District President, it would be "disorderly" for me to raise the plagiarism issue with the Presidium.23

Therefore, I did not attend that meeting.

Stuck

Thus, at the local level there is no one left who is willing and able to help. My pastor will not talk. My Church Council will not talk. If the congregation's circuit pastor tries to intervene, then Pastor Glende gets his own circuit pastor. And the District President will not do anything about that, and further says if I try to raise certain issues with him or the Presidium, then I am being disorderly.

Furthermore, there is very little chance that I am going to convince my congregation of the correct doctrine without some authoritative theological assistance.24 Why should the congregation believe me instead of its called Pastor, its elected Church Council, its District President, and an anonymous seminary professor? Further, if I am wrong about the doctrine, then how am I supposed to be corrected if I cannot attend any meetings where these issues are being discussed?

I do disagree with my pastors and Church Council over doctrine. Because of this disagreement, they have said that I should consider transferring to another WELS congregation, and they have refused to further discuss these issues.25 However, former Circuit Pastor Suhr (the senior pastor at the next closest WELS congregation) has informed me that it is improper to transfer between WELS congregations because of doctrinal disagreement: All WELS congregations are supposed to agree 100% on doctrine.

Thus, I have found myself in a position where I cannot go, I cannot stay, and no matter what I do, I am said to be disorderly and a sinner.

Part II: The Doctrinal Issues

This section explains why I have taken these doctrinal stands. It is not meant to be a comprehensive doctrinal treatise, but rather a clear description of the issues.

I believe that false doctrine is being persistently adhered to and publically taught by WELS pastors, and privately defended by Synod officials. Therefore, my conscience requires me to speak out. False doctrine leads souls to eternal death. It would be better if a pastor physically murdered his parishioners, than if he spiritually murdered them eternally with false doctrine.

Public versus Private Reproof of False Doctrine

In May 2010, District President Engelbrecht sent out an undated letter responding to my November 1, 2009 letter and the March 5, 2010 meeting with me and the five concerned area pastors. On every page of his letter, District President Engelbrecht stamped in large red letters: "CONFIDENTIAL." I will let most of this letter remain confidential, but not the aspects that touch doctrine. This is because the doctrine of a district president is not confidential. A district president's doctrine is not confidential when he communicates it to others. A district president's doctrine is not confidential when he doctrinally instructs laymen and other pastors. A district president's doctrine is especially not confidential when his defense of false doctrine is used as justification for other pastors to continue shaping a public ministry around that false doctrine.


If someone wants to keep their doctrine confidential, then they should keep it to themselves, and they should not teach. But when a pastor teaches others, then his doctrine must be tested. James says: "Not many of you should presume to be teachers . . . because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." (James 3:1). Likewise, Luke commended the Bereans because they "examined the Scriptures every day to see if what [the Apostle] Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11). And when Paul instructed the Colossians, he did not say, "keep this letter confidential because my doctrine is a secret," but rather he said, "After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea." (Colossians 4:16). Paul proclaimed the mystery of Christ because no doctrine given to the Church is a secret. (John 18:20).

Further, the doctrines of St. Peter congregation are not private. They are not confidential. There can be no false judging as to what these doctrines are because they have been sung in songs, reflected in the sermons, communicated in verbal meetings, typed up in e-mails, and defended in written letters on paper.26
Where there are many witnesses and records of false doctrine because it is being taught publically, God says that it should also "be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning." (1 Timothy 5:19-20. See also Galatians 2:14). Luther also taught in the Large Catechism that where the false doctrine "is public, the reproof must also be public, that everyone may learn to guard against it."27 He does not say that the reproof may be public, but rather he says that the reproof must be public. This is because eternal souls are at stake.

"But if they say that one should beware of rebelling against spiritual authority, I answer: Should God's word be dispensed with and the whole world perish?"28
 
Nonetheless, so far, all reproofs have been private. This may have been a mistake. If a spiritual murderer refuses to repent, refuses to stop teaching others false doctrine, refuses to publically admit error so that all the people "may take warning" and also repent; then someone else must step forward to warn the people. Spiritual murder must be exposed and stopped.

Moreover, because all the avenues of communication have been slowly choked, private reproof is no longer allowed.

False Doctrine: Can Christians choose to believe God's Word?

With regard to the position that Christians can choose to believe God's Word, District President Engelbrecht wrote:

I talked at length with Pastor Glende about the quote that Mr. Techlin has on page 24 of his document and is repeated in the document presented to the District Praesidium, viz "In the light of faith we can choose to believe God's Word." I wanted to determine whether or not by making that statement, Pastor Glende accepted/promoted "decision theology."

Pastor Glende stated that he firmly believes what Luther says in the catechism, that we cannot by our own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ our Lord, nor come to Him. He stated that he believes, as we believe and as Scripture teaches, that no one can, on his/her own, come to faith in Christ or choose to believe God's Word. The unregenerate man is dead in trespasses and sins. He does, however believe, and as Scripture also teaches, that in the light of faith, in other words, in the context of the Holy Spirit already dwelling in a person's heart and having produced faith in that heart, an individual can choose to believe the Word of God. It is a decision that is enabled only by the power of the Holy Spirit in a person's heart.

In that connection we discussed Joshua 24:15 where Joshua, a believer in God by the power of the Holy Spirit dwelling in him, said "But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord." The option to serve (and therefore believe or accept the Word and promise of God, for what else would that decision be based on) the Lord, as opposed to rejecting God and His promises, was made as a result of the Holy Spirit giving Joshua the power to understand and accept the words and promises of God. One might also consider Deuteronomy 30:19 where God says to the children of Israel "This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice..." God places before the children of Israel two options. They can either accept His word and promise, i.e. life and all the blessings that God had told them about, or they could choose death and the curses that go with it. God then tells them to choose life, i.e. to accept His Word and His way as opposed to the way of death through unbelief. We know from the rest of Holy Scripture and from the Lutheran Confessions, which accurately present the truth of Scripture, that the Israelites could only make that decision through the power of the Holy Spirit dwelling in their hearts. In both of the passages cited above the "choosing" is made in the context of faith, not conversion.

That is also the context in which the song "The Voice Of Truth" makes the statement: "I will choose to listen and believe the Word of truth." i.e. the context of a Christian in whose heart the Holy Spirit has already done His work of conversion.29 Pastor Glende and Skorzewski said that they ran those lyrics past professors at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary to make sure that the words could be understood in the proper context and would be in harmony with the Lutheran Confessions, and they were told that the lyrics of the song were acceptable the way it was being used and understood.30
 
District President Engelbrecht then concluded by further emphasizing that pastors who teach that Christians can choose to believe God's Word "do not accept or teach a 'decision theology' or a form of synergism . . ."31

Pastor Glende, my entire Church Council, an anonymous seminary professor, and District President Engelbrecht all agree that in the light of faith, Christians can choose to believe God's Word. However, their interpretation of Scripture is flawed. For example, they all cited Joshua 24:15 as proof. However, Joshua said to the people: if you think serving the Lord is undesirable (in other words, if you do not believe), then your choice is between worthless idols. The choice he offered was not between God's Word and false gods, but rather between "the gods . . . beyond


In context, Joshua also says to the Israelites, "You are not able to serve the Lord," and "You are witnesses against yourselves that you have chosen to serve the Lord." (Joshua 24:19, 22). When Joshua says that the people "are not able," and that they "are witnesses against" themselves, he is not expressing confidence in their ability to choose to believe.

In contradistinction to the false doctrine that Christians can choose to believe God's Word, Paul told the early believers:

I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is like the working of his mighty strength, which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead . . . For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this [faith & grace is] not from yourselves, it is the gift of God [Ephesians 1:17-20, 2:8].

There is not a more beautiful and clear passage of Scripture. Jesus is the author and perfecter of our faith. (Hebrews 12:2). The work of God is to believe in the one he has sent. (John 6:29). "The apostles said to the Lord, 'Increase our faith!'" (Luke 17:5). From beginning to end, life and faith are not of our choosing, but rather they are the pure gift of God.

The Small Catechism says:
I believe that I cannot by my own thinking or choosing believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to him. But the Holy Spirit has called me by the gospel, enlightened me with his gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith. In the same way he calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith.32

Where does that say anything about our cooperation or choosing?33 It is the Holy Spirit who gives faith and keeps us in the one true faith. At Augsburg, the Reformers Confessed:

So that we may obtain this faith, the ministry of teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted. Through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, the Holy Spirit is given. [John 20:22]. He works faith, when and where it pleases God [John 3:8], in those who hear the good news that God justifies those who believe that they are received into grace for Christ’s sake. This happens not through our own merits, but for Christ’s sake.34

The Augsburg Confession is clear that the Holy Ghost "works faith, where and when it pleases" Him. The Apology of the Augsburg Confession declares that faith "is a divine power" and "a new life."35
District President Engelbrecht emphasized that pastors who teach Christians they can choose to believe God's Word "do not accept or teach a 'decision theology' or a form of synergism . . ."36

However, the Formula of Concord censures and rejects the teaching of the Synergists, who pretend that . . . The will can apply itself to grace, can grasp and accept it, and can believe the Gospel. It can also cooperate, by its own powers, with the Holy Spirit, in the continuation of this work.

Against this teaching, it has been shown at length above that the power known to qualify one's self for grace naturally does not come from our own natural powers, but only from the Holy Spirit's work.37
The Formula of Concord says that our wills cannot apply themselves to grace, cannot grasp or accept it, cannot believe the Gospel, and cannot cooperate with the Holy Spirit in the continuation of this work.38 It condemns this teaching.

True belief in Christ is life itself. No one who is alive chooses to be alive. Just as we do not choose to be born, so also we do not choose to live. Life is a condition, not a choice. (John 1:13 & John 3:6). When God tells a dead man like Lazarus to rise or a paralytic to get up and walk, that is the same as telling someone to believe. Yes, it is a call to action, but the calling word of God is the power of the action both for believer and unbeliever. Lazarus came out of the tomb, not because he chose to be alive or stay alive, but rather because he heard Christ's call to come out.

In the light of faith do we choose to believe God's word? No. The truth is that in the light of God's word we see and believe. Faith and the fruit of faith (good choices are the fruit of faith) should not be confused. The fruit does not bring forth the tree, but rather the tree brings forth the fruit. Faith produces works and choices, not the other way around. Those who teach that Christian choices produce faith confound the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone. They confound the central teaching of Christianity by basing faith partly on works instead of on Christ alone. All belief in God's Word is the gift of God, and is not by our reason or strength, or thinking or choosing, or any other work. (Ephesians 2:9).39

The effects of this horrible false doctrine (of post conversion decision theology) are not just theoretical. They are very real, very serious, and very dangerous. They change the entire focus of a ministry. "If coming to faith is a work of the Spirit, but continuing to believe is a work of our thinking and choosing, then Christians do not need the Gospel. What Christians then need are moral encouragements to make the right choices, and that is what we get."40

Therefore, as stated before:
This theology causes at least four problems: First, sermons to Christians become motivational speeches instead of proclamations of the life-giving Word of God.Second, it creates two "gospels," one for believers and one for unbelievers. Third,it causes us to view God's Word as a tool we use to improve ourselves, instead of as a life-line that we cling to in desperation and faith. And fourth, it causes people to base their faith and salvation on their daily choices instead of on the firm promise of God.

Consider the case of the Christian who has allowed sin to rule in their lives, who has grieved the Holy Spirit, and therefore must be converted again.41 Now also consider the fact that all Christians still struggle with sin. (Romans 7). Thus, how could a sinner know for sure whether they must be converted again, or whether they can still choose to believe?

Do they choose to believe God's Word, or do they trust God's Word? Which "gospel" is for them? The one true gospel preaches faith as a pure gift of grace. "And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace." (Romans 11:6). This other "gospel" preaches faith as the result of grace and works because choosing to believe is a work.

There is one true gospel for all men for all time, and that is the gospel message of faith apart from works. (Romans 4:5-6). The gospel message of faith does not change after conversion from trust into choice. Emphasizing that the gospel message does not change, Paul said, "if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" (Galatians 1:7).

This error turns Christians completely inward, and causes us to focus on our own choices instead of on God's objective promises in word and sacrament. It is the Pietistic error, and it is diametrically opposed to true Lutheranism, the true Word of God: the one true Christian faith. Unfortunately, the entire ministry of St. Peter, Appleton/Freedom, WI is built on this false doctrine because the entire leadership of St. Peter actually believes this false doctrine.

The question of whether Christians can choose to believe God's Word also touches upon the effectiveness of God's Word. Is God's Word the very power of life and salvation both for the believer and unbeliever? (Romans 1:16). Or does a Christian need to add something to God's Word to make it effective? Is the effective Word of God our very life? Or is the Bible our tool, and the Word of God just information?

False Doctrine: Does God need our service?

This long running doctrinal dispute has revolved around a song entitled "Ready Lord" that appears in the Northwestern Publishing House book Let All the People Praise You, and has continued to be heavily utilized at St. Peter Congregation over the last few years. The November 2009 letter did not deal extensively with this doctrinal issue because I (mistakenly) believed that the Church Council and Synod officials would agree that God does not need our service, and force Pastor Glende to recant.

The problem here is not that a congregation would constantly sing a song containing false doctrine. That happens. Words are overlooked because we do not pay careful attention. We are men, and we make mistakes. Only the Scriptures are infallible.

The problem is when a pastor persistently adheres to false doctrine by privately defending error, and publically teaching that same error even after correction. If at any point over the last two years, Pastor Glende had said, "I was wrong. God does not need our service," and changed those false lyrics, this issue would be moot. But Pastor Glende has not done that. Instead, he had our congregation sing "show me Lord, the service you will need" an average of once per month forthe next two years. At one point, those lyrics were even added to our liturgy. Those are not the actions of a pastor who believes that God does not need our service.

Pastor Glende's position is that from our perspective God does need our service. During this dispute, Pastor Glende did concede that, "From God's perspective he needs nothing from us," but then he negated that by saying that from our perspective God does need our service, and "I can sing Lord show me the service I need to do that you need from me to serve you in my life and share you with the world."42
 
Further, the ministry of St. Peter and The CORE is built around this belief that God needs us to "be all things to all people," and that God needs us to find culturally relevant ways to reach out to the world. (1 Corinthians 9:22). If we do not become "relevant," the church will die. It is yet another doctrinal denial of the efficacy of the means of grace.43

Whether God needs our service strikes at the very heart of the doctrine that God's word alone is effective. (Genesis 1:3). This false doctrine says that God's word and sacraments are not enough to grow the Church.

However, John the Baptist said, God can make Christians out of the stones. It is God who builds his Church. (Matthew 3:9 and 16:18). The Evangelist also wrote that theGod who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. . . In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. [Acts 17:24-25, 30].

The Scriptures are clear: God is almighty and does not have needs.44 Also, Luther wrote in his Church Postil about the Lord Jesus:

For this reason he said while eating the evening meal: "This is my commandment that you love each other as I have loved you" [John 13:34]. You see here that he has loved us and that he has done all his works for us. The purpose is that we, in turn, do likewise, not to him—he is not in need of it—but to our neighbor.45
It is not the Lord who needs our service, but only our neighbor.

How easy it would have been to change the words:
"Lord, show us the service you will need" to
"Lord, show us the service we will need."
This suggested change would have not only removed the blasphemy, it would have still rhymed! Yet, this solution is rejected.46 One would expect such brassy blasphemy from only the apostate church. (Revelation 17:6).

"We should not consider the slightest error against the Word of God unimportant."47 If even a slight error against the Word of God is important, then how should we consider an error so grave so large and so obvious that against which even the enemies of Christ (Muslims and Jews) would recoil in horror? Not even the Muslims say that God needs our service. Nonetheless, we have the unmitigated gall to sing to God's face about his need for our service every month. It is blasphemy. Anyone with even a smidgen of zeal for the Lord would condemn this blasphemy. Even worse that a Lutheran pastor would defend, perpetuate, and base a ministry around this false teaching.

Back in 2008, after our first disagreement over whether from our perspective God needs our service, Pastor Glende told me that I was no longer allowed to question him on this issue, and he was not going to discuss it any further. Continued use of false lyrics along with the steadfast refusal to even discuss the doctrinal issue is the very definition of persistent error.

False Doctrine, Practice: Pietistic Plagiarism

Plagiarizing the sermons of our theological enemies is a doctrinal issue for three reasons: First, the sermons of our theological enemies do not have the true doctrine. Second, failure to struggle with the Word by doing one's own work shows a lack of understanding of the gospel, "at the center of which is a cross."48 (Genesis 32:24-30). Third, plagiarism is deceit and a sin. Those who defend sin and call wrong right, also commit doctrinal error. "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter." (Isaiah 5:20).

In 2008 I started to suspect sermon plagiarism. The sermons did not seem Lutheran, so occasionally I would Google a sermon title to see if anything turned up. I could not find anything.

When St. Peter began the "Fearless" sermon series, other sermons began turning up. Almost every nondenominational, Baptist, and Methodist congregation in the country seemed to have a "Fearless" sermon series. I found some by a Baptist preacher in Florida that were close to Pastor Glende's sermons, and wrote to that preacher asking if he was the author of those sermons. He claimed that he was, and he sent me some of his "Fearless" sermon outlines. His outlines were similar to Pastor Glende's. The sermons of that Baptist worked toward the conclusion that his listeners needed to do something for God, and that was to respond to an altar call.49

I was concerned that the same basic sermon outlines that were being used to motivate altar calls, were also being used in a Lutheran congregation. However, I did not trust this Baptist preacher, and considered the possibility that he had copied from Pastor Glende.

In 2009, I finally discovered at least one source of Pastor Glende's sermons: Craig Groeschel at LifeChurch.tv. My parents also attend St. Peter, so sometimes I would invite them to listen to Craig Groeschel's internet sermons after church. Sometimes, Pastor Glende would change the order of Groeschel's outline. Sometimes, he would paraphrase an outline, and sometimes he would use the same words as Groeschel. These are all forms of plagiarism.

I mention these facts because Pietistic plagiarism is not just about the sins of fraud and deception, it is also about false doctrine. It would still be a sin for a pastor to pass off Martin Luther's sermons as his own, but there would not be the same concern for doctrine. deception, it is also about false doctrine. 50 A pastor could deceive and sin against his congregation in many ways, but if he still preached the pure word of God, the Word would still save spiritual lives.


But when a pastor deceives his congregation about the source of heterodox sermons, then the sin of deceit and the sin of false doctrine magnify each other. All false teachers in the visible Christian Church are wolves in sheep's clothing, but some are more effective at hiding their fangs than others. Being up front and honest about the fact that a sermon outline was written by our theological enemies would not effectively hide that sermon's fangs. On the other hand, plagiarism keeps the sermon source a secret, and is less likely to raise alarm.

I contacted Circuit Pastor Suhr with my concerns.51 According to Circuit Pastor Suhr, he contacted Pastor Glende who denied any plagiarism. It was very soon after this that Pastor Glende told Circuit Pastor Suhr that he could no longer be his circuit pastor.

Because Pastor Glende had denied plagiarism to the Circuit Pastor, I picked out a sermon to transcribe concrete examples of plagiarism that could not be denied. Specifically, I picked out a sermon to transcribe concrete examples of plagiarism that could not be denied.  Specifically, I chose the "You Don't Have What It Takes: You Can't Handle It All" sermon because in this sermon Pastor Glende did not even change the order of Groeschel's outline, and I could just follow along without having to jump back and forth in the recordings.

I (mistakenly) believed that if Pastor Glende, the Church Council, and the Synod officials were presented with undeniable evidence of plagiarism, then Pastor Glende would repent, and there would be forgiveness in Christ.  The problem would be solved.  Unfortunately, obfuscation and denials of plagiarism turned into defenses of plagiarism. 


"You Don't Have What It Takes: You Can't Handle It All" sermon because in this sermon Pastor Glende did not even change the order of Groeschel's outline, and I could just follow along without having to jump back and forth in the recordings.

I (mistakenly) believed that if Pastor Glende, the Church Council, and the Synod officials were presented with undeniable evidence of plagiarism, then Pastor Glende would repent, and there would be forgiveness in Christ. The problem would be solved. Unfortunately, obfuscation and denials of plagiarism turned into defenses of plagiarism.

In his May 2009 letter District President Engelbrecht made false excuses for and defended the sin of plagiarism by saying:

I also spoke with Pastor Glende about using outlines and even "word for word" quotes from sources such as Lifechurch.tv as Mr. Techlin seems to clearly indicate happened at least on one occasion (the sermon dated 01/25/09 cited in Mr. Techlin's document).52 While we agreed there they may be nothing wrong with adapting an outline or even the framework of a series that someone else has originated, even if they are not of our fellowship is not sinful, we did agree that using someone else's material is generally no substitute for doing your own work and should not be standard procedure. We have been trained to do our own text study, outlining, and sermon writing at the seminary. Pastor Glende assured me that he faithfully does his study as we were taught in preparation for his sermons.

I am not enough of a lawyer to determine whether or not quoting from someone else’s sermon can be considered plagiarism in the strictest or legal sense of the word and prosecutable, but if so we probably have quite a few men down through the decades who would be considered guilty of plagiarism by preaching word for word (or nearly so) sermons out of the old Concordia Pulpit, a Missouri Synod volume. Many WELS pastors, of course, use someone else’s series, outlines, and even entire sermons during Lent or as part of special programs developed and promoted by the synod (such as stewardship sermons, Walking Together, Year of Jubilee, etc.). I don’t think any of them (self included) believes that they are guilty of plagiarism in doing so.

Of greater concern than whether or not quoting from someone else’s work or outline without giving proper credit to the author is plagiarism as defined by law, is whether or not the actual material used is Scriptural and theologically sound. When our men are using outlines, sermon series, or sermons that have been produced by our synod, we can be fairly confident that anything we quote or use is Scripturally sound and accurate. That, of course, cannot always be said of material that may be used from an author that does not share our confession or theology. Though Mr. Techlin showed in his document that at least one sermon that Pastor Glende preached was extremely close in phraseology to one preached by Craig Groeschel, few, if any, of the phrases and thoughts appear to have any theological content. Those that do (e.g. "my soul finds rest in God alone") do not appear to contain false teaching.53

Of equal concern is that is by listening to sermons and theological material from sources outside our fellowship on a regular basis, one may gradually find himself taking on the theology of the author, even though we are trained to filter out the heterodox theology in anything we read or hear. There is also the danger in using the material of heterodox authors so completely and so often, even if adapted and filtered through our WELS theology, that people identify us with the heterodox, whether we like it or not.

All of these cautions were discussed fully with Pastors Glende and Skorzewski to make sure that they understand the dangers involved. They were in agreement with the cautions that were stressed and expressed a desire and a willingness to heed those cautions.54



If the District President really did not know what the legal definition of plagiarism was, and he did not trust the definitions I included in the November 2009 letter, then he should have asked someone or looked it up himself. This is because before someone judges a case, he should know both the rules and the facts. Then he will be properly prepared to judge whether the facts are a violation of the rules. 


District President Engelbrecht also wrote to the five concerned area pastors saying:

Of some interest is the question that I posed to Mr. Techlin at the end of our discussions on March 5th and after some personal discussion with him. The question I posed was: since he brought forth the concerns about the lack of emphasis on the cross and justification by faith in the sermons at St. Peter, has there been any change. He stated that he had noticed that in the past few months a greater emphasis on the cross and the doctrine of justification in the sermons, which we can assume was the purpose in bringing the concerns to Pastor Glende's attention. Based on the response of the Church Council to Mr. Techlin's concerns, it likely that for some reason or other Mr. Techlin simply failed to see the emphasis on the cross and the doctrine of justification previously, because he may have been looking for something else in Pastor Glende's sermons. The leadership of St. Peter, in their letter of response to Mr. Techlin, indicate that Pastor Glende has been preaching both sound Lutheran doctrine and a proper mix of both Law and Gospel, which would include a proper emphasis on justification by faith and Christ crucified for sinners.55

No. It is not likely that I "failed to see the emphasis on the cross and the doctrine of justification" because I was "looking for something else." Here is the truth: I began to really listen to sermons in 2006. In 2007, I started to listen with more discernment, and began to ask questions such as: "What is the problem identified by this sermon?" Is the problem sin? Or, for example, is the problem a lack of good time management? Also, what is the sermon's solution to the problem? Is the solution Christ crucified? Or is the solution for us to make a "to-don't list" or to be "loud" and have the "right attitude"? I also began to consider the number of times Christ and his cross were mentioned, and to ask, "What is Christ doing in this sermon?" For example, "In this sermon, does Christ raise us from the dead and save us from eternal death? Or is Christ cited as mere example and motivation for us to emulate?" In other words, is Christ the main subject in the sermon, or are we?

It was not that I failed to see Christ crucified because I was looking for something else; but rather, I failed to see Christ crucified at the very point I started to look for him.

I have been observing the doctrine and practices at St. Peter for years, and yes, I did notice improvement in the one month of February 2010. However, at the end of the March 5, 2010 meeting, District President Engelbrecht did not tell me that he was going to assume my listening skills were deficient, but rather he told me that he was going to listen to the sermons for himself.

Repentance is Required

The issue has become larger than just plagiarism and false doctrine. The larger issue has been the ongoing defense and protection of false doctrine and sin.


How many years should we wait for repentance? After all this time, what would genuine repentance look like? First, there would need to be an admission of wrongdoing and wrong doctrine.

Second, there needs to be a turning away from sin, and a setting right. (Acts 26:20). (In the case of taught false doctrine, a "setting right" would be a very loud admission of previous error and proclamation of the truth so that all the people can learn and take warning). There must be a setting right. For example, when Zacchaeus repented, he gave half his possessions to the poor, and said, "if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount." Jesus said, "Today salvation has come to this house . . . For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost." (Luke 19:8-10). John the Baptist also preached that we should produce "fruit in keeping with repentance." (Luke 3:8). But it is not a choice to pay back four times that produces repentance or saves, rather it is Christ who seeks and saves. Zacchaeus' choice was a fruit of repentance, not the cause of repentance. Like faith, genuine repentance is the pure gift of God. (Acts 11:18).

No one had to badger Zacchaeus into openly confessing and repaying. What he did he did out of joy at the newfound gift of faith & repentance given him by Christ.

After much of this letter was written, the five concerned area pastors shared the results of their last meeting with the Presidium. In an undated letter received near the end of December 2010, District President Engelbrecht reiterated the Presidium's position that Christians can choose to believe, but did finally concede that plagiarism is unethical, and that plagiarism of the materials of our theological enemies is not only unethical but also dangerous. However, his letter contained no word on whether the District President also agrees that his year-long defense of the sin of plagiarism was itself a sin or just gross incompetence. The District President then hinted that his newfound discovery that plagiarism is a sin might result in private reproof.

Genuine repentance is not merely a confession of wrongdoing or wrong doctrine. Just as true faith always produces works, so also genuine repentance always produces fruit. King Saul confessed his sin to Samuel, but he showed that his repentance was not genuine because he still wanted to be honored before Israel. (1 Samuel 15. At least Saul acknowledged that he had sinned).

Will there ever be an acknowledgment of sin and genuine repentance? Only God knows the answer. But when a ministry is based in part on the abilities and personality of the pastor, and the pastor believes that one of his primary duties is maintaining a good public relations image of that ministry, then it can be very difficult to face up to real problems in that ministry. Nonetheless, God's standards are not our standards: he does not judge the numbers, or the money, or the outward image; he judges hearts. In the short term, it may seem easier to defend sin, but defending sin is another sin, and God is not absent. This is a serious warning that should be taken to heart.

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. [Hebrews 10:26-31].

As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?' [Ezekiel 33:11].

Part III: Fellowship Doctrine and Practice

Even though it is my opinion that some WELS officials are more concerned with procedure than doctrine, and that certain WELS leaders have a bad habit of making up procedure as they go along to suit themselves; nonetheless, I have put up with it. This is because the people of God should willingly suffer all manner of abuse from their religious leaders.56 Jesus said, "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you." (Matthew 23:2-3). But when those religious leaders attack the true doctrine, then they are attacking the Word of God who is Jesus, and the laymen need to draw a line. The religious leaders can attack me all they want, but they must not be allowed to again smite or crucify the Word of God. (Exodus 17:5-7 & Numbers 20:1-13, 20:22-29, 27:12-14 and Hebrews 10:11-14).

Never again should a religious leader lay a harsh hand on the Word of God. (John 18:22-23). When the religious leaders attack the doctrine, which is the word, they are again attacking Jesus who is the Word of God. When they attack the Word of God, they attack the gospel message that it is finished. (John 19:30). When the religious leaders continue to smite the Word with false doctrine, they say it is not finished. And when they attack the gospel message that it is finished, they set up additional sacrifices to take the place of Christ's one effective sacrifice.

Christ said, "I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." (John 12:32). What Christ said is true. But today's religious leaders have better ways to draw all men. They have a decision theology, marketing, entertainments, and other earthly wisdom. Because they practice these false doctrines in the name of Christ, they call Christ a liar, and smite the Word all over again. The religious leaders do not believe Christ crucified alone will draw or keep anyone: according to them additional sacrifices are needed: sacrifices of entertainments and methods and works and choices.

Nonetheless, their efforts are futile because they build on a foundation of spiritual sand. (Matthew 7:26-27). When Christ returns, he will destroy their earthly kingdoms, and establish, on his Word alone, his own eternal kingdom. (Daniel 2:44-45).

Doctrine and practice are intimately related. They are not the same, but if faith is doctrine, then works are practice. James says: "Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do." (James 2:18).

My doctrinal differences with my congregation have been known by me for well over two years. These doctrinal positions are buttressed by the unanimous opinions of Pastor Glende, our Church Council, an anonymous seminary professor, and the District President. And I believe these false doctrines strike at the very heart of the Gospel.57
 
When the Synodical Conference broke up over fellowship issues, the break took a long time.58 However, errors in the doctrine of fellowship do not strike immediately at the core doctrine of justification. Breaking fellowship with others over fellowship issues could take time, however, breaking fellowship with false teachers over the core doctrines of faith should not take so long. These false doctrines put souls in immediate danger, so the alarm must be raised as soon as possible.

Therefore, as of November 2010 (one year after my twenty-nine page letter), I have ceased attending St. Peter congregation as a public testimony against the false doctrine of Pastor Glende, its Church Council, and District President Engelbrecht. This is in accord with the Apostle Paul who wrote:

Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple.59  [Romans 16:17-18 NKJV.
Emphasis added].

Because this error is persistent, the watchmen60 must blow the trumpet to warn the people. I have not been chosen to be a watchman, but I am saying to the watchmen: "Look. I think you need to sound the warning trumpet." (Ezekiel 33:1-9 and Matthew 18:17). The danger is too great for the warning horn to get bogged down in procedure for years.

Too many assume that WELS pastors will never teach false doctrine. We often assume that God's warnings to the Church in the New Testament do not apply to the WELS, and so we fall asleep, we do not watch, we are not on guard. (Acts 20:28-31). Instead of assuming everything is ok, we need to watch and pray. (Luke 21:36).61

I believe these false doctrines are spreading through the WELS like a cancer. Pastor Glende has repeatedly suggested that I should consider transferring to another WELS congregation.62 However, it is improper to transfer between WELS congregations, if the only reason to transfer is because of doctrinal disagreement. Furthermore, it is not my intention to just leave the WELS because of the false teaching of some of its pastors. Therefore, since God baptized me as an infant in St. Peter congregation, this congregation is as good as any for me to make either a last stop or a last stand. I would rather make a last stand, and be excommunicated from the WELS on doctrinal issues; than stand and retreat, and stand and retreat, from congregation to congregation for the rest of my life.

For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline. So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of mehis prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God,who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we havedone but because of his own purpose and grace. [2 Timothy 1:7-9].

Should I be a member of the WELS?

Should I be in fellowship with church leaders whose doctrine of salvation is by grace alone through faith and works (human choices)? Should I continue in fellowship with those whose very ministry is based around a lack of faith in the means of grace, and who are so bold in this lack of faith as to regularly teach that God needs our service?63 Should I continue in fellowship with synod officials who not only protect and defend false teachers and plagiarists, but also promote them as examples to follow? Pastor Skorzewski is not only a leader at St. Peter, he is also regularly called upon to teach other leaders in the WELS. And he is popular.64

District President Engelbrecht says that many WELS pastors use other people's work without giving proper credit. If so, then should I continue in fellowship with many religious leaders who deceive? If this is not true, then should I continue in fellowship with a District President who says such things about a whole category of pastors?


Should I continue in fellowship with synod leaders who counsel laymen not to pray with other non-WELS Christians, but then defend WELS pastors who plagiarize the sermons of our theological enemies?

The answer is no. I should not continue in fellowship with the theological blackguards of the WELS, and I am ready to be excommunicated from the WELS over doctrine. However, I am not willing to depart on the terms as set by the St. Peter Church Council: that I have just a different perspective or opinion.

Disregard of important doctrinal issues is another one of the hallmark errors of Pietism. Therefore, I am sending this letter to the WELS Conference of Presidents (COP) in the hope that maybe I do not have to leave the WELS over doctrine. These are important issues, and if I am wrong, then I should be properly instructed so that I can be convinced by God's Word. I cannot continue on year after year believing that my pastors are false teachers.

My strongest desire is not to leave the WELS, rather I more strongly desire that these doctrinal conflicts would be resolved with unanimous agreement. To that end, there needs to be discussion, and that is one of the primary purposes of these letters. (Papering over important doctrinal disagreements is unionism, another false doctrine).

1. Is it the WELS doctrine that Christians can choose to believe God's Word?


2. Is it the WELS doctrine that from our perspective God needs our service?

3. Is it the WELS doctrine that the sin of plagiarism is not a sin?

If the answer to any of the above questions is "no," then would the Conference of Presidents be able to offer any guidance to the people involved? If I am not wrong, then my pastors need someone who can show them the light, and help them to avoid the stricter judgment reserved for false teachers. (James 3:1, Luke 17:1-5, and 1 Corinthians 3:10-21).

If the WELS Conference of Presidents answers "yes" to any of these questions, please have some kind person explain the doctrine to me in a way that I can understand. If I am wrong, then I will be wrong. I have no personal stake in being infallible, and neither should any other Christian.65 Further, it is not my desire to leave the WELS without serious effort to at least understand these positions, even if I am unable to agree.

I cannot simply choose to believe that which I actually believe is false. I must be shown the truth in the light of plain reason or the Scriptures. This points to the fifth consequence of post conversion Decision Theology: There has been very little (virtually no) effort put into showing me the "light." I have been simply expected to choose to believe the St. Peter & The CORE doctrine. And if praise songs, popcorn, and big screen TVs are not enough positive motivation, then other negative motivators are applied. The goal is not to reveal the light of truth, but to motivate a choice.

As I told the Church Council, we can choose our opinions, but we cannot choose our facts. Therefore, we cannot choose our beliefs about facts, and Christianity is a fact-based religion. Whether Jesus rose from the dead, is a factual question. Whether faith is 100% the gift of God, is a factual question. What God's Word says, is a factual question.66

Nonetheless, the Church Council continued to maintain that it was all a matter of opinion. However, I do not care what anyone thinks the truth should be, but rather I care what the truth is.

Finally, this pretense within the WELS that we all agree on doctrine must end. It is a lie. It is the worst sort of lie because it is a betrayal of the Word of God. When Judas opposed the Word of God, he pretended that all was well with a kiss. This lie that we all agree on doctrine is a "Judas kiss" because it simultaneously betrays the clear Word of God and pretends that all is well. (Luke 22:48).
65 God expects us to struggle with his Word. (See Genesis 32:24-30).
66 Reality is not subject to choice, therefore, belief in facts is also not subject to choice. Since we don't choose reality, we also don't choose our beliefs about reality (unless we are self-deceivers and delusional). If we are self-deceivers, then we can choose a factual belief because lies can be manufactured, however, the truth is outside ourselves and is not subject to any choice. Therefore, belief in the truth must come from only outside ourselves.

Should we forget our doctrinal differences, and pretend that it is just a matter of opinion? No. Jesus Christ is the Word of God factually incarnate: He is the true doctrine, and we must be faithful to him. (John 1:1). At the end of the November 2009 letter, I asked Circuit Pastor Suhr, District President Engelbrecht, and Synod President Schroeder for help and protection. That was not the best request because what happens to me is unimportant. What really matters is the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thank you.
Sincerely, Frederick 'Rick' Techlin Jr. x22sun-church@yahoo.com
"Out of the depths I cry to you, O Lord." (Psalm 130).
Kyrie elesion! Christe elesion! Kyrie eleison!

Notes (numbered in red in the text)

1. (The November 2009 letter is 29 pages in length. Here is a link to a copy of the Nov. 2009 letter. http://vdma.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/letter-to-council-and-pastors.pdf)
2 Pastor Christenson has a duty to speak. (Ezekiel 33:1-9, Jonah, and Acts 20:25-31).
3 "December 14, 2009 Call Meeting," 12/21/09, Light from Light. (A side note: Pastor Glende had strongly requested that he and the Church Council leaders be allowed to review my blog posts about St. Peter before publication, and this post went through that review process).
4 "Another layman estimated that the motion to table received about a third of the votes present. I thought it probably received less than that, but there was no official count." (December 14, 2009 Call Meeting,12/21/09, Light from Light).
5 E-mail from Pastor Glende, December 13, 2009. Circuit Pastor Suhr was never invited to any meetings at St. Peter.

6 The entire text of the Church Council's letter can be found at this link:

http://vdma.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/st-peter-church-council-response-to-nov-1-2009-letter.pdf
7 The entire text of the Church Council's letter can be found at this link:

http://vdma.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/st-peter-church-council-response-to-nov-1-2009-letter.pdf

8 In the context of the evidence that was presented about what was happening at St. Peter, the Church Council's letter defends the sin of plagiarism.
9 These lyrics are from the song "Ready Lord," a song published in Let All the People Praise You by Northwestern Publishing House. Emphasis added.
10 December 17, 2009 e-mail from President Denny. Emphasis added.
11 The five pastors were Pastor Frey, Pastor Jenkins, Pastor Luebke, Pastor Berg, and Circuit Pastor Suhr.
12 For example: December 17, 2009 e-mail from President Denny. (This is just one of a number of examples).
13 All emphases (blue color and bold) in the original. April 5, 2010 e-mail from Church President Denny. 
14 April 19, 2010 e-mail from Church President Denny.
15 District President Engelbrecht's undated letter received in the first half of May 2010. (The theological details of this letter will be dealt with in the section about doctrine).
16 "WELS Northern WI District Doctrinal Issues," Light from Light.
http://vdma.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/wels-northern-wi-district-doctrinal-issues/
17 "WELS Northern WI District Doctrinal Issues," Light from Light.
http://vdma.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/wels-northern-wi-district-doctrinal-issues/
18 Northern Wisconsin District Convention, Floor Committee Reports, "Membership Realignment Attendance," Resolution #1. Adopted.
19 "On average, each circuit is made up of about nine congregations ..." ("Helping Pastors Help Pastors," http://www.wels.net/news-events/helping-pastors-help-pastors).
20 For example, St. John (Center) is now in a circuit with churches in Menasha, Wrightstown, Black Creek, Woodville, Little Chute, and Kaukauna.
21 A gerrymander is "the process of dividing a ... territory into the authorized ... divisions, but with such a geographical arrangement as to accomplish an ulterior or unlawful purpose, as, for instance, to secure a majority for a given political party in districts where the result would be otherwise if they were divided according to obvious natural lines." (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, 687).
22 Undated letter from District President Engelbrecht sent to Pastor Suhr the week of July 20-27, 2010.
23 September 21, 2010 e-mail from District President Engelbrecht to Pastor Kenneth Frey, pastor of St. Paul in Appleton, WI. Here is the full text of that e-mail:

Ken,

Although Mr.Techlin would like to join us, I would request that he not be included, but rather that we talk as brother pastors about the doctrinal matters you wish to discuss. Though he may be an educated layman, I think the things we want to talk about are matters for pastors to discuss. I believe that his concerns are still a matter between him and his congregation, and even though he might be interested in some of the things we discuss, I do not want to give him the impression that he can pursue his concerns with the "plagiarism" issue with Pastors Glende and Skorzewski through the district officers. That is disorderly. 

Some of the concerns we would like to discuss center around: 

-Hebrews 13:17 and how it applies to our synod/district constutution (sic) and the divine Call -issues with the 8th commandment -concerns about the confessional statements made by Interpid (sic) Lutherans -trusting blogs such as Ichabod as a reliable source of information -legalism and phariseeism in the WELS?
In Him, DOUG

24 That is not a doctrinal statement. The Word of God is always effective. 
25 April 5 & 19, 2009 e-mails from Church Council President Denny.

26

Large Catechism, Part I. The Ten Commandments, paragraphs 279-284. Paragraph 284 states:

For when a matter is public in the daylight, there can be no slandering or false judging or testifying. It is like when we now rebuke the pope with his doctrine, which is publically (sic) set forth in books and proclaimed in all the world. Where the sin is public, the rebuke also must be public, that everyone may learn to guard against it.27





28 Luther's Works, volume 39, "Against the Spiritual Estate of the Pope and the Bishops Falsely So Called." Here is an extended quote from this section of Luther's writing:

... worldly rule, even though it commits violence and injustice, hurts only the body and property. But spiritual dominion, whenever it is unholy and does not support God's word, is like a wolf and murderer of the soul, and it is just as though the devil himself were ruling there. That is why one should beware as much of the bishop who does not teach God's word as of the devil himself. For wherever God's word is missing, there we certainly find only the devil's teaching and the murder of souls. For without God's word the soul can neither live nor be delivered from the devil.
But if they say that one should beware of rebelling against spiritual authority, I answer: Should God's word be dispensed with and the whole world perish? Is it right that all souls should be killed eternally so that the temporal show of these masks is left in peace?


Thus, the spiritual false doctrine of St. Peter Congregation as defended by District President Engelbrecht must be dealt with publically so that all those who have been exposed to this false doctrine "may take warning." (1 Timothy 5:19-20). The truth of God's word is not a secret, and must be defended publically because eternal souls are at stake.

29 Pastor Glende's original defense of those lyrics was that they were being used "to reach out in a different setting" at The CORE, an outreach ministry. (April 23, 2009 e-mail. Emphasis added).
30 All emphasis in the original. Also, paragraph breaks were added to make the text more readable. (Undated letter from District President Engelbrecht, printed on district stationary, and received in May 2010).
31 Emphasis in the original. (Undated letter from District President Engelbrecht, printed on district stationary, and received in early May 2010). This is the quote in a larger context:
... the bottom line is that Pastors Glende and Skorzewski do not accept or teach a "decision theology" or a form of synergism, but believe and teach what the Scriptures teach and the Lutheran Confessions present, namely that we cannot do anything to come to faith or to accept the words and promises of God, without the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts. Post conversion, however, we are enabled by the power of the Holy Spirit to believe and accept the words and promises of God as well as do that which is pleasing to God.
the River" and "the gods of the Amorites." (Joshua 24:15).

32 Luther's Small Catechism: a contemporary translation, published by Northwestern Publishing House, Fifteenth printing, 2009. Emphasis added.
33 Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, , Article II, Free Will, paragraph 42.
34 Augsburg Confession, Article V, The Ministry. Emphasis added. (All quotations of the Lutheran Confessions are to this edition, unless otherwise noted: Concordia : The Lutheran Confessions. Edited by Paul Timothy McCain. St. Louis, MO : Concordia Publishing House, 2005).
35 Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article V (III), paragraph 129 (250).

36 Emphasis in the original. Undated letter from District President Engelbrecht, printed on district stationary, and received in early May 2010.
37 Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration,, Article II, Free Will, paragraphs 77-78. Emphasis added.

38 Please note that the words "this work" are in the singular.
39 We are completely and always at God's mercy.
Infants cannot choose. Therefore, if Christians can choose to believe, then adults can have more faith than infants. But Christ said, "unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 18:3). Emphasis added.
40 November 1, 2009 " Letter to Council and Pastors," page 24 of 29.
41 Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article II, free will, paragraph 69.
42 E-mail from Pastor Glende, September 1, 2008; cc: Rev. Ron Ash. Emphasis added. Here are those quotes from Pastor Glende within context:

From God's perspective he needs nothing from us, that is true. But when it comes to his Christian people he expects that they respond with fruits of faith. God wants, commands, and expects service -in other words there are things that we need to do because God has given us the responsibility to do them. Take for example the words of Romans 10 -How can they here if no one is sent? etc. God uses us to preach his word, and from the human perspective that is something I need to do. As a husband I need to love my wife as God says I should, that is me serving God in my Christian life. I need to raise my children to know the Lord, that is a command. So I can sing Lord show me the service I need to do that you need from me to serve you in my life and share you with the world. WE are sinners so in some respects singing these words also admits we need you to show us what is expected and needed by us from the Word so we can carry it out.

43 The means of grace are God's word and the sacraments.
44 See also Psalm 50:8-17, 19, 21.
45 Luther, Martin: Pelikan, Jaroslav Jan (Hrsg.) ; Oswald, Hilton C. (Hrsg.) ; Lehmann, Helmut T. (Hrsg.): Luther's Works, Vol. 52 : Sermons II. Philadelphia : Fortress Press, 1999, c1974 (Luther's Works 52), S. 52:iii-17.
46 When changing the lyrics to this song, there would be copyright hurdles to overcome. However, overcoming copyright hurdles is much easier (in the long run) than blaspheming God.
47 What Luther Says: An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., compiled by Ewald Plass; Concordia Publishing House; St. Louis, MO; 1959, Vol. II, p. 637.
48 "Be a Gospel Man," a sermon by WELS Pastor Jonathan Hein:
"... Then there's the pastor who doesn't have the time to write his own sermon. He preaches that of others, regardless of Gospel quality, believing that he's a good enough actor to convince his people he's excited about a message which cost him no blood or sweat or tears. He justifies this by saying, 'But I'm surrounded by so many lost. There's so much outreach to do!' In conducting their ministry in ways that are entirely comfortable to them—ways that fit their own personal preferences—such pastors prove they don't really understand the Gospel very well, at the center of which is a cross."
49 An altar call is a method used by people who believe in the heresy of Decision Theology to motivate people to make a decision for God and choose to believe God's word.


50 Lutheran pastors would not be ashamed to be forthright and honest about preaching a sermon by Luther. They would gladly let the light shine on such a practice. It is when a pastor preaches a sermon from our theological enemies that he would want to hide such a practice.
51 When I first confirmed that there was plagiarism at St. Peter, I did not immediately go to Pastor Glende. I did not know what to do, so I let it go on for awhile, and then sat down with Circuit Pastor Suhr for the very first time. The reason I proceeded in that order was because at about the same time, Pastor Glende was accusing me of sin for saying that Church and Change was a controversial organization, that The CORE was only one block from St. Paul in Appleton, that Pastor Glende was aka "Pastor Tim," and that St. Peter was calling an "assistant pastor."

These statements were part of a blog post entitled "Lent and The CORE Location." When I refused to remove the entire post from the internet, Pastor Glende sent me two e-mails indicating which parts of the post needed to be removed. These e-mails conflicted with each other as to what parts Pastor Glende wanted removed. When I refused to change the post, Pastor Glende informed me that all the leadership of St. Peter agreed that my post was divisive, that he was going to publically accuse me of sin, and that I needed to appear before our head elder to give an accounting of my behavior.

At this meeting, Pastor Glende did agree that I have a right to relate truthful information and to have an opinion about matters at church. However, he then proceeded to have me explain all my motivations because he suspected that I had bad motives for saying things like The CORE was only one block from St. Paul. I told him that my motive was the truth, and that if there was anything untrue in the post, I would gladly change it. Pastor Glende then said that St. Peter was calling an "associate" pastor, not an "assistant" pastor; and that my information about the parsonage and the amount of money spent on The CORE was incorrect, however, he would not give me the correct amount of money or information about the parsonage. In the end, I did not make any changes because if I was going to face a an excommunication hearing in front of the entire congregation, then I wanted the evidence of my innocence to remain intact.

After all that, a friend advised me that if I contacted Pastor Glende directly about plagiarism, the reaction from Pastor Glende might be very bad.

52 District President Engelbrecht should ask Pastor Glende about the extent of the plagiarism. Pastor Glende does not have the right to remain silent on this issue, he needs to be honest and forthright.

Further, District President Engelbrecht should demonstrate some curiosity as to the extent of the plagiarism, not only at St. Peter and The CORE, but also in the Northern Wisconsin District. In the month of May 2010, the Intrepid Lutherans exposed other pastors in the Northern Wisconsin District of plagiarism. The Intrepid Lutherans threatened those pastors with a public confrontation, and those pastors then repented and apologized.
53 Apparently, District President Engelbrecht thinks the belief that Christ came to earth to give us earthly rest, is not false teaching. This false doctrine causes every Christian who is not experiencing earthly rest to question their faith and God. However, the truth is that the Son of Man had no earthly place to rest his head, and his servants should not be deceived into believing false promises that they will live better than their master. (Luke 9:58. See also Acts 9:16 and Hebrews 11:13-16 & 11:36-40).
54 Emphasis in the original. District President Engelbrecht’s Letter to a Group of Five Pastors and Two Laymen Who Met with the District Presidium on March 5, 2010; undated, but received in early May 2010. Pages 11-12.
55 District President Engelbrecht’s letter to a group of five area concerned pastors and two laymen who met with the District Presidium on March 5, 2010; undated, but received in early May 2010. 
56 I think this sentence might be a quote from Martin Luther, however, I am unable to find its source.
 
57 See also Article VII of the Augsburg Confession:

Our churches teach that one holy Church is to remain forever. The Church is the congregation of saints [Psalm 149:1] in which the Gospel is purely taught and the Sacraments are correctly administered. For the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree about the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments. It is not necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies instituted by men, should be the same everywhere.
58 What would the WELS men who broke with LCMS over fellowship issues have thought about future WELS pastors plagiarizing the sermons of avowed anti-Lutheran Pietists. Is that not also a fellowship issue?
flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple. [Romans 16:17-18 NKJV.
Emphasis added].
59 This public act of no longer attending the church where I was baptized and where I have my membership demands a public explanation, and this letter and the letter dated November 1, 2009 should serve as that explanation.
59 Emphasis added.
60 Augsburg Confession, Article XIV. See also Ezekiel 33:1-9.

61 "Innumerable preachers imagined that they were preaching Christ and proclaiming His doctrine until their eyes were opened and they saw that they had concealed Christ from the eyes of poor sinners and had directed men away from Him rather than to Him." (C.F.W. Walther, Law and Gospel, Concordia Publishing House, 1986. Page 362).
62 I could transfer to a congregation that is opposed to these false doctrines.

63 The means of grace are God's word and the Sacraments.
64 In March 2010, I attempted to attend Pastor Skorzewski's seminar, "Be Relevant," at the Northern Wisconsin District Workshop for Congregations, but was turned away because there was not enough overflow capacity. In 2009, Pastor Skorzewski made the same presentation at Fox Valley Lutheran High School. (Workshop for Congregations Northern Wisconsin District).

Why I No Longer Attend My Church « Light from Light

Why I No Longer Attend My Church « Light from Light

Why I No Longer Attend My Church
February 4, 2011 by Rick
It is with sadness that I no longer attend my church (St. Peter; Freedom, WI) where I was baptized and am still a member. Even though I am not a watchman (Ezekiel 33), the public act of no longer attending the church where I was baptized and am a member demands an explanation.

I have doctrinal disagreements with my pastors, my Church Council, and the District Presidium. For the most part, I have kept these doctrinal disagreements private. However, whether or not the Church openly discusses God’s Word is a theological matter. (Isaiah 8:20; 9:2, 6-7). The Word is communication, and God expects His people, His Church, to wrestle with His Word. (2 Corinthians 13:5). The Word is how God communicates light and truth into us, and we struggle with His Word only by reading and openly discussing the word.

The Word is communication, and it is through the Word that the Holy Spirit works to enlighten, sanctify, and keep the whole Christian Church on earth in the one true faith. (Small Catechism, Explanation of the Third Article). Therefore, we must communicate doctrine, and we must struggle with the Word openly. Further, if there is pain and loss in that struggle, then that pain should be understood as a necessary step on the way of the cross. (Matthew 10:34-39).

However, when the local church and District Presidium use endless procedures to stifle disagreement and discussion of the word, they are not struggling with the Word, but instead they are engaging in an earthly political struggle. Temporal earthly kingdoms are built through political struggle. On the other hand, citizens of the eternal kingdom of heaven must struggle with the word which involves open communication and sometimes the sadness of a cross.

The true Scriptural procedure for dealing with public doctrinal error and disagreement is to discuss the matters. However, the Northern Wisconsin District Presidium has steadfastly refused to have a meeting where everyone sits down to discuss doctrine. Instead, they have been completely hung-up on a never-ending series of frivolous procedures that no one can fulfill. (For example, one is not allowed to invite the District President to a meeting without first asking the permission of the District President).

I am not the only man who disagrees on matters of doctrine and practice with my pastors and the District Presidium. Other WELS pastors have also expressed disagreement. Thus, there needs to be discussion of God’s Word. That is the true Scriptural procedure. Only God’s Word can make alive and heal.

I have written two letters dated November 1, 2009 and January 20, 2011 that detail some of the doctrinal problems I have seen at my congregation, St. Peter. And it is in the spirit of the word (which is communication) and the theology of the cross (which is pain and struggle) that I share these two letters. I had hoped that the second letter would have been unnecessary, and that neither letter would need to be shared. Sadly, there is no other way. (2 Timothy 4:2-3).

We all must lift our cross, and follow Christ. (Matthew 10:38 & Mark 8:34-38). May the Lord’s will be done. (Matthew 26:39).

Postscript: Since the second letter was sent, it has been reported that District President Engelbrecht is “very willing” to arrange a meeting between my pastors and the other concerned area WELS pastors. Nonetheless, because District President Engelbrecht has handled these matters incompetently at best, he would best serve the Church by resigning.

Small Town Radio

Adam Jones worked down a few steps and upstairs from my father's bakery and coffee counter. We knew all the WQUA-AM DJs and the station manager, Flambo.

Adam Jones and his wife produce beautiful ceramic communion ware today.


rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "My Home Town Area Gave Reagan His First Job - WOC ...":

When broadcast radio began in the 1920's, it made our nation and the world a whole lot smaller. If you read the history of some radio stations, it is easy to understand the impact that it had upon many smaller towns, as well as the cities. Even today, the small town stations will air obituaries, births, and other items which seem insignificant. Many of the stations were started by local businesses which could afford the equipment. Syndication and ownership by media conglomerates has taken the personal touch out of much of today's stations.

***

GJ - We saw all the DJs from WQUA on a daily basis. They came in for doughnuts and coffee, told us about the news they could not broadcast. My father became known as the unofficial program manager, because he would make suggestions to the station manager, G. Flambo, and they would be implemented in 24 hours.

Adam Jones, pictured above, went on the bus to Cubs games with my father and the other fans. They all had great fun. We knew the business owners and their families, the teachers and their families.

New Mascot

The Transfiguration of Our Lord

By Norma Boeckler

The Transfiguration of Our Lord

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/bethany-lutheran-worship

Bethany Lutheran Worship, 10 AM Central Time

The Hymn #294 O Word of God 3.31
The Confession of Sins
The Absolution
The Introit p. 16
The Gloria Patri
The Kyrie p. 17
The Gloria in Excelsis
The Salutation and Collect p. 19
The Epistle and Gradual 2 Peter 1:16-21
The Gospel Matthew 17:1-9
Glory be to Thee, O Lord!
Praise be to Thee, O Christ!
The Nicene Creed p. 22
The Sermon Hymn #135 Tis Good 3:81

Not Fables But History Revealed

The Hymn #307 Draw Nigh 3:72
The Preface p. 24
The Sanctus p. 26
The Lord's Prayer p. 27
The Words of Institution
The Agnus Dei p. 28
The Nunc Dimittis p. 29
The Benediction p. 31
The Hymn #283 God’s Word 3:90


KJV 2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

KJV Matthew 17:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. 3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. 4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. 5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. 7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. 8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only. 9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

Sixth Sunday After Epiphany
O merciful and everlasting God, heavenly Father: We thank Thee that Thou hast revealed unto us the glory of Thy Son, and let the light of Thy gospel shine upon us: We pray Thee, guide us by this light that we may walk diligently as Christians in all good works, ever be strengthened by Thy grace, and conduct our lives in all godliness; through the same, Thy beloved Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, one true God, world without end. Amen.

Not Fables But History Revealed

Lenski:

Peter does not tell the whole story of the Transr figuration. He does not use the accounts of the Evangelists, for he helped to inform them, and not they him. Thus all four accounts agree perfectly. The point of importance for Peter is “this voice”; “we on our part (the witnesses present) heard it conveyed to Jesus out of heaven.” Note that “voice” and “brought (conveyed)” are repeated. Peter has already noted the phenomenal character of this voice: τοιᾶσδε marks what it said and the kind of voice that it was, he again emphasizes “this voice,” and now stresses the fact that “we on our part heard it.” This is a direct revelation, directly made by the Father himself, directly received by the witnesses. Let those who will regard it as being merely a “myth.” This revelation attests the glory and the deity of the Son in his earthly life by a voice and a revelation that were so einzigartig. This is he whom Peter has truly named in v. 1, 2, 11, whose Parousia will come in spite of all scoffers, for whom Peter’s readers are to wait with unshakable assurance.
19) And we have as more sure the prophetic Word, to which you are doing well in giving heed as to a lamp shining in a dismal place till day dawns and a light-bearer arises in your hearts; etc. “And” adds in the sense of “and so” as when a resultant fact is added. When Peter says “we have as more certain,” etc., he refers to himself and to all the apostles as those who made known the power and the Parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ. This “we” in the verb does not refer to Peter and to his readers, for “you do well” follows.
Lenski, R. C. H.: The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John and St. Jude. Minneapolis, MN. : Augsburg Publishing House, 1966, S. 291.


2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

This lesson reminds us that there is an enormous gulf between believers and non-believes. In a world where there are so many competing philosophies and religions, Christians say – “There is one truth, one history.”

The Gospel message of the entire Bible is a witness to these events and to the grace of God in Jesus Christ.

Luther said – the Bible is a sermon about one person, Christ.

The scoffers are always looking for problems, and they find them, because their obstinacy blinds them to the truth. There are many details in the Scriptures that cannot be verified, so these scoffers say, “This is all mad up, “ or “That cannot be true.”

There are thousands of historical details that can be verified, and many of the old puzzles have been solved, but that does not move the scoffers. So Christians are tempted to delve into rationalism to solve the problems of rationalism. That is just like drinking salt water to cure thirst – it only makes it worse.

The Word of God is revealed by men of faith to create and sustain faith. Luther pointed out that human reason is not the problem – just the way we use it. The magisterial use of reason places human reason above the Word. The person who makes human reason equal to or superior to the Word will always subordinate the truth of the Scriptures to his own perspective.

That can have comical results, even in science. My science textbook in 6th grade said missiles would not work in outer-space because they needed an atmosphere to push against. Writers, editors, and the publisher let that piece of ignorance through, which was made funnier by the fact of missiles being in space at that time. Likewise, radio waves would not work in outer-space.

So, when someone says, “This could not have happened because I cannot imagine it,” he is subordinating the Word to his reason. That is the reason why most Protestants reject the Real Presence of Christ, and they often make up strange explanations that are contrary to the Word. Several are:
1. There is no word for “is” in Aramaic. Jesus spoke Aramaic, so He could not have said “This is My Body.” However, our text is Greek and clearly says – “This is My Body.” He did not say – This seems to be, or This symbolizes My Body…
2. The communion elements do not convey forgiveness to the communicant. Jesus said “given for the forgiveness of your sin…”

This is why Lenski said, “Resist the beginnings.” Once rationalism works on the text, in an effort to prove the Word of God to scoffers, there is no limit to what can be peeled away by man’s limited mental powers.

I cannot imagine the Lord of Creation fashioning the universe by command, but Genesis 1:1 teaches that, John 1 enlarges upon it, and God sustains my faith in Creation by His Word, not because of “facts.”

The facts are the same for most observers, but how they are interpreted makes all the difference.

People are inclined to say, “This story means a lot to me,” and “I do not like this.” If man is the judge, a new canon develops. The Bible consists of those passages we like and excludes what we dislike or cannot understand at the moment.

But this is revealed truth, one unified message from the Holy Spirit.

The scoffers say, “But we can see individual voices, personalities in the Bible. So it did not drop down from heaven, infallible, inerrant.”

That is another stone of stumbling for people. They do not find Paul to be the romantic hero of gothic novel, but a real person with some annoying traits. The believer says, “God took this persecutor of the Faith and made him an apostle, and he knew his own faults so well.”

These ordinary men were made extraordinary because God chose them to bring His message to the world, to bear the cross of persecution in the Roman Empire. Because He chose them, He revealed the power and majesty of Christ to the apostles.

Here we are, ordinary people with all the flaws of the disciples, plus many more bonus weaknesses. We see their problems in their writing, which is fairly plain and unadorned, not at all like official church histories and convention essays.

So the Bible has two natures, which are united – very much like Christ. One nature is human (Paul, Peter, Luke) and the other is divine (the Holy Spirit’s inspiration). So the Bible is like Christ, human and yet without sin.

Some years ago, people fought for the Bible being infallible and inerrant. The opponents undermined this view by being embarrassed, silent, and above the fray. Now we know from the recent LCMS histories that the Seminex faction hated the inerrancy of the Bible and defined themselves as enemies of that view. But they hid that from everyone, as much as they could. They even called themselves “confessional Lutherans” while trying to destroy the Confessions and make the Creeds meaningless.

That put the burden on anyone trying to show what they were doing. If a professor of theology taught against the Virgin Birth of Christ, the resurrection of Christ, or the existence of Hell and Satan, he had already left the fold. But those were the very people who ruled the roost. How can people see through the long robes to view the clay feet of these plaster saints? Eventually they revealed themselves. Even SP Harrison, who has always worked with ELCA, has said ELCA gives Lutherans a bad name everywhere – but Missouri voted overwhelmingly to keep working with them.

ELCA has no reason to change when the “conservative” synods (LCMS, WELS, ELS) work with their big, apostate cousin. Unitarians do good works too and have the same theological and political positions as ELCA. Why not join with them? The Salvation Army collects money for the poor – why not work with them, too? Oh, WELS already does – with Thrivent money. As someone wrote to the blog – “But it was milk for the children.”

Likewise today, the enemies of God’s Word say nice, vague things in public but they do not believe, teach, or confess that God’s work is carried out by His Word alone.
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

The eyewitness of the Transfiguration remind us that they were still weak in faith until the resurrection. They saw Jesus in His glory with Moses and Elijah, yet they still hid in the locked room after the crucifixion. God said, “This is My Beloved Son,” and yet they still feared man.

We can see that Christ strengthened with His Word, step by step, and transformed them by the miracles they experienced.

The Word and miracles go together. God still strenghthens us with miracles. Kurt Marquart liked to remind his students that Holy Communion was a miracle service. Ordinary elements are also the Body and Blood of Christ, after being consecrated by the Word. This miracle is provided solely to benefit, bless, and strengthen us believers.

Roman Catholics promote the papal mass. I used to wonder why the pope had to have his glorious services with thousands of people in attendance. Their own reason is this – they want everyone to despair that the Catholic Church has the mass and no one else does.

Although I give them points for spectacle, and it must be seen to be appreciated, the message taught is soul-destroying. The meaning of the Catholic mass is that it only removes some of the penalty for sin. No one is ever really forgiven. So this man-made law drives people to daily mass and many sacrifices to atone for their own sins, as if Christ did not pay the full price on the cross. A Roman Catholic is assured of non-forgiveness all his life and even after death, where even more is done for “the souls suffering in Purgatory.”

The LCMS and ELCA pastors joining the Roman Catholic priesthood, sometimes right out of seminary, speaks volumes about the training at those “Lutheran” institutions.

The comforting message of the Gospel is what God does for us, what He has paid for us, not what we do for Him and what we owe Him.

19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

This lesson closes with the admonition that the Word of God belongs to Him alone and not to us. We do not have the freedom and license to make it sound the way we want. “Private interpretation” is simply the first branch in the road toward apostasy.

God always keeps the Gospel message alive somewhere, and persecution tends to drive it to new places and to make it more fruitful.

The fads of the moment do not last and do not bear fruit. Invariably they lead to an emphasis upon the Law and the necessity of works for salvation.

Quotations

Eternal Life
"For the papalists understand the word 'justify' according to the manner of the Latin composition as meaning 'to make righteous' through a donated or infused quality of inherent righteousness, from which works of righteousness proceed. The Lutherans, however, accept the word 'justify' in the Hebrew manner of speaking; therefore they define justification as the absolution from sins, or the remission of sins, through imputation of the righteousness of Christ, through adoption and inheritance of eternal life, and that only for the sake of Christ, who is apprehended by faith."

Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971, I, p. 467.
"And, in short, the meritum condigni is the Helen for which the Tridentine chapter concerning the growth of justification contends. For they imagine that the quality, or habit, of love is infused not that we may possess salvation to life eternal through this first grace but that, assisted by that grace, we may be able to merit eternal life for ourselves by our own good works. For concerning the meritum condigni Gabriel speaks thus: 'The soul shaped by grace worthily (de condigno) merits eternal life.'" [Kramer note - Scholastics taught that the good works of the unregenerate had only meritum congrui; the good works of the regenerate rewarded as meritum condigni, merit worthy with being rewarded with eternal life.]
Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, 1971, I, p. 541.

"How is a person justified before God? This occurs solely by faith in the Son of God, Jesus Christ; that is, freely, not because of any works or merits of one's own but only because of the one Mediator, Jesus Christ, who became the sacrificial victim and propitiation on our behalf. By this sacrifice, man obtained forgiveness of sins and became righteous; that is, God-pleasing and acceptable. His righteousness was imputed to man for Christ's sake, and man becomes an heir of eternal life when he believes with certainty that God gives him these blessings for the sake of His Son."
David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith, (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 105.

"Christian righteousness is the forgiveness of sin, the imputation of the righteousness of Christ and acceptance to eternal life. It is free, not the result of any virtues or works but is given solely because of Christ, the Mediator, and apprehended by faith alone."
David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith, (1568), 1994. p. 106.
"Scripture therefore uses these words, 'We are justified by faith,' to teach both: 1) What the reason (or merit) for justification is, or what the blessings of Christ are; to wit, that through and for the sake of Christ alone we are granted forgiveness of sins, righteousness and eternal life; and 2. How these should be applied or transferred to us; namely, by embracing the promise and relying on Christ by faith alone."
David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith, (1568), 1994. p. 107.

"The second argument is that 'God desires all men to be saved' (1 Timothy 2:4), and He gave His Son for us men and created man for eternal life. Likewise: All things exist for man, and he himself exists for God that he may enjoy Him, etc. These points and others like them can be refuted as easily as the first one. For these verses must always be understood as pertaining to the elect only, as the apostle says in 2 Timothy 2:10 'everything for the sake of the elect.' For in an absolute sense Christ did not die for all, because He says: 'This is My blood which is poured out for you' and 'for many'--He does not say: for all--'for the forgiveness of sins.' (Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28) Martin Luther, Luther's Works, 25 p. 375. 2 Timothy 2:10; 1 Timothy 2:4; Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28 "His gifts and works in His Church must effect inexpressible results, taking souls from the jaws of the devil and translating them into eternal life and glory."
Sermons of Martin Luther, ed. John Nicolas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, VIII, p. 220.


"In this epistle lesson Paul gives Christians instruction concerning the Christian life on earth, and connects with it the hope of the future and eternal life, in view of which they have been baptized and become Christians. He makes of our earthly life a death--a grave--with the understanding, however, that henceforth the risen man and the newness of life should be found in us."
Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, VIII, p. 141.
"Therefore, whoever would have a joyful conscience that does not fear sin, death, hell, nor the wrath of God, dare not reject this Mediator, Christ. For He is the fountain that overflows with grace, that gives temporal and eternal life."
Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols V, p. 331.

"Therefore, do not speak to me of love or friendship when anything is to be detracted from the Word or the faith; for we are told that not love but the Word brings eternal life, God's grace, and all heavenly treasures."
Martin Luther, What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1411f.
"In all simplicity and without any disputing, children believe that God is gracious and that there is an eternal life. Oh, what a blessing comes to the children who die at this time! Such a death would, of course, cause me extreme sorrow, because a part of my body and the mother's body would die. These natural affections do not cease in the pious, as those who are without feeling and are hardened imagine, for such affections are the work of divine creation. Children live with all sincerity in faith, without the interference of reason, as Ambrose says: There is lack of reason but not of faith."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, I, p. 142.

"To be converted to God means to believe in Christ, to believe that He is our Mediator and that we have eternal life through Him."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, I, p. 343. Acts 26:20.
"The Church has no word of its own. Whatever is not taken from Scripture is not the 'Word of the Church,' but what Luther bluntly calls 'prattle.' Also other books can exert a divine power and efficacy, but always only inasmuch as they have absorbed God's Word. Of Scripture Luther says: 'No book teaches anything concerning eternal life except this one alone' (St. Louis edition XIV:434)."
Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., trans. Walter W. F. Albrecht, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950, I, p. 315.

"But Christ was given for this purpose, namely, that for His sake there might be bestowed on us the remission of sins, and the Holy Ghost to bring forth in us new and eternal life, and eternal righteousness [to manifest Christ in our hearts, as it is written John 16:15: 'He shall take of the things of Mine, and show them unto you.' Likewise, He works also other gifts, love, thanksgiving, charity, patience, etc.]. Wherefore the Law cannot be truly kept unless the Holy Ghost is given." Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article IV, Justification, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 159. Romans 3:31; John 16:15.

"But Christ was given for this purpose, namely, that for His sake there might be bestowed on us the remission of sins, and the Holy Ghost to bring forth in us new and eternal life, and eternal righteousness [to manifest Christ in our hearts, as it is written John 16:15: He shall take of the things of Mine, and show them unto you. Likewise, He works also other gifts, love, thanksgiving, charity, patience, etc.]. Wherefore the Law cannot be truly kept unless the Holy Ghost is received through faith...Then we learn to know how flesh, in security and indifference, does not fear God, and is not fully certain that we are regarded by God, but imagines that men are born and die by chance. Then we experience that we do not believe that God forgives and hears us. But when, on hearing the Gospel and the remission of sins, we are consoled by faith, we receive the Holy Ghost, so that now we are able to think aright."
Augsburg Confession, Article III, #11, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 159.

"This power {the Keys} is exercised only by teaching or preaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments, according to their calling, either to many or to individuals. For thereby are granted, not bodily, but eternal things, as eternal righteousness, the Holy Ghost, eternal life. These things cannot come but by the ministry of the Word and the Sacraments, as Paul says, Romans 1:16: The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. Therefore, since the power of the Church grants eternal things, and is exercised only by the ministry of the Word, it does not interfere with civil government; no more than the art of singing interferes with civil government."
Augsburg Confession, Article XXVIII, #8, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 85. Romans 1:16.

"This righteousness is offered us by the Holy Ghost through the Gospel and in the Sacraments, and is applied, appropriated, and received through faith, whence believers have reconciliation with God, forgiveness of sins, the grace of God, sonship, and heirship of eternal life." Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration, III 16 Righteousness Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 921.

"Also they teach that at the Consummation of the World Christ will appear for judgment, and will raise up all the dead; He will give to the godly and elect eternal life and everlasting joys, but ungodly men and the devils He will condemn to be tormented without end."
Augsburg Confession, Article XVII, Of Christ's Return to Judgment, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 51.

My Home Town Area Gave Reagan His First Job - WOC Radio in Davenport

Reagan came back as president to pose at the WOC mike and broadcast.
Dave Coopman wrote about this event in his book on WOC Radio.

Dutch Reagan was born not too far from Moline - Tampico, Illinois, only 45 miles away. On this day, 100 years ago, it was also snowing furiously.

Reagan grew up in Dixon, Illinois and graduated from Eureka College in Eureka, Illinois, 1932.

WOC Radio, started by the Palmer (School of Chiropractic) family, hired him as an announcer. We take radio for granted now, but the Palmers were pioneers in introducing radio to the area.

Facebook is the technological rage now, and Moline High graduate John Getz plays the lawyer in the new movie about Facebook.

Snowbound in Milwaukee

Who needs another snow photo?


rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "Snowbound in Bella Vista":

Now that was an adventure! You have to love those big cruisers like the Ichaboat. We had 24 inches of snowfall in about a 12 hour period, and it all happened at night. It set a record for our city. Initially, in the aftermath, the only motorized vehicles that could travel were ATV's and snowmobiles. You to wait until daylight and the wind to stop. The gusts were up to 50 mph and the visibility was reduced to zero. Even the big snow plows and fire trucks were getting stuck when they were trying to rescue the foolhardy ones who thought that they could drive in it.

Lutheran leader sees Protestants aligning | The Journal Gazette | Fort Wayne, IN

 

Courtesy photo

The Rev. Matthew Harrison is president of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.

Published: February 5, 2011 3:00 a.m.

Lutheran leader sees Protestants aligning

Rosa Salter Rodriguez | The Journal Gazette

The Rev. Matthew Harrison has a vision of what the future of American Protestantism might look like – and it includes a potentially big realignment.

Harrison, who was pastor of Zion Lutheran Church in Fort Wayne in the 1990s and early 2000s, was elected last year to head the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, a 6,200-congregation denomination with 2.3 million baptized members. The synod is the second-largest and most traditional among the branches of Lutheranism in North America.

In an interview last month during a visit to the Synod’s Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Harrison said he sees opposition to homosexuality and support of traditional marriage as leading to new ties among dissident members of diverse Protestant groups.

“I certainly see it happening,” he said. “It’s a very interesting moment worldwide.”

In recent years, several U.S. denominations including Lutherans, Episcopalians and Presbyterians have seen splinter groups form in reaction to policies that broadened acceptance of homosexuals.

Now, he says the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s recent move to allow some non-celibate gay clergy is affecting the church’s mission in the developing world, where different branches of the faith have traditionally cooperated.

He called the decision “the worst blunder in the history of Lutheran missions,” saying it makes it harder for the church’s message to be heard.

In Africa it’s because of homosexuality’s connection to the AIDS epidemic, he said. In countries such as Indonesia where Islam is prevalent, he added, Islamic radicals seize on the issue as proof that the Western Christian church is decadent and should be rejected.

Harrison said the issue may present an opportunity for his denomination in some countries. In the past several years, Lutheran groups in Madagascar, where the population is 25 percent Lutheran, have made informal overtures to the Missouri Synod. Lutherans in the country have historically aligned with the ELCA, he said.

Another sign of the realignment, he added, is that his denomination and the Anglican Church in North America have begun formal dialogue seeking common ground.

The Anglican body formed in 2008 in a split from the U.S. Episcopal Church largely over the issue of allowing homosexual bishops and priests. It has ties to Anglican churches in Africa that opposed homosexuality, including Uganda, Nigeria and Rwanda.

Anglicans and the Missouri Synod are talking “to be able to affirm each other in significant ways as fellow Christians, stand together against certain societal and ecclesial trends and cooperate together in works of mercy,” according to the synod’s description of the dialogues. They began in November and will continue this year.

Still another sign of movement is a declaration signed by Harrison in December on marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The declaration was endorsed by leaders of about 20 Protestant Christian groups as well as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as the Mormon Church.

Harrison said for Missouri Synod Lutherans, the issue of homosexuality strikes at the root of the authority of Scripture.

“The difficulty we have runs to the very heart of the Gospel – is there salvation outside of Christ? The Bible says no,” he says, adding that those who claim acceptance of homosexuality are imposing their interpretation of the texts.

Harrison last year also wrote a letter to U.S. lawmakers saying that the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the U.S. military “will sorely inhibit our chaplains’ ability to call all sinners to repentance.” He said the new policy will likely lead to openly homosexual chaplains and added that Missouri Synod members may be counseled not to partake of their services.

“But the challenge for the Missouri Synod on this whole issue is simply not to be the denomination of ‘no.’ ” he said.

“It is my deep desire to refrain from statements against homosexuality, at the same time affirming the biblical stance and that the church has a role in assisting people who struggle with this issue,” Harrison said.
In Fort Wayne, Harrison was known for spearheading a project with neighboring St. Peter Catholic Church that rejuvenated the Hanna-Creighton neighborhood.

Dilapidated homes were cleared from a 10-block area around the churches and replaced with new development, such as the Pontiac branch of the Allen County Public Library and the headquarters of the Urban League.

After leaving Fort Wayne, Harrison served as executive director of LCMS World Relief and Human Care.

Those Who Read Pentecostal, Write Pentecostal

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Lutherans Write about the Sermon - Worship - III -...":

J-1026
"So it goes in the spiritual government of the Church, as specially indicated in the narrative now before us. Where I have preached and taught during the past ten or twenty years, there another could perhaps, have done more in one year; and one sermon may bring forth more fruit than many others. Here, also, it is true that our labor, diligence and effort can accomplish nothing These two things must go together, namely, that each one does his duty, and that he, nevertheless, acknowledges with Peter: 'My labor cannot bring forth anything, if thou dost not give the increase.'"
Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, IV, p. 153. Luke 5:1-11.

Compare and Contrast to the Glory of the (W)ELS

So the question really isn’t whether something in worship is Roman Catholic or catholic. If it conveys God’s truths to God’s people it is catholic and therefore useful. The question should be whether something in worship is excellent.
God demands the very best from us. He commands faithfulness in all we do. He requires excellence in our worship of Him. Yet how many times do we settle for less than the best in our lives, in our faith, in our worship?

God deserves excellence in worship. Worship is for the Lord. It is giving Him what He deserves – praise, honor and glory. It is you offering God your best. Worship is also for us. It is giving us what we need – forgiveness, peace and fellowship. It is God offering us His best in Word, water, bread and wine.

This Gospel of free and full forgiveness in Christ calls for nothing but the best from God’s people in response.

The Holy Spirit not only touches minds, but also hearts. He works through words but also emotions.
http://www.epiphany-wels.org/Sermons/052310.htm

Lutherans Write about the Sermon - Worship - III - Thy Strong Word

Luther was the swan that rose from the ashes of Hus, as the Czech reformer predicted.
Lutherans follow Schwan instead.
Art by Norma Boeckler.

Part 3

Lutherans Write about the Sermon

J-1018

"Now, all who wish to be saved ought to hear this preaching [of God’s Word]. For the preaching and hearing of God’s Word are instruments of the Holy Ghost, by, with, and through which He desires to work efficaciously, and to convert men to God, and to work in them both to will and to do. This Word man can externally hear and read, even though he is not yet converted to God and regenerate; for in these external things, as said above, man even since the Fall has to a certain extent a free will, so that he can go to church and hear or not hear the sermon."

Formula of Concord, SD, II, #52. Free Will. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 901f. Tappert, p. 531. Heiser, p. 246.

J-1019

"Likewise those fastidious spirits are to be reproved who, when they have heard a sermon or two, find it tedious and dull, thinking that they know all that well enough, and need no more instruction. For just that is the sin which has been hitherto reckoned among mortal sins, and is called akedia, i. e., torpor or satiety, a malignant, dangerous plague with which the devil bewitches and deceives the hearts of many, that he may surprise us and secretly withdraw God’s Word from us."

The Large Catechism, #99, The Third Commandment, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 609. Tappert, p. 378. Heiser, p. 175. Exodus 20:8-11. Akedia: Aristotle's Ethics, IV.

J-1020

"Against both these parties the pure teachers of the Augsburg Confession have taught and contended that by the fall of our first parents man was so corrupted that in divine things pertaining to our conversion and the salvation of our souls he is by nature blind, that, when the Word of God is preached, he neither does nor can understand it, but regards it as foolishness; also, that he does not of himself draw nigh to God, but is and remains an enemy of God, until he is converted, becomes a believer [is endowed with faith], is regenerated and renewed, by the power of the Holy Ghost through the Word when preached and heard, out of pure grace, without any cooperation of his own."

Formula of Concord, SD II. #5. Free Will. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 881. Tappert, p. 520f. Heiser, p. 241.

J-1021

"All this is the old devil and old serpent, who also converted Adam and Eve into enthusiasts, and led them from the outward Word of God to spiritualizing and self-conceit, and nevertheless he accomplished this through other outward words. Just as also our enthusiasts [at the present day] condemn the outward Word, and nevertheless they themselves are not silent, but they fill the world with their pratings and writings, as though, indeed, the Spirit could not come through the writings and spoken word of the apostles, but [first] through their writings and words he must come. Why [then] do not they also omit their own sermons and writings, until the Spirit Himself come to men, without their writings and before them, as they boast that He has come into them without the preaching of the Scriptures?"

Smalcald Articles, Part III, VIII. #5-6. Confession. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 495. Tappert, p. 312f. Heiser, p. 147.

J-1022

"Moreover [On the other side], both the ancient and modern enthusiasts have taught that God converts men, and leads them to the saving knowledge of Christ through His Spirit, without any created means and instrument, that is, without the external preaching and hearing of God’s Word."

Formula of Concord, SD II. #4. Free Will. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 881. Tappert, p. 520. Heiser, p. 241.

J-1023

Gerhard: "The more purely the Word of God is preached in a Church, and the nearer the preaching and doctrine comes to the norm of the Holy Scripture, the purer will be the Church; the further it recedes from the rule of the Word, the more impure and corrupt will be the Church."

Cited in Henry Eyster Jacobs, A Summary of the Christian Faith, Philadelphia: General Council Publication House, 1913, p. 383f.

J-1024

"Since the Word of God is this weapon [sword], it behooves us to make use of it at all times and to this end become acquainted with it both by means of public preaching and by earnest Bible study at home. Cursory reading must be supplemented by careful memorizing of proof-texts and strong passages. Only in this way shall we be able to make the proper use of the Word of God as a true weapon of offense at all times."

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the New Testament, 2 vols., St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, II, p. 292. Ephesians 6:17.

J-1025

"So much, we see, depends on the kind of men who preach the Gospel. Let all preachers keep this in mind! In the last analysis, however, the decisive assurance for all believers is the Word itself with its divine effects. See Galatians 1:8. In Thessalonians, too, the ultimate ground of assurance is the Word."

R. C. H. Lenski, Thessalonians, Columbus: The Wartburg Press, 1937, p. 259. 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Galatians 1:8.

J-1026

"So it goes in the spiritual government of the Church, as specially indicated in the narrative now before us. Where I have preached and taught during the past ten or twenty years, there another could perhaps, have done more in one year; and one sermon may bring forth more fruit than many others. Here, also, it is true that our labor, diligence and effort can accomplish nothing These two things must go together, namely, that each one does his duty, and that he, nevertheless, acknowledges with Peter: 'My labor cannot bring forth anything, if thou dost not give the increase.'"

Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, IV, p. 153. Luke 5:1-11.

J-1027

"God has chosen despised and frail human beings for the ministry of the Word that the divine power of the Word might become apparent—a power impossible to suppress even in the weakest of persons. Moreover, if the mighty of the world were to preach the Gospel, people would be captivated more by the authority of the person preaching than by the Word itself."

What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed. Ewald M. Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1118.

J-1028

For we did not follow cunningly devised fables... "That is, we preach not the nonsense of men, but we are sure that what we preach is of God and has become so through our eyes and ears. That is to say, When we were with Christ upon the mountain, we saw and heard his glory."

Martin Luther, Commentary on Peter and Jude, ed. John N. Lenker, Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1990, p. 245. 2 Peter 1:16-18.

J-1029

"That is the reason why our Church from the very beginning declared that it requires its preachers 'not to depart an inch' from its confessions, not to turn aside from the doctrines laid down in them, non tantum in rebus, sed etiam in phrasibus, that is, both as regards the matter offered in their sermons and the manner of their teaching."

C. F. W. Walther, The Proper Distinction between Law and Gospel, trans., W. H. T. Dau, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1928, p. 277.

The Pastor’s Role

J-1030

"The Gospel ministry should spare no one, no matter how high the position may be which he occupies, but should rebuke wrong in everybody. This is why ministers and preachers exist. A very heavy burden is placed on them. They should so conduct their office that they stand ready to answer for it on Judgment Day. If they do not speak to you and rebuke in you what their office requires them to speak and to rebuke, God will require your blood from their hand. Tell me, why should we preachers burden ourselves still more by preaching to you as you desire? It is not our word. Nor do we live for your sake, as though you had ordered us, and we had to preach what you like. Preachers can, will, and should not do this. Therefore he who will not listen is free in God's name to walk out through the church door and let our Lord God keep His ministry unhindered."

            What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1114.

Lack of trust in the efficacy of the Word has led to a scornful attitude toward Lutheran pastors. Synodical leaders have no love for the Word of God, so they also despise the divinely called pastors under their oppressive and corrupt regimes. Synodical leaders effectively convey their contempt toward the Word and the clergy in dealing with congregations. Even if the congregation shares this contempt for the Word and deals with the pastor in the most evil and underhanded way possible, the minister is still obligated by his call to teach the Word in its truth and purity, regardless of the consequences. If the congregational leaders engage in adultery and have to be taken to court to pay support for the children of their previous marriages, they will not likely endure the pure Word of God. If the treasurer is a man who lives with and assaults his girlfriend and then damages the police car when he is arrested, he is only going to like corrupt pastors who flatter him. If the minister cuts a deal with the synod or the congregation to preserve his comfort through doctrinal compromise, he is no longer a shepherd, but a wolf with a shepherd’s crook, all the more dangerous for his disguise. Wolves love to run in packs, so the other wolves welcome him, especially if he has the sniveling, groveling attitude they crave.

Strangely, pastors have abandoned those who love the Gospel in favor of those who hate the Word and only see it in terms of benefiting themselves. The pan-Lutheran effort to promote unionism has created several generations of those who are completely indifferent to sound doctrine. Nevertheless, some remain who have not bowed the knee to Baal. The Word and Sacraments gather the congregation, so if the Gospel cannot be tolerated by one group of people, then there will be another who will listen and appreciate.

Now we are at the lowest point in Lutheran history, worse than the days before the Book of Concord was published. Pastors and congregations have the opportunity of re-discovering orthodox Lutheran doctrine. Many old Lutheran books are still circulating through book sales, so it is possible to gather a fine library in spite of what the synods are failing to do. When people read the Lutheran classics for the first time and discover names they have never known before, such as Loy, Jacobs, and Krauth, they are amazed that men could live in another century and deal with the same problems we are facing today. Even more exotic are the famous but obscure theologians of Europe. When I became a Lutheran, I could find their books in the college library in Latin, but nowhere else. Now I can at least own a selection of Gerhard, Chemnitz, Chytraeus, and Quenstedt, who are no longer just names in a Lutheran encyclopedia but clear, Gospel teachers, honored in the past for their great learning but scorned in the present for not marketing the Gospel with gimmicks and graphs.

Pastors, whether they are in a synod or independent, have the greatest flexibility in their use of time. They can control how to spend their time more easily than most professionals, or they can make themselves into victims of busy-work. Sometimes they are just lazy. A pastor’s time should be consumed with preparation for the sermon, adult classes, catechism, and visitation. He can and should ignore almost everything else. He is not the social director of the Love Boat. At meetings he should invoke the famous Kiwanis rule, “If you are in favor of this activity, you must also support it by helping out. Otherwise, do not talk in favor of something you have no intention of supporting or attending.” Pastors do not need to dither about social events, taking care of the property, or where to take the youth group on the next outing. Congregations have cleverly pushed their responsibilities onto the pastor by abandoning their own duties, then insisting that these non-essential jobs be done by him or his wife. One congregation railed at the previous pastor for taking too long on the production of the newsletter, then copied and assembled it themselves for two or three months. Suddenly they concluded that the newsletter was not needed at all. “No one reads it,” claimed the woman who had grown weary of Xeroxing, stapling, and addressing.

J-1031

"Your first desire will be that all men may obtain the same knowledge of divine grace. Hence your love will not be restrained from serving all to the fullest extent, preaching and proclaiming the divine truth wherever possible, and rejecting all doctrine and life not in harmony with this teaching. But take note, the devil and the world, unwilling that their devices be rejected, cannot endure the knowledge of what you do. They will oppose you with everything great, learned, wealthy and powerful, and represent you as a heretic and insane."

Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, VI, p. 147.

I am quite sure that Luther did not have a Sunday School program, a baseball team, a flower chart, worship bulletins, or a coffee hour. If a congregation cannot get these going with their own labor, they should abandon them and not tell the pastor, “We refuse to do this on our own. It is now up to you to motivate us.” I was always impressed that members thought it was a good idea for me to deliver flowers to the shut-ins, whom I saw all the time. My idea was that shut-ins would love to see their own members every so often. Many times I organized an effort where all the members visited one another, and this was very beneficial for the entire congregation. It also frustrated those who loved being unhappy.

The lack of pastoral visitation today speaks eloquently about the lack of trust in the Word. If ministers believe in the power of the Word, they naturally take this power to people’s homes, to nursing homes, and to hospitals. They do not make appointments for people to see them in their offices. Hospital stays and family emergencies are so important that the minister should clear his schedule to be with his members when needed. In my opinion, one of the best uses of time is to sit with a family during an operation, to visit daily in the hospital, to spend extra time with a family during and after a funeral. Visiting with families in times of difficulty and in normal times will establish trust and build an interest in God’s Word.

Many skeptics will say, “This preaching, teaching, and visiting will consume all of a pastor’s time. There will be no more time left.” That is true. We all have 168 hours per week given to us by the Creator. It is best spent on important matters. Lutherans need to abandon the Methodist model of having special interest groups (World War II discussion groups, stamp collectors), special Sundays to bring out the crowds (girl scout, boy scout, Masonic Lodge recognition day, Civil Air Patrol, favorite cookie day), and ecclesiastical intramurals.⁵¹⁸ Some people think that the ideal church has a gym, although few if any secular gyms have chapels. Of course people are free to organize sports through the congregation, but they should see all social activities as fruits of the Gospel and not as Gospel. One evangelism expert ran all around the Michigan Synod, LCA, telling pastors how to organize baseball teams in their congregations. That’s how he built up his congregation, with baseball teams. He was no longer serving a congregation or married to his wife, but he wanted to make a baseball game into the Means of Grace. Even the most jaded ministers were shocked by his devotion to gimmicks.

J-1032

"Infinite and unutterable is the majesty of the Word of God, and we can never thank God enough for it. Human reason, however, thinks: Ah, if I could hear the Lord, the Creator of heaven and earth, I would run to the end of the world! Listen, brother, God, the Creator of heaven and earth, does speak with you through His preachers; it is He who baptizes, instructs, and absolves you through the ministry of His Sacraments. These words of God are not words of Plato or Aristotle, but God Himself is speaking. And those preachers are the most suitable who very simply and plainly, without any airs and subtlety, teach the common people and youth, just as Christ taught the people with homespun parables. And those are the best and most suitable hearers who listen to the Word and do not doubt its teaching. They may be weak in faith; but as long as they do not doubt the doctrine, it is possible to help them."

            What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed. Ewald M. Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959 III, p. 1118.

Someone Asked on Facebook - What Is the Main Function of the Church?

By Norma Boeckler


I wrote: "The true church proclaims the pure, efficacious Gospel through the Means of Grace."