WELS AnswerMan Keeps Us Laughing

Q:
I noticed in recent wels communication it stated that WLS was not accredited which ment that students had to begin repaying student loans. Why not be accredited? I expect such an undertaking would prabably intail some expense, possibly some grants or funds may be secured to cover the related costs. This would relieve the financial burden on students. It would also be helpfull if at a later time they wanted an advanced degree.

A:
Dear Friend:
Thank you for your concern for our seminary students. It is always good to know that God's people are holding them in their hearts and prayers.
You ask a good question, one which the seminary has wrestled with in the past and will probably wrestle with in the future. There certainly are economic advantages for the students in accredition. That consideration was the primary reason why we looked into the matter in 2000, at which time the seminary requested and received a preliminary visit from the Association of Theological Schools.

At the the time, the ATS found a great deal to praise about WLS. The head ot the team wrote, "I was impressed by the seminary and I am very confident of the quality of you as a faculty." The great sticking point was not the expense. Rather it was the ATS policy that faculty "have advanced degrees in their primary teaching areas." I am not sure we can get around that: in fact, I'm not sure that we should.

There are possibly theological implications for us in such a policy. Let's take as an example a professor who teaches systematic (doctrinal) theology. For him to get an advanced degree (PHD) would likely involve studying systematic theology at a theological school that does not share our Bible-based beliefs on the proper way to interpret the Scriptures, nor even our commitment to the nature of the Scriptures themselves as God's inspired Word.

It may well be that such considerations led our head visitor to remark, "What you have here is good. Pursuing accreditation might change you more than you feel you should change, given your single purpose of preparing pastors for service in your church body."

So while we recognize the obvious economic advantages for students, we felt that the attainment of terminal degrees in certain theological disciplines (like systematic or doctrinal theology), might not be in the best interests of our seminary. It could bring into our seminary unwelcome influences from theologies that are not in harmony with the Scriptures or the Lutheran Confessions.

Allow me to clarify this point just a little bit more, however. The seminary administration is certainly not opposed to seminary professors pursuing advanced degrees. Far from it. Three out of our seventeen professors currently hold doctorates. Three more are currently pursuing them. Others are looking into programs. All of this the seminary administration supports and encourages. But in all these cases, the professors have been able to pursue their studies in areas where the chances of an unwholesome theological impact are not as great.

In any case, after reflecting on these matters, we decided in 2000 not to pursue the question any further--at least, at the time. In the future, the seminary may want to revisit the question. Since 2000, the Association of Theological Schools may have adopted a more flexible approach in applying their policy of advanced degrees.

In the meantime, we are fully committed to easing the financial burdens on our students through our own programs of financial aid and low or even no interest loans. We are very grateful to God's people for their generosity in making that support possible.

***

GJ - AnswerMan did not list all the WELS leaders who studied at Fuller Seminary, which is accredited. They should move Lawrence Otto Olson up to the seminary. At least he now admits being a Fuller product.

The thesis of this propaganda is - Professors might go astray if they study elsewhere. There is no better way to go astray than to listen to WELS' hairsplitting about sound doctrine. Their previous seminary president, David Valleskey, had no doctorate but adored Fuller's Pentecostal-Marketing doctrine. "Let us spoil the Egyptians!" he exclaimed, while denying he ever studied at the garbage dump of Enthusiasm.

The seminary president before Valleskey wrote, "The jury is still out on the Church Growth Movement." Then they appointed the jury - David Valleskey.

When I asked John (Sparky) Brenner about Valleskey's false doctrine in the journal, he said, "Write a letter." I said, "Where is the faculty? Why do the faculty members let this get published?" His answer was that the editor was sickly at the time.

Another thesis of this article is - Judge by the school, not by the doctrine taught. Anyone can teach anything if he has punched the right ticket.

Meanwhile, in the Little Sect on the Prairie, the ELS seminary is headed by a graduate (master's) from Nashotah House, a gay-feminist Episcopalian seminary. How do I know about Nashotah? I went there to visit one of the two conservatives on the faculty. Seminary president Schmeling marches to the drumbeat (or whip) of WELS. The Wisconsin Synod has its own flaggelant order. Schmeling and Pope John the Malefactor engineered the recent ELS debacle, creating a whole new mini-synod.

Instead of making disciples, they are making synods in the ELS.

The real issue is scholarship, not doctorates. Many PhDs go on vacation as soon as the sheepskin is inked. A certain number of pastors are scholars on their own. One translated an enormous Latin work on his own. It was implicitly anti-Church Growth (anti-Pietism) so it was ignored.

Another issue should be - doctrinal norms. As long as each synod navel-gazes, adoring its own production of documents, Lutheran doctrinal teaching will decline. The priorities should be, apart from the Scriptures:
1. Luther - the finest theologian of all time.
2. The Concordists - taught by Luther and Melanchthon.
3. The post-Concord theologians.

This is the current situation:
1. Obsess about the synod's recent publications.
2. Venerate what the synod published a few years ago.
3. Genuflect toward Pieper and Walther.
4. Attack Luther.