Quantcast
Channel: Ichabod, The Glory Has Departed
Viewing all 11615 articles
Browse latest View live

Kate, Duchess of Cambridge at London hospital in early stages of labor with royal baby - CBS News

$
0
0
Soon.


Kate, Duchess of Cambridge at London hospital in early stages of labor with royal baby - CBS News:

The Duchess of Cambridge is in the early stages of labor in a London hospital, Kensington Palace says.
Prince William was with his wife, the former Kate Middleton, when she was brought, by car, to St. Mary's Hospital, the palace says.
Kate is expected to give birth in the private Lindo Wing of the hospital, where Princess Diana gave birth to William and his younger brother, Prince Harry.
The baby will be third in line for the British throne, behind Prince Charles and William, and is anticipated eventually to become king or queen.

'via Blog this'

Cardinals Fans - Catholic Church Fighting Proposed Sex Abuse Bill In California

$
0
0



These cardinals would pay up, no?

Catholic Church Fighting Proposed Sex Abuse Bill In California:

LOS ANGELES -- Tony Quarry suppressed his memories of being abused by a Roman Catholic priest for nearly 30 years and decided to sue only after finding out that his five brothers were molested by the same man – just to discover that it was too late.
The state's high court ultimately tossed out the brothers' lawsuit because they missed a special legal window that allowed victims to sue over abuse claims decades after the fact. Their plight, however, has inspired new sex abuse legislation in California a decade after a similar bill cost the church hundreds of millions in civil settlements.
"I still believed in the tooth fairy when these things happened to me," Quarry, 51, told The Associated Press in a phone interview Tuesday. "It's a good thing for these other people to have the opportunity to step forward."
Like the previous law, Senate Bill 131 would permit many victims who would otherwise be unable to file a civil suit due to time and age restrictions – like the Quarry brothers – to sue their abuser's employer in civil court.
The proposed law would lift the statute of limitations for one year for the group of alleged victims who were 26 and older and missed the previous deadline.
The Catholic Church did not fight the 2002 bill that opened the flood gates for hundreds of victims and led to $1.2 billion in settlements from dioceses statewide, including $660 million in Los Angeles alone. This time, however, the church is fighting hard against the proposed legislation – from the pews to lobbyists.
The 2002 law led to settlements that also forced the Los Angeles archdiocese to make public earlier this year thousands of pages of confidential files kept on priests accused or suspected of abuse.

'via Blog this'

It's a Prince - Predicted by Mrs. Ichabod

$
0
0

Mrs. Ichabod predicted today that Princess Kate would have a boy.

Shepherd of the Lakes Lutheran Church Milford, Iowa » WELS. To Close Its Doors.

$
0
0
Shepherd of the Lakes Lutheran Church Milford, Iowa » Important Update:


Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

Shepherd of the Lakes has long existed on the prayers and generosity of our brothers and sisters from other congregations across the district, but two years ago, the congregation decided that it was time to put ourselves in God's hands and grab the opportunity to truly test this mission field with a full-time pastor. We knew at that time that we were, in a sense, taking a chance, but we wanted to seize the opportunity while it was available so that we could confidently say that we'd tried.

Shepherd of the Lakes has also received a great amount of assistance in our ministry from WELS from the synod itself. The past two years the synod's Board for Home Missions has given some assistance to our congregation, but this year the BHM decided not to grant any funding to Milford.

After thoroughly exploring our financial situation and the options before us, the congregation has decided to close its doors.

In light of that decision, the congregation is moving forward with efforts to sell the building and they have made me eligible for a call to serve as pastor elsewhere.

We have not set a date for a final service, but are tentatively looking at the weekend of September 29th.

The congregation is so thankful for God's blessings over the last 13 years, especially the prayers, offerings, and encouragement from our brothers and sisters in the Minnesota District, but in light of the lack of growth, the congregation prays that the remaining resources of the congregation might better serve to support another ministry.

'via Blog this'

---

Wikipedia on Milford -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milford,_Iowa

WELS/LCMS Partner in Ministry - 2013 ELCA Churchwide Assembly meets Aug. 12-17 in Pittsburgh - News Releases - Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

$
0
0

They violated their own rules to make Erwin a pastor,
then voted him in as a bishop to make a statement.

2013 ELCA Churchwide Assembly meets Aug. 12-17 in Pittsburgh - News Releases - Evangelical Lutheran Church in America:

News Releases

ELCA NEWS SERVICE
July 22, 2013
2013 ELCA Churchwide Assembly meets Aug. 12-17 in Pittsburgh
13-52-CHB/MRC
     CHICAGO (ELCA) -- Members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) will gather Aug. 12-17, 2013, in assembly at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh. The 4-million-member ELCA is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year under the theme “Always being made new,” which serves as the theme for the ELCA Churchwide Assembly -- the highest legislative authority of this church.

     Underscoring the ELCA’s commitment “to care for creation” all assembly materials will be available electronically to the 952 voting members. Nearly all voting members will be using iPads equipped with an ELCA Guidebook application that contains materials to conduct business, saving an estimated 500,000 pages of paper. ELCA members and others not attending the assembly can access live video of plenary sessions athttp://www.ELCA.org/assembly. An assembly schedule, the Pre-Assembly Report and other resources are also available at this site.

     Two key action items at the assembly include the elections for an ELCA presiding bishop and ELCA secretary. Prior to the election, members are asked to consider the document “A Conversation Regarding the Election of Churchwide Officers” which encourages conversation and discernment relating to the election of the two six-year term positions.

     Voting members will also consider:
+ “The Church and Criminal Justice: Hearing the Cries” -- a proposed social statement on criminal justice with supporting implementing resolutions. Social statements are teaching documents that assist members in their discernment about social issues, set policy for this church and guide its advocacy and work in the public arena.
+ A proposal for the ELCA’s first major fundraising campaign. If approved the five-year campaign, to begin in 2014, is designed to increase this church’s capacity to renew and start new congregations, educate and develop its leaders, bolster its global mission efforts and expand the impact of its relief and development work.
+ Proposals (known as memorials) from the ELCA’s 65 synods include topics such as gender identity discrimination, the Uniting American Families Act, community violence, ministering to same-gender couples and their families, immigration reform, hydraulic fracturing, and the Middle East.
+ Budget proposals for 2014 to 2016
+The Book of Faith initiative as a continuing emphasis and priority in this church. The assembly will also consider other action items.
     During plenary sessions, voting members will receive:
+ A new ELCA message on mental illness. The ELCA Church Council adopted “The Body of Christ and Mental Illness” in November 2012.
+ A report and recommendations of the ELCA Addressing Social Concerns Review Task Force commissioned by the 2011 ELCA Churchwide Assembly to review ways in which ELCA members address social concerns.
+ A report on the implementation of the ELCA social statement “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust” adopted by the 2009 Churchwide Assembly.
+ Greetings from Christian, Jewish, Sikh leaders and others.

     The 2013 assembly will also receive an update on the ELCA Malaria Campaign; learn more about the observance of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation; participate in a series of hearings about mission planning, healthcare reform, world hunger, women and justice and more.

     Along with voting members, hundreds more people will participate in the assembly as ELCA congregational observers, special ecumenical guests and global leaders, presidents of the eight ELCA seminaries and 26 college and universities, advisory and resource members, staff and others. The ELCA's 65 synods elect voting members to serve at churchwide assemblies.

     The ELCA’s newsroom will be located at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Room 328. A news conference will be held Aug. 14 at 6:30pm ET in Room 329 and will be available through live video streaming. Reporters are welcome to participate in person or through teleconference. To register as press and for other news and media information, contact Melissa Ramirez Cooper at Melissa.RamirezCooper@ELCA.org or Candice Hill Buchbinder atCandice.HillBuchbinder@ELCA.org.

'via Blog this'

Narrow-Minded Asks Impertinent Questions

$
0
0

Keith Free to the bean-counters:
"This is no good - it looks like a church, not like a bar."



narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "Shepherd of the Lakes Lutheran Church Milford, Iow...":

Translation: "Since we are not offering praise band/light show services with foo-foo coffee and popcorn in a converted bar a few blocks from an established parish, WELS has decided to spend its money on more appropriate venues."

According to the WELS Church Locator, the nearest parishes are over forty miles from Milford. One has to wonder how many elderly people will be unable to travel this distance to receive Word and Sacrament in foul weather, which is probably close to one-third of the year there. How much has WELS blown on corporate offices?
Hideous! No room for a latte machine!
---

Joel has left a new comment on your post "Narrow-Minded Asks Impertinent Questions":

The congregation was given assistance for 13 years. That is a long time for a mission congregation to be given help from the home mission board. From the pictures, it looks like it is a beautiful building and I'm sure it's going to be a hardship for the members. Sometimes, though, there have to be hard decisions like this. It's unfortunate but true. My prayers are with the pastor and members at Milford.

***

GJ - Some might question the $500,000 plus spent on a stinky, empty bar for The CORE, especially since the people involved knew about all the un-pastoral activities there.

Speaking of financial stewardship - since when does a congregation (St. Peter, Freedom) with a huge budget ($1.4 million per year) need a bail-out to buy a bar, not to mention a loan to fix it up?


Worldview Everlasting - Universal Objective Justification?

$
0
0


Worldview Everlasting - Universal Objective Justification?:

Where do you come done on Universal Objective Justification? I have a hard time with it, perhaps not a hard a time as Gregory L. Jackson and his Ichabod blog. Still I don’t see Scriptural supporting it. Maybe it’s worse in WELS but I’ve heard it mentioned on Issues Etc. too. I’m an old guy that has recently returned to the church to reconnect with my Lutheran roots, well the church was still there but I’m having a hard time finding any Lutherans.
The easiest and most succinct Biblical explanation is an examination of Romans 3:22b-24:
“For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,”
To break this apart:
1) Who have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God? All
2) Who are the ones that are then justified by God’s grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus? The same “all”
To sum: all have sinned… the same “all” are justified
The subjects of the verbs agree. There is no different subject as in “all fall short… *only some* are justified”. Rather the second phrase: “and are justified” uses the same subject as the first clause.
The plain and simple truth of the matter is that Christ’s death on the cross means absolutely nothing if he did not die for every single son of Adam (all people, in all times, and in all places).
Faith then clings to this proclamation and receives this (which we call subjective justification).
Rev. Matthew Lorfeld



'via Blog this'

GJ - Haha. Lorfeld had to add an "all" to make UOJ dogma come out the way he wished.

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Worldview Everlasting - Universal Objective Justif...":

UOJ is the reason he's having a hard time finding any Lutherans. The Lutheran Synods have officially jettisoned Christ and the chief and central article of Justification solely by faith in Christ alone. Notice how Rev. Lorfeld accurately teaches the object of UOJ's faith - "this proclamation". In contrast Scripture declares that the faith of the Holy Spirit graciously worked in men solely through the Means of Grace, Word and Sacraments, clings to Christ and Him crucified.

Rev. Lorfeld and the other hirelings teaching Justification without faith should provide the Scripture passage that declares a person believe he was forgiven before he believed - nay, even if he never believes.

William and Kate Left the Hospital with the Little Prince Today

$
0
0




Ever since Queen Elizabeth I, the history of the British Empire has been the history of the world. Britain's navy ruled the waves until America became a world power.

The English monarch is far more influential in world affairs than most people realize. That has been especially true of Queen Elizabeth II, who began her reign when Winston Churchill was prime minister.



UOJ Claims Exploded by Dr. Lito Cruz

$
0
0


LPC has left a new comment on your post "Worldview Everlasting - Universal Objective Justif...":

Further, we have tackled this passage before. Typical of UOJ to isolate a verse without respect to the context where the passage is found.

First off Rev. Lorfeld, skips v.22 and drops down quickly to v.23. What this verse 22 says is that there is no DISTINCTION on those who BELIEVE in Christ.

The "are justified" harkens back to the people in v.22. The "all" in that verse is not a generic "all" but have been qualified - it says unto all and upon all them that believe for there is no difference

We also notice that Rev. Lorfeld left out v.25-26, a very crucial point. As Brett said the Scripture teaches that the object of faith is Christ and Him crucified. This truth is taught by Romans 3:25-26.

Romans 3:25-26 states that Christ has been set forth by God as the propitiation for the sins of the world through faith in His blood. "Blood" here refers to His death which is payment for our sins. This is the object of faith. God justifies those who believe in Christ's death in this way.

LPC

---

KJV Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every
way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. 3 For what if some did not
believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but
every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome
when thou art judged.

5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man ) 6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? 7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? 8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. 9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. 13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: 14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood: 16 Destruction and misery are in their ways: 17 And the way of peace have they not known: 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes. 19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. 

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

***

GJ - I tried out the UOJ claims, using the New NIV reading, asking a class of non-Lutherans about justification without faith, UOJ. They said, "No, justification by faith is clearly stated anyway."

Here is the NNIV rendition, which Mequon wants so passionately -

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. [NNIV, copyright, Rupert Murdoch, aka Lizard Hands]

As I wrote several times before, the way to test the meaning is to ask what the opposite statement might be. The original wording has one all, but the stoners, Universalists, and UOJists want the second phrase to say all people in the world are justified, contrary to what was clearly taught earlier in the same chapter. Look at all the references to faith and believing in Romans 3.

The contrary question asks - is anyone justified apart from Christ? The answer throughout Romans is - NO!

Everyone has sinned, so all have sinned.

Everyone who is justified is justified in Christ alone.

The only justification is by faith.


The following fact should make the WELSians very frightened - the UOJ rendition so loved by the Sausage Factory and all UOJists is the dogma of the Leftist mainline denominations:


  • ELCA
  • Presbyterian
  • Methodist
  • Liberal Baptist
  • Episcopalian
  • Liberal Roman Catholic
  • Disciples of Christ.
UOJ is the great unifier, the backbone of ecumemism, because the double-justification of Halle University degraded into universal salvation (all are justified). And where did this universal salvation come from? Halle University - Schleiermacher, later his heir Karl Barth, the official theologian of Fuller Seminary. And Fuller is THE seminary for all denominations in American, including the Roman Catholics.




Pan-Denominational UOJ Community Agrees on Many Items

$
0
0


The UOJ community embraces all denominations - the older, the better. ELCA began during the first wave of Pietism, with Muhlenberg establishing the origins of the General Synod. Muhlenberg came directly from Halle University.

Much later, Bishop Stephan brought his group over so he could continue his affairs with his young female groupies. Stephan was a cell group leader and a former student at Halle University. With the bishop was his enforcer - the future pope of the Synodical Conference, CFW Walther.

Both wings of Lutherdom started at Halle University. No wonder they work well together today and sound so much alike. The LCMS did not sneak around like WELS. They voted to continue their joint ministry with ELCA. They even called ECLA and Thrivent "ministry partners" on their websty - at one point, years ago. That was not under Harrison, so it does not count. Haha.

I remember hearing a recording from the LCA where a leader denounced Evangelicals because "they do not teach grace." There was so much anger in his voice that the message has stuck in my brain ever since 1978, when the LCA was emphasizing evangelical outreach through their Word and Witness program, a pale copy of the Bethel Bible Series.

Let us suppose one of you decides to step on the Third Rail of Ecumenism and question UOJ. How will the Storm-Brownies of WELS, Missouri, and the ELS respond?


  • You do not have the Gospel. 
  • You do not teach the Gospel.
  • There is no grace in your message. 

These are angry, ignorant, grace-less words.


And grace will be said with the same quavering fury that I heard 35 years ago. What is this grace? Answer - in their minds, grace is God's universal forgiveness of sin. Any mention of faith makes it a work of man, they claim, with clenched teeth and furrowed brow. Faith cannot be contingent, which means using "if" in a statement, like this one -

KJV Romans 4:21 And being fully persuaded that, what He had promised, He was able also to perform. 22
And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. 23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it
was imputed to him; 24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on Him that raised up
Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our
justification.

Lenski:
 By a divine reckoning Abraham was justified; by the same, a divine reckoning, all believers are justified and in no other way.

24) Thus for our sakes, too, was it written since he is our spiritual father, and we his spiritual children “to whom it shall be reckoned.” Paul retains the summary expression. Our justification is a divine reckoning just as Abraham’s was. see v. 3 and 3:24. Shall be imputed (mellei) with the present infinitive is a periphrastic future: “shall be reckoned,” but a broad, general future that covers the entire time of the new covenant and all believers in it. Zahn calls it a timeless present. The fact that the reckoning had already been made in the case of some when Paul wrote makes no difference, for the number comprised in “us” ever increases, for they are “those believing on him who raised our Lord Jesus from the dead,” who justified the faith of Abraham to the effect that he is able to do what he has promised (v. 21), he who makes alive the dead as Abraham believed regarding him (v. 17). Why the ἐπί used with πιστεύειν should denote emotion (R.602) is unclear; it denotes the basis on which our confidence rests. That basis is the same that Abraham’s faith had.

But the promise given to Abraham’s faith has now been fulfilled. Paul mentions the crown of that fulfillment, God “having raised Jesus, our Lord (see 1:4), from the dead.” This fulfillment, as was the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham, is the basis of our faith as it was and as it will be, the basis for all new covenant believers. We fail to understand those who say that the death of Jesus is omitted here and elsewhere in Paul. Does not the resurrection imply the death? Is not the death implied in v. 25 and already in 3:25, “in his blood”? And “blood” (not merely “death”) means sacrificially shed blood just as “delivered up” means as a sacrifice for our transgressions. Then see 2 Cor. 5:14, 15: “died for all,” three times.

Jesus’ resurrection always includes his sacrificial death but it brings out the all-sufficiency of his death. If death had held him, he would have failed; since he was raised from death, his sacrifice sufficed, God set his seal upon it by raising him up. This is how and why Christ’s resurrection stands out so prominently in the apostolic records, and why it ever holds this position in our faith. This is also why Christ’s resurrection is denied and explained away together with anything sacrificial in regard to his death by the opponents of the gospel, by all the modernistic descendants of the moralists who were crushed by Paul in chapter 2. On the sense of from the dead and the interpretation of the phrase on the part of millennialists those interested may consult our remarks in connection with Matt. 17:10; Mark 9:9; Luke 9:7; John 2:22; Acts 3:16.

R. A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, by A. T. Robertson, fourth edition.
Lenski, R. C. H.: The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Columbus, Ohio : Lutheran Book Concern, 1936, S. 326.

The Greek text makes the parallels even closer than what we see in English. 

Not for him (Abraham) alone that it was imputed.
But for us also it shall be imputed.
For those believing in Him
Who was betrayed for our transgressions
And raised for our justification by faith. [Jackson New Living Translation, Second Edition]

There is not a repetition of the Greek word for, but a repetition of that concept, which can only be translated in that way. All this God did for Abraham, but also for us who believe in Him.

Believing is forgiveness. Believing is receiving grace, as Paul concludes Romans 4 and opens Romans 5

KJV Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 
2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory 
of God.


They Want Y'all To Debate the Small Stuff - And Leave Justification by Faith Alone

$
0
0
Here is another Pietist with his enabling wife.
Schaap is in the Big House now, for discipling minor girls.

The LCMS is meeting in convention and leaving people upset that a bureaucracy behaves like a bureaucracy.

The purpose of a meeting, according to Roberts' Rules, is to allow the people present to direct the actions of a group. However, the leaders do not want to hear from the hoi polloi. They only want votes of approval, so the death spiral continues. The so-called mission of the LCMS, WELS, and ELS is to provide fat salaries and luxurious benefits for the few who bite and claw their way to the bottom (that is, the bureaucracy) so they can live like the Rich Man and not like Lazarus.

Continuing SMP is a nod to Bishop Stephan,
the first SMP, who never graduated and never earned his credentials.
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/04/lcms-case-darwin-schauer-convicted-sex.html


I guess the convention voted to continue the fake pastor program, called SMP, because I saw posts about ignoring AC XIV.

Article XIV: Of Ecclesiastical Order.

Of Ecclesiastical Order they teach that no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called.

I countered by saying, "Why not? They have been teaching against AC IV and V for 150 years."

That earned some snarling rebukes from the UOJ Storm-Brownies. Am I wrong?

Article IV: Of Justification.

1] Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for 2] Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. 3] This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4.


Article V: Of the Ministry.

1] That we may obtain this faith, the Ministry of Teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted. For through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, 2] the Holy Ghost is given, who works faith; where and when it pleases God, in them that hear 3] the Gospel, to wit, that God, not for our own merits, but for Christ's sake, justifies those who believe that they are received into grace for Christ's sake.

4] They condemn the Anabaptists and others who think that the Holy Ghost comes to men without the external Word, through their own preparations and works. 
---

By now readers understand that Stephan and Walther came to America to preserve the sex cult established by the bishop's cell group ministry. They settled in a slave state and chose poor land far away in Perryville rather than develop a much better offer in St. Louis. As Zion on the Mississippi shows, Stephan's female groupies were causing talk and the locals were ready to measure out some rope for His Grace.

Walther did not repristinate Lutheran orthodoxy but continued the hybrid Pietism/Rationalism that he learned from his formal education and voluntary association with Pietists, first under one leader who died and then under Martin Stephan, who lied. But so did his blind followers, who saw nothing wrong with their bishop leaving his wife behind and sailing to America with his mistress and groupies. CFW Walther and the rest made Stephan their bishop for life.

Walther taught against the Augsburg Confession because he continued in the double justification taught to him by Stephan. Moreover, Walther had to control everything and be the boss of everything, even down to editing the dogmatics books.

The UOJ movement grew and almost devoured justification by faith in the LCMS. Still, many today do not bow the knee to Stephan, even though his first followers were always on their knees to him. But Stephan and Walther always win when Missourians choose to battle over the small stuff while avoiding the Gospel, justification by faith, the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace.

Wut?

"The Word of His Grace"
Tolja. Tolja. Tolja.
See the post below - UOJ is all grace,
according to the myth-makers.

Luther's Sermons for the Ninth Sunday after Trinity. Luke 16:1-9.The Unrighteous Steward

$
0
0



Luther's First Sermon for the NINTH SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY. Luke 16:1-9. The Unrighteous Steward.


This, sermon appeared under the title: “A sermon for the second Sunday after Mary’s Ascension. Preached at Wittenberg by Dr. Martin Luther, 1522.” As Easter in the year 1522 came on the 20th of April, the 9th Sunday after Trinity came on the 17th of August.

Text. <421601>Luke 16:1-9. And he said also unto the disciples, There was a certain rich man, who had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he was wasting his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, What is this that I hear of thee? render the account of the stewardship; for thou canst be no longer steward.

And the steward said within himself, What shall I do, seeing that my lord taketh away the stewardship from me? I have not strength to dig; to beg I am ashamed. I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the steward ship, they may receive me into their houses. And calling to him each one of his lord’s debtors, he said to the first, How much owest thou unto my lord? And he said, A hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bond, and sit down quickly and write fifty. Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, A hundred measures of wheat.

He saith unto him, Take thy bond, and write fourscore. And his lord commended the unrighteous steward because he had done wisely: for the sons of this world are for their own generation wiser than the sons of the light. And I say unto your, Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness: that, wheat it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles.

CONTENTS:

PARABLE OF THE UNRIGHTEOUS STEWARD.
I. OF THE UNRIGHTEOUS MAMMON.

1. Origin of the word Mammon. 1-2.

2. Why is it called unrighteous. 3-4. This parable is to be explained in its plain meaning and no subtle or mysterious meaning is to be sought in it. 5-7.

II. HOW TO DEFEND THIS PARABLE AGAINST ITS THREEFOLD MISUSES BY THE PAPISTS.

1. This threefold misuse in general.

2. The threefold misuse of this parable and its defense in particular. a. Its defense against the first misuse. 9-13. b. Its defense against the second misuse. 14-17. c. Its defense against the third misuse.

SUMMARY OF THIS GOSPEL:

1. This parable does not teach us how one should cheat another; for Christ calls him an unrighteous steward, and numbers him among the children of this world, therefore his wisdom is praised, not his unrighteous dealings.

2. Spiritual wisdom distributes temporal possessions to those who need them, and in their place Christ welcomes the givers into the eternal tabernacle. For he himself says, Matthew 10:20: “Whosoever giveth a cup of cold water unto one of the least of these my disciples in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward,” an. d in the day of judgment he will say, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Matthew 25:40.

3. But the flesh and hypocrisy can not do this, for the children of the world look only to what is their own, even when they think in their way, that is, according to the flesh, that they do the very best possible and perform great deeds of kindness in behalf of other people.

4. Therefore the Lord says here to those who are born again: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles.” Thus the workrighteous persons and hypocrites can not here seek any merit whatever and found a righteousness upon good works. He says: “Make to yourselves friends,” they are not the papal works and offerings and the like, unless you would understand thereby the rich canons and the rich monks.

1. This is truly a Gospel for priests and monks, and will bring them money, unless we prevent it. Before entering upon the consideration of it, we must accustom ourselves to the language used, especially the word mammon.

The Jews were acquainted with this word from the Hebrew, and it has come down to us, just like other Hebrew words, as Halleluja, Amen, Kyrie eleison. In German mammon means riches, not simply riches, but a superfluity of riches, whatever is beyond our needs. However, that which is called mammon and that which is not called mammon are distinguished in a twofold way. First, if the estimate be according to that of our Lord God and of the truth, there are many who possess mammon. But if the estimate be that of the world and of man’s mind, there are few who possess it. For our leaders in thought have taught in the high schools and even from the pulpit, that everyone should see to his station in life, what he needs, and adjust his possessions accordingly. If he be a man with wife and children, he needs more, for where many persons are there much will be needed.

And when we reckon thus, no one has anything to spare, but everyone would rather have more. If one has two thousand guilders he says, this I need for my family, to support myself, my wife and children.

2. In the second place they have taught that one is not bound to help, except in cases of the greatest need. Such teaching entirely overthrows the Gospel, so that no one has been helpful to another; but they have in the meantime built churches; and yet in doing so they did not even wait for the greatest need, until the arches were rent asunder and churches became roofless, but they gave to great excess, spreading their gold upon the walls.

To sum up the whole matter, mammon properly means, that a man has more than he needs for his support, so that he can help others without injuring himself.

3. Hence the Lord calls it “The mammon of unrighteousness,” because it is daily made use of by the wicked; as it is said: riches develop courage, and the heathen have also called it irritamenta malorum, riches tempt to evil.

Again St. Paul says, 1 Timothy 6:10: “The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil,” whence cometh strife, pride, war and bloodshed.

Therefore it is also called here the unrighteous mammon, because it is applied to such evil uses, and is a great cause of evil to men.

4. Nevertheless it is God’s creature like wine and corn, and the creatures of God are good. Why then does he call them evil? Because they tempt us to so much evil, as Paul says to the Ephesians 5:16: “Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.” Not that the time or days in themselves are evil, but because great evil is done in them. He also says to the Romans 2:5: “The day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.”

Although the day is good, but because God’s wrath will be revealed on that day, the day must take its name from it. And thus, since mammon runs into the service of evil, Christ calls it mammon of unrighteousness, namely, that which we have above our needs and we will not use in helping our neighbor; for this we possess unrighteously, and before God it is stolen goods, for in the presence of God one is bound to give and lend, and suffer himself to be deprived of it. Therefore as the saying runs, the greatest owners of property are the greatest thieves; because they possess far more than they need, and give the least possible to others. So much on the meaning of the word; we now return to the Gospel.

5. We take this parable in a common sense way, without seeking any subtleties in it, as Jerome has done, for it is not necessary to. seek a subtle meaning, the pure milk is sufficient. The parable in itself teaches how the steward deprived his master of his property, and artfully, but deceitfully and falsely, appropriated it to himself. For it is not right, that he, who previously cheated his master out of his property, should also act most deceitfully to secure for himself easy days all his life; let us abide by this explanation. For the Lord concludes that the unjust steward did wisely. He does not praise the thing in itself as good, but blames him for previously squandering his master’s goods, and afterwards shrewdly appropriating his property. This however the Lord commends, namely, that he did not forget himself, praising nought but his cunning and shrewdness. Just as when a flirt draws the whole world after her, and I say: she is a clever flirt, she knows her business. The Lord further concludes, that just as the steward is wise and shrewd in his transactions, so should we also be in obtaining eternal life.

6. And that you may understand this, take the passage of St. Paul to the Romans 5:14, Adam a type of Christ. How can the Apostle compare Adam to Christ, since Adam brought upon us sin and death, and Christ brought righteousness and life? He compares Christ to Adam in regard to origin and source, but not in regard to the fruit and work. For as Adam is the source and chief of all sinners, so Christ is the source and head of all the saints. For we have inherited from Adam nothing but sin, condemnation and the eternal curse; but from Christ we have obtained righteousness and salvation. Now these two are not alike, for sin is punishable, and righteousness is praiseworthy. But he compares them in regard to their origin; just as by Adam sin and death came upon all men, so by Christ righteousness and life come upon us.

7. Thus he compares here the unjust to the just. As the unjust man acts shrewdly, though wrongly and like a rogue, so we also should act shrewdly but righteously in godliness. This is the proper understanding of this parable. For the Lord says: “The children of this world are wiser than the children of light.” So that the children of light should learn wisdom from the children of darkness or the world. Just as they are wise in their transactions, so should also the children of light be wise in their transactions. Therefore he adds, “in their generation.” Here are truly three great questions, in which our adversaries quote this Gospel against us, when the Lord says: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness, that, when it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles.”

8. From this they try to conclude, that we must first of all do works to become good. For they say, here we read: “Make to yourselves friends,” and this surely means to do works. Secondly, they say, that God here even desires to praise works, and not only that, but also to reward them. For here we read of work and its reward, and nothing is said of faith. In the third place they claim that Christ here wishes to establish the comfort and help of the saints, when he says: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness, that, when it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles.” Thus this Gospel is made to directly oppose us, for it says: “Make to yourselves friends.” That is, do good works, that they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles. This appears to mean that we should previously merit our reception by them into the eternal tabernacles. These three points the Pope and his priests have claimed strongly for their side, and he has even called his indulgences the mammon of iniquity, mammon iniquitatis, unrighteous mammon.

9. If they thus attack us we must answer. Above all things it must be remembered that there is indeed no doubt whatever, that faith and love are the only source, as you have ever learned, that through faith we become inwardly pious, and we outwardly prove our faith by our works of love.

For I have often said, that the Scriptures speak of man in a twofold manner. At one time of the inner man, and then again of the outer man. For the Scriptures properly make distinctions, just as when I speak of a foot, I do not mean a nose. So the Scriptures at one time speak of us as of the Spirit, spiritual, how we must stand before God by faith, for this purpose he sends forth his Word to which we hold, and afterwards he follows or endows with his Spirit. Thus the tree must be good beforehand, as you have recently heard.

10. This godliness cannot be attained by anyone without grace in his heart.

If I am to make for myself friends by means of mammon, I must first be godly. For compare these two statements: A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit, and again, a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit. From which judge for yourself: if I am to do good and give away mammon, I must indeed be first good at heart, for God looketh upon the heart, and as he finds the heart, so he estimates our works. This I say, that . men should not cram works into the heart, but let the heart first be good through faith, that the works may flow forth, otherwise you do no one any good; for if you have before given a person anything, it did not come from the heart.

Hence the conclusion is, that I must first be good before I can do good.

You cannot build from without inward, you do not commence at the roof, but at the foundation. Therefore faith must first be present.

11. Hence the Scriptures speak of us as the outer man, as we in our flesh and blood live among men. Now, that I am good, you do not know, nor do I. Renee I must establish my faith to the satisfaction of myself and of the people, and I must do good to my neighbor in order to prove my faith; thus the outward works are then merely signs of the inner faith. Works do not make me good, but show that I am good, and bear witness that the faith in me is genuine. In this manner must you understand the Scriptures here also, when they say: Give of your mammon and thus make to yourselves friends; that is, do good, that your faith may become approved. So we must also distinguish what pertains to the Spirit and what is the fruit of the Spirit.

12. Luke has described the fruit of faith thus: Give to the poor and make to yourself friends. As though he would say: I will not now speak of faith, but how you should prove your faith. Wherefore do good to your neighbor, and if you can give from the heart you may be assured that you believe.

Thus the Scriptures speak at one time of fruits, at another time of faith.

Again, they also speak of fruits, when they teach, Matthew 25:42, how the Lord will speak to the lost on the last day: “I was hungry, and ye did not give me to eat; I was athirst, and ye gave me no drink,” and the like.

This means, you have not believed, as I will prove to you by your own works.

13. The Scriptures in some passages speak of the outward conduct, and in others of the inner. Now if you will apply that which is said of the outward to the heart and confuse matters, you pervert it and do wrong. Hence you must let the distinction remain, and observe it. These expressions: I have been hungry, thirsty, shelterless, naked, sick and in prison, and you have shown me no work of mercy, refer to the external conduct, and signify as much as: you have never exhibited any outward conduct by which you have shown your faith; and to prove this, I appeal to the poor as witnesses.

Therefore, faith alone must be present first to make us good, after that good works must follow to prove our piety. This now is one point, namely, concerning works.

14. The second point is far more difficult, when the Lord says: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles.” You say, our adversaries cry: you say a person shall not do good works to obtain eternal life; behold, here it reads differently. Now, what shall we answer?

There are many passages here and there, showing how we wish to have merit on our part. By quoting these passages they intend to disprove to us God’s mercy, and to lead us to satisfy God’s righteousness by our good works. By all means beware of this, and insist that it is nothing but pure grace and mercy alone, and say: I am a poor sinner, O God, forgive me my sins, gladly will I say nothing about my merit, only say thou nothing of thy judgment! Thus David said: “Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight no man living is righteous,” <19E302> Psalm 143:2. And just for this reason Christ is given to us as our Mediator. If we wish to enter into judgment before God with our good works, we cast Christ aside as our Mediator, and cannot stand before God. Therefore let him remain our Mediator and abide thou under the shadow of his wings, as Psalm 91:4 reads: “He will cover thee with his pinions, and under his wings shalt thou take refuge.” Therefore speak thus: O God, I would not merit anything before thee by my own works, but will employ them only to serve my neighbor, and I will depend only upon thy mercy.

15. You must hence remember that eternal life consists of two things, faith and what follows faith. If you go and believe and do good to your neighbor, everlasting life must follow, although you never think about it.

Just as when you take a good drink, the taste will follow as soon as you drink, even though you do not seek it. So it is also with hell, the damned do not seek it, but it follows unsought and undesired, and he must inherit it whether he will or no. This St. Paul also says, 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16, of the persecuters of the Gospel: They “drove out us, and pleased not God, and are contrary to all men; forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved; to fill up their sins always, but the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.” As though he would say: They only persecute us to fill the measure of their sins and fairly to deserve hell, and ever urge their sins more and more until they become entirely hardened, and finally have no regard for either God or man.

16. Thus the Scriptures declare here, that we should do good, so that we may be saved; and this is not meant to say, that we must first earn salvation by our works, but that we must believe, and it will follow of itself.

Therefore mark well, that you do not take what follows for what goes before, and keep yourself free from the merit of works. Should God give us heaven for our works? No, no, he has a1ready given us heaven freely, out of mere mercy. Therefore give unto the poor, in order that the eternal tabernacles may follow, and not that you may merit them by your works.

17. Observe then that these passages are explained in two different ways.

First, that a man should seek salvation by works, which is false. Second, as a consequence of faith, which is right. Therefore, you are not to seek heaven with any kind of works, but only to do the works freely, then the result, eternal life, will follow of itself without your seeking. For if I should see heaven standing open and could merit it by picking up a straw, I would not do it, lest I might say: Behold, I have earned it! No, no, not to my deservings, but to God be the glory, who has given me his Son to abolish sin and hell for me.

18. In the third place, you should faithfully hold fast to the following words: “That they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles.” Behold, they say, here it stands written that they receive us into heaven, how then can you say that we dare not place the saints as mediators before God, and that they cannot help us to heaven? Here observe, that we have but one Redeemer before God, and he is Christ. For thus St. Paul speaks, Timothy 2:5: “For there is one God, one Mediator also between God and man, himself man, Christ Jesus.” Again, Christ himself in John 14:6 says: “I am the way, no man cometh unto the Father but by me.” Therefore we must not seek our consolation in any of the saints, but in Christ alone, through whose merits alone we and all saints are sated. Therefore I will not give a penny for St. Peter’s merits, that he should help me. He cannot help himself, but whatever he has he has from God by faith in Christ. Now then, if he cannot help himself, how then can he do anything for me?

Consequently I must have another, who is Christ, God and man in one.

19. But how can he say: “Make to yourselves friends, that they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles?” This passage we understand from Matthew 25:37-40, where Christ tells us how the King will answer them who will say on the last day: “Lord, when saw we thee hungry, athirst, homeless, naked, sick and in prison? Verily I say unto you,” he will say, “inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, ye did it unto me.” Here the Lord shows who those friends are, namely, the poor and needy. As though to say: when you make them your friends, then you have me as your friend also, for they are my members.

20. Now one thought remains: How will they receive us into the eternal tabernacles, as the text here says? Will they lead us in by the hand? No, but when we come before the judgment seat of God, poor persons whom we have assisted here, will stand in heaven and say: he has washed my feet, he gave me drink, food, clothing and the like. He will certainly be my friend and a witness of my faith, whatever words he may use to declare it. Then a beggar will be more useful to me than St. Peter or St. Paul, for there none of these can help. But when a beggar comes and says: My God, this he has done unto me as thy child! that will help me, for God will say: Whatsoever you have done unto these, you have done unto me. Therefore these poor people will not be our helpers but our witnesses so that God shall receive us. By this I would not object to your honoring St. Peter and other saints, for he is a member of Christ and of God. But you do better by giving your neighbor a penny, than by building a church of gold for St. Peter. For to help your neighbor is commanded, but it is not commanded to build a church to St. Peter. Now everything is twisted the wrong way, one goes to a certain passage in St. James, another to Aix-la-Chapelle, another to Rome, to seek help from the departed saints. But the poor people, who are the real sainthood, are left behind lying in the streets. Let this be sufficient on this Gospel.

---




Luther's Second Sermon for the NINTH SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY. Luke 16:1-9.

Defense of the True Doctrine of Faith and Works.

KJV Luke 16:1 And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. 2 And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward. 3 Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. 4 I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses. 5 So he called every one of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord? 6 And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty. 7 Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore. 8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light. 9 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.


This sermon appeared during the years 1522 and 1523 in eight editions. It was translated first into Latin in 1522, and again in 1525.

CONTENTS:

THE DEFENSE OF THE TRUE DOCTRINE, CONCERNING FAITH, WORKS AND THE MERITS OF THE SAINTS AGAINST THE OBJECTIONS OF THE PAPISTS.
I. THE TRUE TEACHING CONCERNING FAITH,WORKS,AND THE MERITS OF THE SAINTS IN GENERAL.

II. THE OBJECTIONS OF THE PAPISTS AGAINST THE TRUE DOCTRINE.

III. THE TRUE DOCTRINE DEFENDED OR RESCUED.

A. The defense of the true doctrine concerning faith.

1. The true doctrine concerning faith. 4-6.

2. The defense. 7-14.

B. The defense of the true doctrine concerning works.

1. The true doctrine concerning works. 15-16.

2. The defense. 17-19.

C. The defense of the true doctrine concerning the merits of the saints.

1. The true doctrine.

2. The defense. 21-22.

IV. THE ANSWERS TO THREE QUESTIONS.

A. The three questions in general. 23.

B. The three questions and their answers in detail.

1. The first question with its answer.

2. The second question with its answer. 25-26.

3. The third question with its answer. 27-28.

1. Although in my Postils hitherto, and in my little book, Christian Liberty and Good Works, I have taught very extensively, how faith alone without works justifies, and good works are done first after we believe, that it seems I should henceforth politely keep quiet, and give every mind and heart an opportunity to understand and explain all the gospel lessons for themselves; yet I perceive that the Gospel abides and prospers only among the few; the people are constantly dispirited and terrified by the passages that treat of good works; so that I see plainly how necessary it is, either to write Postils on each gospel lesson, or to appoint sensible ministers in all places who can orally explain and teach these things.

2. If this Gospel be considered without the Spirit by mere reason, it truly favors the priests and monks, and could be made to serve covetousness and to establish one’s own works. For when Christ says: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles;” they force from it three points against our doctrine of faith, namely: first, against that we teach faith alone justifies and saves from sin; second, that all good works ought to be gratuitously done to our neighbors out of free love; third, that we should not put any value in the merits of saints or of others.

3. Against our first proposition they claim the Lord says here: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness,” just as though works should make us friends, who previously were enemies.

Against the second is what he says: “That they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles;” just as though we should do the work for our own sakes and benefit. And against the third they quote: “The friends may receive us into the eternal tabernacles;” just as though we should serve the saints and trust in them to get to heaven.

For the sake of the weak we reply to these:

I. FAITH ALONE MAKES US GOOD, AND FRIENDS OF GOD.

4. The foundation must be maintained without wavering, that faith without any works, without any merit, reconciles man to God and makes him good, as Paul says to the Romans 3:21-22: “But now apart from the law a righteousness of God hath been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe.” Paul at another place, Romans 4:9, says: “To Abraham, his faith was reckoned for righteousness;” so also with us.

Again, 5: “Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Again, 10:10: “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” These, and many more similar passages, we must firmly hold and trust in them immovably, so that to faith alone without any assistance of works, is attributed the forgiveness of sins and our justification.

5. Take for an illustration the parable of Christ in Matthew 7:17: “Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but the corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.” Here you see that the fruit does not make the tree good, but without any fruit and before any fruit the tree must be first good, or made good, before it can bear good fruit. As he also says, Matthew 12:33-34: “Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by its fruit. Ye offspring of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things?”

Thus it is the naked truth, that a man must be good without good works, and before he does any good works. And it is clear how impossible it is that a man should become good by works, when he is not good before he does the good works. For Christ stands firm when he says: “How can ye, being evil, speak good things?” And hence follows: How can ye, being evil, do good things?



6. Therefore the powerful conclusion follows, there must be something far greater and more precious than all good works, by which a man becomes pious and good, before he does good; just as he must first be in bodily health before he can labor and do hard work. This great and precious something is the noble Word of God, which offers us in the Gospel the grace of God in Christ. He who hears and believes this, thereby becomes good and righteous. Wherefore it is called the Word of life, a Word of grace, a Word of forgiveness. But he who neither hears nor believes it, can in no way become good. For St. Peter says in the Acts 15:9: “And he made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.”

For as the Word is, so will the heart be, which believes and cleaves firmly to it. The Word is a living, righteous, truthful, pure and good Word, so also the heart which cleaves to it, must be living, just, truthful, pure and good.

7. What now shall we say of those passages which so strongly insist on good works, as when the Lord says: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness?” And in Matthew 25:42: “For I was hungry, and ye did not give me to eat.” And many other similar passages, which sound altogether as though we had to become good by works. We answer thus: 8. There are some who hear and read the Gospel and what is said by faith, and immediately conclude they have formed a correct notion of what faith is. They do not think that faith is anything else than something which is altogether in their own power to have or not to have, as any other natural human work. Hence, when in their hearts they begin to think and say: “Verily, the doctrine is right, and I believe it is true,” then they immediately think faith is present. But as soon as they see and feel in themselves and others that no change has taken place, and that the works do not follow and they remain as before in their old ways, then they conclude that faith is not sufficient, that they must have something more and greater than faith.

Behold, how they then seize the opportunity, and cry and say: Oh, faith alone does not do it. Why? Oh, because there are so many who believe, and are no better than before, and have not changed their minds at all. Such people are those whom Jude in his Epistle calls dreamers, 5:8, who deceive themselves with their own dreams. For what are such thoughts of theirs which they call faith, but a dream, a dark shadow of faith, which they themselves have created in their own thoughts, by their own strength without the grace of God? They become worse than they were before. For it happens with them as the Lord says in Matthew 9:17 “Neither do men put new wine into old wine-skins; else the skins burst, and the wine is spilled.” That is, they hear God’s Word and do not lay hold of it, therefore they burst and become worse.

9. But true faith, of which we speak, cannot be manufactured by our own thoughts, for it is solely a work of God in us, without any assistance on our part. As Paul says to the Romans 5:15, it is God’s gift and grace, obtained by one man, Christ. Therefore, faith is something very powerful, active, restless, effective, which at once renews a person and again regenerates him, and leads him altogether into a new manner and character of life, so that it is impossible not to do good without ceasing.



For just as natural as it is for the tree to produce fruit, so natural is it for faith to produce good works. And just as it is quite unnecessary to command the tree to bear fruit, so there is no command given to the believer, as Paul says, nor is urging necessary for him to do good, for he does it of himself, freely and unconstrained; just as he of himself without command sleeps, eats, drinks, puts on his clothes, hears, speaks, goes and comes.

Whoever has not this faith talks but vainly about faith and works, and does not himself know what he says or whither it tends. For he has not received it; he juggles with lies and applies the Scriptures where they speak of faith and works to his own dreams and false thoughts, which is purely a human work. Whereas the Scriptures attribute both faith and good works not to ourselves, but to God alone.

10. Is not this a perverted and blind people? They teach we cannot do a good deed of ourselves, and then in their presumption go to work and arrogate to themselves the highest of all the works of God, namely faith, to manufacture it themselves out of their own perverted thoughts. Wherefore I have said that we should despair of ourselves and pray to God for faith as the Apostle did. Luke 17:5. When we have faith we need nothing more, for it brings with it the Holy Spirit, who then teaches us not only all things, but also establishes us firmly in it, and leads us through death and hell to heaven.

11. Now observe, we have given these answers, that the Scriptures have such passages concerning works, on account of such dreamers and selfinvented faith; not that man should become good by works, but that man should thereby prove and see the difference between false and true faith.

For wherever faith is right it does good. If it does no good, it is then certainly a dream and a false idea of faith. So, just as the fruit on the tree does not make the tree good, but nevertheless outwardly proves and testifies that the tree is good, as Christ says, Matthew 7:16: “By their fruits ye shall know them”--thus we should also learn to know faith by its fruits.

12. From this you see, there is a great difference between being good, and to be known as good; or to become good and to prove and show that you are good. Faith makes good, but works prove the faith and goodness to be right. Thus the Scriptures speak in the plain way, which prevails among the common people, as when a father says unto his son: “Go and be merciful, good and friendly to this or to that poor person.” By which he does not command him to be merciful, good and friendly, but because he is already good and merciful, he requires that he should also show and prove it outwardly toward the poor by his act, in order that the goodness which he has in himself may also be known to others and be helpful to them. 13 So you should explain all passages of Scripture referring to works, that God thereby desires to let the goodness received in faith express and prove itself, and become a benefit to others, so that false faith may become known and rooted out of the heart. For God gives no one his grace that it may remain inactive and accomplish nothing good, but in order that it may bear interest, and by being publicly known and proved externally draw every one to God; as Christ says, Matthew 5:16: “Even so let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” Otherwise it would be but a buried treasure and a hidden light. But what profit is there in either? Yea, goodness does not only thereby. become known to others, but we ourselves also become certain that we are honest, as St. Peter in 2 Peter 1:10 says: “Wherefore, brethren, give the more diligence to make your calling and election sure.” For where works do not follow a man cannot know whether his faith is right; yea, he may be certain that his faith is a dream, and not right as it should be. Thus Abraham became certain of his faith and that he feared God, when he offered up his son. As God by the angel said to Abraham, Genesis 22:12: “Now I know, that is, it is manifest, that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.”

14. Then abide by the truth, that man is internally, in spirit before God, justified by faith alone without works, but externally and publicly before men and himself, he is justified by works, that he is at heart an honest believer and pious. The one you may call a public or outward justification, the other an inner justification, yet in the sense that the public or external justification is only the fruit, the result and proof of the justification in the heart, that a man does not become just thereby before God, but must previously be just before him. So you may call the fruit of the tree the public or outward good of the tree, which is only the result and proof of its inner and natural goodness.

This is what St. James means when he says in his Epistle, James 2:26: “Faith without works is dead.” That is, as the works do not follow, it is a sure sign that there is no faith there; but only an empty thought and dream, which they falsely call faith. Now we understand the word of Christ: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness.” That is, prove your faith publicly by your outward gifts, by which you win friends, that the poor may be witnesses of your public work, that your faith is genuine. For mere external giving in itself can never make friends, unless it proceed from faith, as Christ rejects the alms of the Pharisees in Matthew 6:2, that they thereby make no friends because their heart is false. Thus no heart can ever be right without faith, so that even nature forces the confession that no work makes one good, but that the heart must first be good and upright.

II. ALL WORKS MUST BE DONE FREELY AND GRATUITOUSLY, WITHOUT SEEKING GAIN BY THEM.

15. Christ means this when, in Matthew 10:8, he says: “Freely ye receive, freely give.” For just as Christ with all his works did not merit heaven for himself, because it was his before; but he served us thereby, not regarding or seeking his own, but these two things, namely, our benefit and the glory of God his Father; so also should we never seek our own in our good works, either temporal or eternal, but glorify God by freely and gratuitously doing good to our neighbor. This St. Paul teaches the Philippians 2:5: “Have this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus: who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross.” That is, for himself he had enough, since in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and yet he served us and became our servant.

16. And this is the cause; for since faith justifies and destroys sin before God, so it gives life and salvation. And now it would be a lasting shame and disgrace, and injurious to faith, if any one by his life and works would desire to obtain what faith already possesses and brings with it. Just as Christ would have only disgraced himself had he done good in order to become the Son of God and Lord over all things, which he already was before. So faith makes us God’s children as John 1:12 says: “But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become the children of God, even to them thai: believe on his name.” But if they are children, then they are heirs, as St. Paul says, Romans 8:17, and Galatians 4:7.

How then can we do anything to obtain the inheritance, which we already have by faith?

17. But what shall we say of passages that insist on a good life for the sake of an external reward as this one does: “Make to yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness?” And in Matthew 19:17: “But if thou wouldst enter into life, keep the commandments.” And Matthew 6:20: “But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven.” We will say this: that those who do not know faith, only speak and think of the reward, as of works. For they think that the same rule obtains here as in human affairs, that they must earn the Kingdom of heaven by their works.

These, too, are dreams and false views, of which Malachi 1:10, speaks: “Oh, that there were one among you that would shut the doors, that ye might not kindle fire on mine altar in vain!” They are slaves and greedy self-enjoying hirelings and day laborers, who receive their reward here on earth, like the Pharisees with their praying and fasting, as Christ says, Matthew 6:2.

However, in regard to the eternal reward it is thus: inasmuch as works naturally follow faith, as I said, it is not necessary to command them, for it is impossible for faith not to do them without being commanded, in order that we may learn to distinguish the false from the true faith. Hence the eternal reward also follows true faith, naturally, without any seeking, so that it is impossible that it should not, although it may never be desired or sought, yet it is appropriated and promised in order that true and false believers may be known, and that every one may understand that a good life follows naturally of itself.

18. As an illustration of this take a rude comparison: behold, hell and death are also threatened to the sinner, and naturally follow sin without any seeking; for no one does wickedly because he wants to be damned, but would much rather escape it. Yet, the result is there, and it is not necessary to declare it, for it will come of itself. Yet, it is declared that man might know what follows a wicked life. So here, a wicked life has its own reward without seeking it. Hence a good life will find its reward without any seeking it. When you drink good or poor wine, although you do not drink it for the taste, yet the taste naturally follows of itself.

19. Now when Christ says: make to yourselves friends, lay up for yourselves treasures, and the like, you see that he means: do good, and it will follow of itself without your seeking, that you will have friends, find treasures in heaven, and receive a reward. But your eyes must simply be directed to a good life, and care nothing about the reward, but be satisfied to know and be assured that it will follow, and let God see to that. For those who look for a reward, become lazy and unwilling laborers, and love the reward; more than the work, yea, they become enemies of work. In this way God’s will also becomes hateful, who has commanded us to work, and hence God’s command and will must finally become burdensome to such a heart.

III. IT IS NOT THE SAINTS, BUT GOD ONLY WHO RECEIVES US INTO THE ETERNAL TABERNACLES, AND BESTOWS THE REWARD.

20. This is so clear that it needs no proof. For how can the saints receive us into heaven, as every one himself must depend on God alone to receive him into heaven, and every saint scarcely has enough for himself? This the wise virgins prove, who did not wish to give of their oil to the foolish virgins, Matthew 25:9, and St. Peter, 1 Peter 4:18, says: “The righteous is scarcely saved.” And Christ in John 3:13: “And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of Man, who is in heaven.”

21. What then shall we reply to: “Make to yourselves friends out of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when it shall fail, they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles ?” We say this: that this passage says nothing about the saints in heaven, but of the poor and needy on earth, who live among us. As though he would say: why do you build churches, make saints and serve my mother, St. Peter, St. Paul and other departed saints?

They do not need this or any other service of yours, they are not your friends, but friends of those who lived in their days and to whom they did good; but do service to your friends, that is, the poor who live in your time and among you, your nearest neighbors who need your help, make them your friends with your mammon.

22. Again, we must not understand this reception into the eternal tabernacles as being done by man; however, men will be an instrument and witness to our faith, exercised and shown in their behalf, on account of which God receives us into the eternal tabernacles. For thus the Scriptures are accustomed to speak when they say: sin condemns, faith saves, that means, sin is the cause why God condemns, and faith is the cause why he saves. As man also is at all times accustomed to say: your wickedness will bring you misfortune, which means, your wickedness is the cause and source of your misfortune. Thus our friends receive us into heaven, when they are the cause, through our faith shown to them, of entering heaven.

This is enough on these three points.

23. In this connection we will explain three questions, that we may better understand this Gospel. What is mammon? Why is it unrighteous? And why Christ commands us to imitate the unjust steward, who worked for his own gain at his master’s expense, which without doubt is unjust and a sin?

24. First, mammon is a Hebrew word meaning riches or temporal goods, namely, whatever any one owns over and above what his needs require, and with which he can benefit others without injuring himself. For Hamon in Hebrew means multitude, or a great crowd or many, from which Mahamon or Mammon, that is, multitude of riches or goods, is derived.

25. Second, it is called unrighteous, not because obtained by injustice and usury, for with unrighteous possessions no good can be done, for it must be returned as Isaiah 61:8, says: “For I, Jehovah, love justice, I hate robbery with iniquity.” And Solomon, Proverbs 3:27, says: “Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thy hand to do it.” But it is called unrighteous because it stands in the service of unrighteousness, as St. Paul says to the Ephesians 5:16, that the days are evil, although God made them and they are good, but they are evil because wicked men misuse them, in which they do many sins, offend and endanger souls. Therefore, riches are unrighteous, because the people misuse and abuse them. For we know that wherever riches are the saying holds good: money rules the world, men creep for it, they lie for it, they act the hypocrite for it, and do all manner of wickedness against their neighbor to obtain it, to keep it, and increase it to possess the friendship of the rich.

26. But it is especially before God an unrighteous mammon because man does not serve his neighbor with it; for where my neighbor is in need and I do not help him when I have the means to do so, I unjustly keep what is his, as I am indebted to give to him according to the law of nature: “Whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them.” Matthew 7:12. And Christ says in Matthew 5:42: “Give to him that asketh thee.” And John in his first Epistle,1 John 3:17: “But whoso hath the world’s goods, and beholdeth his brother in need, and shutteth up his compassion from him, how doth the love of God abide in him?” And few see this unrighteousness in mammon because it is spiritual, and is found also in those possessions which are obtained by the fairest means, which deceive them that they think they do no one any harm, because they do no coarse outward injustice, by robbing, stealing and usury.

27. In the third place it has been a matter of very great concern to many to know who the unjust steward is whom Christ so highly recommends? This, in short, is the simple answer: Christ does not commend unto us the steward on account of his unrighteousness, but on account of his wisdom and his shrewdness, that with all his unrighteousness, he so wisely helps himself. As though I would urge some one to watch, pray and study, and would say: Look here, murderers and thieves wake at night to rob and steal, why then do you not wake to pray and study? By this I do not praise murderers and thieves for their crimes, but for their wisdom and foresight, that they so wisely obtain the goods of unrighteousness. Again. as though I would say: An unchaste woman adorns herself with gold and silk to tempt young boys; why will you not also adorn yourself with faith to please Christ? By this I do not praise fornication, but the diligence employed.

28. In this way Paul compares Adam and Christ saying: “Adam was a figure of him that was to come.” Romans 5:14. Although from Adam we have nothing but sin, and from Christ nothing but grace, yet these are greatly opposed to each other. But the comparison and type consist only in the consequence or birth, not in virtue or vice. As to birth, Adam is the father of all sinners, so Christ is the father of all the righteous. And as all sinners come from one Adam, so all the righteous come from one Christ.

Thus the unjust steward is here typified to us only in his cunning and wisdom, who knows so well how to help himself, that we should also consider in the right way the welfare of our souls as he did in the wrong way that of his body and life. With this we will let it suffice, and pray God for grace.

Joel Lillo Waxes Hysterical on the Article While Indifferent about Unscriptural Behavior in the Clergy, Plagiarism, False Doctrine

$
0
0

Joel Lillo, Fox Valley WELS has left a new comment on your post "They Want Y'all To Debate the Small Stuff - And Le...":

"The Hoi Polloi" is one of my grammatical pet peeves. Since "hoi" means "the," it must be an expression dreamed up by the Department of Redundancy Department.

It's like "VAT Tax." (That would make it "Value Added Tax Tax, for crying out loud.)

***

GJ - Joel Lillo, Fox Valley, is consistently wrong.

Hoi polloi means "the many" in Greek, but the two words together have become a noun in normal usage. Grammatical usage in one language does not transfer into the new language when those adaptions are made.

A graduate of the Sausage Factory might say "the polloi" but no one would know what he was trying to say. Perhaps the idea is to arouse the curiosity of the audience, so the poorly educated bumpkin can say, "I. Studied. Greek."

We normally say, "The data shows..." even though data is plural for datum. Data has become a singular in English.

I suppose the rubes in Fox Valley say VAT tax, but I have always heard it simply described as the Value Added Tax. Since the acronym is all English, that is not too difficult to grasp.



Does Luther Teach UOJ? - The Trinity Nine Sermon Answers That Question

$
0
0


narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "Luther's Sermons for the Ninth Sunday after Trinit...":

Luther teaches UOJ, does he?

"For thus the Scriptures are accustomed to speak when they say: sin condemns, faith saves, that means, sin is the cause why God condemns, and faith is the cause why he saves." 

Luther's second sermon for Trinity Nine, #22.

Classic Ichabod - Corky's Essay about WELS in 1992 - Erased from Issues in WELS

$
0
0



Monday, March 2, 2009

Corky Koeplin's Paper, 1992 - Ipsissima Verba



REFLECTIONS, CONCERNS, AND QUESTIONS
ABOUT OUR BELOVED WELS – 1992

Why is it that after a fairly long life, thirty-nine years of which have been spent in the public ministry of our dear synod, three questions, somewhat similar in content, persistently come to mind?
1. “WELS, oh WELS, wherefore art thou my WELS?”
2. The song title: “Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered”
3. “Oh foolish, WELS, who hath bewitched you?”

Why on earth do I feel at times like a traumatized lover, a Blue’s singer and an ancient Galatian? What is the cause, or are the causes, for a soul’s deep distress? Perhaps it isn’t at all strange to find comfort in the fact that I am not alone in my anxiety and concern. Multiple scores of brothers throughout the length and breadth of synod, covering the spectrum of ages and types of pastoral services, share all or most of these distressing concerns. These are good men; tried, true blue and tested in the crucible of devoted service to Christ and the synod. Some few are honored “em’s”; some seminary professors; some full-time or part-time synod or district administrators. The vast majority are evangelical parish pastors whose work and lives center squarely on the proclamation of the saving Gospel of our Lord Jesus. They abhor legalism, eschew extremism, while craving balance and moderation in judgment. If someone insists on a label, try: “Progressive-Conservative.”

At the risk of missing a few key points, -- a “P-C” is:
A. pleased to be rooted in the Scriptural and the Lutheran Confessions and yet is not afraid to “try something new or different”;
B. in love with the King James version but uses a more modern English translation in both pulpit and readings;
C. happy to be Christian, Lutheran and WELS;
D. virtually a workaholic, but knows full well that whatever good results are strictly due to the gracious work of the Spirit and whatever “bad” results are due to human inadequacies, his;
E. not afraid to launch out into deep “at Thy word,” but prays fervently for an extra measure of uncommon sanctified sense so that the “new” does not get in the way of the Spirit’s work;
F. not hankering for, longing for, or pining after a return to the “good old days.” But, while recognizing that change and new are inevitable, wants to be certain that the changes are rooted in our WELS heritage and not because of some outside and strange shepherd-teacher or ecclesiastical heritage;
G. quick to recognize and say that non-WELS folk may indeed have some good ideas and sound methods which we may “sanitize,” adapt and adopt, but only if the terminology employed has not been co-opted by the heterodox so as to confuse the faithful rather than edify them.



-2-
In short, these dear brothers are not fanatical “headhunters” nor do they subscribe in any form or fashion to some sort of a “conspiracy theory “that” someone” or “some group” is quietly and persistently trying to drag the WELS to “the left” into the 21st century. However, rejecting that nonsense does not still the anxious hearts either. What is it, rather than who is it, that “troubleth Israel/WELS”? Our concerns can perhaps be summed up into six major categories to whit:
1. A Synodical Drift.
2. The “Business” of the Church Supplanting the Work of the Church.
3. An Unhealthy Inroad of “Church Growth.”
4. A Top Heavy Administration.
5. A Denigration of the Holy Ministry.
6. A Dismantling of the Worker Training System.

Before we look at these items individually, one or two things should be said at the outset. We freely grant that many, if not most of the items listed fall into the category of “feelings,” “impressions,” “observations” and/or “perceptions.” All of the assertions can be flatly denied. But deniability does not obviate reality even if the reality may indeed be somewhat nebulous. Even as we are free to say that Christian brothers of good heart and intent will not and do not agree with our assessments, so also do we ask that the same characterizations be granted to those who respectfully disagree with the assumption that “all is well in the WELS.” Give us the courtesy of a brotherly and thoughtful hearing when we say, “there is – something – an ecclesiastical bug – if you will, that is threatening and attacking the body of corporate WELS and let’s get it now before we wind up in an intensive care ward. No, WELS is not “sick unto death!” By the same token, please grant that “Mother WELS” has more than a simple case of the sniffles.

1. “A SYNODICAL DRIFT”

Yea verily, this concern is perhaps the hardest one to quantify and the most difficult to articulate. Granted, it is a feeling, a perception. But it is also, in our judgment, real enough to be felt and perceived by a rising number of synodical historians, insiders, outsiders and watchers. Again, in our judgment, our beloved WELS is adrift in a sea of indecision. It does not seem to know where it’s going nor how to get there. It seems to lack a unifying focus as it once had in the years immediately following the breakup of the Synodical Conference. It was a mission church on fire for Christ, and from the humble parish pastor in Pumpkin Junction to the high echelon of leadership –‘ most every pastor zeroed in on getting the gospel of Jesus out to a dying and needy world. Say what you will, that driving passion is not present today. Instead we find rising numbers of parish pastors who, to an ever increasing degree, have pronounced a pox on the mail people who deliver rafts of directives, injunctions, appeals, updates (as opposed



-3-
to down dates), and notices of workshops, seminars and skill sharpening sessions all streaming forth Niagara-like from “2929.” They’ve simply “withdrawn”; will do only those synodical “things” that they absolutely “have to,” – but without enthusiasm. Far too many of the foot soldiers of Jesus have said by their lack of gung ho response: “Hey, ‘synod,’ bug off! I’ll work my heart out and my head off in my local vineyard; just leave me alone! You solicit my support, but only if support begins and ends with $$$$ and evermore of them. My advice and counsel is not sought, and if by chance an honest question is raised, it is brushed aside as either being “false” or one raised out of ignorance in not seeing ‘the big picture.’ Hey, O.K. if I’m too ill-informed to get it, go fetch it without me. I pass.” Now apparently “someone” in 2929 may have sensed something of this because “Mission Vision 2,000+” appeared and was adopted with great fanfare at a reasonably recent synod convention. It paints pictures. It sets goals. It lays out plans. It has objectives. It contains numbers for every division, sub-division and unit of synod. It also, unfortunately and factually, falls far short of being the unifying force and rallying point that perhaps it was intended to be. The document is seriously, if not fatally flawed.

You cannot take a document born out of “dreams” (“If there were neither restraints of men and money, where/what would like to see our synod be, go and do next year, three years, five years, ten years from now? Dare to dream a little and let not your dreams be small.”) and then when reality and expectation do not come together, draw the conclusion that somehow we are “failing” as a synod because MV 2000+ says so!

While it is most certainly true that we are confident that not one of our pastoral brothers, synod-wide, does not freely confess from the heart that “the Spirit works;when and where He wills, and is solely responsible for the increase,” nonetheless, numbers, statistics, percentages, growth patterns (or lack thereof), and the ubiquitous bottom-line have SEEMINGLY been cited with alarming regularity. Numbers (not the biblical book), have SEEMINGLY achieved an unhealthy status in our circles.

One of the by-products of the bottom-line fetish has been that many of our parish pastoral brothers have been given yet another ticket for an unwanted, unnecessary, unasked for and unappreciated guilt trip. These distressed brothers have in turn adopted a defensive mode which has also resulted in a rising confrontational stance, “2929” versus “us.”

It is inevitable that this question arises: “Who Is Running the Synod?” We speak not concerning those matters where the Word has clearly spoken, but rather, “Who Is In Charge? Who Sets the Direction? Who Points the Direction Where We Should Be Going and What and How We Should Be Doing It?”



-4-
Is it: a) the General President and the Praesidium?
b) the Coordinating Council?
c) the Board of Trustees?
d) the Conference of Presidents?
e) the Synod in Convention?
f) all of the above?
g) none the above?
h) a combination of the above?

At the present there seems to be a large amount of confusion as to who is supposed to do what. Are we run by a Board of Directors, titled in the WELS, the Coordinating Council? Are we run by the Board of Trustees? Is it a shared responsibility between these two boards?

Constitutionally the lines are clear. But in fact, the reality is a whole lot less clearly defined which has resulted in “The Drift.” How do the district presidents, full-time pastors, and part-time administrators fit into this equation? Again, constitutionally they seem to be restricted to “spiritual matters.” They seem to have little or no voice in practical policy and programs of synod. Is this wise? Is this truly in the best interest of the synodiacal “good and welfare?” The upshot of all this is that there is no clear, insistent clarion call to united action. The trumpet seems to be muted and that, to us, is distressing.


2. THE “BUSINESS” OF THE CHURCH SUPPLANTING
THE “WORK” OF THE CHRUCH
The second concern is like unto the first. Indeed, it is related. Since the mid-eighties it seems that more and more (all) of our WELS – work has fallen under a financial microscope. This is a mixed blessing. On the one hand , none of us are that obtuse not to recognize that money, offerings, the synod dollar, the financial resources the Lord places into our hand; call it what you will, is the “mother’s milk to church work.” Missionaries, professors, et al. need to be salaried/supported. Utilities, vendors of all sorts and description need to be satisfied with legal tender. Secondly, who will argue with good stewardship? Properly understood, the terms, like unto “careful money management,” “maximum results,” “accountability,” – even “more bang for the buck” take on an almost benign air. On the other hand, we do take some umbrage over money calling the shots; decisions which are financially driven; the financial tail wagging the mission dog. Now



-5-
lest some feel that the terminology is both too judgmental or pejorative, kindly permit a brief demonstration to illustrate their aptness. I shall cite but four programs which started out on a pious and devoted “wish list,” captured the heart, interest and imagination of a God-fearing, Christ-believing Christian and are now up and running as part of a synodical budgetary program:
a) Brazil;
b) Taiwan #4;
c) Germany/Eastern Europe (Two year, two men to assist our brothers who formerly were in East Germany;
d) the seminary graduate to the CIR (Russia)

Now understand, NONE of these programs are bad, bad, bad,! On the contrary, they are good! We rejoice, thank and praise a gracious God that He moved the hearts of monetarily blessed Christians to see a special need and have the wherewithal to make something good happen. But that is not the point. These four world mission illustrations hopefully serve to demonstrate that in all innocence and honesty a pliosophical/theological inversion has occurred. We seemingly have gone from, “There’s the Lord’s work, let’s find the money to do it”; to: “There’s the Lord’s work, let’s check our bottom-line to see how much of it we can do.” There is a vast difference, not at all subtle, between the two approaches to “the Lord’s Work.” We know that the WELS cannot do it all. We know that our inability to do it all should not, must not, prevent us from doing all that we can. We know that it takes “someone” to exercise leadership and that “someone” must exercise “value judgments.”

What seems to be missing in these value judgments is the Faith Factor, an unquantifiable attitude of heart and mid-set. It will appear in no computer spread sheet. One cannot attach a number to it on an accountant’s ledger. But, in the Lord’s work, in the “business” of the church, it must be taken into account as “bottom-lines” are scrutinized and evaluated! Parish pastors, hopefully all pastors, know whereof we speak. In a congregation, when the pastor(s) and perhaps key leadership are convinced that a new project which will cost money is in the best interest of: the good and welfare of the kingdom; is the product of prayer, planning and analysis; is both the work and will of God, --but does not have the full cost of the project firmly in hand- four phrases will be sounded by someone in the voters’ assembly just as sure as crabgrass grows bigger and quicker than good lawn seed:
a) “we’ve got to be practical”;
b) “we’ve got to be realistic”;
c) “ we can’t afford it”;
d) “we’ve got to count the cost before we go into battle.”





-6-
Confidently looking for and expecting the blessing of God is NOT “practical” nor “realistic.” It’s the faith factor! “Can’t afford it” is a matter of sanctified Christian judgment while, surely, it is a RARE WELS pastoral bird who ignores the biblical injunction concerning “cost counting.”

We are not aware of a single WELS parish that does NOT have a budget. Similarly there isn’t one around that constructs its budget on its bank or checkbook balance. Likewise the parish does not exist that first takes commitments and then, on the basis of what the commitment total is, - construct the budge. Neither does our synod. Congregations and the synod take into account those who are unwilling to commit/“pledge” (but have, will, and do bring gifts), incidental offerings, special gifts, wills, bequests, and the Faith Factor. We recognize our responsibility; we accept it; we set about, under God to do it.

Our God does, in a very real sense, ask us to “crawl out on a limb.” He, on the other hand, promises not to saw it off behind us. It seems too many of us that we today, in our synod, have business expertise, business, acumen, business efficiency, and business techniques. We also seem to have in abundance, practical thinkers who deal in realism and are great in cost counting and accounting. What seems to be in short supply is a mind-set, that risks, dares, and is sure that the faith factor is not dreamy idealism. Has the time come to find the answer to the questions: “Is the Lord’s business (WELS) business – a business?” “Is the Lord’s business the same as any other large multi-national corporation?” “Can we apply the same business principles which are good, tried and true on the “outside” to the WELS?”

Maybe all of the horror stories of the 30’s, those terrible times when our synod was in deep financial trouble, when professors and what few home missionaries we had waited for “short” checks, -- maybe we still bear the deep psychological scars which that near bankrupt condition placed upon our WELS soul. But we now ask, one-half a century later, and just that much closer to The Day, have we become not just “fiscally conservative,” but a timid and frightened synod, who if we can’t see it on our bottom- lines, if we can’t put our finger into the black and white numbers, -- we will not believe in a nebulous “faith factor”. What we respectfully ask is that the questions be addressed via a study of Scripture and perhaps settle the unsettling perception that we’ve somehow reversed how we carry out the Lord’s work, the business of the WELS.


3. “AN UNHEALTHY INFLUENCE OF CHURCH GROWTH”

It is precisely in the area of this concern that our “nervous needle” jumps off the


-7-
meter. What on earth is happening in our WELS? Some seem to be “talking funny” and regional accents have nothing to do with it. Our once common theological language is undergoing a metamorphosis so that either we yearn for parenthetical explanation or a translator or both, to explain what is meant when these foreign-to-WELS-words are used. What manner of language is being used? For want of a better descriptive term, we’ll call it: “CG-speak.” Kindly permit a few examples:
a) Apparently we are not to shepherd God’s flock any longer, we are to “minister” to them.
b) Apparently it’s somewhat passé to teach our people “whatsoever I have commanded you,” we “disciple” them.
c) Instead of “leading people into the pleasant pastures of the word and giving them to drink of the Living Water,” we now are to “nurture” them.
d) People are to “grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.” The biblical quote is less seen than the words “discipling” and “nurturing.”
e) Although we’ve been “saved to serve,” now we should think of a variety of “ministries,” such as “the ministry of leaf raking,” “the ministry of snow shoveling” and “the ministry of greeting.” Not to be overlooked is the wonderful fun ministry, “the ministry of valet parking.!”
f) Care should be taken that our services, in addition to being the usual edifying, should also be “user friendly.” Additional care should be taken to avoid the name, Lutheran, since it is “well known”(?) that the name, Lutheran is a “turnoff” (in sharp contrast to being “turned on” by “entertainment evangelism” and that marvelous “user friendly” service).

At this point, before proceeding, it perhaps would be wise to comment briefly on the Church Growth Movement itself before proceeding to “CG-speak.” We acknowledge that not everything is rotten about CGM. There are some few so-called “common sense” things (a misnomer), that many have done or are doing as an automatic. For example, is there a WELS pastor around who does not emphasize that the congregation’s ushers should look neat, clean, tidy and well dressed, as well as giving off an aura of friendly welcome as they distribute the worship folders of the day? What disturbs us is the origin, the authorship and the theological heritage of CGM. Although it is used by lawyers, to some of us the “poison fruit” terminology with reference to bodies of evidence, seems to not be fit, but apply in the case of CGM. Luther identified it as “the other of different spirit” at Marburg. He did not classify his opponent as a non-Christian antagonist; but Ulrich badly needed a theological attitude adjustment. The upshot of this is that WELS Lutherans do not leave




-8-
“Wittenberg” and take excursions into “Geneva” to see what “good things” we can pick up, use and ingest. We feel that the warning label, “Poison Fruit,” should be printed in bold type and affixed to all things having to do with the CGM. We are aware that some may indeed say that first of all we are “too extreme” and secondly our COP has looked into it, commissioned our seminary to examine and dissect it and that our official WELS position is that the CGM is “wanting,” to say the least. We would simply counter by contending that a defense of our theological heritage is hardly “extremism” and that in our honorable effort to be “balanced” in our critique we MAY have given a measure of credibility of the CGM by “damning it faintly.”

Two other items need to be touched on at this point in time:
1) Why have some felt the need to use “CG-speak” in a variety of communications one to the other? Is it wise, is it in the best interests of the WELS to use terms and phrases which unfortunately have been co-opted by the heterodox, Reformed, Evangelicals and suchlike?
To illustrate: It may be biblically correct (there’s nothing “wrong” with the phrase), to refer to Mary, the mother of our Lord, as “The Blessed Virgin Mother.” But brothers, who in the WELS speaks like that? The term, like “catholic,” has been co-opted by the Romanists! These are “good” words; a good title, but it simply is neither wise nor expedient to use them. So also with “CG-speak.” Uncommon sanctified sense would seem to indicate that we avoid, discontinue use of, or at the very least, be extremely judicious in the sparing use of co-opted terms and phrases.
2) Are we way off the mark when we express concern over our WELS brothers taking in seminars, workshops, etc. etc. sponsored by and featuring CG speakers? What do we hope to learn from teachers who are not of our theological persuasion? Verily, we do turn out mature men of discernment from our seminary. But it’s hard to erase the biblical picture of the Apostle Peter, who only wanted to warm himself by the fire, and see what he could see and perhaps learn about the fate of his Lord. Although there wasn’t a fire-blister apparent on Peter, who will argue that “he got burned!” Is it “absurd” to think that maybe; just maybe, that if we persist in warming ourselves by the fires of false teachers in an effort to rid ourselves of the cutesy but terribly unfair label of “The Frozen Chosen”, a whole host of good WELS-folk are going to be badly burned and blistered?
Perhaps this section can be concluded by the one final set of not-so-nice questions.
a) However inadvertently and with the purest of intentions, have some subconsciously fallen victim to “a number fixation?” “Why can’t we of the WELS, who have the truth, grow, go and share?” “There’s got to be something wrong somewhere! We’re not doing something right! We’re not


-9-
growing as we should or could!” It’s vexing to see the Elmbrooks and the Willow Creeks, almost in our backyards with their thousands per Sunday,- While we sit there with our couple hundred thousand WORLD WIDE!
b) Is it barely possible; Is it even worth a long second look; Is it unseemly even to ask the question;- that there has been a subtle shift from a “Theology of The Cross” (its proclamation) to a “Theology of Glory” (“results”)??? In the end, we feel strongly that the nose of the “CG camel” has stuck itself into our WELS tent and before that ungainly beast succeeds in making further inroads which may indeed destroy our heritage- habitat, we call for a theological whacking across the snout of the strange animal with a large 2x4 so that the CGM gets an unmistakable message: “CGM is neither welcomed, wanted or needed in the WELS!”


5. A TOP HEAVY ADMINISTRATION

Here we address the concern of not only the explosion of the number of people employed/called to “2929” but also what we sense as a shift in mind-set.
1. In 1985 when our synod reorganized itself organizationally, we added ca. 1 million dollars to our administrative costs.
2. We readily recognize that we must have a certain amount of administrative personnel to manage and coordinate a relatively complex entity called “the synod.”
3. Since the 1991 convention called for the formation for a CPR (Committee on Program Review), we will not address the concern of too many full time people producing too much of “a good things.”
4. Rather, we ask respectfully, are our administrative people resource people, people who serve the body of synod, or are they people who lead, formulate and set both policy and programs for the WELS?

In all candor, the reason for this Boldlast question is the unmistakable feeling/perception that we of the WELS are now working from the top down, that decisions are made and announced from headquarters to the trench. For those who would vigorously decent (sic) from that assessment, we would submit in meekness the following: Olympia Village, Oconomowoc. A few years ago everyone and anyone who had anything at all to do with synodical administration and/or budget planning was summoned to Olympia Village where it was announced that from henceforth, “Decision Package Budgeting” was in. “Old things are passed away. Behold, all things are new!” No one asked the troops. The new marching orders were given, period. We had the option-presumably, to love it or hate it. It really made no difference. THIS IS THE WAY IT SHALL BE DONE! All descended from Olympia with instruction sheets and manuals firmly in hand.



- 10 -
Oconomowoc was not an administrative and therefore an internal matter. It was a precursor of things to come and with ever greater frequency. One not so little illustration: If “someone” has “nominated” members of our parish, (identified those who have been thought of being blessed with golden heels), they will be solicited by a LHTC worker for a special gift-with or without (obviously, preferably with), the parish pastor’s blessing. This has caused perceptive lay people to ask, along with aggrieved pastors, “Has synod abandoned its traditional raising of funds THROUGH the congregations or does it now try to raise its funds through a “heavy hitter’s list” nationwide? This is merely another symptom of not running a synod by consensus but by decree. From the bottom up may indeed be not only idealistic, impossible and totally impractical, but could someone please be more conscious leading by the velvet cords of love rather than a pronouncement? This leads us to yet another nettlesome concern: “pastor bashing.” We hastily acknowledge that we are aware of the fact that this is NOT an all pervasive, common or every day occurrence. But even if it happens on occasion with some degree of regularity, it bothers and disturbs our community. Phrases such as: “If only the pastors out there would...,” “There are some pastoral pockets of resistance out there which...” -should be purged from all speech and hearts. It does not bode well for the church to have synodical administration and pastors fall into a confrontational posture. Let’s unite to fight sin and Satan and not each other!


6. A DENIGRATION OF THE HOLY MINISTRY

Here we speak of EFFECT, not cause. Somewhere, somehow, we recently have seen the rise of the use of the use of words, “ministry” and “ministries.” We are now seemingly awash in a variety of ministers ministering to segments and/or special interest groups of God’s people via a plethora of ministries. You name it; we’ve got it-“just like the Big Boys” of the church world. Who says that WELS isn’t a “full service church,” (and that phrase could use some catechtical examination), we minister to every age group, sex marital status, and special interest under the sun. And well we should! But haven’t we in the past? Have we failed so miserably in olden days so as to call for a total revamping and remaking of our WELS corps of pastors? Yes, a case could well be made for the use of the words minister, ministry and ministries. But as we plunge forward in our enthusiasm for the training of, placement and use of a variety of staff ministers, could we ask whatever happened to THE ministry? Is it just one of scores? Less than a generation ago if the answer to the question were given, “Well, I’m the minister of St. Peter’s Lutheran Church,” most, if not all, rational people



- 11 -
would know what I am and do! Want to try that today? Would not a more likely response to your humble question be, “Yes, that’s nice, but what do you do??” We feel that there is a swiftly approaching case of wholesale confusion “out there” while at the same time, there is,-albeit unconscious, a denigration of the Holy Ministry and its ministers. The ministry is being demeaned by the excessive use of the term to denote various service activities in the Church. Could we ask for a study of Scripture concerning these terms, titles and activities? Let’s review the Greek again and attempt to underscore what the Spirit meant to tell us when he used different words to describe differing aspects of serving in and service to the body of Christ?


7. A DISMANTLING OF OUR WORKER TRAINING SYSTEM

Indeed, we grant that some may vigorously take exception to the term, “dismantling.” But with all due deference and with a brief apology to the person who first coined the hoary phrase: “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, squawks like a duck-it ain’t a horse!” There were four. But then, the numbers weren’t right; “too much money for too few church worker candidates.” Tearfully, we closed Mobridge. And then there were three. “MLPS is too expensive! We’ve got too much plant for not enough students. A million plus extra is going into that school each year we run it. Let’s close it.” And soon there are to be two. But this triggers multiple moves. Move MLPS; merge it into NPS and bring forth one new prep school with a new name and say goodbye to an over 100 year old school. Move NWC to DMLC and merge it so that we have two schools, on terminal and one preparatory on the same campus.

Take a unique crown jewel out of our educational system, the only single purpose, single focus college in the U.S. if not the world and put the two student bodies on the same campus while building lasting friendships as future co-workers. Truly, we understand that closing a campus is not the same as getting out of the college training program for pastoral candidates altogether.

But please understand us when we say that it looks like a radical departure from the tried, true and traditional. It even looks like-forgive us- a piecemeal dismantling of our worker training system. Right here is the place where each of these concerns of our seem to be linked. One of the major reasons MLPS is getting its feet put to the fire is because is IS too much plant for too few students and it does cost a bundle. But, would the question have come


- 12 -
up if we would have had a constant set of significant percentage increases of the synodical portion of our congregations offering in the last ten years? Well, why isn’t the money rolling into “2929?” Could it possibly be because of a growing disaffection for the way things are or are not done; the way decisions roll down from the heights of Mayfair Road; the frustration pastors feel over not being able to implement every new program and project streaming forth out of headquarters; the inability of the pastors to deal with the guilt trips they’ve been given the feeling of pastors that we are ill trained and ill equipped to effectively serve Christ in a ministry that has passed us by?

Some closing thoughts about our worker training system and its current trauma.
1. In view of the wide variety of reaction to the special study committee’s report and recommendations to the districts, we feel that very few MAJOR decisions of long-range consequence be sought of the 1993 synod convention. There simply are too many unanswered questions and we are too far removed from a consensus agreement by an overwhelming majority to make moves which radically alter our workers training system for the next century.
2. We also feel that a substantial number of pastors, while recognizing that MLPS has performed well and admirably under some very difficult circumstances, may have come to also recognize that it is too large of a facility for too few students.
3. In light of the foregoing we would respectively ask that more study be given to alternatives such as proposed by at least one of our districts; sell the campus at “PDC”; move the school, so to speak, and merge it into ALA (thus fulfilling the fondest dreams of the founders of “The Academy”); but leave the colleges substantially untouched.

In conclusion, this isn’t the last word about “concerns,” it’s just the latest. We have tried to be moderate and evangelical in our judgments and statements. Where we’ve failed and some one of our brothers has been inadvertently and unintentionally wounded, please, please forgive. We’ve made every effort to be impersonal; it’s brothers talking shop; nothing more or less. Yes, obviously, there are a number of critical areas of concern and disagreement Therefore we earnestly pray that God will give us both direction and answers so that we can indeed walk forward together in Christ.

Celebrating His Pentecost Promise
Pastor Kurt F. Koeplin
Milwaukee, WI
August, 1992

***

GJ - WELS pastors were furious that I mailed this to Christian News to be reprinted. A later convention warned everyone that the only report on the convention allowed was theirs. A friend said to me, "That is because Corky's paper was sent to Christian News."

I said, "I did that."

"You did?"

It is a sin to tell the truth in WELS.

Classic Ichabod - SMP Program Star - Crimes Erased on Order from SP Harrison - Steadfast Complied

$
0
0

Thursday, April 5, 2012

The LCMS Case - Darwin Schauer - Convicted Sex Offender Encouraged To Become Lay Pastor.
Surprise - He Abused Again

Minnesota LCMS officials encouraged Darwin Schauer, a convicted sex offender,
to become a lay pastor, so he abused another victim.
All the "conservative" Lutheran synods and ELCA are guilty of this kind of behavior.
More information and better formatting later.
This is another Steadfast article with comments.


From Steadfast Lutherans - Accounts by Pastor Don Kirchner - In Case They Are Kilcreased Later


It’s time…

I went down to Park Rapids two weeks ago, to the Hubbard County Detention Center, and spoke with Darwin Schauer for about an hour. (I had tried to see him a week earlier but was unable to see him due to an ongoing shift change of jail personnel at the time.) On March 4, 2012, I met with Minnesota North District President Donald Fondow (Fondow), Bemidji Circuit Counselor Allan Wierschke, and the congregational president of Trinity, Lake George to discuss what I had learned as laid out in Schauer’s current criminal charges and to discuss further action on our part. It was determined that Rev. Wierschke would render pastoral care to Schauer since I had a clear conflict of interest. Still, it was necessary for various reasons for me to talk to Schauer about what had transpired. When I met with him, I immediately advised Schauer that I was not there as his pastor or as a lawyer, lest he be given any expectation of confidentiality.

I now know from that conversation that The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), particularly on the district level, was well aware of Darwin Schauer’s 1983 conviction for the sexual abuse of his 13 year old step-daughter and, in spite of it, assisted him in becoming a lay minister and chose to place him as a lay minister in Immanuel Lutheran Church of Cass Lake and Trinity Lutheran Church of Lake George without warning or advising the congregations that a sexual predator was being placed in their midst to render them pastoral care, to teach confirmation classes to 12 to 14 year olds, etc.

Fondow recently told me that when he was convicted in 1983, Schauer was told to resign his Synodically rostered position as a school teacher or he would be removed. He had resigned. I was upfront with Schauer and told him that we now knew about the 1983 conviction. We discussed that. I then asked Schauer how he got into the lay ministry program at Concordia College in Mequon,WI (now Concordia University-Wisconsin.)

http://locator.lcms.org/nworkers_frm/w_detail.asp?W28381

He stated that, after his probation on the 1983 conviction was completed, he went to Rev. O. H. Cloeter, who was District President of Minnesota South District of the LCMS 1978–91. Darwin laid out everything about his conviction and asked if there was any way that he could still serve the church. Cloeter stated that being an ordained minister was out of the question, but that there were other ways around that. The answer was the lay ministry program that led to being commissioned as a lay minister in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. I do not know how involved Cloeter was in getting Darwin into the program, but he certainly had no objection to it and encouraged Schauer. Darwin stated that President Cloeter was a very nice, understanding man. No one has been able to explain to me how it is out of the question for a sexual predator to become an ordained minister but perfectly okay to be a lay minister, performing nearly all of the same functions as an ordained minister!

It seems that, given his previous undergraduate degree, Schauer spent only 6 months at Mequon to complete the lay ministry program in 1989 and was commissioned as a lay minister and was assigned to Immanuel, Cass Lake. His supervisor was a Rev. Rudder of Blackduck. Rudder knew all about Darwin’s conviction. Later on, there was some friction between Darwin and a pastor of the LCMS- sponsored Indian Ministry in Cass Lake. Rev. Richard L. Guehna, District President of Minnesota North District of the LCMS 1986-96, came up from Brainerd to personally meet with Darwin about the issue. He also brought with him the newspaper clipping that had been sent to him, the article in Darwin’s District file, and asked Darwin about it. Darwin again laid it all out on the table, explaining everything about what had happened, Darwin stated that President Guehna was a very forgiving man. Guehna took no action and, it seems, told no one in the congregation.

Later, Darwin was allowed to serve Trinity, Lake George with no objection and with no one at the congregation being told that their minister had a 1983 conviction for ongoing sexual abuse of his 13 year old step-daughter. As I now know from emails between Fondow and me in late 2007 – early 2008, and from what he has now confirmed, is that Fondow knew about the 1983 conviction at least as early as 2008, at that time discussing Schauer’s history and situation with MNS DP Seitz, Synodical Secretary Hartwig, and then Synodical 1st VP Diekelman, had possession of the 1983 newspaper article, and continued the District apathy toward the situation. He did nothing.

I thank everyone for their prayers and words of support to the congregation and me and especially to the victim and the victim’s family. Through these weeks we have learned that the glorious Gospel is indeed the Word of life. As we enter the Paschal Triduum let us remember that the Lord indeed has made all things new.

Thanks be to God.
Don Kirchner

---

Rev. Don Kirchner
April 5th, 2012 at 07:33 | #55 Reply | Quote

On March 4, 2012, at a meeting at the Lake George Café with Minnesota North District President Donald Fondow (Fondow), Bemidji Circuit Counselor Allan Wierschke, and the congregational president of Trinity, Lake George, we discussed what had happened and the fact that Darwin Schauer was being arrested even as we met. At one point, the congregational president excused himself to use the restroom. Fondow then advised Allan and me that he had looked through Darwin’s file when he retired (which would have been May or June of 2008, I believe) and that there was a newspaper article in the file about a similar sort of incident. The next day Fondow emailed me a scanned copy of the article which detailed Schauer’s 1983 plea of guilty to sexual abuse of a minor.

This seemed somewhat odd. I recalled a series of emails between us some years ago when Fondow had done some extensive checking of Darwin Schauer’s history. I had previously written to Fondow , inquiring about why the Minnesota South District had blocked Darwin Schauer’s path to ordination, which Schauer had told me happened, though Schauer did not tell me why. Fondow had responded with a non-answer, that Minnesota South had determined that he should not be allowed to complete such a path, confirming what we already knew.

On 10-08-07 I emailed Fondow, advising him that, given our membership at Immanuel, Cass Lake, (Darwin Schauer was serving that congregation and the congregation of Trinity, Lake George), my wife and I “would certainly would like the minister at our congregation to be an ordained pastor so that we can actually receive an indicative-operative absolution, etc. How do we go about getting Darwin Schauer ordained?”
I heard nothing back from Fondow. On 10-22-07 I sent him the exact same email. I heard nothing. On 10-26-07 I sent him the exact same email. On 10-30-07 Fondow responded, advising me that he had been checking on Schauer’s situation. He stated, “I apologize for the delay in responding to your e-mails regarding Darwin. I am doing some more checking into this and will communicate with you as soon as I receive some more information and clarification.”

I waited a month and heard nothing further. On 11-30-07 I decided to get his attention. I emailed: “Having not heard back from you on this matter may I propose an action before Darwin retires? Is it okay if a few of us pastors go ahead and ordain Darwin Schauer, thereby formally establishing what already is in place- i.e., his call as a pastor to Immanuel, Cass Lake and Trinity, Lake George?”

That got a response. Within less than two hours, Fondow responded: “In my last e-mail to you I indicated that I would look into this matter. I have had conversation with President Seitz and Secretary Hartwig and asked them to find out information for me and I will be checking back with them.

In answer to your question and in keeping with the agreed upon protocol of our church-body it would not be in order for an Ordination such as you are proposing. I would ask you to be patient as I seek answers and clarification as to the reasons for past decisions in an effort to see that all things be done ‘decently and in order’.”

I replied, “Thanks for your reply and your response to my proposal. That’s why I asked, although to formalize or ‘ordain’ what already has taken place- Darwin’s placement as a pastor- would seem to be decent and in good order. As we all know a lay minister, in this context, is an oxymoron. but I understand your position. I’ll await to hear from you.”

Nearly three weeks later, having not heard anything, I wrote: “We’re coming up on the end of the year. What have you found out about Pastor Schauer’s situation?”

I heard nothing. A week later, I decided to press the situation again. I wrote, “We are now nearly into the new year, about a half-year from Darwin’s retirement. I still would like my pastor to be a legitimate pastor. A few of us were looking at possibly [of ordaining him.]” Fondow responded, “I understand your intention, however, I strongly advise against this course of action… I will be speaking once again with Secretary Hartwig about this matter as well as President Seitz…The fact that his Ordination was not approved sometime ago is what I am asking to have looked at now. We do need to things decently and in order and that is the way in which I am proceeding.”

I couldn’t understand the delay. On 12-31-07, I wrote, “I simply can’t understand why you are putting this off. The appearance, even though I’m not saying that it is the case, is that you simply are waiting for Darwin to retire so that the issue is moot. Meanwhile, my wife and I, along with the other members, cannot even receive an indicative-operative absolution from our pastor who is somewhat placed in the office but is not allowed the rite of the Office.”

On 01-02-08 (it was now nearly three months since my initial inquiry), Fondow responded: “I’m sorry if it seems that I am putting this off, it is not my intention to do so…I have spoken today with President Seitz and he is calling me back tomorrow. Also, tomorrow I will be in communication with Secretary Hartwig.”

I waited a week and on 01-09-08, having heard nothing further, I asked for an update. Fondow replied later that day: “I have spoken to both President Seitz and Secretary Hartwig. At the present time I am waiting to hear back from First Vice-President Bill Diekelman. So, I am following through as previously indicated and I will be in contact with you.”

I waited a week and, having heard nothing back, again inquired. Later that day, Fondow replied: “This morning I spoke once again to President Seitz and this afternoon First Vice-President Diekelman called me back. They have shared with me information pertaining to Darwin and his situation (past and present). To the end that, according to the Handbook of Synod, Darwin may apply for admission to the Pastoral Ministry (Ordained) Roster of the Synod…I would ask that if he is seeking to pursue this that he would contact me to schedule a meeting to discuss this and to request the necessary application forms and to schedule a meeting with the District Interview Committee (cf. 2007 LCMS Handbook)

Once again, I apologize for the delay in answering your initial straight forward question. Due to the fact that there was some previous history involved and with a desire to learn of the background and information pertaining to this matter and wanting everything to be done according to our agreed upon procedures, it has taken me longer than it should have.”

I was frustrated. I replied, “We’ve spent months and months, and you’ve needed to make numerous calls to a district president, a Synodical Secretary, and a Synodical VP so that you could tell me that Darwin is eligible to do what we already knew he could do- apply for admission to the Pastoral Ministry (Ordained) Roster of the Synod by colloquy according to Bylaw 3.8.2.4.2, (a) or (b)?”

I wrote to a friend that day, “There’s something going on here. At any time Fondow could have picked up the phone and said, “Sorry. Darwin would have to go through the regular colloquy process to be ordained. Nothing else can be done.’ But everything has been done quite formally, including Fondow’s stiff, formal, non-conversational tone which is quite unlike him, except in cases where he’s being wary and treading lightly.

So, the reason that Darwin was blocked from being allowed to do this back in the ’70s was…?
Something stinks…”

The next day, 01-17-08, Fondow snapped back, “Since you inquired, I felt that it would be well to check on the past history of his situation to see if there was anything that would prevent him from applying! If you already knew what he could do, then why did you ask me?”

Later that day, I replied, “I’m not sure why you are being this way, President Fondow. As I previously stated, normally you would pick up the phone and call me. Instead, you’ve been quite formal, cool, and careful with your statements. There was no phone call stating, ‘I checked it out, Don, and it looks like Darwin is going to have to go the regular route under the Synodical Bylaws. I realize that the chances of anything being done before his retirement are virtually nil, but it appears that there is no other way.’
No, it was a formal statement that Darwin ‘may’ pursue this under such and such rule, something that you and I both know he always could have done. Please go back and look below at your statement, President Fondow. It is a caricature of lawyerspeak.

And now you respond with a testy attempt to play word games. Of course I knew the Bylaw. You know quite well why I asked. I asked if there was a way that we could get him ordained given the time constraints. And by the way, after waiting months you now suggest that he take action similar to what he did years ago and which was denied him at that time. What has changed that you suggest that he should try again? Can you give any assurance that he would not simply be going through the motions (as if this could be done in 4 months) in order to again receive a denial? Bottom line- why not simply state, ‘Sorry, it looks like Synodical approval to ordain Darwin is not going to happen, given his probable retirement in May’?”
Schauer retired a few months later.

---


Now, before we see the usual “circle the wagons” mode with suggestions such as that putting forth Schauer’s conversations with District personnel is hearsay (it is not), information is from a secular reporter and we know what they’re like (a classic argumentum ad hominem), and other such fallacies and irrelevancies, let me state the main reason why I make these things public and why I am not doing so.
With the events of the past month I have become beyond cynical with District interaction. I have virtually no trust left. The continued verbal dancing and passing of the buck continues. Our DP met with the congregation on March 7th and claimed little or no knowledge about the newspaper clipping of the 1983 incident, claiming that all knowledge rested with a man who is now in heaven (former DP Guehna).
On March 13th, our DP emailed me, now even suggesting that he showed me the newspaper clipping on February 7, 2008. He did not. But it is a classic red herring, intended to divert. For the sake of argument, even if he had shown me the article, I was covering a vacancy in Duluth at the time. Our DP was the ecclesiastical supervisor and it was he who bore responsibility to Trinity Lutheran Church of Lake George, a congregation with which I had no relationship at the time. Most importantly, our DP’s suggestion that he showed me the article confirms that HE had knowledge of it at least in early February of 2008, while Darwin Schauer was still serving Trinity of Lake George and Immanuel of Cass Lake.

Keep in mind that Schauer also continued on the Synodical roster after his retirement, filled in for me at Trinity the last several years when I was out-of-town, filled in for at least one other Circuit pastor/congregation, attended winkels, etc. until March 4th when the horror began for the congregation. Thankfully, and that is what we look to, that is the day that the horror for the young victim ended. Somewhat, for the victim will never be the same. What was taken can never be replaced. Only the Gospel can give that peace that passes all understanding, the victim knowing that he or she is a lamb safe in the Good Shepherd’s arms.

It goes on. Our DP attended Schauer’s arraignment on March 19th. One of our congregational elders is a court bailiff for Hubbard County and also was at the hearing. Afterwards, our DP approached the elder and told him that he had been trying to contact “Pastor Kirchner” and that he wanted to meet with me and congregational leadership. My response to the elder was that this simply was baloney! Our DP has my email address. He has my cell phone number. He had used both to communicate with me until recently when, suddenly, there is silence. He hasn’t been trying to contact me!

I expect that the silence is due to my announcement to our DP, on March 15, 2012, that our congregational delegate and I will not be attending the District Convention later this month. We simply see it as a waste of time for us. Our view is not only that there is nothing beneficial in doing so but that we trusted District and District leadership allowed a child predator in our midst without telling the congregation. The congregation asks me why, and I have no answer for them. I do not know why church leadership does this– past, present, and regrettably probably into the future.

I also have no expectation that anything will be done at the District level to hold anyone accountable. The time when the integrity of leadership– The buck stops here, this happened on my watch and, therefore, I must step down– is long past the present day. Leaders don’t do that anymore. Thankfully, the secular entities that some disdain will hold Schauer accountable. Our DP will be re-elected, probably on a unanimous ballot, and Synodical life on the District level will go on. The only change I foresee is that I will become an outcast in District circles, maybe even disciplined.

Brothers and sisters, I hope that I am wrong about much of this. Perhaps I will be surprised. I realize my cynicism is great, spiritually unhealthy, and sinful. Tomorrow, at a Circuit Treore service, I will preach on the words of our Lord, “Father forgive them.” Do we forgive those who have wronged us? Of course! For this Christ died! Because of the forgiveness won for us on the cross we get to forgive others. That is the joy this Holy Week.
Trust? That takes time.

***

GJ - There is some discussion about what rules would keep these things from happening.

I can list exact parallels with the Episcopal Church (Bishop Bennison) or WELS (Tabor, Just, Stolzenburg, Werner, Adrian, Zerbe).

Or the Roman Catholic Church, which the Protestants deride but emulate to perfection.

The problem is not with the rules but with the men involved. Denominational leaders are spineless, ruthless, unethical, and shameless. They shift from one deception to another, whenever caught in a lie. They have no concern about the victims or the congregations, only about their careers, perks, and reputations.

Two stories on Schauer -

http://www.parkrapidsenterprise.com/event/article/id/32090/

http://www.parkrapidsenterprise.com/event/article/id/32132/publisher_ID/15/

Classic Ichabod - Fake Doctorates in WELS - Is There a Real Doctor in the House?

$
0
0

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Is There a Real Doctor in the House?



Paul Kelm, D.Min., Concordia Seminary, St. Louis


The Wisconsin sect has always been allergic to earned doctorates, even to honorary ones. Some say it is because the intellectuals like Richard Jungkuntz went liberal, joining the LCMS and eventually the ELCA. Others say it came from the Protest'ant split (long story) where the intellectuals left or experienced the Left Foot of Fellowship.

Lately I have noticed a surge in Dr. titles around the sect.

Long ago, while letting his pal deny it, Larry Olson got a D.Min. from Fuller Seminary. All he had to do was write a paper to get the degree. (And pay some money.)

Dr. Larry Otto Olson, D.Min. Fuller

Dr. Paul Kelm, D.Min. Concordia Seminary, St. Louis

Dr. Steve Witte - D.Min. - Gordon Conwell.

Dr. John Parlow - D.Min. - Denver Babtist.

Dr. James Witt, D.Min., Concordia Seminary, St. Louis

Dr. Rich Krause, D.Min., Ohio Ecumenical Consortium. Larry Oh! was his advisor in Church Growth - the bland leading the blind.

David Valleskey, Forrest Bivens, and most of the WELS leaders studied at Fuller Seminary, some Fuller extension, and/or Willow Creek.

Tim Glende and his bartender, Ski, left no stern untoned as they toured the highway of false teachers, from Andy Stanley and Mark Driscoll, to Groschel and Sweet.

Dr. Floyd Luther Stolzenburg, Jr. He lets people call him "Dr" but he never earned the degree. DP Mueller and VP Kuske tried to get him into their sect, but the facts prevented it. Then the Little Sect on the Prairie adopted him and Roger Kovaciny, the Batman and Robin of the Norwegians.

Dr. Waldo Werning. LCMS. Known as Agent X at Christian News, Waldo never earned a real doctorate but always pretended, crowing like a rooster on a dunghill. His favorite dunghill was Fuller Seminary, and they rewarded him with a tin-plated title. He is honorary WELS because he spent so much time selling his Church Growth books to sect officials. WELS DMB chair Wally Oelhaven loved Werning's deep, deep theology and promoted Church Growth without shame or hesitation. Church and Change invited the wise old man of Church Growth to speak, but integrity prevailed for one, brief shining moment.

Dr. Kent Hunter, the Church Doctor. LCMS. He has a seminary degree from an ELCA seminary and a coveted D.Min. from Fuller Seminary. His books are so silly that he makes Werning look profound. They work together, probably trading newly discovered Church Growth principles over the Internet. Hunter was invited to be a key speaker for Church and Change, so he is also honorary WELS. Alas, his invitation was also canceled, but do not worry. He is definitely more popular in WELS than Martin Luther.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...
I wonder if your doctorates are legit. I think I'll contact the schools you claim to have attended and I'll check and see what earned degrees you really have.
A. Nony Mouse said...
I has suspitions (sic) that you're (sic) doctorates is (sic) fakes.
MLS Veteran said...
Notre Dame ? That is probably one of those "diploma mills"....

Besides, who would trust a university that is actually accredited anyway?

LOL!

Classic Ichabod - Why a Signature Bond for Ski?Should All WELS Clergy Work Toward Signature Bonds To Get the Synod To Buy Them a Bar?

$
0
0

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Bishop Burnside Has a Signature Bond for Court, So Why Did Pastor Ski Have a Bond in Milwaukee - Normally To Guarantee a Court Appearance?

Prophetic Ichabod Photoshop - WELS threw Gausewitz under the bus with the Kuske catechism.
Ski threw Gausewitz' father under the bus with his scrotum/oozing Jesus sermon.
Pastor Ski's sermon at the Gausewitz church.


bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "In the Spirit: Lutheran pastor calls for special o...":

In Joel Hochmuth's case, as soon as it was apparent there was a strong case against him, he was removed from his office by SP Schroeder. In the case of the ELCA bishop, they have surveillance footage of the three felonies, plus a police report and witnesses, yet the assistant bishop said that Burnside "would remain in the elected position." BTW, the ELCA is definitely on the hook since Burnside was on the job when he committed the felonies:

http://www.channel3000.com/news/Man-starts-nonprofit-to-honor-wife-killed-jogging/-/1648/19704400/-/cyflks/-/index.html

Her accused killer, Bruce Burnside, was in court Wednesday, charged with three felonies. He’s a Lutheran bishop who oversees more than 100 congregations in Southcentral Wisconsin. Burnside’s assistant said he’ll remain in the elected position.

As for Burnside, a criminal complaint said a nearby restaurant’s surveillance video showed him speeding down an off ramp, hitting a traffic sign and then Maureen. The complaint said he kept driving and pulled over at a nearby gas station. He denied using drugs and alcohol when a Sun Prairie officer asked him, but his preliminary breath test was .128.

"Clearly, there was no effort to stay there, there was no effort to go back and it’s my understanding that he stayed there or that he was stopped at that gas station by citizens who would not let him leave," said the Dane County Assistant District Attorney Emily Thompson.

He’ll be released Wednesday on a signature bond, but will have to enter a treatment program and follow certain conditions that include no drinking and he can’t contact the Mengelt family.

If Burnside violates the conditions, he'll return to jail and have bail set at $150,000. 

---

http://www.channel3000.com/news/Man-starts-nonprofit-to-honor-wife-killed-jogging/-/1648/19704400/-/cyflks/-/index.html

SUN PRAIRIE, Wis. -
"Maureen’s love was the kids; every kid she came into contact with she would connect with," said Kevin Mengelt, husband of the woman killed Sunday.



Sun Prairie police said a drunk driver struck and killed Maureen Mengelt at the intersection of highways 151 and 19.
There's a growing memorial there for the mother of three and avid runner, who was out on a jog when she was hit.
Her accused killer, Bruce Burnside, was in court Wednesday, charged with three felonies. He’s a Lutheran bishop who oversees more than 100 congregations in Southcentral Wisconsin. Burnside’s assistant said he’ll remain in the elected position.
Since the incident, Kevin Mengelt has been overwhelmed with community support and he’s started a non-profit in Maureen’s name. Donations will go toward local sports and music programs she loved, he said.
“We feel blessed; I don’t feel like I have one family anymore, I have a family of many hundreds,” Kevin Mengelt said.
As for Burnside, a criminal complaint said a nearby restaurant’s surveillance video showed him speeding down an off ramp, hitting a traffic sign and then Maureen. The complaint said he kept driving and pulled over at a nearby gas station. He denied using drugs and alcohol when a Sun Prairie officer asked him, but his preliminary breath test was .128.
"Clearly, there was no effort to stay there, there was no effort to go back and it’s my understanding that he stayed there or that he was stopped at that gas station by citizens who would not let him leave," said the Dane County Assistant District Attorney Emily Thompson.
He’ll be released Wednesday on a signature bond, but will have to enter a treatment program and follow certain conditions that include no drinking and he can’t contact the Mengelt family.
If Burnside violates the conditions, he'll return to jail and have bail set at $150,000.
Burnside is due back in court May 13.
The U.S. Bank off Highway 19 in Sun Prairie is accepting donations in Maureen’s name. Her husband is encouraging people wear tennis shoes in her honor at her Friday funeral services.

Crimes Being Erased - Start with Martin Stephan and His Enabler - CFW Walther

$
0
0


bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Classic Ichabod - SMP Program Star - Crimes Erased...":

Talk about crimes being erased, here's a couple points to ponder:

1) Zion on the Mississippi doesn't mention whether any of the women in Germany or at St. Louis whom Stephan molested were minors (by today's standards), but I'd bet that was the case. Back then women often married as early as 15 years of age, and the law didn't treat offenses against 15 through 17 year olds as more serious crimes, I believe. Would Stephan have been convicted of statutory rape in our day, or child molestation?

2) In what I've read on LCMS history, I've never heard that the women recanted their testimonies against Stephan, and the relatives of these women and CPH all say Stephan was guilty without a doubt, to my knowledge. They even give plenty of evidence that he gave young women syphilis. Yet, Wikipedia's article on Stephan says that they all recanted, and yet his ministerial position was not restored. Even if, in the unlikely event, they recanted, Stephan's position ought not have been restored since St. Paul said that Christians ought not even give the appearance of wrongdoing, and yet Stephan ignored many admonitions from many people (and authorities) not to be alone with young women, especially on long walks out into the countryside, which behavior would make any wife jealous and suspicious anyway. Just because Stephan was a legal Houdini doesn't mean he deserved to keep his clerical calling:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Stephan

Though the women who initially accused Stephan of sexual misconduct later recanted, he was never restored to his position. Following his removal from the colony, he served another congregation, Trinity Lutheran Church, at Horse Prairie near Red Bud, Illinois.

***

GJ - The Stephanites told so many lies about their bishops scandals that the layers are difficult to peel away.

Stephan's main mistress was a single girl, the daughter of members. She came over on the ship with Stephan. The same woman came to live with Stephan after he was exiled to Illinois. She also lived in the same room with him when he went to spas in Germany.

Mrs. Stephan was left at home with all the children (except one), some of them dying from the congenital syphilis that the wandering husband gave to his wife.

The story of the confession after the moving sermon, which was supposedly conveyed to a shocked Walther, was a big fat lie. As the Missourians admitted (Zion on the Mississippi), the adultery was already known so the seal of the confessional was not broken. In fact, the St. Louis residents were all too familiar with the many young women hanging around Stephan's temporary residence (including his mistress). They left for Perryville to escape the condemning looks and the smell of rope dangling from a maple tree.

The riot against Stephan was staged by Walther, and it included only the stooges who went along with the scheme.

The various felonies of Walther have been covered up by the Concordia Historical Institute and the careful editing of Wikipedia, but the facts are available to anyone with mild curiosity.




Episcopal Presiding Bishop Schori - Wears Hindu Vishnu Symbol on Her

$
0
0
Vishnu can be seen on the left and right of her garment.
I hate to give it a liturgical name, since it is
blatantly pagan - not even subtle.
The yellow hat is hideous, but besides the point.

When the symbol is abstract, the four arms are raised without
the customary symbols. See below.
Vishnu is heavenly blue.
The lower arms hold a mace weapon and a lotus flower.
The upper arms hold a disk weapon and a conch shell.
Vishu in Wikipedia:
In almost all Hindu denominations, Vishnu is either worshipped directly or in the form of his ten avatars, the most famous of whom are Rama and Krishna.[11] The Puranabharti, an ancient text, describes these as the dashavatara, or the ten avatars of Vishnu. Among the ten described, nine have occurred in the past and one will take place in the future, at the end of Kali Yuga, (the fourth and final stage in the cycle of yugas that the world goes through). These incarnations take place in all Yugas in cosmic scales; the avatars and their stories show that gods are indeed unimaginable, unthinkable and inconceivable. TheBhagavad Gita mentions their purpose as being to rejuvenate dharma,[12] to vanquish those negative forces of evil that threaten dharma and also to display His divine nature in front of fallen souls.
The Trimurti (three forms) is a concept in Hinduism "in which the cosmic functions of creation, maintenance, and destruction are personified by the forms of Brahma the creator, Vishnu the maintainer or preserver, and Shiva the destroyer or transformer."[13][14] These three deities have also been called "the Hindu triad"[15] or the "Great Trinity",[16] all having the same meaning of three in One. Of the three members of the Trimurti, the Bhagavata Purana, which espouses the Vaishnavite viewpoint, claims that the greatest benefit can be had from worshipping Vishnu.[17] Vishnu engages in the creation of 14 worlds within the universe as Brahma when he deliberately accepts rajas guna. Vishnu sustains, maintains and preserves the universe as Vishnu when he accepts sattva guna and annihilates the universe at the end of maha-kalpa as Shiva or Rudra when he accepts tamas guna.[18][19][20] According to this reference, the holy Trimurti is not different from Vishnu.

ELCA PB Mark Hanson and Episcopal PB Kate Schori work together.
WELS and LCMS work with ELCA,
but they are "confessional" and
becoming even more confessional, according Mark Schroeder.

Like pagan Rome,
they tolerate every god except the One True God.

Viewing all 11615 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>