Altlutheraner

I have promised in a previous post to report on the 2023 Synodical Convention, and this post should be thought of as the beginning of the fulfillment of that promise. It is especially for the reasons outlined in that post that this is needed.

Women in the Church

On April 30 omnibus Resolution B, introduced by President Matthew Harrison, was passed, which asserts that “there appears to be insufficient rationale” to follow the Word of God on woman suffrage. It is as Eduard Pardieck once said: “such words as: ‘Let your women be silent among the congregation’ (1 Cor. 14:34) and: ‘I do not allow a woman to teach’ (1 Tim. 2:12) are no longer held as God’s Word, but as the hateful words of a misogynistic bachelor.” As justification for this friendship with the world, we are directed to 1995 Resolution 3-05, 1986 Resolution 3-09, and 1969 Resolution 2-17. These are all based on, not the Word of God, but a report of the CTCR, which, to say the least, is an organization whose credibility with faithfulness to God’s Word is severely lacking. For example, it finds nothing to condemn in self-castration, because it considers it a form of contraception, which it also does not condemn. Of note also is the following statement in the 1995 blasphemy: “such difference of opinion is not divisive of fellowship.” What, one wonders, does the LCMS consider “divisive of fellowship”? For it does not consider the hierarchicalism of the SELK “divisive of fellowship” either. Oh, but of course, contradicting its reigning Pope is a crime worthy of excommunication.

Earlier, an overture which would make it so that women should obey 1 Timothy 2:12 was sent by unanimous vote to the CTCR, which cannot be expected to follow the Word of God, as said above.

The Harrison-Pless-Teufelskatechismus

Attempting to influence the delegates, the recently reelected President Matthew Harrison asserted on the first day of Convention:

The kerfuffle over the explanatory essays accompanying the new edition of Luther’s Large Catechism was unfortunate. Some things could have been written more clearly as the CTCR has acknowledged. But there is nothing in the book that is going to take a person into heresy or away from the clear confession of Christ. I encourage the church to read Luther’s Large Catechism, as it will aide each person in faith and a clear confession.

This, being a repeat of his earlier lies, was almost not worth mentioning, except that he is now equating the commentary on Luther’s Large Catechism with the Large Catechism itself.

Later, on August 2, the convention refused to even mention the Teufelskatechismus of Harrison and his lackeys. Mark Stern, recapping the decisions in Issues, etc., an official organ of the LCMS, defended this unionism by saying that to even discuss the writing would “reopen old wounds.”

Obfuscation on Usury

It was unanimously decided to send the decision on whether the CTCR should study the Usury Question to the CTCR, which, whatever it does, will definitely not side with God here. Hence, one can be certain that the LCMS is less outwardly moral than the Antichrist himself, who still condemns usury, at least pro forma.

Lawyers or Christians?

On July 31, the LCMS reaffirmed its refusal to allow the 1986 translation of Luther’s Small Catechism to leave its iron grip of copyright.

Honors for Heretics

On August 2, the LCMS officially honored Gerald B. Kieschnick and his wife “for their service to the synod.” Gerald Kieschnick, among other things, asserts that Mohammedans worship the true God, and his wife is quite willing to speak during sermons.

The Negrolatry of the LCMS

On the same day the LCMS asserted, in passing Resolution 11-02A (praised by unofficial synod mouthpiece Todd Wilken), which, much like its President, endorses the blasphemous CTCR majority report Racism and the Church, the following. 1) Races which have willingly served Satan for millennia are in every way equal to those who were Christian for millennia. 2) Dividing people based on race, or rather recognizing the existing divisions of race, which were made by God and which will continue in eternity, is “Nazism, White Supremacy, and White Nationalism,” and therefore “racism”; and 3) for this imaginary sin all sensible men (since no sensible man denies the reality of race and ethnicity) must be “called to repent.” Consequently, 4) there is a need to “acknowledge our past failures in this regard” (the reporting on the Black rape in Germany following WWI, which was only made possible [and also supported] by the vindictive, atheistic French, who were “not yet satisfied with having employed hundreds of thousands of primitive African barbarians,” the 1919 “Mission Lecture on Africa,” and all writings of the Missouri Synod on slavery, would certainly be included among these “failures”) and 5) crowd White congregations with Blacks, as a form of reparations. And these are only the direct assertions. (Of note is the fact that more delegates voted to condemn “racism” than to affirm the Biblical practice of closed communion.)

Matthew Harrison, following the adoption of this resolution, declared it and similar ones passed to be “some of the finest resolutions” and the official confession of the LCMS.

Prior to this Resolution being discussed, Montana District President Terry Forke, joyful instigator of hidden plots at the behest of President Matthew Harrison, said, “The most odious issue the committee addressed is racism … it is universal and it is not going away … it is abhorrent, it is deadly and brothers and sisters in Christ suffer from it every day.” It is also “racism” (which never has a consistent definition) that false prophet Terry Forke accuses the author of this post of (when he isn’t finding excuses for destroying the institution of the Lord’s Supper, that is). But really, Forke in this should only be considered the lackey of Pope Harrison, who threatened in his February encyclical to make use of “pastors and district presidents” in order that sensible Christians may be excommunicated.

Now that Forke has me thinking about his accusations, here is another one: I am “anti-Semitic.” Now, much like racism, “anti-Semitism” has no consistent definition. According to Jews, seeking their conversion is “anti-Semitic.” Would the slanderer Terry Forke accept this definition? I have slight doubts. But because he gives no definition of any terms, and because he is afraid to face the one he accuses, why should I not assume this to be his definition? Another possible definition, also used by Jews: Anti-Semitism includes so-called supersessionism, i.e., the doctrine of Scripture that the Christian Church, not the Jewish people as such, is the chosen nation of God. See 1 Peter 2. Or perhaps an anti-Semite is simply someone the Jews don’t like. That fits much better, and it makes Forke’s actions all the more understandable.

Praise of Unionism

In the article on “Unionism” in the 1927 Concordia Cyclopedia, we are given the following summary of unionism: “Its essence is an agreement to disagree.” And that is what happened nearly everywhere at the convention.

As mentioned above, the LCMS in convention refused (in a vote that was, to put it mildly, far from unanimous) to even consider passing judgment on doctrinal material of the LCMS, thus allowing the assertion of Harrison and the CTCR, that “There is nothing in the content of the volume promoting … any theological position at odds with biblical and confessional Lutheranism,” to remain the effective final judgment on the matter. And Montana District President Terry Forke has also praised this lack of conviction. — Furthermore, those who voted against closed communion are still in the same fellowship as those who condemned them.

Now, I could go on, but that would be of benefit to no one. For what has been presented here is already more than enough to prove that the 68th Regular Convention of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod should be rejected and condemned by all Christians.