tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post2154547888216073912..comments2024-03-27T15:47:46.091-05:00Comments on Pastoral Meanderings: The perfect trinity. . . Pastor Petershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10653554256101480140noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-13264270173928136702017-04-30T15:45:59.307-05:002017-04-30T15:45:59.307-05:00The revisionist accounts tend to diminish the impo...The revisionist accounts tend to diminish the importance and contribution of Dr. Vehse's <i>Protestation</i> document to Walther in the Altenburg debate, or merge the position of Vehse with that of Marbach, the loser in the Altenburg debate.<br /><br />In his 1953 book, <i>Zion on the Mississippi</i>, Walter Forster noted (p. 520), "Walther was ready to admit his indebtedness to the Dresden archivist. Keyl and Burger joined in this aknowledgement. Later writers with a less meticulous sense of fairness, however, gave Vehse little credit."<br /><br />C.F.W. Walther died in 1887. Six years later, such a "less meticulous sense of fairness" already appeared in an 1893 CPH publication, <i>Half a Century of Sound Lutheranism in America</i>.<br /><br />Alan Graebner in his 1975 <i>Uncertain Saints: The Laity in the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod 1900–1970</i> observed (pp. 261-2) "[A]rchives have flourished in the synod while historical scholarship has not. To collect the texts of the fathers is one thing; to expose change quite another."<br /><br />Ironically, even Graebner gets the history confused (p. 6) by combining Marbach with Vehse's position. Yet eight lines later (p. 7) Graebner notes that Walther was influenced by Vehse's ideas. This gives the contradictory notion that Vehse was vicariously debating himself in the 1841 Altenburg Debate.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-41400732985005163972017-04-30T07:14:42.895-05:002017-04-30T07:14:42.895-05:00Do you know why there are varying accounts of what...Do you know why there are varying accounts of what happened among Lutherans acting in good faith? Why is the truth not nailed down by now? I don't understand the agendas.Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-2727616264611280552017-04-29T17:17:06.121-05:002017-04-29T17:17:06.121-05:00Yes, there is a lot of good information for Luther...Yes, there is a lot of good information for Lutherans in Rev. Cascione's 2001 book, <i>How to Start Or Keep Your Own Missouri Synod Lutheran Church</i>.<br /><br />However, to no surprise, as with almost every recounting of the Missouri Saxon (1839-1841) history by a member of the Missouri Synod, the book's Chapter 11 discussions (pp. 36-42) are replete with historical errors. <br /><br />The most egregious errors are the statements (pp. 40-1) that link the positions of Drs. Vehse and Marbach, and refer to the "Vehse/Marbach theses." Even the statements' footnoted references to Carl Mundinger's book are incorrect (Mundinger makes the false link of the two men elsewhere, e.g., pp. 111-2, 122-3, and 162). As Walter Forster correctly states (<i>Zion on the Mississippi</i>, pp. 521-2), "Theologically, Walther's position [at Altenburg] was based upon an elaboration of Vehse's position that the immigrants were a group of Christians and by that simple fact 'a church'."Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-26097948396353899732017-04-29T15:13:01.566-05:002017-04-29T15:13:01.566-05:00And don't forget "How to Start Or Keep Yo...And don't forget "How to Start Or Keep Your Own Missouri Synod Lutheran Church" by J.M. Cascione. I finished reading that one today.<br />MarKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-54035558855277317782017-04-29T13:48:20.370-05:002017-04-29T13:48:20.370-05:00The so-called "catholicity" one is looki...The so-called "catholicity" one is looking for exists. From C.F.W. Walther's "<a href="http://www.lutherquest.org/walther/articles/cfw00006.htm" rel="nofollow">The Evangelical Lutheran Church the True Visible Church of God on Earth</a>": <br /><br /><b>Thesis XXI.A</b>: The Evangelical Lutheran Church is sure that the teaching contained in its Symbols is the pure God's truth because it agrees with the written Word of God in all points.<br /><b>Thesis XXV</b>: The Evangelical Lutheran Church has thus all the essential marks of the true visible Church of God on earth as they are found in no other known communion, and therefore it needs no reformation in doctrine.<br /><br />Finding a local congregation that is a faithful part of the Evangelical Lutheran Church is left as an exercise for the Lutheran reader, with guidance from C.F.W. Walther's <br />"<a href="http://www.lutherquest.org/walther/articles/cfw00005.htm" rel="nofollow">The Proper Form of an Evangelical Lutheran Congregation Independent of the State</a>," and, of course, his <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=2XQrAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow"><i>Die Stimme unserer Kirche in der Frage von Kirche und Amt</i></a>.Carl Vehsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00348831096001668813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329600504016968888.post-40181579259828346662017-04-29T09:42:06.852-05:002017-04-29T09:42:06.852-05:00This blog has been a blessing to me.....you are a ...This blog has been a blessing to me.....you are a good and faithful servant.<br /><br />The Priesthood of Believers and the Divine Service (liturgy)<br />Author: Dr. George Wollenburg<br />With the exception of the biblical doctrine of justification, perhaps no biblical teaching is more dear to the hearts of Lutherans than the priesthood of all believers.<br />The very nature of the priesthood precludes making this gathering a marketing tool to increase the membership of the organization. When the public ritual becomes "meaningful" to people without faith in God, it is false ritual, a betrayal of the priestly gathering, and a betrayal of the God who has chosen them as his own purchased possession. It is idolatrous.<br />ErnestOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13077415409728022160noreply@blogger.com