“IP address tracking” for Lutheran landlubbers

Ronan McCabe here. That’s the Ronan McCabe to you. I’m your guide for today’s fun activity. All you’ll need is your computer, tablet, or smartphone, with internet access—I know you’ve already got the equipment, or else you wouldn’t be reading this.

Let’s begin.

  1. Visit this website: https://www.ultratools.com/tools/ipWhoisLookup

  2. Type in “doorcellarthe.wordpress.com”

  3. Hit “enter”

Wuzzit sey? San Francisco, California, baby.

No, it’s not because we started using a VPN—we didn’t, and we don’t need to. It’s because this is a WordPress blog and WordPress’s servers are in or around Silcon Valley.

Perhaps you’d like to graduate to Mid-Level Pet Detective and track the IP address from one of our specific posts. You wouldn’t have access to this information ordinarily, but I’ll let you peak at a screencap:

Go to the IP geo-location lookup tool on the same site, type in 192.0.89.186, and…

Marina Del Rey, CA. Without doxxing anyone, I can assure you that no one from our masthead lives there. But WordPress’s servers do.

So, a few days ago, we get this message from one Chris Rosebrah in our inbox (apparently we solicited feedback the other day), and it’s got this screencap of an IP address out of Cheyenne, Wyoming, at the top, with “The Cellar Door” typed out above it. And then, in this gay script-font, like what a kid would use for his ransom note if he didn’t want to go to the trouble of cutting letters out of a magazine, there’s this invitation…to “parley”! Get it? Parley, like, what pirates do. Then there’s this stream of ball-clicking gibberish about how “you think you know the things that you know but you totally don’t know them and I have documents and data to prove it”—basically, a variation on the same theme he was playing in a totally wigged-out Facebook message that he sent to us earlier:

O-K. Well, I don’t know about any “events,” but I suppose if I were a scandal-monger like you I’d be really interested right now.

Anyway, I’m sidetracking myself: I don’t know who it was who opened this thing first—the email, not the above screencapped FB message—but soon we were all reading it. Much merriment ensued, let me tell you. Here’s the working theory:

Rosebrah assumes that by monitoring the IPv4 addresses of visitors to his own website(s) and looking for patterns, he is going to “catch the culprit” in some big conspiracy that’s afoot to bring him down, a conspiracy which is presumably headquartered here at The Cellar Door. But you know what they say about assuming: it makes an ass out of Chris Rosebrah.

So the same night that we get this message, Rosebrah is on Twitter and Facebook just wetting himself, saying that he “tracked the Cellar Door’s IP address to Wyoming.” He posted this on Twitter, and we managed to gank it before it mysteriously disappeared:

This actually happened. Your favorite “discernment ministry” Pirate Cap’n and Issues, Etc. guest…

(a) puts words from a Star Wars movie in the mouth of Jesus Christ.
(b) slanders an entire town.
(c) does stuff like this, and then throws a tantrum when people don’t take him seriously.

“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”—unless it suits your small-man purposes. What’s a little casual blasphemy, after all? The honor of Christ is a small thing to sacrifice for the sake of ROOTING OUT THE GRAND CONSPIRACY. What an impious child-man. In the above “meme” you see Chris Rosebrah’s entire M.O. in microcosmic form: there is nothing this grifter will not submarine to exalt himself and his pathetic little brand. The Word of God, the honor of Our Lord, the honor and dignity of the pastoral office, the honor of Holy Church—all of these he will gladly deep-six in his quest to control the narrative in his little adventure story.

Needless to say, we’re not “parleying” with Rosebrah because we’re not little boys playing pirates. I’m not even interested in whatever scandals he thinks we all know about. We’re not a hivemind, you know—I didn’t post the tweet that rustled his jimmies, but I’ve read it, and it sounds plausible. But I don’t really care. I don’t mean that I don’t care about people being harassed and threatened—insofar as I can care about such things in the abstract, I’ll do my best. What I mean is that, for my part, I don’t care about Chris Rosebrah. I see him as thoroughly discredited and transparently idiotic, and I don’t have any interest in his little dramatic spats (except for this one, which was too good to pass up commenting on). Philopponus wrote about Rosebrah once, like a year ago, and he wasn’t even the main topic, Higher Things was. Recently we published a guest post about his…um…”online church,” which, as far as I could tell, contained nothing that someone with decent Google Fu wouldn’t be able to uncover in two minutes. And that’s it. I will shed not a tear if no forthcoming content on this blog features anything about Chris Rosebrah. In general, you don’t have to expose exhibitionists. They expose themselves.

 

Advertisements

W(h)ither the Great Lutheran Hymns? – Trinity 7: “All Praise to God Who Reigns Above”

The chief hymn for Trinity 7, “All Praise to God Who Reigns Above,” is one of my favorite Lutheran chorales. Like many of the great seventeenth-century hymns, it was written by a guy who was so pietistic that he makes Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson look tame. Read about Johann Jakob Schütz here. J. S. Bach expanded on this hymn in one of his chorale-cantatas (see above), BWV 117, “Sei Lob und Ehr dem höchsten Gut.”

Here’s the damage:

TLH 19
“All Praise to God Who Reigns Above”

LSB 819
“Sing Praise to God The Highest Good”

1. All praise to God, who reigns above,
The God of all creation,
The God of wonders, pow’r, and love,
The God of our salvation!
With healing balm my soul He fills,
The God who ev’ry sorrow stills,–
To God all praise and glory!
1. Sing praise to God, the highest good,
The author of creation,
The God of love who understood
Our need for His salvation.
With healing balm our souls He fills
And ev’ry faithless murmur stills:
To God all praise and glory!
2. What God’s almighty pow’r hath made,
His gracious mercy keepeth;
By morning dawn or evening shade
His watchful eye ne’er sleepeth;
Within the kingdom of His might,
Lo, all is just and all is right,–
To God all praise and glory!
2. What God’s almighty pow’r has made,
In mercy He is keeping.
By morning glow or evening shade
His eye is never sleeping.
Within the kingdom of His might
All things are just and good and right:
To God all praise and glory!
3. I cried to Him in time of need:
Lord God, oh, hear my calling!
For death He gave me life indeed
And kept my feet from falling.
For this my thanks shall endless be;
Oh, thank Him, thank our God, with me,–
To God all praise and glory!
3. We sought the Lord in our distress;
O God, in mercy hear us.
Our Savior saw our helplessness
And came with peace to cheer us.
For this we thank and praise the Lord,
Who is by one and all adored:
To God all praise and glory!
4. The Lord forsaketh not His flock,
His chosen generation;
He is their Refuge and their Rock,
Their Peace and their Salvation.
As with a mother’s tender hand
He leads His own, His chosen band,–
To God all praise and glory!
4. He never shall forsake His flock,
His chosen generation;
He is their refuge and their rock,
Their peace and their salvation.
As with a mother’s tender hand,
He leads His own, His chosen band:
To God all praise and glory!
5. Ye who confess Christ’s holy name,
To God give praise and glory!
Ye who the Father’s pow’r proclaim,
To God give praise and glory!
All idols under foot be trod,
The Lord is God! The Lord is God!
To God all praise and glory!
5. All who confess Christ’s holy name,
Give God the praise and glory.
Let all who know his pow’r proclaim
Aloud the wondrous story.
Cast ev’ry idol from its throne,
For God is God, and He alone:
To God all praise and glory!
6. Then come before His presence now
And banish fear and sadness;
To your Redeemer pay your vow
And sing with joy and gladness:
Though great distress my soul befell,
The Lord, my God, did all things well–
To God all praise and glory!
Uh, what happened?

The translation of the first line of this hymn as found in LSB is closer to the German. That is the last nice thing I am going to say about the LSB version.

In fact, that isn’t really a positive, because it requires monkeying with a perfectly good rhyme scheme. I guess references to God “reigning” must be omitted, as they might make us think that God is a king or something, rather than a president whom we got to vote for. “God the highest good” might be closer to the German, but it makes God sound like Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover. Then we’re off to the races, rhyming with “understood.” Really? Does anyone think this is pretty? “Uh-un-der-stood”? It’s ridiculous.

In the last installment I criticized the change from third-person singular to first-person plural, as in that particular instance it introduced needless introspection at an inappropriate juncture. This doesn’t mean that I’m against the first-person point-of-view or introspection in hymns—I am not. But I am against random changes for no reason. For example, I’m against weirdly pluralizing the first person POV. Take another look at the changes above: every “I” is now “we,” every “me” is now “us,” every “my” is now “our.” Whatever is the point of this, besides tripping up bitter TLH-clingers? LSB’s edits in this regard aren’t even consistent, so it can’t be that they think it’s never appropriate for the whole church to sing as the singular Body of Christ, with each person confessing the faith personally (as we do in the Creed). With both last week’s hymn and this week’s hymn, everything ends up in the first-person plural: “we,” “us,” and “our.” Why?

The words “the author” are awkward to sing, as you get locked into a shapeless elided vowel. Most people are going to sing “thuh” rather than “thee,” and this only makes it worse. It’s another needless change. But it doesn’t hold a candle to “faithless murmur.” I don’t know if I can think of a word less given to being set to music than “murmur.” If you’re alone, try shouting the word “murmur” at the top of your lungs. It’s awful. “MURRRR-MURRRR!!!” Yeah, they got rid of “every sorrow” so that we could all sound like seven-year-old boys making sound-effects for our toy lawnmowers.

Then there’s verse 2. Verse 2 in LSB is garbage. It’s a prime example of a huge problem with LSB in general, so I’ll talk about the huge general problem first:

When you say the Lord’s Prayer, would it ever occur to you to say this?

Our Father in heaven:
Holy be your name,
Your kingdom come,
Your will be done
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins,
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Save us in the time of trial,
and deliver us from evil,
For yours is the kingdom, the power,
and glory forever. Amen.

The above is from what is commonly called the ’69 Worship Supplement, whose merits, if it had any, were drowned in the sea of its nonsensical blunders. I hope it would never occur to you to use that version of the Lord’s Prayer. If you really think this modernized version of the Lord’s Prayer is good, I wouldn’t trust you as far as I could throw you. And if I met you, and I somehow had learned of your vile modernism ahead of time, chances are good that I wouldn’t even say “hello,” I would just try to throw you. I don’t care if you’re 300 pounds, I’d do my best.

Imagine this conversation:

“How about we change the Lord’s Prayer?”

“No! Are you crazy? The Lord’s Prayer is special. Everyone knows that.”

“But no one talks that way anymore.”

“So? That’s part of what shows you that it’s sacred: it’s set apart from our everyday speech. A fixed idiom symbolizes the unchanging nature of God’s Word. An older idiom reminds us that God’s Word, our great heritage, is from of old, and that it’s timeless.”

“OK. Well, how about we change the text of the liturgy so that it’s a weird mixed idiom where everything that’s sung is Jacobean and everything that’s spoken is modern? And let’s ‘update the language’ of random hymns.”

“Oh, that’s fine. The liturgy and hymns aren’t special. Only the Bible is. And not even the whole Bible—just the Lord’s Prayer.”

“OK. Here, I made you a hymnal. I call it Lutheran Service Book.”

“What’s that on the cover?”

“Clip art.”

I rest my case.

If we come across a hymn written in 1970, we shouldn’t expect it to sound like Victorian poetry (although given the general quality of that decade’s output, that would be a pleasant surprise). But when we come across hymns that were composed or translated in the Victorian era, we act like we can’t possibly understand them: “‘Keepeth’? ‘Thy’? ‘Ye’? What do these words mean? Why can’t everyone talk like me?”

Actually, we, the laity, don’t say that. Rather, the LCMS hymnal committee imagines that such people exist. If such people exist, their whims should be corrected, not indulged. And whoever they are, they’re not jonesing for language updates to the hymnal—they don’t even use the hymnal, or hymns, for crying out loud! They use projector screens and maybe Lutheran Service Builder, and they sing pitchy crap like “In Christ Alone” led by a “worship team.” They find the very idea of a hymnal to be confining. Ironically, they’re exactly the sort of people who would probably really dig verse 5 of LSB 585, “Lord Jesus Christ With Us Abide.” They’d probably sing it from a projector screen at their “traditional service,” set to keyboard, and they’d all think about those closed-minded people who would dim the words God’s Spirit wants them to sing by forcing them to use a hymnal/drop their Beth Moore study. Some of the aging soccer moms would read ahead quickly so that they could sing this line with their eyes closed and their hands raised. You know I’m right. “Language updates” are not made because a significant subset of the laity is requesting them. They’re just not.

No, “language updates” are made by synod-o-crats with little or no pastoral experience who think that the reason people don’t use the hymnal is because they don’t know what “thy” means. But this is absurd. The hymnal committee was not responding to this sort of feedback:

Yes, hello? My 1.2 children don’t know what ‘thy’ means in the hymns that we never sing in our church, because we only sing the Methodist hymns/do contemporary worship, and by the way we don’t even attend regularly—but that’s also because the hymns which we don’t sing make us feel unwelcome. In the next hymnal, which we won’t use, could you ruin all of those hymns?

Come on. The people who love and sing the great Lutheran chorales have never wanted or asked for the language to be updated, and the people to whom the updates are supposedly going to make these hymns “more accessible” never sang them to begin with and aren’t going to start singing them just because they now sound like crap. That’s called a failure of in-reach.

Here’s the thing: a poet or hymn-writer can reach back and make use of an older idiom, and his work can still sound beautiful. He doesn’t have to, but he can. The older idiom has stood the test of time. It is not just time-tested, but time-honored. To imitate it is to be informed by and defer to its wisdom and beauty. We need to kill this stupid notion that the essence of creativity is “being original.” That’s a load of godless secular crap. (I would use stronger words, but I don’t want to cut too much into the Jagged Word’s readership.) Good artists imitate. Good artists respect convention. Good artists incorporate the past into their present work. Bach did this all the time with the well-loved hymns of his day.

But it really doesn’t work in reverse. You can’t take something that was written in an older idiom and render it into a new one without doing violence to it. And you have no right to do so. Notice that little “alt.” after almost every author or translator’s name in LSB? Nine times out of ten, that means “we don’t have the talent to do our own hymn translations, but we will gladly screw with this one.” The analogy to this hilarious—yet horrifying—news story is too perfect:

Three separate photographs of “Ecce Homo” by painter Elias Garcia Martinez show extensive damage caused by an elderly woman who decided the masterpiece needed a little refurbishment.

But in a time of austerity, rather than calling in a professional to complete the job, the unnamed woman attempted to restore the mural herself – at a devastating cost.

The result was a botched repair where the intricate brush strokes of Martinez were replaced with a haphazard splattering of the octogenarian’s paint. Years of carefully calculated depth of expression simply washed out by copious amounts of red and brown.

The comparisons make themselves. Oy vey. Remember, this dear sweet lady had the best of intentions.

“Hey, but if you can’t take something that was written in an older idiom and render it into a new one, then we wouldn’t have the ESV.” Yeah, I know. And what a wonderful world it would be. The ESV is an absolute mule of a Bible translation. The King James Version is the most beautiful translation of Scripture out there. It’s not perfect, no, but it’s still the best. You modernists and your neverending quest for a perfect English translation have only ushered in confusion and uncertainty. If you don’t like the King James, I don’t know what to tell you. You’re probably a Philistine with a disordered soul. Get help.

I would guess that Martin Franzmann’s hymns have maybe twenty more years before an LCMS hymnal committee of the future decides to “fix” their archaic language. He wrote his hymns in the middle of the twentieth century, yet had the audacity to use fancy, confusing, purty-words. What a highbrow jerk! All confessional LCMS Lutherans seem to know and love “Thy Strong Word,” even though its not his best hymn (it’s still a good hymn, though), so let’s imagine what an updated version of it would look like:

Thy strong word did cleave the darkness;
At thy speaking it was done.
For created light we thank thee
While thine ordered seasons run.
Alleluia! Alleluia! Praise to thee who light dost send!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia without end!
Your strong word did cut the darkness;
At your speaking it was done.
You made light, so we say “thank you”
While the seasons run and run.
Alleluia! Alleluia! We praise you for justification!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! Jesus has won.

You laugh, but this is what we do to the old translations of the great Lutheran chorales. Update the pronouns, rephrase things pointlessly, change the topic, and overcompensate for real or perceived weaknesses.

Make your own judgment about verse 3. LSB’s version is clearly inferior. Verse 4 is relatively unmaimed. Verse 5 is a train-wreck. In general, it is good English style to reserve the definite article “the” for things which are actually singular and distinct. This is one of the reasons why you sound like an idiot when you sing, “I’ve got the joy, joy, joy, joy down in my heart,” although this wouldn’t be improved by getting rid of the definite article. All I’m saying is, “Give God the praise and glory” sounds schmaltzy and is a definite downgrade in eloquence from “To God give praise and glory.” And the lovely parallelism of TLH’s version with its double refrain of “To God give praise and glory” gets scrapped so that instead we can exhort each other to “proclaim / Aloud the wondrous story.” This is a line written for a warbling choir of suburbanite women, but no one else.

LSB says that you don’t get to sing verse 6. In a way this is good, because one shudders to think what would have happened to it. I think I know why it got the axe: “To your Redeemer pay your vow” makes it sound like worship is something we owe to God. Zounds, it might even make you think that you have to go church. I’ve got news for you: it is and you do. I know that we recently called Pastor Hans Fiene a troll, but he said something awhile ago that was spot on: “Saying that you don’t have to go to church in order to be a Christian is like saying, ‘I follow Jesus except everywhere He goes.” Something like that. It was good. “Thou shalt sanctify the holy day.” As God’s redeemed children, we are not burdened by this command, but it is still a command. But in the antinomian LCMS, we durst not talk this way. Snip, snip. Goodbye, verse 6, which is written for a choir of strong male voices—another reason why it had to go. Too manly. Anyway, nothing is stopping you from singing this verse, un-gutted, un-maimed, and un … molested. Just pick up your TLH.

Overall, what we see with this week’s chief hymn are yet more needless changes. Why? So that some committeeman could put his personal stamp on this hymn? I don’t know, maybe each person on a subcommittee got to edit a stanza. That sounds nice and collaborative. No elitism here! So the next time you lament the destruction of one of your favorite hymns by the LCMS, comfort yourself with this thought: every time the Schmitzes and the Muellers come over to that guy’s house for Thanksgiving, he’s going to get out the LSB, turn to that formerly great hymn, find the verse in question, and say, “That right there is my little contribution,” and beam with pride. Mark this well: boomers will sacrifice anything for a warm fuzzy feeling of personal accomplishment. Even your heritage.

I don’t judge these men’s hearts. I am not condemning them. This is not the end of the world we’re talking about here, just the ruination of a hymnal. I don’t doubt that the air in those committee-meetings was thick with good intentions. But many of those men just did not know what they did not know. They shouldn’t have been put in the position of editing a hymnal. Others knew a lot, but had an anti-traditional agenda. Others were exactly the sort of men you’d want working on a new hymnal, but they were outnumbered…or kicked off the committee. Now we have to pay the piper. And the drummer, and the guitarist, and the worship chanteuse.

Alright, I’m done. I think I’ll start doing these a week ahead of time. That way if I manage to convince (or embolden) the odd pastor to use the TLH version of the chief hymn, he can save the image and print it out. If a high-resolution scan of the hymn is available from hymnary.org, I will include it at the end of every post.

Aside from that one guy on Facebook, I don’t know if anyone reads these posts, and I don’t presume to think of myself as some great influencer of opinion, public or private. I’m just giving voice to what we all know to be true but don’t want to say because of the insane social pressure, gossip, and backstabbing of the world of Facebook Lutheranism: this is our heritage, and we’re losing it.

W(h)ither the Great Lutheran Hymns? – Trinity 6: “All Mankind Fell in Adam’s Fall”

Before I get started on this week’s hymn, I need to give some explanations for a few things.

Someone was offended by my use of the word “rape” in my article yesterday. “Crude rape language doesn’t strengthen any argument,” this guy writes. Now, I am not an admin on the Facebook page, but someone who is handled this guy pretty well, pointing out that I used the word “rape” figuratively and sharing a link to Alexander Pope’s “The Rape of the Lock.” I don’t think this settled anything for this guy, though. Anyway, to clear the record on my own behalf, I just want to assure him and anyone else who may have been wondering that I was not actually accusing the LSB hymnal committee of engaging in forcible coitus with Lutheran hymns. (I also didn’t think that I was “strengthening my argument” by using the word “rape.”) I didn’t think I’d have to issue such a disclaimer, but there ya go. Also, if only because I came up with an extremely funny pun (please clap) for the series title, there will be no further triggering. Well, that’s probably not true, but at least the title won’t be the thing that gets you going, unless you hate puns.

Regarding yesterday’s post, a friend writes:

That particular variant in ‘Come Follow Me’ traces its origins to LBW. It’s actually quite interesting, because the text was altered significantly from TLH in LBW/LW, but the LSB committee returned to TLH in all but the last phrase. Same thing with ‘Lord Jesus Christ, With Us Abide.’ It was almost unrecognizable in LW, but it was somewhat restored in LSB, though still with fatal issues. Check out stanza five of LSB 585 (‘Lord Jesus Christ, With Us Abide’), and compare to TLH 292 stanza 6. Unbelievable. It has literally the opposite meaning. The original is a prayer against heresy/modernism/new theology, and the LSB/LW one is a plea that the fuddy-duddies and their tradition wouldn’t get in the way of the Holy Ghost. Anyway, I think it would be good to acknowledge the role that LW/LBW played in all of this, because it seems even more damning when you see the original modernist product and realize that it’s the source of this sewage. Otherwise, some people with a bit of knowledge will just blame the translation issues on LW and excuse the editors of LSB. Until you see that they did edit the modernist revisions, and retained far too many of them.

All of that is 100% true. “I think it would be good to acknowledge the role that LW/LBW played in all of this, because it seems even more damning when you see the original modernist product and realize that it’s the source of this sewage.” — Acknowledged!

And “Lord Jesus Christ With Us Abide” is totally the flagship example. It’s appointed for Easter evening or Easter Monday, but it’s also a great hymn all the time, especially at Vespers, so we will do a sneak peak of the two verses mentioned:

TLH 292 LSB 585
6. The haughty spirits, Lord, restrain
Who o’er Thy Church with might would reign
And always set forth something new,
Devised to change Thy doctrine true.
5. Restrain, O Lord, the human pride
That seeks to thrust Your truth aside
Or with some man-made thoughts or things
Would dim the words Your Spirit sings.

This is your synod on homosexuality.

You know what this … molested version is fit for? Clown mass. Episcopalian clown mass presided over by flamers—but I repeat myself. That’s it. This is state-of-confession stuff. If you have any love for the Lutheran Church, you cannot sing the LSB version.

LSB is a synthesis of a good hymnal (TLH) and some abominable hymnals (LBW/LW). This is like a synthesis of a barrel of fine wine and a teaspoon of raw sewage, which yields a barrel of what? Sewage. Why did they do this? Because everything has to be a compromise. Everyone gets their interests represented, even if their interests are heterodox, effeminate, and contrary to all sanity, because the LCMS is a “big tent.”

Great. Now I need a breakfast beer. I did not plan on that when I woke up, but writing this stuff has put me in a mood. Cheers.

The chief hymn for Trinity 6 is “All Mankind Fell In Adam’s Fall,” written by Lazarus Spengler in 1524. It has the distinction of being the only hymn quoted in the Book of Concord. In the Formula of Concord, which was intended to settle certain intra-Lutheran controversies, we read this:

23] 7. They are rebuked and rejected likewise who teach that the nature has indeed been greatly weakened and corrupted through the Fall, but that nevertheless it has not entirely lost all good with respect to divine, spiritual things, and that what is sung in our churches, “Through Adam’s fall is all corrupt, Nature and essence human,” is not true, but from natural birth it still has something good, small, little and inconsiderable though it be, namely, capacity, skill, aptness or ability to begin, to effect, or to help effect something in spiritual things. 24] For concerning external, temporal, worldly things and transactions, which are subject to reason, there will be an explanation in the succeeding article. (FC SD I, 23-24)

The words in bold are a translation of the first few lines of verse 1 of the hymn: “Durch Adams Fall ist ganz verderbt menschlich Natur und Wesen.” To read about the controversy, which was called the Flacian Controversy, click here.

Here are the TLH and LSB versions of the hymn in parallel:

TLH 369 LSB 562
1. All mankind fell in Adam’s fall,
One common sin infects them all;
From sire to son the bane descends,
And over all the curse impends.
1. All mankind fell in Adam’s fall,
One common sin infects us all;
From one to all the curse descends,
And over all God’s wrath impends.
2. Thro’ all man’s pow’rs corruption creeps
And him in dreadful bondage keeps;
In guilt he draws his infant breath
And reaps its fruits of woe and death.
2. Through all our pow’rs corruption creeps
And us in dreadful bondage keeps;
In guilt we draw our infant breath
And reap its fruits of woe and death.
3. From hearts depraved, to evil prone,
Flow tho’ts and deeds of sin alone;
God’s image lost, the darkened soul
Nor seeks nor finds its heav’nly goal.
3. From hearts depraved, to evil prone,
Flow thoughts and deeds of sin alone;
God’s image lost, the darkened soul
Seeks not nor finds its heav’nly goal.
4. But Christ, the second Adam, came
To bear our sin and woe and shame,
To be our Life, our Light, our Way,
Our only Hope, our only Stay.
4. But Christ, the second Adam, came
To bear our sin and woe and shame,
To be our life, our light, our way,
Our only hope, our only stay.
5. As by one man all mankind fell
And, born in sin, was doomed to hell,
So by one Man, who took our place,
We all received the gift of grace.
5. As by one man all mankind fell
And, born in sin, was doomed to hell,
So by one Man, who took our place,
We all were justified by grace.
6. We thank Thee, Christ; new life is ours,
New light, new hope, new strength, new powers:
This grace our every way attend
Until we reach our journey’s end!
6. We thank You, Christ; new life is ours,
New light, new hope, new strength, new pow’rs:
This grace our ev’ry way attend
Until we reach our journey’s end.

As with pretty much all German Lutheran chorales, the version we sing in English is not a straight-across translation but a paraphrases and adaptation. A literal translation of the original German of verse 1 reads as follows:

By Adam’s fall, human nature and being is corrupted;
Which same poison has been passed down to us,
With the result that we could not be saved without the consolation of God,
Who has redeemed us from the tremendous damage,
Wherein the Serpent compelled Eve to invite upon her the wrath of God.

I can’t really imagine singing that, can you? Obviously there’s some adaptation involved, sometimes borrowing of material from other verses, or even distributing material from other verses entirely so that the result is often very different. I don’t want to get too bogged down talking about translation, as I am not an expert. I always at least look at the original version, but my concerns are mainly with the already-existing English versions of our hymns. Very rarely does the change from the TLH version to the LSB version have anything to do with being more faithful to the German (or Latin); usually it has nothing to do with translation at all.

LSB can’t really avoid the word “mankind” in the opening line, but they avoid it for the rest of the hymn. The line “from sire to son the bane descends” gets the axe, and instead we have the limp “from one to all the curse descends,” because (a) patriarchy is bad, and (b) you don’t know what a bane is and can’t be bothered to learn. LSB’s version doesn’t even say the same thing. TLH’s version teaches us that every generation since Adam, and every act of generation, passes on original sin. “From sire to son.” This is why the Jews circumcised their sons: the organ by which a man sired sons was marked to show that his generation was corrupted by sin. TLH’s version puts you in mind of this truth, which is not taught as often as what LSB’s “from one to all” refers to. LSB’s version, while not untrue, is just neutered. (I hope that “neutered” doesn’t trigger people on Facebook. I can read it now: “Crude neuter language doesn’t strengthen any argument”!) It’s also bland and ugly by comparison, and that matters.

Verse 2 has more pointless gender-neutral “we” language, which, instead of directing our thoughts “extra nos” to the archetypes of the Old Adam and the New Adam (Christ), makes us all introspective and pietistic. On the bright side, if you know the old version and you’d like to sing it from memory, you’ll trip up at this point, get distracted, and have to fumble for the page number to see what other booby-traps are waiting for you. Oh wait that isn’t a bright side.

Verse 5 has one of those stupid Lutheran corrections. “We all received the gift of grace” doesn’t thread the needle tightly enough, because people might think that grace is infused or something. I don’t know what the deal is here. “We all were justified by grace” doesn’t actually fix the problem of potential misunderstanding; it, too, is lacking in precision…which is OK, because hymns have a bit more latitude than dogmatics textbooks. That doesn’t mean any amount of imprecision is allowable, but it does mean that there’s some leeway and poetic license. If you want to sing Francis Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics set to music, you might be a good guy and all, but you know nothing about beauty. (And don’t give me some derp “precise doctrinal formulation is the most beautiful thing.”) Again, why change the words? Is “we all received the gift of grace” unbiblical? No, it’s not. It ain’t broke, and it doesn’t need fixing, but some people just can’t leave well enough alone. Once again, this is a pointless booby-trap that cuts people off from one another and creates factions. But then if you don’t want to get on board with the new and inferior stuff, you’re the one who’s being divisive and a stick-in-the-mud.

I’ll stick with this mud, thanks. It’s actually very nutrient-rich soil, and it will be growing good things long after your bed of modernist clay has dried up. So there. See you next week sometime.

The rape of the Lutheran chorale -or- How LSB is subtly robbing you of your heritage

I wasn’t going to write this post, because I realized that it might commit me to writing something every week here, and I’m not sure I can handle that kind of pressure.

But then it happened again. I noticed a yuge difference between the chief hymn as sung in church from LSB and the chief hymn as sung at home from TLH. Last week, Trinity 5. This one was a doozy. I thought to myself, “This one is a doozy.” It dawned on me that there was a better way forward than my usual routine of taking pictures of offending verses from LSB and texting them to my friends with messages like “WHAT THE HELL?!” and “ARE YOU SERIOUS??”—yeah, an even better way forward than that, if you can believe it.

If I do end up writing a series, I guess this post will be the pilot episode. So pardon me if I go long on this one.

Last week, which among the churches of God is called Trinity 5 or the Fifth Sunday after Trinity, the chief hymn was “Come, Follow Me, The Savior Spake,” by Johann Scheffler. Yes, it is true that Scheffler became a papist later in life, but that’s a crap attempt at poisoning the well (heh, no pun was intended there, but Luther would be proud). You people still sing “The Infant Priest” even though Chad Bird became a serial adulterer. I know that you think becoming a Roman Catholic is worse, because you’re Lutherans, but seriously, don’t go there.

Here are the TLH and LSB versions side by side. Note verse 5:

TLH 421

LSB 688

1 Come, follow Me, the Savior spake,
All in My way abiding;
Deny yourselves, the world forsake,
Obey My call and guiding.
Oh, bear the cross, whate’er betide,
Take my example for your guide.

2 I am the Light, I light the way,
A godly life displaying;
I bid you walk as in the day,
I keep your feet from straying.
I am the way, and well I show
How you must sojourn here below.

3 My heart bounds in lowliness,
My soul with love is glowing,
And gracious words My lips express,
With meekness overflowing.
My heart, My mind, My strength, My all,
To God I yield, on Him I call.

4 I teach you how to shun and flee
What harms your soul’s salvation,
Your heart from every guile to free,
From sin and its temptation.
I am the refuge of the soul
And lead you to your heavenly goal.

5 Then let us follow Christ, our Lord,
And take the cross appointed
And, firmly clinging to His Word,
In suffering be undaunted.
For who bears not the battle’s strain
The crown of life shall not obtain.

Amen.

1 “Come, follow Me,” the Savior spake,
“All in My way abiding;
Deny yourselves, the world forsake,
Obey My call and guiding.
O bear the cross, whate’er betide,
Take my example for your guide.

2 “I am the Light, I light the way,
A godly life displaying;
I bid you walk as in the day;
I keep your feet from straying.
I am the way, and well I show
How you must sojourn here below.

3 “My heart abounds in lowliness,
My soul with love is glowing;
And gracious words My lips express,
With meekness overflowing.
My heart, My mind, My strength, My all,
To God I yield, on Him I call.

4 “I teach you how to shun and flee
What harms your soul’s salvation,
Your heart from ev’ry guile to free,
From sin and its temptation.
I am the refuge of the soul
And lead you to your heav’nly goal.”

5 Then let us follow Christ, our Lord,
And take the cross appointed
And, firmly clinging to His Word,
In suff’ring be undaunted.
For those who bear the battle’s strain
The crown of heav’nly life obtain.

 

Thanks, LSB, for helping us “keep it positive.” I guess all hymns need to end with a happy Gospel thought, too. Definitely wouldn’t want people to think that those who do not take up their cross and follow Christ might not enter heaven, even though the Bible says so:

Matthew 10:38: “And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after Me, is not worthy of Me.”

Luke 9:23-25: “And [Jesus] said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it. For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away? For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father’s, and of the holy angels.

And just so there’s no doubt, LSB’s translation is unfaithful:

Modern Lutherans believe that Scripture is “perspicuous” until some perspicuous passage threatens one of their cherished antinomian beliefs. That’s generally how it goes. So they do things like edit the hymnal, sometimes subtly, sometimes grossly— as future installments will show (dang it, I guess that sounds kind of committed).

With few exceptions, the versions of our great Lutheran chorales which appear in LSB have been just gutted. Maybe you don’t think that’s a fair metaphor. Fine. Those that are not gutted are often critically maimed in small but significant ways. If someone cuts your pinky-toes off, you can’t walk. Yeah, great, no one gave you the Braveheart treatment, but how do you like being a cripple?

Why have our trusted LCMS theologians and “liturgical experts” done this to our hymns?

One reason is that our synod is severely infected with antinomianism. Some would say at the “highest levels.” I have a friend who left the LCMS for the WELS because, at least in his mind, the LCMS is full of “Fordeians” (a reference to the ELCA theologian Gerhard Forde) “at the highest levels.” (I’m not confident about my recollection of the full quote, but those were definitely the last four words.) He couldn’t stomach it anymore. That’s his take. I still wish he would’ve stayed, but like Bill Clinton, I feel his pain (this is the only way that I’m like Bill Clinton). There can be no doubt about it: the LSB’s rape of our great Lutheran hymns manifests an antinomian agenda. Sometimes it’s blatant, as with today’s example. Sometimes it’s more subtle. Later installments (dang, more commitment talk there) will bear witness to this, but I’ll say this for now: LSB’s obsessive stripping away of male pronouns and references to “man,” “mankind, and “men” should trouble you. And it’s all over the place. Feminism is a revolt against the order of creation, for which “patriarchy” is a perfectly good synonym. It is pure antinomianism.

A second reason: Beauty is confusing, apparently, and you’re stupid and wouldn’t benefit from encountering it, apparently, nor could you come to appreciate it. So LSB’s squad of “editors” just flattened the poetic contours of beautiful hymn-verses into Midwestern Nice so that you never have to worry about feeling awe or wonder stirring in your breast. It’s safer that way. You’ll “understand” it better. Snip snip. I’m glad that a hymnal committee didn’t decide what version of Shakespeare we all get to read. Can you imagine what these people would do to Romeo And Juliet? “Romeo, Romeo, huh, that sure is a funny name!”

The arrogance of these lyrical alterations is just astounding. Who are these people that they think they are free to hack away things that don’t fit their little procrustean beds-o’-the-moment? The great Lutheran hymnographers of old are dead and can’t protest the butchery of their work. All of this is like Chesterton’s fable of the gate: two men walk down a country lane and come upon a gate. The first says, “I don’t understand why this is here. Let’s tear it down.” The other says, “I don’t understand why this is here. We’d better not touch it.” To me the analogy is obvious, so I’m not going to bother spelling it out. I will say, though, that I would love to see the edits that our Lutheran fathers would make to our hymns. How would we like that? Probably not one bit. But because we are arrogant and ungrateful children, we have no problem turning the tables.

Whatever the intentions of LSB’s hymn-wrecking crew might have been, this is all objectively insidious: this is how tradition—good tradition, which is the act of passing down good things to the next generation—dies. It’s like the memory hole in George Orwell’s 1984. In today’s LCMS, converts and millennials—anyone who’s grown up only knowing LSB, basically—are effectively cut off from their heritage, and they don’t even know it. In fact, they—and the synod-o-crats who all seem to love the LSB—adopt an air of superiority around anyone who expresses frustration with it. Unless that person is Pastor Mark Preus. It’s really hard to adopt an air of superiority around Mark Preus. Not only is he ten times smarter than you (on the topic of Lutheran hymns and probably plenty of others), but he also looks like he could take a bite out of a truck bumper while singing “Salvation Unto Us Has Come.” Just stand down.

I’m not against new hymns, in theory. Yes, the LSB includes some good newer hymns that weren’t written when TLH first came out, but, really…not that many, when you think about it. And I’d give up every single one of the supposedly great new hymns in LSB if I could have all of Gerhardt’s hymns in their place—unmaimed and with the guts still in. Again, I’m not judging the intentions of (all of) the men who worked on LSB. I’m sure some of them had great intentions. But it’s a bad book. Containing good hymns does not make a hymnal good. A camel is a horse built by a committee. With each passing year, I think more people in the LCMS realize that the LSB’s horse costume is falling apart and the hump is poking through. We’re not going to whoop ass on the Apache while riding this steed.

But I’m going to try to be fair. If there’s a genuine improvement in LSB’s version of a hymn, or even if they just leave it a lone, I will certainly note this and give credit where credit is due. But that’s small comfort, and it’s not going to change the overall verdict, which has already been set by a jury way larger than one autistic guy on a gripe blog. Way larger. It includes those who are dead. (Didn’t Chesterton say something about that, too? Tradition is the democracy of the dead?)

That’s all I’ve got to say for now. If you want to follow along with this project, or work ahead of me, or if the concept of a chief hymn is new to you, consult this list. Look up the same hymns in TLH that are given for LSB.

Chris Rosebrough’s “Aletheia Church”

Heyo! Welcome to Aletheia Outreach, Chris Rosebrough’s latest grand gesture of stroking his ego in private…yet somehow still in public, so as to be seen by men:

http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/req-srv

I MEAN church. We’re a church. This isn’t weird.

First some pre-service music:

Wait a second—how did you get here? Have you been vetted by PASTOR? Ah. That’s right. You have the sacred GoToMeeting link. Just like Jesus did it. Well, don’t forget to set some matzos and Mogen David on the table and do a sound check, because when PASTOR speaks his all-powerful consecrating words, you’ll need to be sure that some of the sound-waves make contact.

Yes, this is what they do.

Those of us who have known Chris from the early days saw this coming a loooooong time ago. Saw what coming? Please, take another look at General Hamilton’s tweet. You either die draining the swamp, or you live long enough to see yourself become the swamp.

He didn’t want to take the time off to go apply to the seminary. No—the public needed him! How would they have dealt with life while he was cracking books? So he asked his pastor if he’d endorse him for the SMP program. Yeah, that’s right. Take it to the bank. This is well corroborated.

I wasn’t there, but this must have been the gist:

Chris’s pastor: “Uh…the SMP program? But that’s for…you know…liberals. It’s a weak-sauce fast track. We’re against that.”

Chris: “Yeah, well…I can’t go to seminary like ordinary people.”

Chris’s pastor: “How come not?”

Chris: “Uh, hello? I’m Chris Rosebrough. I’m special. Besides, if I stop breathing life into people via my internet radio station, the church will fall.”

Chris’s pastor: “It will?”

Chris: “Yes. Besides I’m already super smart and stuff. Smarter than a whole entire pastor and everything. I just need to get the badge.”

Chris’s pastor: “You mean ordination.”

Chris: “Whatever. I already know all the stuff.”

Chris’s pastor: “Well, be that as it may, the SMP program is shite and it’s for liberals. You of all people should be opposed to that. I cannot, in good conscience, recommend you.”

Chris: “OK, I’m peacin’ out. Gonna go somewhere where people will recognize that I’m a genius who’s too cool for regular school.” *Immediately orders clerical shirts, collarettes, and huge pectoral cross from Almy*

Now, I don’t know much of anything about the TAALC. I know that the LCMS is in fellowship with them, but I don’t know whether that speaks well of them or not. I know that some of their pastors went to an online seminary and seem to be none the worse for it, and I know that…there’s also Chris Rosebrough. They must be desperately trying to figure out how to put their toothpaste back into the tube right now. I don’t know if you’ve ever tried this, but it doesn’t work.

Let’s be real. Rosebrough sought a fast track into the ministry for the optics. The TAALC provided that way, probably without knowing what they were doing. Fast-forward to today, past the part where Chris is whoring himself at a conference run by a pseudo-Lutheran sexual predator: now he’s doing an online invite-only “church” for people who’ve been “hurt by the institutional church.” (Oh, please. Let me guess— this is the “Gospel for those broken by the Church.”) His actual church is just a physical front to provide him with legitimacy, like a dry-cleaner run by the mob, except that, at least in the movies, mobsters are cool and sympathetic, and Chris is not. He’s there at Kongsvanger so that he can be “Pastor Chris Rosebrough” rather than some nerd who carps all day on an “internet radio station” about “muh false teachers.” Yeah, well, if you lie down with the dogs all day, don’t be surprised if you come up covered in fleas. Apparently he’s absorbed their ideas by osmosis or something. He’s doing parachurch just like all of the schmucks he rails on…but he’s doing it the right way, see?

No, I don’t see, and neither do you, because we’re not idiots. An online video-conventicle with a tele-consecrated Lord’s Supper is not church. And the supper that they eat is not the Lord’s Supper. Sorry, but it’s just not. (That’s the worst part, the whole sacraments part. I’m sensitive to this because I grew up in a cult.) No, it isn’t described in these terms on the website, but this is absolutely what they do. I know because I talked to someone who’s “attended” one of the Aletheia Outreach services. Just ask Chris. He’ll even defend it. He’ll say it’s no different than using a microphone to project the pastor’s voice, yadda yadda. Yeah. Come on. Because someone sitting at the back of a big church has their own little altar set up on a TV-tray with their own elements. No, of course they don’t. “Our Lord Jesus Christ took bread,” etc. He didn’t just think of all of the bread in various places in the world, say magic words, and turn it into His body. For that and a hundred other reasons, this doesn’t pass a basic smell test.

You don’t need hifalutin theology to recognize that this is bogus. This is a guy who wants you to want him. He’s somehow not busy enough ministering to actual 3D members at a church that has actually called him to be their pastor? Really? Do you believe that? Maybe you’re reading this, and you’re a pastor. If so then you know that this is total crap. This man is just an internet addict LARPing the holy ministry. Why can’t these people go to actual churches? Answer: because Chris Rosebrough is the indispensable man. Or so he thinks. Any old pastor simply will not do. He is the anointed leader.

If that sounds culty, it’s not a coincidence. It’s culty.

Oh, and in case you’re wondering if you can give your first seed to Aletheia Ministries so that later you can stand under the rainbow and claim the blessing or whatever, yes, there is a way to do that. Give money here! You have to just laugh. What a sheister. To be honest, though, I don’t think Chris is malicious. I think he truly just believes his own hype. He’s also never worked a day of real work in his life (Vintegrity does not count, for obvious reasons), so he probably does need the money. Still, don’t give him any.

Here are all of the links on Aletheia Outreach:

http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/support-aletheia

http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/req-srv

http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/aletheia-home/

They’re all on archive.org, too, in case he scrubs them. Hell, I sure would.

Anyway, just wanted to get this out before Chris preaches at Higher Things tomorrow. I’m sure your kids will learn great stuff from him. Sorry, buddy. I know it hurts, but at this point you’re just doing it to yourself. You need to give it up and go work at Target or learn to cut hair or something.

 

 

Lutheran Twitter Trolls, Useful Idiots, and Your Pearl-Clutching

We are not…

Are there other Lutheran troll accounts?

Whoever @Repravda, @RealVELoescher, @King_Prester, and @HansFiene are, we thank them for those times when they are right, and we ask them to sober up a bit, choose their battles wisely, and stop tagging us. We are not offended by their use of fake names, however, and we recognize the need for the use of the same in this day and age when not everyone has a six-figure “screw you” petty-cash sock to fall back on if petty people try to ruin their lives for speaking the truth.

We don’t know if all of what these good trolls do rises to the august level of “truth-speaking” or not—probably not, as at least one of them writes for the FDRLST, which sucks—but we don’t care, either, and we’re not going to madly scan their tweets and clutch our pearls if they step out of line. We don’t even have pearls. If you do, you should stop clutching them, because that little string is going to break, and they’re going to fall on the floor and bounce all over the place; some might go down the heater-vent, and you’re just never going to find them all…

Stop reading their damn tweets if they offend you. Put your damn iPhone on your damn dresser and go for a damn half-hour walk and look at the damn birds. Then come home and read a damn book for an hour. Better yet, read the Bible. For Pete’s sake, you are such a neurotic foot-stamping little child.

If there are more so-called “troll-accounts,” we are not them, either. We are @doorcellarthe, and that’s it. But that Twitter account is a bit like John Malkovich in the movie Being John Malkovich. Don’t get the reference? Watch the movie.

We are small and insignificant for now, but you should pay attention to us. Follow us on Twitter or subscribe to our Facebook page (you don’t even have to “like” it). We talk about important things here.

Do you hate the degradation of the Lutheran Church?

Do you, like us, find that what might be termed “reactionary traditionalism” is necessarily entailed by our Lutheran confession of faith, especially if our churches are to survive and flourish?

Do you despise secularism, liberalism, modernism, feminism, antinomianism, and all of their works and ways, and are you tired of watching supposedly orthodox Lutheran synods, churches, pastors, and theologians incessantly capitulate to them and compromise with them?

Do you think that Robert Conquest’s Three Laws of Politics apply all too well to the LCMS?

Then you may already be one of us already. Welcome.

Don’t apologize if the foregoing describes you. Lutherans apologize online way too much. It’s super fake, and it’s super gay.

What do you think? We’ll leave comments open on this post for a change. But we still aren’t going to publish your comment, Bill. Or yours, Chris.

 

 

1517 The Legacy Projection: whither movest it, and whence?

From the comment section over at BJS. Trent Demarest pointed me to this with the following disclaimer:

This was sent to me via email by Pr. Mark Surburg, who assumed that I was the author and indicated that others have been making the same assumption (presumably on Facebook). I’m honored(ish), but, no, I am not the author. Funny thing, I was actually trying to get a comment in on that story all day, but was having weird CAPTCHA difficulties and was unable to post. I am not the author, but I wish I were. Well, kind of. I would never say, “1517/CHF is a lot of good and a lot of bad all mixed together”— I think the whole thing is a flaming pile of […], and I have never liked Rod Rosenbladt even a little. Nothing personal— I only know him as a theologian, and he’s awful. Even when I was an antinomian, I thought he was a weird, emotive try-hard. It’s like he never stopped being a pietist. Anyway, on the whole and in general, yes to all of this. You should post it.

Alright, well…whatever.

I’ve taken the liberty of putting links in where available. Read and share. Papa bless.


NOTE: photos, captions, etc., are all the creation of The Cellar Door Syndicate™ and are all completely © and even ®, so don’t even think about stealing our OC.

What is a “Preston Sprinkle”? We just don’t know. But, wow, Popovits. What a cool guy. “How cool?” you ask. Oh, you don’t even know…

Comparisons with Issues, Etc. or Seminary Symposium, or pastors contributing to non-Lutheran blogs are more obscuring than helpful. Same with personal testimonies about how 1517 used to be. 1517 understands itself as a “movement.” The question is, where is it moving?

Once upon a time 1517 had nothing to do with Christ Hold Fast (CHF). Now it does. Is that a “movement” toward or away from Confessional Lutheranism?

The founder of CHF, “Pastor” Daniel Price, has sexually preyed upon one of Christ’s sheep. He twists the Bible to remain instated as a “pastor” of an “independent Lutheran church” (read: cult leader). He practices open communion, slanders confessional brothers, is divisive, quarrelsome, and blatantly unrepentant. If you want to know his m.o. read, “Beware of Broken Wolves” by Joe Carter. It spells out how Price uses the gospel so that Price can do what Price wants to do.

What Price wants to do is (actually) strangle Demarest. This just looks like soccer-between-the-trenches “haha irony” stuff.

Once upon a time Van Voorhis used his gifts in service to Confessional Lutheranism. For example, google his videos on “American Christianity” and “A Brief history of Lutheran Pietism.” Since becoming part of the “movement” that is 1517, how has Van Voorhis moved? There was the pro Nadia Bolz-Weber article, bizarre and questionable videos on “Christ and Culture,” the Reinke interview, the Eilers interview, and now hours of narcissism and humble-bragging about a sinful past (See “Virtue in the Wasteland” and “Monsters”).

If 1517 was interested in working together with Confessional Lutherans, how hard would it be to simply post a correction, retraction, or clarification (on the Eilers issue, for example, or any of the others)? How hard would it be for 1517 to simply say: “If you see something contrary to the Bible or the Confessions, let us know, we will take it down”?

But 1517 is a movement and it isn’t interested in what Confessional Lutheranism thinks. It’s headed in another direction, one small step at a time.

Evidence? Donavan Riley: “Clark Kent in a Manger” (Eutychianism), “God’s Not Angry At You” and “The Gospel For those angry At God” (Antinomianism). Chad Bird: “Safe Preaching and the Prophylactic Gospel” and “Gospel Phobia” (Antinomianism). Scott Keith: “Do you Really think You can Use God’s Law” (Antinomianism), “The Gospel As Dynamite …” (Anachronism, Bad Exegesis, Reductionism), “My First Lutheran Cruise” (Mocking the Lutheran church). Joel Hess: “Is God Drunk” (Blasphemy), “Want Uniformity In Worship? Go back to Prussia” (Anti-liturgical). There’s even a papist! Graham Glover: “Authority Problem” and “Protestants Need the Pope.”

Awwww! All of the boyz together, with somebody’s mom. (NB: Van Voorhis is the one rocking the contraposso and protest tats.) Man, this picture is just uncomfortable to look at.

Add all this to what you know about CHF and the tragic turn of Van Voorhis.

1517 identifies as a “movement.” Does it appear that they are moving (and want their audience to move) toward Confessional Lutheranism or away from it?

1517 has also promoted an organization called Mockingbird and its conferences (see the “friends” section of 1517’s website). If you want the abstract, simply google “episcodisco.” If you want the full scoop, check out the crass antinomianism of Paul Zahl’s book, Grace In Practice or the identical theology of his son, David Zahl. Mockingbird is also pro women’s ordination and has had, for example, “Rev.” Mrs. Fleming Rutledge as a conference speaker. Again, 1517 promotes Mockingbird and its conferences.

1517 identifies as a “movement.” Does it appear that they are moving toward Confessional Lutheranism or away from it?

1517/CHF are now promoting a conference called “Here We Still Stand” The conference name and list of speakers will tell you all you need to know. Orthodox (Montgomery, Rosenbladt, Francisco, Siemon-Netto), mixed with heterodox (non-Lutherans, David Zahl, etc.), mixed with predatory (Daniel Price), mixed with flat-out heretical (Stephen Paulson). Yes, Stephen Paulson who, in his book, “Lutheran Theology” denies the atonement (p. 91-93), denies the Third Use (p. 170-188), and even accuses our Lord Jesus Himself of personal sin (p.105) is one with whom 1517/CHF is going to “stand” on the 500th anniversary of the Lutheran Reformation. Let that sink in.

1517 identifies as a “movement.” If it “stands” with the kind of teachers listed above, and implies that Lutherans have always stood with these kinds of teachers (“Here We Still Stand”), is this a “movement” toward or away from Confessional Lutheranism? Is it a “movement” toward or away from Truth?

Try not to laugh. Narrator def needs some Dulcolax.

How have orthodox teachers gotten wrapped into this? By not truly understanding the nature of the “movement” to which they are lending their names and talents. Once upon a time 1517 was not so. Now it is. The big picture and the slow drift are sometimes hard to see. Old age, old friendships, and a bit of money can make it even harder to see.

Of course, you could simply come to the same conclusion about 1517/CHF using the well-worn short-cut: lex orandi, lex credendi. If the worship is generically protestant, revivalistic, and ego driven – so too will be the theology. Check out any 1517/CHF conference.

1517/CHF is a lot of good and a lot of bad all mixed together. The bad is a move toward protestantism, nuanced with radical Lutheranism. The good is why it has its champions. Everyone interested in Confessional Lutheranism needs to understand that 1517/CHF is a “movement,” and they need to understand where that “movement” is headed.

And if this is, indeed, a “movement” that Higher Things wants to join, then, “Higher Things – Quo Vadis?”