Strangers to Sisters - Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Library: Essays

where the one advocating them refuses admonition and is disturbing and dividing the
church, there one finds a heretic. And, furthermore, this heretic cannot be admonished
indefinitely. After one or two admonitions, he is to be rejected. The Gullerud exegesis
displays the common WELS/ELS method in approaching a text. Gullerud shows what
each key word means etymologically and in the context of the sentence. He compares
that to the standard Greek grammar (Kittel), states the simple sense of the passage and
then, and only then, does he show that this is the way that the past teachers of the
Lutheran Church understood this passage.
The discussion that followed underscored the hermeneutical unity of the WELS
and ELS men. Harstad, Lillegard, Madson, Brenner and Reim all line up solidly behind
Gullerud’s exegesis and its application to the LCMS-ALC discussions. Both the WELS
and ELS men apply Titus 3:10 to not simply referring to a heretic or schismatic within a
fellowship, but to anyone outside the fellowship, who by his false doctrine, seeks to
divide the church. For instance, Adolph Harstad (ELS) stated that he cannot follow the
argument of Mazak that the passage cannot be applied to a heretic outside of framework
of fellowship. In support of Harstad, John Brenner (WELS) remarks,
Let us remember that Ohio was formerly within and left the
Synodical Conference for doctrinal reasons. Missouri [as a
member of the Synodical Conference therefore] is
admonishing the A.L.C. Engelder said, “That’s horrible,
they must correct that.” Harms says they are admonishing
and cannot fellowship them because they still have error
and hold to it. Reu has said, “If Missouri thinks we will
yield in the least point, they are mistaken.” I cannot follow
Dr. Harms’ points at all. We have seen no fruit of
admonition at all. The ALC is continuing to fellowship
errorists…. 324 (Italicized words of explanation mine)
324 Minutes of the IRC, April 1953, 4.
175