He said to the crowd: “When you see a cloud rising in the west, immediately you say, ‘It’s going to rain,’ and it does. And when the south wind blows, you say, ‘It’s going to be hot,’ and it is. Hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky. How is it that you don’t know how to interpret this present time?”

Luke 12:54-56

LCMS President Rev. Matthew Harrison released the denominational leadership’s official statement on the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on October 1st, 2021. With that, it is time to pronounce the failure of the Synodical Leaders and Tastemakers (SLT) to interpret our present time as complete.

We currently exist in a state of cold war between the oligarchic Elites, hell-bent on reshaping the world according to their well laid plans, and the people of the nations over which these elites hold sway. We are propagandized daily with messaging designed to move us into the next phase of existence.

At the center of this propaganda is one core idea:

You do not belong to God. You do not belong to yourself. You belong to this world, and to its Masters.

As subjects to this conditioning, we are increasingly seeing justifications for CCP-like social credit systems in the West, with the inevitable goal of rationing resources for those who are compliant with Elite rule. The cancel culture that was formerly laughed at as a simply online phenomenon has spread, as “conspiracy theorists” predicted, to banks and payment processors. There is a perceptible squeeze taking place around those who object to the new mode of being which we are seeing ushered in. The Powers That Be are whittling down the avenues for dissent and, thus, escape from the new system being brought online before our eyes.

Now, enabled by the constant and heavy seeding of fear of COVID-19, the propaganda campaign has advanced to the next node of its journey. At this juncture, we are supposed to be convinced that violating the bodily rights of our neighbors is a moral necessity. Such a necessity, in fact, that those who will not submit to injection by a dubious and novel agent — one which is purported only to lessen individual risk of adverse outcomes, not prevent spread of contagion — must be compelled to submit by stripping them of their livelihoods until they bend the knee and roll up the sleeve.

After all, your body belongs not to God. Nor to you. It belongs to the community, which is to say, the world. 

Which is to say, the Elite.

But, given the chance to stand against this tide, to shout to the rulers of this world…

No. Our bodies are temples of the Holy God. 

Any administration of a compound with:

1. Zero history of either safe or effective use
2. Which many of our members find morally repugnant on the basis of a commitment against self-harm informed by the 5th Commandment
3. As well as a commitment against abortion also informed by same

against the will of the person and under heavy coercion is condemned by our church body as damnable and Satanic. We hereby announce the members of the LCMS as religiously exempt from COVID-19 “vaccine” (so-called) mandates, as required by obedience to God.

…our SLT have instead taken a collective step back from those of us who say, here I stand, I can do no other than refuse this injection.

I can accept that some have made the personal choice to overrule conscience and common sense to accept this injection. I understand that fear is compelling, and marketing powerful.

But for the SLT to fail to speak against these mandates — which are even against the secular Nuremberg Code (printed below), to say nothing of the above Christian justification — as an unjust imposition upon the consciences of LCMS members defies easy, much less comfortable, explanation.

So too does the failure to denounce these mandates for their murderous intent — attempting to cut conscientious objectors off, as they do, from gainful employment and, thus, the right given by God to work that we may eat — make one question just how spiritually asleep the SLT must in fact be.

This question derives, of course, from the best construction.

Even without an answer, and even acknowledging Harrison’s playing at concern for the Constitutionality of these mandates where churches are concerned (his only objection, meekly proffered), one conclusion is unavoidable: the SLT has utterly failed to exercise their role to feed Christ’s sheep. Instead they stay silent as the sheep are denied pasture for the crime of remaining “unvaxxed”, in accord with their consciences before God and their duties before their kin to act wisely in the preservation of their bodies and health.

They have failed to interpret this present time.

They have failed Christ.

_____________________

The Nuremberg Code (1947)

(Emphasis per Ann Barnhardt)

Permissible Medical Experiments

The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity. (“I was just following orders” is NO DEFENSE. Every person who participates in this in any way is guilty of capital crimes against humanity.)

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.