My Calov versus Your Calov - Wauwatosis

Hardly anyone knows who Calov is. Luther correctly taught that the Holy Spirit speaks to us concisely so we do not have vast volumes of work to twist into pretzels (my rough translation).

I do not have enough years left to read Calov or the rest of the post-Concord theologians. Calov and Gerhard were astonishingly productive. Unfortunately, this era grew more philosophical and scholastic, leaving the ordinary pastor and layman behind.

Although Luther's Works travel around from owner to owner, usually in pristine condition, few have read much of Luther, who surpassed all other theologians in Christendom. I am glad some of the older works (post-Concord) are now available in English. In a few years no one will be reading Latin except a few classics majors.

If someone spent 20 years and proved Calov taught UOJ, our confession of faith would still rest primarily on the Scriptures first as the ruling norm and the Book of Concord second as the ruled norm. The Wisconsin Synod does not like the Book of Concord, but they love their Wauwatosa opinions. A few statements from them will show that they place their fads above all authority. A common statement is: "In our circles, this means..." Thus, they suffer from a bad case of Wauwatosis.

The Book of Concord was knitted together to prevent a sect, city, or territory from wandering off on its own. Lutherans study the Book of Concord as an act of humility: these confessors have something to teach me about the Scriptures and Patristic Age. Yes, those reformers did not skip from Paul to Luther as the modern know-nothings do. They used the Fathers (Augustine, Jerome - not J. P. Meyer and Sig Becker) to show they were in harmony with orthodox Christianity.

I have noticed that when people rail against the Book of Concord, they show very little knowledge of the work (ditto, railing against Luther).

I have three reasons for quoting authors so frequently:
1. To show the anti-Scriptural opinions of false teachers, especially UOJ and Church Growth fanatics.
2. To repeat what has always been taught in Lutheran orthodoxy.
3. To evoke interest in reading the classics of the Faith.

If my house were on fire and I had the last books left in Christianity, this is what I would grab on the way out the door:
A. The KJV, my Hebrew OT, my Greek NT.
B. Luther's Sermons (now in five volumes, check Christian Book Distributors).
C. Luther's Family Devotions.
D. The Book of Concord. Triglotta? I am not Arnie.
E. Anything by Chemnitz I can run out the door with.

***

M Schottey has left a new comment on your post "My Calov versus Your Calov - Wauwatosis":

The WELS does NOT teach that men are saved a part from faith.

Salvation and Justification are two different terms.

Again, faith is the method by which the blessings of justification (which is for all men) is (sic) imparted (subjective) on each man.

Therefore no one is saved apart from faith. But all are justified.

The purpose of many of the quotes you have trotted out is that they were written to support the Pauline justification by Grace through faith. They were not written against UoJ.

Find me an author, one, who would have said that Jesus came to earth, suffered, and died only for some. Christ's death was not for some, but for all mankind.

You seriously and gravely misuse interchangibly the words 'justify' and 'saved'.

You also seriously and gravely attribute a false teaching to the WELS which is not there. None of us men are being taught that a person is saved apart from faith. We are taught that all were declared 'not guilty' but that the promises af that declaration are recieved only by grace THROUGH faith. As Paul teaches.

***

GJ - WELS had an "evangelism" campaign where the banners said, "I am saved, just like you." Even die-hard WELSians were shocked by the Universalism. Preuss would have nodded his approval.

A common WELS pastoral saying, "Two thousand years ago, all sins were forgiven."

Salvation comes from the forgiveness of sins, so do not erect so many straw man fallacies in the same post.

I am glad the comment was posted, because it reveals the anti-Scriptural opinions of those who are brain-washed at Mequon. I will recap:
1. There are two justifications.
2. The first justification is really important - all sins are forgiven: Hottentots, Hindus, Muslims, but not critics of WELS.
3. The second justificaiton is also important: all sins are forgiven, with all people declared righteous - but that does not count until they are subjectively justified and forgiven.

True Calvinists say that Christ died only for the elect. Their numbers are few and, like the Wisconsin Synod membership, growing smaller each day.

The two-justification false doctrine of WELS/ELS/LCMS is a recent opinion, at odd with the Book of Concord. UOJ is from Pietism, imported by Walther, blessed by Pieper, but fueled lately by the Church Growth professors like Valleskey and Bivens.