 |
| Jack Kilcrease nominates North America's greatest Lutheran theologian, earning our favorite Catholic lecturer another free trip to Ft. Wayne, where they routinely turn out Catholic and Eastern Orthodox priests. |
Dr. Jack Kilcrease has left a new comment on your post "Infamous Huberists: From the New Gallery at The Sm...":
Though I am certainly flattered to be chosen for your hall of fame - don't you think Dr. Scaer would be more fitting than I? I mean, I'm small potatoes. I think he's probably the greatest living Lutheran theologian in North America at this point (Oswald Bayer would be the greatest in Germany). Just saying.
***
GJ - The facts show Walther to have been a brittle, tyrannical, and fanatical usurper. Tom Hardt is a UOJ fanatic, so he did a fine job of connecting Walther with Huber. Hardt's praise of Walther mercifully exposes the Kidnapper's alarming opinions.
The following quotations are from Hardt's essay - Justification and Easter, A Study in Subjective and Objective Justification in Lutheran Theology.
Hardt - "As a first observation it should be said that Walther’s homiletic treatment of the relationship between Easter and justification shows no sign of a gradual development. Our material covers the period 1840-1886, and all the sermons seem to possess the same degree of dogmatic clarity."
Walther - “As we were co-punished in Christ’s death, we are again co-absolved from our sins in His resurrection.“48
GJ - Walther's statement above is bizarre and profoundly wrong.
Hardt - "In 1844 we see an expression coined that was to become well known: 'That the resurrection of Christ is the fully valid justification of all men.'”51
GJ - The early use of Easter absolution suggests learning this fallacy from Stephan, Pietistic circles, or even the rationalists of Berlin where Walther was trained.
Walther - “Yet, my beloved, the resurrection of Jesus Christ is not only the highest and final consolation of all men, because not until then is the consolation of the cross and death of Christ revealed and are both of them made consoling, but because it contains a consolation in itself which is not to be found in any other work of the redemption, not even in the passion and death of Christ. Consider only the following and you will soon agree with me. Whereas the passion and death properly speaking were acts of Christ, His resurrection was, on the contrary, properly speaking the act of His heavenly Father... This is, however, of the highest and most consolatory importance... Whereas the passion and death of Jesus Christ was the penitence and confession of the Son of God for the entire apostate humanity, His resurrection was, on the contrary, the heavenly Father’s absolution, subsequently solemnly and factually delivered in Christ to all men, publicly before heaven and earth.”57
Hardt - "Easter as an act toward the world in general is thus continued, repeated, in the means of grace, the Gospel in all its forms, which effectively convey the gift of Easter to individuals."
GJ - Hardt does not recognize that he and Walther are using Easter as the Means of Grace for the entire world, without the Word, without faith. This opinion is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, who works only through the Word and Sacraments. The Scriptures do not teach that the Holy Spirit works again to create a second justification that validates the first one. Hardt is consistent with Olde Synodical Conference false doctrine - no wonder he is admired by Ft. Wayne, the ELS, and Jay Webber. High church Enthusiasts are still Enthusiasts, as witnessed in the Church of Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy.
Missouri Proceedings, 1860, Walther presiding - "During the discussions a reference was made to the fact that within the Missouri Synod it had always been preached that: “Through the resurrection from the dead God has absolved all the world, i.e., set it free from sin; if now the world already is absolved and set free from sin, what is then the absolution or preaching of the Gospel in the church? Is it, too, a setting free, or merely a proclamation of the setting free that has already occurred? Answer: … precisely through the Gospel occurs the conveying of what is in God’s heart... a proclamation that really brings and gives the forgiveness… The absolution in the Gospel is nothing else than a repetition of the factual absolution which has already happened through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.”63
GJ - WELS, Missouri, and the ELS do not teach the Biblical Means of Grace, but twist its meaning to say that the Gospel in Word and Sacrament simply states what is already true - they are already forgiven, whether they believe it or not. They were born forgiven, but they have to decide that they are forgiven, just like everyone else in the world. Walther is the hero who brought the false doctrine of Samuel Huber to the new world, later clothed in the double-justification language of Knapp (Woods' translation).
Hardt - "Another expression of considerable repute connected with Walther’s theology on Easter and justification is “objective justification” versus “subjective justification.” It has been investigated as to when this terminology was first used by Walther or men like him.68 It seems, as far as the investigations for this article permit us to see, that the terms were made known to Walther through an article in a theological paper in Germany, printed in 1867. Walther reprinted it in his Lehre und Wehre in the same year, and it can be said to throw clarity on the original meaning of the words."69
GJ - The article was printed in Germany in 1867, but the OJ/SJ language in English had been in use in the Knapp two-volume set (English translation) since 1831. Woods (Calvinist) was a super-star among mainline Protestant leaders in America, and Knapp was in print throughout the 19th century. Therefore one might expect that the OJ/SJ terms drifted across the ocean in English and drifted back in German. Walther was every bit as original as Paul Calvin Kelm, copying his false doctrine and gasping "Oh - this is so creative."
Note well - Walther introduced OJ/SJ terms originally from a Calvinist American used to explain the doctrine of a Halle Pietist.
Dr. Lito Cruz is correct in labeling all this a product of the Calvinists, smuggled into the Olde Synodical Conference by Walther - the American Luther or the American Crypto-Calvinist?
Hardt - "The essential differences between Walther’s doctrine and Huber’s concerning universal justification can be summarized in the following way: First of all, we do not meet the slightest hint in Walther’s theology about God as being forced by His own essence to know of no contradictory tension between Law and Gospel. Walther at no place suggests that the unbeliever is no more under the wrath of God or that a second judgment is necessary to deprive the unbeliever of his first, universal justification. As early as 1846 Walther says in a sermon: “For that is indeed true: here everything depends on faith. He who does not apply to himself the victory of Christ in His resurrection through faith, upon him Law, sin, death and hell still have power. He experiences no power, no joy from this victory. For him Christ is still in His tomb.”72 So Walther upholds the truth of John 3:36: “The wrath of God abideth on him.” Within this frame all Walther’s statements on Easter and justification must be understood."
GJ - The first difference is not important for this discussion. The second one shows Hardt's inability to grasp basic Biblical, Lutheran doctrine. "Apply to himself" is synergistic at best, drifting toward Pelagianism, where man perfects himself. This is not upholding the truth of John 3:36. The Synodical Conference is blind to the efficacy of the Word alone in the Means of Grace. We do not decide to believe in the universal absolution, a truly ham-fisted blend of universalism and decision theology. The Gospel Word creates and sustains faith in us by the work of the Holy Spirit. God declares us justified through faith in His Son's death and resurrection.
Hardt's Conclusion - "Not unimportant is the fact that Walther was well aware of Huber’s theology and its dangers. In his edition of Baier’s Compendium Theologiae Positivae, Walther inserted a page with very pertinent material concerning the Huberian controversy, dealing with the impossibility of saying that all mankind has received the remission of sins, pointing to John 3:36: “The wrath of God abideth on him.” As a professor of dogmatics Walther thus has seriously warned his students against Huberian aberrations.75 In his ministry as a preacher of the Word he has certainly led his parishioners on equally safe paths. Also for coming generations his presentation of the relationship between justification and Easter has a lasting value."
GJ - Just as Joe Kron feared, Easter absolution (UOJ) had its place in the LCMS from the very beginning. However, the written evidence shows that Missouri was perfectly able to express justification by faith in Biblical, Confessional language - in its 1905 Catechism, in other statements before the 1932 Brief Statement (now canonized by the Enthusiasts). Concordia Publishing House prints a KJV catechism with no mention of OJ/SJ and once sold the WELS Gausewitz Catechism, which also managed to discuss the Chief Article without repeating Walther's fetish about Easter absolution.
Narrow-minded Lutheran has left a new comment on your post "Jack Kilcrease Butters Up David Scaer for Another ...":
"GJ - WELS, Missouri, and the ELS do not teach the Biblical Means of Grace, but twist its meaning to say that the Gospel in Word and Sacrament simply states what is already true - they are already forgiven, whether they believe it or not."
You nailed this one, Pastor Jackson. When arguing for weekly Communion, one reply I heard was, "I know I'm already forgiven, so why cut into fellowship time EVERY week and make those who can't Commune with us feel unwelcome EVERY week?"
Following this rationale, perhaps C&A should only be utilized on the non-Communion weeks, because I know I'm already forgiven. Besides, that "poor, miserable sinner" stuff is offensive to visitors.
