Thesis 3
The Calvinist doctrine that God desires only some to be saved is entirely rejected by us as contrary to
God’s Word as clearly set forth in the Lutheran Confessions. So is the Huberian9 thought that God has
actually elected all to salvation but some, somehow, fall away by failing to grasp the “Objective Justification”
made at the cross and pronounced in the resurrection. Nor is any sort of Arminianism (including
any Arminian-shaded concept of election intuitu fidei) to be received. Rather, we contend, both those
who teach Waltherian “Objective Justification” and those who teach that Walther’s position is contrary
to the Reformers’ understanding of the Article of Justification confess, instead (with the Book of Concord),
that God has elected only in connection with Christ. Further, we confess that in such election He
has both foreseen and caused to be all things needed to bring men to faith and to keep them therein (i.e.,
the sending of God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, the establishment of the Sacraments, the Office of
the Ministry, and so forth).
Thesis 4
As the above theses would not have been agreed upon by all parties in previous controversies over the
Article of Justification, historical battles over aspects of this article are well brought into the picture, but
none of them completely speaks to the current discussion, whether the Wittenberg faculty’s dealings
with Huber or the Synodical Conference’s fear of an encroaching Arminianism/Semi-Pelagianism during
the controversy regarding predestination. It is unfitting simply to label one another as having a position
identical to one in a previous battle,10 though it may rightly be said that a position bears similarities or
could lead to such a historic position.11 That is, we must not condemn by the application of labels, but
must address what is actually taught or not taught by any party.
9 Samuel Huber (1547–1624), a former Calvinist, was brought to Wittenberg as a professor after making a good defense against the Calvinists at Tübingen, but within three years they discovered that he was straying from the outline of Justification in common use by Lutherans, using novel terminology and accusing his fellow professors of Calvinism when they rejected his new teaching: “Our Churches have always taught and still teach the justification that is by faith and that pertains to believers, but that by no means extends to the whole world.” (Hunnius, A Clear Explanation of the Controversy among the Wittenberg Theologians Concerning Regeneration and Election, p. 57; see, also, the next four pages of this work for a summary of the full course Huber’s errors)
10 Unless one can absolutely show such to be the case.
11 If and only if it can be demonstrated that such is so.
Thus far the theses
***
 |
| Leonard Woods was the Calvinist superstar who translated Knapp and explained Knapp's doctrine using the double justification language that traveled to Germany and won Walther's approval. Pieper and many others have since used Objective Justification and Subjective Justification. |
GJ - The UOJ Hive claims that justification by faith is Calvinism, and they are quick to label critics as Calvinists, even though their double-justification formula came from the Calvinist Woods translating Georg Christian Knapp, professor of theology, Halle University.
Samuel Huber, the former Calvinist, fell back into Calvinism once he was on the Wittenberg faculty. Therefore, the faculty felt compelled to reject Huber's version of Objective Justification. Although the historians of doctrine will say that there is a difference between Huber and Walther, the common thread is the Calvinism that came into the Lutheran Church through Pietism and rationalism. Walther never benefited from a Lutheran education, earning his BA in rationalism and experiencing faith only under the shadow of abusive Pietistic cults. Walther biographies show that he was rescued from obsessive self-mortification by Martin Stephan's justification and taught that justification - without changing - throughout his ministry.
Stephan studied at Halle University and never graduated from a university. He was not qualified to be a pastor, but the Pietistic enclave at Dresden was permitted to call him because of their special status as Bohemian Pietists.
 |
| Armenians |
Nor is any sort of Arminianism (including any Arminian-shaded concept of election intuitu fidei) to be received.
The parenthetical aside helps derail the sentence, which makes a claim without clarification. One should not write creeds as homework for former professors but for the public, to edify and explain.
I imagine ELDONA wants to set aside the charge of faith as a decision or work of man, which is an answer of Arminius to the Calvinists. Calvin separated the work of the Holy Spirit from the Word, so double predestination and confusion about forgiveness follow.
Walther did a lot of crop-dusting, always labeling his critics as Calvinists. His little essay on election, which I reviewed on Ichabod, is a swamp of confusion. His big attempt as amateur theologian was to prove that election is without faith, because faith is a work of man. He proved this by quoting himself and creating his own catechism on the topic. Perhaps it was never translated from German because of its poor quality.
Walther went on one of those ecclesiastic witch-hunts, which drove entire groups away from him, including the Ohio Lutherans. I view the election battles as proxies for Walther's UOJ, and they are parroted today. Examples:
1. "Your faith is in faith."
2. "Your argument is intuitu fidei, which was condemned."
3. "You are making faith a work of man."
4. "You are a Calvinist."
5. "You are an Arminian."
The original formulation of the dreaded intuitu fidei was perfectly fine and derived from Gerhard - in view of the all-sufficient merits of Christ perseveringly apprehended by divinely wrought faith.
R. C. H. Lenski, Ephesians, p. 356f.
Apparently that longer phrase was shortened to "saved in view of faith," but these charges of intuitu fidei have been overworked and beaten to death. The theses are in danger of following that old Synodical Conference weakness of settling matters through a lengthy and hotly debated history of the issues rather than an explanation based on the Scriptures first and the Book of Concord for clarification.
Another DOA Sentence
Rather, we contend, both those who teach Waltherian “Objective Justification” and those who teach that Walther’s position is contrary to the Reformers’ understanding of the Article of Justification confess, instead (with the Book of Concord), that God has elected only in connection with Christ.
I cannot comprehend the breadth, width, or depth of this sentence. It does not make sense.
I would correct the last sentence in Thesis 3 to associate grace, the efficacious Word in the Means of Grace, and faith together with election.
Walther's election battles prove that he never understood the Formula of Concord, which is typical of Pietists and rationalists. The article on predestination clearly warns against divisive speculation but Walther plunged ahead anyway and dismissed all critics as false teachers.
This is a caution against labels, although the previous thesis offered Huberian, Waltherian, and Arminian. If the authors wade into the Slough of Despond, they should not be surprised about the muck they accumulate.
However, to be charitable, the Book of Concord went through many revisions and trials before the final version was published in 1580. Poor Chytraeus, a brilliant man, had much of his work chopped out.
My caution is this - avoid getting sucked into a flurry of Waltherian accusations, all ad hominem. Instead, demand that they explain what they mean.
If people studied the dark history of Walther as an enabler of Bishop Stephan, the cover-ups of early LCMS history, CFW would cease to be an authority on anything except how to grab power. The Great Walther reminds me of the Byzantine general who used his affair with the Emperor's wife to sneak in and murder the Emperor. He took over as Emperor and promptly sent his mistress into exile for the crime of adultery.
Links to the individual ELDONA Justification by Faith Posts.
