Ichabod, The Glory Has Departed: 10/10/13

Thursday, October 10, 2013

ELDONA THESES - Definition of Objective Justification.
Fasten Your Seatbelts.

Justification

as Taught in

Holy Scripture and the

Confessions of Christ’s Holy Church

with Special Attention to “Objective Justification”

as discussed during the 2013 Colloquium and Synod

of the

Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America

and later approved in the following form

by the pastors of the diocese

First, A Matter of Definition:
“Objective Justification” has been variously presented
• as merely a synonym for unlimited atonement,
• as properly referring to justification as the object of faith,
• and as the ‘proper’ understanding of the teaching.3

This last view states that it is a fact4 that Mankind has been not only atoned for by Christ, but actually
declared free from sin by God prior to faith. In the resurrection, it is said, God actually absolved the
world.5 Indeed, Pieper says6 that if this idea is not maintained Christianity is completely lost and the
Gospel is necessarily turned into a set of rules by which to gain God’s favor.

To be clear, then, in these theses, we will mean by the term “Objective Justification” precisely and solely
what was taught by Pieper in his Dogmatics, which is what is the stated official position of the LCMS in
its Brief Statement, to wit: “Objective Justification” is the dogmatic assertion that a forensic declaration
was made by God in the resurrection (because of a change in His heart effected by the atoning death of
the Christ) that Man is without sin.

Such a teaching, it is stated, requires a ‘second part’ for justification to be enjoyed by any person: that he
personally and individually receive what God has objectively declared of all together. While in practice
we have often witnessed a minimizing of the Means of Grace in bodies that hold to this teaching, that is
certainly not the intent of those who first promoted it, since such reception is done by means of faith that
is created in the one receiving by the Holy Ghost’s use of the Gospel.7

3 I.e., as found in, e.g., Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics and the Missouri Synod’s Brief Statement.
4 Whether believed or not; thus, “objective.”
5 Note, that among LCMS theologians it is not generally stated as “all men,” but as “Mankind” or “the world,” so that the ‘class’ is absolved, but no persons in particular. Among the WELS theologians, this distinction doesn’t seem to be maintained.
Cf. “This We Believe,” IV:1, http://www.wels.net/what-we-believe/statements-beliefs/this-we-believe/justification;
Dr. Siegbert Becker’s 1982 essay, “Objective Justification,” p. 1,14, http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerJustification.pdf;
Forrest Bivens’s essay, “Getting The Right Message Out—And Getting It Out The Right Way,” in the section where he abuses Romans 3:23–24, http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BivensMessage.pdf;
John Schaller in his The Wauwatosa Theology,
Volume 1, p. 459, 466–467; and David Kuske in his comments on 2 Corinthians 5:19 in “Making Use of Our Lutheran Heritage—‘Objective Justification’ in Our Mission Outreach Based on an Exegesis of 2 Corinthians 5:18–19,” p. 7,9,11,
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/KuskeOutreach.pdf.
6 Christian Dogmatics, II, 347–351.
7 Thus, one sees C.F.W. Walther, for example, rightly promoting the use of the Gospel in all its forms (i.e., that which is read, preached upon, spoken directly in Holy Absolution, or tied to physical elements in Holy Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, the Means [or Channels] of Salvation, as they are properly called) to distribute and confer what God the Son has won by His passive and active obedience, for which purpose Christ instituted the Office of the Holy Ministry.

Here endeth the Theses, so far.

***

GJ - The Synodical Conference has to face the dread reality of their Sacraments being as meaningless as ELCA's, because they do not treat them as the Instruments of Grace but only as symbols of what has already taken place - the universal absolution of the unbelieving world - without faith, without the Word, without the Means of Grace.

One cannot "rightly promote the use of the Gospel" when the Gospel is denied via the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace.

Walther was hopelessly confused about Christian doctrine, so he made sure a clone followed him - F. Pieper. Walther jiggered the election of Pieper so it would happen at the convention he controlled, in St. Louis, instead of the district conventions. Ludwig Fuerbringer noted this anomaly, which is appropriate for an Antinomian. See Fuerbringer's books, which reveal and conceal much about Missouri's early history.

Here is the UOJ contradiction. The entire world is forgiven, even before birth, either on Good Friday or at the resurrection of Christ. Faith has nothing to do with this. However, no one is really forgiven until he believes that the entire world has already been absolved of sin and saved. Thus everyone in Hell is a guilt-free saint.

No one can connect coherent Christian doctrine to those absurdities, but the Synodical Conference has tried without success. They cannot face the truth of their dogma being almost exactly like that of the liberals once Halle University became rationalistic (one generation). That is the great divide, since people either think in terms of the Reformation and Concordist era or they fashion everything based on Halle rationalistic philosophy. Hence, most UOJ apologists fall into saying, "If this is so, then that must be true." If Christ paid for the sins of the world, then the entire world must be righteous, forgiven, and saved - they imagine.

Halle spawned rationalistic anti-Biblical tirades and such faith-without-belief theologians as Schleiermacher. But that does not matter, since few LCMS-WELS pastors know anything about the 19th century liberals and their heirs in the 20th century. Tillich, Barth, Bultmann, and the rest - Missouri ate that up in the 1950s and loved the Social Gospel Movement too.

The Social Gospel is dependent upon a post-faith use of the Scriptures to promote political activism. Lutherans would know that if they read the Rauschenbusch lectures, The Social Gospel, given at Yale in 1917. The activism of the Social Gospel hit the ULCA and Augustana during the Great Depression and made a big impact on the LCMS later.

WELS-LCMS pastors like to pretend that ELCA has a horrid belief system that lets ELCA do anything they want, but the doctrinal basis is almost the same as the SynCons. ELCA is honest about its debt to rationalistic philosophy and the Social Gospel Movement. If WELS-LCMS disagreed so much with ELCA, they would not work with ELCA on evangelism, worship, leadership, and the Malaria Project with Thrivent and the United Nations.

Knapp's double-justification became the formula of the Synodical Conference,
but the Protestant liberals soon dropped the second justification.

JP Meyer published the first three sentences in
the Kokomo Statements, which WELS
blames on the critics on UOJ,
proving once again that all UOJists are liars.

Guilt-free saints can murder and commit adultery,
as long as they agree with this precious doctrine,
right?

UOJ cops a plea for its own weird Decision Theology,
left untouched in the new edition of this monstrous book.

There is great comfort for Sodom,
yea even in Hell.
Ask St. Liberace.

Birdbrain.

Links to the individual ELDONA Justification by Faith Posts.

ELDONA Justification by Faith Theses - Introduction

DP Jon Bucholz and SP Mark Schroeder removed
WELS Circuit Pastor Paul Rydecki and his congregation
from WELS in the midst of discussing
justification by faith with the Arizona-California District.

WELS did not remove ex-VP Paul Kuske (previously voted out of office)
for attacking their precious UOJ.

Theses on the Article of

Justification

as Taught in

Holy Scripture and the

Confessions of Christ’s Holy Church

with Special Attention to “Objective Justification”

as discussed during the 2013 Colloquium and Synod

of the

Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America

and later approved in the following form

by the pastors of the diocese

Preface
A pastor [GJ - Paul Rydecki] was recently removed from a church body’s clergy roster, ostensibly for false doctrine concerning the Article of Justification. His statements concerning this article of doctrine were entirely compatible with the fathers of Lutheran orthodoxy,1 but were considered “inadequate,” because they did not
fully express certain formulations demanded by said church body. The official position of the (defunct)
Evangelical Lutheran Synodical Conference of North America (and of the current bodies that were constituent of it) is clear from, e.g, the 1932 “Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri
Synod,” to wit, the teaching of “Objective Justification.” However, that teaching 2 has by no means been
consistent throughout the publications or seminaries of said bodies since that time. The following theses
examine both the terminology and the teaching of “Objective Justification” to see whether it was what
was understood by the old Lutheran dogmaticians and exegetes, complementary to what they taught
concerning the Article of Justification, or inimical to it.

1 By this phrase, we are restricting our present consideration to the period beginning with Martin Luther and ending with Johann Gerhard (c. AD 1515–1637).
2 Or even what is meant by that term.

---

Commentary

The inconsistency of WELS continues to this day, which is just as true of abusive sects and it is true of abusive parents. One is abused, the other is spared.

ELDONA surprised me by issuing the theses, which are found here, because I know how vicious, underhanded, dishonest, and disruptive the UOJ claque is. I kept hearing the rumors, but I did not see them until LutherQuest (sic) alerted everyone with their hissy-fit.

The ELDONA introduction is correct in stating that the Synodical Conference has not been consistent in its embrace of UOJ, and that polarity exists to this day. WELS used the Gausewitz justification by faith catechism for many decades before it was replaced by David Kuske's UOJ catechism. The LCMS had a 1905 German catechism that clearly taught justification by faith, but false doctrine struggles against sound doctrine. The 1932 Brief Statement was elevated to canonical status, perhaps because it included a ridiculous, unexplained declaration of UOJ.

Paul McCain will never admit that Concordia Publishing House still sells a KJV catechism that is all justification by faith. But - the UOJ Enthusiasts think they teach justification by faith, even while they are attacking the doctrine of St. Paul. UOJ is the perfect dogma for unbelievers, ecumenists, and Church Shrinkers.

This Synodical Conference devolution has paralleled the decline of the Muhlenberg tradition, which had a fine record of promoting Reformation studies and theology, until rationalistic Pietism asserted its dominance, after the ULCA merger of 1918. Like Gausewitz, such ULCA pioneers as Jacobs, Krauth, and Schmauk were forgotten and allowed to go out of print. Lenski (ALC) survived in WELS-LCMS-ELS, but not in those groups that united to form the ELCA in 1987.

By merger time, ELCA was almost devoid of Lutheran doctrine - so what was left? They rested their dogmatics on rationalistic Pietism, as all modern theologians do. The Book of Concord means nothing. Everything is subject to man's reason. Naturally, these trends moved all the Lutherans closer together. Once united by a common promotion of inerrancy and efficacy, they created a new, more perfect union based on UOJ, ecumenism, joint religious projects, and Enthusiasm.

Those who look into the documents can see what has happened, and any layman can read the Scriptures and understand justification. An honest discussion of justification is good for everyone, but WELS and Missouri will not allow it.