Justification by Faith Book – The Real History of Objective
Justification
Expanded Rough Draft
Webber made a staggering and unbelievable claim when he
described his propaganda essay as a work of historical theology. The boggy,
verbose, and undisciplined effort avoided key points of history and revealed a
lack of knowledge – or candor – about most of it.
The
Dogma Is Older Than the Term
First we have to distinguish between the term Objective
Justification and the concept. The concept arrived among Lutherans long before
the term was used. Since Walther is the gold standard of doctrine for Webber
and other synodical drones, it should be added that OJ is a term later adopted
by Walther, blessed, by Walther, and used by his minions.
Hoenecke used General Justification, which may sound
neutral, but the German word really means :”every single one” so the German
term has the same force as universal. To make this redundantly clear, WELS has
generally used Universal Objective Justification lately, because the sect has
made a fetish of their favorite doctrine. Using Universal and Objective
together is repetitive in meaning, similar to saying “a very unique”
destination when unique literally means one of a kind.
But WELS has not been blessed with literate writers for a
long time, so they have their UOJ and others their OJ. Sig Becker, a Missouri
convert to WELS, tried to make distinctions about some of these terms, but his
explanations were distinctions without a difference.
Huber
the First Professor of OJ in Lutheranism
Some think Objective Justification is very much like
Calvinism. Our researcher is working on a separate essay about this. Dr. Lito
Cruz believes this to be true, and I would add that Calvin’s scheme is
harmonious with OJ.
Calvin separated the Holy Spirit’s work from the Word and
Sacraments, using the term sovereign. Because the Spirit is sovereign, He may
make a sermon effective or he may not even appear. Calvin did not write this
once but many times, as described by a Harvard doctoral researcher and published
in his excellent book on this topic. This separation of Word and Spirit is
called Enthusiasm by Luther and the Book of Concord in the overlooked Smalcald
Articles, where Enthusiasm is condemned.
Notice how Calvinism is remarkably close to Walther’s
“election without faith.” For Calvin, God has predestined a small percentage of
all church members to eternal salvation and the rest of the world to eternal
damnation. That is Calvin’s double predestination. The tiny yield is because of
God’s grace, and truly shows God’s grace, they claim. Mark Twain observed that
a Calvinistic sermon reduced the number of saved to such a small number that it
was not really worth the trouble. The Waltherians like to emphasize Grace! -
disparaging the Means of Grace by thought, word, and deed. So their grace is a
faux-grace, since they tear down or ignore the Instruments of Grace, the Word
and Sacraments. Thus Missouri and its siblings passed easily into
Pentecostalism and Church Growthism. Worship has been left behind in favor of entertainment.
The rationalism of Calvin certainly infected his followers,
who often live up to the slogan “Young Calvinist, Old Unitarian.” This slogan
fits entire countries, as evidenced in the Calvinistic history of New England,
and other parts of America. The greater the Calvinistic influence, the more
quickly rationalism takes over.
Missouri has often been infatuated with old time
Calvinists, because many Calvinists were early to use English in America
(unlike Missouri) and the traditional Calvinists seemed to be allies against
Modernism.
WELS, Missouri, the Little Sect on the Prairie, and the
Coveting Legalistic Cult have all cast longing eyes over the fence at other
Protestant groups, the loopier the better. Fuller is their Mecca, and Willow
Creek is their local haven. The first one to open the gate was Samuel Huber,
and they have yet to admit this fact, quoting their Pietist leader Walther to
confirm the truth of their denial.
Samuel
Huber, Wittenberg OJ Errorist Defeated by Concordists
Huber was a Calvinist who became a Lutheran, long enough to
be on the Wittenberg faculty. He began attacking justification by faith from
within, like his descendants in the Synodical Conference. The Objective
Justification salesmen of today would like to disassociate themselves from
Huber, but they teach essentially the same dogma. Walther also could not accept
this, because all the arguments against Huber also address Walther’s errors.
The answer, say the OJ Fan Club, is to agree with Walther that Huber was not
truly in the OJ camp, just a demi-semi-OJist.
http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2013/10/exploring-hubers-doctrine-further.html
Even so, the Wuerttemberg
theologians, as you say, did not like Huber’s terminology, while the Wittenberg
theologians unequivocally rejected his terminology. Why, then, did Walther and
H.A. Preus go on to adopt that very terminology? And why does it bother the
supporters of universal justification so much to be linked to Huber, if,
according to Walther, his doctrine was substantively orthodox and nothing for
orthodox Lutherans to get bent out of shape about? If Walther’s followers think
that Huber was basically orthodox with regard to justification and that the Wittenberg
theologians taught justification wrongly (since they rejected Huber’s teaching
of it), then it would seem to be the honest thing to just come out and say so.
http://www.faithalonejustifies.com/a-hunnius-on-the-truly-confessional-lutheran-teaching-of-romans-518/
Hunnius takes apart Huber’s
(and the official WELS) doctrine piece by piece, concluding with this
observation about Huber’s supposed “confessional subscription” to the Lutheran
Book of Concord:
And what will Dr. Huber reply to the Book of Concord, which, in
citing these very words from Romans, explicitly confirms that those things mean
nothing other than that we are justified by faith? This is what the Book of
Concord says in the Latin edition, page 666: “Therefore, these statements are
equivalent and clearly mean the same thing, when Paul says that we are
justified by faith; or that faith is imputed to us for righteousness; and when
he teaches that we are justified by the obedience of one Mediator, who is
Christ; or that through the righteousness of one man, justification of life
comes upon all men. For faith does not justify on account of this, that it is
such a good work, or that it is such a splendid virtue, but because it
apprehends and embraces the merit of Christ in the promise of the Gospel.” Thus
far the Book of Concord. If the Pauline phrase (that “through the
righteousness of one Man, justification of life comes upon all men”) clearly
means the same thing as that other statement, “We are justified by faith” (as
the Book of Concord clearly and emphatically asserts), then the interpretation
is rejected by the sentence of the Book of Concord that imagines from these
words of Paul a justification apart from faith—one that extends also to those
who have never had faith and never will. Dr. Luther says it even better in [his
lectures on] the second chapter to the Galatians: “Where Christ and faith are
not present, there is no remission of sins, no refuge, nothing but pure
imputation of sins and condemnation.”
Rydecki
continued –
According to Hunnius, one cannot honestly claim to be a
“confessional” Lutheran while at the same time teaching a justification apart
from faith based on Romans 5:18. His
quotation from Luther is also highly relevant. How long will the WELS
continue to claim to be a “confessional Lutheran” church body? How long will
the truly confessional Lutheran pastors in the WELS remain in voluntary
fellowship with the synod that officially condemns the Gospel of justification
by faith alone in Christ as heresy?
A unionist tries to pooh-pooh
similarities. In the end, false teachers demand and appreciate a translation of
the Bible that repeats their error and appears to canonize it – the New NIV.
However, the core of Objective Justification, however it
might be explained, is declaring the entire world forgiven of its sin. That is
where Huber started, and that is what Polycarp Leyser and Hunnius opposed.
Leyser was respected enough to be one of the editors of the
Book of Concord and an expert in discussions about justification.
Pietism
Pietism really has two major eras in Europe, starting with
Spener and his immediate followers, peaking with the establishment of Halle
University with the mission of promoting Pietism. Soon after, Halle became the
center of rationalism in Europe, and F. Schleiermacher, an alumnus and teacher,
earned his place as the pivotal modern theologian – advocating faith without
belief.
The second era of Pietism was a reaction to the rationalism
that took over clergy training and the institutional church in Europe. Those
who dissented were called mystics and Pietists, and many found it difficult to
find acceptance or positions in the establishment.
This
is very important – all the American Lutheran groups were
established with this background of Pietism. The American Luther leaders were
either trained at Halle (Hoenecke), trained by Halle students (Walther by
Stephan), or associated themselves closely with Halle, - Muhlenberg taught
there.
All the American Lutherans groups were greatly influenced
by the spirit of union with Calvinism, hiding doctrinal differences among
Protestants, and looking for gimmicks like the revival. This rationalistic
Pietism was keen on denominational cooperation and allergic to any high church
tendencies (as they imagined them) – the liturgy, frequent Holy Communion, and
the Book of Concord.
Thus the ingredients of the Wisconsin Synod, the Missouri
Synod, and the Evangelical Lutheran Synod were Pietistic. So were the founders
of The American Lutheran Church and the Lutheran Church in America.
Hoenecke
and Halle University
The passage in Hoenecke’s Dogmatics dealing with General Justification offers no refuge for
UOJ, but the author does quote the son-in-law of Johann Bengal (1687-1752), who
worked closely with and edited his father-in-law’s work. Bengal was a Wuerttemberg
Pietist. Hoenecke studied the Confessions on his own after graduating from
Halle University. One of the last of the Pietists, Tholuck was his mentor.
Tholuck was a Universalist and admitted it gladly. Hoenecke was not.
Rambach
and Halle University
Rambach is especially important because:
·
Webber quoted him favorably on Objective
Justification.
·
The first baptism hymn in The Lutheran Hymnal
is Rambach’s.
·
Rambach was a loyal Halle Pietist.
·
Rambach gives us a definite data-point on UOJ
being taught at the central school for all Lutherans in North America.
Rambach taught – “In His Person all mankind was justified
and absolved from sin and curse.
Rambach advocated teaching 1 Timothy 3:16 as all mankind being
justified when Christ rose from the dead. Although Bishop Martin Stephan did
not graduate from Halle University, we know that his version of justification
was life-changing for CFW Walther. We also know that Walther taught the same
form of justification all his career. Therefore, the Easter absolution of the
entire world, without the Word and without faith, is definitely an effect of
Halle’s lasting influence.
Walther-Pieper
Kokomo
Robert Preus CG UOJ, later anti-CG and anti-UOJ
ELCA
