Chemnitz on Creative Writing in Theology

Here is a passage from Martin Chemnitz' Loci Theologici in the section about special cautions or reminders when talking about the teachings of the Church.

"Finally, we must note which methods of speaking the church has accepted in the case of an individual locus, and why and with what rationale it rejected other methods so that we do not carelessly, out of a foolish love of novelty, depart from the proper language of the church. For pious people consider it proper to speak in harmony with the church for the sake of peace. Heedless change either produces errors or division. And often dangerous errors are strewn along the way, since many people have grown sick of the 'fisherman's simplicity' of the Holy Spirit and have introduced error under the cover of some ornate and elegant new method of speaking."

***

GJ - I especially like Chemnitz' phrase - the fisherman's simplicity of the Holy Spirit. Almost all of modern theology - and the posturing on blogs - seems to devoted to showing how creative the writer is, how elegant, how far beyond the basics of the Word of God.

Look at the UOJ statement from Ed Preuss, who became a major figure in Roman Catholicism -

Flowery? You bet. Faithful to the Scriptures? Hardly.

Jack Preus Quoting Luther at the Bethany Lectures - Did Anyone Listen?

 Jack Preus translated the book I mentioned in the post below -Jack and Robert Preus had spine and led from the front,unlike the Thrivent slugs of today.

Martin Chemnitz on the Doctrine of Justification [Presented at the Reformation Lectures, Bethany Lutheran College and Bethany Lutheran Theological Seminary, October 30, 1985, Lecture II] By Dr. Jacob A. 0. Preus 1. In 1537 at Wittenberg Luther presided over a Disputatio held in connection with the academic promotion of two candidates, Palladius and Tilemann, in which he discussed the passage in Rom. 3:28,

“We believe that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.” Luther, in his prefatory remarks, said, “The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord and ruler and judge of all areas of doctrine. It preserves and governs the entire teaching of the church and directs our conscience before God. Without this article the world is in total death and darkness, for there is no error so small, so insignificant and isolated that it does not completely please the mind of man and mislead us, if we are cut off from thinking and meditating on this article. Therefore, because the world is so obtuse and insensitive, it is necessary to deal with this doctrine constantly and have the greatest understanding of it. Especially if we wish to advise the churches, we will fear no evil, if we give the greatest labor and diligence in teaching particularly this article. For when the mind has been strengthened and confirmed in this sure knowledge, then it can stand firm in all things. Therefore, this is not some small or unimportant matter, particularly for those who wish to stand on the battle line and contend against the devil, sin, and death and teach the churches.”

How many UOJ Stormtroopers heard Bainton lecture
and received help on their PhD dissertations from him?

One Small Book - Martin Chemnitz on Justification: The Chief Article of Christian Doctrine

Here is a book that came my way not long ago. Concordia Publishing House published it, and Jack Preus translated it.

The book is slender, easy to read. Chemnitz took material from Melanchthon and expounded upon the various issues surrounding the Chief Article.

Luther called himself a Solafide-ist, a Faithian,
so I am happy to use that label.

Given the blabber that comes from Ft. Wayne graduates like Jack Cascione, Paul McCain, and Jay Webber, is it too much to ask about their study of this volume? They were in school when Jack and Robert Preus were teaching or leading the LCMS. Jack and Bob were scholars.

Likewise, Robin Leaver, who lectured at Ft. Wayne, wrote a CPH book about Luther's Justification by Faith Alone. Nobody read that book?

Chemnitz and Melanchthon are especially important for those who want to call themselves "Confessional Lutherans," a term rendered meaningless by ELCA, Father Neuhaus, and the rest of the rabble.

All the gaseous output from the UOJ Stormtroopers is already addressed by Justification. "Your faith is in your faith! You are not a Christian. You are a Faithian!" - Typical Ft. Wayne palaver, from the infamous manure spreader himself, David Scaer.

Chemnitz has a chapter on faith, not only worth reading, but worth careful long-term study.

 Justified before we are born?
No wonder the Synodical Conference began to tank
after this notion was accepted as Gospel, 1932,
even though Ed Preus joined the Church of Rome as a major writer, editor, and theologian.

Consider the Teaching of Melanchthon and Chemnitz. Thoughtful Comments from 2012

A. Berean has left a new comment on your post "Imputation Is the Foundational Issue - Says A. Ber...":

Justification - the Chief Article of Christian Doctrine as Expounded in Loci Theologici, by Martin Chemnitz. Translated by J.A.O. Preus. Published by Concordia Publishing House. Page 149.

Also in his Examination of the Council of Trent vol. 1, pg. 532, paragraph 17. Published by Concordia Publishing House. Translated by Fred Kramer.

---

solafide (http://solafide.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Imputation Is the Foundational Issue - Says A. Ber...":

Here it is to be noted that these three things are joined together: faith, Christ, and acceptance or imputation. Faith takes hold of Christ and has Him present, enclosing Him as the ring encloses the gem. And whoever is found having this faith in the Christ who is grasped in the heart, him God accounts as righteous. This is the means and the merit by which we obtain the forgiveness of sins and righteousness. “Because you believe in Me,” God says, “and your faith takes hold of Christ, whom I have freely given to you as your Justifier and Savior, therefore be righteous.” Thus God accepts you or accounts you righteous only on account of Christ, in whom you believe.

Now acceptance or imputation is extremely necessary, first, because we are not yet purely righteous, but sin is still clinging to our flesh during this life. God cleanses this remnant of sin in our flesh. In addition, we are sometimes forsaken by the Holy Spirit, and we fall into sins, as did Peter, David, and other saints. Nevertheless, we always have recourse to this doctrine, that our sins are covered and that God does not want to hold us accountable for them (Rom. 4). This does not mean that there is no sin in us, as the sophists have taught when they said that we must go on doing good until we are no longer conscious of any sin; but sin is always present, and the godly feel it. But it is ignored and hidden in the sight of God, because Christ the Mediator stands between; because we take hold of Him by faith, all our sins are sins no longer. But where Christ and faith are not present, here there is no forgiveness of sins or hiding of sins. On the contrary, here there is the sheer imputation and condemnation of sins. Thus God wants to glorify His Son, and He Himself wants to be glorified in us through Him.

Martin Luther, Luther's Works, Vol. 26 : Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 1-4, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald and Helmut T. Lehmann, Luther's Works (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999, c1963). 26:132-133.

SolaFide: Pretty clear, I think.

---

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Imputation Is the Foundational Issue - Says A. Ber...":

Ichabod - Thank you for highlighting, A Berean's excellent comment. Yes! The word "Imputation," is at the forefront of this universal objective justification controversy and discussion.

Luther correctly said: "Where there is the forgiveness of sins, there is life and salvation."

But it is here where the universal objective justification enthusiasts [UOJE] get tripped up, and never do get to first base:

UOJE [Universal objective justification enthusiasts] become hung up on the Atonement as a "be all" and "end all." They would rather just view Christ's universal sacrifice for sin as the one time imputation to the human soul. Their basic view of imputation is that when Christ died and rose; - that is what Luther talked about - "Where there is the forgiveness of sins, there is life and salvation." To them, that is the sum and substance of imputation. Hence, this is why UOJE often don't highlight the Holy Spirit's work in the salvation process. [John 3:8 in context] They essentially diss (ignore) faith. They bypass faith and actually believe that with the forgiveness of sins brought about by the Atonement, - that has brought [as Luther put it] "life and salvation" to all. So, then, their understanding is all based around the Atonement; that Christ's sacrifice was imputed, - not, faith.

On the other hand, those of us who believe Scripture, (and, the Confessions, concur); we believe that we, (by God's grace) are justified by faith. [Ephesians 2:8-9] We believe that the faith the Holy Spirit creates in us is imputed to us. We could almost use the words "infused" and "continually dispensed." Luther put it this way in his explanation of the 3rd Article of the Apostles Creed:

"In which Christian church He daily and richly forgive sins to me and all believers......"

Finally, I will point to an illustration, using an analogy. [And, I realize that no analogy is perfect]:

The universal objective justification crowds are stuck on the Atonement. To them that is their priceless "auto body."

But, the car doesn't travel (anywhere) without wheels and fuel. Hence, the Atonement without its (Holy Spirit) "imputation wheels & fuel" is useless. Without the Spirit's wheels and fuel, the human soul cannot personally partake of and benefit from Christ's all encompassing Atonement. Nor, (without Holy Spirit wheels and fuel) will that human soul travel to heaven. All that, though, does not matter for the universal objective justification enthusiasts still stuck in their Atonement auto. To them a car without wheels and fuel is a perfect and complete auto.

Nathan M. Bickel

www.thechristianmessage.org

www.moralmatters.org

***

GJ - The readers and I are grateful for the thoughtful contributions that arrive as comments.

Speaking of Chemnitz versus Marquart - Another Great Quotation from the Senior Editor of the Book of Concord

"Beautiful is the statement of Cyprian, which Augustine declares to be the best without any doubt, showing what ought to be done when examples and customs are held up to us which do not have the authority of the canonical Scripture. 'If,' says he, 'we return to the head and origin of the divine tradition, human error will cease. For if the channel of water, which before flowed copiously and purely, either fails or brings muddy water, then certainly one goes to the source in order to find out whether there is something wrong in the veins or in the source, or whether something got in midway.' So also it is rightly, necessarily, and indeed safely done when things that happened in later times in matters of religion must be examined."
Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, trans., Fred Kramer, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1986, III, p. 237.

***
GJ - The source is not the Synodical Conference but the Scriptures.

Martin Chemnitz the Senior Editor of the Book of Concord, Or Rambach the Halle Pietist? Boycott the Emmaus Conference

For the whole process or act of the reconciliation of man the sinner with God is simply and clearly represented, as it were, with the word justify. For this matter is not handled incidentally or lightly, but seriously and, what is more, before the court of God and God Himself the judge. For the Law summons us to the tribunal of divine judgment, where it not only accuses us of sin, but completely convicts us. And since before that just court of God every mouth is to be stopped and the whole world [is to be] subject to God (Ro 3:19), therefore Moses pronounces against us the sentence of death and condemnation. 2 Co 3:7, 9; Dt 27:26. 

Therefore when our conscience, now convicted of sins and therefore made subject to eternal death and damnation, anxiously looks about for something with which to oppose this just judgment of God, so that it might avoid and evade the broad sentence of damnation, it finds nothing at all. But finally God Himself, rich in mercy, sets His Son before us in the Gospel as atonement. Romans 3:25. 

And those who through faith take recourse to that Son the Mediator, and apprehend Him by faith—those the Father justifies from the charge placed by the Law and from the sentence of condemnation; that is, He absolves [them] for the sake of Christ, and, by imputation of the obedience and death of Christ, declares [them] righteous and awards them life eternal. Romans 8:33–34. And this is the process or act of the justification of a sinner before the judgment seat of God, so that he appeals from the throne of the strict justice of God to the throne of grace in the blood of the Son of God, as Gerson describes the matter of justification by the apt simile of forensic appeal.

Martin Chemnitz and Luther Poellot, Ministry, Word, and Sacraments: An Enchiridion, electronic ed. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 73.

Pastor Paul Rydecki - Chemnitz and Justification - Dangers of UOJ

http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2013/02/chemnitz-on-judicial-or-forensic.html#comment-form

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2013

Chemnitz on judicial or forensic justification

More Sharing ServicesShare|Share on facebookShare on myspaceShare on googleShare on twitter

I posted this article on Martin Chemnitz' definition of justification this morning.  He claims his definition to be the only true meaning of the word "justify" according to the Holy Scriptures, as justification is discussed in the doctrine of justification.  (See the link for Chemnitz' quote in context.)

I invite our readers to compare the following definitions of "forensic" or "judicial" justification.  One is by Martin Chemnitz.  The other is by WELS District President Jon Buchholz, as quoted in a comment on the previous post.

Chemnitz: The meaning of the word 'justify' in this article is judicial, namely, that the sinner, accused by the Law of God, convicted, and subjected to the sentence of eternal damnation, fleeing in faith to the throne of grace, is absolved for Christ’s sake, reckoned and declared righteous, received into grace, and accepted to eternal life."

Buchholz: "Here is the legal or juridical nature of justification, revealed at Calvary. The change does not take place in the sinner. The change takes place in the relationship or the status between a sinner and God.2 A verdict has been rendered, which declares man free of sin and guilt, righteous in God’s sight, and worthy of eternal life, for Jesus’ sake." Page 2
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BuchholzJustification1.pdf

Notice when this courtroom or judicial verdict is said to occur in each definition.  According to Chemnitz, the verdict is rendered when the sinner flees in faith to the throne of grace (i.e., Christ).  According to Buchholz, the verdict was already rendered for all people at Calvary, i.e., 2,000 years ago.

Some will claim that Chemnitz is describing what they call "subjective justification," while Buchholz is describing "objective justification," like "two sides of the same coin."    I find this explanation to be completely inadequate and arbitrary.  Chemnitz does not claim to be describing one side of some fictional "justification coin."  He is describing how sinners are justified, period.  Chemnitz's definition has the support of dozens of Scripture passages.  Buchholz's position has the support of (dare I say) none.  On the contrary, his position is directly contradicted by several passages of Scripture (John 3:16-18, John 20:23, John 5:22-24, Luke 18:14, John 3:5-8, John 3:36, Rom. 9:30-33,Rom. 10:10, 2 Cor. 6:14, Gal. 2:16-17, Gal. 5:4-5, Eph. 2:1-3, 1 John 5:11-12, etc.).

To assert that God did or declared something is a big deal, and one had better be able to support such a claim with clear passages of Scripture.  There are many passages that describe Christ's finished work at the cross, but "justification" is not one of them.  On the contrary, unbelievers throughout Scripture are said to be condemned, not "justified, whether they believe it or not."

Pastor Paul Rydecki - Intrepid Lutherans: Reconciling the world—but not without means

Intrepid Lutherans: Reconciling the world—but not without means:

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2013

Reconciling the world—but not without meansMore Sharing ServicesShare|Share on facebookShare on myspaceShare on googleShare on twitter

I offer here another piece of Lutheran history on the Lutheran Church's historical understanding of 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.

Some assert that God "finished" reconciling the world to Himself 2,000 years ago, and that He justified all people at that time ("not imputing to them their sins").  Now, they say, He has entrusted the ministers of the Word with the task of announcing that God finished reconciling the world to Himself in the past, and in this way, they say, people become "individually" or "subjectively" reconciled to God.  They claim that Paul is teaching two separate things in these verses:  (1) that God finished reconciling the world (i.e., all people) to Himself at the cross, and (2) that by preaching this truth, ministers of the Word enable hearers to become "subjectively" reconciled as well.

But that this is not how 2 Corinthians 5 should be understood is made clear by Martin Chemnitz's treatment of it in theExamination of the Council of Trent.  He ties the reconciling of the world to the means of grace, specifically to the Ministry of the Word.  God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself through the preaching ministry of Christ.  So also Christ is present in the authoritative preaching ministry of the apostles, still reconciling the world to Himself.

It is not as if God actually "completed" the reconciling of the world to Himself 2,000 years ago, and then gave the Apostles the ministry of telling the world that the reconciliation was completed.  Instead, God even now continues His work of reconciling men to Himself through this ministry.

I sense that some who balk at this understanding do so, for one reason, because the thought of such an authoritative Office of the Holy Ministry is repulsive to them.  They would rather see the Pastoral Office as simply announcing the fact that pardon has already been issued, so that the pastors are simply passing on information or communicating what was already true.  They don't like the fact that God actually and personally works through the ministry of the Word to pardon sins and to effect reconciliation.  But this is exactly what God says of the Office of the Holy Ministry, not that the apostles/pastors are to announce something that was already done in heaven long ago, but "whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 18:18).

 

10 Now this power of forgiving sin must not be understood to have been given to the priests in such a way that God had renounced it for Himself and had simply transferred it to the priests, with the result that in absolution it is not God Himself but the priest who remits sin. For Paul expressly distinguishes between the power and efficacy of reconciliation which belongs to God, and the ministry which was given to the apostles, so that it is God who reconciles the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19) and forgives sins (Is. 43:25), not however without means but in and through the ministry of Word and sacrament.

Ministers indeed are said to loose and remit sins on account of the keys, that is, because they have the ministry through which God reconciles the world to Himself and remits sins. Thus Paul says (2 Cor. 1:24) that although he has authority, he nevertheless does not lord it over their faith but is a servant and steward of the mysteries of Christ (1 Cor. 4:1), so that he who plants and he who waters is nothing, but He who gives the increase, namely God (1 Cor. 3:7). Nevertheless, he shows that the use of the ministry is useful and necessary, for, says he, we are co-workers, that is, assistants, whose labors God uses in the ministry, but where nevertheless all the efficacy belongs to Him. We are servants, says he, through whom you have believed. Likewise: “I became your father in Christ Jesus through the Gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15). Paul treats this distinction clearest of all in 2 Cor. 5:18–20. It is God who reconciles us to Himself through Christ, not counting our sins against us. To the apostles, however, He gave the ministry of reconciliation. But how so? “He entrusted to us,” says Paul, “the message of reconciliation. So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making His appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”

Thus this distinction honors God and gives Him the glory that properly belongs to Him; it also claims for the ministry the honor and authority it has according to the Word of God. For even as it is Christ who baptizes through the ministry and also imparts His body and blood, so also it is Christ who through the ministry absolves and remits sins.

Chemnitz, M., & Kramer, F. (1999). Vol. 2: Examination of the Council of Trent (electronic ed.) (559–560). St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

'via Blog this'

From Pastor Paul Rydecki - Faith Alone Justifies

"By faith? Seriously?
They never taught that at Mequon, Mankato, St. Louis, Ft. Wayne,
or the portable mini-seminaries!"

Faith Alone Justifies:

Chemnitz on the true meaning of the word justify

Posted on February 2, 2013 by Rev. Rydecki

In Martin Chemnitz’s classic Examination of the Council of Trent, he defines the word ”justification” as understood by the Lutheran Church according to the Scriptures.  It is understood in a forensic (legal or courtroom) sense that always includes faith, by which the convicted sinner flees to Christ, the Throne of Grace. It is not understood as a one-time trial that supposedly took place 2,000 years ago where a sentence of innocence was pronounced on all human beings, or where justification “happened.”  Those who would “use the word differently” than Chemnitz describes here need to prove that they are “justified” in doing so.

For the question is not really what the word “justify” means in other passages of Scripture, but this is being asked, what meaning the word “justify” has in those passages of Scripture in which the doctrine of justification is taught and treated, as in its own sedes doctrinae. The other examples are added only for the sake of explanation.

However, the antithesis is quite clear from Rom. 8, which shows the proper and true meaning of the word “justify” in this article. It agrees entirely with the forensic meaning, that we are absolved before the judgment of God, for Christ’s sake, from the guilt of sin and from damnation, pronounced just, and received to eternal life. For this is how the words read: “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn?” etc. So also in Rom. 5 justification and condemnation are repeatedly placed in opposition to each other. And in Rom. 3 the whole process is, so to say, described in judicial terms. The Law accuses all of being under sin. Every mouth is stopped and the whole world is made to stand guilty before God, because by the works of the Law no flesh is justified. But we are justified freely by His grace, through the redemption, etc. In 1 Cor. 4:3-4 we read: “I do not want to be judged by a human court, but He that judges me is the Lord. Therefore, though I am not conscious of anything against myself, nevertheless, I am not for this reason justified.” Thus in 1 John 2:1 mention is made of an advocate, as in Rom. 8:26 of an intercessor.Ps. 143:2 reads: “Enter not into judgment, … for in Thy sight shall no man living be justified.” In Luke 18:13-14: the publican, standing as it were before God’s tribunal, prays: “God, be merciful to me, a sinner.” When Christ wants to indicate that this prayer of the publican has been heard, He says: “He went down justified,” that is, God was propitiated with respect to his sins. Acts 13:38-39 tells us: “Through Christ there is preached to you the forgiveness of sins, and in this everyone who believes is justified from all the things from which you could not be justified by the Law.” These testimonies cannot be frustrated by any kind of sophistry so as to be referred to the infusion of inherent righteousness, butthey clearly show that the meaning of the word “justify” in this article is judicial, namely, that the sinner, accused by the Law of God, convicted, and subjected to the sentence of eternal damnation, fleeing in faith to the throne of grace, is absolved for Christ’s sake, reckoned and declared righteous, received into grace, and accepted to eternal life. And although John does not employ the word “justify,” yet he describes the doctrine in judicial terms: “He that believes is not judged; he does not come into judgment.” “He sent His Son into the world, not that He should judge the world.” And 1 John 3: “We have passed from death to life.” In Acts 3 Peter says that “sins are blotted out.” Paul explains this when he says, Col. 2, that the hand writing which was against us has been blotted out.

Chemnitz, M., & Kramer, F. (1999). Vol. 1: Examination of the Council of Trent (electronic ed.) (473–474). St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

• Visit Emmanuel Lutheran Church

  

• Make a donation to Emmanuel Lutheran Church, Las Cruces, NM

  

'via Blog this'

Pastor Bickel on Extra Nos

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Extra Nos: Faith alone justifies. Pastor Paul Ryde...":

Ichabod -

The "take" on how certain Lutherans derive their practical teaching, is spot on!

The Extra Nos website article says:

">>>>>>> ....... the Lutherans there have thought that all exegetical issues are now moot and void, since C. F. W. Walther has spoken. So what is happening today? Well we have what might be called theology by proxy. What I mean is that they do not do the hard work of going deeper in interpreting the Biblical text, what they do is just find out what so called authority said on a topic and by default they adopt the pontifications of that so called "accepted authority". It is a type of Romanism in a small scale. So the Lutherans pick their own little pope like Walther and find out what he said and then settle the question based on that......

.........They have done their theology by proxy rather than doing it on their own. You do not need to be a Greek expert to handle the Scripture, you just need a faithful translation....... <<<<<<<< [Your words]

That "type of Romanism" is a proper comparison. Not too long ago I took the occasion to listen to a few hours of Roman Catholic Ava Maria radio, here in the US. A constant theme was always reverting [back] to mother church. Although Christ and the Scriptures were mentioned by program hosts and guests; the supreme and ultimate measurement of authority, always reverted [back] to the Church (not, Scripture).

This fallible and pathetic practice, is what I witness certain Lutherans doing; and, now, progressively so. Individual Lutheran churches are so scattered, in that they and their church members are beholden to not only their synodical affiliation, but also their district, circuit and home congregation affiliations. By the time an individual church member can catch his spiritual breath, there is hardly any opportunity or time to grasp basic Scripture in its correct and exegetical context, as it relates to practically living the Christian life at home and being a faithful witness in his geographical sphere of influence. Having stated all that; I must say that the evil one is very successful in keeping Christian church members so occupied, that they do not have the muster to be faithful disciples of Christ in the decadent world's culture.

In conclusion to my long comment, here, I do not in anyway care, to give the impression that I diminish the faith of some Catholics. I've witnessed beautiful and basic Christian faith of some Catholics on their deathbeds, as I have occasion, as a volunteer hospice worker. When it boils down to "brass tacks;" I firmly believe that the Lord saves those of His, inspite of their affiliations with anti-Scriptural entities. After all, did not Christ say: "My sheep hear my voice.....?" Perhaps, my experience is somewhat limited; but, I've never witnessed the Catholics to whom I ministered to on their deathbeds, clinging to their rosaries and papal edicts.........

Nathan M. Bickel

www.thechristianmessage.org
www.moralmatters.org




***

PS - Norton decided that comments were spam and hid them in the spam folder. I have unspammed them, so I can keep up better.

---

narrow-minded has left a new comment on your post "Pastor Bickel on Extra Nos":

Who are the true papists?

http://www.cph.org/p-19260-c-f-w-walther-churchman-and-theologian.aspx?SearchTerm=walther

http://www.cph.org/p-19505-cfw-walther-commemorative-medallion.aspx?SearchTerm=walther

http://www.cph.org/p-21944-c-f-w-walther-bust.aspx?SearchTerm=walther

Answering Paul McCain's False Accusations. More Proof of His Deceptions and Slander. McCain Violated Wikipedia Conditions with His Fraudulent Copyright Notice

Paul McCain, UOJ Enthusiast
and Facebook friend of DP Jon Buchholz.
McCain also worked with the WELS Fox Valley Circuit -
Glende, Ski, Lillo.

Paul McCain's latest rant.

Copy Cat Alert!!

November 9th, 20121 comment

 http://cyberbrethren.com/2012/11/09/copy-cat-alert/

So, get this, there’s a guy who runs a really wacky web site (RWWS) and whines about the fact that I quote from various sources but do not use Chicago Manual of Style references. He routinely prints a picture of Martin Chemnitz on his site that I took when I was in Braunschweig, Germany several years ago, without attribution of any kind. Go figure! Pretty funny stuff actually.

We won’t mention names, since the one thing he craves is attention.

Here’s what Grumpy Cat has to say to you.

---

Paul McCain's comment sent to the Ichabod blog:

Paul McCain has left a new comment on your post "No Call Paul Has Trouble with Honesty":

Greg, thanks for helping us understand your situational ethics. Love it. You are one really funny guy.

It is ok for you to steal intellectual property as long as you doctor it up on photoshop (sic).

Interesting understanding you have there of copyright law and the seventh commandment.

You crack me up.

Can you please work up some more photoshop (sic) stuff of me as the Pope?

I rather like it. I think I look great in papal duds.

 McCain's legacy is comical,
as shown by his cardboard tank and anti-Otten gun for hire.

 LCMS McCain threatened ELS Norman Teigen with excommunication.
Different synods - papal trespassing.

 Anonymous shopped McCain into the
Mary nursing a saint oil painting,
a painting used by McCain on his blog.

---

GJ - The surprise is not so much about Paul McCain's varnishing the facts and stealing another man's work to claim as his own, but about unwavering support of dishonesty and stealing by SP Harrison and CPH CEO Kintz.

The crease down the face is on another photo, taken by a Russian,
so Paul McCain probably took the photo with a perspective correcting lens.
A photograph of a public domain image is not protected by copyright.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_copyright_(Germany)

"Because the technical reproduction procedure alone does not justify a photo protection...Rather a minimum of personal mental performance is necessary, which is to be denied if a photo or a similarly manufactured product is not any more than the bare technical reproduction of an existing representation."

In the United States, a Federal court decided, in its 1999 case Bridgeman Art Library vs. Corel Corporation, that original, faithful photographs of paintings were not copyrightable, since the originality is missing. (United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 18 February 1999).....If a raw photograph and/or reproduction of a public-domain original is published in a book, then the predominant jurisdiction assumes this illustration can be reproduced at will, without agreement of the photographer and the publishing house.

-------------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality

Reproductions of public domain works

The requirement of originality was also invoked in the 1999 United States District Court case Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. In the case, Bridgeman Art Library questioned the Corel Corporation's rights to redistribute their high quality reproductions of old paintings that had already fallen into the public domaindue to age, claiming that it infringed on their copyrights. The court ruled that exact or "slavish" reproductions of two-dimensional works such as paintings and photographs that were already in the public domain could not be considered original enough for protection under U.S. law, "a photograph which is no more than a copy of a work of another as exact as science and technology permits lacks originality. That is not to say that such a feat is trivial, simply not original".^[6]....

Germany

In German copyright law, the "Schöpfungshöhe" (height of creation) 

------------------

Program AE mode:
http://www.digicamhelp.com/taking-photos/advanced-techniques/pshift/

------------------

Canon EOS 5D manual (pp 84-85 on Program AE):

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/eos_digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d#BrochuresAndManuals

-----------------

Related links:

Copy Cat Alert, by Paul T. McCain, Nov 9, 2012:

http://cyberbrethren.com/2012/11/09/copy-cat-alert/

Commemoration of Martin Chemnitz, Pastor and Confessor

November 9th, 2012, by Paul T. McCain:

http://cyberbrethren.com/2012/11/09/happy-birthday-to-the-second-martin-the-rev-dr-martin-chemnitz-1522-1586/

No Call Paul Has Trouble with Honesty, Nov 10th, 2012, by Dr. Jackson:

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/no-call-paul-has-trouble-with-honesty.html

-------------

DCRP Review: Canon EOS-5D, 30 Dec 2006

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/eos_5d-review/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_5D

------------

Image Forensics pages (click on the first and last of

the Hidden Data Links, i.e., Exif and Error Level links):

http://imgops.com/http://cyberbrethren.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Chemnitz.jpg

http://imgops.com/http://web.archive.org/web/20060630035347im_/http:/www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/images/ChemnitzMemorial.jpg

http://imgops.com/http://cyberbrethren.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8345168f369e2010535e63089970c-320wi

http://imgops.com/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Martinikirche_02_1a.jpg

-------------

St. Martini Kircke pictures, etc:

http://freeimagefinder.com/tag/innenraum.html

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5239/7006892958_50a03124df.jpg

http://freeimagefinder.com/detail/7006892958.html

http://freeimagefinder.com/detail/7152988153.html

http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7274/7153041297_f9371980d8.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jrlascorz/6085631810/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13988823@N08/7152988153/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13988823@N08/7157866438/in/photostream/

Tourist shot of Chemnitz (scroll way down):

http://talusha.3bb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=6380

Bells video:

http://wn.com/friedrich_wilhelm_martini

Epitaph um 1586, Braunschweig

http://www.bildindex.de/obj07030286.html

http://www.inschriften.net/braunschweig/inschrift/nr/di056-0574.html

http://www.inschriften.net/typo3temp/pics/di-56_0574_1_a3a3a82129.jpg

http://www.inschriften.net/braunschweig/inschrift/ansichten/medien/tx_hisodat_sources_1678/0.html

http://www.raymond-faure.com/Braunschweig/Braunschweig_Martinikirche_Hochaltar.html

http://radikal.ru/1208/e6/9956de8d6e4a.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:St._Martini_in_Braunschweig

Side of church:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Braunschweig_Martinikirche_Suedfassade_(2005).JPG

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DOM1.JPG

===========

Rev. David J. Webber:

Apr 11, 2004 (original Chemnitz commemoration page):

http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/chemnitz.html

"Web Sites Maintained by David Jay Webber"

Chemnitz image in question added before Jun 30th, 2006:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060630035347/http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/chemnitz.html

Image URL:

http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/images/ChemnitzMemorial.jpg

---------------------

Jun 3, 2007, by David Jay Webber:

www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/lutherantheology.manngraebner.html

July 19, 2007, by Catholic blogger Dave A. Armstrong:

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/07/martin-chemnitz-is-man-for-lutherans.html

Apr 5th, 2008, by Dr. Jackson (no Chemnitz photo use at all):

http://web.archive.org/web/20080405021540/http://martinchemnitzpress.blogspot.com/2007/09/catholic-lutheran-protestant-finished.html

Sep 2009, by Dr. Jackson:

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2009/09/enthusiasm-defined-in-book-of-concord.html

Dec 2009, by Dr. Jackson:

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2009/12/party-in-mls-sharing-from-ski-wall-of.html

19 SEPTEMBER 2008, by Walter P. Snyder:

http://xrysostom.blogspot.com/2008/09/do-lutherans-use-rosary.html

SEPTEMBER 29, 2008, by Joel Woodward, Lutheran student at Ann Arbor:

http://alutheranbeggar.blogspot.com/2008/09/lutheran-quote-of-day-martin-chemnitz.html

June 2009, Darren, from Aberdeen, Scotland:

http://via--crucis.blogspot.com/2009/06/communicatio-idiomatum.html

Dec 19th, 2009, by Paul McCain (thumbnail):

http://lhpqbr.blogspot.com/2009/12/fw-confession-and-absolution.html

Spiritual eating: Taking issue with Chemnitz, by 

blogger Tapani, Sep 23, 2010

http://simonpotamos.wordpress.com/2010/09/23/spiritual-eating/

Nov 2012, by Paul McCain:

http://cyberbrethren.com/2012/11/09/happy-birthday-to-the-second-martin-the-rev-dr-martin-chemnitz-1522-1586/

------------

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Martinikirche_02_1a.jpg

Der Urheber gestattet jedermann jede Form der Nutzung, unter der Bedingung der angemessenen Nennung seiner Urheberschaft. Weiterverbreitung, Bearbeitung und kommerzielle Nutzung sind gestattet.

http://translate.google.com

Redistribution, any form of use, on the condition that appropriate mention his authorship.

Redistribution, derivative work and commercial use is permitted.

---

Additional links:

============

St. Martini Church in Braunschweig, Germany:

coordinates: 52.262465° 10.515909°

----------

What Not to Do when Using a Digital Camera

http://cyberbrethren.com/2006/12/27/what-not-to-do-when-using-a-digital-camera/

"OK, so I go on this great trip to Germany last summer, in June."

----------

Martin Chemnitz and His Church

June 19th, 2006

http://cyberbrethren.com/2006/06/19/martin-chemnitz-and-his-church/

On this trip to Germany I made it a point to go visit St. Martini Church in Braunschweig where Chemnitz served as superintendent and pastor, and where he is buried. 

------------

***

GJ - Someone else did the research work and graphics above, volunteering to reveal what happened.

I collect graphics of all kinds. Martin Chemnitz is my favorite theologian, after Martin Luther. At some point I copied the creased version of Martin Chemnitz. I used Photoshop to erase the crease, although a bit of evidence remains on Chemnitz left' eyebrow. Editing the eye area is very difficult and I am just an amateur.

I used my improved version and later saw it appear on the Net, which is fine. 

Synod President Matt Harrison's overpaid buddy has shown that he does not abide by the well known standards of publishing and intellectual honesty. While accusing me on his sad little blog, McCain has claimed graphics that do not belong to him and even attached copyright notices to them.

McCain reminds me of LCMS hero C. F. W. Walther stealing Bishop Stephan's land from him, a total of 120 acres. Walther secretly took away the title of the 40 acres given to Stephan while stirring up trouble behind the real leader's back. Later, Walther talked Stephan's son out of another 80 acres of land, even though the father bought the land with his own money.

This is Paul McCain's epic fail with the Book of Concord:

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2010/07/epic-fail-of-paul-mccain-mdiv.html

---

Norman Teigen has left a new comment on your post "Answering Paul McCain's False Accusations. More Pr...":

Interesting how the Celebrity Lutheran Blogger continues on. He says that he enjoys the Photo Shop pictures of himself in papal robes. He confirms that he is not only regarded as a public fool, but that he considers the label appropriate.

Since the election, the Celebrity Lutheran Blogger has been enforcing orthodoxy. He indicates that he was once a cop. Whenever I find myself and others on the end of the CLB's attacks, I picture in my mind an enforcement official from another country and another era. Yes, I see an officer from the Sicherheitsdienst.

---

LPC has left a new comment on your post "Answering Paul McCain's False Accusations. More Pr...":

Isn't copyrighting someone else's copyright, stealing?

Well the guy is no scholar, we all know that, he can not even reference. The guy has only one form of argument, and it is fallacious - ad hominem, his favorite.

Then, the guy is no gentleman either, copyrighting someone else's copyright. Waht duh? What is the need for that? How hard is it to credit someone for your source material? It does not take a minute to type it in... now is that hard to do?

LPC

***

GJ - To steal a photo from Wikimedia and place a copyright on it - that is stealing. But to accuse me of stealing "his" Chemnitz photo, which was not his at all - that is hypocrisy. Luther said hypocrisy was the homage that vice pays to sin, but it is still a sin.

A Concordia Publishing House editor should not be plagiarizing from Roman Catholics and stealing an individually owned photo. I do not trust CPH products because their editorial management does nothing about this sinful and illegal behavior.

McCain has once again plagiarized the Catholic Encyclopedia with this verbatim copy about Martin of Tours.

Here is the Roman Catholic link to compare - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09732b.htm.

By placing this at the bottom of the entire post - Source: Catholic Cyclopedia - McCain is indicating that he wrote the article himself and based the perspective or key facts upon that one source. But that is entirely misleading, and typical of college plagiarists. He has failed again to show that the entire post is from his favorite Roman Catholic source, one designed to lead people into Romanism.

The Roman Catholic editor placed the citation material at the bottom of the post - thus -

About this page

APA citation. Clugnet, L. (1910). St. Martin of Tours. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.Retrieved November 12, 2012 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09732b.htm

MLA citation. Clugnet, Léon. "St. Martin of Tours." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910. 12 Nov. 2012 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09732b.htm>.

Transcription. This article was transcribed for New Advent by Michael C. Tinkler. In honor of the Societas Sancti Martini Episcopi Turonensis at Emory University.

Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.

For No Call Paul to be honest, he would have to indicate at the beginning that the entire post was quoted from this source. He has failed to do this again, so he would be kicked out of a university for repeated acts of academic dishonesty, presenting the original work of others as his own - but CPH pays him royally. There must be something the rest of us do not know.

---

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Answering Paul McCain's False Accusations. More Pr...":

related posts:

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2012
No Call Paul Has Trouble with Honesty:
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/no-call-paul-has-trouble-with-honesty.html
------------
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2012

Fareed Zakaria apologizes for plagiarism - POLITICO.com.
Suspended by Time and CNN.
Removed from Yale Board, But CPH Rewards Plagiarism:

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/fareed-zakaria-apologizes-for.html

----------
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2012

Paul McCain Probably Does Not Like the Photoshops, In Spite of His Claims.
Why Should We Believe a Plagiarist about Anything?

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/paul-mccain-probably-does-not-like.html

-----------

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Answering Paul McCain's False Accusations. More Pr...":

Two additional related posts:

No Call Paul McCain:
Pistols, Plagiarism, and Popery,
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2012

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/no-call-paul-mccain-pistols-plagiarism.html

--------
Paul McCain Cannot Claim Ownership of a Public Domain Work,
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2012

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/paul-mccain-cannot-claim-ownership-of.html

-------------

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Answering Paul McCain's False Accusations. More Pr...":

related post:

Paul McCain Demonstrates His Uncanny Sense of Humor, Ignoring the Photoshop Trademark By Making It Generic, SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2012

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/11/paul-mccain-demonstrates-his-uncanny.html