Northwestern Publishing House
Ministers Of Christ-2 Corinthians
Author: Joh. P. Meyer
Ministers of Christ, Professor Joh. P. Meyer's commentary on Paul's second letter to the Corinthians, was first published in 1963 as part of the centennial celebration of Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. Almost fifty years later, Armin J. Panning, another professor of Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary and student of Meyer, has updated the commentary by incorporating the New International Version of the Bible where appropriate. This classic commentary continues to influence another generation of pastors and seminary students. The commentary features an exposition of the great thoughts of the divinely inspired writer, plus a study of the writing's emotional overtones. Size 6x9 inches. Hardcover. 313 pages. Published 2011. $42.50!
The publishing house blurb is correct about this being an influential book, so that would be one reason to buy it. The confusion and contradictions are the essence of the Synodical Conference segments still alive today. Except for working with Thrivent and ELCA, the ELS, Missouri, and WELS agree most of all on Universal Objective Justification, so neatly summarized above in the graphic.
Armin Panning, the retired seminary president and New Testament professor, supposed work on this revision, to smooth out the rough patches. He must have used the wrong side of the sandpaper.
I am trying to reconcile the Wisconsin slander against the two Kokomo families with this commentary. WELS has claimed that the Kokomo Statements are a parody of justification, but three of the four Kokomo statements are from this commentary, which WELS proudly reprinted.
No one can really understand the Wisconsin Sect until he realizes that they are willing to head-fake people about their own dogma, dogma so important that they excommunicate people just for asking questions about it, as they did with Joe and Lisa Krohn this year. I remember the Thought Police in the novel about Stalinism - 1984. WELS has Thought Police too.
UOJ from Concordia Seminary, St. Louis
J. P. Koehler, John Schaller, and August Pieper earned their degrees at St. Louis, during the time Missouri and the Wisconsin Synod had a school sharing plan. Walther was an elder professor at the seminary when they were students, and Stoeckhardt was just starting to teach. Thus the Wauwatosa trio had their beginnings in Knapp-Walther UOJ dogma.
J. P. Meyer's Studies
J. P. Meyer studied at Northwestern College and the seminary in Wauwatosa. The seminary later moved to Thiensville, and moved again to Mequon, when the post office changed the Thiensville address to Mequon (an inexpensive move, but confusing to outsiders). The change to the new seminary was also significant for the Wisconsin Synod, because J. P. Koehler was fired as president of the school, during its construction. The Depression hit afterwards, so the synod was saddled with a large debt and a long stretch of bad economic news. John Brenner (Historic St. John Lutheran, Milwaukee) was president of the synod during those years.
Meyer was a parish pastor for six years, 1896-1902, spending the rest of his career teaching, except for one three-year spell at Oconomowoc.
His teaching career was long, ending in retirement and the writing of this book:
"1896-1902, pastor, St. Stephen, Beaver Dam, Wis.
1902-1903, professor and dean, Northwestern College
Nov. 26, 1903, married Lydia Reinke
1903-1915, professor, Dr. Martin Luther College, New Ulm, Minn.
1915-1918, pastor, Oconomowoc, Wis.
1918-1920, president, DMLC
1920-1964, professor, Lutheran Seminary, first in Wauwatosa, then Thiensville (now Mequon), Wis.
1937-1953, president, Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary
1963, published Ministers of Christ
Nov. 10, 1964, died at the age of 93."
Two Fatal Flaws
This book has two fatal flaws, which are overlooked, because he belongs to the unbroken line of UOJ promoters, from Knapp at Halle to Valleskey at Fuller.
Saint
One is the "status of saints." The Wauwatosa professors are supposed to be strictly exegetical, but this example, in the graphic, shows they were quite willing to write fiction and call it exegesis. The term "saint" in the New Testament is synonymous with "believer." Although this is widely known, NPH has chosen to footnote the problem as if it does not really matter.
The WELS spin on the term makes nonsense out of it, and this is no small matter. When the great Greek expert Panning is willing to be associated with such a farce, everything else is in doubt as well.
There are many hints, if not outright declarations, that the Wauwatosa men were willing to ignore all previous studies and declare their opinions to be derived from exegesis of the text. That is also another way of rejecting the Lutheran Confessions and Luther in favor of a tiny seminary that looked just like the Addams Family mansion - truly a cartoon version of Lutheran education.
I offer as additional proof, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the Sausage Factory attitude toward Lenski. The graduates sneer at Lenski without using his commentaries. They imagine the repetition of UOJ talking points will suffice for proclaiming the Gospel, but feel compelled to plagiarize from all kinds of false teachers. Apparently, their UOJ
Gospel leaves them hungry - or just predatory.
The Scriptures were written to create and sustain faith, to provide God's own unchanging standard for truth. If their favorite dogmatics book cannot get a simple, obvious term right, the rest of the content is also suspect. That fact cannot be missed in the merging of atonement and justification.
Atonement and Justification - Not the Same
The second fatal flaw is impossible to miss. J. P. Meyer taught that the atoning death of Christ made everyone in the world free of sin. His parody of
saint has this effect - every single person from that point on became a "guilt-free" saint...or sinner. Reading the statement in the graphic again will not straighten out the matter. The sinner is a saint, whether he ever believes or not, whether he even finds out about this mysterious status.
Worst of all - he has to
make a decision. Will he accept or decline, once he hears this strange dogma?
Did the Three Kokomo Meyer Statements Survive Editing?
Yes, they did. One is in the graphic above. I created two more, so everyone has the information in graphical form.
Some Kokomo Narrative for the Newbies
The Kokomo episode began when Pastor Papenfuss began teaching UOJ in the congregation in Kokomo, Indiana. Thanks to some research from Name Withheld, we know that WELS used a Justification By Faith catechism for many decades, the Gausewitz, until it was replaced by the horrid UOJ Kuske catechism. Two families were upset by the new dogma being promoted by Papenfuss.
Look at the 1978 graduates with Papenfuss - Mark Jeske, Stroh, Starr, Schumann the Born-Again Atheist, Curia the UOJ Scribe, Jim Witte (DMin in CG), Marcus Manthey - Defender of Unfaith. And the faculty - no less than four UOJ fanatics: Gerlach (Fuller alumnus), Becker, Panning, and Kuske.
Although Papenfuss admitted to the families that he never heard of UOJ before The Sausage Factory (he may have said Mequon), he went ahead with excommunicating the two families who had questions. I was at the Hartmann farm talking to both men about this, and they copied the letters of excommunication for me.
The four Kokomo Statements came about this way. The families wrote down the three statements from Meyer's Ministers of Christ, which Papenfuss gave them to study. They added a fourth from their research. They said, "Is this what you are saying?" Papenfuss agreed with those statements. The letter of excommunication removed them for NOT agreeing with the statements.
The same Synod President who lied about the origin of the Kokomo statements also lied about the Tabor adultery and murder.
Either the families or someone else wrote around to WELS about this and it became a big deal in
Christian News. The families appealed, which is always a waste of time in WELS, and Panning headed the board that backed UOJ. Sig Becker also gave papers defending and promoting UOJ.
J-580
I. "Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinner's attitude toward Christ's sacrifice, purely on the basis of God's verdict, every sinner, whether he knows it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of saint."
II. "After Christ's intervention and through Christ's intervention God regards all sinners as guilt-free saints."
III. "When God reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, He individually pronounced forgiveness to each individual sinner whether that sinner ever comes to faith or not."
IV. "At the time of the resurrection of Christ, God looked down in hell and declared Judas, the people destroyed in the flood, and all the ungodly, innocent, not guilty, and forgiven of all sin and gave unto them the status of saints."
[34]
Footnote 34: "Every one of the statements can be understood correctly, even though one must swallow a little hard to accede to the fourth [Kokomo Statement]." Sigbert Becker, "Objective Justification," Chicago Pastoral Conference, WELS, Elgin, Illinois, November 9, 1982, unpaginated.
The letter sent to the two families quoted the statements and declared that the families were being expelled for denying those statements. Certain people have tried to confuse the issue by claiming the statements were made up by the expelled families to parody WELS doctrine. Three statements are almost verbatim from J. P. Meyer’s Ministers of Christ, now out of print. The fourth statement came from a controversy in the 19th century but was added by Pastor Papenfuss to the previous statements from J. P. Meyer. Although WELS has often backed away from the Kokomo statements, the synod continues to defend the content and reproduce the most obnoxious falsehoods found in them. The Evangelical Lutheran Synod teaches Kokomo justification in their seminary. After a layman wrote to Bethany Seminary professor John Moldstad Jr., the following statements appeared in the Evangelical Lutheran Synod Lutheran Sentinel:
J-581
“When Paul uses the word ‘reconciling’ here, [2 Corinthians 5:19] he clearly means that forgiveness of sins is really imputed to ‘the world.’
John Moldstad, Jr., “I have heard some Lutherans say they do not believe the Bible teaches objective justification. How can they assert this and still call themselves ‘Lutheran’?”
Lutheran Sentinel, October, 1996, p. 11.
[35]
Footnote 35 says - "The alleged question sets a record for being prejudicial. The typical ELS member would never say something so idiotic, since most Lutherans react in shock and disbelief to the very concept Moldstad is trying to promote, that forgiveness comes without the Word, without repentance, without the Means of Grace, without faith. The article is a response to Dr. Peter Moeller questioning the validity of Objective Justification, enclosing articles on the topic from Pastor Vernon Harley. Moldstad sent a long, friendly letter to Moeller on August 6, 1996."
Using Orthodoxy To Merge Atonement and Justification
By using two justifications, object and subjective, Meyer confused the act of Christ in atoning for the sins of the world with God's declaration of innocence received in faith.
This double justification formula comes from the Halle Pietist Georg Christian Knapp, whose work was available in German and English before the American
Luther Kidnapper landed in the Big Easy. SP Harrison loves to gush about Walther but cannot deal with Walther's many crimes. I dare say that Missouri would never let a criminal like that join their miniserium - unless he had a lot of money to offer. You know, like Thrivent and ELCA as ministry partners.
Ministers of Christ, starting on page 90, simply ignores the plain words of the Book of Concord, Luther, Calov, and Hoenecke to prove the assumption of two justifications. The argumentation is simply appalling.
Those who remain faithful to Justification by Faith, taught by Paul and Luther, should obtain this book to see the way in which plain statements are distorted to fit the UOJ agenda. I have discussed this with various people, including one who can speed read the dogmatics classics in Latin, translating into English faster than I can follow the original.
One explanation is mission creep. To express the atonement of Christ, some engage in exaggerations that compete with one another for absurdity. For example, Ed Preuss wrote that Hottentots are justified, that we are born already justified.
Another explanation came from Dr. Lito Cruz today. He mentioned being familiar with the UOJ categories and terms from Calvinism.
In contrast, I was not familiar with the fetishes of UOJ. The Augustana Synod opposed the Norwegians on UOJ, and the people I knew emphasized the efficacy of the Word rather than the glories of The Founder. (Only Missouri does that - to its shame and detriment.) Those who think and communicate in terms of Enthusiasm cannot maintain a Lutheran position. Nor can a sect or synod. The Enthusiasm spreads like cancer - to legalism, receptionism, Church Grow-ti-vation, and Pentecostalism.
Like bankers, we need to train people with sound doctrine - from the Book of Concord and the KJV, Luther and Chemnitz. Complaining about the counterfeit is not as effective as seeing the true Gospel and noticing how bizarre and stupid UOJ is, in comparison. Yes, UOJ is a fair copy of the Gospel, one that can fool just about any MDiv. But when UOJ is placed next to the Means of Grace, the efficacy of the Word, and justification by faith, Knapp's dogma is dull and toxic.
Deadly nightshade is closely related to tomato, which is another nightshade. The nightshade berries are delicate and attractive. Cows eat them and get sick. Nightshade berries are also black and ominous looking, especially when compared to the bright red and tomato cousin.
UOJ is especially toxic because it supplants rather than attacks. Atheists, like the former WELS CG experts, work by attacking the Christian faith. Far better to substitute a Gospel, when no one is looking, such as replacing Gausewitz with Kuske, or the KJV with the NIV, or Lenski with Meyer.
----
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Review of J. P. Meyer - Ministers of Christ, Revi...":
People should find it absolutely appalling that the (W)ELS and LCMS have established the false gospel of UOJ as their central and chief article, yet, they have no Confessional statement detailing this doctrine. Nothing. You cannot even get a common confession from 10 different (W)ELS pastors. Some will admit that it doesn't exist in the Lutheran Confessions. Seriously, where's the chapter on Universal (General) Justification in the Book of Concord where this doctrine is detailed in "this we confess" and "this we reject" statements?! They teach that without UOJ there is no gospel so how did the Lutheran Confessors miss this critical doctrine. They didn't because it isn't Scriptural.
Some will say it's in the BOC so ask your UOJ pastor to show you where it's at. They'll twist Confessional statements that are directed to believers and attributes the forgiveness of sins and justification to faith in Christ.
Quote the BOC in the following places and watch the smoke pour forth from the ears of those who've placed Synod above Christ, 6] Let any one of the adversaries come forth and tell us when remission of sins takes place. O good God, what darkness there is! They doubt whether it is in attrition or in contrition that remission of sins occurs. And if it occurs on account of contrition, what need is there of absolution, what does the power of the keys effect, if sins have been already remitted? Here, indeed, they also labor much more, and wickedly detract from the power of the keys. If the Keys, given by Christ to the Priesthood of believers, can forgive and retain sins - how then were they already forgiven without the Means of Grace, when Christ paid for the worlds sins - the true meaning of the Atonement.
http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_10_repentance.php
In desperation over the fact that the BOC doesn't contain the UOJ doctrine, they will tell you that the BOC was written to address the RCC's false teaching of works righteousness so the emphasis of the BOC was on "Subjective Justification" and not on "Objective Justification". Respond with the question, "Exactly when did the Roman Catholic Church accept the doctrine of UOJ which teaches the entire unbelieving world was declared forgiven, justified and righteous before and without faith or works?" Truth is that the introduction to the BOC states it contains all the chief articles of the Christian faith, even some like Election which were not under contention at the time.
Following those quotes, secure your excommunication from the (W)ELS and LCMS by quoting these BOC statements:
29. You cannot extricate yourself from unbelief, nor can the Law do it for you. All your works in intended fulfillment of the Law must remain works of the Law and powerless to justify in the sight of God, who regards as just only believing children.
74. But what is the process whereby Christ gives us such a spirit and redeems us from under the Law? The work is effected solely by faith. He who believes that Christ came to redeem us, and that he has accomplished it, is really redeemed. As he believes, so is it with him. Faith carries with it the child-making spirit. The apostle here explains by saying that Christ has redeemed us from under the Law that we might receive the adoption of sons. As before stated, all must be effected through faith. Now we have discussed the five points of the verse.
http://www.trinitylutheranms.org/MartinLuther/MLSermons/Galatians4_1_7.html
If by the grace of God they turn in repentance to Christ and Scriptural Justification by faith alone, rejecting the false gospel of UOJ, apply the Key to absolve their sin and build them up in Christ alone, forsaking all others, including the Synod who taught them this false gospel in their grade school, high school, college and Seminary.
