LP Cruz from Extra Nos sent a perceptive note, so I asked him if I could publish it:
I have been reviewing Maier's paper again.
I found the Calov quote that Jay Webber quoted to me.
This [Maier] paper is a clear and solid refutation of UOJ and is quite complete in that it even suggests how UOJ terminology should be corrected.
The fallacy of Pieper was the thinking - Tertium non Datur, meaning, he taught that either accept UOJ or you wind up believing you are saved by works which faith is a subset of. He believed there was no other alternative position.
This is a serious blunder and people are assuming what Pieper assumed, that there is no 3rd alternative to his idea of objective justification.
It has become serious because people are saying that if you do not believe in UOJ you do not believe the Gospel. Maier's paper is very sound and he paraded his exegesis of passages. For this to not be taken up by folk in LC-MS shows to me that there must have been a political spirit operating at LC-MS.
LPC
***
GJ - The basic fallacy of the Synodical Conference is the infallibility of CFW Walther. Therefore, they had to construct arguments to support everything he wrote, and Walther was prolific.
UOJ was cleverly used by the Preus brothers to push Maier out of the seminary presidency.
Rolf Preus, Jay Webber, and Paul McCain--three difference synods--promote UOJ as the pure Gospel when it is plagiarized from the Pietists. Those who reject their Calvinism are called "Calvinists"! That shows how little they have progressed from their repeat-after-me training at Ft. Wayne.
