Mystery Solved: The Secret Behind Robert Preus' Justification and Rome

Robert Preus earned two doctorates in theology
and the respect of all Protestants for his scholarship.

When I bought Robert Preus' Justification and Rome, I read it carefully. I was interested in what he said about Rome, which was not going to be a surprise. And I also wanted to know how he expressed himself on justification.

I knew what he wrote and taught before. His little essay, which Jack Cascione lovlingly reproduced, quoted his distant relative Eduard Preuss offering the fabulous opinion that we are justified before we are born.

I also knew that UOJ was untouchable by LCMS standards because it was embedded in the 1932 Brief Confession, doubly blessed.

First of all, that particular statement was the swan song of Franz Pieper.

Secondly, the Olde Synodical Conference fixated on that particular confession as the infallible truth of all time, far above the Book of Concord (in practice).

Big shock. Robert Preus quoted various sources against UOJ and definitely confirmed his opposition to that strange heresy. My intuition was that his sources were arguing against someone or something. Later, when someone showed me the double-justification from the English version of Georg Christian Knapp (Halle University, mother ship of Pietism), I was still stumped. The Preus citations were pre-Knapp, pre-Pietism.




Just recently, another researcher--name withheld--fell upon the Hardt essay involving Samuel Huber and Polycarp Leyser. That explained the Preus citations. The post-Concord theologians were arguing against Huber's weird justification - the absolution of the whole world. As Dr. Lito Cruz has pointed out in his cogent posts and comments, the merging of the Atonement and justification is a hallmark of Calvinism. Huber came over from Calvinism. Spener got his cell groups from Calvinism.

The Walther mythology deceives people into thinking he delivered American Lutherans from Pietism. CFW Walther was a Pietist who swore allegiance to the Pietist Stephan, a cell group fanatic. Cell groups continued in the foundering Missouri Synod, because all the pastors were Pietists. They did come to struggle against the unionism of America. So did the General Council, another Pietistic group. The Wisconsin Synod was Pietistic and moved away from it (with mixed success) - thanks to Hoenecke and Bading.

Therefore, enjoy the graphics gathered below and see how they are reactions against the false doctrine of Samuel Huber. If you agree with Huber's version of justification, you are roundly condemned by Leyser (Chemnitz' biographer and also an editor of the Book of Concord) and other great theologians.

Preus repudiated UOJ in this statement and cited
Calov in support.

This statement is answering the claim that
everyone in the world is absolved of sin (OJ).

I heard Preus lecture about how much he
loved Quenstedt.

J. S. Bach, who was orthodox, owned the famous
Calov Biblical commentaries.

Gerhard co-authored a famous book with Chemnitz.
No Lutheran before Huber taught universal absolution.
Huber was kicked off the faculty for teaching what the
Olde Synodical Conference leaders love the most.

Quenstedt was a precise writer.

Some of these theologians have been cited as supporting UOJ,
just as Tim Glende claimed I did.
UOJ fanatics are not very bright.