Beginning of the Repudiation of the Emmaus Essay

Jay Webber Essay, First Part

The Term Justification and the Double Justification of OJ and SJ.

            The essay begins with the routine, practiced dishonesty of the crowd who took over the Synodical Conference and sold its members down the river to mainline apostasy and union with the ELCA. Nothing is more appropriate than to have Jay Webber write - an advocate for open communion with ELCA. Moreover, as a Lutheran missionary in the Ukraine, Webber was happy to work with and obtain money from Floyd Luther Stolzenburg, Church Growth advocate extraordinaire in Columbus, Ohio – unfaithful in marriage and doctrine, expelled from the LCMS but embraced by WELS/ELS.

            The essay is not about justification but the pet dogma of the mainline Protestants, CFW Walther, and Martin Stephan – universal absolution without faith. Webber chooses to call this “an aspect” of justification in focusing on Objective Justification. But for the heirs of rationalistic Pietism, Objective Justification is the Gospel and faith is only an afterthought. Yes, their Gospel message is – “The entire world has already been forgiven and saved, without faith.” Their afterthought is, “But you have to believe this for it to matter for your sin-free, guilt-free soul.” This afterthought is called Subjective Justification, which has also been demoted by Webber to an “aspect of justification.”

            These peculiar labels, Objective Justification and Subjective Justification, have a history, but one outside of the Lutheran Church. Long ago, when few theology books were printed, Georg Christian Knapp published his Halle University lectures in German. He was considered the last of the old fashioned Pietists at Halle, which was established to promote Pietism. The university rapidly became rationalistic, and some of that certainly rubbed off on Knapp. He denied that the Christian Church’s definition of the Holy Trinity was in harmony with the Bible. But Knapp was old-fashioned for his time, and his book was translated by the Calvinist Woods in America. Knapp was already established as a famous and traditional theologians for all Protestants, so this translation was published well before the Stephanites landed in New Orleans in 1839. However, the group remained German speaking for many decades and doubtless relied on the German edition of Knapp. The Calvinist translator explained Knapp’s opaque language in a footnote -

"This is very conveniently expressed by the terms objective and subjective justification. Objective justification is the act of God, by which he proffers pardon to all through Christ; subjective, is the act of man, by which he accepts the pardon freely offered in the Gospel. The former is universal, the latter not (Woods, p. )."

“His [Woods'] translation of Georg Christian Knapp's Christian Theology (1831-1833) was long used as a text-book in American theological seminaries.” (http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Leonard_Woods)

            The terms, conveniently expressed, did not come from Confessional Lutherans, but from a famous Calvinist with no Lutheran training. The impact of the English Halle lectures made itself felt when the two terms were adapted in Germany and pleased Walther, who approved their use. This does not make them orthodox or Lutheran, although the soothsayers would have us believe that. Instead, the adoption of Objective Justification reveals the common thread of Halle Pietism and rationalism in America. All the Lutheran groups were Pietistic to some extent and this Pietism soon displaced their loyalty to any Confessions, whether Calvinistic or Lutheran. The spirit of Pietism—which favors cooperation over sound doctrine—makes it easy for the LCMS, WELS, and ELS to work with the ELCA – especially through Thrivent.  Their own LCMS/WELS pastor, Mark Jeske sits on the Thrivent board.

Halle Rationalistic Pietism

            We should never underestimate the power and influence of Halle University and its rationalistic Pietism. The founder of the ULCA/LCA tradition was Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, who taught at the Franke Foundation orphanage at Halle. The real founder of the Missouri Synod, Martin Stephan, attended but did not graduate from Halle University. In fact, Stephan never graduated from a university and was not qualified to be a pastor. His position as a Bohemian and Pietist gave him the credibility to be called to the Pietist congregation, which was closely allied with the Pietist Zinzendorf. The Pietist Stephan attracted the attention of the Pietistic Walther group of clergy, who gravitated to Stephan when their Pietist guru - Johann Gottlieb Kuehn - suddenly died.

The main theologian of the Wisconsin Synod, Adolph Hoenecke, graduated from Halle University in 1859. His mentor Tholuck was a Universalist. Thus we should not be too shocked that Hoenecke wrote about General Justification, a misleading translation of the German term – algemeine Rechtfertigung – Universal Justification (every single one, no exceptions, as in Universal Conscription).

            As one theological student asked, “What happened to Subjective Justification in the mainline denominations like ELCA?” The best explanation comes from the meaning of the term – not faith in Christ, but faith in Universal Justification – “the former is universal, “as the Calvinist Woods translated. The nature of Subjective Justification dooms it to make faith irrelevant, as Webber’s essay has demonstrated with countless, stolid, prolixic, redundancies.

Another Obscure Pietistic Hero

            Webber enjoys citing Pietists and baptizing them as orthodox or confessional Lutherans. The seldom-cited Quistorp gets that treatment from Webber, which would make church historians gasp in wonder. Strangely, Webber begins his essay citing Professor Caroll Herman Little, who once served as president of the seminary I attended – Waterloo Lutheran in Ontario, Canada. Robert Preus once mentioned Little to me and doubtless taught Little as an example of a ULCA pastor who agreed with the LCMS about doctrine. One little problem remains – the Canada Synod was Pietistic. For example, when one of the patriarchs of the synod visited a home and saw the boys playing cards, he said nothing. On Sunday, old Reble delivered a blistering sermon on the evils of playing cards – a typical Pietistic sermon for that era. Like most readers I have to wonder why Little’s opinions about justification matter to anyone.

Misuse of Justification as a Term

            The Objective Justification cabal has decided that their peculiar dogma is the justification of the Reformation, the Book of Concord, and the Scriptures. Rather than attack justification by faith directly, they simply substitute their philosophy for Biblical doctrine, knowing well that their OJ terminology is found no earlier than Pietism – after the Reformation – and freely witnessed in various denominations and even in cults.

“As an objective fact, justification is applied to the entire human race fully redeemed in Christ. [Read Rom. 5:18.] – Adventist website - http://www.jacksequeira.org/issues06.htm

“ Legal universal justification implies that all human beings come into the world legally saved, pardoned, justified; from God's perspective they are not lost. If it is true that every human being who has been and will be born on this planet was present in Christ when he died and that they all were legally justified, then those who are not yet born have already been justified.” Adventist website –

https://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/materials/theology-salvation/some-problems-legal-universal-justification

One should not be shocked by Synodical Conference authors praising justification in the words of Luther and switching to OJ for the rest of the essay. Webber is almost this obvious.

            Indeed, Webber on page 3 indulges himself in the usual potpourri of Scriptural citations that do not fit. He quoted Romans 5:18 – as the Adventist did. In spite of Romans 4 being a chapter about justification by faith, climaxing with Romans 5:1-2, Webber fished out Romans 4:25, part of a verse, avoiding the real meaning of the sentence, chapter, and epistle.

^{Romans 4:22} And therefore it was imputed to him [Abraham] for righteousness.

²³ Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

²⁴ But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

²⁵ Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. KJV

As we see in many LCMS publications, the citations are simply stated as if they prove a contentious point, but there is no contention since the OJ mob does not recognize, quote, or acknowledge justification by faith. For example, Webber studied under Robert Preus but in this essay never mentioned the last book of Preus, Justification and Rome, which eviscerated OJ in a series of quotations from orthodox Lutherans.

More Confusion – In View of Faith

            As many have observed, the second part is just as distorted and strange as Objective Justification. Note the additional terms – Individual, Personal, and Subjective Justification. So many terms are needed to replace justification by faith. Webber defines this Subjective Justification as faith in Objective Justification –

“… the actual acceptance by faith in the Objective Justification.” (p. 3)

The plot grows even shallower –

“If personal or subjective Justification is the acceptance by faith of Objective Justification it is manifest that it does not take place ‘in view of faith.’ Thus a synergistic view of Justification is avoided. (p. 3)

The logic is bizarre, because Webber proves his assumption with his assumption, reasoning in a circle. Justification by faith is synergistic or Calvinism – I can never figure those accusations out. If justification by faith, as taught by Paul, Luther, and the Book of Concord, is synergistic, then what is faith in OJ, as taught by Stephan, Walther, DP Ed Werner, and David Valleskey?

            This in view of faith accusation seems to have originated in Walther’s febrile mind, where he imagined faith as a work. And yet, the self-contradicting Walther told his gullible followers they had to make a decision for OJ, precisely what Webber is claiming.

Naturally, one can never be accused of anything when aping Walther, but the circle of rationalistic Pietists supporting rationalistic Pietists is not a compelling Biblical or Concordist argument.

No Grasp of Lutheran Doctrine

            Webber displays no grasp of Lutheran doctrine as he wanders from point to point, something to be expected when someone starts with a Canadian-American professor of Pietism as the ruling norm of doctrine. There are minor disagreements among the Lutherans, say Little and Webber, but no worry. (p. 4)

            One would never imagine that this Webber essay is an extended, if bloated, attack on justification by faith, the Bible, Luther, the Book of Concord, the post-Concord orthodox Lutherans, Gerhard, groups within the LCMS, and Gausewitz. Dismissing a long history of justification by faith and large numbers of people who find OJ alarmingly foul, Webber tries to jawbone the new Synodical Conference into an agreement that never will happen. Too many people, when informed of the agenda of OJ, disagree with great energy and conviction.

           

           

               

Did You Plant That on Purpose? A Next-Door Nursery Trumps a Local Nursery

Coreopsis or tick-seed has many varieties,
and they favor beneficial insects.

More than once someone has said to me, "Did you plant that on purpose?" Many overlooked plants are the best possible treatment for the ills caused by monoculture - too much of the same plant.

My blog-friend and reader has a vineyard, and he points out the difficulty in controlling all the evils drawn in by a mass of grape vines. I see the same problem with rows of roses. Fortunately, I can drop beneficial insect plants wherever I want and provide host plants for my little allies.

Almost Eden is the next-door nursery, and the owner has the same philosophy about planting that I do. His wife works in hospitality for Walmart, so I do not have to listen to rants about our local mom and pop store.

I went through his website, looking for hummingbird plants - not only a major education by itself but also great encouragement for the future. The distant and expensive online nurseries deliver plants where the first question is - "Has it died yet?"

Any supplier is going to make me dizzy with the varieties of plants I have never grown. I know some of the names superficially, but that does not make me knowledgeable about how to use them and enjoy them. Some brand new names for me were - Chaste Tree and Beautyberry.

Now I am especially interested in plants -

1. Favored by beneficial insects. The life stages of various beneficial insects need more than food for their babies. The adults need their own food and shelter.
2. Visited by hummingbirds. Free hummingbird food is a plus since I do not own or fill feeders.
3. Loved by bees of all types. In Phoenix we had the leaf-cutter bees, black and ominous, but harmless. They lumbered through from time to time, harvesting leaves from my bougainvillea jungle. There are many varieties of bees, and they have their special roles.

I planted my latest finds from Almost Eden this morning. Sassy, after enjoying her 6 AM walk, sat nearby and supervised each hole.

Mrs. Ichabod wants screening plants to block the unscenic back alley view. I was able to put the Chaste Tree in just the right spot to grow 10 - 20 feet tall. This shrub-tree is the ultimate bee plant, which is fine with me. The flowers are beautiful and fragrant.

The Big Slug Trap
I began with one can of beer in the old roasting pan.

• First night - 24 slugs were in the brew and dead.
• Second night - more slugs were slowing moving in. In the morning many dead slugs were missing and the pan was almost dry.
• Third night - the pan was completely cleared of all beer and all slugs.

Hummingbird Plants - a complete list

John Huss Holy Communion Hymn - From Christianity Today's Website

The Huss statue in Prague encouraged freedom lovers,
just as Huss inspired Luther to break with the papacy.

We sang this hymn in church today.

John Huss

Pre-Reformation Reformer -

Kelmed from Christian History

"Lord Jesus, it is for thee that I patiently endure this cruel death. I pray thee to have mercy on my enemies."

Early in his monastic career, Martin Luther, rummaging through the stacks of a library, happened upon a volume of sermons by John Huss, the Bohemian who had been condemned as a heretic. "I was overwhelmed with astonishment," Luther later wrote. "I could not understand for what cause they had burnt so great a man, who explained the Scriptures with so much gravity and skill."

Huss would become a hero to Luther and many other Reformers, for Huss preached key Reformation themes (like hostility to indulgences) a century before Luther drew up his 95 Theses. But the Reformers also looked to Huss's life, in particular, his steadfast commitment in the face of the church's cunning brutality.

To escape poverty, Huss trained for the priesthood: "I had thought to become a priest quickly in order to secure a good livelihood and dress and to be held in esteem by men." He earned a bachelor's, master's, and then finally a doctorate. Along the way he was ordained (in 1401) and became the preacher at Prague's Bethlehem Chapel (which held 3,000), the most popular church in one of the largest of Europe's cities, a center of reform in Bohemia (for example, sermons were preached in Czech, not Latin).

During these years, Huss underwent a change. Though he spent some time with what he called a "foolish sect," he finally discovered the Bible: "When the Lord gave me knowledge of Scriptures, I discharged that kind of stupidity from my foolish mind."

The writings of John Wycliffe had stirred his interest in the Bible, and these same writings were causing a stir in Bohemia (technically the northeastern portion of today's Czech Republic, but a general term for the area where the Czech language and culture prevailed). The University of Prague was already split between Czechs and Germans, and Wycliffe's teachings only divided them more. Early debates hinged on fine points of philosophy (the Czechs, with Wycliffe, were realists; the Germans nominalists). But the Czechs, with Huss, also warmed up to Wycliffe's reforming ideas; though they had no intention of captionering traditional doctrines, they wanted to place more emphasis on the Bible, expand the authority of church councils (and lessen that of the pope), and promote the moral reform of clergy. Thus Huss began increasingly to trust the Scriptures, "desiring to hold, believe, and assert whatever is contained in them as long as I have breath in me."

A political struggle ensued, with the Germans labeling Wycliffe and his followers heretics. With the support of the king of Bohemia, the Czechs gained the upper hand, and the Germans were forced to flee to other universities.

The situation was complicated by European politics, which watched as two popes vied to rule all of Christendom. A church council was called at Pisa in 1409 to settle the matter. It deposed both popes and elected Alexander V as the legitimate pontiff (though the other popes, repudiating this election, continued to rule their factions). Alexander was soon "persuaded"—that is, bribed—to side with Bohemian church authorities against Huss, who continued to criticize them. Huss was forbidden to preach and excommunicated, but only on paper: with local Bohemians backing him, Huss continued to preach and minister at Bethlehem Chapel.

When Alexander V's successor, the antipope John XXIII (not to be confused with the modern pope by the same name), authorized the selling of indulgences to raise funds for his crusade against one of his rivals, Huss was scandalized and further radicalized. The pope was acting in mere self-interest, and Huss could no longer justify the pope's moral authority. He leaned even more heavily on the Bible, which he proclaimed the final authority for the church. Huss further argued that the Czech people were being exploited by the pope's indulgences, which was a not-so-veiled attack on the Bohemian king, who earned a cut of the indulgence proceeds.

Scripture rebel

With that Huss lost the support of his king. His excommunication, which had been tacitly dropped, was now revived, and an interdict was put upon the city of Prague: no citizen could receive Communion or be buried on church grounds as long as Huss continued his ministry. To spare the city, Huss withdrew to the countryside toward the end of 1412. He spent the next two years in feverish literary activity, composing a number of treatises. The most important was The Church, which he sent to Prague to be read publicly. In it he argued that Christ alone is head of the church, that a pope "through ignorance and love of money" can make many mistakes, and that to rebel against an erring pope is to obey Christ.

In November 1414, the Council of Constance assembled, and Huss was urged by Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund to come and give an account of his doctrine. Because he was promised safe conduct, and because of the importance of the council (which promised significant church reforms), Huss went. When he arrived, however, he was immediately arrested, and he remained imprisoned for months. Instead of a hearing, Huss was eventually hauled before authorities in chains and asked merely to recant his views.

When he saw he wasn't to be given a forum for explaining his ideas, let alone a fair hearing, he finally said, "I appeal to Jesus Christ, the only judge who is almighty and completely just. In his hands I plead my cause, not on the basis of false witnesses and erring councils, but on truth and justice." He was taken to his cell, where many pleaded with him to recant. On July 6, 1415, he was taken to the cathedral, dressed in his priestly garments, then stripped of them one by one. He refused one last chance to recant at the stake, where he prayed, "Lord Jesus, it is for thee that I patiently endure this cruel death. I pray thee to have mercy on my enemies." He was heard reciting the Psalms as the flames engulfed him.

His executioners scooped up his ashes and tossed them into a lake so that nothing would remain of the "heretic," but some Czechs collected bits of soil from the ground where Huss had died and took them back to Bohemia as a memorial.

Bohemians were furious with the execution and repudiated the council; over the next several years, a coalition of Hussites, radical Taborites, and others refused to submit to the authority of the Holy Roman emperor or the church and fended off three military assaults. Bohemia eventually reconciled with the rest of western Christendom—though on its own terms (for example, it was one of the few Catholic regions that offered Communion of both bread and wine; the rest of Christendom simply received the bread). Those who repudiated this last compromise formed the Unitas Fratrum ("Union of Brethren"), which became the foundation for the Moravian Brethren (Moravia is a region in the Czech Republic), who would play an influential role in the conversion of the Wesley brothers, among others.

How far we have come from the days of Huss - straight down.