The Election War Invented
by Walther
The war about
Election developed only because of Walther’s leadership. The self-serving jibe
is that one man did not get elected to a position, so he created the battle on
his own. That should remind people that Zion on the Mississippi was written
by “a disgruntled LCMS pastor,” and In Pursuit of Religious Freedom was
not written by church history professor. The three complaints have something in
common – they are irrelevant and illogical. The question is whether the three
men presented their information as truthfully as possible.
By 1877, Walther
was supreme in the Missouri Synod and highly respected in other synods. Each group
had a unique origin and they worked through various doctrinal and practical struggles
within their ranks. On the Masonic Lodge issue, the question was not who was
pure – because no synod was – but who was outwardly more critical.[1]
Once Walther
reached the issue of predestination in his theses, others noticed the
Calvinistic language and objected. Readers should be reminded that Objective
Justification already suffered from those shortcomings, but they were
overlooked for the same reason they are ignored now.
1.
People could assume that Objective
Justification was simply another word for the Atonement.
2.
They could also think that Subjective
Justification was an expression for believing the Gospel.
3.
Walther held such a powerful position
– synod, seminary, and publications head – that his perspective was
monopolistic and respected.
4.
Justification itself was a word skillfully
used to imply one thought (Justification by Faith) while declaring the opposite
(Absolution of the World, Without Faith): General Justification, Justification
of the Sinner, Justification by Grace, Objective Justification, Universal
Objective Justification.
5.
The fact remains that Objective and
Subjective Justification were terms used by the Calvinist translator of Knapp’s
Halle theology lectures, an important book for all Protestants, German and American.
6.
Halle University and the Halle
charities were so influential that their unionist (Lutheran-Reformed) doctrine
was easily spread but refuted with difficulty. Spener was simply beyond criticism,
so Pietism was practiced but Luther’s name was emphasized.[2]
Professors of
German literature love the term Wendepunkt – turning point. The Election
controversy is often described in view of history, but the Wendepunkt is
Walther’s embrace of grace without the Means of Grace, world absolution without
the Word, separation of the Holy Spirit and its exclusive work through the Word.
Walther’s weakness on Justification was the evil tree that bore the corrupt fruit
of Calvinistic double-predestination.
Walther was so eager
to deny anything in man contributing to salvation that he parroted Calvin’s
concept of a minority being predestined to glory while the majority were
predestined to eternal damnation. Walther’s odd and fatal notion of faith being
a “work of man” meant that one Enthusiasm (Objective Justification) would
easily foster another – Double Predestination. God alone works, as the Scripture
teaches and Book of Concord confesses, so faith is the work of the Holy Spirit
in the Gospel Word.
Nothing is quite so
heinous pitting grace against faith when the Holy Spirit says through St. Paul –
Romans 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it
might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to
that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of
Abraham; who is the father of us all.
Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace
with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 By whom also we have access by faith
into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
Looking at the
history of this topic will take us back to Augustine versus Pelagius, the
Molinists against the Jansenists, Calvin and Luther. The next stage would
include Walther’s own history and the Election debates, including The Errors
of Modern Missouri. That is its entirely would not focus on the real issue –
the poor Biblical foundation of Walther’s dogmatics. When the Chief Article is
presented in a hazy and deceptive way, lacking the key points of Biblical
teaching, nothing claimed for Election is going to be sound doctrine.
[1]
One WELS seminary professor told me about taking in Masons because “they were
all Masons in Pennsylvania.” A Missouri Circuit Pastor said the same thing.
Frosty Bivens admitted in his book that WELS took in Masons as soon as they
were removed by Missouri congregations. The former head of the ELS, George
Orvick, was known for the Masons in his congregation. St. Paul in German
Village (Independent, finally WELS, earlier Reformed-Lutheran, ALC, and Masonic)
had a policy of not communing Masons except for the one who was privately
communed when I was serving in Columbus.
[2] My
Christology professor at Waterloo Seminary (LCA, now ELCic), Otto Heick, graduated
from a German Pietistic seminary, belonged to a local Pietist congregation and
an LCA congregation. My vicarage supervisor regarded Heick’s other congregation
as “a bunch of trouble-makers.” They called themselves, in German, Separated
Christians. My home congregation had been Augustana Synod, where Pietism was
highly regarded instead of being denied. They had little regard for Bishop’s
Hill, an extreme Pietistic group.
