Why Did Walther Support Stephan's Objective Justification with His Calvinistic Double Predestination?
My theory is that Walther could not force the Stephan dogma on his German speaking colleagues. That may also be why LCMS and WELS took so long to translate German works (Pieper's Dogmatics, Hoenecke's) into English.
So Walther brought up a non-controversy and made that a love-it or leave-it challenge to the Synodical Conference.
Calvin's double-predestination defies all logic and is not Biblical.
Walther seized on the debater's trick of re-defining the language. What he forcibly argued was the faith is a work of man, so his spin on election was that there could be no grace where faith came through as a work of man. I have
heard that repeated in many different ways. John Brenner, SJ, conceded in the Marquette dissertation that the predestination controversy was Walther's way of backing up Objective Justification.
Now the old Synodical Conference partners assume that any questioning of Walther is treasonous and worthy of the Left Foot of Fellowship. CFW did not know the Biblical languages but he was good at Latin, a good cover for his opinions.
 |
| Feline OJ |
 |
| Like John Brenner, SJ, Jack Kilcrease was trained for a PhD at Marquette University, a Jesuit school and proud of it. |
.jpg)
