Gerhard Forde: instructor to today's LCMS (2 of 2)

[2020-02-24: added reference at bottom to old blog]
     In Part 1, it was shown that the theologian Gerhard O. Forde questioned the foundational Christian doctrine of the vicarious satisfaction.  Forde's theology is thereby anti-Christian and unLutheran.  One would think that a synod claiming to be truly Lutheran would completely avoid Forde's theology because of this but that is not the case with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.  Their new seminary textbook, to update Pieper's Christian Dogmatics, quotes him approvingly in many places, offering only minor warnings, e.g. on his Third Use of Law.

Forde in Samuel Nafzger's/LC-MS textbook Confessing the Gospel

      The following is my tabulation of the references to the works of Gerhard O. Forde, an ELCA theologian, in the new (2018) LC-MS textbook Confessing the Gospel:

Samuel H. Nafzger General Editor	Confessing the Gospel	Concordia Publishing 2018
Chapter title	Primary Contributor(s)	#  Forde references
Prolegomena	David A. Lumpp	5
Anthropology	Jerrold A. Eickmann, Jerald C. Joersz, Thomas E. Manteufel, Daniel L. Mattson, Joel P. Okamoto	5
Work of Christ	Henry A. Hamann	8
Christian Life	Milton L. Rudnick, Martim C. Warth	5
Election	Robert Kolb	3 =========== Total: 26

There are approximately 26 references to Forde's writings in this 2-volume textbook for seminarians.  Most references offer no warning against his theology but rather quote him with approval.  All of these contributors are either ignorant of Forde's error on the fundamental article of the Christian faith, or what is more likely, they are, to borrow Siegbert Becker's words, "deliberately and culpably blind" to it – they are willing to overlook Forde's teaching that the Vicarious Satisfaction "creates more problems than it solves".

      But the ultimate tragedy of the praise of Forde's theology comes particularly in the last chapter "Election" by primary contributor Dr. Robert Kolb.  In the 2018 CPH book Walther's Works: Predestination, [2020-09-01 see also this post] it is repeatedly pointed out that one cannot hold the proper doctrine of Election of Grace without holding to the Lutheran doctrine of Universal, Objective Justification, or what is the same, the Vicarious Satisfaction.  While the author of Nafzger's textbook chapter (Kolb or Nafzger?) quotes both C.F.W. Walther and Franz Pieper in his attempt to set forth the Lutheran doctrine of "Predestination" or "Election", he then amazingly immediately follows these quotes with the following (p. 1255-1256):

"The most important North American Lutheran to articulate the doctrine of election in the late 20th century was Gerhard O. Forde (1927-2005).… Forde thereby seeks to drive home for troubled consciences the comfort that comes from knowing that before the world began God chose those to whom he has delivered his promise in Jesus Christ, and those in whom he has created faith through that same promise."

Forde demonstrates his "smokescreen" vocabulary by supposedly offering "comfort for troubled consciences" while questioning the Vicarious Satisfaction, an impossibility – as the CPH Walther's Works book demonstrates.  For Drs. Robert Kolb and/or editor Samuel Nafzger to hold up Gerhard O. Forde in the face of Walther and Pieper (and Stoeckhardt) is to join in Forde's duplicity, and thereby sadly exposes the author/editor's mixed, confusing theology.

      It is even sadder that Prof. (emeritus) Thomas Manteufel, in a recent article for Summer 2019 CHIQ, attempts to justify the Nafzger-Kolb textbook by highlighting its references to Walther and Pieper, while ignoring the travesty of its reference to Gerhard O. Forde in the same writing! – I am truly sorry for the seminarians that now are taught with Nafzger's textbook, and more sorry for the Lutheran congregations who will have their future pastors taught under its "Lutheran approach", instead of Walther and Pieper. — For the reader interested in a in-depth debate on "Predestination" that clearly distinguishes truth from error, the 2018 CPH book Walther's Works: Predestination is the best there is. (2020-02-24: see also this blog)

Manteufel: UOJ-1998; Walther on Scripture-2004 (unauthorized); "move out"… or not?

[2019-02-18: added note in red below on 1st publication]
     This post is an "excursus" from my series presenting an English translation of Walther's "Foreword" to the 1886 Lehre und Wehre (after Part 12, Table of Contents in Part 1).  While preparing this series, I came across Prof. Thomas Manteufel's extensive historical survey of many of Walther's writings on inspiration entitled “C. F. W. Walther and the Doctrine of Scripture in the Early History of the Missouri Synod”.  This essay is included in the "The Pieper Lectures" vol. 9 (2004 ©2005).  Unfortunately it is not available online as is his translation of “Walther's Evening Lectures on Inspiration” from 1885-1886 (see #1 in "Walther's Inspiration Trilogy" above). It is languishing in only a few select libraries.  And so..... hmmm… I think I will do something about that. —  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      But before I proceed with the main part of this post, a review and "repristination" of an old post from 2011 is in order.  Although I corresponded with Dr. Manteufel 20 years ago, and he responded to me by return letter, he probably does not remember me.  But I remember him, for he dared to defend the Doctrine of Universal, Objective Justification (UOJ) against a strong attack by Mr. Larry Darby. He was the only LCMS seminary professor who openly defended against the public attacks of this doctrine by Darby.  Even Profs. Kurt Marquart and Eugene Klug were weak or missing in this struggle.  Although I provided a link to Manteufel's essay printed in the January 12, 1998 issue of Christian News, I want to give that essay more exposure today than just a link.  I have since produced a text file of that essay and am presenting it below in a more accessible format so that it may be more easily searched, copied, and printed: [2019-02-18: this essay apparently was prepared at Concordia Seminary and a copy is apparently available at their library]

This document may be directly accessed >>>  here  <<<.  PDF file (7 pages) here. (A good supplement to this is George Stoeckhardt's 1888 essay "General Justification" (WayBk).)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

      The following is an entirely unauthorized publication of Prof. Manteufel's work.  I did not consult with either Concordia Historical Institute or Luther Academy, the copyright holders who sponsored the (now defunct?) "Pieper Lectures".  Neither of these entities show an online availability to purchase any of the "Pieper Lectures" series books. – I also did not consult Dr. Manteufel for permission to publish his essay.

===>>> I am publishing Prof. Manteufel's essay because the Church is desperate to know the true "Doctrine of Scripture" and Walther's lead in the defense of it!

So if both the copyright holders contact me to stop publishing this important essay,  I will disable the following window and will publish their instructions in large, bold red letters. OK, so to honor Prof. Manteufel's assertion that his "LCMS" = "the Missouri Synod", I want to publish proof that at least one teacher in the last 20 years at least sounded a little like C.F.W. Walther on the Doctrine of Holy Scripture. 

This document may be directly accessed >>>  here  <<<.

One will notice in Appendix 2 that Manteufel translated Walther's "Thirteen Theses on Luther's Doctrine of Holy Scripture" (my term) from the 1886 Lehre und Wehre "Foreword".  It was my wish that Prof. Manteufel would have come forward on my multiple requests to have Walther's essay translated since he did such a marvelous job on Walther's Lectures for CHI... but alas, no one did.  I was certainly happy that Andrew Boomhower came forward on my request for a translation of the 1886 Synodical Conference essay.  —
      Manteufel's essay is a masterful work of scholarship!  It is very helpful in bringing out the manifold writings of Walther on Scripture.  I find little to quibble with it... except that I am now (again) left with questions for him:

Questions for Prof. (em.) Manteufel: 

      You would be rather naive if you believed you were not an anomaly in the LC-MS. You speak in your essay as if your "LCMS" is Walther's church.  Do you really believe this when your prominent seminary teachers teach as Prof. Dr. James Voelz (& here), and Prof. Dr. David Scaer (& here) at least publicly question it.  — 
You yourself defended against prominent LCMS theologians Ed. Schroeder (fn 46) and Carl S. Meyer (fn 21) in your essay, theologians who clearly misstate and misuse Walther (and Luther).  Do you really believe now that the "LCMS" is Walther's church?  Do you think Walther would say your "LCMS" is his church?  Yes? ... No?   — If "yes", then perhaps now you should add Dr. Robert Kolb to your list of erring theologians... [Continued in the "Read more »" section below; Walther series continues with Part 13.]

Response to CPH warning letter...

Related to my posting (Dec. 14, 2012) of download links of the in-copyright volumes Essays For The Church by C.F.W. Walther, I have received an emailed warning notice letter from an official at Concordia Publishing House on January 10, 2013.  I had not noticed it until now. It was attached to the following email text:

Dear Sir or Madam:
Please see the attached document and respond at your convenience.  Thank you.

God's Blessings,
Norma
Norma Muench
Intellectual Property Specialist
copyrights@cph.org | P: 800.325.0191 | F: 314.268.1243

First of all, I have removed the download links at CPH's request.  Apparently they noticed my warning to them of this tragic situation created by them – I see I got their attention.  Actually, I'm a bit surprised it took them so long – these books are only 20 years old and were a huge effort (over 600 large pages!) to present to the members.

I'm sorry, CPH, for disturbing your "celebration" of Walther...  I was only trying to help you in your "celebration".  I'm sorry for cutting into the rights you have to Walther's English translations.  Upon your request, I'll turn over 100% of the profits I have earned from this endeavor.

OK, I'll leave you to your normal duties... whatever they are.  Surely they include a massive effort to be

"...presently engaged in releasing a new set of Walther's works, ...  "Essays for the Church" will be included in this new series."

=========================
==>> Personal note to Norma Muench:
In the administration of your official duties, did you know that Walther said the following in these books? (Vol. 1, pg 54):
Question:

“How is it that the consciousness that the Evangelical Lutheran Church alone is entrusted with the pure doctrine of justification has largely disappeared even within this our church?”

Answer:

5. A fifth part consists of those who have indeed recognized the ungodly nature of [Protestant] union (der Union), but now, over against the Reformed, lay the main stress—instead of on the pure doctrine of justification—on outward churchianity, on the visibility of the true church, on its ceremonies, rules, and constitution, on the office [of the ministry] as a special rank created by ordination and [on] its privileged dispensation of grace, on the ex opere operato effectiveness of the sacraments (i.e., by the mere use of them, regardless of faith), and so forth. And in part, besides all this, they either are themselves given to various favorite errors that have become fashionable in our time among the so-called “faithful,” e.g., chiliasm, the hades doctrine, etc., or at least want particularly these heresies to be tolerated in the church as relating to open questions, and in this connection often try to create and preserve in dictatorial fashion (treiberisch) a legalistic piety.

To Norma Muench:
Walther is speaking here of matters of spiritual "life and death".  And the largest English translations of Walther's essays are currently unavailable from CPH.  I suggest you find a copy of these books of Walther in your library there (or a bootlegged file copy of my downloads) and sit down and read them... and discover what the pure Gospel means -- Universal, Objective Justification.  Then, and only then, will you know what "God's Blessings" truly are.  If you want to hear from someone personally, go find Prof. (emeritus) Thomas Manteufel and have him explain it to you.
=========================

The Lukewarm Lutheran Report. (Finally!)

A commenter on the previous post stated this:

In other posts you seem to accuse Dr. Scaer the Elder of denying Universal Justification. Do you even know what he has dedicated decades of his life to teaching? He's fought real battles to preserve this doctrine and been a chief factor in restoring it to prominence at CTSFW.

For a few moments, this comment floored me.  I was wondering "What have I done?"... I should never disparage a great teacher of Universal Justification, one who restores and preserves this wonderful doctrine... especially at a seminary like CTS-FW that is training young men for the holy Ministry...

Then I started to come to my spiritual senses...

Finally!  I have flushed out some "intrepid Lutheran", some Lutheran "with an attitude", some "gnesio" Lutheran who will finally suggest that the LC-MS actually teaches Objective Justification, actually teaches Universal Justification – other than Paul McCain's claim.  Yes, maybe even defends it!  If I had only known...

When Larry Darby was directly attacking my faith with his vehement denial of Universal, Objective Justification (UOJ) in the 1990s, when I was trembling in my very weak faith,  I was desperate for someone in the LC-MS to come forward, to step up to the plate, to show that the LC-MS was still actually the heir apparent to the true teaching of Christianity, what the old (German) Missouri Synod taught (and the old Synodical Conference was built on)... that it would still be able throw off all the terrible errors it had fallen into, the horrible unionism in its midst.  Larry Darby even started publishing and mailing a newsletter called "The Lukewarm Lutheran Report", basing his charge of "lukewarm" on the allegation that today's LC-MS was still following that erroneous teaching (UOJ) of old Missouri and not teaching "justification by faith", that "great cry of the Reformation!".

The pastor of Darby's congregation (Pastor William Bischoff, formerly of the LCR) struggled mightily against this layman's attack.  So much so that he called on an LC-MS professor to give his opinion, thinking he would be confirmed in his defense of UOJ.  Who did he turn to?  He turned to a member of the faculty of CTS-FW!  He turned to Prof. Kurt Marquart (why not Prof. Scaer "the Elder" who fought real battles for decades for UOJ?).

Did Pastor Bischoff ask Prof. Scaer for his opinion in this matter concerning the heart of Christianity?  No.  Did Marquart turn this assignment over to Scaer because he considered Scaer the better proponent of UOJ?  No.  Did Scaer write anything on this matter or about the Walter A. Maier Jr. controversy?  I have not seen it.  It must have been in other decades of Scaer's life that he publicly defended UOJ than the years I looked for him.  Nothing was found in your CTS-FW Seminary Bookstore... no articles in your journals... nothing.

- - - - - - - - - - -

The WELS teachers were being charitable towards you, today's LC-MS, when its representative (on page 5) gave you complements on your 1983 CTCR Theses on Justification.  Was this CTCR document only the opinion of Robert and J.A.O. Preus?

I will consider that student who ran weeping away from Prof. W.A. Maier Jr.'s teaching to Prof. Buls, that student is the real Christian in this matter.  I too am a son of the LC-MS who is running from the LC-MS...  no... more than that, I am... oops, I'm jumping to conclusions – see my last paragraphs below.

- - - - - - - - - - -

But then I read how your LC-MS tried to defend UOJ...  with Scaer?  No, it was Prof. Kurt Marquart who earlier had produced an essay during the great controversy that erupted over Prof. Walter A. Maier Jr. [archived] with his teaching against UOJ.  And how Marquart tried to be the peacemaker in both the W.A.M. Jr. and Darby controversies.  How hard he struggled in his essays to put a constructive face on those who utterly denied the true Gospel.

---------------------

How it grates at me when I run across online LC-MS Lutherans proclaiming "Peace".  What peace?  Peace?  God gives the peace that passes all understanding (Philippians 4:7); but to you, today's LC-MS, He says this of your "peace"  –

Peace, peace; when there is no peace. (Jeremiah 6:14, 8:11)

--------------------

Does Paul McCain call on Prof. David Scaer today to write a great defense of UOJ ... maybe write a book on it... maybe extol Walther for "gathering the luminous rays of the Gospel"?  Of course not.  Because your claim about Scaer does not hold true today. 

I am aware that Prof. Scaer may have been known in earlier times for being "conservative"... he even authored the helpful little pamphlet "A Latin Ecclesiastical Glossary for Francis Pieper's Christian Dogmatics" in 1978 to help students understand the many Latin phrases.  How I longed to see him or Marquart or Buls or MacKenzie... or someone at CTSFW take up this torch of the Gospel and run with it.  How I longed that he understood Pieper's use of the Latin phrase usque ad nauseam.

During the Darby controversy, there was a professor in the LC-MS who cried out against Darby's allegations in Herman Otten's Christian News, but surprisingly (actually shocking to me) it was a professor in St. Louis!... not Fort Wayne (CTS-FW).  It was a St. Louis seminary professor!  It was Prof. Thomas Manteufel, emeritus.  I could hardly believe my eyes.  If you must believe that the LC-MS is orthodox, then read his letter to the editor of Christian News publicly defending UOJ in January, 1998.  He is probably the best defender of UOJ within the LC-MS today.  How did he get on the faculty of St. Louis?  But the greater question (that I wrote to him) was how could he stay on the faculty of an LC-MS seminary?  Where was he in the debacle of Prof. Walter A. Maier Jr.?

-------------------------

Lest I confirm any of Herman Otten's enemies, I will state that, although I warn against Otten for his weakness, I did (finally) find one place that he personally admitted "objective justification" in a letter to "GJ" (CN, Dec. 19, 2000 – pg 15).  But how hard I had to search for that!  Would to God that he would preach it!... proclaim it to the mountaintops instead of pining away to be certified into today's LC-MS.

--------------------------

But just like the new (English) LC-MS which did not censure Prof. Theodore Graebner in his public attack against Walther's and Pieper's teaching on UOJ (search "American Lutheran magazine" on my blog), so CTSFW could not expel Prof. W.A. Maier Jr. in his hardness.

Yes, today's LC-MS, you are "lukewarm" as Darby charged, but for the very opposite reason that Darby stated.  You are "lukewarm" on UOJ. (Revelation 3:16)  This doctrine is the real "First Premise" according to the Lutheran Confessions, despite those who claim "Theologia crucis", theology of the cross.  There is no "theology of the cross" without UOJ – Universal Justification, Objective Justification!

- - - - - - - - - - -

– Here's an assignment for my commenter(s) – some real "research" for you.  Find out who all the panel members were on the CTCR panel that came out with the 1983 Theses on Justification.  According to Rolf Preus, his father, Robert Preus was the author.  I can believe that.  Was David Scaer or Kurt Marquart on that panel?  I would like to find this out...  it shouldn't be too hard for you with your contacts.

– Here's another assignment for you... start a Wikipedia article on the "Statement of the 44".  Surprisingly there is none.  It should have been at least mentioned on the Seminex page, but I have not seen it.  Now there, that should keep you busy.

- - - - - - - - - - -

But my faith is far too weak to admit those who are weak on the Gospel... I am one step away from Hell!  I have tried to "taste and see that the Lord is good" (Psalm 34:8) by devouring all I could of today's LC-MS, chewing, rolling it around in my mouth, chewing some more, and finally, Finally!  I felt an uneasiness in my stomach, a sick feeling, a burning sensation in my throat, awful feeling, something was coming up,....

I vomited out today's LC-MS!  I vomited you out – by faith!  Then I wrote franzpieper.com (Wayback).  Let that be the testimony for the Twentieth Century!

I have vomited you out, you who think you can judge Luther, Walther, and Pieper!  ... you who think you've got the Gospel down pat... in your back pocket.

I have spued you out because you cannot root out the great error that fights against the Gospel.  It started with Theodore Graebner, was allowed to grow through unionism under Ludwig Fuerbringer and J.W. Behnken, flourished through the Statement of the 44, never fully recovered after the walkout of those who formed Seminex.  It continues through your CTSFW Professor Walter A. Maier Jr. and those who will not discipline him (with his error that destroys Christian faith), who will not cry out against the soul-destroying doubt that his teaching brings.  All these have put the true Gospel in doubt!  The Devil is having a field day... right in your midst!  The WELS (with all its problems) suspended a pastor for teaching against UOJ – a thousand times more evangelical than you.  The old (German) Missouri Synod disciplined a pastor over Modern Dance (ha, ha!) –  but you can't even discipline a seminary professor over the true Gospel – you are "losing it".

No, I could not find a real defense in today's LC-MS that I needed for the true Gospel – God had strengthened my faith through the fight against Larry Darby so that I would never again throw Him off – let all men be liars, but God be true – to His Word (Romans 3:4)!

Since vomiting you out, I can see the horrible effects that you still are having on Christianity Today....  you have caused this blog that I can cry out against you.  I could go on page after page of this... but, I'm going to have to end this post now.

I will allow no comments from the likes of those on my previous blog post.  This is a Christian blog, not a quiz for the "Jeopardy" TV show.  This is not a forum for smart-alecks, smug scholar/theologians.

Let the reader judge who are the real "helpers of joy", who are the real ones who have "gathered the luminous rays of the Gospel".  See my masthead!

Now read what real confessional Lutherans start with – the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification (BookOfConcord.org here, Triglotta pg 121, Concordia, the Lutheran Confessions, page 82 – Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article IV (II), Of Justification:

But since in this controversy the chief topic of Christian doctrine is treated, which, understood aright, illumines and amplifies the honor of Christ [which is of especial service for the clear, correct understanding of the entire Holy Scriptures, and alone shows the way to the unspeakable treasure and right knowledge of Christ, and alone opens the door to the entire Bible], and brings necessary and most abundant consolation to devout consciences,

Oh! those beautiful Lutheran Confessions!  Do you see that word "alone" in there twice?  Get McCain's edition... it's on sale for just $19.99 with free shipping now!  Then turn to page 82, and highlight this portion, put a sticky note there, turn the corner of the page, read it again daily.  Here is where the Lutheran Church from above, yes all of Christianity, lives and breathes.

A letter to a St. Louis LC-MS professor...

[2024-11-09: updated link to E. C. Fendt book]

I wrote some letters to a conservative St. Louis professor in 1998 about a then current hot topic concerning "Objective Justification".   The topic was hot because a man named Larry Darby had written an article vehemently denying the teaching of Objective Justification and that Walther and Pieper did not hold to this teaching.  But for me this was a matter of spiritual "Life or Death" and so I wrote to several well known "conservative" Lutherans and Lutheran teachers to see if they believed and taught this doctrine.  One of the persons I wrote to was a professor at Concordia Seminary-St. Louis who seemed to be "conservative".  I will call him Prof. X.  I am presenting this letter now to the public because it contains my confession of faith that I believe Universal, Objective Justification and hang onto it for dear life!

2/10/98

Dr. X

Concordia Seminary

801 DeMun Ave.

St Louis, MO  63105

Dr. X:

Your short answer to me did nothing for my confidence in you.  I do not follow your defense of the doctrine of Objective Justification – rather I believe it.

Cursed is your precious Graebner Synod.  Cursed are your seminaries.  And Dr. X, if in your short answer you hide behind this doctrine to save your precious Synod, cursed are you!

Here are your PUBLIC doctrines, Dr. X:

Marquart:

“… A. Hoenecke, whose magnificent dogmatics is in important respects superior to F. Pieper’s” (Anatomy of An Explosion, page 45); “Foreign missionaries had, if anything, even more occasion to complain of impossible rigidities.” (ibid, page 56); “Graebner said long ago that a short-sighted legalism would ‘breed radicalism, liberalism, strife, and division.’  He was right.” (ibid, page 57)

Plass:

Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics. 3 vols. “… this comprehensive synthesis of Scripture doctrine does not discuss some of the more recent theological developments.”  (What Luther Says, page 1634)

C.S. Meyer:

Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, The. VI. Conservation, 1887-1932. 2. F. Pieper … “favored German culture.” under same heading, same page: 10.  “In relations with other churches the synod seemed to stand aloof.” (Lutheran Cyclopedia, 1975, page 491);

Theodore Graebner:

“I told you at Decorah and I am repeating it now that Dr. Preus and Rev. Torrison had every reason to be confounded by such an ‘opinion’.  It is not for me to judge what caused Dr. Pieper to write this meaningless letter.  All that I have a right to say is this: due to my enormous respect for Dr. Pieper as a theologian, I did not have the courage to protest against the letter but became a partner in these evasive tactics. …  Preus and Torrison are with the saints of God and whatever injustice they experienced in this life cannot disturb their rest.” (Aaberg, A City Set on a Hill, Board of Pub., ELS, 1968, page 279.  Letter written by Theodore Graebner to Dr. Nils Ylvisaker on November 12, 1938)

“One of the statements in the A.L.C. declaration has been criticized as hiding a denial of objective justification – when this doctrine is accepted by the American Lutheran Church (because it has accepted our Brief Statement) and when both Ohio and Iowa Synods for generations past have taught correctly this same doctrine.  As long ago as 1872 and as recently as 1938 the public doctrine in the areas here placed under suspicion has been the plain doctrine of Scripture as we teach it ourselves.” (American Lutheran, December, 1939 {vol. 22, pgs 3796-3797)

“But the real “Breakthrough” in Dr. Graebner’s change in attitude toward other Lutherans was observed at the Philadelphia meeting of this conference several years later (I would guess mid-1940s - ed.).  In a session when Dr.  Elmer Flack of Hamma presided, Dr. Graebner asked for the floor to make a statement.  I wish somebody had taken down the statement, but all of us were intent to listen carefully; the statement in essence was: “All of you know how active I have been in keeping my church suspicious and hostile with respect to developments in other Lutheran churches.  I want you to know that I regret many things I have written and said.  I have learned to respect and trust many Lutheran brethren in other synods.  From now on I shall devote the rest of my life, the few years that may remain to me, to rectify matters and plead with my brethren in the Missouri Synod to follow my example”.  At times his voice halted and tears come into his eyes while making this statement.  All of us in the meeting were stunned, not exactly surprised, but lacking words to express our appreciation.  I remember seeing Elmer Flack’s tears roll down on his face and temporarily he was immobilized.  But after a bit he arose and without saying a word he stepped over to shake Dr. Graebner’s hand and embrace him.  Then I remembered Dr.  Greever’s prediction and thanked God with the others at the meeting for Dr. Graebner’s statement.” (Edward C. Fendt, The Struggle for Lutheran Unity and Consolidation in the U.S.A. from the Late 1930’s to the Early 1970’s., Augsburg Publishing House, 1980, p. 26) [2024-11-09: updated link to exact page.]

Theodore Graebner, in the American Lutheran article, could not have been more plain in his attack on Objective Justification. He should have been immediately questioned by theological leaders in Synod and stripped of his offices of professor and editor if he adhered to this position.  He wasn’t.  Your doctrinal discipline now “should” start with Dr. Theodore Graebner.  And then perhaps, after several other later teachers in the LC-MS were disciplined, you could address the Larry Darby situation.  But you would have to instruct your President Barry who “has elected to stay above the fray and leave us to his wolves.” – per Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx.

In your face, today’s LC-MS:

Franz Pieper – 20th Century Luther

= = = = = = = =

Marquart:

“In the long term, if the world lasts, Missouri is as doomed as Jerusalem, Constantinople, Rome, Moscow, or Wittenberg” (prophetic words from Anatomy, page 55)

I recorded a statement of Luther in my readings of him:

“Farewell, unhappy, hopeless, blasphemous Rome! The wrath of God hath come upon thee, as thou hast deserved.  We have cared for Babylon, and she is not healed.  Let us, then, leave her, that she may be the habitiation of dragons, specters, and witches and, true to her name Babel, an everlasting confusion, a new pantheon of wickedness.”

Substitute for “Rome” the term “today’s LC-MS”, for your synod has returned to Rome.  How could I say this?  Because the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification opened my eyes.

I am not through with the Breakthrough Graebner LC-MS yet.

Signed, XXXX

A Pieperian ‘short-sighted legalist’

Jeremiah 5:2, 6:14, 8:11

This professor did profess to believe this core doctrine of Christianity.  Good!  However he had to be warned of the grave danger he was in to be in fellowship with so many who would question or falsify this basic doctrine.  In the next post, I am publishing a letter to a Fort Wayne seminary professor in the LC-MS.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

• As of Nov. 6, 2012, I have decided to reveal the identity of this Professor – it is Professor (emeritus) Thomas Manteufel.  His defense of Objective Justification was published in a letter section of Christian News on January 12, 1998.  The 2-page PDF copy is available to download here.

New Walther movie/video by LCMS

I see the LCMS is about to release a movie/video to coincide with the 200th year anniversary of Walther's birth.  As with the Luther movie of a few years ago, it will largely give some history of the life of the man and not much his doctrine.  It may even distort some of his teaching. I see there is some excitement about the coming of this film, but it is along the lines of movie madness, the euphoria of being able to do anything like the film-making of Hollywood...  rather than learning the teachings of the man.  It was Walther's prayer that the Missouri Synod would not depart one bit from the Scriptures... but sadly today's LC-MS has long ago departed from the purity of teaching of it's fathers.
I noticed one of the historians for this movie is Dr. Thomas Manteufel, a professor emeritus of Concordia Seminary.  In 1997 or 1998, Manteufel was called on by a pastor to respond to a controversy regarding Walther's teaching of Universal, Objective Justification.  Since this doctrine is the heart of Christianity, I wrote to him to ask him if he really believed it since his synod does not actively teach it (the true Gospel).  Although he responded in the affirmative, I have to inform him of the dilemma he is in as a member of the LCMS.  Here is my final word to him:

You remain in a synod that tolerates doubt on this doctrine.  How so?  By the discounting of this doctrine in dealings with other church bodies- unionism.  What would Luther say?  “Monstrous!” - monstrom incertitudinis.

 So much for the LCMS attempt to honor Walther. In your face today's LC-MS --> 

"Walther, the American Luther!"