EC11: Justification, Law & Gospel, Hermeneutics (Central District 1868)

     This continues from Part EC10 (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — In this sixth of eight essays, Central District 1868, elucidating the Theses in Walther's True Visible Church book, he covers XVIII A–C. This essay is one that grounded me in my new found Christian faith when I first read it in the mid-1990s. I have quoted the phrase found on page 14 several times on my blog, and even reproduced the exact 1992 printed page (p. 172). I am pleased to be the one to honor Director August Suelflow's efforts to bring Walther to today's church by once again bringing this special essay to public view in English. What was it that Walther said? This:

“…you often hear them preach: You are saved if you believe, instead of saying: You are saved so that you might believe.” [See AC12, 4-5]

That is the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification. I am a Lutheran because of this.

Notable Quotes:

12: "The doctrine of Christ is no other than the doctrine of justification and vice versa."

12: "The Reformed false doctrine of the sacraments comes precisely from the fact that they do not rightly believe "that man is justified and saved for Christ's sake alone".

13: The Lutheran Church "actually makes this distinction [of Law and Gospel] and thus proves itself to be the true church."

13: The OT Jewish "faith was more hopeful, looked more to the future — ours looks more to the past."

14: "Because they do not recognize "the difference between the Law and the Gospel" "as a special glorious light", many pastors in Germany and here do not make a proper distinction between the acquisition of salvation and the appropriation of the same. That is why you often hear them preach: You are saved if you believe, instead of saying: You are saved so that you might believe. Nor does one of the sects teach that Christ has already acquired everything and that man only has to accept by faith what God offers him." [Universal, Objective Justification!]

16: "the Methodists…always indicate the actual character of Christians with the words: "They are serious about sanctification"…we answer: We want to be saved by grace alone for Christ's sake. That is the main thing for us."

18: "The Missouri Synod is thought to be orthodox, and it is thought that it only comes from the letter. But the faith of the heart has brought us together."

21: "If, however, the foundation is left standing, but only human thoughts are built on it, … then wood, hay and stubble have been built on the foundation."

21: "stubble Christian": "But the stubble, such as [St.] Bernard's monasticism and the like, fall away, are consumed by the fire of temptation."

22: "The essential foundation is Christ, grasped through faith; the instrumental foundation, by which that foundation is laid, is the Word of God."

23: "There is still enough in the Roman Church that people can be saved.…When he [the priest] baptizes children, he is Christ's servant, but when he reads mass, he is the devil's servant. The doctrine of the papacy, however, is not Christian, but overturns the whole of Christianity."

24: "A resolute Calvinist overturns the foundation of faith.…does not know from God's Word that God wants to save all and that Christ has redeemed all men". [Universal Justification]

In the following, underlining follows Walther's emphasis, which is sometimes missing in the 1992 CPH translation. Paragraph breaks follow the 1992 translation, many hyperlinks added:

Web version here; The file may be downloaded >> here <<; the German text >> here <<.

In the next Part EC12…

EC4: Justification — LDJ essay revisited (Western District 1859) (LDJ)

     This continues from Part EC3b (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — I have blogged twice before (here and here) on this foundational essay of the old Missouri Synod. While the doctrines of Church and Ministry are quite important in Christian doctrine, yet they are based on the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification. It all hinges on this doctrine.

       Walther gave dozens of quotes and references to the writings of Martin Luther and so this essay (Western District 1859) provides the greatest compilation of Luther quotes every assembled on this doctrine. It still seems incredible that it is no longer available from CPH or the LC–MS, Walther's great essay on the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification. So I am revisiting this essay on this blog post to allow it to shine once again, with additional material. Just one quote to share the heavenly doctrine that Luther brought to light again:

“In the life beyond we will forever find our joy and delight in this, that the Son of God so deeply abased Himself that He takes my sin on His back;  yes, not only my sins, but also those of the whole world, from those of Adam down to the very last man, … On this now stands the basis of all Christian doctrine; whoever believes this is a Christian…” — Martin Luther

      The following is a vastly updated version of the one published over 10 years ago. I spent some days updating the hyperlinks and adding new ones. In most cases the links provide direct, immediate access to even the American Edition's translation, along with my English translation of the St. Louis Edition of Luther's writings. Almost all of the links to outside reference materials are on the Internet Archive and should survive this blog. So if one downloads this file, these links should be viable for many years, should the world continue:

 This file may be downloaded >> here <<; same file with no highlighting >> here <<.

In the next Part EC4a… we give a proper presentation of a major essay by Walther on The Proper Form of a Christian Congregation.

"According to a pure understanding": true unity of the Church

      Ten years ago I did a blog post where I tried to expand upon the meaning of Article VII of the Augsburg Confession for the unity of the Church. Where Article VII spoke of agreement on "the doctrine of the Gospel", I asked the rhetorical question: "Could the Augsburg Confession be quite serious at this point in emphasizing the pure Gospel?" At that time I was not aware of what the original text said in the German version. Here are the relevant texts for comparison, as published in the venerable Triglotta:

(1) In the English it reads:

And to the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments.

(2) In the original Latin, it reads as translated by Google Translate and Yandex Translate:

And for the true unity of the church, it is enough to agree on the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments.

(3) However the German language version is more explicit, for it does not want a misapplication of this article by opponents (DeepL/Google Translation):

For this is enough for the true unity of the Christian Church, that the Gospel is with one accord [einträchtiglich] preached according to a pure understanding, and the sacraments are administered according to the divine Word.

So the simple phrase "the doctrine of the Gospel" is clarified by the addition of "according to a pure understanding" of this Gospel. The Roman Catholic and Reformed errors on the Gospel take away this "pure understanding". Now I have, in the German original text, a confirmation of my point that all disunity in the Church is caused by an impure understanding of the Gospel. And a true unity was restored by C. F. W. Walther with his pure teaching of the pure Gospel, i.e. 

the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification.

Walther on: Heshusius, Justification; "pure doctrine… most lacking in Protestant sects" (Der Lutheraner 1876) (Part 1 of 2)

     Tilemann Heshusius (Red Brick Parsonage bio; books), an early Lutheran theologian, was written about in the 1876 Der Lutheraner, in an announcement of a republished Missouri Synod book of his, Ten Sermons on the Justification of the Sinner Before God (Zehn Predigten von der Rechtfertigung des Sünders vor Gott, WorldCat).  What made it of special importance was that C.F.W. Walther wrote the notice and review, and so we hear a truly orthodox commentary. 

      One of the most common things I hear from correspondents is that they think some erring parties, including LC-MS Lutherans, do not err in the fundamental Doctrine of Justification but only in certain other doctrines.  But Walther answers this with the resounding rebuttal “It is precisely the pure doctrine of justification that is most lacking in all the so-called Protestant sects.” Walther knew that Heshusius, in his Preface, teaches the same thing when he wrote

"When this principal point is darkened or adulterated, various seductions and errors must follow in other doctrines also and it is difficult for any article of Christian faith to remain pure; or if anything is ever left unadulterated, it is still without all use and power, because the above-mentioned principal source is blocked by false teaching."

This refutes those that think that the Reformed sects only err on the sacraments, but are right in the pure doctrine of Justification.  This refutes those who think that the LC-MS does not err in the Doctrine of Justification, but only in other secondary doctrines, e. g. Church Fellowship.  No, it is because they first err on Justification that they err on the Sacraments, or on the Person of Christ, or on the doctrine of the Antichrist, or on Church Fellowship, etc. — The following book announcement and review of Walther is from Der Lutheraner vol. 32 (1876), p. 72, col. 1, [EN]:

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

Ten Sermons on the Justification of the Sinner Before God. By Dr. Tilemann Heshusius. (Reprinted unchanged from the 1563 edition.) St. Louis, Mo., and Leipzig. 1876. 

This book has just been published. It belongs to the many pearls from earlier times, which are worth being brought out of the dust of the past. As the title says, it deals with the central doctrine of our holy Christian faith, with which, as our ancients rightly said, the church stands and falls. Many people now think that even if the various so-called Protestant parties disagree in some important doctrines, they are all united in this main doctrine, the doctrine of justification, and even if there is now often a lack of thorough knowledge of many doctrines among the faithful, no believer lacks knowledge of the doctrine of justification. But this is a serious error. It is precisely the pure doctrine of justification that is most lacking in all the so-called Protestant sects. If they were pure in this doctrine, they would and should have to abandon their other errors as well; for, as Luther so often testifies: “In this article hangs and stands everything, and shows all the others with it, and everything is to be done for this one, so that whoever errs in the others is certainly not right in this one either, and even if he holds the others and does not have this one, it is still all in vain. Again, this article also has the grace, where one perseveres in it with diligence and earnestness, that it does not fall into heresy.” (Tom. VIII, p. 504.) But it is equally erroneous when so many now think that they know at least the doctrine of justification so well that they hardly need further instruction on this point. Just the opposite is the truth. There is no doctrine of the entire Christian religion that a Christian learns less than this one, and anyone who claims to have already learned it proves that he has hardly made a start in this knowledge. The greatest scholars of God have always said that they must remain students of this doctrine until their death. Therefore, not only all preachers, but all Christians who desire to grow in knowledge, should welcome with joy any writing that treats the doctrine of justification in a pure, thorough and experiential way. The present one is indeed such. The author of it, Heshusius, was born on November 3, 1527 in Wesel in the Prussian province of Rhineland, studied in Wittenberg, and died as the first professor of theology in Helmstedt in 1588. His main activity thus falls into the frightening time after Luther's death up to and after the adoption of the Formula of Concord. In this time, when so many fell away from the teachings of the Reformation, our Heshusius was among the few faithful students of Luther. His incorruptible faithfulness also had the consequence that his whole life was almost a constant wandering from place to place. Almost regularly, after a short administration, he was expelled by the enemies of the pure doctrine or of Christian discipline. The most peaceful years of his life were the four years during which he was court preacher to Count Palatine Wolfgang of Zweibrücken in Neuburg on the Danube. It was during this time, in 1568, that he published the Ten Sermons on the Justification of Sinners before God. They deal with this doctrine in a thorough manner and in Heshusius' own, at that time so rare, fluent and granular language. The book, comprising 380 pages in small octavo and bound in pasteboard with gold title, costs $1.00.  Postage is 10 cents. It may be obtained at the address of the publisher, F. Dette, 710 Franklin Ave., St. Louis, Mo., in Leipzig von E. Bredt.   W. [Walther]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

      Walther's emphasis on the Doctrine of Justification follows Luther and the Lutheran Church as we saw in many previous blog posts. And we see that Heshusius also shines as a Lutheran theologian and deserves to be read.  This brief book announcement by Walther caused me to prepare a translation of Heshusius's book and publish it… in the next Part 2. 

Lutheran Church teaches… what? (Part 2a, on Concordia Journal 2017)

      This continues from Part 1, a defense against the assertions and theology promoted in the Summer 2017 issue of Concordia Journal magazine on science and theology.  In Part 1, I addressed a point of science.  In this post, I want to address a point of theology – the Doctrine of Justification.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      After defending against the science aspect, it would be misleading to suggest that the Journal does not address theology.  But what about the “article with which the Church stands and falls”, the Doctrine of Justification?  I want the reader to compare the theological teaching promoted in the Concordia Journal with what the true Missouri Synod taught by its founder and his successor.  Then let the reader judge.  And what better source of information can there be than what was “reprinted” by Concordia Seminary's own website ConcordiaTheology.org in 2011 to “celebrate” Walther?  Below are side-by-side excerpts:

Profs. Charles Arand Joel Okamoto (Concordia Journal, Summer 2017)	C.F.W. Walther Franz Pieper ConcordiaTheology.org (1 & 2)
Arand, p. 18: …I will argue that we begin by working out from the center of our faith. We get our bearings by re-centering ourselves in that which makes us Christians. And that means that we begin where we find Jesus, namely, “in crib and cross—and in the crypt he left behind.” For that reason, I propose Luther’s theology of the cross as a way of helping our people— and ourselves—to think through issues of faith and science. A View from the Cross Luther first formulated his theology of the cross in a series of theses that he penned in 1518 as an account of his theology as requested by his Augustinian superiors in Heidelberg. Less than a year earlier, he had posted his ninety-five theses for debate on the question of indulgences. Now Luther sets forth a series of theses on the issue of justification. He does not deal with that topic in isolation, instead, he sees that the position one takes on justification is indicative of a larger methodological approach to all of theology. In these theses, Luther identifies two approaches to theology, a theology of the cross versus a theology of [human] glory. Luther contrasts a scholastic theology (shaped by philosophy) that glories in human abilities and capacities with a theology of the cross that trusts the crucified and risen Lord. “Luther believed that the best view of all reality was to be had from the foot of the cross on Calvary. The death and resurrection of Christ parted the clouds, and he could see God and himself clearly.” Together, they “disclose in the most decisive way possible what it means for God to be God and what it means for us to be humans.” The theology of the cross thus provided a way of thinking and a method of practicing theology that Luther continued to draw on for different situations and purposes throughout his life. Indeed, for Luther, “theology is always hermeneutical, an interpretation of God’s dealings in the world by individuals from within the world.” Robert Kolb notes that a theologian of the cross thus “employs the cross of Christ as the focal point and fulcrum for understanding and presenting a wide range of specific topics within the biblical message.” Okamoto, pp. 54-55: … In other words, Christian theology must be cosmological. All other topics—sin and grace, incarnation and salvation, justification and sanctification— should be derived from and discussed in this context, rather than be set alongside or above God and his creation. In an important sense, there is nothing new about doing this. It is simply letting “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” stand. It is following through in theological method on the first article of the Creed: I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth. It is taking seriously that Christ was sent to announce and to establish the reign of God over creation. It is looking for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. But it is also no longer letting God as Creator and his creation lie in the background or at the margins for theology in favor of an agenda set by certain occasional intramural questions. Instead, theology makes God creating all things the starting point for all reflection. What kind of person is God? The Creator. What is a human being? A creature of God the Creator. What is sin? Not acknowledging God and his rights as Creator. Why is justification by grace? Because God the Creator gets to justify as he pleases. What does it mean to believe in God? To freely let him be the Creator. And so on. The point is not to teach something different, but rather to teach differently. All theology is occasional in the sense that it arises out of particular occasions. For example, the doctrine of justification as articulated in the Lutheran Confessions arose to deal with questions and confusions raised by medieval teaching and practice over the righteousness of sinners. Roman Catholic theology was not uniform, but it did uniformly maintain that righteousness before God was proper, that is, one’s own. Evangelical theologians maintained that this righteousness was entirely alien, God’s own. And it was this distinction that informed how the Lutheran Confessions formulated their doctrine of justification. As just noted, the “God and his creation” perspective on justification only reinforces that righteousness before God is entirely alien. Nothing changes in the article itself. But how and why it is stated does. Nothing different is taught, but it is taught differently.	When we try to depict Dr. Walther as theologian, we must, above all, discuss his doctrine of justification, for his attitude toward this doctrine supplies the clue to his whole line of action in his life so full of controversy. Walther recognized the doctrine of justification, or the doctrine that a sinner is justified before God and saved by grace through faith in Christ, as the focal point of all Christian doctrines. All other doctrines serve this doctrine as premises, or they flow from it as conclusions. Uncompromisingly Walther attacked all errors, because he knew that by all of them this central doctrine was endangered.… In our theological seminary he showed his students, above all, how to preach this doctrine rightly, pointing out to them both the right way and in graphic description also the usual aberrations. We believe that it is not saying too much when we declare that after Luther and Chemnitz no other teacher of our church has attested the doctrine of justification so impressively as did Walther. It was particularly in this doctrine that he followed Luther, and he united into one shining beam of light all other bright rays on this doctrine radiating from our later dogmaticians. … According to Walther, the doctrine of justification is the characteristic mark of the Christian religion, by which it distinguishes itself from all other so-called religions. He writes: When we speak of justification, we speak of the Christian religion, for the doctrine of the Christian religion is none other than God’s revelation concerning the way in which sinners are justified before God and saved through the redemption made by Christ Jesus. All other religions teach other ways which are supposed to lead to heaven; only the Christian religion points out a different way to heaven by its doctrine of justification. This indeed is a way the world has never heard nor known, namely, the counsel of salvation that was hidden in the mind of God before the foundation of the world was laid. (SCR, p. 21.) …To fight for the doctrine of justification and for Holy Scripture and the Christian religion amounts to one and the same thing. Without the doctrine of justification the Christian religion is like a watch without a spring. All other doctrines lose their value if the doctrine of justification is corrupted. When the foundation gives way, the whole building caves in. When the doctrine of justification falls, then the whole Christian doctrine also collapses. In that case the church becomes a mere reform school. Furthermore, as regards the understanding of Scripture let me say: Theologians who err in regard to the doctrine of justification are sitting not in Scripture, but before a closed door, no matter how diligently they may study and quote the Bible. To those who do not understand the doctrine of justification the Bible is merely a book of moral instructions with all manner of strange side issues. The doctrine of justification is therefore the “chief topic of Christian doctrine” (Ap. IV [(II)] 2). … It is absolutely necessary for everyone rightly to know the doctrine of justification in order that he may be saved. … This doctrine is therefore rightly called the article with which the church stands and falls. … Through the preaching of this doctrine, the Reformation of the church was effected, while all other means that had been tried before to reform the church failed. It was this doctrine which also in other lands and at other times reformed the church. … .… What indeed is all learning, no matter how important it may be in its proper place, compared with the wisdom of God? This becomes apparent already when only the passage is expounded that “God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son,” etc. That message works joy in all penitent sinners; that is something in which the holy angels rejoice, and that is something at which the whole world should prostrate itself and cry out: “Glory, hallelujah!” … In short, let us learn from Luther that we cannot start a Reformation in this country unless we believe this doctrine of justification most firmly, preach it with divine assurance, and faithfully guard and keep it. A living knowledge of the doctrine of justification therefore is essential to the right preparation for the pastoral ministry. … We shall now consider some teachings which, according to Walther, are essential today if we are to preserve the doctrine of justification in its purity. Walther writes: “When considering the pure doctrine of justification, as our Lutheran Church has again set it forth on the basis of God’s Word in its full radiant brilliancy, we must keep in mind three doctrines, namely, (1) that of the general and perfect redemption of the world by Christ; (2) that of the power and the efficacy of the means of grace, and (3) that of faith. (SCR, p. 20.)” … Should, for instance, anyone deny the universality of Christ’s redemption, negating with Calvin the Scripture truth that Christ has redeemed all mankind and that in the Gospel God seriously offers to all men His grace without any discrimination, then he subverts the doctrine of justification. If that error is maintained, then the individual sinner cannot become personally sure of his salvation …To keep the doctrine of justification pure, we must hold the True Biblical Doctrine of the Perfect Redemption of All Men by Christ In order to present the perfect redemption of all men by Christ in its full clarity, Walther is concerned to insist that there exists for every person grace, righteousness, and salvation even before faith is engendered, that every sinner is righteous before God, even before he believes, so far as this righteousness has been procured and God has purposed to bestow it … …Walther writes: “Also the heathen believed that they must secure grace and the forgiveness of their sins, but they have never known that forgiveness of sins has already been procured by another and that it already exists.”
Pieper: To fight for the doctrine of justification and for Holy Scripture and the Christian religion amounts to one and the same thing. To which pair of theologians will you trust your soul’s salvation to?

      In the left column, although the word "justification" is mentioned, it is not expanded upon.  Instead Prof. Arand immediately switches to a "theology of the cross" and uses this theme (and Robert Kolb dozens of times) to explain the heart of Christianity.  As for Prof. Okamoto, I can only say he speaks as a philosopher who can, in very few places, throw in some Lutheran sounding words… and he is easily dispensed with.
      In the right column, the focus is on the Doctrine of Justification: (1) its basis for the Christian religion, (2) its objective nature, (3) its universal nature, (4) its priority in the Lutheran Confessions as the "chief topic of Christian doctrine", (5) its proof against all heathen religions.

      Why can't today's LC-MS speak plainly about the Doctrine of Justification?  (haven't they lost it?)

      As I blogged earlier, there was a comment made on Walther's/Pieper's Doctrine of Justification by a reader of the above "reprint" on ConcordiaTheology.org.  It was by a certain Mr. Jeff Wild:

• Jeff Wild says:
• October 23, 2011 at 1:29 pm
• This is a wonderful document and I look forward to the second part. For me this is the clearest description of the doctrine of justification that I have ever read.
• For awhile now I have been considering ordering Francis Pieper’s DOGMATICS, but have been hesitant due to the cost. Would you say that this essay is characteristic of his writing? If so, it sounds like the volumes would be well worth the money.

Mr. Wild testifies indirectly against today's Concordia Seminary.  The theology of today's Concordia Seminary will not get this kind of accolade from a reader because they do not teach like the Old (German) Missouri Synod. Mr. Wild's judgment is one of the clearest public Christian testimonies on the Internet today.  If the reader finds my polemics offensive, then just read the full version of Concordia Seminary's own "reprint" of this essay, and compare Walther's teaching to those who would claim him as their founder. Better yet, read the full un-cut series “Walther as Theologian” in my blog series here.

———————————————————————————

This post became lengthy, but I can not refrain from pointing out where Prof. Arand inadvertently quotes a Bible passage that exposes his error, his mixed theology – in Part 2b.

The Gospel is nothing more than… (Walther's Light of Life sermon book)

      About 15-20 years ago, I ran across a particularly comforting expression used by C.F.W. Walther in one of his yet untranslated sermon books, Licht des Lebens or Light of Life.  I made a note of this then for my future reference so that it would be remembered for as long as I live.  Now I want to publish a short paragraph from this sermon to the world.  On page 601, Walther presents exactly what the Gospel is, and I will take this to my grave (German text here, all emphasis is mine):

The Gospel is, therefore, really nothing more than a letter from God to the whole world in which he tells it that its sins are paid and forgiven; nothing other than a receipt, which is to be handed over to all sinners, which in it is written: God is paid-up by the death of his Son; the debts of all sinners are paid.

Licht des Lebens
(Light of Life)

      For the reader that would like to know more about this sermon book, or for anyone considering translating this book, there is a book review published in Lehre und Wehre, 1905 (vol. 51), pp. 508-510.  It was written by Prof. Friedrich Bente and focuses on another sermon (pages 302-309) from the same book that emphasizes the universal justification of the whole world.  But Bente approaches this subject from the angle of refuting the Ohio Synod and its rejection of this most beautiful of Christian doctrines.  I will leave to the reader the further work of loading this book review into a Chrome browser and automatically translating it.  This essay by Bente is similar to the great warning that Franz Pieper sounded out against the Ohio Synod in this earlier blog post.  In a nutshell, the refutation says, “It's not Calvinism, it's the Gospel”. — To repeat the glorious expression of Walther:

The Gospel is nothing more than a receipt!

Would you like your receipt?  It's been printed out for you...

Missouri Theses II- English Conf w/ Walther (1884) -- for a "well grounded Lutheran congregation"

      Again while researching and expanding the download links for the Convention Essay blog post, I discovered that the Theses published and discussed in 1876 and 1877 (see last post) in the German Missouri Synod were also partially discussed in the emerging "English Lutheran Conference" – a forerunner of today's LC-MS.  But not all 28 Theses were discussed... not even the beginning Theses.  So what two Theses did the convention discuss with C.F.W. Walther providing the presention?  They were Theses IV and V (Fourth and Fifth).   These were the Theses on Luther's writings and the Doctrine of Justification... these were prioritized to be the only ones out of the 28 Theses to be discussed.  Ah!... now we have an early English translation of Walther's work.  And I want to present this in a separate blog post because here Walther speaks my language... English.
      See the preceding blog post regarding the Theses for a "well founded Lutheran congregation" for reference.   A scanned copy of this 1884 English Conference's Proceedings may be downloaded and viewed on my original Convention Essays listing post.

• Thesis IV: In honor of the upcoming Reformation Anniversary, the discussion on "Thesis Fourth" will be most uplifting in its presentation of Martin Luther.
• Thesis V: Beginning on page 10, "Thesis Fifth" startles Lutherans with the following statement regarding the Doctrine of Justification:

"It is generally supposed that all denominations teach alike concerning Justification by Faith. But no other than the Lutheran church teaches correctly concerning Justification in all its bearings."

May this reprint be to the glory of God and the edification of all readers... including me!  Amen.

Luther, Chemnitz,… Walther! (not Gerhard in Big 3)

[2020-09-04: added link below to later post on Mayes judgment; 2019-07-30 updated link to new CPH Gerhard book; 2017-05-31: added item #6 to Gerhard's weaknesses; updated August 14, 2015 in green text; July 29, 2015 – added red text]
I have previously highlighted (see also here) the following statement made by Franz Pieper, but I want to repeat it again because it is so striking in the face of many of today's theologians:

We believe we are not asserting too much when we say that after Luther and Chemnitz probably no teacher of our Church has given more vital witness of the doctrine of justification than Walther.  Walther had Luther as his teacher especially also in this doctrine, and gathered the luminous rays which the later teachers shed upon this doctrine into one beam of brilliant light.

— Franz Pieper (LuW 36-1890, pg 10)(German text)

Franz Pieper knew very well the teachings of John Gerhard, another great teacher of the Lutheran Church from the 17th century.  He quoted Gerhard over 125 times in his Christian Dogmatics books.  But Franz Pieper boldly sets Walther ahead of John Gerhard in this statement!  And Pieper knew exactly what he was doing.  Walther himself would never have set himself above Gerhard as he highly praised Gerhard's work, even concerning the Doctrine of Justification, even (somewhere) setting Gerhard just behind Luther and Chemnitz.  But Franz Pieper was no ordinary judge of Church History, for he could see that the "luminous rays" of the Gospel had not been so well gathered "into one beam of brilliant light" since the Reformation century than by ... C.F.W. Walther.

So why reassert this today?  Because it directly refutes what many modern theologians are attempting to do:

1) Repristination Press, Sacred Meditations, pg 9 (James Heiser?, as Nathaniel Biebert of WELS repeats):

“Gerhard is the third (Luther, Chemnitz, Gerhard) in that series of Lutheran theologians in which there is no fourth” 

Repristination Press would slam the door in Walther's face!  But Franz Pieper not only kept that door open, he proclaims to the face of Repristination Press that Walther is right behind Luther and Chemnitz, indeed implicitly ahead of Gerhard on the Doctrine of Justification.  Anyone who has read both Walther and Pieper would know that this certainly is not out of disregard for Gerhard!  Rather it reflects the beauty of the pure Gospel, the Gospel that Walther set back on its pedestal, reflected in the beautiful descriptive terminology of "Universal, Objective Justification".

and

2) Concordia Publishing House is following in these same footsteps in parts of its praise for John Gerhard.  Matthew Harrison joins those who would so praise Gerhard as to forget Walther and Franz Pieper:

“Gerhard’s Loci is the greatest doctrinal text in the entire history of Lutheranism."

What these moderns mean by their elevation of John Gerhard today is to obscure C.F.W. Walther.  They propose to know Lutheranism better than the father of the Missouri Synod, better than his successor Franz Pieper.  They purposely take the focus away from the many writings of C.F.W. Walther (including his Baieri Compendium, but also implicitly place Franz Pieper's Christian Dogmatics out of view.  They do not expose (Distinguendem Est) the weaknesses of John Gerhard who:

1. Disagreed with Luther's translation of Gen. 4:1b
2. Attempted to rationalize the doctrine of Election with the phrase intuitu fidei (in view of faith)
3. Was not as forceful in directly proclaiming the universality of God's justification 
4. "... some later Lutheran dogmaticians [e.g. Gerhard] differentiated, as to the object of faith, between Christ's merit as the thing that justifies ... and justification, or remission of sins, itself, presenting only Christ or Christ's merit and not the forgiveness of sins, or justification itself, as the object of faith." - De iustificatione, § 179 (ref. Christian Dogmatics Vol. 2, pgs 539-540
5. Deviated from Scripture and Confessions on teaching of Sunday (per Christliche Dogmatik v. 1, pg 637, n. 1570 #2, Baier-Walther III, 351-355)
6. Showed some confusion on the distinction of Antilegomena and Homologoumena (per Christliche Dogmatik v. 1, p. 406 & n. 1127; Christian Dogmatics v. 1, p. 336 & note 139)

On point #3, I am interested in the forthcoming English translation from CPH of Gerhard's Loci - On Justification in the Fall of 2018 [2019-07-30 updated link], to see Gerhard's strengths and weak areas of expression when compared to Luther, Chemnitz, Walther and Pieper. [2020-09-04: see this later post for sad judgment in this book by General Editor Prof. Mayes against Walther]

To those who continue to be blinded to the greatness of C.F.W. Walther in the Lutheran Church, and rather hold up John Gerhard ahead of him, they do an injustice to Gerhard.  In reality they do not properly honor him when they overlook, and maybe even follow, Gerhard's weaknesses.  The same holds true also in the case of Hermann Sasse today.

Yes, go ahead Repristination Press and CPH, heap up your praise of Gerhard, show how scholarly you are!  ... how "Lutheran" you are! ... how "theological" you are... higher than the heavens! ... so much higher than Walther and Pieper!  By this you distinguish Franz Pieper even more, you in essence betray yourself and proclaim

Franz Pieper, the Twentieth Century Luther!

... and the true Church Historian.  I will read of Gerhard's works because Walther and Pieper recommend him, certainly not because the moderns recommend him above Walther and Pieper.